Missionary Nature 013246 Mbp

8/22/2019 Missionary Nature 013246 Mbp

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/missionary-nature-013246-mbp 1/192



MISSIONARY NATURE .

OF THE CHURCH

' A re-examination of the Biblical basis of

mission has been aa essential part of the" "" "

the past three decades.

Hie



1\UG 2- 1976

I,""' .,

J l ~ W iI j ' ,

·'·



266B645H1 62-16307

Blauw

The missionary nature ofthe Church

266 B645m 62-16307Blauw

The missionary nature ofthe Church



THE MISSIONARY NATURE OF THE CHURCHHE MISSIONARY NATURE OF THE CHURCH

i''!" .............,. .. , ..... ...,, ...... -...._______

i"";" .. ' " • " " " " " " ' " " u - - . - > o _ _ . . .

... - ~ · · - - · - . - '"!-······-- ' ......................... -·-" ····-···· _..,.............. .! · · · · ~ - - - - ..· - - - -i ;

- .... ...... ,,,.,__ ·-·-"· ....... , ...........t ........ ....... .. ~ · · ' " " ' " ' ' ~ " ' " " " ' ' 7 ' " .....·---·--- ...-

1 II ' j

. - - - - - - - ~ - t ~ · · · · · " " ~ " " ' ' " ' " " ...... ''"'""i--..·--· ...- ............-.j--------····--1 : ;

.. ·-·-------r·-· ........... ......._., .____ ,._.

...._____ : - = = ~ - th• h ...... ..,,,.._______

I

...... - - - ~ - - - - ·I

···--------·1--·- ------.--·i.. , ... ___ .. ~ ...., ..



FOUNDATIONS OF THE CHRISTIAN MISSION

Studies in the Gospel and the World

Advisory Board

HENDRIK KRAEMER

Driebergen, Holland, late Director ofEcumenical Insti-

tute, Geneva

VICTOR E. W. HAYWARD

Research

Secretary,

World Council of Churches Com-mission on World Mission and Evangelism, London

HERBERT G. JACKSON

Director, Missionary Research Library, New York

D. T. NILES

GeneralSecretary, East Asia Christian Council, Ceylon

PAUL MINEAR

Director, World Council of Churches Faith and Order

Commission, Geneva


Studies in the Gospel and the World

Advisory Board

HENDRIK KRAEMER

Driebergen, Holland, late Director ofEcumenical Insti-tute, Geneva


Research Secretary, World Council of Churches Com-mission on World Mission and Evangelism, London

HERBERT C. JACKSON

Director, Missionary Research Library, New York

D. T. NILES

General Secretary, East Asia Christian Council, Ceylon

PAUL MINEAR

Director, World Council of Churches Faith and Order

Commission, Geneva




THE

MISSIONARY NATUREOF THE CHURCH

A Survey of the Biblical Theology of Mission

JOHANNES BLAUWSecretaryy Netherlands Missionary Council

McGRAW-HILL BOOK COMPANY, INC.

NEW YORK: TORONTO: LONDON


THE

MISSIONARY NATURE

OF THE CHURCH

A Survey of the Biblical Theology of Mission

JOHANNES P ~ A U WSecretary, Netherlands Missionary Council

McGRAW-HILL BOOK COMPANY, INC.

NEW YORK: TORONTO: LONDON



First edition, 1962

Library ofCongress Catalog Card Number: 62-8829

05B75

COPYRIGHT 1962 JOHANNES BLAUW

"The Missionary Nature of the Church" is publishedin

co-operation with the Department ofMissionary Studies

of the World Council of Churches9

Division of World

"Mission and Evangelism

Printed in Great Britain

First edition, 1962

Library ofCongress Catalog Card Number: 62-8829

05875

C O P Y R I G H T ~ 1962 JOHANNES BLAUW

"The Missionary Nature of he Church" is published inco-operation with the Department ofMissionary Studies

of the World Council ofChurches' Division of World

Mission and Evangelism

Printed in Great Britain



CONTENTS

Foreword page J

Introduction 9

1. THE POINT OF DEPARTURE AND GENERAL PER-

SPECTIVE OF UNIVERSALISM IN THE OLD TESTA-

MENT , 15

2. THE OLD TESTAMENT MESSAGE OF UNIVERSALISM

AS A MISSIONARY MESSAGE 29

3. THE OLD TESTAMENT MESSAGE OF UNIVERSALISM AS

A MESSIANIC MESSAGE 44

4. THE INTER-TESTAMENTAL PERIOD 55

5. THE NEW TESTAMENT MESSAGE OF UNIVERSALISM

IN RELATION TO THAT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 65

6. THE MISSIONARY MESSAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT

IN CONTRAST WITH THE OLD TESTAMENT 8 1

7. TOWARDS A THEOLOGY OF MISSION? 104

Notes 137

Abbreviations 173

General Bibliography1 74

Index of Bible References 175

Index of Authors180

'

CONTENTS

Foreword

Introduction

page 7

9

I. THE POINT OF DEPARTURE AND GENERAL PER

SPECTIVE OF UNIVERSALISM IN THE OLD TESTA

MENT

2 . THE OLD TESTAMENT MESSAGE OF UNIVERSALISM

AS A MISSIONARY MESSAGE 29

3· THE 'OLD TESTAMENT MESSAGE OF UNIVERSALISM AS

A MESSIANIC MESSAGE 44

4· THE INTER-TESTAMENTAL PERIOD 55

5· THE NEW TE('ITAMENT MESSAGE OF UNIVERSALISM

IN RELATION TO THAT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 65

6. THE MISSIONARY MESSAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT

IN CONTRAST WITH THE OLD TESTAMENT

7. TOWARDS A THEOLOGY OF MISSION?

Notes

Abbreviations

General Bibliograplry

Index ofBible References

Index ofAuthors

5

8 I

I04

137

I73

I74

I75

I80





FOREWORD

As A PART of their current study on "The Word of Godand the Church's Missionary Obedience", the Working

Committee of the Department of Missionary Studies

jointly run by the International Missionary Council and

the World Council of Churches decided to commission a

survey and appraisal of recent work in Biblical theology

having any bearing upon the nature and necessity of the

Church's mission to the world. Dr. J. Blauw, ofthe Nether-lands Missionary Council, kindly accepted their invitation

to undertake this task. At the same time a series of con-

sultations was planned in America, Asia, Europe, and

Africa, to be attended chiefly by people responsibly en-

gaged in the Churches' missionary work, at which this and

other material was to form the basis for discussion. These

conferences were to be followed

up bythe

writing,

and

careful theological scrutiny, of a book by Dr. D. T. Niles1

dealing with the empirical issues which arise today in con-

nection with Christian missions. This whole study, focused

in the publication of these two books, seeks to answer the

question "What does it mean in theological terms and in

practice in this ecumenical era for the Church to discharge

its mission to all the nations?"

We are very grateful to Dr. Blauw for admirably ful-

filling his assignment, and to the Netherlands Missionary

Council for enabling him to take time for work on this

1 D. T. Niles, Upon the Earth: the Mission of God and the Missionary

Enterprise of the Churches.

7

FOREWORD

As A PART of their current study on "The Word of Godand the Church's Missionary Obedience", the WorkingCommittee of the Department of Missionary Studiesjointly run by the International Missionary Council and

the World Council of Churches decided to commission asurvey and appraisal of recent work in Biblical theologyhaving any bearing upon the nature and necessity of the

Church's mission to the world. Dr.J. Blauw, of he Nether·lands Missionary Council, kindly accepted their invitationto undertake this task. At the same time a series of con-sultations was planned in America, Asia, Europe, and

Mrica, to be attended chiefly by people responsibly en·

gaged in the Churches' missionary work, at which this and

other material was to form the basis for discussion. Theseconferences were to be followed up by the writing, and

careful theological scrutiny, of a book by Dr. D. T. Niles1

dealing with the empirical issues which arise today in con·

nection with Christian missions. This whole study, focusedin the publication of these two books, seeks to answer the

question "What does i t mean in theological terms and in

practice in this ecumenical era for the Church to dischargeits mission to all the nations?"

We are very grateful to Dr. Blauw for admirably ful-filling his assignment, and to the Nether ands MissionaryCouncil for enabling him to take time for work on this

1 D. T. Niles, Upon the Earth: the Mission of God and the MissionaryEnterprise of the Churches.

7



study. We have pleasure in commending this constructive

presentation of a critical survey ofBiblical theology in this

field, believing it to be a real contribution to ecumenical

thinkingwhich concerns itself

equally

with the mission

and the unity of the Church.


London C.W.M.E. Research Secretary

8

study. We have pleasure in commending this constructivepresentation of a critical survey ofBiblical theology in thisfield, believing it to be a real contribution to ecumenicalthinking-which concerns itself equally with the missionand the unity of the Church.


London C.W.M.E. Research Secretary

8



INTRODUCTION

DURING the Ghana Assembly of the International Mis-

sionary Council, the late Professor W. Freytag made a

comparison between 1928 and 1958. In away so charac-

teristic of him he expressed the difference thus: "Thenmissions had problems, but they were not a problemthemselves."1

The problematic character of the missionary movement

which began about two and a half centuries ago has led

to an ever more insistent question as to the why ofmissions.

Not only the method but even the right of missions to

exist at all is at stake. For those who see the missionary

movement ofthe last few centuries merely as a historically

distinct phenomenon, it is not difficult to consign missions

themselves to the great institutions which have had their

day, like any other specific historical complex, since mis-

sions will of course gradually disappear of their own

accord. For what is old and obsolete is at the point of

disappearing.

However, when missions are considered not as an

historical phenomenon but as a commission from God,

the question of a Biblical and theological foundation for

mission becomes important.

There was a time when this Biblical foundation and

motivation was not considered to be so urgently necessary

as is now the case. In fact, the Biblical motive for missions

was only one among many motives, and sometimes not

even the most important one. The impulses that led to

the awakening of missionary work have been varied and

multiple in the course of history, and the deposit of all

9

INTRODUCTION

DuRING the Ghana Assembly of the International Mis-sionary Council, the late Professor W. Freytag made acomparison between rg28 and 1958. In a way so charac-

teristic of him he expressed the difference thus: "Thenmissions had problems, but they were not a problemthemselves."1

The problematic character of the missionary movementwhich began about two and a half centuries ago has ledto an ever more insistent question as to the why ofmissions.Not only the method but even the right of missions to

exist at all is at stake. For those who see the missionarymovement of the last few centuries merely as a historicallydistinct phenomenon, it is not difficult to consign missionsthemselves to the great institutions which have had theirday, like any other specific historical complex, since mis-sions will of course gradually disappear of their ownaccord. For what is old and obsolete is at the point of

disappearing.However, when missions are considered not as an

historical phenomenon but as a commission from God,the question of a Biblical and theological foundation formission becomes important.

There was a time when this Biblical foundation and

motivation was not considered to be so urgently necessary

as is now the case. In fact, the Biblical motive for missionswas only one among many motives, and sometimes not

even the most important one. The impulses that led to

the awakening of missionary work have been varied and

multiple in the course of history, and the deposit of all

9



these is plain to see in the history ofmissionary theory and

knowledge.2

During the last thirty years, however, a growing resist-

ance has been noted to amultiple

foundation for missions,

especially on the European continent. The plea has been

made with ever greater emphasis for a "purification ofthe

motive for missions" and for an exclusive limitation to a

Biblical foundation.8

Though this Biblical foundation might not have been

lacking in the past, we must admit that the theological

basis was often

quitenarrow, and frequently took little

or no account of the important trends in academic

theological research.

So far as theology is concerned, missions have often been

regarded as a by-product. And when attempts have been

made to treat them as a theological problem, the reaction

from the theological and church side has not been satis-

factory. At this point a great change has come about in

the last few decades. The result ofthe theology of the Old

and New Testament points more and more in the direction

of the universal and missionary character of the Church;and systematic theology is keeping up its end.4

At the same time, there is a felt need in missionarycircles for a broader and deeper theological orientation.

Not only church and mission, but also theology and mis-

sionary thinking, are approaching each other more and

more.

The influence ofthese factors is not always apparent at

missionary conferences, perhaps because the themes of

such conferences are more often concerned with practical

missionary affairs and with missionary leadership rather

than with theological sensitivity. Above all, there is

always the language barrier, so that the results of theo-

logical research in one language area become known only

slowly in another language area. In order to fill this exist-

ing lacuna to some degree, the attempt is ventured in the

following survey to set forth the most important results of

10

these is plain to see in the history ofmissionary theory and

knowledge. 2

During the last thirty years, however, a growing resistance has been noted to a multiple foundation for missions,especially on the European continent. The plea has beenmade with ever greater emphasis for a "purification of the

motive for missions" and for an exclusive limitation to aBiblical foundation. 3

Though this Biblical foundation might not have beenlacking in the past, we must admit that the theologicalbasis was often quite narrow, and frequently took littleor no account of the important trends in academictheological research.

So far as theology is concerned, missions have often beenregarded as a by-product. And when attempts have beenmade to treat them as a theological problem, the reactionfrom the theological and church side has not been satisfactory. At this point a great change has come about in

the last few decades. The result of the theology of the Old

and New Testament points more and more in the directionof the universal and missionary character of the Church;and systematic theology is keeping up its end.4

At the same time, there is a felt need in missionarycircles for a broader and deeper theological orientation.Not only church and mission, but also theology and mis

sionary thinking, are approaching each other more and

more.The influence of these factors is not always apparent at

missionary conferences, perhaps because the themes of

such conferences are more often concerned with practicalmissionary affairs and with missionary leadership rather

than with theological sensitivity. Above all, there is

always the language barrier, so that the results of theological research in one language area become known onlyslowly in another language area. In order to fill this existing lacuna to some degree, the attempt is ventured in the

following survey to set forth the most important results of

10



the theological research ofthe last thirty years concerning

the basis and the purpose, the place and the meaning of

missions.

In discussions onmissionary

work and its distinctive

place in the Church, it has been generally agreed that

the Church has a missionary calling. The question has

been, what is the relation between this calling, the exist-

ence of which is not disputed, and the shape it is to take,

which is a point ofdispute in our time and age, and which

is usually expressed by the word "missions" (foreign mis-

sions, dussere Mission).

I had been asked to have this manuscript ready by

April 1960. As I was unable to start work upon it till

November 1959 and, once I had started, was occupied

with other work time and again, it bears clear signs ofthe

haste in which it had to be written. After it had been

extensively discussed in Geneva from July 10 to 14,

1960, it appeared to be necessary to add a few things to it.

Again this revision had to be postponed till the end of

November 1960. This manuscript is now presented to the

reader with apologies for not having been able to give

anything better.

I would like the reader to take into account the follow-

ing factors when judging it:

(a]This little book is not intended to present a new

Biblical theology of missionary work but a critical

survey of what has been said about the subject by

others in the past thirty years. The gaps that will

be encountered are therefore indications both of

gaps in the theological material and of faulty com-

pilation.

(b)I realize that in arranging the large amount of

material in such a way that it could be given in the

present paper, I have made the treatise more

schematic than the Biblical data and their theological

reflections warrant. Actually the data to be found

in the Bible are more varied in character than

ii

the theological research of the last thirty years concerningthe basis and the purpose, the place and the meaning of

missions.In discussions on missionary work and its distinctive

place in the Church, it has been generally agreed that

the Church has a missionary calling. The question hasbeen, what is the relation between this calling, the exist-ence of which is not disputed, and the shape it is to take,which is a point ofdispute in our time and age, and whichis usually expressed by the word "missions" (foreign mis-sions, iiussere Mission).

I had been asked to have this manuscript ready by

April 1960. As I was unable to start work upon it tillNovember 1959 and, once I had started, was occupiedwith other work time and again, it bears clear signs of the

haste in which it had to be written. Mter it had beenextensively discussed in Geneva from July 10 to 14,

1960, it appeared to be necessary to add a few things to it.

Again this revision had to be postponed till the end of

November rg6o. This manuscript is now presented to the

reader with apologies for not having been able to giveanything better.

I would like the reader to take into account the follow-ing factors when judging it:

(a) This little book is not intended to present a new

Biblical theology of missionary work but a criticalsurvry of what has been said about the subject byothers in the past thirty years. The gaps that willbe encountered are therefore indications both of

gaps in the theological material and of faulty com-pilation.

(b) I realize that in arranging the large amount of

material in such a way that it could be given in the

present paper, I have made the treatise moreschematic than the Biblical data and their theologicalreflections warrant. Actually the data to be foundin the Bible are more varied in character than

II



could be shown in the limited space available. It

may be, however, that this gives the book greater

practical value.

(c) In view of the amount of material and the task I

was given, I restricted myself to the questions that

concern what is called the Biblical foundation of

missionary work. The important and nowadays

burning question of the relation between "the word

of God and the living faiths ofmen" had to remain

unanswered or practically so.

(d) I have been asked what is meant by "Biblical

theology of missionary work". Personally I take it

to mean a conception of missionary work that is as

closely as possible related to what the Bible tells us.

Every age needs a fresh encounter with the Bible,

because every age has its own questions and prob-

lems. Nothing is more healthful than to listen to the

Bible time and again, not because we want to hear

the answer to our question from the Bible (theologi-

cal ventriloquythrough the medium ofthe Bible is a

favourite but rather tiring and useless pastime), but

because we want to miss nothing of the light that

God's Word sheds on our path.

Some people will consider my approach to the

Holy Bible too conservative, others may consider it

too liberal. Some people will think I have let myself

be influenced too much by the present-day prob-

lems of missionary work, others that I have dealt

with the material in too abstract and timeless a way.I admit that as far as the task entrusted to me is

concerned, namely, to write a treatise about theo-

logical data (exegetic and systematic), I have over-

stepped the boundaries several times, particularly

in the last two chapters and in the notes.

(e)I have also been asked why I have taken the Old

Testament as my starting point. Some were of the

opinion that this wronged Jesus Christ as God's

12

could be shown in the limited space available. I tmay be, however, that this gives the book greater

practical value.(c) In view of the amount of material and the task I

was given, I restricted myself to the questions that

concern what is called the Biblical foundation of

missionary work. The important and nowadaysburning question of the relation between "the word

of God and the living faiths of men'' had to remain

unanswered or practically so.(d) I have been asked what is meant by "Biblical

theology of missionary work". Personally I take it

to mean a conception of missionary work that is asclosely as possible related to what the Bible tells us.Every age needs a fresh encounter with the Bible,because every age has its own questions and prob-

lems. Nothing is more healthful than to listen to the

Bible time and again, not because we want to hear

the answer to our question from the Bible (theological ventriloquy through the medium ofthe Bible is afavourite but rather tiring and useless pastime), but

because we want to miss nothing of the light that

God's Word sheds on our path.

Some people will consider my approach to the

Holy Bible too conservative, others may consider it

too liberal. Some people will think I have let myselfbe influenced too much by the present-day prob-

lems of missionary work, others that I have dealt

with the material in too abstract and timeless a way.I admit that as far as the task entrusted to me isconcerned, namely, to write a treatise about theological data (exegetic and systematic), I have over

stepped the boundaries several times, particularlyin the last two chapters and in the notes.

(e) I have also been asked why I have taken the Old

Testament as my starting point. Some were of the

opinion that this wronged Jesus Christ as God's

12



main revelation. I hasten to declare that I, too,

consider the Scriptures precious because they

testify ofJesus Christ (John 5 : 39), and are realized

in Him. TheScriptures

have an

open

horizon

turned towards Jesus Christ, but that also means

that Jesus Christ has a previous history worth in-

vestigating. It is He who gives the Old Testament

its perspective and He cannot be understood except

in the light of God's actions in history, the history

ofsalvation. That iswhy thisbook has been arrangedin such a way as to deal with God's actions in his-

tory since the creation of the world. It seemed to

me illegitimate, theologically speaking, (i)to pro-

ject Jesus Christ back into the Old Testament and

thus to interpret Him into its text; (ii)to surrender

to those who exegesize away the Messianic nature

of (parts of) the Old Testament.

(/) Finally the author is surrounded by European con-

tinental theologians, which means that he has a

certain opinion about theological subjects and that

he deals with them in a characteristic manner. The

author has not been either able or willing to turn

himselfinto a cosmopolitan in theologicis. The litera-

ture he used was also for the major part ofEuropean

(continental) origin. There is no doubt that more

British and American theological literature nowexists in the university libraries than was the case

twenty years ago, but there were all too many books

that could not be secured and there was not enoughtime for travelling. So the author wishes to apolo-

gize in advance if he has missed out any important

works to be found in Great Britain and America,

The harvest of missionary ideas from systematic

theology has been extremely poor, partly because

systematic theology has shown very little interest in

the questions with which we deal in this book,

partly because the author has been very inaccurate

13

main revelation. I hasten to declare that I, too,consider the Scriptures precious because they

testifY ofJesus Christ (John 5 : 39), and are realizedin Him. The Scriptures have an open horizon

turned towards Jesus Christ, but that also meansthat Jesus Christ has a previous history worth in-

vestigating. I t is He who gives the Old Testament

its perspective and He cannot be understood exceptin the light of God's actions in history, the historyofsalvation. That is why thisbook has been arranged

in such a way as to deal with God's actions in his-tory since the creation of the world. It seemed to

me illegitimate, theologically speaking, (i) to pro-

ject Jesus Christ back into the Old Testament and

thus to interpret Him into its text; (ii) to surrender

to those who exegesize away the Messianic nature

of (parts of) the Old Testament.

(f) Finally the author is surrounded by European con-

tinental theologians, which means that he has acertain opinion about theological subjects and that

he deals with them in a characteristic manner. The

author has not been either able or willing to turn

himselfinto a cosmopolitan in theologicis. The litera-ture he used was also for the major part ofEuropean

(continental) origin. There is no doubt that more

British and American theological literature nowexists in the university libraries than was the casetwenty years ago, but there were all too many booksthat could not be secured and there was not enough

time for travelling. So the author wishes to apolo-gize in advance if he has missed out any important

works to be found in Great Britain and America.

The harvest of missionary ideas from systematictheology has been extremely poor, partly becausesystematic theology has shown very little interest in

the questions with which we deal in this book,partly because the author has been very inaccurate

13



in his research in this respect; exegetic literature

claimed practically all his time and attention.

As it has so often been necessary in this survey to

refer to others, the author has been in

dangerof

misunderstanding them and/or of reporting their

opinions incorrectly. He sincerely hopes that he has

succeeded in doing injustice to nobody and that he

is capable of listening carefully enough to be able

to pass on to others what he has heard.

I am indebted to the International Missionary Council

for the honour ofthis assignment; to the Netherlands Mis-

sionary Council for permission to spend time on its fulfil-

ment; especially to Dr. W. L. Holladay, who under

pressure of time translated the first draft from the Dutch

language; to Dr. A. M. Chirgwin, who reshaped the final

text; to the Rev. Drs. J. Slomp, who took care ofthe notes,

bringing them up to the Anglo-Saxon standard; and

finally to all those who have helped me through discussing

the first draft, in criticizing and stimulating my thoughts.

With the gratitude of a son and the pride of a father,

I mention thatthe indexes ofBible referencesand ofauthors

have been prepared by my eighty-years old father and mytwenty-years old son. This symbolizes the fact that the

present generation is nothing without the former, and

helpless without the future, generation.

j. BLAUW

June 1961

in his research in this respect; exegetic literatureclaimed practically all his time and attention.

As it has so often been necessary in this survey torefer to others, the author has been in danger of

misunderstanding them andfor of reporting their

opinions incorrectly. He sincerely hopes that he hassucceeded in doing injustice to nobody and that he

is capable of listening carefully enough to be ableto pass on to others what he has heard.

I am indebted to the International Missionary Councilfor the honour of this assignment; to the Netherlands Mis

sionary Council for permission to spend time on its fulfilment; especially to Dr. W. L. Holladay, who under

pressure of time translated the first draft from the Dutch

language; to Dr. A.M. Chirgwin, who reshaped the finaltext; to the Rev. Drs. J. Slomp, who took care of the notes,bringing them up to the Anglo-Saxon standard; and

finally to all those who have helped me through discussing

the first draft, in criticizing and stimulating my thoughts.With the gratitude of a son and the pride of a father,

I mention that the indexes ofBible references and ofauthorshave been prepared by my eighty-years old father and mytwenty-years old son. This symbolizes the fact that the

present generation is nothing without the former, and

helpless without the future, generation.

J. BLAUW

June rg6r



CHAPTER I

THE POINT OF DEPARTURE AND GENERALPERSPECTIVE OF UNIVERSALISM IN THE

OLD TESTAMENT

i. Introduction

WHENTHE QUESTION OF THE BASIS AND MEANING

of the mission of the Church to all the nations is

raised, the Old Testament can neither be by-passed nor

referred to merely by way ofintroduction.

There was a time when one scarcely knew what to do

with the Old Testament. The search for the motive for

mission in the Old Testament was confined to the indica-

tion of some non-Israelite persons who were incorporated

into Israel or who accepted the faith of Israel (Ruth and

Naaman, for example), and to the unearthing from pro-

phetic writings of testimonies to universalism which also

bear a missionary character to a greater or lesser degree.

The most popular subjects were Jonah and the so-called

Deutero-Isaiah. Thus in this respect the older literature is

constantly disappointing.1

This should not come as too much of a surprise to us.

For years Old Testament criticism was, with few excep-

tions, more impressed by the dependence of the Old Testa-

ment on its environment than by its special vocation in the

midst of this environment. Historical and literary criticism

had little interest in a "theology ofthe Old Testament" in

the sense attached to this expression at the present time.

In the last thirty years a great change has taken place.

So far as I know, W. Eichrodt was the first to take a new

direction, in his Theologie des Alten Testaments, which

appeared in 1933-35 (E.T. Theology of the Old Testament}.

15

CHAPTER I

THE POINT OF DEPARTURE AND GENERAL

PERSPECTIVE OF UNIVERSALISM IN THE

OLD TESTAMENT

r. IntroductionW HEN THE QUESTION OF THE BASIS AND MEANING

of the mission of the Church to all the nations israised, the Old Testament can neither be by-passed nor

referred to merely by way of introduction.There was a time when one scarcely knew what to do

with the Old Testament. The search for the motive formission in the Old Testament was confined to the indication of some non-Israelite persons who were incorporatedinto Israel or who accepted the faith of Israel (Ruth and

Naaman, for example), and to the unearthing from prophetic writings of testimonies to universalism which alsobear a missionary character to a greater or lesser degree.The most popular subjects were Jonah and the so-calledDeutero-Isaiah. Thus in this respect the older literature is

constantly disappointing.1This should not come as too much of a surprise to us.

For years Old Testament criticism was, with few exceptions, more impressed by the dependence of the Old Testament on its environment than by its special vocation in the

midst of this environment. Historical and literary criticismhad little interest in a "theology of the Old Testament" in

the sense attached to this expression at the present time.In the last thirty years a great change has taken place.

So far as I know, W. Eichrodt was the first to take a newdirection, in his Theologie des Alten Testaments, whichappeared in I933-35 (E.T. Theology of the Old Testament).

IS



Since then several theologies of the Old Testament have

appeared which go further in the direction taken by

Eichrodt.2 The most recent publication

in this area is that

of G. vonRad:

Theologiedes Alien Testaments, Band I: Die

Theologie der geschichtlichen Uberlieferungen,Ch, Kaiser Ver-

lag, Munich, 1957-60 (E.T. in preparation, Theology ofthe

Old Testament, Vol. I: The Theology of the Historical Tradi-

tions}*In more than one respect this work is especially

instructive for our purpose, because von Rad is particu-

larly concerned to understand the kerygma of the Old

Testament, 3 To this end he does not drawup

a dogmatic

scheme, thereupon to go looking in the Old Testament

for answers to the questionsasked of him; instead he at-

tempts to understand the Old Testament in the context in

which it has come to us. He leaves the material in the

context of Heilsgeschichte (salvation-history),in which it

has been placed by Israel herself. He considers recital to be

the mostlegitimate

form of theological discussion about

the Old Testament.4

Now it is striking that since more attention has come to

be paid to the whole peculiarcharacter of Israel and its

"religion" in the midst of the nations, the message of Israel

and the placeof Israel stand out much more clearly.

Therefore we are also in a happier position than we

were thirty years ago, as regards the Old Testament

foundation of mission. Where Heilsgeschichtestands out

again in its own right, mission comes into the picture too.

The heilsgeschichtlich (salvation-historical)foundation of

mission has a long history, and it would seem that a new

chapter to this history can now be added,5 which in

essence is nothing but an elaboration of one of the first

chapters. The clearer becomes the view of the unity of

the Bible, the greater appears the value of visions which,

while they date from a "pre-critical" age, nevertheless

appear more correct than we used to think.6

We consider it of great importance that a "theology of

mission" be based not only on the narrow strip of some

16

Since then several theologies of the Old Testament have

appeared which go further in the direction taken by

Eichrodt.a The most recent publication in this area is that

of G. von Rad: Theologie des Alten Testaments, Band I: DieTheologie der geschichtlichen Uberlieferungen, Ch. Kaiser Verlag, Munich, 1957-60 (E. T. in preparation, Theology of theOld Testament, Vol. I: The Theology of the Historical Tradi-tions). In more than one respect this work is especiallyinstructive for our purpose, because von Rad is particularly concerned to understand the kerygma of the Old

Testament. 3 To this end he does not draw up a dogmaticscheme, thereupon to go looking in the Old Testamentfor answers to the questions asked of him; instead he attempts to understand the Old Testament in the context in

which i t has come to us. He leaves the material in the

context of Heilsgeschichte (salvation-history), in which it

has been placed by Israel hersel£ He considers recital to bethe most legitimate form of theological discussion about

the Old Testament.4

Now it is striking that since more attention has come tobe paid to the whole peculiar character of Israel and its"religion" in the midst of the nations, the message of Israeland the place of Israel stand out much more clearly.

Therefore we are also in a happier position than wewere thirty years ago, as regards the Old Testament

foundation of mission. Where Heilsgeschichte stands out

again in its own right, mission comes into the picture too.The heilsgeschichtlich (salvation-historical) foundation of

mission has a long history, and i t would seem that a new

chapter to this history can now be added,5 which in

essence is nothing but an elaboration of one of the firstchapters. The clearer becomes the view of the unity of

the Bible, the greater appears the value of visions which,while they date from a "pre-critical" age, neverthelessappear more correct than we used to think.6

We consider it of great importance that a "theology of

mission" be based not only on the narrow strip of somex6



"missionary texts", but on the whole witness of both the

Old Testament and the New Testament. That this is the

case in regard to the Old Testament must now be demon-

strated in this chapter.

Perhaps it would not be superfluous to call attention to

the not unimportant distinction between "universal" and

"missionary".

When we call the message of the Old Testament "uni-

versal", we mean that it has the whole world in view and

that it has validity for the whole world. This universality

is the basis for the missionary message of the Old Testa-

ment. By "missionary" we understand the commission to

deliberate witness, to going out. Our thesis, which will be

set forth below, is that we must be much more reserved in

speaking of the missionary message of the Old Testament

than of its universal message.

2. Point ofDeparture

As our point ofdeparture we choose the first chapters of

the Bible, Gen. i-i i. This is not so self-evident as it seems.

Ordinarily the exodus from Egypt forms the point of de-

parture both in the theologies of the Old Testament and

in the description of the history of Israel.

But it is no coincidence that the Old Testament has

been handed down to us in its present form. The arrange-

ment, the order of the material also belongs to the kerygma,

the message of the Old Testament. Historical and literary

criticism have proved that there are various sources and

strata in the Old Testament tradition; but we need not

concern ourselves with this at the present juncture. Our

problem is the kerygma, and this kerygma can be neither

preserved nor passed on properly if some point of depar-

ture is chosen other than that given by the Old Testament

itself in its traditional form. Therefore for an understand-

ing of the universal purport of the Old Testament, it is

necessary to have the Old Testament begin where it be-

gins.As long ago as 1936, K. Hartenstein pointed out

B 17

"missionary texts", but on the whole witness of both the

Old Testament and the New Testament. That this is thecase in regard to the Old Testament must now be demonstrated in this chapter.

Perhaps it would not be superfluous to call attention tothe not unimportant distinction between "universal" and

''missionary''.When we call the message of the Old Testament "uni

versal", we mean that it has the whole world in view and

that it has validity for the whole world. This universalityis the basis for the missionary message of the Old Testa

ment. By "missionary" we understand the commission todeliberate witness, to going out. Our thesis, which will be

set forth below, is that we must be much more reserved in

speaking of the missionary message of the Old Testamentthan of its universal message.

2. Point ofDeparture

As our point ofdeparture we choose the first chapters ofthe Bible, Gen. I-I I . This is not so self-evident as it seems.Ordinarily the exodus from Egypt forms the point of departure both in the theologies of the Old Testament and

in the description of the history of Israel.But it is no coincidence that the Old Testament has

been handed down to us in its present form. The arrange-

ment, the order qf the material also belongs to the kerygma,the message of the Old Testament. Historical and literarycriticism have proved that there are various sources and

strata in the Old Testament tradition; but we need not

concern ourselves with this at the present juncture. Our

problem is the kerygma, and this kerygma can be neitherpreserved nor passed on properly if some point of depar

ture is chosen other than that given by the Old Testamentitself in its traditional form. Therefore for an understanding of the universal purport of the Old Testament, it is

necessary to have the Old Testament begin where it begins. As long ago as I936, K. Hartenstein pointed out

B 17



(albeit in another connection) that the first chapters of

Genesis are of special significance for a theology of mis-

sion.7 But he left this remark without elaboration, and it is

now time for us to follow

upthis hint of his. This can all

the more easily be done, now that exegetical research is

providing us with increasing light.8

The first chapters of Genesis are (asis the whole Book

of Genesis, for that matter) a key to the understanding of

all the rest of the Old Testament and even, for those who

recognize the unity of the Bible, of the whole Bible.

The conviction that we are to look

upon

these beginning

chapters not only as an adaptation of very old narrative

material, but more especiallyas a "theology of history

5

',

and as rilckwarts gekehrte Prophetic (prophecy turned back-

wards) is gaining ground more and more.9 We shall there-

fore have to put aside the thought that we are being offered

here an "ontology" of creation and ofman. We shall have

to dispense with this philosophical terminology and mode

of thinking, in order not to lose sight ofthe true intentions

ofthese very compact and charged chapters. Israel did not

think and live philosophically, but historically, and the

Old Testament, more than any other document from these

times, has a historical, prophetic character. As history, the

Old Testament is prophecy; as prophecy, it is at the same

time history.

The first chapters of Genesis must therefore be seen also

as witness, as confession concerning the ^-history of

Israel as the People of God, and at the same time as pre-

history which gives meaning to the history of Israel itself.

In short compass the contents of this "pre-history" maybe summed up as follows.

In the beginning God created the heavens and the

earth. The whole creation has been instituted upon manand for man (Gen. i). In consequence the centre of

creation is man (Gen. 2), but man misuses this centrality

and does not understand hisresponsibility (Gen. 3). Then

there begins the guilty alienation from God which assumes

18

(albeit in another connection) that the first chapters of

Genesis are of special significance for a theology of mission.7 But he left this remark without elaboration, and it isnow time for us to follow up this hint of his. This can allthe more easily be done, now that exegetical research isproviding us with increasing light.8

The first chapters of Genesis are (as is the whole Bookof Genesis, for that matter) a key to the understanding of

all the rest of the Old Testament and even, for those whorecognize the unity of the Bible, of the whole Bible.

The conviction that we are to look upon these beginningchapters not only as an adaptation of very old narrativematerial, but more especially as a "theology of history",and as riickwarts gekehrte Prophetic (prophecy turned backwards) is gaining ground more and more.9 We shall therefore have to put aside the thought that we are being offeredhere an "ontology" ofcreation and ofman. We shall haveto dispense with this philosophical terminology and modeof thinking, in order not to lose sight of the true intentionsof these very compact and charged chapters. Israel did not

think and live philosophically, but historically, and the

Old Testament, more than any other document from thesetimes, has a historical, prophetic character. As history, the

Old Testament is prophecy; as prophecy, it is at the sametime history.

The first chapters of Genesis must therefore be seen alsoas witness, as confession concerning the pre-history of

Israel as the People of God, and at the same time as pre-history which gives meaning to the history of Israel itself.

In short compass the contents of this "pre-history" may

be summed up as follows.In the beginning God created the heavens and the

earth. The whole creation has been instituted upon manand for man (Gen. 1). In consequence the centre of

creation is man (Gen. 2), but man misuses this centralityand does not understand his responsibility (Gen. 3). Then

there begins the guilty alienation from God which assumes18



ever more catastrophic proportions, and which makes it-

self felt in the whole creation (Gen. 4-6) . Judgment, then,

cannot fail to come (Gen. 7-8), but after this judgment,

and through it, God still remains faithful to His creation

and to man (Gen. 8, 9). A new generation of men grows

up (Gen. 10), but these also turn away from God and pre-

sumptuously seek only themselves and look only to them-

selves. Again the judgment of God strikes man, this time

not in a Flood but in the dispersion of mankind over the

whole earth as a result of their alienation from each other

(Gen. n).

Here we have a conception both of the origin and of

the history of the earth and the world of nations which is

of an uncommon "theological" quality.10

Now this relationship of God to the world of nations is

the background of the history of Israel, which begins with

the patriarchs and particularly with the call ofAbraham.11

The call of Abraham, and the history of Israel which

begins at that point, is the beginning of the restoration of

the lost unity of mankind and of the broken fellowship

with God. "In you all the families of the earth will be

blessed" (or "will bless themselves"), Gen. 12: 312 Here it

becomes clear that the whole history of Israel is nothing but the

continuation of God's dealings with the nations, and that therefore

the history of Israel is only to be understood from the unsolved

problem of the relation of God to the nations.

[This connection of what has been called Urgeschichte,

primeval history (Gen. i-n) and the history of the origin

of Israel (Gen. 12ff.)

has been convincingly indicated by

von Rad.13 A complete exegesis of chapters 10-12: 9 of

Genesis lies outside the scope of this book, but the main

lines may be set forth here. In the Table of the Nations in

Gen. 10 we have a consequence of the announcement in

Gen. 9 regarding the new covenant with the earth. This

covenant shows its effectiveness in the fillingof the earth

with a multitude ofthe nations. Thejoy ofthe Creator has

won out over his sadness and wrath(cf.

Acts 17: 26). The

19

ever more catastrophic proportions, and which makes itselffelt in the whole creation (Gen. 4-6).judgment, then,cannot fail to come (Gen. 7-8), but after this judgment,and through it, God still remains faithful to His creationand to man (Gen. 8, g). A new generation of men growsup (Gen. I o), but these also turn away from God and presumptuously seek only themselves and look only to themselves. Again the judgment of God strikes man, this timenot in a Flood but in the dispersion of mankind over the

whole earth as a result of their alienation from each other(Gen. u).

Here we have a conception both of the origin and of

the history of the earth and the world of nations which isof an uncommon "theological" quality.10

Now this relationship of God to the world of nations is

the background of the history of Israel, which begins withthe patriarchs and particularly with the call ofAbraham.11

The call of Abraham, and the history of Israel which

begins at that point, is the beginning of the restoration ofthe lost unity of mankind and of the broken fellowshipwith God. "In you all the families of the earth will be

blessed" (or "will bless themselves"), Gen. I 2: g12 Here it

becomes clear that the whole history of Israel is nothing but the

continuation of God's dealings with the nations, and that therefore

the history of Israel is onry to be understood from the unsolved

problem of the relation of God to the nations.[This connection of what has been called Urgeschichte,

primeval history (Gen. I-II) and the history of the originof Israel (Gen. I 2 ff.) has been convincingly indicated by

von Rad.13 A complete exegesis of chapters I0-12: 9 of

Genesis lies outside the scope of this book, but the main

lines may be set forth here. In the Table of the Nations in

Gen. 10 we have a consequence of the announcement inGen. 9 regarding the new covenant with the earth. Thiscovenant shows its effectiveness in the filling of the earth

with a multitude of the nations. The joy of the Creator haswon out over his sadness and wrath (cf. Acts I 7: 26). The

19



world of nations is the result of the peace made with man

afterthe Flood.

The nations are simultaneously signs of God's will to

peaceand of His

judgment.It is from this double point of

view that the nations will be considered, again and again,

in the whole Old Testament. The key to understanding

this ambivalent assessment is put into our hands in Gen. 10

and n. They contain the reflection of Israel on the prob-

lem of the nations (or the heathen) and the fundamental

kerygma regarding the nations.

Nevertheless,

thestory

of the Tower of Babel does not

carry the same weight as does that of the List of Nations,

because the confusion oflanguage and the dispersion over

the whole earth are counterbalanced by the call of Abra-

ham and the election of Israel. Even in the choice of

words Gen. 12 : 1-3 recalls the story ofthe Tower ofBabel.

The promise to Abraham reflects both the salvation ofGod

(Gen. 10)

and the

judgment

of God (Gen. n), but salva-

tion prevails (cf."him who curses you", singular, with

"those who bless you", plural). "Salvation and judgment

are now brought into history by God, and by the attitude

taken toward this work that God will perform in history,

men shall determine the decision made for judgment or

salvation.3 '

(Von Rad, i Mose, p. 133; E.T., Genesis.)

It is possible to see an analogy between the central and

decisive part allotted to Abraham in Gen. 12: 3 and the

story in Gen. 2: 16 and 17. In the one, Man's answer

(Adam Man^humanity) to God's commandment con-

cerning the tree ofknowledge ofgood and evil decided his

life and future, in the other it becomes clear that from then

on one's attitude with regard to Abraham will have the

same decisive meaning. This implies that God's actions in

history in fulfillingHis promise to Abraham (that is, to the

people of Israel) perform a critical function in the lives of

all peoples. In other words, obedience and disobedience

towards God are judged against the background of those

people's attitude towards Israel. There is an interaction

20

world of nations is the result of the peace made with man

after the Flood.The nations are simultaneously signs of God's will to

peace and of His judgment. It is from this double point of

view that the nations will be considered, again and again,in the whole Old Testament. The key to understandingthis ambivalent assessment is put into our hands in Gen. IO

and I 1. They contain the reflection of Israel on the problem of the nations (or the heathen) and the fundamentalkerygma regarding the nations.

Nevertheless, the story of the Tower of Babel does not

carry the same weight as does that of the List of Nations,because the confusion of language and the dispersion overthe whole earth are counterbalanced by the call of Abraham and the election of Israel. Even in the choice of

words Gen. I2 : 1-3 recalls the story ofthe Tower ofBabel.The promise to Abraham reflects both the salvation ofGod

(Gen. 10) and the judgment of God (Gen. u), but salvation prevails (cf. "him who curses you", singular, with

"those who bless you", plural). "Salvation and judgment

are now brought into history by God, and by the attitudetaken toward this work that God will perform in history,men shall determine the decision made for judgment or

salvation." (Von Rad, I Mose, p. I33; E.T., Genesis.)It is possible to see an analogy between the central and

decisive part allotted to Abraham in Gen. I 2 : 3 and the

story in Gen. 2 : r6 and I7. In the one, Man's answer

(Adam=Man=humanity) to God's commandment concerning the tree of knowledge ofgood and evil decided hislife and future, in the other it becomes clear that from then

on one's attitude with regard to Abraham will have the

same decisive meaning. This implies that God's actions in

history in fulfilling His promise to Abraham (that is, to the

people of Israel) perform a critical function in the lives of

all peoples. In other words, obedience and disobediencetowards God are judged against the background of thosepeople's attitude towards Israel. There is an interaction

20



(which cannot be fully proved exegetically, but which

can be derived theologically and anthropologically) be-

tween Gen. 1-12 and the remainder ofthe Old Testament;

the history of Israel is the elaboration of what has been

related in Gen. i-i i;Gen. i-i i in its turn is a reflection

of Israel's history. Any anthropology based on the Bible

will therefore have to take seriously both the portrait of

Man as painted in Gen. i-i i and Israel's reaction to God's

action.

An obvious illustration of the data in Gen. 10-12 is

Ps. 87.

Here the greatness ofJerusalem, the city ofGod, is cele-

brated. This greatness she derives from the fact that she is

the city of God. But as the city of God she is at the same

time the native city of all nations. They come not only to

thiscity,

but they have their domicile, their citizenship,

their birthright there. As pars pro toto we find Egypt

(Rahab) and Babylon, Philistia, Tyre, and Ethiopia

named. In the history of Israel most of these nations

appear as constant arch-enemies ofIsrael and Israel's God.

In an imposing statement from God's own mouth (verse

4),it is declared that they are all at home in the city of

God. In an unequivocal way the law of God is declared

to be binding on the nations. They have their origin and

destiny in the same love wherewith Yahweh lovesJerusalem

and Israel. This universal love is answered in the glad

round-dance of the nations within the city of God : an

ecumenical vision which was granted to Israel in worship,

as a reminder of the universal lordship and goodness of

Israel's God. This song must have been of great signifi-

cance, particularly for the strangers incorporated into

Israel.]

3. Election

If Gen. i-i i forms the background of the history of the

patriarchs, the latter in its turn forms the background of

the history of Israel which begins in Exodus.

21

(which cannot be fully proved exegetically, but whichcan be derived theologically and anthropologically) between Gen. I-I2 and the remainder ofthe Old Testament;the history of Israel is the elaboration of what has beenrelated in Gen. I-I I; Gen. I-I in its turn is a reflectionof Israel's history. Any anthropology based on the Biblewill therefore have to take seriously both the portrait of

Man as painted in Gen. I-I r and Israel's reaction to God'saction.

An obvious illustration of the data in Gen. ro-12 is

Ps. 87.Here the greatness of erusalem, the city of God, is cele

brated. This greatness she derives from the fact that she is

the city of God. But as the city of God she is at the sametime the native city of all nations. They come not only to

this city, but they have their domicile, their citizenship,their birthright there. As pars pro toto we find Egypt(Rahab) and Babylon, Philistia, Tyre, and Ethiopia

named. In the history of Israel most of these nationsappear as constant arch-enemies oflsrael and Israel's God.In an imposing statement from God's own mouth (verse4), it is declared that they are all at home in the city of

God. In an unequivocal way the law of God is declaredto be binding on the nations. They have their origin and

destiny in the same love wherewith Yahweh loves Jerusalem

and Israel. This universal love is answered in the gladround-dance of the nations within the city of God: an

ecumenical vision which was granted to Israel in worship,

as a reminder of the universal lordship and goodness of

Israel's God. This song must have been of great signifi

cance, particularly for the strangers incorporated into

Israel.]

3· Election

I f Gen. I- I I forms the background of the history of thepatriarchs, the latter in its turn forms the background of

the history of Israel which begins in Exodus.21



That the call of Abraham (and thus Implicitlythat of

Israel) must be seen In the light of God's revelation to the

nations, is especiallyto be gleaned from Gen. 12:3.

[Paulnames Abraham in Rom.

4: 13

the heir of the

world, and the meeting with Melchizedekj Gen. 14: 18-245

is connected in Heb. 7 with the universal priesthood of

Christ. The important declaration of Gen. 12: 3 is inter-

preted in the New Testament as a promise ofsalvation for

all peoples, and placed in a Ghristological light (Gal. 3:

8,16,29).]. .

Thegreat importance

of this declaration is being admit-

ted more and more. Abraham and his descendants will

draw the attention of the nations to themselves and make

them eager to share in his blessings. The act of election of

Abraham (and implicitly of Israel)coincides with the promise

or

prospect of blessing for the nations.1* H. EL Rowley (among

others) has pointed out in detail this universal meaning of

the election of Israel.15 One might differ with him in

opinion as to the motive for Israel's election: he supposes

that God chose Israel because Israel was most fit for the

task.16

It seems to me that there is no specific basis present in

the Old Testament itself for this declaration. In fact, the

opposite is often set forth: Deut. 7 : 6-8, Amos 9 : y.17 Em-

phaticallyand rightly, however, Rowley maintains that

election is "election for service". "The purpose of the

election is service, and when the service is withheld the

election loses its meaning, and therefore fails."18 This does

not mean, however, that God on His part abandons the

election; on the contrary. Special emphasis on this election

for service is made by Th. G. Vriezen in his basic study on

the election of Israel according to the Old Testament;

Die Erwahlung Israels nach dem Alien Testament.19

The Old Testament is not concerned in the first instance

to lay the foundations of a certainty of salvation, and least

of all a personal certainty ofsalvation, but to place the fact of

[Israel's]existence as the people of God in the right light:

22

That the call of Abraham (and thus implicitly that of

Israel) must be seen in the light of God's revelation to the

nations, is especially to be gleaned from Gen. I 2 : 3·[Paul names Abraham in Rom. 4: 13 the heir of the

world, and the meeting with Melchizedek, Gen. 14: 18-24,is connected in Heb. 7 with the universal priesthood of

Christ. The important declaration of Gen. I 2 : 3 is interpreted in the New Testament as a proinise ofsalvation forall peoples, and placed in a Christological light (Gal. 3:

8, r6, 29).]The great importance of this declaration is being admit-

ted more and more. Abraham and his descendants willdraw the attention of the nations to themselves and make

them eager to share in his blessings. The act cif election cif

Abraham (and implicitly cif Israel) coincides with the promise orprospect of blessing for the nations.14 H. H. Rowley (amongothers) has pointed out in detail this universal meaning of

the election of IsraeJ.l5 One Inight differ with him in

opinion as to the motive for Israel's election: he supposesthat God chose Israel because Israel was most fit for thetask,lS

I t seems to me that there is no specific basis present in

the Old Testament itself for this declaration. In fact, the

opposite is often set forth: Deut. 7: 6-8, Amos 9: 7P Em-

phatically and rightly, however, Rowley maintains that

election is "election for service". "The purpose of the

election is service, and when the service is withheld the

election loses its meaning, and therefore fails." 18 This does

not mean, however, that God on His part abandons the

election; on the contrary. Special emphasis on this electionfor service is made by Th. C. Vriezen in his basic study on

the election of Israel according to the Old Testament;

Die Erwahlung Israels nach dem Alten Testament.1 9

The Old Testament is not concerned in the first instanceto lay the foundations of a certainty of salvation, and leastofall a personal certainty ofsalvation, but to place the fact of[Israel's] existence as the people of God in the right light:

22



this privilege has not been extended to Israel that she might

become infatuated by it, but that she might recognize it as

a commission. Election sets Israel apart from the nations, so

that she might in a special way serve God and reveal Ms

glory and lordship on earth and in the end bring the whole

world to God20. . . Election has no goal in itself, but only

the Kingdom of God. 21

It seems to me of the highest importance to take careful

note of the specific meaning and import of the word elec-

tion. As Vriezen and Rowley both demonstrate convinc-

ingly, it has no connection with favouritism, and there is

therefore no ground for the reproach still often heard

within the younger Churches of Asia (an.echo of the

reproach from the neo-Hindu side?) : "We do not like a

God who has favourite peoples and favourite persons."

As a matter of fact, the idea that the divine deed of

election is to be explained as favouritism belongs to the

great sin, the apostasy of Israel.22

It is therefore of great

significance that the word election and choice in the Old

Testament, whenever it refers to Israel, is always used in

the active, never in the passive form: Israel is never called

bah&r, "chosen35

.23

Israel is not so much the object of divine election as sub-

ject in the service asked for by God on the ground of elec-

tion. Perhaps one could put it this way: that there is not

service through election but rather election because 0/*service.

Therefore election is not primarily a privilege but a

responsibility. If the responsibilityis refused, election can

even become the motiye for divine punishment: "You only

have I known of all the families ofthe earth, thereforeI will

punish you for all your iniquities" (Amos 3 : 2). It is there-

fore a rnisjudgment of the clear declarations of the Old

Testament to derive from the election of the nation Israel

any national concept, much less any sanction for a "master

race" or nationalism. 24 The Old Testament is not at all

concerned with purity of descent, unity of territory or

culture, or the like. The emphasis in the Old Testament

this privilege has not been extended to Israel that she mightbecome infatuated by it, but that she might recognize it asa commission. Election sets Israel apart from the nations, sothat she might in a special way serve God and reveal his

glory and lordship on earth and in the end bring the wholeworld to God10••• Election has no goal in itself, but onlythe Kingdom of God.n

It seems to me of the highest importance to take carefulnote of the specific meaning and import of the word ele&-

tUm. & Vriezen and Rowley both demonstrate convincingly, it has no connection with favouritism, and there is

therefore no ground for the reproach still often heardwithin the younger Churches of Asia (an echo of the

reproach from the neo-Hindu side?) : "We do not like aGod who has favourite peoples and favourite persons."As a matter of fact, the idea that the divine deed of

election is to be explained as favouritism belongs to the

great sin, the apostasy of Israel. 22 It is therefore of great

significance that the word election and choice in the OldTestament, whenever it refers to Israel, is always used in

the active, never in the passive form: Israel is never calledhahiir, "chosen".aa

Israel is not so much the object of divine election as sub-ject in the service asked for by God on the ground of election. Perhaps one could put it this way: that there is not

service through election but rather election because ofservice.Therefore election is not primarily a privilege but aresponsibility. If the responsibility is refused, election caneven become the motiye for divine punishment: "You onlyhave I known ofall the families of the earth, therefore I willpunish you for all your iniquities" (Amos 3: 2). It s therefore a misjudgment of the clear declarations of the Old

Testament to derive from the election of the nation Israelany national concept, much less any sanction for a "masterrace" or nationalism.24 The Old Testament is not at allconcerned with purity of descent, unity of territory or

culture, or the like. The emphasis in the Old Testament

23



never lies upon Israel as a people, but only upon Israel as

the People of God.m

The election of Israel is a matter of divine Initiative

which has as its

goal

the recognition ofGod by all nations

over the whole world. The way to this goal Is the theocracy

of Israel; the means is Israel's separation from the other

peoples.26

While the emphasis Is laid during the whole history of

Israel on her necessity to be separate, this must never be

explained as an expression of Old Testament "particu-

larism", but as the adherence to the conditio sine qua non for

the maintenance of theocracy in Israel as the forerunner

for the lordship ofGod over the whole world.

[The exegesis which R. B. Y. Scott has given of Exod.

19: 6, is especially enlightening at this point.27 In the

previous verse (verse 5) the right of possession of all

peoples by Yahweh is underlined: ". . . you shall be myown possession among all peoples; for all the earth is

mine." Verse 6 says: "And you shall be to me a kingdom

of priestsand a holy nation." This does not mean that

Israel shall be a people that is made up entirely ofpriests,

but that Israel shall fulfil a priestly role as a people in the

midst of the peoples; she represents God in the world of

nations. What priests are for a people, Israel as a people is

for the world.

No doubt the Old Testament is "particularistic", in the

sense that salvation and the service ofGod are confined to

one special people; but this "particularism" is the instru-

ment for the universal ends ofGod with the world. There-

fore the word particularism Is unsuited to define the task and

place of Israel. It arouses misunderstandings and associa-

tions with isolationism, separatism, individualism. To my

way of thinking we will do best to discard the scheme of

particularism and universaHsm in the light ofthe theology

ofthe Old Testament in our days.28

Alongside ofdeclarations such as Exod. 19 : 6, we might

further cite such Psalms as 67, 96, 100, 117, etc. The oft-

24

never lies upon Israel as a people, but only upon Israel asthe People of God. 25

The election of Israel is a matter of divine initiativewhich has as its goal the recognition of God by all nationsover the whole world. The way to this goal is the theocracyof Israel; the means is Israel's separation from the other

peoples.116

While the emphasis is laid during the whole history of

Israel on her necessity to be separate, this must never beexplained as an expression of Old Testament "particu-

larism", but as the adherence to the conditio sine qua rum forthe maintenance of theocracy in Israel as the forerunnerfor the lordship of God over the whole world.

[The exegesis which R. B. Y. Scott has given of Exod.I 9: 6, is especially enlightening at this point.27 In theprevious verse (verse 5) the right of possession of allpeoples by Yahweh is underlined: ". . . you shall be my

own possession among all peoples; for all the earth is

mine." Verse 6 says: "And you shall be to me a kingdomof priests and a holy nation!' This does not mean that

Israel shall be a people that is made up entirely of priests,but that Israel shall fulfil a priestly role as a people in the

midst of the peoples; she represents God in the world of

nations. What priests are for a people, Israel as a people isfor the world.

No doubt the Old Testament is "particularistic", in thesense that salvation and the service of God are confined toone special people; but this "particularism" is the instrument for the universal ends of God with the world. Therefore the word particularism is unsuited to define the task and

place of Israel. It arouses misunderstandings and associa

tions with isolationism, separatism, individualism. To my

way of thinking we will do best to discard the scheme ofparticularism and universalism in the light of the theologyof the Old Testament in our days.28

Alongside ofdeclarations such as Exod. 19: 6, we might

further cite such Psalms as 67, g6, 100, I 17, etc. The oft-

24



used term "holy" as a designation for Israel also points in

this direction. By "holy" (qddhbs) is meant not an ethical

quality but a relation with God; consecrated (and thus

also separated) for a special service.2

]

4. The Nations

If the election ofAbraham, i.e. Israel, is to have a uni-

versal purpose, the consequence of it for the world of

nations is that they can be described as "peoples whomYahweh does not know". The designation "nations" is

identical with "heathen"; in other words, the designation

"nations"(goyyim) does not have a

political or national,

but a religious meaning.30

It is not possible here to treat in broad outline the placeand meaning of the nations in the Old Testament. But it

is worth while here to assemble the results of research in

a few statements.

(i)The Old Testament does not state that the election

of Israel means the rejection of the nations. The fact that

the Old Testament knows nothing ofthe passive definition

(that Israel is the chosen people), but the active announce-

ment that Yahweh chooses, makes it impossible to speakof the nations as "rejected". And this never occurs in the

Old Testament.

(ii)The nations come into view variously in the Old

Testament, but always in their relation to Israel as the peopleof God. It is out of the question, then, to speak of a uni-

form judgment on the nations; on the contrary, it is

always a question oftheir concrete relation to Israel. In other

words, the distinction between Israel and the nations is

exclusively connected with God's dealings.31 In principle,

then, the possibility is always open for reception into Israel

as the people of God and for sharing in the salvation and

blessing of Israel.

(iii) Often, particularly in the historical books of the

Old Testament, the nations are a threat to Israel in politics

and a temptation in respect to religion. Whenever Israel

25

used term "holy" as a designation for Israel also points inthis direction. By "holy" (qadhOs) is meant not an ethicalquality but a relation with God; consecrated (and thusalso separated) for a special service. 211]

4· The .Nations

I f he election of Abraham, i.e. Israel, is to have a uni-versal purpose, the consequence of it for the world of

nations is that they can be described as "peoples whomYahweh does not know". The designation "nations" isidentical with "heathen"; in other words, the designation"nations" (gqyyim) does not have a political or national,but a religious meaning.30

It is not possible here to treat in broad outline the placeand meaning of the nations in the Old Testament. But it

is worth while here to assemble the results of research in

a few statements.(i) The Old Testament does not state that the election

of Israel means the rejection of the nations. The fact thatthe Old Testament knows nothing of the passive definition(that Israel is the chosen people), but the active announce-ment that Yahweh chooses, makes it impossible to speakof the nations as "rejected". And this never occurs in theOld Testament.

(ii) The nations come into view variously in the Old

Testament, but always in their relation to Israel as the peopleof God. It is out of the question, then, to speak of a uni-form judgment on the nations; on the contrary, it isalways a question of their concrete relation to Israel. In other

words, the distinction between Israel and the nations isexclusively connected with God's dealings. 31 In principle,then, the possibility is always open for reception into Israel

as the people of God and for sharing in the salvation andblessing of Israel.

(iii) Often, particularly in the historical books of theOld Testament, the nations are a threat to Israel in politicsand a temptation in respect to religion. Whenever Israel

25



cannot withstand the temptation to consort with the gods

ofthe nations, and whenever it has let itselfbe yoked with

them, it has lost its sense and right of existence, and has

been threatened andconquered by

them. This is the

waythe judgment ofYahweh works: He punishes Israel for her

infidelity and uses the nations as His instrument.

(iv)The nations are witnesses of Yahweh's deeds in

Israel. This is their most prominent function. In God's

dealings with Israel, however, they, too, are summoned

to recognize the God of Israel as the God of the whole

earth. The existence of other gods was never theoretically

denied; in the light of Yahweh's deeds, however, they are

unimportant and powerless. That God's dealings with

Israel directlv concern the nations comes explicitly and

clearly to light in the Psalms(e.g. 22: 28, 24: i, 33: 8,

47: 8, 48: 10, 66:7, 67, 87, 93-100, 117, etc. etc.).

[The opening of a psalm of the nations, Psalm 67, is

quite plain in this regard; Israel prays: "May God be

gracious to us [Israel] and bless us, and make his face to

shine upon us, that thy way may be known upon earth,

thy saving power among all nations" (verses 1-2). The

conclusion is still shorter and more pregnant (verse 7) :

"God has blessed us; let all the ends of the earth fear

him!"* The same thought is found in Ps. 117 and else-

where.]

The nations are also created (Ps. 86 : 9) and summoned

by their relation to Israel to praise (i.e.to recognize) the

God of the whole earth (ExocL 19: 5, Deut. 32: 8, Psalms

passim).

(v) The recognition by the nations of Yahweh, the-

God of Israel, as the God ofthe earth is anticipated by the

message of the prophets, who involve the nations most

intensively in their preaching. In this regard there is

complete unanimity in all the prophets.32 The question

in Israel and in the world of nations is not the existence,

* The Dutch version reads ". . . that all the ends of the earth may fear

him", and Dr. Blauw has underlined "that".

26

cannot withstand the temptation to consort with the godsof the nations, and whenever it has let itself be yoked withthem, it has lost its sense and right of existence, and hasbeen threatened and conquered by them. This is the waythe judgment ofYahweh works: He punishes Israel for herinfidelity and uses the nations as His instrument.

(iv) The nations are witnesses of Yahweh's deeds inIsrael. This is their most prominent function. In God'sdealings with Israel, however, they, too, are summonedto recognize the God of Israel as the God of the wholeearth. The existence of other gods was never theoretically

denied; in the light ofYahweh's deeds, however, they areunimportant and powerless. That God's dealings withIsrael directlv concern the nations comes explicitly and

clearly to light in the Psalms (e.g. 22: 28, 24: I , 33: 8,47:8,48: IO, 66: 7, 67, 87,93-100, 117, etc. etc.).

[The opening of a psalm of the nations, Psalm 67, isquite plain in this regard; Israel prays: "May God be

gracious to us [Israel] and bless us, and make his face toshine upon us, that thy way may be known upon earth,

thy saving power among all nations" (verses I-2). Theconclusion is still shorter and more pregnant (verse 7):"God has blessed us; let all the ends of the earth fearhim!"* The same thought is found in Ps. I 17 and elsewhere.]

The nations are also created (Ps. 86: g) and summonedby their relation to Israel to praise (i.e. to recognize) the

God of the whole earth (Exod. I g: 5, Deut. 32: 8, Psalmspassim).

(v) The recognition by the nations of Yahweh, theGod oflsrael, as the God of the earth is anticipated by themessage of the prophets, who involve the nations most

intensively in their preaching. In this regard there iscomplete unanimity in all the prophets.32 The questionin Israel and in the world of nations is not the existence,

* The Dutch version reads". . . that all the ends of the earth may fearhim", and Dr. Blauw has underlined "that".

26



but the presence of God.33 The active presence of God is

the problem of world history.34

It is no coincidence that in the prophetic books of the

Old Testament the nations come to the fore so frequently

in a different perspective from that in the historical

books.35

It is in the light of the exile that the special task

and place of Israel in the world of nations becomes plain.

In every case the downfall of Israel means not the downfall

of the "national" god, as is considered self-evident among

all the nations, because Israel's God is not a local divinity,

but the Creator of heaven and earth. The promised

restoration of Israel, according to Ezekiel, has the same

motive as had the downfall of Israel: and you (Israel,the

nations) shall know that I am Yahweh. The prevalent

judgment on the nations in the Old Testament finds here

its basis and unity.

(vi)The recognition of Yahweh by the nations is

usually set forth as imperative and the future as summons and

as promise.This summons is the meaning of Israel's history

and the contents of her liturgy. During the whole history

of Israel this comes to realization little if at all.36 It is

ordinarily expressed in this way so that the universal

character of the Old Testament, of Israel's history, is

eschatologically defined.37 This eschatology is brought to

bear especially on the return of Israel from exile, as the

immediate goal. But this return will be an evidence that

Israel's God is indeed the only living God, an evidence

that must convince the nations.

(vii)This eschatological outlook is often connected with

the expectation of the Messiah.38 At the point where this

universal expectation of salvation comes out in the

prophets,there is a living reminder of God's power and

right as Creator (notably in the so-called Deutero-Isaiah),

5. Summary and Conclusions

If we may summarize what we have said thus far re-

garding the universal point of departure and purport for

27

but the presence of God. 33 The active presence of God is

the problem of world history. s4It is no coincidence that in the prophetic books of the

Old Testament the nations come to the fore so frequentlyin a different perspective from that in the historicalbooks. 35 It is in the light of the exile that the special taskand place of Israel in the world of nations becomes plain.In every case the downfall oflsrael means not the downfallof the "national" god, as is considered self-evident amongall the nations, because Israel's God is not a local divinity,but the Creator of heaven and earth. The promised

restoration of Israel, according to Ezekiel, has the samemotive as had the downfall oflsrael: and you (Israel, thenations) shall know that I am Yahweh. The prevalentjudgment on the nations in the Old Testament finds hereits basis and unity.

(vi) The recognition of Yahweh by the nations is

usually set forth as imperative and the future as summons and

as promise. This summons is the meaning of Israel's historyand the contents of her liturgy. During the whole historyof Israel this comes to realization little if at all.36 It is

ordinarily expressed in this way so that the universalcharacter of the Old Testament, of Israel's history, is

eschatologically defined.37 This eschatology is brought tobear especially on the return of Israel from exile, as the

immediate goal. But this return will be an evidence thatIsrael's God is indeed the only living God, an evidencethat must convince the nations.

(vii) This eschatological outlook is often connected withthe expectation of the Messiah.33 At the point where thisuniversal expectation of salvation comes out in theprophets, there is a living reminder of God's power and

right as Creator (notably in the so-called Deutero-Isaiah).

5· Summary and ConclusionsIf we may summarize what we have said thus far re

garding the universal point of departure and purport for

27



universalism in the Old Testament in general, we cannot

do better than quote the words ofone ofthe few systematic

theologians who have given attention to the problem that

confrontsus,

Karl Earth:

The history of Israel in her totality and in her context is

universal prophecy. For the Old Testament makes it un-

mistakably clear, again and again, that it is preciselythe

covenant of Yahweh with a unique Israel, of Israel with a

unique God ... far from being an end in itself, far from

getting one wrapped up in this particular relationship has

meaning, revelation, real and dynamic import for the rela-

tion between God and all peoples, men of all peoples.

While Earth lays emphasis on the prophetic character of

the Old Testament "as an accurate example and adequate

prefiguration ofthe prophecy ofJesus Christ", we saw the

accent in Exod. 19: 5-6 lying on the priestly character of

Israel.

Our conclusion in regard to the universal character of

the Old Testament can then read as follows: Israel has

been called in her election by Yahweh to be preacher and

example, prophet and priest for the nations.

The active presence of God in Israel is a sign and

guarantee of His presence in the world : and the presence

of Israel is thus a continuing appeal to the nations of the

world.

We recall that in this chapter we are speaking only of

the universal and not (yet)ofthe missionary character ofthe

Old Testament. It is, however, of great significance, not

only for a "theology of missions", but also for a "theology

of the Church", constantly to call to mind this universal

task of Israel in and for the world. In any case an intro-

verted Church, which is tempted to consider itself the

goal of the purposes of God, can never make appeal to

Israel, in the light of the Old Testament kerygma.

Can an extroverted "theology of missions" do so? To

this question we must seek an answer in the following

chapter.

28

universalism in the Old Testament in general, we cannotdo better than quote the words ofone ofthe few systematictheologians who have given attention to the problem that

confronts us, Karl Barth:

The history of Israel in her totality and in her context isuniversal prophecy. For the Old Testament makes it un

mistakably clear, again and again, that it is precisely the

covenant of Yahweh with a unique Israel, of Israel with aunique God ... far from being an end in itself, far fromgetting one wrapped up in this particular relationship-has

meaning, revelation, real and dynamic import for the rela

tion between God and all peoples, men of all peoples.

While Barth lays emphasis on the prophetic character of

the Old Testament "as an accurate example and adequateprefiguration of the prophecy of esus Christ", we saw the

accent in Exod. 19: 5-6 lying on the priest!J character of

Israel.Our conclusion in regard to the universal character of

the Old Testament can then read as follows: Israel hasbeen called in her election by Yahweh to be preacher and

example, prophet and priest for the nations.The active presence of God in Israel is a sign and

guarantee of His presence in the world: and the presenceof Israel is thus a continuing appeal to the nations of the

world.

We recall that in this chapter we are speaking only of

the universal and not (yet) of the missionary character ofthe

Old Testament. It is, however, of great significance, not

only for a "theology of Inissions", but also for a "theologyof the Church", constantly to call to Inind this universaltask of Israel in and for the world. In any case an introverted Church, which is tempted to consider itself the

goal of the purposes of God, can never make appeal toIsrael, in the light of the Old Testament kerygma.

Can an extroverted "theology of Inissions" do so? To

this question we must seek an answer in the followingchapter.



CHAPTER 2

THE OLD TESTAMENT MESSAGE OFUNIVERSALISM AS A MISSIONARY MESSAGE

/. Universalism and Mission

WHILETHERE IS BROAD AGREEMENT AS TO THE

trend toward universalism in the Old Testament,

great differences arise whenever one proceeds from this

universalism to the missionary intention and commission.

In earlier years the thought ofmission in the Old Testa-

ment was often seen as the end result of an extended pro-

cess of development: Yahweh was assumed to have de-

veloped gradually

from an Israelitic

folk-god

to a God

of the other nations and to a world-God; the writing

prophets, especially, were thought to have fulfilled an

important function. Thus monotheism was thought to

have had universalism as a consequence; and the idea

of mission was thought in its turn to have emerged from

universalism. 1

In more recentyears much

criticism has been levelled

against such an assumption. Some people observe mono-

theism already present in Moses and thus the germ of the

idea of mission as well.2 In this way the scheme of mono-

theism-universalism-mission continues to be maintained;

and likewise the idea that the goal of the missionary idea

was gradually attained. Moses has sometimes even been

considered to be the first missionary.3

It occurs to me that the idea of this gradual ascent from

polytheism via monotheism to universalism and the idea

of mission can be maintained only if one assumes that the

idea of mission can be gleaned from a process of growth in

29

CHAPTER 2

THE OLD TESTAMENT MESSAGE OF

UNIVERSALISM AS A MISSIONARY MESSAGE

I . Universalism and Mission

WHILE THERE IS BROAD AGREEMENT AS TO THE

trend toward universalism in the Old Testament,great differences arise whenever one proceeds from this

universalism to the missionary intention and commission.

In earlier years the thought of mission in the Old Testament was often seen as the end result of an extended pro

cess of development: Yahweh was assumed to have de

veloped gradually from an Israelitic folk-god to a God

of the other nations and to a world-God; the writing

prophets, especially, were thought to have fulfilled an

important function. Thus monotheism was thought to

have had universalism as a consequence; and the idea

of mission was thought in its turn to have emerged from

universalism.1

In more recent years much criticism has been levelledagainst such an assumption. Some people observe mono

theism already present in Moses and thus the germ of the

idea of mission as well.2 In this way the scheme of mono

theism-universalism-mission continues to be maintained;and likewise the idea that the goal of the missionary idea

was gradually attained. Moses has sometimes even been

considered to be the first missionary. 3It occurs to me that the idea of this gradual ascent from

polytheism via monotheism to universalism and the idea

of mission can be maintained only if one assumes that the

idea of mission can be gleaned from a process of growth in

29



Israel's religion. But it seems to me impossible to glean

this from the Old Testament.

We are not therefore obliged to climb the ladder of

polytheism-monotheism-universalism in order to come out

finally at the highest rung, that of the idea of mission.

The prophetic-priestly-royal character of Israel as a

people of the election is an established fact from the begin-

ning, and it is an obsolete notion to think that the idea of

a universal call could emerge only late in Israel. But the

whole scheme of polytheism-to-monotheism-to-univer-

salism-to-the-idea-of-mission is surely forced on the Old

Testament, and time and again has led us offin the wrongdirection. And, in particular, the idea of a postulate is

surely more ofa philosophical construct than an exegetical

conclusion?4 In fact, I think that if one assumes that the

idea of mission is a postulate of universalism, one is up

against a very great difficulty in regard to mission.

What is this difficulty? Simply this : that while the point

of departure of the Old Testament is universalistic, the

idea of mission either occurs only sporadically or is missing alto-

gether. In this case we can call the Old Testament "mis-

sionary" only if we abandon the distinction between

universalism and mission. But if we do this, we are de-

priving ourselves of the distinctive effort ofthe Old Testa-

ment. If we direct our thoughts in this chapter exclusively

to the missionary character ofthe Old Testament, we will

really end by considering only two portions of the Old

Testament.

If every declaration of universalism in the Old Testa-

ment is called "missionary", then Isaiah 40-55 and the

book ofJonah are indisputably the high points ofthe Old

Testament from a missionary point of view. But if the

word "missionary" is confined to the idea of being sent

out to the nations with the message of salvation, then

these two portions of Scripture become almost the only

passages in support of an idea of mission. But even here

there is no longer any unanimity because the missionary

30

Israel's religion. But it seems to me impossible to gleanthis from the Old Testament.

We are not therefore obliged to climb the ladder of

polytheism-monotheism-universalism in order to come out

finally at the highest rung, that of the idea of mission.The prophetic-priestly-royal character of Israel as a

people of the election is an established fact from the beginning, and it is an obsolete notion to think that the idea of

a universal call could emerge only late in Israel. But the

whole scheme of polytheism-to-monotheism-to-universalism-to-the-idea-of-mission is surely forced on the Old

Testament, and time and again has led us off in the wrongdirection. And, in particular, the idea of a postulate issurely more ofa philosophical construct than an exegeticalconclusion ?4 In fact, I think that if one assumes that the

idea of mission is a postulate of universalism, one is up

against a very great difficulty in regard to mission.What is this difficulty? Simply this: that while the point

of departure of the Old Testament is universalistic, theidea of mission either occurs on(y sporadical(y or is missing alto-gether. In this case we can call the Old Testament "missionary" only if we abandon the distinction betweenuniversalism and mission. But if we do this, we are depriving ourselves of the distinctive effort of the Old Testament. I f we direct our thoughts in this chapter e x c l u s i v e ( ) ~to the missionary character of the Old Testament, we willreally end by considering only two portions of the Old

Testament.

If every declaration of universalism in the Old Testament is called "missionary", then Isaiah 40-55 and the

book ofJonah are indisputably the high points of the Old

Testament from a missionary point of view. But if the

word "missionary" is confined to the idea of being sentout to the nations with the message of salvation, then

these two portions of Scripture become almost the onlypassages in support of an idea of mission. But even herethere is no longer any unanimity because the missionary

30



character of these passages of Scripture has not remained

unchallenged.

We will want to place side by side the various views

regarding these oft-discussed

passages

of

Scripture,

in

order to draw our conclusions regarding the character

and boundaries of the missionary message of the Old

Testament.

2. The "Missionary High Points" of the Old Testament

A. ISAIAH 40-55

Almost all those who have been concerned with the

question of the missionary message of the Old Testament

are agreed that the universal significance and calling of

Israel is nowhere expressed more clearly than here.

Those who see Moses as the first missionary in the Old

Testament consider the author of Isa. 40-55 to have been

inspired by him/ and thus to be continuing Moses's long-

forgotten and neglected work.

Those who see the germ of the Old Testament in the

divine election of Israel also recognize in Deutero-Isaiah

the high point of the doctrine of election as an expression

of universalism.6

The prophecies ofuniversalism in Isa. 40-55 have been

discussed frequently enough to render repetition of this

point unnecessary,7 The strictly missionary prophecies are

usually confined to two Songs of the Servant of Yahweh,

42: 1-7 and 49: 1-7. It is clearly stated in these passages

that the Servant is called to reveal justice to the nations

(42: i) and to be as a light to the nations (42: 6, 49: 6),

in order that the salvation of God may reach to the end

of the earth (49 : 6) . While in the remaining passages of

Deutero-Isaiah it is stated only that the world of nations

will be taken aback by the restoration of Israel, or that

they are summoned to praise Yahweh for the liberation He

extends to Israel, here the Servant directly calls the nations

themselves to salvation.

There is pretty general agreement that the figure of the

character of these passages of Scripture has not remainedunchallenged.

We will want to place side by side the various viewsregarding these oft-discussed passages of Scripture, in

order to draw our conclusions regarding the characterand boundaries of the missionary message of the Old

Testament.

2. The "Missionary High Points" of the Old Testament

A. ISAIAH 40-55

Almost all those who have been concerned with the

question of the missionary message of the Old Testamentare agreed that the universal significance and calling of

Israel is nowhere expressed more clearly than here.Those who see Moses as the first missionary in the Old

Testament consider the author ofisa. 40-55 to have beeninspired by him,5 and thus to be continuing Moses's longforgotten and neglected work.

Those who see the germ of the Old Testament in the

divine election of Israel also recognize in Deutero-Isaiahthe high point of the doctrine of election as an expressionof universalism.G

The prophecies ofuniversalism in Isa. 40-55 have beendiscussed frequently enough to render repetition of thispoint unnecessary.7 The strictly missionary prophecies are

usually confined to two Songs of the Servant of Yahweh,42 : I -7 and 49: 1-7. It is clearly stated in these passagesthat the Servant is called to reveal justice to the nations(42: I) and to be as a light to the nations (42: 6, 49: 6),in order that the salvation of God may reach to the endof the earth (49: 6). While in the remaining passages of

Deutero-Isaiah it is stated only that the world of nations

will be taken aback by the restoration of Israel, or thatthey are summoned to praise Yahweh for the liberation He

extends to Israel, here the Servant directly calls the nationsthemselves to salvation.

There is pretty general agreement that the figure of the

31



Servant is best conceived of neither as a personificationof

Israel exclusively, nor as an individual person, but as a

"corporate personality",who can be understood both as

individual and as collective. Therefore there is real justi-

fication for speaking of a missionary calling of Israel.

Israel is called (under the figure of the Servant) to bring

justice to the nations and to be a light to the nations.

Certainly the charge to mission can be formulated no

more clearly, and one of the exegetes rightly observes:

"The objections raised against an exegesis of Isa. 42 and

49

which

imply

mission activity are in my estimation valid

only if we make a consistent attempt to elucidate the

Servant of the Lord as an individual (and eschatological)

figure."8 This expresses the opinion of most exegetes. But

quite recently there has been proposed another exegesis

of these very passages.For Martin-Achard argues

9 that

even in these statements regarding the Servant of the

Lord the Old Testament does not go any farther than uni-

versalistic preaching; according to him there is no question

here of any preaching in the world, any going out to the

nations, nor of any commission to them, but only of a

witness that remains confined to Israel's existence and

suffering in the midst of the nations.

Let us quote Martin-Achard's conclusion concerning

Isa. 42 and 49 and Deutero-Isaiah in general:

The message of Deutero-Isaiah is not missionary in the

ordinary sense of this word; his preaching does not issue in

proselytism.The prophet does not invite Israel to range

the world to call the heathen to repentance. The raison

d'etre of the chosen people is to exist; its presence gives testi-

mony to the divinity of Yahweh, its life proclaims all that

God is for it and for the world. The mission of Israel exists

in reflecting the glory of God by accepting His gifts along

with His judgments; by beholding the whole singular

fortune of the chosen people, one discovers heaven and earth

and their Maker. Israel exercises the function of mediator

over against the nations; she points them back to Him

32

Servant is best conceived of neither as a personification of

Israel exclusively, nor as an individual person, but as a

"corporate personality", who can be understood both as

individual and as collective. Therefore there is real justi

fication for speaking of a missionary calling of Israel.

Israel is called (under the figure ofthe Servant) to bring

justice to the nations and to be a light to the nations.

Certainly the charge to mission can be formulated no

more clearly, and one of the exegetes rightly observes:

"The objections raised against an exegesis of Isa. 42 and

49 which imply mission activity are in my estimation valid

only if we make a consistent attempt to elucidate the

Servant of the Lord as an individual (and eschatological)figure."8 This expresses the opinion of most exegetes. But

quite recently there has been proposed another exegesisof these very passages. For Martin-Achard argues9 that

even in these statements regarding the Servant of the

Lord the Old Testament does not go any farther than uni

versalistic preaching; according to him there is no questionhere of any preaching in the world, any going out to the

nations, nor of any commission to them, but only of a

witness that remains confined to Israel's existence and

suffering in the midst of the nations.

Let us quote Martin-Achard's conclusion concerning

I sa. 42 and 49 and Deutero-Isaiah in general:

The message of Deutero-Isaiah is not missionary in theordinary sense of this word; his preaching does not issue in

proselytism. The prophet does not invite Israel to rangethe world to call the heathen to repentance. The raison

d'etre of the chosen people is to exist; its presence gives testimony to the divinity of Yahweh, its life proclaims all that

God is for it and for the world. The mission of Israel existsin reflecting the glory of God by accepting His gifts alongwith His judgments; by beholding the whole singularfortune of the chosen people, one discovers heaven and earthand their Maker. Israel exercises the function of mediatorover against the nations; she points them back to Him

32



whom she has to thank for everything. She is their light

because Israel has been lit by God's glory in a special

manner. While Deutero-Isaiah preaches comfort to his

brethren, he is also proclaiming that their glorious return

testifies to the unique greatness of Yahweh. The marvel bywhich Israel lives publicizes the glory of her God to the

whole world.

The fortune of the world ultimately hangs upon the

existence of Israel in the midst of the nations; living by

Yahweh, the chosen people lives for mankind. That is the

missionary perspective which becomes visible in the

declarations of Deutero-Isaiah.10

B. THE BOOK OF JONAH

Jonah, like Deutero-Isaiah, has often been termed the

missionary high point of the Old Testament. It is a

welcome contrast to the book of Esther (an ultra-particu-

laristic document).

Although personally I believe that this point of view

tends to exaggerate the significance of the book, at the

same time it is difficult to deny that Jonah breathes an

uncommonly universal spirit. But what about a missionary

spirit?

Most of the exegetes are unanimous in the judgment

about Jonah, too. Here, as far as they are concerned, the

missionary ideal is proclaimed unambiguously, and in this

book Israel is directed toward her proper calling in the

world. The book is levelled against Jewish religious and

nationalistic exclusivism and is thus a straight-out plea for

mission among the heathen.11 The assumption is also

frequently made that the writer is dependent on the book

of Deutero-Isaiah.12

But others, both at an earlier period13 and more recently,

deny that the book is concerned with the commission to

proclaim to all nations the message of salvation. The

opposition to aJewish exclusivism consists only, according

to this view, in accentuating the infinite and ample mercy

of Yahweh. Martin-Achard14associates himself with the

c 33

whom she has to thank for everything. She is their lightbecause Israel has been lit by God's glory in a specialmanner. While Deutero-Isaiah preaches comfort to his

brethren, he is also proclaiming that their glorious return

testifies to the unique greatness ofYahweh. The marvel bywhich Israel lives publicizes the glory of her God to thewhole world.

The fortune of the world ultimately hangs upon theexistence of Israel in the midst of the nations; living byYahweh, the chosen people lives for mankind. That is themissionary perspective which becomes visible in thedeclarations of Deutero-Isaiah.10

B. THE BooK oF JoNAH

Jonah, like Deutero-Isaiah, has often been termed the

missionary high point of the Old Testament. I t is a

welcome contrast to the book of Esther (an ultra-particularistic document).

Although personally I believe that this point of view

tends to exaggerate the significance of the book, at the

same time it is difficult to deny that Jonah breathes an

uncommonly universal spirit. But what about a missionaryspirit?

Most of the exegetes are unanimous in the judgment

about Jonah, too. Here, as far as they are concerned, the

missionary ideal is proclaimed unambiguously, and in this

book Israel is directed toward her proper calling in theworld. The book is levelled against Jewish religious and

nationalistic exclusivism and is thus a straight-out plea formission among the heathen.11 The assumption is also

frequently made that the writer is dependent on the bookof Deutero-Isaiah.l2

But others, both at an earlier period13 and more recently,

deny that the book is concerned with the commission toproclaim to all nations the message of salvation. The

opposition to aJewish exclusivism consists only, according

to this view, in accentuating the infinite and ample mercyof Yahweh. Martin-Achardu associates himself with the

c 33



ideas of the Roman Catholic theologian. A, Feuillet, who

prefers to understand Jonah as a humiliating sermon to

narrow-minded Jews; nothing more.

It cannot be denied that a real plea for mission to the

heathen is lacking in the book ofJonah; at most it can only

be deduced from the book.

C. AGGRAVATION OF THE PROBLEM

Now with the chief witnesses for the idea of mission in

the Old Testament Deutero-Isaiah and Jonah no

longer above suspicion, are we not led to the conclusion

that we had best abandon the Old Testament as a source

for the Biblical foundation of mission? Or is there still

some suggestion ofa common conviction in the conflicting

testimony of exegesis,a conviction that can open the way

to a solution of this difficult question? I believe we will

do well to separate two issues.

First, it seems to me that both sides are agreed that

never in the whole period ofthe Old Testament was there

any deliberate missionary activity. Even those who hold

fast to a missionary interpretation of Deutero-Isaiah and

Jonah recognize that the concern is for commissions and

promises which willbe realized only in thefuture. During the

Old Testament period no one could arrive at mission as an

act ofgoing out for proclamation among the nations. Ifthe

Old Testament has become acquainted with the idea of

mission in the narrower sense, its realization is reserved

to the future age. So we encounter the problem of the

future expectation in the Old Testament.

Second, we shall do well to realize that when people use

the word "mission35

in contrast to "universalism" they do

not always mean the same thing. At the risk of being

suspected here of sophism, may I venture to complete the

distinction already made between "universalism" and

"mission" by a further distinction betweencentripetal and

centrifugal missionary consciousness. I believe that those

who advocate a missionary exegesis ofDeutero-Isaiah and

34

ideas of the Roman Catholic theologian, A. Feuillet, whoprefers to understand Jonah as a humiliating sermon tonarrow-minded Jews; nothing more.

It cannot be denied that a real plea for mission to the

heathen is lacking in the book of onah; at most it can onlybe deduced from the book.

C. AGGRAVATION OF THE PROBLEM

Now with the chief witnesses for the idea of mission in

the Old Testament-Deutero-Isaiah and Jonah-no

longer above suspicion, are we not led to the conclusionthat we had best abandon the Old Testament as a sourcefor the Biblical foundation of mission? Or is there stillsome suggestion of a common conviction in the conflictingtestimony of exegesis, a conviction that can open the wayto a solution of this difficult question? I believe we willdo well to separate two issues.

First, it seems to me that both sides are agreed that

never in the whole period of the Old Testament was thereany deliberate missionary activity. Even those who holdfast to a missionary interpretation of Deutero-Isaiah and

Jonah recognize that the concern is for commissions and

promises which will be realized onlyinthefoture. During the

Old Testament period no one could arrive at mission as an

act of going out for proclamation among the nations. I f he

Old Testament has become acquainted with the idea ofmission in the narrower sense, its realization is reservedto the future age. So we encounter the problem of the

future expectation in the Old Testament.Second, we shall do well to realize that when people use

the word "mission" in contrast to "universalism" they do

not always mean the same thing. At the risk of being

suspected here of sophism, may I venture to complete thedistinction already made between "universalism" and

"mission" by a further distinction between centripetal and

centrifugal missionary consciousness. I believe that thosewho advocate a missionary exegesis ofDeutero-Isaiah and

34



Jonah are right in so far as they understand that these

passages of Scripture are concerned with more than uni-

versalism as defined in Chapter i . On the other hand, I

believe that those who reject such a missionary exegesis

are right in so far as they understand that there is no

thought of mission in the Old Testament in the centrifugal

sense in which it comes to the fore in the New Testament.

3. The Character of the Old Testament Expectation for

the Future

The Old Testament might be characterized as the book

ofthe expectation of Israel. The content ofthis expectation

is none other than Yahweh Himself (Jer. 14: 8, 17: 13,

50: 7, Ps. 71 15).

Yahweh is not, like the gods of the other nations, a

power of nature, but the God of history.15 Therefore He is

almost never referred to in the Old Testament as "God of

gods", as if He were the primus inter pares among the gods

of the earth; rather He is the God of Israel. Here, and

particularly here, is where His special character lies; He

has entered into a covenant with men, in particular with

Israel. The God of Israel is the God who steps into human

life and thereby makes history. This is why history carries

such a great weight in and for Israel because it is the

history of the acts of Yahweh (cf. e.g. Ps. 78, and the

appeal to the acts of Yahweh in the past in the prophetic

writings).

From this God, who in the past chose Israel and con-

cluded a covenant with Abraham, everything is expected

in the future as well. The Old Testament is all expecta-

tion.16 Because Yahweh steps actively into history and

leads His people, therefore people expect everything from

Him. The past ofthe acts ofYahweh thus never really be-

comes past in the sense of finished business. The past is

never only past; it is also a powerful witness for the active

presence and power of Yahweh today, and therefore also

a promise for Yahweh's future activity.17

35

Jonah are right in so far as they understand that thesepassages of Scripture are concerned with more than uni-versalism as defined in Chapter 1 . On the other hand, Ibelieve that those who reject such a missionary exegesisare right in so far as they understand that there is nothought of mission in the Old Testament in the centrifugalsense in which it comes to the fore in the New Testament.

3· The Character of the Old Testament Expectation for

the Future

The Old Testament might be characterized as the bookof the expectation oflsrael. The content of his expectationis none other than Yahweh Himself (Jer. 14: 8, 17: 13,

50: 7, Ps. 71: 5).Yahweh is not, like the gods of the other nations, a

power of nature, but the God ofhistory.15 Therefore He is

almost never referred to in the Old Testament as "God of

gods", as if He were the primus inter pares among the gods

of the earth; rather He is the God of Israel. Here, and

particularly here, is where His special character lies; He

has entered into a covenant with men, in particular with

Israel. The God oflsrael is the God who steps into human

life and thereby makes history. This is why history carriessuch a great weight in and for Israel-because it is the

history of the acts of Yahweh (cf. e.g. Ps. 78, and the

appeal to the acts of Yahweh in the past in the propheticwritings).

From this God, who in the past chose Israel and con-cluded a covenant with Abraham, everything is expectedin the future as well. The Old Testament is all expecta-tion.16 Because Yahweh steps actively into history and

leads His people, therefore people expect everything from

Him. The past of the acts ofYahweh thus never really be-comes past in the sense of finished business. The past is

never on?J past; it is also a powerful witness for the activepresence and power of Yahweh today, and therefore alsoa promise for Yahweh's future activity.17

35



In this light we must also view the relationship between

Israel, as the People of God, on the one hand, and the

nations (heathen), on the other.

In the past God created these nations. They are the work

of His hands (Ps. 86: 9), they witness to His many-sided

wisdom and goodness (Gen. 9: 16), to His yearning for

peace as well (Gen. 10: i, 32), because He blessed the

earthafter the flood with a multitude of peoples. Because

the God of Israel has been the God of all nations in the

past, so also is He in the present and will be in the future.

Because the God of Israel is the Creator not only of all

nations but also of heaven and earth, man and beast,

therefore will He reveal Himself in the future as Creator

and Possessor, and more particularly as Redeemer also ofthe

whole world.

The salvation of Yahweh reaches out as far as possible

in time and space (Gen. i-n), and it will extend just

as far in the future. The past is guarantee ofthe future and

the future is confirmation of the past, because in both

Yahweh is the living, the acting, and the only God.

Thus we have just as much right to say that Israel's

future is defined by her past as that the appreciation of

her past is defined by her expectation for the future. In

the prophets' expectation for the future, and in the per-

spective ofthe Psalms, we get a new view both of creation

and of the world of nations, illumined just as the descrip-

tion in Gen. i-i i is illumined : by the light ofthe goodness,

thefriendship, the blessing of God.

It is precisely "to the uttermost limits of their range"that the declarations (in the Psalms and Wisdom litera-

ture) concerning creation mean to bear witness to the

salvation which Yahweh will give not only as the God of

Israel but as the God of all that lives and has breath

(Ps. 1 50).

People have fallen into the common habit of referring

every expectation for the future to "eschatology". But it

seems to me more correct to keep the word "eschatology"

36

In this light we must also view the relationship betweenIsrael, as the People of God, on the one hand, and the

nations (heathen), on the other.In the past God created these nations. They are the work

of His hands (Ps. 86: g), they witness to His many-sidedwisdom and goodness (Gen. g: 16), to His yearning forpeace as well (Gen. 10: 1, 32), because He blessed the

earth after the flood with a multitude of peoples. Becausethe God of Israel has been the God of all nations in the

past, so also is He in the present and will be in the future.Because the God of Israel is the Creator not only of all

nations but also of heaven and earth, man and beast,therefore will He reveal Himself in the future as Creatorand Possessor, and more particularly as Redeemer also of the

whole world.The salvation of Yahweh reaches out as far as possible

in time and space (Gen. 1-n), and it will extend just

as far in the future. The past is guarantee of the future and

the future is confirmation of the past, because in bothYahweh is the living, the acting, and the only God.

Thus we have just as much right to say that Israel'sfuture is defined by her past as that the appreciation of

her past is defined by her expectation for the future. In

the prophets' expectation for the future, and in the per

spective of the Psalms, we get a new view both of creation

and ofthe world ofnations, illumined just as the description in Gen. I-II is illumined: by the light ofthe goodness,the friendship, the blessing of God.

It is precisely "to the uttermost limits of their range"

that the declarations (in the Psalms and Wisdom literature) concerning creation mean to bear witness to the

salvation which Yahweh will give not only as the God of

Israel but as the God of all that lives and has breath(Ps. 150).18

People have fallen into the common habit of referringevery expectation for the future to "eschatology". But it

seems to me more correct to keep the word "eschatology"

s6



for that expectation of Israel which really extends to the

"eschata", the farthest limits (geographical, historical,

qualitative). So in general we can say that Israel's ex-

pectation of Yahweh and the God of Israel belongs not to

the eschatological expectation, but Israel's expectation of

Yahweh as the God of the world of nations does belong

to eschatology, because here the limits are really over-

stepped. The sharp distinction from other nations cannot

be rationalized out of the Old Testament. It would run

counter to the election of Israel if the nations were already

put on a par with Israel in the present; on the other hand,

it would run counter to the sense and purpose of Israel's

election if the prospect of the nations' knowing and

praising Yahweh were not to be preserved in spite of the

sin, the idolatry, the guilt of the nations toward Israel.

But it is quite plain that He who has made the nations (Ps.

86: 9) and who has made them as His nations (Ps. 87)

is also the only one who can call them to Himself. That

which will bring the world of nations to Him is not Israel's

calling them, nor her going out to them, but exclusively the

visible manifestation of the deeds of God in and with

Israel; only so will they recognize Yahweh as their God,

i.e. confess that Israel's God is their God, the God of the

whole earth, the only God.

Israel's expectation for the future in general, and a

fortioriIsrael's eschatological expectation for the nations

who do not know Yahweh, the heathen, is not based on a

future act of Israel's, but on the future acts ofYahweh. In

other words, eschatology in the Old Testament is not con-

cerned with a mission of Israel in the sense of a going out

to the nations to preach the gospel: the mission of Israel

consists in the fact that through this nation God will make

His power known, visible, and tangible to the view of all

nations and with a view to all nations.

The character of eschatology as expectation of what Yahweh

will do really excludes the idea of mission in the narrower sense

(Israel's going out to the nations).

37

for that expectation of Israel which really extends to the

"eschata", the farthest limits (geographical, historical,qualitative). So in general we can say that Israel's ex-pectation of Yahweh and the God of Israel belongs not tothe eschatological expectation, but Israel's expectation of

Yahweh as the God of the world of nations does belongto eschatology, because here the limits are really over-stepped. The sharp distinction from other nations cannotbe rationalized out of the Old Testament. It would run

counter to the election of Israel if the nations were alreadyput on a par with Israel in the present; on the other hand,

it would run counter to the sense and purpose of Israel'selection if the prospect of the nations' knowing and

praising Yahweh were not to be preserved in spite of thesin, the idolatry, the guilt of the nations toward Israel.But it is quite plain that He who has made the nations (Ps.86: g) and who has made them as His nations (Ps. 87)is also the only one who can call them to Himself. That

which will bring the world of nations to Him is not Israel'scalling them, nor her going out to them, but exclusively the

visible manifestation of the deeds of God in and withIsrael; only so will they recognize Yahweh as their God,i.e. confess that Israel's God is their God, the God of the

whole earth, the only God.Israel's expectation for the future in general, and a

fortiori Israel's eschatological expectation for the nationswho do not know Yahweh, the heathen, is not based on afuture act oflsrael's, but on the future acts ofYahweh. In

other words, eschatology in the Old Testarr.tent is not con-cerned with a mission of Israel in the sense of a going outto the nations to preach the gospel: the mission of Israelconsists in the fact that through this nation God will make

His power known, visible, and tangible to the view of allnations and with a view to all nations.

The character of eschatology as expectation of what Yahweh

will do really excludes the idea of mission in the narrower sense

(Israel's going out to the nations).

37



Neither the activity of Israel nor that of the nations

stands in the foreground ofeschatology, but exclusively the

activity ofYahweh, His acts happen to Israel, in the sight

of the nations, and therefore to the nations too.

So whether there will be any deliverance directed to the

nations depends upon their relation to Israel and upon

Yahweh's activity in and with Israel. The arbitrariness

and overweening pride of the nations (Gen. u) prevents

them from seeing reality, namely, that they have Yahweh

to thank for their existence (Gen. 10); therefore He will

make them see reality by creating space in their midst for

a nation (Gen. 12) that is His special possession, in order

to create space for His recognition among the nations.

This is the theme of Heilsgeschichte and therefore the out-

look of eschatology as well. In eschatology, Heilsgeschichte

will find its confirmation and crown. Therefore the escha-

tological expectation can also avail itself of present and

even of perfect (verb forms) : prophetic present and pro-

phetic perfect.

The correctness ofthis conception ofthe Old Testament

expectation for the future is concisely confirmed by Karl

Earth, K.D. IV, 3, pp. 788-92. He distinguishes between

a tentative, subordinate conception, present in the fore-

ground, of the coexistence of the nations with Israel as

temptation and threat, and a conception in the back-

ground, superordinate and definitive, which sees the

nations as the creation ofGod and as the Kingdom ofGod.

For our purpose here it is sufficient to establish

(i)that the expectation in regard to the world of

nations is an eschatological expectation which also

harks back to the past and which can therefore be

celebrated liturgically as already present;

(ii) that the fulfilling of this expectation will be ex-

clusively an act of Yahweh's.

4. Mission as Eschatological Possibility

In the light of the expectation for the future which has

38

Neither the activity of Israel nor that of the nationsstands in the foreground ofeschatology, but exclusively theactivity ofYahweh. His acts happen to Israel, in the sightof the nations, and therefore to the nations too.

So whether there will be any deliverance directed to thenations depends upon their relation to Israel and uponYahweh's activity in and with Israel. The arbitrarinessand overweening pride of the nations (Gen. I I) preventsthem from seeing reality, namely, that they have Yahwehto thank for their existence (Gen. 10); therefore He willmake them see reality by creating space in their midst for

a nation (Gen. 12) that is His special possession, in orderto create space for His recognition among the nations.This is the theme of Heilsgeschichte and therefore the outlook of eschatology as well. In eschatology, Heilsgeschichtewill find its confirmation and crown. Therefore the eschatological expectation can also avail itself of present andeven of perfect (verb forms): prophetic present and pro

phetic perfect.The correctness of this conception ofthe Old Testament

expectation for the future is concisely confirmed by KarlBarth, K.D. IV, 3, pp. 788-g2. He distinguishes betweena tentative, subordinate conception, present in the foreground, of the coexistence of the nations with Israel astemptation and threat, and a conception in the back

ground, superordinate and definitive, which sees thenations as the creation ofGod and as the Kingdom ofGod.

For our purpose here it is sufficient to establish(i) that the expectation in regard to the world of

nations is an eschatological expectation which alsoharks back to the past and which can therefore becelebrated-liturgically-as already present;

(ii) that the fulfilling of this expectation will be exclusively an act ofYahweh's.

4· Mission as Eschatological PossibilityIn the light of the expectation for the future which has

38



been sketched out here, we must now raise the question

once more as to whether there is any trace of missionary

consciousness in the Old Testament or not.

Our appeal to Deutero-Isaiah, and particularly to the

songs ofthe Servant ofthe Lord, is fullyjustified when our

concern is to demonstrate the eschatological expectation

for the world of nations. But we have already seen (2)

that a missionary significance to these Biblical passages is

both accepted (Sellin, Volz, Eichrodt, Vriezen, Rowley,

Jacob)19 and rejected (de Boer, Snaith, Martin-Achard).

20

Some go so far as to doubt or even to deny any univer-

salistic character to Deutero-Isaiah.21 But I must oppose

such an interpretation on the ground of the unity of the

Bible, and I submit that Israel's eschatological expectation

of salvation becomes an expectation for the nations.22

Likewise, I think that it is difficult to oppose the missionary

character of such declarations as Isa. 42 : 4, 45 : 22, 23,

49: 6, 53: ii for they clearly say that salvation shall

reach the coastlands; that the nations shall see the light

of the Servant of Yahweh, that the ends of the earth are

called to turn to Yahweh.

But I think we shall have to admit that there are no

compelling reasons for explaining Isa. 45: 22, 23 and

53: ii in this way; there is no reference here to Israel's

going out (or to that of the Servant of Yahweh). I do be-

lieve that this must be affirmed of Isa. 42 : 2 and 49 : 6.

After all, we are doing some violence to these declarations

in denying the most obvious idea in these verses, that

justice shall be brought to the waiting coastlands (42 : 4),

and in denying that the expression "so that my salvation

shall reach to the end of the earth" (in direct connection

with the designation "light for the nations" ofthe Servant

ofYahweh, 49: 6) also implies the bringing of the news.

Thus we must conclude that there is in fact only one

statement in the Old Testament that expresses in so manywords the idea of mission in the sense of "going out to the

nations", and that of the other passages cited here another

39

been sketched out here, we must now raise the questiononce more as to whether there is any trace of missionaryconsciousness in the Old Testament or not.

Our appeal to Deutero-Isaiah, and particularly to thesongs of the Servant of the Lord, is fully justified when our

concern is to demonstrate the eschatological expectationfor the world of nations. But we have already seen (2)

that a missionary significance to these Biblical passages is

both accepted (Sellin, Volz, Eichrodt, Vriezen, Rowley,Jacob) 19 and rejected (de Boer, Snaith, Martin-Achard).2°Some go so far as to doubt or even to deny any univer

salistic character to Deutero-Isaiah.21 But I must opposesuch an interpretation on the ground of the unity of theBible, and I submit that Israel's eschatological expectationof salvation becomes an expectation for the nations.22

Likewise, I think that it is difficult to oppose the missionary

character of such declarations as Isa. 42: 4, 45: 22, 23,49: 6, 53 : I I - for they clearly say that salvation shall

reach the coastlands; that the nations shall see the lightof the Servant of Yahweh, that the ends of the earth arecalled to turn to Yahweh.

But I think we shall have to admit that there are nocompelling reasons for explaining Isa. 45: 22, 23 and

53: II in this way; there is no reference here to Israel'sgoing out (or to that ofthe Servant of Yahweh). I do be

lieve that this must be affirmed of I sa. 42 : 2 and 49: 6.Mter all, we are doing some violence to these declarationsin denying the most obvious idea in these verses, that

justice shall be brought to the waiting coastlands (42: 4),and in denying that the expression "so that my salvationshall reach to the end of the earth" (in direct connectionwith the designation "light for the nations" of the Servant

ofYahweh, 49: 6) also implies the bringing ofthe news.Thus we must conclude that there is in fact only one

statement in the Old Testament that expresses in so manywords the idea of mission in the sense of "going out to the

nations", and that of the other passages cited here another

39



interpretation is possible simply that the nations shall

come to salvation.

This idea is to be found not only in the passages cited

here; the Psalms often express the idea that the nations

shall come to Israel, to Jerusalem again and again. The

best known in this regard is certainly Isa. 2 : 2-5 (cf.

Mic. 4: i ff.; Zech. 8: 20, 21, 14: 16).

It is to the merit of Bengt Sundkler23 that he has called

attention to thisspecific form ofmissionary sense in Israel,

namely, the conviction that Israel and especially Jerusalem is the

centre ofthe world, whither the nations shall turn theirsteps.

That

this has nothing to do with the familiar ethnocentrism

which is met with in so many forms throughout the world,

need not be set forth in this connection in any greater

detail. But it is also good to realize that the prophecy of

the coming ofthe nations to Yahweh, or to Israel,Jerusalem

or Zion is announced only in the later writings of the Old

Testament. The notion of the universal significance ofthe

election of Israel is certainly present from the very begin-

ning, without, however, our having the promise of the

coming of the nations, of the answer of the nations to the

"universal prophecy" of Israel.

The prospect of a positive reaction on the part of the

nations to the existence of Israel is first held forth in the

prophetic writings and in the Psalms. To my way ofthink-

ing, this is a valid reason for distinguishing in the Old

Testament between:(a)

the thought of universalism; (b]

the thought of mission in the centripetal sense; (c)the

thought ofmission in the centrifugal sense.

This first is quite general, and is even the very pre-

supposition of Israel's election (Gen. 10, n, and 12); the

last is so rare that one can actually point to only one

Scriptural passage with certainty, Isa. 42: 4. But the

thought of mission in the centripetal sense occurs with

great frequency both in the prophets and in the Psalms.

By this we understand the promise of the coming of the

nations as aresponse to God's acts in Israel. That Israel herself

40

interpretation is possible-simply that the nations shallcome to salvation.

This idea is to be found not only in the passages citedhere; the Psalms often express the idea that the nations

shall come to Israel, to J r u s a l e m - a g a i r ~ : and again. The

best known in this regard is certainly Isa. 2 : 2-5 (cf.

Mic. 4: Iff.; Zech. 8: 20, 21, 14: 16).It is to the merit ofBengt Sundkler23 that he has called

attention to this specific form of missionary sense in Israel,namely, the conviction that Israel and especially Jerusalem is the

centre of he world, whither the nations shall tum their steps. That

this has nothing to do with the familiar ethnocentrismwhich is met with in so many forms throughout the world,need not be set forth in this connection in any greaterdetail. But it is also good to realize that the prophecy of

the coming of he nations to Yahweh, or to Israel, Jerusalemor Zion is announced only in the later writings of the Old

Testament. The notion of the universal significance of the

election of Israel is certainly present from the very begin-ning, without, however, our having the promise of the

coming of the nations, of the answer of the nations to the

"universal prophecy" of Israel.The prospect of a positive reaction on the part of the

nations to the existence of Israel is first held forth in the

prophetic writings and in the Psalms. To my way of think-

ing, this is a valid reason for distinguishing in the OldTestament between: (a) the thought ofuniversalism; (b)the thought of mission in the centripetal sense; (c) the

thought ofmission in the centrifugal sense.This first is quite general, and is even the very pre-

supposition of!srael's election (Gen. 10, I I , and 12); the

last is so rare that one can actually point to only one

Scriptural passage with certainty, !sa. 42: 4· But thethought of mission in the centripetal sense occurs withgreat frequency both in the prophets and in the Psalms.By this we understand the promise of the coming of the

nations as a response to God's acts in Israel. That Israel herself

40



thereby fulfils the role of messenger, caller out of the land

of Israel, the city ofJerusalem, or the Temple, is not out of

the question. But we must certainly remember that the

Psalms, for example, summon the nations to know and

praise Yahweh, but that these Psalms were sung in the

temple of Israel, and thus could only be heard by those

there present, that is, by Israel herself.

But the execution of the summons and the promise to

the nations is an affair of the future. In other words, the

revealing of Israel's universal significance, the centripetal

missionary function of Israel and(if necessary) the centri-

fugal missionary task ofthe Servant ofthe Lord (Isa. 42 : 4)

is an eschatological expectation, which will be fulfilled

only at the end of days.

We have paid attention here exclusively to Deutero-

Isaiah rather than to Jonah (cf. 2) because of my con-

viction that the book ofJonah has to be classified amongthe universalistic and not among the missionary portions

of the Old Testament. The universalism of the book of

Jonah expresses anti-particularistic, anti-nationalistic, or

(anachronistically) anti-Pharisaic tendencies, but I do not

feel that it can be advanced as evidence for the presence in

the Old Testament of a missionary commission to go out-

side Israel. Here, I think, we must admit, "He [Jonah]

brings no new revelation regarding Yahweh, but combats

a bad interpretation of Israel's election by recalling an

essential characteristic of the God of Israel,"24

namely,

His care for the nations.

We will return in another chapter to another important

passage in the Old Testament which in the history of

revelation has fulfilled an important function, namely,

Dan. 7: 1-14.

5. Summary

When, after this short survey, we inquire as to the results

ofour investigation into the significance of the Old Testa-

ment for a theology of mission, we must affirm, in view of

41

thereby fulfils the role of messenger, caller out of the land

oflsrael, the city ofJerusalem, or the Temple, is not out of

the question. But we must certainly remember that the

Psalms, for example, summon the nations to know and

praise Yahweh, but that these Psalms were sung in the

temple of Israel, and thus could only be heard by thosethere present, that is, by Israel herself.

But the execution of the summons and the promise tothe nations is an affair of the future. In other words, the

revealing of Israel's universal significance, the centripetalmissionary function oflsrael and (if necessary) the centri

fugal missionary task ofthe Servant of the Lord (Isa. 42: 4)is an eschatological expectation, which will be fulfilledonly at the end of days.

We have paid attention here exclusively to DeuteroIsaiah rather than to Jonah (cf. 2) because of my conviction that the book of Jonah h,as to be classified amongthe universalistic and not among the missionary portions

of the Old Testament. The universalism of the book of

Jonah expresses anti-particularistic, anti-nationalistic, or

(anachronistically) anti-Pharisaic tendencies, but I do not

feel that it can be advanced as evidence for the presence in

the Old Testament of a missionary commission to go outside Israel. Here, I think, we must admit, "He [Jonah]brings no new revelation regarding Yahweh, but combats

a bad interpretation of Israel's election by recalling anessential characteristic of the God of Israel,"24 namely,His care for the nations.

We will return in another chapter to another importantpassage in the Old Testament which in the history of

revelation has fulfilled an important function, namely,

Dan. 7: 1-14.

5· SummaryWhen, after this short survey, we inquire as to the results

of our investigation into the significance of the Old Testa

ment for a theology of mission, we must affirm, in view of

41



the present-day state of the data, that the harvest is not

particularly great. When one turns to the Old Testament

to find a justification and basis for missions in the current

meaning,

that is,as "foreign missions", one is bound to be

disappointed* It does not seem advisable to build a

theology of missions on a few statements, especially on

those which are still exegetically in dispute.

But we may question whether there is any reason to

complain about this meagre result. I certainly do not think

it should be considered a loss if the Bible does not give us

an answer to the questions we ask but leads our thought in

another direction. It is not the human activity that stands

in the foreground of the Old Testament but the divine

acts for the redemption of Israel. These acts cannot be

confined to Israel, for the existence and redemption of

Israel has consequences for the nations. The nations do not

know this themselves, it has been avowed to Israel alone;

but one day it will be avowed to the nations themselves.

And then the destiny of the nations will be determined in

their coming to Yahweh or in their refusing to come. But

this belongs to eschatological expectations, not to the

promises already realized. Only in liturgy and in the

visions of apocalyptic can the future be surveyed as

already present.

The significance of these insights for a theology of

mission becomes completely clear from the words with

which Martin-Achard closes his investigation into the

missionary perspective in the Old Testament:

In conclusion, the Church cannot deny that God converts

the nations, acting in the midst of His people. His inter-

vening, and this alone, makes of Israel the light ofthe world.

The Churchevangelizes

to the extent that her Lordinspires

her; her existence, then, itself is her power. Mission has

nothing to do with this or that political or commercial

undertaking, as people have sometimes thought; it is com-

pletely dependenton the secret activity ofGod in the Church,

it is the fruit of a life that is truly founded in God. First

42

the present-day state of the data, that the harvest is not

particularly great. When one turns to the Old Testamentto find a justification and basis for missions in the current

meaning, that is, as "foreign missions", one is bound to be

disappointed. It does not seem advisable to build atheology of missions on a few statements, especially on

those which are still exegetically in dispute.But we may question whether there is any reason to

complain about this meagre result. I certainly do not think

it should be considered a loss if the Bible does not give usan answer to the questions we ask but leads our thought in

another direction. It is not the human activity that standsin the foreground of the Old Testament but the divineacts for the redemption of Israel. These acts cannot be

confined to Israel, for the existence and redemption of

Israel has consequences for the nations. The nations do not

know this themselves, it has been avowed to Israel alone;but one day it will be avowed to the nations themselves.

And then the destiny of the nations will be determined intheir coming to Yahweh or in their refusing to come. But

this belongs to eschatological expectations, not to the

promises already realized. Only in liturgy and in the

visions of apocalyptic can the future be surveyed asalready present.

The significance of these insights for a theology of

mission becomes completely clear from the words withwhich Martin-Achard closes his investigation into the

missionary perspective in the Old Testament:

In conclusion, the Church cannot deny that God convertsthe nations, acting in the midst of His people. His intervening, and this alone, makes oflsrael the light of the world.The Church evangelizes to the extent that her Lord inspiresher; her existence, then, itself is her power. Mission hasnothing to do with this or that political or commercialundertaking, as people have sometimes thought; it is completelydependenton the secret activity of God in the Church,it is the fruit of a life that is truly founded in God. First

42



and foremost, the evangelization of the world is not a

matter of words or of activity, but of presence: the presence

of the people of God in the midst of humanity, the presence of God

among His people. It is not without purpose that the Old

Testament brings this to the recollection of the Church.25

Now that we have distinguished the universalistic from

the in this special sense missionary character ofthe Old

Testament, we shall want to turn our attention, in the

following chapter to the connection ofboth these elements

with the expectation ofthe Messiah in the Old Testament.

43

and foremost, the evangelization of the world is not amatter of words or of activity, but of presence: the presence

of the people of God in the midst of humanity, the presence of Godamong His people. It is not without purpose that the Old

Testament brings this to the recollection of the Church. 25

Now that we have distinguished the universalistic from

t h e -in this special sense-missionary character of the Old

Testament, we shall want to tum our attention in the

following chapter to the connection ofboth these elements

with the expectation of the Messiah in the Old Testament.

43



CHAPTER 3

THE OLD TESTAMENT MESSAGE OFUNIVERSALISM AS A MESSIANIC MESSAGE

/. Expectation ofSalvation and Expectation ofthe Messiah

IT

IS A NOTEWORTHY PHENOMENON THAT OLD TESTA-

ment research in the last few decades has spent only a

modest amount of effort in research into the Messianic

character of the Old Testament in general and of the Old

Testament expectation of salvation in particular.1 Prob-

ably one reason for this is the aversion which historical

criticism has always displayed for the earlier Messianic

exegesis of the Old Testament on the part of the Church.2

Another reason is that the Old Testament expectation for

the future is always an expectation of salvation, but does

not always bear the character of a Messianic expectation.3

The justification for calling attention here to the Old

Testament Messianic expectation is that for the investiga-

tion of the Biblical foundations for a theology of mission,

this Messianic expectation is, in our opinion, of special

significance. Perhaps, after all, the Messiah does play a

greater role than one might realize on the basis of the

number of publications on the subject in recent years. It

is certainly significant that Jewish and Christian tradi-

tions run parallel in regard to the explicitly Messianic

passages in the Old Testament.4

Thus, even though future expectation and Messianic

expectation may not coincide, nevertheless the Messiah is

in a special sense the symbol and the culminating point

for future expectation and salvation-expectation in the

Old Testament. Within the limits of our investigation, we

want only to trace the significance and range of the uni-

44

CHAPTER 3

THE OLD TESTAMENT MESSAGE OF

UNIVERSALISM AS A MESSIANIC MESSAGE

r. Expectation ofSalvation and Expectation of the MessiahIT IS A NOTEWORTHY PHENOMENON THAT OLD TESTA-

ment research in the last few decades has spent only amodest amount of effort in research into the Messianiccharacter of the Old Testament in general and of the Old

Testament expectation of salvation in particular.1 Probably one reason for this is the aversion which historicalcriticism has always displayed for the earlier Messianicexegesis of the Old Testament on the part of the Church.2

Another reason is that the Old Testament expectation forthe future is always an expectation of salvation, but doesnot always bear the character of a Messianic expectation.8

The justification for calling attention here to the Old

Testament Messianic expectation is that for the investigation of the Biblical foundations for a theology of mission,this Messianic expectation is, in our opinion, of special

significance. Perhaps, after all, the Messiah does play agreater role than one might realize on the basis of the

number of publications on the subject in recent years. It

is certainly significant that Jewish and Christian traditions run parallel in regard to the explicitly Messianicpassages in the Old Testament.'

Thus, even though future expectation and Messianic

expectation may not coincide, nevertheless the Messiah isin a special sense the symbol and the culminating pointfor future expectation and salvation-expectation in the

Old Testament. Within the limits of our investigation, wewant only to trace the significance and range of the uni-

44



versal and missionary character of the Old Testament to

the extent to which the expectation of the Messiah in

Israel can fill out the picture thus far sketched.

2. Messianic Figures

A. If the Messiah figure is considered solely as a royal

figure, the origin of Messianic expectation will be sought

in the time ofDavid. 5 But ifnot only kings, as executors of

God's will, but also prophets, as proclaimers of God's will,

are to be considered in a Messianic light, then the picture

becomes more varied. I believe we can do justice to the

Old Testament Messianic expectation only by payingattention to the prophetic as well as to the royal tradition.

In our investigation of Messianic expectation, we must

further bear in mind the dynamic unity of the Old Testa-

ment and of the whole Bible, and not confine ourselves

exclusively to the analytical methods of historical and

literary criticism.6

Although with good reason Israel can be called the

Messianic nation,7nevertheless I believe it is better to con-

fine the term "Messianic" to those individual figures

which give expression in a special way to God's will and

work in history. This is not to deny that the notion of a

Messiah has become compressed in the course of time and

has been connected particularly with the Davidic royal

house. We must certainly state emphatically that any at-

tempts to explain the idea of the Messiah as a borrowing

from other nations, particularly from Babylon or Egypt,

must be regarded as a failure.8 In the Messianic expecta-

tion, Israel's expectation for the future takes on unique

form. Its origins are probably very old as we can see in the

ancient sayings of Gen. 49 : 8 ff., and it is not improbable

that this passage contains a recollection of Gen. 3: 15, in

view of the Paradise motifs which resound through it.9> 10

Now it is remarkable that Messianic expectation in this

broader sense bears the character of universalism well-

nigh continually. If, with the synagogue and early

45

versa! and missionary character of the Old Testament tothe extent to which the expectation of the Messiah in

Israel can fill out the picture thus far sketched.

2. Messianic FiguresA. I f he Messiah figure is considered solely as a royal

figure, the origin of Messianic expectation will be soughtin the time ofDavid. 5 But ifnot only kings, as executors of

God's will, but also prophets, as proclaimers ofGod's will,are to be considered in a Messianic light, then the picturebecomes more varied. I believe we can do justice to theOld Testament Messianic expectation only by payingattention to the prophetic as well as to the royal tradition.

In our investigation of Messianic expectation, we mustfurther bear in mind the dynamic unity of the Old Testa-ment and of the whole Bible, and not confine ourselvesexclusively to the analytical methods of historical and

literary criticism.6

Although with good reason Israel can be called theMessianic nation,' nevertheless I believe it is better to con-fine the term "Messianic" to those individual figureswhich give expression in a special way to God's will andwork in history. This is not to deny that the notion of aMessiah has become compressed in the course of time and

has been connected particularly with the Davidic royal

house. We must certainly state emphatically that any at-tempts to explain the idea of the Messiah as a borrowingfrom other nations, particularly from Babylon or Egypt,must be regarded as a failure.8 In the Messianic expecta-tion, Israel's expectation for the future takes on uniqueform. Its origins are probably very old as we can see in the

ancient sayings ofGen. 49: 8 ff., and it is not improbable

that this passage contains a recollection of Gen. 3: 15, inview of the Paradise motifs which resound through it.9• 10

Now it is remarkable that Messianic expectation in thisbroader sense bears the character of universalism well-nigh continually. If, with the synagogue and early

45



Christian Church, we do count Gen. 3: 15 among the

Messianic passages,this is simply an indication of the uni-

versality of salvation and of the Personage who brings

salvation. The figure of Melchizedek, Gen. 14, interpreted

Messianically in the Epistleto the Hebrews, is likewise a

universal figure and its significance there is just that the

universal priesthood is more than the Aaronic one. The

same thought underlies Ps. 1 10 also. Perhaps here we have

the key to the explanation ofthe remarkable fact that the

priesthood in Israel seems seldom to be referred to Mes-

sianically.11 In Gen. 49: 10, which is almost always

termed "early Messianic", it is said in plain words of the

Ruler of Shiloh, "to him shall be the obedience of the

peoples". Here at this early stage the Messianic expecta-

tion and the expectation of universal salvation coincide

completely. The Messianic statement in Num. 24: 17, is

of a somewhat different character, because it is not con-

cerned with obedience but (in harmony with the ideas of

that age) with the chastisement and defeat ofthe nations.12

Also striking is the formulation in the so-called testa-

ment ofDavid, 2 Sam. 23 : 1-7, where there is no reference

to a righteous ruler over Israel, but to "a righteous ruler

over men". A similar nuance in such devotional sayings as

these certainly has a tendency to universalism.

A similar tendency is to be found in passages which,

while not explicitly Messianic, are certainly implicitly so,

such as Isa. 2 : 2-5, and Mic. 4: 1-4. Furthermore, beyond

these we can point out other Messianic texts which see

salvation dawning exclusively over Israel (Amos 9: n,

Hos. 3: 5, Isa. 4: 2 the Messianic designation "Branch"

Isa. 9: 1-6, Mic. 5: 1-5, Jer. 23: 5-8, 30: 9, 33: 14-18,

Ezek. 34: 21-30, 37: 24-28, Hag. 2: 7-9, Zech. 6: 9-15),

but where the designations and descriptions of the Mes-

sianic kingdom often go beyond the specifically Israelite

framework. In this connection it is also not without

significance that the Messiah, although almost never

called "king", still receives the attributes of the general

Christian Church, we do count Gen. 3: I 5 among the

Messianic passages, this is simply an indication of the universality of salvation and of the Personage who bringssalvation. The figure ofMelchizedek, Gen. 14, interpretedMessianically in the Epistle to the Hebrews, is likewise auniversal :figure and its significance there is just that the

universal priesthood is more than the Aaronic one. The

same thought underlies Ps. I ro also. Perhaps here we havethe key to the explanation of the remarkable fact that the

priesthood in Israel seems seldom to be referred to Messianically.11 In Gen. 49: ro, which is almost always

termed "early Messianic", it is said in plain words of the

Ruler of Shiloh, "to him shall be the obedience of the

peoples". Here at this early stage the Messianic expectation and the expectation of universal salvation coincidecompletely. The Messianic statement in Num. 24: 17, isof a somewhat different character, because it is not concerned with obedience but (in harmony with the ideas of

that age) with the chastisement and defeat of he nations.12

Also striking is the formulation in the so-called testament ofDavid, 2 Sam. 23: 1-7, where there is no referenceto a righteous ruler over Israel, but to "a righteous rulerover men''. A similar nuance in such devotional sayings asthese certainly has a tendency to universalism.

A similar tendency is to be found in passages which,

while not explicitly Messianic, are certainly implicitly so,such as Isa. 2: 2-5, and Mic. 4: 1-4. Furthermore, beyondthese we can point out other Messianic texts which seesalvation dawning exclusively over Israel (Amos g: u ,

Hos. 3: 5, Isa. 4: 2-the Messianic designation "Branch"- Isa . g: I-6, Mic. 5: 1-5, jer. 23: 5-8, 30: g, 33: !4-I8,

Ezek. 34: 21-30, 37: 24-28, Hag. 2: 7-9, Zech. 6: g-rs),

but where the designations and descriptions of the Messianic kingdom often go beyond the specifically Israeliteframework. In this connection it is also not withoutsignificance that the Messiah, although almost nevercalled "king", still receives the attributes of the general

46



style of an Oriental court outside Israel/3 whereas this is

almost never the case as regards Israel's kings themselves.

The Messiah figure is a divine figure who will bring to

expression the actual royallordship

of God in the future.

Therefore the Messiah is not so much the bringer and

author ofsalvation as He is its representative. The Messiah

is the visible manifestation of God Himself. In the light of

this statement, all the Psalms which celebrate the future

royal lordship of God belong to the category of Messianic

Psalms; while, moreover, Israel's kings are often providedwith Messianic features, as for example Ps. 72 et al. In

other words, the universal lordship of God and the lord-

ship of the Messiah are correlates: the latter is an expres-

sion of the former. We are justified in concluding that the

universal lordship of God, the eschatological expectation of salva-

tion and the expectation of the Messiah belong together; they are,

as it were, concentric circles: the Messiah is the centre of the

Israelite as well as of the universal expectation ofsalvation.

B. Now it is in this light that we must refer again to

thewell-known Songs ofthe Servant ofthe Lord. Naturally

one can say that there is nothing Messianic as such in

these songs;14 but this conviction, I believe, only makes

clear the fact that there is no possibility of connecting the

tradition ofroyal Messiah expectation and the tradition of

prophetic Messiah expectation.

These two traditions were probably present in Israel

from early times, even though the so-called royal tradition

seems to have spoken more strongly to the imagination of

the nation than the prophetic. But the way the Servant of

the Lord is addressed in these songs, the way he himself

speaks, the way he is celebrated, point unmistakably in the

direction of a Messianic figure.16 One might rightly say

that the Servant-of-the-Lord prophecies supplement and

deepen the Messianic idea in ways previously unheard of:

(i)In the designation "Servant", more than in any

other Messianic designation, we find an expression

of the absolute surrender to the service of Yahweh.

47

style of an Oriental court outside Israel,13 whereas this isalmost never the case as regards Israel's kings themselves.

The Messiah figure is a divine figure who will bring toexpression the actual royal lordship of God in the future.Therefore the Messiah is not so much the bringer and

author ofsalvation as He is its representative. The Messiahis the visible manifestation of God Himself. In the light of

this statement, all the Psalms which celebrate the futureroyal lordship of God belong to the category of MessianicPsalms; while, moreover, Israel's kings are often providedwith Messianic features, as for example Ps. 72 et al. In

other words, the universal lordship of God and the lordship of the Messiah are correlates: the latter is an expression of the former. We are justified in concluding that the

universal lordship of God, the eschatological expectation of salva-tion and the expectation of the Messiah belong together; they are,

as it were, concentric circles: the Messiah is the centre of the

Israelite as well as of the universal expectation of salvation.

B. Now it is in this light that we must refer again tothe well-known Songs of the Servant of the Lord. Naturallyone can say that there is nothing Messianic as such in

these songs ;14 but this conviction, I believe, only makesclear the fact that there is no possibility of connecting the

tradition of royal Messiah expectation and the tradition of

prophetic Messiah expectation.

These two traditions were probably present in Israelfrom early times, even though the so-called royal traditionseems to have spoken more strongly to the imagination of

the nation than the prophetic. But the way the Servant of

the Lord is addressed in these songs, the way he himselfspeaks, the way he is celebrated, point unmistakably in the

direction of a Messianic figure.15 One might rightly say

that the Servant-of-the-Lord prophecies supplement anddeepen the Messianic idea in ways previously unheard of:

(i) In the designation "Servant", more than in any

other Messianic designation, we find an expressionof the absolute surrender to the service of Yahweh.

47



The whole emphasis is laid on the human character

of the Servant, which is underlined in the clearest

way by his suffering and dying (Isa. 50, 53).

(ii)

At the same time (Isa. 42 : i, 49: i)his connection

with Yahweh is expressed in such a way as to sug-

gest a more-than-human glory and authority,

(iii) Similarly, all the emphasis falls on the establish-

ment of the lordship of God. He magnifies the

unique glory ofGod and becomes light and salvation

for the world.16

(iv)The task of showing that Yahweh alone is God,

which the other prophecies (notably Jeremiah and

Ezekiel) affirm to be a task for all Israel, is here

ascribed to the Servant. Through all the Old

Testament historical and prophetic books we find

a "progressive reduction": from the many to the

few, from the nation to the remnant, from the

remnant to the one Servant.17

If now in contrast to our treatment in the previous

chapter we regard the Songs of the Servant of the Lord

as Messianic prophecies, rather than as expressing uni-

versalism, then the question arises: do they give any

further answer to our inquiry as to the missionary message

of the Old Testament? The question comes to a head, I

think, in another question: is the Messianic figure which

appears here as the "Servant of the Lord" to be con-

sidered as a missionary personage?

If we were to confine ourselves only to Isa. 42 : 4, we

would certainly be inclined to answer this question affirma-

tively. But if we consider the four songs as one organic

whole (and I think the text ofthe songs themselves argues

very strongly for this), then we are not so sure.

Let us summarize the contents of these songs :

In thefirst song, Isa. 42 : 1-7, we find celebrated the

election and vocation of the Servant to be a covenant for

the people and a light to the nations. The order of law,

the reign of peace, and complete human well-being as a

The whole emphasis is laid on the human characterof the Servant, which is underlined in the clearestway by his suffering and dying (Isa. so, 53).

(ii) At the same time (Isa. 42: I, 49: I) his connectionwith Yahweh is expressed in such a way as to suggest a more-than-human glory and authority.

(iii) Similarly, all the emphasis falls on the establishment of the lordship of God. He magnifies the

unique glory ofGod and becomes light and salvationfor the world.16

(iv) The task of showing that Yahweh alone is God,

which the other prophecies (notably Jeremiah and

Ezekiel) affirm to be a task for all Israel, is hereascribed to the Servant. Through all the Old

Testament historical and prophetic books we finda "progressive reduction": from the many to the

few, from the nation to the remnant, from the

remnant to the one Servant.17

If now-in contrast to our treatment in the previouschapter-we regard the Songs of the Servant of the Lord

as Messianic prophecies, rather than as expressing universalism, then the question arises: do they give any

further answer to our inquiry as to the missionary messageof the Old Testament? The question comes to a head, Ithink, in another question: is the Messianic figure which

appears here as the "Servant of the Lord" to be considered as a missionary personage?If we were to confine ourselves only to Isa. 42 : 4, we

would certainly be inclined to answer this question affirmatively. But i f we consider the four songs as one organicwhole (and I think the text of the songs themselves arguesvery strongly for this), then we are not so sure.

Let us summarize the contents of these songs:In the first song, Isa. 42: 1-7, we find celebrated the

election and vocation of the Servant to be a covenant forthe people and a light to the nations. The order of law,the reign of peace, and complete human well-being as a

48



gift from Yahweh, describe a situation in which all the

world may share.

In the second song, Isa. 49 : 1-7, it is made clear that the

fulfilling ofthis vocation lies in Israel, but seems to fail there

completely. The fault for this lies not on God's side; He

has given to the word ofHis Servant a powerfully intrusive

and penetrating ability ("sword", "arrow", verses 2-4).

All labour seems in vain, but the Servant is strengthened

and consoled by the promise that his work for Israel will

not be useless, and furthermore that he shall be a blessing,

a light for the nations. But we are not told how this is to

happen.

In the third song, Isa. 50 : 4-9, all the emphasis falls on

dedication to Yahweh and on the contumely which this

means for the Servant. His message involves innocent

suffering. The messenger ofthe righteousness ofGod must

suffer as someone without rights.

In thefourth song, Isa. 53 : 1-12, which bears the charac-

ter of a confession by the congregation, the last and deep-

est secret of suffering is disclosed : innocent suffering is

vicarious suffering; suffering is the way to glory, to the

recompense which exists in the fact that many will be

justified. It is not difficult in the light of 52 : 13-15 and of

the previous songs to see in those "many" a reference to

the world ofnations which will fall as booty to the Servant

who, following death, is saved.18

In all the songs where there is reference to the world of

nations, we do not find the Servant going out to the world

of nations19 so much as his being recompensed by the

world of nations. In other words, the nations are the

reward of the Messianic Servant, and the guarantee that his

work will not be in vain. All the emphasisfalls on thefact that

the world ofnations is a gift to the Messianic Servant; there is no

reference here to the world of nations as a "mission territory" of

the Servant. In itself it is completely understandable that

we are to see these songs as mission songs, and that we see

the Messiah as a Missionary. But this is not to be gleaned

D 49

gift from Yahweh, describe a situation in which all the

world may share.In the second song, I sa. 49 : r-7, it is made clear that the

fulfilling ofthis vocation lies in Israel, but seems to fail therecompletely. The fault for this lies not on God's side; He

has given to the word ofHis Servant a powerfully intrusiveand penetrating ability ("sword", "arrow", verses 2-4).All labour seems in vain, but the Servant is strengthenedand consoled by the promise that his work for Israel willnot be useless, and furthermore that he shall be a blessing,a light for the nations. But we are not told how this is to

happen.In the third song, I sa. 50: 4-9, all the emphasis falls on

dedication to Yahweh and on the contumely which thismeans for the Servant. His message involves innocentsuffering. The messenger ofthe righteousness of God mustsuffer as someone without rights.

In the ourth song, Isa. 53: r-r2, which bears the charac

ter of a confession by the congregation, the last and deepest secret of suffering is disclosed: innocent suffering is

vicarious suffering; suffering is the way to glory, to the

recompense which exists in the fact that many will bejustified. It is not difficult in the light of 52: 13-15 and of

the previous songs to see in those "many" a reference tothe world ofnations which will fall as booty to the Servant

who, following death, is saved.18

In all the songs where there is reference to the world of

nations, we do not find the Servant going out to the worldof nations19 so much as his being recompensed by the

world of nations. In other words, the nations are the

reward of the Messianic Servant, and the guarantee that hiswork will not be in vain. All the emphasis falls on the fact that

the world ofnations is a gift to the Messianic Servant; there is noreference here to the world of nations as a "mission territory" of

the Servant. In itself it is completely understandable that

we are to see these songs as mission songs, and that we seethe Messiah as a Missionary. But this is not to be gleaned

D 49



directly from the Old Testament text. Isa. 49: 7, just as

much as 52 : 13-15, requires the conclusion, I believe, that

the powerful acts ofGod with and by the Servant which

will fill thenations,

andparticularly

the

princes(the

"divine" princes of the ancient Oriental world) with

amazement are the occasion^ those princes to acknow-

ledge Yahweh.

Here, too, ifwe wish to speak of the idea of mission, we

must understand "missionary" exclusively in the sense of

the centripetal activity of the nations; they will come to

Israel in order to put themselves under the rule of Yah-

weh's law. This is also expressed in Zech. 8:23: ten men

from the nations ofevery tongue shall take hold ofthe robe

of a Jew, saying, "Let us go with you, for we have heard

that God is with you."

C. We shall want to deal separately with the important

pericope Dan. 7: 1-14, and particularly with verse 14, in

which the Son ofMan is referred to. In another connection

we shall have to return to verse 14 in more detail. We shall

therefore confine ourselves here to stating the fact that it

is to the Son ofMan, in whom we see an apocalyptic indi-

cation of the Messiah,20 that the dominion is given after it

has been taken away from the four beasts. These four

beasts represent kingdoms rising from the world of

nations, that is, from the anti-godly depths (of the sea).

Their dominion is cruel, inhuman, blasphemous, and

"beastly". Over against the anti-godly powers God Him-

self places the power of the Son of Man. 21

Here also the Messianic dominion over the nations is a

gift for which neither the Messiah himself nor the nations

have asked. The depicting ofthe dominion ofthe Messiah

in this vision still has the special nuance of a human

dominion, in contrast to the subhuman and brutish lords

before him. All nations, peoples and tongues will enter

into this dominion and will serve and obey the Son ofMan

(verse 14, cf. verse 27). Here also there is no reference to

the way the nations will come to this obedient service. One

dl.rectly from the Old Testament text. Isa. 49: 7, just asmuch as 52: 13-15, requires the conclusion, I believe, that

the powerful acts of God with and by the Servant-which

will :fill the nations, and particularly the princes (the"divine" princes of the ancient Oriental world) with

amazement-are the occasionfor those princes to acknowledge Yahweh.

Here, too, if we wish to speak of the idea of mission, wemust understand "missionary" exclusively in the sense ofthe centripetal activity of the nations; they will come toIsrael in order to put themselves under the rule of Yah

weh's law. This is also expressed in Zech. 8: 23: ten men

from the nations of every tongue shall take hold of he robeof a Jew, saying, "Let us go with you, for we have heard

that God is with you."C. We shall want to deal separately with the important

pericope Dan. 7: r-14, and particularly with verse 14, in

which the Son ofMan is referred to. In another connection

we shall have to return to verse 14 in more detail. We shalltherefore confine ourselves here to stating the fact that it

is to the Son of Man, in whom we see an apocalyptic indication of the Messiah,20 that the dominion is given after it

has been taken away from the four beasts. These fourbeasts represent kingdoms rising from the world ofnations, that is, from the anti-godly depths (of the sea).

Their dominion is cruel, inhuman, blasphemous, and"beastly". Over against the anti-godly powers God Him

self places the power of the Son of Man.21

Here also the Messianic dominion over the nations is agift for which neither the Messiah himself nor the nationshave asked. The depicting of the dominion of the Messiahin this vision still has the special nuance of a human

dominion, in contrast to the subhuman and brutish lordsbefore him. All nations, peoples and tongues will enter

into this dominion and will serve and obey the Son of Man

(verse J4., cf. verse 27). Here also there is no reference tothe wqy the nations will come to this obedient service. One

50



can trace here a resemblance to Isa. 42 : 4, 6, 49 : 6, and

the like, in which there is reference to the Messiah as the

one to whom the nations look forward and for whom he

shall be alight,

but not to the

waythis

lightshall be

spreadand the expectation shall be fulfilled.

In the apocalyptic vision of the Son of Man, together

with the figure ofthe Servant from the songs in Isa. 40-55,

all the Messianic features which we find spread through

the Old Testament are united. In regard to Dan. 7, we

could set them forth as follows:

,(i)

The Messiah represents the

Kingdom,

the

RoyalDominion of God; the Messiah is, as it were, the

visible appearance of God Himself.

(ii)At the same time the Messiah bears "human"

features, by which we do not mean to set "human"

in opposition to "divine", but rather to indicate the

actual divine acts really to be expected in the history

of men.

(iii)This kingship he does not earn; it is granted to him

on the basis of a divine intervention in the history

not only ofIsrael but ofthe world ofnations as well.

(iv) The Messianic dominion is a human, righteous

dominion in contrast to that of the subhuman

powers which have been conquered.

3. Messiah-Missionary?

In this short discussion of a few Messianic passages in

the Old Testament, it has become clear that we are not

being entirely fair to the distinctive nuances of the Old

Testament witness if we seek bases for a theology of mis-

sion (as a "going out to the nations") in the figure of the

Messiah.

The Messiah himself is more a visible appearance of

God than a human figure who enters the world of nations

preaching. And even where the Messiah bears expressly

human features as in the figure of the Servant of the

Lord his task is not in the first place proclamation to the

can trace here a esemblance to Isa. 42 : 4, 6, 49: 6, and

the like, in which there is reference to the Messiah as the

one to whom the nations look forward and for whom heshall be a light, but not to the way this light shall be spreadand the expectation shall be fulfilled.

In the apocalyptic vision of the Son of Man, togetherwith the figure of the Servant from the songs in Isa. 40-55,all the Messianic features which we find spread throughthe Old Testament are united. In regard to Dan. 7, wecould set them forth as follows:

(i) The Messiah represents the Kingdom, the RoyalDominion of God; the Messiah is, as it were, the

visible appearance of God Himself.(ii) At the same time the Messiah bears "human"

features, by which we do not mean to set "human"

in opposition to "divine", but rather to indicate the

actual divine acts really to be expected in the historyof men.

(iii) This kingship he does not earn; it is granted to himon the basis of a divine intervention in the historynot only oflsrael but of the world ofnations as well.

(iv) The Messianic dominion is a human, righteousdominion in contrast to that of the subhumanpowers which have been conquered.

3· Messiah-Missionary?In this short discussion of a few Messianic passages in

the Old Testament, it has become clear that we are not

being entirely fair to the distinctive nuances of the Old

Testament witness if we seek bases for a theology of mission (as a "going out to the nations") in the figure of the

Messiah.

The Messiah himself is more a visible appearance ofGod than a human figure who enters the world of nationspreaching. And even where the Messiah bears expresslyhuman features-as in the figure of the Servant of the

Lord-his task is not in the first place proclamation to the

51



nations but to Israel. Furthermore, his proclamation

assumes the form of innocent suffering, a suffering that

receives substitutory meaning for Israel and for the world :22

the Lamb of God that bears the sins of the world.

The dominion over the world of nations and the obedi-

ent service to the nations falls to him, whether simply as a

divine gift or as a reward for his innocent suffering.

Out of the world of nations itself either no activity pro-

ceeds, or else the activity is only a reaction to the eschato-

logical-Messianic acts of God.

So it appears that the Messianic expectation in the Old

Testament does add new features to the eschatological-

universal expectation of the salvation of Israel, but not the

missionary features which we seek as a point ofdeparture

for a theology of mission.

Thus we should again be mistaken ifwe concluded from

the foregoing that the Old Testament is disappointing

from a missionary point of view. Rather, the result we

have here gained seems to me satisfying and enlarging,

because the Messianic message ofthe Old Testament leads

us to underline with special clarity what we found at the

end of Chapter 2 :

(a)That the salvation that God has promised to Israel

is a universal salvation.

(b) That this salvation, as an eschatological reality, has

never been received by Israel during the whole course of

the Old Testament, but only expected.

(c)That this eschatological salvation is connected with

the coming ofthe Messiah.

(d) That this universal-eschatological-Messianic salva-

tion is not a consequence of preaching or of witness, but

is agift which is granted by God Himself to and via the

Messiah.

It occurs to me that it would be good, after what has

been said in Chapter 2, to bear in mind that there is no

concern in the Old Testament for any human activity for

the cultivation or acquisition of salvation.23 The salvation

52

nations but to lsrael. Furthermore, his proclamationassumes the form of innocent suffering, a suffering that

receives substitutory meaning for Israel and for the world: 22

the Lamb of God that bears the sins of the world.The dominion over the world of nations and the obedi

ent service to the nations falls to him, whether simply as adivine gift or as a reward for his innocent suffering.

Out of the world of nations itself either no activity proceeds, or else the activity is only a reaction to the eschatological-Messianic acts of God.

So it appears that the Messianic expectation in the Old

Testament does add new features to the eschatologicaluniversal expectation of the salvation of Israel, but not themissionary features which we seek as a point of departure

for a theology of mission.Thus we should again be mistaken ifwe concluded from

the foregoing that the Old Testament is disappointingfrom a missionary point of view. Rather, the result we

have here gained seems to me satisfying and enlarging,because the Messianic message of he Old Testament leadsus to underline with special clarity what we found at the

end of Chapter 2 :

(a) That the salvation that God has promised to Israelis a universal salvation.

(b) That this salvation, as an eschatological reality, has

never been received by Israel during the whole course ofthe Old Testament, but only expected.

(c) That this eschatological salvation is connected with

the coming of the Messiah.(d) That this universal-eschatological-Messianic salva

tion is not a consequence of preaching or of witness, but

is a gift which is granted by God Himself to and via the

Messiah.It occurs to me that it would be good, after what has

been said in Chapter 2, to bear in mind that there is noconcern in the Old Testament for any human activity forthe cultivation or acquisition of salvation.23 The salvation

52



ofGod for the world is a gift whose joy can be savoured in

the Old Testament period only by anticipation, as hopeor a firm trust in the validity and effectiveness of God's

promises.

[We do not need to enlarge here any further on the fact

that the word "salvation" in the Old Testament is a

rendering of the word salom. Although the origin and

meaning of the word is ultimately religious, it has an un-

mistakably material content as well. Perhaps we should

say, because it is religious, it also has a material meaning.

A situation of complete well-being in every respect is

designated; cf., e.g. Ps. 85: 10-13, where verses 11-13 are

a further definition of the }dlom referred to in verse 10.

Remarkably enough, there is no single passage to be

found in the Old Testament where "salom designates an

inner, personal peace or repose of mind, even though this

is certainly assumed to be involved in the idea itself. The

Messiah himselfis thus typified in Mic. 5:5: this is salva-

tion, an expression which is taken over literally in Eph. 2 :

H-24]

Perhaps it is not superfluous to return at the end of this

chapter to the beginning, especially to the opinion that

the Old Testament as a whole could hardly have known

the idea of a personal Messiah. The question still remains

whether one does not fall short of the unity of the Bible if

one does not, with the ancient Church, acknowledge that

the New Testament is hidden in the Old Testament, and

that the Old Testament is opened up in the New.

Has Israel itself understood the Old Testament in a

more Messianic sense than many Old Testament scholars

do nowadays ?We ask this question because it is a Christian

point ofview that the Old Testament is a first word which

is to be explained and surpassed by a later revelation, and

because for those who read the Old Testament in the light

of the New there is a trend in the former towards a new

and fuller revelation of God's activity. It is a remarkable

fact that this pressing towards the future, this asking-for-

53

of God for the world is a gift whose joy can be savoured in

the Old Testament period only by anticipation, as hopeor a firm trust in the validity and effectiveness of God'spromises.

[We do not need to enlarge here any further on the factthat the word "salvation" in the Old Testament is arendering of the word sal8m. Although the origin and

meaning of the word is ultimately religious, it has an unmistakably material content as well. Perhaps we shouldsay, because it is religious, it also has a material meaning.A situation of complete well-being in every respect is

designated; c£, e.g. Ps. 85: 10-13, where verses rr-13 area further definition of the siilom referred to in verse 10.

Remarkably enough, there is no single passage to befound in the Old Testament where siil8m designates an

inner, personal peace or repose of mind, even though thisis certainly assumed to be involved in the idea itself. The

Messiah himself is thus typified in Mic. 5: 5: this is salva

tion, an expression which is taken over literally in Eph. 2 :

14.24]

Perhaps it is not superfluous to return at the end of thischapter to the beginning, especially to the opinion that

the Old Testament as a whole could hardly have knownthe idea of a personal Messiah. The question still remainswhether one does not fall short of the unity of the Bible if

one does not, with the ancient Church, acknowledge thatthe New Testament is hidden in the Old Testament, and

that the Old Testament is opened up in the New.Has Israel itself understood the Old Testament in a

more Messianic sense than many Old Testament scholarsdo nowadays? We ask this question because it is a Christianpoint ofview that the Old Testament is a first word which

is to be explained and surpassed by a later revelation, andbecause for those who read the Old Testament in the lightof the New there is a trend in the former towards a newand fuller revelation of God's activity. I t is a remarkablefact that this pressing towards the future, this asking-for-

53



more, appears to belong to the Old Testament in such a

way that it was understood by Israel itself long before the

Christian Church drew its conclusions and gave its ex-

planation

of the Old Testament.

The question which has occupied our minds in the

previous chapters, namely, the question of the universal

and missionary character of the Old Testament, has been

clearly answered by Israel itself at a later stage of its his-

tory. Long before the missionary movement as an act of

witness of the Christian Church started, Israel itself was

engaged

in missionary work. To be sure, we cannot over-

look the fact that the missionary activity of Israel was of a

different type from that of the Christian Church some

centuries later; but we must not make the mistake of re-

garding the whole missionary activity of Israel as fanatic,

nationalistic propaganda.

In its writings, too, Israel has shown a missionary men-

tality. For example, one may wonder whether the wisdom

literature, not only outside but already inside the Old

Testament, has built a bridge between a centripetal mis-

sionary consciousness and a centrifugal missionary acti-

vity. We will point out these important phenomena in the

next chapter. Because we have to move partly outside the

Biblical realm and also because we have to summarize still

more briefly than thus far, we will call that chapter an

intermezzo.

54

more, appears to belong to the Old Testament in such away that it was understood by Israel itself long before the

Christian Church drew its conclusions and gave its ex-planation of the Old Testament.

The question which has occupied our minds in the

previous chapters, namely, the question of the universaland missionary character of the Old Testament, has beenclearly answered by Israel itself at a later stage of its his-tory. Long before the missionary movement as an act of

witness of the Christian Church started, Israel itself wasengaged in missionary work. To be sure, we cannot over-

look the fact that the missionary activity of Israel was of adifferent type from that of the Christian Church somecenturies later; but we must not make the mistake of re-garding the whole missionary activity of Israel as fanatic,nationalistic propaganda.

In its writings, too, Israel has shown a missionary men-tality. For example, one may wonder whether the wisdom

literature, not only outside but already inside the Old

Testament, has built a bridge between a centripetal mis-sionary consciousness and a centrifugal missionary acti-vity. We will point out these important phenomena in the

next chapter. Because we have to move partly outside the

Biblical realm and also because we have to summarize stillmore briefly than thus far, we will call that chapter an

intermezzo.

54



CHAPTER 4

THE INTER-TESTAMENTAL PERIOD

/. Diaspora and Proseljtism1

IT

HAS OFTEN BEEN REMARKED THAT THE NEW TESTA-

ment canot be understood merely in terms of the Old.

There is a gap of a few centuries between the conclusion

of the Old Testament canon and the beginning of the

formulation of the New Testament canon. These centuries

were of great importance to the people of Israel in regard

both to its part in and its attitude towards the world of

nations.

The diaspora greatly altered the people of Israel, and

its influence can also be seen in those who escaped it or

returned from it to the Holy Land.2

Here we can indicate only one of its aspects, viz. the

initiation of missionary activity among the Jews during

this period. It seems to me that this is underestimated

rather than overestimated with regard to its extent and

intensity as well as to its significance for the missionary

attitude and activity of the Christian Church in the first

few centuries of its existence.

After having investigated the proselytizing movement

among theJews later on, Derwacter came to the following

conclusion:

We cannot therefore give even an approximate count of

the proselytes to Judaism in the Mediterranean world of the

New Testament period. They were numerous enough to

claim the attention of Philo and Josephus, conspicuous

enough for pagan writers such as Tacitus and Horace and

Juvenal to see them as a part of the Judaism of their time.

They are looked upon as a factor in the great growth of the

55

CHAPTER 4THE INTER-TESTAMENTAL PERIOD

1. Diaspora and Proselytism1I T HAS OFTEN BEEN REMARKED THAT THE NEW TESTA

ment canot be understood merely in terms of the Old.

There is a gap of a few centuries between the conclusionof the Old Testament canon and the beginning of the

formulation of the New Testament canon. These centurieswere of great importance to the people of Israel in regardboth to its part in and its attitude towards the world of

nations.The diaspora greatly altered the people of Israel, and

its influence can also be seen in those who escaped it orreturned from it to the Holy Land. 2

Here we can indicate only one of its aspects, viz. the

initiation of missionary activity among the Jews duringthis period. It seems to me that this is underestimatedrather than overestimated with regard to its extent and

intensity as well as to its significance for the missionary

attitude and activity of the Christian Church in the firstfew centuries of its existence.

After having investigated the proselytizing movementamong the jews later on, Derwacter came to the followingconclusion:

We cann<;>t therefore give even an approximate count of

the proselytes to Judaism in the Mediterranean world of theNew Testament period. They were numerous enough toclaim the attention of Philo and Josephus, conspicuousenough for pagan writers such as Tacitus and Horace and

Juvenal to see them as a part of the Judaism of their time.They are looked upon as a factor in the great growth of the

55



Jewish population following the Exile. The rapid develop-

ment of Christianity into a Gentile religion seems inexplic-

able without a large proselyte constituency. More than this

can hardly be said.2

It cannot be said that the diaspora by itself explains

Jewish missionary propaganda, but it can be said that the

diaspora was its prime mover and that this propagandawas "chiefly, though not exclusively,, a diaspora pheno-menon'

5

.3

Several different elements will have to be taken into

account here. Bamberger enumerates the following:4

(i)The decay of the Jewish nation led to greater

emphasis being laid on the idea that the Jewish

group was chiefly a religious entity;

(ii)The conquest ofmonotheism in Israel transformed

Judaism into a purely universalistic religion;

(iii)The extension of the diaspora strengthened Jewish

self-confidence among the colonists in new places;

(iv) Contact with other ways of thinking, and in par-

ticular with the Hellenistic, must have stimulated

the Jews to undertake apologetic activities at first

and missionary ones later on;

(v)The success of the Maccabean rebellion made for

increased self-confidence within Palestine of a

religious kind.

Long before the diaspora there had been a certain

inclination towards missionary activities, as has been

described in previous chapters. Accepting foreigners into

the Israelitic community can rightly be considered to be

a first stage, or rather a stage leading up to the Jewishmission. 5 In this connection it is particularly significant

that the Hebrew word for a foreigner who has been

accepted in Israel (ger)is as a rule translated as "proselyte"

in the Septuagint.6

G. Bertram pointed out that the diaspora cannot be

completely explained by exile and emigration from the

small country of the Jews.7 Harnack estimated the num-

56

Jewish population following the Exile. The rapid development of Christianity into a Gentile religion seems inexplicable without a large proselyte constituency. More than thiscan hardly be said.8

It cannot be said that the diaspora by itself explainsJewish missionary propaganda, but it can be said that the

diaspora was its prime mover and that this propagandawas "chiefly, though not exclusively, a diaspora phenomenon".3

Several different elements will have to be taken intoaccount here. Bamberger enumerates the following:'

(i) The decay of the Jewish nation led to greateremphasis being laid on the idea that the Jewishgroup was chiefly a religious entity;

(ii) The conquest ofmonotheism in Israel transformedJudaism into a purely universalistic religion;

(iii) The extension of the diaspora strengthened Jewishself-confidence among the colonists in new places;

(iv) Contact with other ways of thinking, and in particular with the Hellenistic, must have stimulatedthe Jews to undertake apologetic activities at firstand missionary ones later on;

(v) The success ofthe Maccabean rebellion made forincreased self-confidence within Palestine of areligious kind.

Long before the diaspora there had been a certaininclination towards missionary activities, as has beendescribed in previous chapters. Accepting foreigners intothe Israelitic community can rightly be considered to bea first stage, or rather a stage leading up to the Jewishmission.6 In this connection it is particularly significantthat the Hebrew word for a foreigner who has been

accepted in Israel (glr) is as a rule translated as "proselyte"in the Septuagint.6

G. Bertram pointed out that the diaspora cannot becompletely explained by exile and emigration from the

small country of the Jews.7 Harnack estimated the num-

56



her of Jews in the Roman Mediterranean area alone

around the time of the birth of Christ at 4-4-^ million,8

that is about 7 % of the total population of that area. This

can only be satisfactorily explained by accepting the

possibility of a propagatory action. Long before the Old

Testament eschatologic universalism ofsalvation had been

deepened and extended in a missionary sense by the

preaching of Christ and theapostles, the process of this

reformation had been set in motion by the Judaism of the

diaspora.

Study of Hellenistic Judaic missionary literature has

shown how important the missionary activity must have

been.9 It was so extensive and intense that it did not at

once disappear after the appearance ofthe young Christian

Church. It is not true that Christianity has not only

adopted Judaic missionary activity but has also replaced

it. Until the fifth century A.D. Judaism must have con-

tinued its proselytizing activities in spite of the difficulties

that increased as the Christian Church expanded.10 And

it is not only the missionary effort that must have been

great, but also the result. In my opinion it is wrong and

rather too tendentious to explain Jesus5

well-known words

in Matt. 23 : 15, as meaning that their success must have

been slight. In my opinion Bamberger's observations on

this text should be considered correct and I agree with

his conclusion:

In short, this verse corroborates the testimony ofHellenis-

tic, Roman and Rabbinic sources that the official leaders

ofJudaism were eager to make converts and highly success-

ful in achieving their aim. Distinction must be made be-

tween the highly coloured style and the actual content of the

passage.11

More or less general agreement has now been reached

with regard to the important result ofJudaic missionary

effort during the diaspora. The causes are partly those

which Bamberger enumerated to prove the proselytizing

57

ber of Jews in the Roman Mediterranean area alonearound the time of the birth of Christ at 4-4! million,sthat is about 7%of the total population of that area. This

can only be satisfactorily explained by accepting the

possibility of a propagatory action. Long before the Old

Testament eschatologic universalism ofsalvation had beendeepened and extended in a missionary sense by the

preaching of Christ and the apostles, the process of thisreformation had been set in motion by the Judaism of the

diaspora.Study of Hellenistic Judaic missionary literature has

shown how important the missionary activity must havebeen.9 It was so extensive and intense that it did not at

once disappear after the appearance of he young ChristianChurch. It is not true that Christianity has not onlyadopted Judaic missionary activity but has also replacedit. Until the fifth century A.D. Judaism must have continued its proselytizing activities in spite of the difficulties

that increased as the Christian Church expanded.1o Andit is not only the missionary effort that must have beengreat, but also the result. In my opinion it is wrong and

rather too tendentious to explainJesus' well-known wordsin Matt. 23: 15, as meaning that their success must havebeen slight. In my opinion Bamberger's observations on

this text should be considered correct and I agree with

his conclusion:

In short, this verse corroborates the testimony ofHellenistic, Roman and Rabbinic sources-that the official leadersof Judaism were eager to make converts and highly success-

ful in achieving their aim. Distinction must be made between the highly coloured style and the actual content of thepassage.11

More or less general agreement has now been reachedwith regard to the important result ofJudaic missionaryeffort during the diaspora. The causes are partly thosewhich Bamberger enumerated to prove the proselytizing

57



activity of the Jews (see above). To these we could add

Dalbert's remarks :

(i)The antisemitic outbursts and martyrdoms which

the Jews experienced several times during the

diaspora led to the growth of Judaism, just as

martyrdom led later on to the growth of Christian-

ity-

(ii)The great moral strength ofJudaism, which made

it superior to all pagan religions.

(iii)The strongly monotheistic tendencies in the Hel-

lenistic world, in which the old town and state

cults had often become mere formalities,

(iv)The readiness of the countries around the Medi-

terranean to accept spiritual values from the

Orient. This orientalism, with its monotheistic ten-

dencies and its ethical tendencies which were

anchored in monotheism, gave Judaism an added

attraction,

(v) The shift from Palestine legalism to the spirituality

of diaspora Judaism.12

The great importance and influence of the Septuagint

should be mentioned separately. This Greek translation of

the Old Testament became mainly through St. Paul

the great mission book ofthe young Christian Church, but

long before that it was the Jews' mission book par excel-

lence}-* The great shift from a centripetal to a centrifugal

missionary consciousness in the New Testament, which

will be dealt with more fully in Chapter 6, can only be

properly appreciated when viewed against the back-

ground ofthe translation ofthe Septuagint, which is muchmore than a mere translation it is an exegesis and trans-

formation of the Old Testament. This point of view will

now be explained.

2. Septuagint and Proselytism

The Septuagint originated in the anxiety felt by the

Jews in the diaspora that those who were living in foreign

58

activity of the Jews (see above). To these we could add

Dalbert's remarks:(i) The antisemitic outbursts and martyrdoms which

the Jews experienced several times during the

diaspora led to the growth of Judaism, just asmartyrdom led later on to the growth of Christian-ity.

(ii) The great moral strength ofJudaism, which made

it superior to all pagan religions.(iii) The strongly monotheistic tendencies in the Hel-

lenistic world, in which the old town and state

cults had often become mere formalities.(iv) The readiness of the countries around the Medi-

terranean to accept spiritual values from the

Orient. This orientalism, with its monotheistic ten-dencies and its ethical tendencies which wereanchored in monotheism, gave Judaism an added

attraction.

(v) The shift from Palestine legalism to the spiritualityof diaspora Judaism.l2

The great importance and influence of the Septuagintshould be mentioned separately. This Greek translation of

the Old Testament became-mainly through St. Paul-

the great mission book of the young Christian Church, but

long before that it was the Jews' mission book par excel-

lence.13 The great shift from a centripetal to a centrifugalmissionary consciousness in the New Testament, which

will be dealt with more fully in Chapter 6, can only be

properly appreciated when viewed against the back-ground of the translation ofthe Septuagint, which is much

more than a mere translation-it is an exegesis and trans-formation of the Old Testament. This point of view will

now be explained.

2. Septuagint and Proselytism

The Septuagint originated in the anxiety felt by the

Jews in the diaspora that those who were living in foreign

58



countries were in danger of losing their knowledge of

the Hebrew tongue, particularly since Aramaic had

taken its place as the spoken language and Hebrew

retained its significanceonly

as the

language

of the

HolyBooks.14

However, as soon as the Greek translation became avail-

able, it began to serve the mission. The great importance

of the Septuagint certainly lay not only in what was in it

but also in how the text was heard and interpreted.15

It is

certain that the fact that a diaspora had taken place had

a great influence on the translation of the Hebrew text. Awell-known example is the translation of Isa. 55: 5, which

does not show any missionary tendency in the Hebrew

text, whereas it does so very clearly in the Greek text

"Behold, thou shalt call a nation that thou knowest not,

and nations that knew not thee [Israel] shall run unto

thee.*5

I have already mentioned the translation of

foreigner (ger) as a synonym for "proselyte". We may take

it that St. Paul subscribed to a well-known interpretation

when in Rom. 10 : 20, he interpreted the words ofIsa. 65 : i

as referring to the Gentiles, although in the Hebrew text

itself no Gentiles are mentioned.16 A similar shifting of

interpretation can be noticed in the Septuagint version of

Isa. 54: 15.

The fact that the Septuagint does not speak the literary

language of Hellenism but the popular one of the koine,

also gives this translation great significance from the point

of view of social history; it opened the Oriental world to

the Occident. According to Bertram its significance from

the point of view of the history of religion is even greater.

In the Hebraic Old Testament a number of books is

collected, theorigin

of which is extended over centuries.

Therefore they reflect the manifold stages of development

in the Israelitic-Judaic religion. The Septuagint comes

from a much more unified world of religious ideas; it is a

creation ofJewry, which owes its origin to the Persians and

its world-wide activity to its Hellenistic rulers. Therefore

59

countries were in danger of losing their knowledge of

the Hebrew tongue, particularly since Aramaic had

taken its place as the spoken language and Hebrewretained its significance only as the language of the HolyBooks.14

However, as soon as the Greek translation became available, it began to serve the mission. The great importanceof the Septuagint certainly lay not only in what was in it

but also in how the text was heard and interpreted.15 It iscertain that the fact that a diaspora had taken place had

a great influence on the translation of the Hebrew text. A

well-known example is the translation of I sa. 55: 5, whichdoes not show any missionary tendency in the Hebrewtext, whereas it does so very clearly in the Greek text-"Behold, thou shalt call a nation that thou knowest not,and nations that knew not thee [Israel] shall run untothee." I have already mentioned the translation of

foreigner (ger) as a synonym for "proselyte". We may take

it that St. Paul subscribed to a well-known interpretationwhen in Rom. ro: 20, he interpreted the words ofisa. 65: 1

as referring to the Gentiles, although in the Hebrew textitself no Gentiles are mentioned.16 A similar shifting of

interpretation can be noticed in the Septuagint version of

Isa. 54: 15.

The fact that the Septuagint does not speak the literary

language of Hellenism but the popular one of the koine,also gives this translation great significance from the pointof view of social history; it opened the Oriental world tothe Occident. According to Bertram its significance fromthe point ofview ofthe history of religion is even greater.

In the Hebraic Old Testament a number of books iscollected, the origin of which is extended over centuries.Therefore they reflect the manifold stages of developmentin the Israelitic-Judaic religion. The Septuagint comesfrom a much more unified world of religious ideas; it is acreation of ewry, which owes its origin to the Persians and

its world-wide activity to its Hellenistic rulers. Therefore

59



one spiritis blowing through the book; its parts fuse. Con-

tradictions and foldings are smoothed out.17

An interaction took place; the diaspora developed the

missionary consciousness that by implication was present

in the testimonies ofdivine revelations and thus influenced

the translation of the Septuagint, while the latter in its

turn gave a vigorous impulse to missionary activity. The

Jews want to be "to all mortals a guide in life".18

Jewish missionary effort must have been so obvious that

a poet like Horace can even produce a bon mot about it

when he wants to stress an invitation to a friend: "Ifyou

won't come willingly, we shall act like the Jews do and

force you to. . . ,"19

Although one should not deduce too

much from words like these, they do show that Judaic

propaganda was of a particularly insistent nature. This is

also evident from the extensive Hellenistic-Judaic mis-

sionary literature.20

IfJewish missionary consciousness is to be explained by

the diaspora, Hellenism and particularly the influence of

the Septuagint, one should not overlook the strong ten-

dencies towards universalistic mission in the later parts of

the Old Testament. Particularly the great importance of

the later wisdom literature should be noted. It is dealt

with now instead of in Chapter 2, only because it has a

unique place in the canon of the Old Testament.21

3. Israelitic Wisdom and Proseljtism

The first nine chapters ofthe book ofProverbs are with-

out doubt amongst the most enigmatic and at the same

time fascinating chokma (wisdom) literature in the Old

Testament. Since this is only a survey we can discuss them

only very briefly. Moreover there is still much uncer-

tainty about the wisdom literature in general and the last

word about it has not yet been said.

Israel has always known that the fear of the Lord is the

beginning ofwisdom. But nowhere else in the Old Testa-

ment is wisdom referred to as a person who is at one and

60

one spirit is blowing through the book; its parts fuse. Contradictions and foldings are smoothed out.17

An interaction took place; the diaspora developed the

missionary consciousness that by implication was present

in the testimonies ofdivine revelations and thus influencedthe translation of the Septuagint, while the latter in itstum gave a vigorous impulse to missionary activity. TheJews want to be "to all mortals a guide in life".18

Jewish missionary effort must have been so obvious that

a poet like Horace can even produce a bon mot about itwhen he wants to stress an invitation to a friend: " I f you

won't come willingly, we shall act like the Jews do and

force you to.... 19 Although one should not deduce toomuch from words like these, they do show that Judaic

propaganda was of a particularly insistent nature. This isalso evident from the extensive Hellenistic-Judaic missionary literature.2o

I f ewish missionary consciousness is to be explained by

the diaspora, Hellenism and particularly the influence o,fthe Septuagint, one should not overlook the strong tendencies towards universalistic mission in the later parts of

the Old Testament. Particularly the great importance of

the later wisdom literature should be noted. It is dealtwith now instead of in Chapter 2, only because it has aunique place in the canon ofthe Old Testament.21

3. Israeliti.c Wisdom and ProselytismThe first nine chapters of the book ofProverbs are with

out doubt amongst the most enigmatic and at the sametime fascinating ckokma (wisdom) literature in the Old

Testament. Since this is only a survey we can discuss themonly very briefly. Moreover there is still much uncer

tainty about the wisdom literature in general and the lastword about it has not yet been said.

Israel has always known that the fear of the Lord is thebeginning ofwisdom. But nowhere else in the Old Testament is wisdom referred to as a person who is at one and

6o



the same time princeps and principle of the creation of

the world. This personification ofwisdom even goes to the

length of representing it as a seductive woman.22

It is worthnoting

that wisdom viewed in this

waybe-

comes importantfrom the point ofview ofthe history ofthe

world and the history of salvation. Israel is not the only

nation to possess wisdom; the world of nations possesses

it too. "By me kings reign, and princes decree justice. Byme princes rule, and nobles, even all the judges of the

earth'5

(Prov. 8: 15, 16).

This should probably be interpreted as meaning, not

that Israel's particular role in God's saving activity is

denied, but that this divine wisdom is rightly known and

recognized only in and by Israel as the first of Yahweh's

creatures.23

Seen against the background of the way of thinking of

the Old Testament, it nevertheless remains a remarkable

phenomenon that the share the nations have in divine

wisdom is spoken of here without reference to Israel's

unique position and significance, at any rate without the

election of Israel being directly mentioned and referred

to.

In Prov. 8 : 35, the normal order of the Old Testament

is even reversed. The gods ofthe nations are idols and non-

entities; only Israel's God is the living and life-giving God.

Here, however, it is not said that he who finds Yahweh

also finds Life, but the other way round; he who finds

wisdom, finds life and so Yahweh's favour "For whoso

findeth me (=Wisdom), findeth Life, and shall obtain

favour of the Lord". What else does this mean but that

wherever there is wisdom, Yahweh is present?

In later days this Wisdom will be identified more par-

ticularly with the Torah. This does not deny its universal

significance but it does give it a more disguised, Judaic

character. One has only to compare Prov. 1-9 with state-

ments regarding the wisdom of Ecclesiasticus and the

Wisdom of Solomon. 24 The word that awakens man to

61

the same time princeps and principle of the creation of

the world. This personification ofwisdom even goes to the

length of representing it as a seductive woman. 22

It is worth noting that wisdom viewed in this way becomesimportantfrom the point ofview of the history oftheworld and the history of salvation. Israel is not the onlynation to possess wisdom; the world of nations possessesit too. "By me kings reign, and princes decree justice. Byme princes rule, and nobles, even all the judges of the

earth" (Prov. 8: 15, 16).This should probably be interpreted as meaning, not

that Israel's particular role in God's saving activity isdenied, but that this divine wisdom is rightly known and

recognized only in and by Israel as the first of Yahweh'screatures. 23

Seen against the background of the way of thinking of

the Old Testament, it nevertheless remains a remarkablephenomenon that the share the nations have in divine

wisdom is spoken of here without reference to Israel'sunique position and significance, at any rate without the

election of Israel being directly mentioned and referredto.

In Prov. 8: 35, the normal order of the Old Testamentis even reversed. The gods of he nations are idols and nonentities; only Israel's God is the living and life-giving God.

Here, however, it is not said that he who finds Yahwehalso finds Life, but the other way round; he who findswisdom, finds life and so Yahweh's favour-"For whosofindeth me (=Wisdom), findeth Life, and shall obtainfavour of the Lord". What else does this mean but that

wherever there is wisdom, Yahweh is present?In later days this Wisdom will be identified more par

ticularly with the Torah. This does not deny its universalsignificance but it does give it a more disguised, Judaic

character. One has only to compare Prov. 1-9 with statements regarding the wisdom of Ecclesiasticus and the

Wisdom of Solomon. 24 The word that awakens man to61



life and salvation is the same as that which God used as a

plan when creating the world. 26

Those curious chapters 1-9 of Proverbs are, as it were,

abridge

between Israel and the nations. The

way

ofthink-

ing in these chapters is more or less the same as that in the

first eleven chapters of Genesis. That which was meant in

the latter as Israel's credo, sounds in the former like an

appeal to anyone who is willing to listen, be it within or

outside Israel; the salvation ofthe world lies in the wisdom

that was already present when the world began.

This

way

of thinking reveals a positive attitude towards

the world of nations and the fact that this positive attitude

was evidently legitimate in Israel and was even sanctioned

by the Judaic canon should warn us to be careful when we

judge Israel's "exclusivism" or "particularism".

And if Prov. 1-9 came into being in the post-exile

period, then it is certainly also thanks to this wisdom

literature that Israel became more and more aware of its

missionary calling. It is not to be wondered at that in the

old Christian Church personified Wisdom was looked

upon as a prefiguration ofJesus Christ. Did He not Him-

selfmake use of this wisdom ifnot identify Himselfwith it

when He said, in words borrowed from the chokma: "Come

unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I

will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of

me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find

rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is

light"? (Matt, ii : 28-30, cf. Ecclus. 51 : 23-27, 6: 24-30.)

We should certainly not attach too much importance

to Prov. 1-9; in careful hermeneutics one should never

promote a surprising and rare perspective in the Old

Testament to the level of a general and guiding point of

view. On the other hand, while searching for the spirit and

intention of the Scriptures, one should not neglect this

testimony either. It seems to me that so far the wisdom

literature has not received the attention it deserves, par-

ticularly in missionary science.

62

life and salvation is the same as that which God used as aplan when creating the world.2s

Those curious chapters 1-9 of Proverbs are, as it were,a bridge between Israel and the nations. The way of hinking in these chapters is more or less the same as that in the

first eleven chapters of Genesis. That which was meant in

the latter as Israel's credo, sounds in the former like an

appeal to anyone who is willing to listen, be it within or

outside Israel; the salvation ofthe world lies in the wisdomthat was already present when the world began.

This way of thinking reveals a positive attitude towardsthe world ofnations and the fact that this positive attitudewas evidently legitimate in Israel and was even sanctionedby the Judaic canon should warn us to be careful when wejudge Israel's "exclusivism" or "particularism".

And if Prov. 1--9 came into being in the post-exileperiod, then it is certainly also thanks to this wisdomliterature that Israel became more and more aware of its

missionary calling. It is not to be wondered at that in the

old Christian Church personified Wisdom was lookedupon as a prefiguration ofJesus Christ. Did He not Himself make use of this wisdom i fnot identify Himself with it

when He said, in words borrowed from the chokma: "Comeunto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and Iwill give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of

me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall findrest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden islight"? (Matt. II: 28-30, cf. Ecclus. 51: 23-27,6: 24-30.)

We should certainly not attach too much importanceto Prov. r-g; in careful hermeneutics one should neverpromote a surprising and rare perspective in the Old

Testament to the level of a general and guiding point of

view. On the other hand, while searching for the spirit andintention of the Scriptures, one should not neglect thistestimony either. It seems to me that so far the wisdomliterature has not received the attention it deserves, particularly in missionary science.

62



In the apocalyptic of the Old Testament and particu-

larly in the book of Daniel we find a connection between

wisdom and apocalyptic; wisdom also gives insight into

the secrets of the future

(Dan.

2: 31,4:

6,

5:12,

7-10passim) . This can easily be understood, because apocalyp-

tic, like chokma, is of a universal nature, though in a

different sense from the other parts of the Old Testament.

If we now go on to discuss the data to be found in the

New Testament we should remember that it not only

builds on those parts of the Old Testament that are

accounts of history and prophecy, but is also a reaction to

the chokmatic and apocalyptic statements which used to

play such an important part in the life and thoughts of

post-exile Israel, amongst those who were in diaspora as

well as amongst those who still lived in Israel itself, par-

ticularly in the centuries following upon the conclusion of

the Old Testament canon.

It has been established that the missionary conscious-

ness of the early Christian Church is partly due to these

centuries which are not mentioned in the Old Testament

itself.26

We are now faced, however, with the extremely awk-

ward question whether this Christian missionary con-

sciousness is indeed a continuation and strengthening of

Judaic missionary consciousness. So far the terms prosely-

tism and missionary activity have been used indiscrimi-

nately in this chapter. There is a tendency to separate these

two ideas sharply. In the present circumstances this is un-

avoidable as well as healthful.27

Can theJudaic propaganda ofthe post-exile period in its

entirety be called proselytism in the derogatory sense which

the word nowadays has? Or should Matt. 23: 15 be seen

as a protest against the excesses of an originally legitimate

missionary impulse ?

A study of the data in the New Testament will show

that the missionary consciousness ofthe Christian Church

did not fall from the air but that, on the other hand, one

63

In the apocalyptic of the Old Testament and particularly in the book of Daniel we find a connection betweenwisdom and apocalyptic; wisdom also gives insight into

the secrets of the future (Dan. 2: 31, 4: 6, 5: 12, 7-10passim). This can easily be understood, because apocalyptic, like chokma, is of a universal nature, though in adifferent sense from the other parts of the Old Testament.

I f we now go on to discuss the data to be found in theNew Testament we should remember that it not onlybuilds on those parts of the Old Testament that areaccounts of history and prophecy, but is also a reaction tothe chokmatic and apocalyptic statements which used toplay such an important part in the life and thoughts of

post-exile Israel, amongst those who were in diaspora as

well as amongst those who still lived in Israel itself, particularly in the centuries following upon the conclusion of

the Old Testament canon.It has been established that the missionary conscious

ness of the early Christian Church is partly due to thesecenturies which are not mentioned in the Old Testamentitself. 26

We are now faced, however, with the extremely awkward question whether this Christian missionary consciousness is indeed a continuation and strengthening of

Judaic missionary consciousness. So far the terms prosely

tism and Inissionary activity have been used indiscriminately in this chapter. There is a tendency to separate thesetwo ideas sharply. In the present circumstances this is unavoidable as well as healthful.27

Can theJudaic propaganda ofthe post-exile period in itsentirery be called proselytism in the derogatory sense whichthe word nowadays has? Or should Matt. 23: 15 be seen

as a protest against the excesses of an originally legitimatemissionary impulse?

A study of the data in the New Testament will showthat the missionary consciousness of the Christian Churchdid not fall from the air but that, on the other hand, one

63



should be very careful about continuing the line from

Judaic missionary propaganda to the Christian Church.

A distinction will have to be made between the apostolic

statement that "if

any

man be in Christ he is a new

creature" (2 Cor. 5:17) and the activities of the Christian

Church that were not only determined by its "being in

Christ5

'.

In this study, the main aim of which is to report the

data to be found in the Bible, the question of the connec-

tion between the Old Testament and the New and the

difference between the Old Testament and the New will

be dealt with apart from the question ofhow far Christian

mission and Judaic proselyte activity were related geneti-

cally and historically. It seems to us that this question is

mainly of importance from the historical point ofview. It

is therefore outside the scope of this study, although in our

opinion it had to be mentioned in this chapter, which is

intended as an intermezzo.

should be very careful about continuing the line fromJudaic missionary propaganda to the Christian Church.A distinction will have to be made between the apostolicstatement that "if any man be in Christ he is a newcreature" (2 Cor. 5: I 7) and the activities of the ChristianChurch that were not onry determined by its "being in

Christ".In this study, the main aim of which is to report the

data to be found in the Bible, the question of the connec-tion between the Old Testament and the New and the

difference between the Old Testament and the New willbe dealt with apart from the question ofhow far Christianmission and Judaic proselyte activity were related geneti-cally and historically. It seems to us that this question is

mainly of importance from the historical point ofview. It

is therefore outside the scope ofthis study, although in ouropinion it had to be mentioned in this chapter, which is

intended as an intermezzo.



CHAPTER 5

THE NEW TESTAMENT MESSAGE OFUNIVERSALISM IN RELATION TO THAT OF

THE OLD TESTAMENT

i. Introduction

E IMPORTANCE FOR A THEOLOGY OF MISSION OF

having a true insight into the message of the Old

Testament is obvious from the difficulties which people

have had with various passages of the New Testament

dealing with the Gentiles. We are referring here speci-

fically to the problem ofJesus and mission, Jesus and the

Gentiles, which has set many pens going in the course of

the years.1

Only by a clearer insight into the structure andintention of the message of the Old Testament could a

satisfying solution to this problem be found, which

except for details has been fairly generally accepted, at

least in missionary circles.

In this chapter we want particularly to underscore the

continuity of the Old and the New Testaments in regard

to the questions with which we are here concerned. It is

perhaps not superfluous to point out that continuity is

quite different from identity. Over against the tendency in

theology which lays strong emphasis on continuity the

inclination to view the New Testament as only an appen-

dage to the Old Testament we wish to affirm emphati-

cally that the message of the New Testament brings us

something quite new, and by the glow of this new thing

not only does the old pale, but it is replaced by something

that is more thanjust the fulfilment ofthe old expectations.

In fulfilment, the expectations are not only exceeded but

also overtaken, modified, corrected* And over against the

E 65

CHAPTER 5

THE NEW TESTAMENT MESSAGE OF

UNIVERSALISM IN RELATION TO THAT OF

THE OLD TESTAMENT

r. Introduction

THE IMPORTANCE FOR A THEOLOGY OF MISSION OF

having a true insight into the message of the Old

Testament is obvious from the difficulties which peoplehave had with various passages of the New Testamentdealing with the Gentiles. We are referring here speci-fically to the problem ofJesus and mission, Jesus and theGentiles, which has set many pens going in the course of

the years.1 Only by a clearer insight into the structure andintention of the message of the Old Testament could asatisfying solution to this problem be found, which

except for details-has been fairly generally accepted, at

least in missionary circles.In this chapter we want particularly to underscore the

continuity of the Old and the New Testaments in regard

to the questions with which we are here concerned. It isperhaps not superfluous to point out that continuity isquite different from identity. Over against the tendency in

theology which lays strong emphasis on continuiry-the

inclination to view the New Testament as only an appen-dage to the Old Testament-we wish to affirm emphati-cally that the message of the New Testament brings us

something quite new, and by the glow of this new thingnot only does the old pale, but it is replaced by somethingthat is more than just the fulfilment of the old expectations.In fulfilment, the expectations are not only exceeded but

also overtaken, modified, corrected. And over against the

E 65



other tendency to pay too little attention to the great

significance ofthe Old Testament for the New Testament,

we wish to affirm just as emphatically that the "new" in

the New Testament is

nothing

else than that which had

already been predicted in the Old Testament, and it is of

great significance that the "new" in the New Testament is

illuminated and clarified time and again from the Old

Testament, so that we go off on the wrong track if we

neglect the Old Testament as irrelevant.

It thus seems to me of essential importance for the con-

struction of a theology of mission that both the unity and

the diversity of the Old and New Testaments be kept in

mind, because the diversity can be understood rightly only

from the unity, and the unity receives its full significance

from the diversity. Particularly in respect to the idea of

"mission" must these things be kept firmly in mind, be-

cause the New Testament brings us something totally new

which is quite lacking in the Old Testament: the commis-

sion to proclamation to the nations, to mission in the

centrifugal sense. We would do scant justice to the New

Testament witness were we to see this only as a victory

over or as a contrast to the Old Testament witness. On the

other hand, it seems to me fully as much an impoverish-

ment and a misjudgment of the great significance of the

call to mission if we explain the centrifugal commission

only as aform, or a mode, of the centripetal task.

In this chapter we want to show, in the first place, that

great continuity exists between the Old and the New

Testament witness with respect to the nations, in order to

indicate, in the second place, the differences from the

Old Testament which will prevent our confusing con-

tinuity with identity. In particular we shall have to indi-

cate the progression of Heilsgeschichte, which offers sur-

prising new perspectives as well.

In this chapter we shall confine ourselves chiefly to the

witness of the Gospels. In the next chapter we shall con-

centrate on the call to mission proper, as the completely

66

other tendency to pay too little attention to the greatsignificance of the Old Testament for the New Testament,we wish to affirm just as emphatically that the "new" in

the New Testament is nothing else than that which had

already been predicted in the Old Testament, and it is of

great significance that the "new" in the New Testament is

illuminated and clarified time and again from the Old

Testament, so that we go off on the wrong track if weneglect the Old Testament as irrelevant.

It thus seems to me of essential importance for the con-struction of a theology of mission that both the unity and

the diversity of the Old and New Testaments be kept in

mind, because the diversity can be understood right?J onlyfrom the unity, and the unity receives its full significancefrom the diversity. Particularly in respect to the idea of

"mission" must these things be kept firmly in mind, be-

cause the New Testament brings us something totally newwhich is quite lacking in the Old Testament: the commis-

sion to proclamation to the nations, to mission in the

centrifugal sense. We would do scant justice to the NewTestament witness were we to see this only as a victoryover or as a contrast to the Old Testament witness. On the

other hand, it seems to me fully as much an impoverish-ment and a misjudgment of the great significance of the

call to mission if we explain the centrifugal commission

only as aform, or a mode, of the centripetal task.In this chapter we want to show, in the first place, that

great continuity exists between the Old and the NewTestament witness with respect to the nations, in order toindicate, in the second place, the differences from the

Old Testament which will prevent our confusing con-tinuity with identity. In particular we shall have to indi-

cate the progression of Heilsgeschichte, which offers sur-prising new perspectives as well.

In this chapter we shall confine ourselves chiefly to the

witness of the Gospels. In the next chapter we shall con-centrate on the call to mission proper, as the completely

66



new element that distinguishes the New Testament from

the Old Testament. That this "new" has roots in the

"old" will then be set forth. Then, besides the so-called

"great commission", the letters of Paul and the other

writings ofthe New Testament will claim our attention. In

the final chapter we shall try to find an answer to the

question as to how, in the light of study of the Old Testa-

ment and the New Testament, and in the light of the

present-day situation in missions, a "theology of mission"

is to be constructed.

2. Jesus, Israel, and the Nations

A. Earlier exegetes could not deny that Jesus avoided

a mission to the Gentiles, though they affirmed that Jesus

would have expressed Himselfinfavour of a mission to the

Gentiles, or would have pursued it Himself; and it is now

seen to be an incontestable fact, which the Gospels state

clearly, that Jesus consciously wished to confine His

activity to Israel. We find the clearest statement in Matt.

15: 24: "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of

Israel." That Jesus spoke of the "house" to a woman who

did not belong to the house of Israel at all is an added bit

of evidence that Jesus kept the contrast firmly in mind

between Israel and the world of nations, quite in accord

with the Old Testament doctrine of election. Israel is

God's vineyard (Mark 12: iff.), God's flock (Matt. 10: 6),

and the promises of God are valid particularly for Israel:

the Kingdom of God will be granted to Israel (Matt. 8 :

12, Luke 12: 32).2

Over against this, the Gentiles (the nations) are drawn

in the same dark colours which we have already seen in

the Old Testament: they do not know God, but they

camouflage that ignorance in their prayers by verbosity

(Matt. 6:7), they seek only the things ofthis world (Matt.

6: 32, Luke 12: 30), they can act only contrary to God

(and His Messiah) (Mark 10: 33, Luke 21: 24, cf. Acts

4: 27).

67

new element that distinguishes the New Testament fromthe Old Testament. That this "new" has roots in the

"old" will then be set forth. Then, besides the so-called"great commission", the letters of Paul and the otherwritings of the New Testament will claim our attention. In

the final chapter we shall try to find an answer to the

question as to how, in the light of study of the Old Testament and the New Testament, and in the light of the

present-day situation in missions, a "theology of mission"is to be constructed.

2. Jesus, Israel, and the .NationsA. Earlier exegetes could not deny that Jesus avoided

a mission to the Gentiles, though they affirmed thatJesus

would have expressed Himself in favour of a mission to the

Gentiles, or would have pursued it Himself; and it is nowseen to be an incontestable fact, which the Gospels stateclearly, that Jesus consciously wished to confine His

activity to Israel. We find the clearest statement in Matt.I 5 : 24: "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of

Israel." That Jesus spoke of the "house" to a woman whodid not belong to the house of Israel at all is an added bitof evidence that Jesus kept the contrast firmly in mindbetween Israel and the world of nations, quite in accordwith the Old Testament doctrine of election. Israel is

God's vineyard (Mark 12: Iff.), God's flock (Matt. 10: 6),and the promises of God are valid particularly for Israel:the Kingdom of God will be granted to Israel (Matt. 8:

I2, Luke I2: 32). 2

Over against this, the Gentiles (the nations) are drawnin the same dark colours which we have already seen in

the Old Testament: they do not know God, but they

camouflage that ignorance in their prayers by verbosity(Matt. 6: 7), they seek only the things of this world (Matt.6: 32, Luke 12: 30), they can act only contrary to God(and His Messiah) (Mark 10: 33, Luke 21: 24, cf. Acts

4= 27).



He forbids His disciples emphatically: "Go nowhere

among the Gentiles, and enter no town ofthe Samaritans,

but go rather ta the lost sheep of the house of Israel"

(Matt.10 :

5-6).His

judgmenton the missionary zeal of

the Jews is completely annihilating (Matt. 23: is).3

It will not do to soften the weight and keenness of these

passages by appealing to the fact that Jesus did heal and

preach outside Israel as well, because in neither case was

there any concern for a labour of mission among the

Gentiles byJesus Himself: the healings ofMatt. 15: 21-28

and Matt. 8:

5-13

take

place

from afar; and His crossing

the Jewish borders was done for the sake of the Jewish

population in previously Jewishareas rather than directed

to the Gentiles.4

B. Attempts to ascribe this state of affairs to Jesus9

nationalism or "particularism" have now been almost

completely abandoned. We recognize all this and I

believe correctly as a sign thatJesus kept Himselfwithin

the "historic context of revelation".5

This context also implies that salvation for the Gentiles

was expected at the time ofthe end, when God's Kingdom

would be fullyrevealed in Israel. That Jesus considered

this time of salvation as immediately near, and that He

brought it into connection with His own Messianic com-

mission, appears convincing in all the Gospels. In no way

does He give in to the nationalistic feelings of aversion and

hate, as we can see from His attitude toward the Samari-

tans and His parable of the good Samaritan (John 4,

Luke 9: 51 ff.310: 25-37, X 7 : II~I

9)>in which respect

He

runs counter to prevailing attitudes (Luke 4: i6-3o).6

At the last judgment, Israel as well as the world of

nations will stand before God, and Gentiles as well as

Israelites will be saved and be lost (Matt. 25: 31 ff.) 5 and

many Gentiles will share in the fellowship ofGod at the end

of days (Matt. 8: 11, 12 : 41 ff.). Belonging to Israel is no

guarantee at all of protection against God's judgment

(Matt 3: 9, Luke 13: 6-9): on the contrary, the differ-

68

He forbids His disciples emphatically: "Go nowhereamong the Gentiles, and enter no town of the Samaritans,but go rather to- the lost sheep of the house of Israel"(Matt. I 0 : s-6). His judgment on the missionary zeal of

the Jews is completely annihilating (Matt. 23: 15).3

It will not do to soften the weight and keenness of thesepassages by appealing to the fact that Jesus did heal and

preach outside Israel as well, because in neither case wasthere any concern for a labour of mission among the

Gentiles byJesus Himself: the healings ofMatt. 15: 21-28and Matt. 8: 5-13 take place from afar; and His crossingthe Jewish borders was done for the sake of the Jewish

population in previously Jewish areas rather than directedto the Gentiles.4

B. Attempts to ascribe this state of affairs to Jesus'nationalism or "particularism" have now been almostcompletely abandoned. We recognize all this-and Ibelieve correctly-as a sign that Jesus kept Himself withinthe "historic context of revelation".5

This context also implies that salvation for the Gentileswas expected at the time ofthe end, when God's Kingdom

would be fully revealed in Israel. That Jesus consideredthis time of salvation as immediately near, and that He

brought it into connection with His own Messianic comInission, appears convincing in all the Gospels. In no way

does He give in to the nationalistic feelings ofaversion and

hate, as we can see from His attitude toward the Samaritans and His parable of the good Samaritan (John 4,Luke g: 51 ff., 10:25-37, 17: 11-rg), in which respect He

runs counter to prevailing attitudes (Luke 4: r6-3o).sAt the last judgment, Israel as well as the world of

nations will stand before God, and Gentiles as well as

Israelites will be saved and be lost (Matt. 25: 31 ff.), andmany Gentiles will share in the fellowship ofGod at the end

of days (Matt. 8: I I , I 2 : 4 I ff.). Belonging to Israel is no

guarantee at all of protection against God's judgment

(Matt. 3: 9, Luke I 3: 6-g) : on the contrary, the differ-68



ences between Israel and the nations will then fall away

(Luie 13 : 1-3, Matt. 23 : 37) and Israel will have more to

answer for than the Gentiles (Matt. 12: 41 ,Luke 4:

25-27).*

Jesus' promise of salvation to the nations, however, be-

comes fully clear only if we see it in the light of His

Messianic declarations. We must consider here, first, the

self-designation "Son of Man", which is borrowed from

Dan. 7 : 13. It is a Messianic title which indicates universal

dominion, though it also probably serves to hide Jesus*

Messianic character during His ministry through Israel.

For Jesus is so completely different from the Messiah of

Jewish nationalistic expectation.8 But it has been demon-

strated beyond doubt that the Son-of-Man title is cer-

tainly intended to reflect the universal claims and the

eschatological character ofJesus* Messianic commission,9

which first becomes fully clear during the trial before

Caiaphas andafter the resurrection.10

In the second place, we must make reference to the

appropriation by Jesus not explicitly by name, but cer-

tainly by His work of the "Servant of the Lord" figure

in Isaiah (Matt. 12: 15-21, Mark 10: 45).uBy this means

His work, His suffering, and His dying are explained as a

suffering and dying for the "many" (Mark 10 : 45, 14: 24),

in which, by universal consent, we are to see a designation

of the world of nations.12

In the third place, the claim to the title "Son ofDavid"

must, in the light of Ps. 1 10, be seen as an indication ofthe

world dominion of Jesus as Messiah (Mark 12: 35-37) *

18

The account of Jesus' entry into Jerusalem on an ass

instead ofon a royal horse, Mark 1 1 : i-io, is also obvious

in this connection. This strange entry must be considered

in direct connection with the dominion ofpeace

over all

nations: Zech. 9: 9 f., cf. Isa. 9: 4-6.14

Among the parables ofJesus are several which point to

a salvation for all nations. The well-known Old Testament

image of the pilgrimage of the nations to Jerusalem and

69

ences between Israel and the nations will then fall away(Luke 13: 1-3, Matt. 23: 37) and Israel will have more toanswer for than the Gentiles (Matt. 12: 41 £, Luke 4:

25-27).7

Jesus' promise of salvation to the nations, however, becomes fully clear only if we see it in the light of HisMessianic declarations. We must consider here, first, the

self-designation "Son of Man", which is borrowed fromDan. 7: 13. I tis a Messianic title which indicates universaldoininion, though it also probably serves to hide Jesus'Messianic character during His Ininistry through Israel.

For Jesus is so completely different from the Messiah ofJewish nationalistic expectation.8 But it has been demonstrated beyond doubt that the Son-of-Man title is certainly intended to reflect the universal claiins and the

eschatological character ofJesus' Messianic cominission,9

which :first becomes fully clear during the trial beforeCaiaphas and after the resurrection.1o

In the second place, we must make reference to theappropriation by Jesus-not explicitly by name, but certainly by His work--of the "Servant of the Lord" :figurein Isaiah (Matt. I2 : I5-2 I, Mark 10: 45).11 By this meansHis work, His suffering, and His dying are explained as asuffering and dying for the "many" (Mark 10 : 45, I4: 24),in which, by universal consent, we are to see a designation

ofthe world ofnations,12In the third place, the claim to the title "Son of David"

must, in the light ofPs. I I o, be seen as an indication of theworld doininion of Jesus as Messiah (Mark I2 : 35-37).18

The account of Jesus' entry into Jerusalem on an assinstead of on a royal horse, Mark I I : I -10 , is also obviousin this connection. This strange entry must be consideredin direct connection with the doininion of peace over allnations: Zech. g: g f., cf. !sa. g: 4-6.14

Among the parables ofJesus are several which point toa salvation for all nations. The well-known Old Testamentimage of the pilgrimage of the nations to Jerusalem and

6g



of the feast of the nations at the end of the times (Isa. 2 :

2-4, 25 : 6~8) recurs in various statements and parables of

Jesus. Jeremias15 has stated in a few sharp lines "what

Jesus read in His Bible about the eschatological pilgrimage

of the nations to the mount of God". In these, according

to him, five features are to be distinguished: (a) the

epiphany of God (Isa. 51:5, Zech. 2: 11, Isa. 2 : 2, 51 : 4,

60 : 3, 62 : 11) ; (b)

the summons ofGod (Ps. 50: i, Isa. 45 :

20, 22, 55: 5, 66: 19, Ps. 96: 3, 10); (c]the march of the

nations (Isa. 2:3, 19:23, Zech. 8: 21, Jer. 3: 17, Ps. 47: 9)

laden with gifts (Isa.18:

7,60: 5-20, Hag. 2: 7,

Ps. 68:30,

32) ; (d)the worship in the sanctuary of the world, Jeru-

salem (Isa. 56: 7,66: 18, Isa. 45: 14, 24, Ps. 22: 27, 72:

911, 86: 9, Zeph. 3:9); (e)the feast on the mount ofthe

world, Zion (Isa. 25: 6-8).

Like Sundkler, Jeremias also accentuates the centri-

petal character of the image in both the Old Testament

and the Gospels.16 This presentation of the pilgrimage of

the nations lies at the basis ofthe well-known statement in

Matt. 8: n. Jeremias rightly refers to Isa. 49: 12 and Isa.

25 : 6,17 and remarks that it is from this image that we

must explain all the eschatological parables and passages

which have reference to the feast.18

Closely related to the

image ofthe pilgrimage ofthe nations is that ofa gathering

of the flock (Matt. 25: 31 , John 10: 16, n: 51 ff.),and

that of the temple (Mark n: 17, 12: 10, 14: 58, John 12:

20ff.),

19 that of the city on a hill (Matt. 5 : I4),20 the light

on the stand (Matt. 5: 15, Mark 4: 21, Luke 8: 16, n :

33), the stream oflife (John 7: 37), the inheritance (Matt.

25: 34), and the tree wherein the birds of the air make

their nests (Matt. 13: 32). In all these images we find the

same concern as in the image of the pilgrimage of the

nations, namely, that of universal and eschatological

salvation. 21Although this conclusion would appear at first

sight to many somewhat strange, and reminds us of the

eschatological dream out of which Karl Barth would like

to awaken men,22

it must be admitted on the other hand

7

of the feast of the nations at the end of the times (Isa. 2:

2-4, 25: 6-8) recurs in various statements and parables of

Jesus. J eremias15 has stated in a few sharp lines "what

Jesus read in His Bible about the eschatological pilgrimageof the nations to the mount of God". In these, accordingto him, five features are to be distinguished: (a) the

epiphany of God (!sa. 51: 5, Zech. 2: II, !sa. 2: 2, 51: 4,6o: 3, 62: I I); (b) the summons of God (Ps. so: r, !sa. 45:20, 22, 55: 5, 66: rg, Ps. g6: 3, ro); (c) the march of the

nations (!sa. 2:3, Ig:23, Zech. 8:21, Jer. 3: 17, Ps. 47: g)laden with gifts (!sa. r8: 7, 6o: 5-20, Hag. 2:7, Ps. 68:30,

32); (d) the worship in the sanctuary of the world, J em

salem (!sa. 56: 7, 66: I8, Isa. 45: I4, 24, Ps. 22: 27, 72:g-I I, 86: g, Zeph. 3: 9); (e) the feast on the mount of the

world, Zion (Isa. 25: 6-8).Like Sundkler, Jeremias also accentuates the centri

petal character of the image in both the Old Testamentand the Gospels.16 This presentation of the pilgrimage of

the nations lies at the basis of the well-known statement inMatt. 8: I I. Jeremias rightly refers to Isa. 49: I 2 and Isa.25: 6,17 and remarks that it is from this image that wemust explain all the eschatological parables and passageswhich have reference to the feast. 18 Closely related to the

image ofthe pilgrimage ofthe nations is that ofa gatheringof the flock (Matt. 25: 3I f., John IO: r6, I I: 51 ff.), and

thatofthetemple (Mark I I : I7, I2: IO, 14: 58,John 12:20 ff.)/9 that of the city on a hill (Matt. 5: 14),20 the lighton the stand (Matt. 5: 15, Mark 4: 21, Luke 8: 16, II:

33), the stream oflife (John 7: 37), the inheritance (Matt.25: 34), and the tree wherein the birds of the air maketheir nests (Matt. 13: 32). In all these images we find the

same concern as in the image of the pilgrimage of the

nations, namely, that of universal and eschatologicalsalvation.21 Although this conclusion would appear at firstsight to many somewhat strange, and reminds us of the

eschatological dream out of which Karl Barth would liketo awaken men,22 it must be admitted on the other hand

70



that the frequently used concept of the Kingdom of God, or of

Heaven, always includes the world of nations. And from this

statement irrefutable, I believe it certainly becomes

probable

that we must understand the

images

andparablesin the New Testament in this light of universal salvation.

The question arises, why has Jesus separated His task

for Israel so strictly from His expectation for the nations?

The answer we shall give is twofold: (i) Salvation must

first be offered to Israel before the Gentiles (the nations)

can be received into the people of God. In this light we

must understand, too, Jesus' strong prohibition to the dis-

ciples against going to the Gentiles, Matt. 10: 5-6: the

Kingdom of God is at hand, but its eschatological revela-

tion has not yet come. (2) The Kingdom ofGod can dawn

only after the blood of the true Passover Lamb has been

shed (Isa. 53: u, Mark 10: 45, 14: 24).23

C. Now we come to the point where we must make clear

the fact that continuity between the Old Testament and the

New Testament does not mean identity, but includes differ-

ence as well. So long as we view the eschatological expecta-

tion ofsalvation in the Old Testament as the only possible

sort of expectation of salvation we can do no justice to the

witness of the New Testament. 24

The view is steadily gaining ground that when one has

stated the continuity between the Old Testament eschato-

logy and the message ofthe Gospels, one has still said only

the first word as regards the distinctive character of New

Testament eschatology.

This distinctive character must be described as follows :

with the coming of Jesus as the Messiah, and with the

coming in Him of the Kingdom ofGod (Mark i : 14-15),

we still have only a provisional fulfilment of the promises

made to Israel during the period of the Old Testament.

We must therefore review the significance ofthis tension

between the fulfilment and the provisional nature of the

Messianic Kingdom of God which has come in Christ. In

other words, we must demonstrate the progression and

71

that the frequently used concept of the Kingdom of God, or ofHeaven, always includes the world of nations. And from thisstatement-irrefutable, I believe-it certainly becomesprobable that we must understand the images and parablesin the New Testament in this light of universal salvation.

The question arises, why has Jesus separated His taskfor Israel so strictly from His expectation for the nations?The answer we shall give is twofold: (I) Salvation mustfirst be offered to Israel before the Gentiles (the nations)can be received into the people of God. In this light wemust understand, too, Jesus' strong prohibition to the dis

ciples against going to the Gentiles, Matt. 10 : 5-6: the

Kingdom of God is at hand, but its eschatological revelation has not yet come. (2) The Kingdom of God can dawn

only after the blood of the true Passover Lamb has been

shed (Isa. 53: I I , Mark 10: 45, 14: 24).23

C. Now we come to the point where we must make clearthe fact that continui0J between the Old Testament and the

New Testament does not mean identi0J, but includes differ-ence as well. So long as we view the eschatological expectation ofsalvation in the Old Testament as the only possiblesort of expectation of salvation we can do no justice to the

witness of the New Testament.24The view is steadily gaining ground that when one has

stated the continuity between the Old Testament eschato

logy and the message of the Gospels, one has still said onlythe first word as regards the distinctive character of NewTestament eschatology.

This distinctive character must be described as follows:with the coming of Jesus as the Messiah, and with the

coming in Him of the Kingdom of God (Mark 1: 14-15),we still have only a provisional fulfilment of the promises

made to Israel during the period of the Old Testament.We must therefore review the significance of this tension

between the fulfilment and the provisional nature of the

Messianic Kingdom of God which has come in Christ. In

other words, we must demonstrate the progression and

7I



unfolding of the heilsgeschichtlich activity of God, as this is

proclaimed to us in the New Testament in contrast to

(but not in opposition to)the Old Testament perspective,

in so far as it is ofimportance to us in our investigation of

the Biblical foundation and motive of mission.

3. The Kingdom^ the Apostles, and the Church

A. The theme and contents of the Gospel are the pro-

clamation of the Kingdom of God as a fulfilment of the

Old Testament promises.25

Its actualization begins in the

preaching of Jesus.26 In His preaching the Messianic

character of the coming Kingdom of God comes into

sharper focus than could be expressed in the Old Testa-

ment. For the relation between the Kingdom of God and

the Messianic revelation becomes a correlation, of such

force that one can almost speak of anidentification ofJesus

Christ and the Kingdom of God; He not only proclaims,

but He is in His person the Kingdom which is at hand.

We can see here the first contrast between the Old

Testament expectation and the New Testament fulfilment.

Not only is theexpectation of salvation in the Old Testa-

ment being fulfilled; the revelation of salvation is becoming

clearer, because the history of salvation(Heilsgeschichte) is

unfolding. In close connection with these facts is the

following:

The Messianic self-declarations of Jesus undoubtedlycontain the universal dominion ofGod, Although He knows

Himself to be the Messiah of Israel, and as such has

chosen the way of suffering and crucifixion, He has not

only steadfastly rejected the designation "Messiah", but

He has also led the thoughts both of His disciples and of

those who rejected Him in another direction. This is clear

from His plain preference for the appellation "Son of

Man", a name which occurs in the Gospels exclusively as

a ^^designation of Jesus. The writers of the Gospels

apparently mean to say that the universal-Messianic con-

sciousness was present in Jesus, but that neither friend nor

72

unfolding of the heilsgeschichtlich activity of God, as this isproclaimed to us in the New Testament in contrast to

(but not in opposition to) the Old Testament perspective,in so far as it is of importance to us in our investigation of

the Biblical foundation and motive of mission.

3· The Kingdom, the Apostles, and the Church

A. The theme and contents of the Gospel are the proclamation of the Kingdom of God as a fulfilment of the

Old Testament promises.25 Its actualization begins in the

preaching of Jesus. 26 In His preaching the Messianic

character of the coming Kingdom of God comes intosharper focus than could be expressed in the Old Testament. For the relation between the Kingdom of God and

the Messianic revelation becomes a correlation, of suchforce that one can almost speak of an identification ofJesusChrist and the Kingdom of God; He not only proclaims,but He is in His person the Kingdom which is at hand.

We can see here the first contrast between the Old

Testament expectation and the New Testament fulfilment.Not only is the expectation of salvation in the Old Testament being fulfilled; the revelation of salvation is becomingclearer, because the history of salvation (Heilsgeschichte) isunfolding. In close connection with these facts is the

following:

The Messianic self-declarations of Jesus undoubtedlycontain the universal dominion ofGod. Although He knowsHimself to be the Messiah of Israel, and as such haschosen the way of suffering and crucifixion, He has not

only steadfastly rejected the designation "Messiah", but

He has also led the thoughts both of His disciples and of

those who rejected Him in another direction. This is clear

from His plain preference for the appellation "Son ofMan", a name which occurs in the Gospels exclusively asa self-designation of Jesus. The writers of the Gospelsapparently mean to say that the universal-Messianic consciousness was present in Jesus, but that neither friend nor

72



foe understood its range before the work of Jesus had

received its fulfilment in cross and resurrection. Jesus

opposes theexpectations of a narrowly Israelite sort (coloured

in part bynationalism) by opening

outprospects of

uni-

mrsalism. Aside from the title "Son of Man", this fact

also becomes clear in the preaching ofJesus, particularly

in the parables which reveal their secret only ifwe under-

stand them as signs of the eschatologically universal

Kingdom of God.

It is this eschatological character of the parables which

opens our eyes to the fact that that magic word "eschato-

logical" has not said everything. For precisely in these

parables we see that the coming ofJesus does not mean

the absolute end> but rather that it ushers in a new periodin

the history of Israel and of the world. This is the third

point of distinction between the Old Testament expecta-

tion and the New Testament fulfilment. And it is just this

distinction which is of all-determinative significance for a

true understanding of the missionary call which Christ

has given to His Church. For while the gospel is the ful-

filment of the expectation of salvation, that fulfilment still

bears a tentative character, and becomes in itself the

source of a new expectation.27

[This new expectation is often interpreted as applying

to the near future, and there has also been talk of a delay

in the Parousia, the Second Coming of Christ, which was

(according to this view) the cause of great disappoint-

ment for the early Christians.28 Others have been of the

opinion that the expectation for the near future played a

smaller role than has generally been assumed, and some

even want to deny any meaning at all to eschatology after

cross and resurrection.29

Still others are ofthe opinion that

the resurrection of Christ is really to be put on the same

level with the Second Coming.30 Our belief is that these

ideas do not do justice to the actual contents of the Gos-

pels, and that we must recognize that the New Testament

witness concerning eschatology cannot be brought under

73

foe understood its range before the work of Jesus had

received its fulfilment in cross and resurrection. Jesusopposes the expectations of a narrowlY Israelite sort (colouredin part by nationalism) by opening out prospects of uni-versalism. Aside from the title "Son of Man", this factalso becomes clear in the preaching ofJesus, particularlyin the parables which reveal their secret only if we understand them as signs of the eschatologically universalKingdom of God.

It is this eschatological character of the parables whichopens our eyes to the fact that that magic word "eschato

logical" has not said everything. For precisely in theseparables we see that the coming ofJesus does not mean

the absolute end, but rather that it ushers in a new period in

the history of Israel and of the world. This is the third

point of distinction between the Old Testament expectation and the New Testament fulfilment. And it is just thisdistinction which is of all-determinative significance for a

true understanding of the missionary call which Christhas given to His Church. For while the gospel is the fulfilment of the expectation of salvation, that fulfilment stillbears a tentative character, and becomes in itself the

source of a new expectation.27

[This new expectation is often interpreted as applyingto the near future, and there has also been talk of a delay

in the Parousia, the Second Coming of Christ, which was(according to this view) the cause of great disappointment for the early Christians. 28 Others have been of the

opinion that the expectation for the near future played asmaller role than has generally been assumed, and someeven want to deny any meaning at all to eschatology aftercross and resurrection.29 Still others are of the opinion that

the resurrection of Christ is really to be put on the samelevel with the Second Coming.30 Our belief is that theseideas do not do justice to the actual contents of the Gospels, and that we must recognize that the New Testamentwitness concerning eschatology cannot be brought under

73



one denominator. We must distinguish, I believe, be-

tween at least three data which are not mutually exclusive

but which supplement and clarify each other:(a) the

coming ofJesus is indeed the fulfilment of the Old Testa-

ment expectation for the future and to that extent is a

complete, unambiguous, eschatological event;31

(b) the

coming ofJesus, and especially His suffering and resurrec-

tion, ushers in a new age in which it becomes clear that

the revelation of the Messiah does mean the end of a

particular period ofsalvation, but not the end ofthe times;32

(c)the end of the times remains, or rather becomes an

object of future expectation in which the complete break-

through of the Kingdom of God is connected with the

Second Coming of Christ. 33

Item (a) has already claimed our attention in 2 of

this chapter. Now we must turn to the meaning of(b)

and(c}.~\

In this connection the parable of the sower (Matt. 13

and parallels) is of much significance since it forms "in

many respects the point of departure and the basis for an

understanding of the ensuing parables".34 This parable is

concerned with "the connection between the event

painted in the parable and the revelation of the Kingdomof Heaven".35 The Kingdom of God (which has come in

and with Christ) now goes the way of the seed, and the

Messiah assumes the figure of the Sower. In the great

eschatological hour of fulfilment, this is just what is hap-

pening: "a sower goes out to sow nothing more; and

that means a new world of God".36 This Kingdom will

fare just as the seed does : there are failures but there is also

(and even in a wonderfully abundant way) fruit. The

salvation of God has come, and as a seed. This assumes

time and space to grow andripen to the harvest. The same thoughtlies at the basis of the parable of the tares among the

wheat, Matt. 13: 24-30, 36-43, in which, even more

clearly than in the previously considered parable, time as

afactor within the Kingdom emerges: "Whoever sows cannot

74

one denominator. We must distinguish, I believe, between at least three data which are not mutually exclusivebut which supplement and clarity each other: (a) the

coming ofjesus is indeed the fulfilment of the Old Testament expectation for the future and to that extent is acomplete, unambiguous, eschatological event; 31 (b) the

coming ofjesus, and especially His suffering and resurrection, ushers in a new age in which it becomes clear that

the revelation of the Messiah does mean the end of aparticular period ofsalvation, but not the end of he times;32

(c) the end of the times remains, or rather becomes an

object offuture expectation in which the complete breakthrough of the Kingdom of God is connected with the

Second Coming of Christ. 33

Item (a) has already claimed our attention in §2 of

this chapter. Now we must turn to the meaning of (b)

and (c).]In this connection the parable of the sower (Matt. 13

and parallels) is of much significance since it forms "inmany respects the point of departure and the basis for an

understanding of the ensuing parables".34 This parable is

concerned with "the connection between the eventpainted in the parable and the revelation of the Kingdom

ofHeaven".35 The Kingdom of God (which has come in

and with Christ) now goes the way of the seed, and the

Messiah assumes the figure of the Sower. In the greateschatological hour of fulfilment, this is just what is hap

pening: "a sower goes out to sow-nothing more; and

that means a new world of God".36 This Kingdom willfare just as the seed does: there are failures but there is also(and even in a wonderfully abundant way) fruit. The

salvation of God has come, and as a seed. This assumes

time and space to grow and ripen to the harvest. The same thoughtlies at the basis of the parable of the tares among the

wheat, Matt. 13: 24-30, 36-43, in which, even moreclearly than in the previously considered parable, time as

afactor within the Kingdom emerges: "Whoever sows cannot

74



forthwith mow." 37 In the parable of the net, Matt. 13:

47-50, there is a similar concern for the distinction and

the interval between gathering and separating and sort-

ing.38 We are to view in the same

waythe

parables

of the

seed growing secretly (Mark 4: 26-29), of the mustard

seed and the leaven (Matt. 13: 31-33). The sense of these

parables is obscured just as much by a one-sidedly present

concept of the Kingdom as by an exclusively future one. 39

At the same time, we must recognize the coming of the

Kingdom and the delay ofthe end as a special gift ofthe

Messianic time. There is an interval of time between the

revelation ofthe Kingdom ofGod and the LastJudgment,an interval which becomes the great characteristic of the

Messianic self-revelation of Jesus. Jesus is Saviour before

He isJudge. The parables ofthe Lost Sheep, the Lost Coin,

and the Prodigal Son (Luke 15) must also be understood

in this light. The divine power and glory which are

granted to the Messiah can be exercised by Him only in

the restricted way which God has indicated to Him. This

way is the way of vicarioussuffering and dying. The Son of

Man is also the Servant of the Lord. It is both foci which

together determine the content of the Gospel.40

"The teaching and work ofthe historical Jesus are only

to be understood in the light of His consciousness of ful-

filling the role of the suffering Servant ofGod and that of

the returning Son of Man."

"In the performance of these two tasks as suffering

Servant ofGod and as the Son ofMan who is to return on the

clouds Jesus has fulfilled God's plan of salvation. The

suffering Servant of God has fulfilled the purport of the

history of the people Israel, which lies enclosed in sub-

stitution . . .;the Son ofMan, coming on the clouds, com-

pletes God's work of creation as the Man, the Second

Adam, at which the creation (Erschaffung] of man, made

in the image of God, has aimed."41

In the vicarious suffering and death of Christ there lies

,a strong motive for the delay in the judgment of the

75

forthwith mow." 37 In the parable of the net, :Klatt. 13:

47-50, there is a similar concern for the distinction and

the interval between gathering and separating and sorting.38 We are to view in the same way the parables of the

seed growing secretly (Mark 4: 26-2g), of the mustardseed and the leaven (Matt. 13: 31-33). The sense of theseparables is obscured just as much by a one-sidedly presentconcept of the Kingdom as by an exclusively future one.39

At the same time, we must recognize the coming of theKingdom and the delay of the end-as a special gift of theMessianic time. There is an interval of time between the

revelation of the Kingdom of God and the LastJudgment,

an interval which becomes the great characteristic of theMessianic self-revelation of Jesus. Jesus is Saviour before

He is Judge. The parables of he Lost Sheep, the Lost Coin,and the Prodigal Son (Luke 15) must also be understoodin this light. The divine power and glory which aregranted to the Messiah can be exercised by Him only in

the restricted way which God has indicated to Him. Thisway is the wqy of vicarious suffering and dying. The Son of

Man is also the Servant of the Lord. It is both foci whichtogether determine the content of the Gospel.40

"The teaching and work of the historical jesus are onlyto be understood in the light of His consciousness of fulfilling the role of the suffering Servant of God and that of

the returning Son of Man.""In the performance of these two tasks-as suffering

Servant ofGod and as the Son ofMan who is to return on theclouds-Jesus has fulfilled God's plan of salvation. The

suffering Servant of God has fulfilled the purport of the

history of the people Israel, which lies enclosed in substitution . . . ; the Son of Man, coming on the clouds, com

pletes God's work of creation as the Man, the SecondAdam, at which the creation (Erscha.ffung) of man, madein the image of God, has aimed." 41

In the vicarious suffering and death of Christ there lies,a strong motive for the delay in the judgment of the

75



world.42 Therefore His resurrection does not mean the end

but the beginning of a new period in world history. For

the forgivenessand reconciliation accomplished through

it

already carry

within themselves the character ofjudg-

ment. By Christ's suffering, judgment is not only post-

poned but in a certain way it is taken over and borne by

Him. In Him the possibilityis now open to escape the

judgment. But then there must be preached to all nations

also what Christ has done vicariously, for Israel (by the

Son of Man, who is the Servant of the Lord) and for the

whole world (by the Servant of the Lord, who is the Son

of Man). Jesus Himself appears to be the seed which dies

(John 12), but which will also bear fruit. This fruit, how-

ever, needs a time of ripening,and a time for bringing

in the harvest which shall be abundant, because it is the

harvest of the whole world. Here the assumptions and

motives of thepreaching ofthe Gospel to the nations are disclosed.

It is this Messianic way of the seed, suffering and dying, of

the resurrection thereafter, and of the preaching of the

Gospel among the nations, that is the new element

through which the fulfilment far surpasses the expectation.

God's eschatological activity in Christ opens out a most

surprising perspective,the surprising thing being not the

fact of the coming of the nations, but how they come, and

the condition for their coming.

There is thus good reason to speak ofa "dethronement"

of eschatology43 in the message ofthe New Testament, be-

cause the 'last things55

which have been enacted in

Christ are at the same time the "first things'5

of a new age

and of a new world. This does not mean that we are

eliminating eschatology as no longer relevant. On the con-

trary, it means that instead of an end-point on the time-

line of history we have a line which points toward a

further and definitive end-point.

From all this discussion, we may conclude that even

"the coming of the nations" is not enacted at a point of

time but is stretched out over the full length of history.

world. u Therefore His resurrection does not mean the end

but the beginning of a new period in world history. For

the forgiveness and reconciliation accomplished through

it already carry within themselves the character of judg

ment. By Christ's suffering, judgment is not only postponed but in a certain way it is taken over and borne by

Him. In Him the possibility is now open to escape the

judgment. But then there must be preached to all nationsalso what Christ has done vicariously, for Israel (by the

Son of Man, who is the Servant of the Lord) and for the

whole world (by the Servant of the Lord, who is the Sonof Man). Jesus Himself appears to be the seed which dies(John r2), but which will also bear fruit. This fruit, however, needs a time of ripening, and a time for bringingin the harvest-which shall be abundant, because it is the

harvest of the whole world. Here the assumptions and

motives of he preaching of he Gospel to the nations are disclosed.It is this Messianic wqy of the seed, suffering and dying, of

the resurrection thereafter, and of the preaching of the

Gospel among the nations, that is the new elementthrough which the fulfilment far surpasses the expectation.God's eschatological activity in Christ opens out a mostsurprising perspective, the surprising thing being not the

fact of the coming of the nations, but how they come, and

the condition for their coming.

There is thus good reason to speak ofa "dethronement"of eschatology43 in the message of the New Testament, because the "last things" which have been enacted in

Christ are at the same time the "first things" of a new ageand of a new world. This does not mean that we are

eliminating eschatology as no longer relevant. On the contrary, it means that instead of an end-point on the time

line of history we have a line which points toward afurther and definitive end-point.

From all this discussion, we may conclude that even"the coming of the nations" is not enacted at a point of

time but is stretched out over the full length of history.

76



This history is to be characterized as the time of sowing

and growing before the harvest, the time of the throwing

of the net, the time of the gathering of the fish before

sorting, the time of the

working

of the leaven in the meal,

and therefore also a time of patience, watchfulness, per-

severance and expectation. It is not eschatology itself, but

a wrongly understood eschatology, which contains the dan-

ger."

B. The picture here sketched of the Kingdom of God

as the end-point ofthe Old Testament expectation and as

the point ofdeparture for the dawning ofa new era for the

nations, is further clarified ifwe ask ourselves what signifi-

cance the apostles have in the new situation. Current dis-

cussions of the "apostolate" direct our attention to the

apostles and to their function in the Kingdom of God.

Here, too, we must confine ourselves to suggesting the

lines which are of importance for our subject.45

Firstof all, itmust be established that the word "apostle"

in derivation and meaning, is not "missionary" in the

sense we usually ascribe to it. In this regard, the use ofthe

word "apostolate" if we intend the meaning "mission-

ary" in the ordinary sense indicates a significant altera-

tion of meaning in comparison with the New Testament

usage. The word is derived from the juridical rather than

the theological world, and means: to be fully entrusted

with the responsibility or representation of another; that

is,a mandatory or a "principal", in the legal sense in

England (the Dutch word islastgever}. That this word is

not to be considered an equivalent of "missionary" or

"one sent" (although the literal meaning of the Greek

word does suggest this) appears from the fact that Jewish

missionaries at the time ofJesus are never called "apostles"

(Hebrew seldhim}.** The apostles are those authorized by

Jesus, whose significance for the first Christian community

consists particularly in the fact that they are witnesses

of the resurrection, and clothed by Jesus personally with

the authority of witnesses. From this alone follows

77

This history is to be characterized as the time of sowingand growing before the harvest, the time of the throwingof the net, the time of the gathering of the fish before

sorting, the time of the working of the leaven in the meal,and therefore also a time of patience, watchfulness, perseverance and expectation. It is not eschatology itself, but

a wrongly understood eschatology, which contains the dan

ger.44

B. The picture here sketched of the Kingdom of Godas the end-point of the Old Testament expectation and asthe point ofdeparture for the dawning ofa new era for the

nations, is further clarified ifwe ask ourselves what significance the apostles have in the new situation. Current discussions of the "apostolate" direct our attention to the

apostles and to their function in the Kingdom of God.Here, too, we must confine ourselves to suggesting the

lines which are of importance for our subject.45

Firstofall, it must be established that the word "apostle"

in derivation and meaning, is not "missionary" in the

sense we usually ascribe to it. In this regard, the use of the

word "apostolate"-if we intend the meaning "missionary" in the ordinary sense-indicates a significant alteration of meaning in comparison with the New Testamentusage. The word is derived from the juridical rather than

the theological world, and means: to be fully entrusted

with the responsibility or representation of another; thatis, a mandatory or a "principal", in the legal sense in

England (the Dutch word is lastgever). That this word isnot to be considered an equivalent of "missionary" or

"one sent" (although the literal meaning of the Greekword does suggest this) appears from the fact that Jewishmissionaries at the time of]esus are never called "apostles"

(Hebrew ~ e l t 1 h £ m ) . The apostles are those authorized byJesus, whose significance for the first Christian communityconsists particularly in the fact that they are witnessesof the resurrection, and clothed by Jesus personally withthe authority of witnesses. From this alone follows

77



their missionary vocation. Although the twelve apostles

do notrepresent the New Testament apostolatt exclusively,*7

the concept of "apostle" is certainly defined by them, by

the twelve chosen by Jesus. This group of twelve repre-

sents Israel first of all, in particular the twelve tribes of

Israel. They form the beginning, the nucleus of the

eschatological people of God around the Messiah48

(Matt.

19: 28) and thus they are also sent out to the lost sheep of

the house of Israel (Matt. 10: 5-6) .49

Here, too, we see how Jesus' appearance as Messiah

remains within the bounds indicated by the Scriptures.50

But the vocation and task of the apostles is seen to be a

future one (Matt. 18: 18, cf. 16: 19). While Jesus Christ

brings the great Messianic future He, at the same time,

opens a new future for His own. The particular work of

the apostles must thus also wait; on them is laid a pro-

visional silence (Matt. 16: 20) which will be broken only

by a sign fromJesus Himself (Acts i :8). Only as the Mes-

sianic sacrifice has been made does the commission given

by Jesus to the disciples come into full activity. And then,

for the first time, all boundaries may (and must) be

crossed to proclaim the salvation ofthe Kingdom through

all the earth. Only after the resurrection does the title

"apostle" take on the special overtone of "missionary",

one sent to the uttermost parts ofthe earth. To do justice,

then, to the word "apostle", we must distinguish three

meanings:

(i)Proxies of the Messiah, who in His name proclaim

and demonstrate the salvation of the time of the

end (by healing the sick, etc.) ;

(ii)First-fruits and representatives of the Messianic

people of the time of the end;

(iii) Witnesses ofHis resurrection to the uttermost parts

ofthe earth, who carry on the work of Christ in the

world (John 17: 18, 20: 21).

In other words, the eschatological task and position makes

them both the first-fruits ofthe new age and a new people

78

their missionary vocation. Although the twelve apostlesdo notrepresent the New Testament apostolateexclusive[y,47

the concept of "apostle" is certainly defined by them, by

the twelve chosen by Jesus. This group of twelve represents Israel first of all, in particular the twelve tribes of

Israel. They form the beginning, the nucleus of the

eschatological people of God around the Messiah48 (Matt.xg: 28) and thus they are also sent out to the lost sheep of

the house of Israel (Matt. xo: s-6).49

Here, too, we see how Jesus' appearance as Messiahremains within the bounds indicated by the Scriptures.50

But the vocation and task of the apostles is seen to be afuture one (Matt. x8: 18, c£ 16: xg). While Jesus Christbrings the great Messianic future He, at the same time,opens a new future for His own. The particular work of

the apostles must thus also wait; on them is laid a provisional silence (Matt. 16.: 20) which will be broken onlyby a sign fromJesus Hixnself (Acts x: 8). Only as theMes-

sianic sacrifice has been made does the commission givenby Jesus to the disciples come into full activity. And then,

for the first time, all boundaries may (and must) be

crossed to proclaim the salvation of the Kingdom throughall the earth. Only after the resurrection does the title"apostle" take on the special overtone of "missionary",one sent to the uttermost parts of the earth. To do justice,

then, to the word "apostle", we must distinguish threemeanings:

(i) Proxies of the Messiah, who in His name proclaimand demonstrate the salvation of the time of the

end (by healing the sick, etc.) ;(ii) First-fruits and representatives of the Messianic

people of the time of the end;

(iii) Witnesses ofHis resurrection to the uttermost partsofthe earth, who carry on the work ofChrist in the

world (John 17: 18, 20: 21).

In other words, the eschatological task and position makesthem both the first-fruits of the new age and a new people

78



ofGod. Continuity with the Old Testament is maintained

but it is equally clear that the position of the apostles is

not identical with that of the twelve tribes in the Old

Testament. The progressionof Heilsgeschichte

which is here

found continues, in that the "last of the days" does not mean the

end of the days, but agreat turning of the days toward a new

future.

C. From the apostles to the Church is but one step. For

the Church must be built on the foundation ofthe apostles

and prophets (Eph. 2: 20). She is the new community of

the Messiah of which the apostles are the beginning.

Descent from Abraham is not determinative in her (Matt*

3:9), nor is belonging to Israel (John 8 : 37-40, cf. Gal. 3 :

29, Rom. 4: 16-17), but only the faith and works ofAbra-

ham(cf. Gal. 3: 28) and these can exist only in so far

as one acknowledges the Messiah of Israel and rejoices

with Him in the salvation of the nations (John 8: 56).

This community of Christ, going out from the centre

(the apostles), will reveal itself in the world as the people

of the time of the end, the flock of the good Shepherd

(John 10), the real Israel(cf.

i Pet. 2 : 10).

Nowhere in the New Testament is the Church made the

equivalent of the Kingdom of God, but neither is the one

set anywhere in opposition to the other. The Church is

the community gathered around Christ and gathered byChrist (and by the apostles who are proxy for Him). She

is not herselfthe Kingdom, but she is its manifestation and

its form. The Church herself is a sign of the new future

which has broken in for the world. It is true that the

Church made her appearance as a result of the expecta-

tion ofthe Kingdom ofGod, but only in the sense that she

has taken this expectation into herself. The Christological

character of the Church does not exclude her eschatologi-

cal character, but includes it. In other words, the Church

is the "holy, catholic, apostolic Church" only when she

receives the eschatological expectation of the fullness of

the Kingdom. Ifshe does not do that, then the great ques-

79

of God. Continuity with the Old Testament is maintainedbut it is equally clear that the position of the apostles is

not identical with that of the twelve tribes in the Old

Testament. The progression qf Heilsgeschichte which is here

found continues, in that the "last qf the days" does not mean the

end of the days, but a great turning qf the days toward a newfuture.

C. From the apostles to the Church is but one step. Forthe Church must be built on the foundation of the apostlesand prophets (Eph. 2: 20). She is the new community of

the Messiah of which the apostles are the beginning.

Descent from Abraham is not determinative in her (Matt.3: g), nor is belonging to Israel (John 8: 37-40, cf. Gal. 3:

29, Rom. 4: r6-17), but only the faith and works ofAbraham (c£ Gal. 3: 28)-and these can exist only in so faras one acknowledges the Messiah of Israel and rejoiceswith Him in the salvation of the nations (John 8: 56).

This community of Christ, going out from the centre

(the apostles), will reveal itself in the world as the peopleof the time of the end, the flock of the good Shepherd(John 10), the realisrael (cf. I Pet. 2: ro).

Nowhere in the New Testament is the Church made the

equivalent of the Kingdom of God, but neither is the oneset anywhere in opposition to the other. The Church is

the community gathered· around Christ and gathered by

Christ (and by the apostles who are proxy for Him). Sheis not herself the Kingdom, but she is its manifestation and

its form. The Church herself is a sign of the new futurewhich has broken in for the world. It is true that the

Church made her appearance as a result of the expectation of the Kingdom of God, but only in the sense that shehas taken this expectation into herself. The Christological

character of the Church does not exclude her eschatological character, but includes it. In other words, the Churchis the "holy, catholic, apostolic Church" only when shereceives the eschatological expectation of the fullness of

the Kingdom. I f she does not do that, then the great ques-

79



tion is whether she has the right any longer to be called

the community of the Kingdom and of the King.51

Ifthis confession of the Church as theform andanticipation

of

the

Kingdom of

God is correct, then it

implies

that the

Church has substituted for the Old Testament's "not yet5 '

the "already", though this "not yet" of the Old Testa-

ment is not dropped. So one might really express the

situation ofthe Old Testament and ofthe New Testament

in this way: "not yet" "already" "not yet".

In regard to the world of the nations, this means that

the Church, in so far as she has taken the place of Israel,

represents the salvation which has come in Christ, just

as in the Old Testament, Israel could, in anticipation,

represent the salvation of the world. But the difference is

that the Church no longer merely anticipates, she remains

a symbol of the hopes for the Kingdom in the fullness of

the nations.62 Mission comes into view when this hope for

the world takes the form of acts ofproclamation on behalf

of Christ.53

At this point we make the transition to the following

chapter. We have wanted to emphasize the continuity of

the Old Testament and of the New Testament witness, in

the progression and modification of Heilsgeschichte. In the

next chapter we want to go further into the whole new and

surprising aspect of the New Testament witness, namely,

the summons to mission among the nations. Only now,

therefore, do we come to a discussion of the Biblical bases

ofmission in the strict and only sense ofthe word. Yet how

can one distinguish and evaluate the "new", ifhe does not

know the "old"?

80

tion is whether she has the right any longer to be calledthe community of the Kingdom and of the King.51

Ifthis confession of the Church as theform and anticipationof the Kingdom of God is correct, then it implies that the

Church has substituted for the Old Testament's "not yet"the "already", though this "not yet'' of the Old Testa-ment is not dropped. So one might really express the

situation of the Old Testament and of the New Testamentin this way: "not yet"-"already"-"not yet".

In regard to the world of the nations, this means that

the Church, in so far as she has taken the place of Israel,represents the salvation which has come in Christ, just

as in the Old Testament, Israel could, in anticipation,represent the salvation of the world. But the difference isthat the Church no longer merely anticipates, she remainsa symbol of the hopes for the Kingdom in the fullness of

the nations.52 Mission comes into view when this hope forthe world takes the form of acts of proclamation on behalfof Christ.53

At this point we make the transition to the followingchapter. We have wanted to emphasize the continuif)! of

the Old Testament and of the New Testament witness, in

the progression and modification of Heilsgeschichte. In the

next chapter we want to go further into the whole new and

surprising aspect of the New Testament witness, namely,the summons to mission among the nations. Only now,therefore, do we come to a discussion of the Biblical basesofmission in the strict and only sense of the word. Yet howcan one distinguish and evaluate the "new", i fhe does notknow the "old"?

8o



CHAPTER 6

THE MISSIONARY MESSAGE OF THENEW TESTAMENT IN CONTRAST WITH THE

OLD TESTAMENT

i. Presuppositions

TN TURNING OUR ATTENTION TO THE MISSIONARY

JLcommission as it is given us in the New Testament we

want first of all to set down the conditions and presup-

positions which have led to this missionary commission.

(1)In the first stage of the history of the world, God is

creator of heaven and earth; He grants life and peace to

man after (and even in) his disobedience, and He reveals

something ofHis manifold divine wisdom in the multitude

of nations (Gen. 10). At the same time, He resists the

attempts ofman to give form to his life and future himself

without acknowledging God as the Lord over his life. This

divine resistance leads to the scattering ofthe nations over

the whole world, as a sign and consequence of the fellow-

ship men had had and have now lost.

In this divinejudgment (which must be fully recognized

as judgment, just like the deluge and the expulsion from

the Garden ofEden), the way is opened to a restoration of

fellowship between God and man, and thus between God

and the world of nations this way is the election of

Abraham.

(2)At this point history enters a new phase, that of

"one for many": Abraham the individual from Ur,

Israel the individual among the nations, but also a witness

to all nations that God has not abandoned the world but

continues His work. Further, when Israel defends herself

against the nations, it is only a defence against apostasy,

F 81

CHAPTER 6

THE MISSIONARY MESSAGE OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT IN CONTRAST WITH THEOLD TESTAMENT

I . Presuppositions

IN TURNING OUR ATTENTION TO THE MISSIONARY

commission as i t is given us in the New Testament we

want first of all to set down the conditions and presup-positions which have led to this missionary commission.

(r) In the first stage of the history of the world, God is

creator of heaven and earth; He grants life and peace toman after (and even in) his disobedience, and He reveals

something of His manifold divine wisdom in the multitudeof nations (Gen. 10). At the same time, He resists the

attempts of man to give form to his life and future himself

without acknowledging God as the Lord over his life. This

divine resistance leads to the scattering of the nations overthe whole world, as a sign and consequence of the fellow-

ship men had had and have now lost.

In this divine judgment (which must be fully recognizedas judgment, just like the deluge and the expulsion fromthe Garden of Eden), the way is opened to a restoration of

fellowship between God and man, and thus between God

and the world of nations-this way is the election of

Abraham.

(2) At this point history enters a new phase, that of

"one for many": Abraham the individual from Ur,Israel the individual among .the nations, but also a witnessto all nations that God has not abandoned the world but

continues His work. Further, when Israel defends herself

against the nations, it is only a defence against apostasy;F 81



when Israel suffers by the nations, it is a suffering for God's

sake. When Israel forgets the distinction between herself

and the nations, she commits treason not only against the

covenant of God but also against those nations for whose

sake she has been set apart.

But the failure of Israel as the Servant of the Lord will

not prevent God from reaching the goal He envisages for

the future; He will reach it. The expectation of Israel is

concentrated in the expectation of the coming Kingdomover the nations, represented in the expected Messiah.

World history is a history around Israel, just as Israel's

history is a history around the works of God. The victory

and the justification in the judgment of the God of Israel

over against the nations and their gods is the final goal and

the great prospect of history. Therefore the revelation of

the salvation of God means both the redemption of Israel

and the liberation of the nations. "How" these nations

will share in salvation remains unsaid; but the "that" is

incontrovertibly established.

(3)The third stage ofhistory begins with the coming of

Jesus Christ. With Him the Kingdom of God pushes its

way through: the last phase, the end of days has come. In

Him is manifested the ultimate intention of God with

Israel and with the world: He will bear the judgment

Himself and open the way to salvation for all. The "last

of days" thus becomes a new beginning. The time of

eschatological expectation is past, the time of eschatologi-

cal fulfilment has dawned. But the fulfilment is just at the

early stage; therefore the expectation remains part of life

and even determines life. In this tension of the "already"

and the "not yet", all the history of Israel, and thus of

the Church, and thus of the world, is included.

(4)There is a fourth stage of history; that since Christ

the end has come into sight. This new beginning exists in

the fact that the nations may now see and experience

what Israel has been allowed to see and experience in

the covenant with God. The manifestation of the great acts

82

when Israel suffers by the nations, it is a suffering for God's

sake. When Israel forgets the distinction between herselfand the nations, she commits treason not only against the

covenant of God but also against those nations for whose

sake she has been set apart.

But the failure of Israel as the Servant of the Lord will

not prevent God from reaching the goal He envisages forthe future; He will reach it. The expectation of Israel is

concentrated in the expectation of the coming Kingdom

over the nations, represented in the expected Messiah.

World history is a history around Israel, just as Israel'shistory is a history around the works of God. The victoryand the justification in the judgment of the God of Israelover against the nations and their gods is the final goal and

the great prospect of history. Therefore the revelation of

the salvation of God means both the redemption of Israel

and the liberation of the nations. "How" these nations

will share in salvation remains unsaid; but the "that" is

incontrovertibly established.(3) The third stage ofhistory begins with the coming of

Jesus Christ. With Him the Kingdom of God pushes itsway through: the last phase, the end of days has come. In

Him is manifested the ultimate intention of God with

Israel and with the world: He will bear the judgment

Himself and open the way to salvation for all. The "last

of days" thus becom.es a new beginning. The time of

eschatological expectation is past, the time of eschatologi-cal fulfilment has dawned. But the fulfilment is just at the

early stage; therefore the expectation remains part of lifeand even determines life. In this tension of the "already"

and the "not yet", all the history of Israel, and thus of

the Church, and thus of the world, is included.

(4) There is a fourth stage of history; that since Christ

the end has come into sight. This new beginning exists in

the fact that the nations may now see and experiencewhat Israel has been allowed to see and experience in

the covenant with God. The manifestation of the great acts

82



of God to the nations determines the character of history after

Christ's death and resurrection. This last sentence summarizes

what we must now demonstrate and develop in this

chapter.1

2. The Great Turning-Point*

The fact that there is no reference to a call to mission

until after the resurrection of Christ has already drawn

our attention several times. Let us now investigate this

special relation between resurrection and mission in the

world of nations.

A. It is a striking peculiarity that both the synoptic

Gospels and the Gospel of John culminate in the pro-

nouncement of the resurrection and the call to mission

emerging from it. The clearest passage of all is found in

Matt. 28: 1 8-20. We want, therefore, to follow up this

pronouncement. The older explanations often began from

the idea that this pericope contains a pronouncement of

the ascension. 3 It is the great service of O. Michel that he

has set forth convincingly that this passage had originally

been connected with a completely different thought-

world,4

"Our Matthew tradition regards Dan. 7: 13-14 as ful-

filled and its triad simply as a Christological transforma-

tion of the Daniel passage. What Dan. 7: 13-14 has pre-

dicted has come to pass : 'The Son of Man came on the

clouds of heaven, and was brought before the Ancient

of Days, and to him was given dominion and glory and

kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should

serve him.' Thus the service of the nations is a portion of the

enthronement of the Son of Man. The ancient Oriental cere-

mony of the enthronement of a king comprises three

events: exaltation, presentation (= declaration of exalta-

tion)and enthronement (= transfer of dominion). This

ceremony is transferred to Jesus in the thought-world

of our text: the word of authority refers to the exalta-

tion which has taken place, the command to mission

83

of God to the nations determines the character of history afterChrist's death and resurrection. This last sentence summarizeswhat we must now demonstrate and develop in thischapter I

2. The Great Turning-Point 2

The fact that there is no reference to a call to missionuntil after the resurrection of Christ has already drawnour attention several times. Let us now investigate thisspecial relation between resurrection and mission in the

world of nations.

A. It is a striking peculiarity that both the synopticGospels and the Gospel of John culminate in the pronouncement of the resurrection and the call to missionemerging from it. The clearest passage of all is found in

Matt. 28: 18-20. We want, therefore, to follow up thispronouncement. The older explanations often began fromthe idea that this pericope contains a pronouncement of

the ascension.3 It is the great service ofO. Michel that he

has set forth convincingly that this passage had originallybeen connected with a completely different thoughtworld.<l

"Our Matthew tradition regards Dan. 7: 13-14 as fulfilled and its triad simply as a Christological transformation of the Daniel passage. What Dan. 7: 13-14 has pre

dicted has come to pass: 'The Son of Man came on theclouds of heaven, and was brought before the Ancientof Days, and to him was given dominion and glory and

kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages shouldserve him.' Thus the service of the nations is a portion of the

enthronement of the Son ofMan. The ancient Oriental ceremony of the enthronement of a king comprises three

events: exaltation, presentation (=declaration of exaltation) and enthronement (=transfer of dominion). Thisceremony is transferred to Jesus in the thought-worldof our text: the word of authority refers to the exaltation which has taken place, the command to mission

83



is nothing but the proclamation of the exaltation which

has taken place,the secret of the Lordship of Jesus is

hidden in the promise as well. From the homogeneity of

these three sayings it could certainly be concluded that

they have existed from the beginning as a unity. Probably

our Evangelist has also combined resurrection, exaltation

and installation into a unity, and has thus tinged Easter

with the colours of the Second Coming ofJesus.

"Nowitis alsounderstandablewhyour Evangelist brings

us no explicit story of the ascension, and why he alterna-

tively does not let our text end with an ascension. The

decisive removal to the Father has taken place and is connected

with the enthronement. In the meantime the eternal Lordship

of Christ over heaven and earth has begun. He discloses

Himself to His disciples as a hidden yet present Son ofMan

and Lord, and now He summons them to proclaim the

Lordship among the nations which has now begun. The

proclamation ofthe Gospel is thus the proclamation of the Lordship

ofChrist among the nations. Matthew means that since Easter

the Gospel has taken on a new form, like its Lord Himself.

Perhaps also the various prophecies, Matt. 16: 27, 26; 64,

correspond to this exaltation and enthronement which

have taken place with Easter. Here we have Christology

similar to the one we meet in Phil. 2 : 5-1 1 : Therefore

God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the

name which is above every name, that at the name of

Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and

under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus

Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.5

"The installation ofJesus into His Lordship and the pro-

clamation necessarily resulting from it is thus eschatology

which is fulfilled, which has become history. With Easter

a new age has begun, the enthronement of a new ruler of

the world, and the proclamation of this new ruler amongthe nations. Mission is the summons of the Lordship of Christ.

The distinctive thing about this Christology is that, in the

Easter event, the resurrection of the body is not being set

is nothing but the proclamation of the exaltation whichhas taken place, the secret of the Lordship of Jesus ishidden in the promise as well. From the homogeneity of

these three sayings it could certainly be concluded that

they have existed from the beginning as a unity. Probablyour Evangelist has also combined resurrection, exaltationand installation into a unity, and has thus tinged Easterwith the colours of the Second Coming ofJesus.

"Nowitis also understandable why our Evangelist bringsus no explicit story of the ascension, and why he alternatively does not let our text end with an ascension. The

decisive removal to the Father has taken place and is connectedwith the enthronement. In the meantime the eternal Lordshipof Christ over heaven and earth has begun. He disclosesHimself to His disciples as a hidden yet present Son of Man

and Lord, and now He summons them to proclaim the

Lordship among the nations which has now begun. Theproclamation of the Gospel is thus the proclamation of the Lordship

ofChrist among the nations. Matthew means that since Easterthe Gospel has taken on a new form, like its Lord Himsel£Perhaps also the various prophecies, Matt. x6: 27, 26: 64,correspond to this exaltation and enthronement whichhave taken place with Easter. Here we have Christologysimilar to the one we meet in Phil. 2: 5-1 I: 'ThereforeGod has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the

name which is above every name, that at the name ofJesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and

under the earth, and every tongue confess that JesusChrist is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.'

"The installation of esus into His Lordship and the proclamation necessarily resulting from it is thus eschatologywhich is fulfilled, which has become history. With Easter

a new age has begun, the enthronement of a new ruler ofthe world, and the proclamation of this new ruler amongthe nations. Mission is the summons of the Lordship ofChrist.The distinctive thing about this Christology is that, in the

Easter event, the resurrection of the body is not being set

84



forth so much as the elevation of the Lord into the new

Messianic situation."

The significance of this statement is emphasized by the

fact that the word "all" occurs four times: "all" authority,

"all" nations, "all" that I have commanded, always

(Greek: "all the days").5 This indicates that, according to

the judgment of the writer of the gospel himself, we are

involved in an extremely important and all-embracing

declaration. The resurrected and exalted Lord Himself

gives to the joyous message a new form which must be

brought to the nations.6

All authority has been given to me. The expressed premise of

"me" prevents us from simply assuming "all authority"

to mean a high position. It is not thefact of authority itself

which is important, but the bearer of authority. The

gospel is precisely that He who has been suffering, been

crucified, died, been buried, and risen, has now gained all

authority as agift of the Father, In this way the whole

world, visible and invisible (heaven and earth), has been

wrested from the grip of any other powers whatsoever.

The authority which rules heaven and earth is henceforth

the authority ofthe abased and exalted Servant ofGod.

Go therefore and makedisciples of all nations. This new, un-

heard-of reality is not to be made known to Israel alone,

but must be passed on to "all nations". This expression

forms a contrast to the Jews, Israel, to whom there is such

frequent reference in this very Gospel of Matthew. (Cf.

Matt, i: 1-17, 2: 2, 10: 5-6, 15: 21-28, etc.)In this "go

to all nations" there lies therefore the distinctive turning-

point, the great change of direction of the gospel, indi-

cated and prepared by earlier declarations ofJesus (e.g.

Matt. 13: 38, 22: 1-14, 24: 14, etc.),but now coming into

effect.

Mission was formerly based a little too one-sidedly and

(even) almost exclusively on this "great commission". But

the fault lay not in the fact that mission was based on this

declaration, but in the fact that Matt. 28: 18-20 was iso-

85

forth so much as the elevation of the Lord into the newMessianic situation."

The significance of this statement is emphasized by the

fact that the word "all" occurs four times: "all" authority,"all" nations, "all" that I have commanded, always(Greek: "all the days").5 This indicates that, according tothe judgment of the writer of the gospel himself, we are

involved in an extremely important and all-embracingdeclaration. The resurrected and exalted Lord Himselfgives to the joyous message a new form which must be

brought to the nations.6

All authority has been given to me. The expressed premise of

"me" prevents us from simply assuming "all authority"to mean a high position. It is not the fact ofauthority itselfwhich is important, but the bearer of authority. The

gospel is precisely that He who has been suffering, beencrucified, died, been buried, and risen, has now gained allauthority as a gift of the Father. In this way the whole

world, visible and invisible (heaven and earth), has beenwrested from the grip of any other powers whatsoever.The authority which rules heaven and earth is henceforththe authority of the abased and exalted Servant of God.

Go therefore and make disciples ofall nations. This new, un

heard-of reality is not to be made known to Israel alone,but must be passed on to "all nations". This expression

forms a contrast to the Jews, Israel, to whom there is suchfrequent reference in this very Gospel of Matthew. (Cf.

Matt. r: I-17, 2:2, ro: s-6, rs: 21-28, etc.) In this "go

to all nations" there lies therefore the distinctive turningpoint, the great change of direction of the gospel, indicated and prepared by earlier declarations ofJesus (e.g.Matt. 13: g8, 22: r-14, 24: 14, etc.), but now coming into

effect.Mission was formerly based a little too one-sidedly and

(even) almost exclusively on this "great commission". Butthe fault lay not in the fact that mission was based on thisdeclaration, but in the fact that Matt. 28: r8-2o was iso-

8s



lated from the whole of the Biblical witness. For it cannot

be denied that here, and herefor thefirst time^ the commission

is given to go out among the nations. 7

Here the limits to the

preaching

of the gospel which the

apostles had been set before Jesus' resurrection(cf. Matt.

10: 5 ff.)are removed; all the world is to hear about the

great salvation. This, however, can be achieved only by

going forth, by visiting the nations. This going forth is

linked to the task of making disciples as a guiding and

determining participium. The fact that this participium

is put first (going forth or after having gone forth, partici-

pium aoristi} places the emphasis on going, on travelling.

One will have to pass Israel's boundaries consciously

and intentionally to be able to fulfil the order. In this

"going forth" the world apostleship of the Christian

Church is clearly indicated; the making of disciples can

happen only in a movement of the disciples of Christ to-

wards all nations.

Seen in the light of Christ's position of authority over

all things (in heaven and on earth) a positive attitude to-

wards "all nations" has come into being that overshadows

anything negative that may have been said about the

nations. This positive relationship has been given charac-

ter and meaning by the order "make them into disciples

of mine".8

All that I have commandedyou. The total dominion over the

total world ofmen must also come to expression in a total

dedication and submission to whatJesus had commanded.

That is not to say that life is to be submitted to a new im-

personal law or legalism; it seems of great significance to

me that there is no reference here to the "commandments

ofJesus", but of "what I have commanded". The obedi-

ence is determined by the relation to Jesus Christ Himself,

not by a conformity to an impersonal commandment.9 ' 10

There is nothing new in this teaching,11

it is simply a

matter of recollecting what Jesus has already said; it is

therefore not a matter of a "secret teaching" or of a new

86

lated from the whole of the Biblical witness. For it cannot

be denied that here, and herefor the.first i m e ~ the commissionis given to go out among the nations.7

Here the limits to the preaching of the gospel which theapostles had been set before Jesus' resurrection (cf. Matt.

ro: 5 ff.) are removed; all the world is to hear about thegreat salvation. This, however, can be achieved only by

going forth, by visiting the nations. This going forth islinked to the task of making disciples as a guiding and

determining participium. The fact that this participiumis put first (going forth or after having gone forth, partici-pium aoristi) places the emphasis on going, on travelling.

One will have to pass Israel's boundaries consciouslyand intentionally to be able to fulfil the order. In this"going forth" the world apostleship of the ChristianChurch is clearly indicated; the making of disciples can

happen only in a movement of the disciples of Christ to-wards all nations.

Seen in the light of Christ's position of authority overall things (in heaven and on earth) a positive attitude to-wards "all nations" has come into being that overshadowsanything negative that may have been said about the

nations. This positive relationship has been given charac-ter and meaning by the order "make them into disciplesof mine".8

All that I have commandedyou. The total dominion over the

total world of men must also come to expression in a totaldedication and submission to whatJesus had commanded.That is not to say that life is to be submitted to a new im-personallaw or legalism; it seems of great significance tome that there is no reference here to the "commandmentsofJesus", but of "what I have commanded". The obedi-

ence is determined by the relation to Jesus Christ Himself,not by a conformity to an impersonal commandment.9• 10

There is nothing new in this teaching,11 it .is simply amatter of recollecting what Jesus has already said; it is

therefore not a matter of a "secret teaching" or of a new

86



law. In this respect what Jesus has commanded is reminis-

cent of what had had validity even "in the beginning"

(cf.i John 2:7). But it receives new authority because it

is now commanded

by

Him who has received all authority.

This "commanding" is a reference to the royal and divine

-glory which is spoken ofin verse i8.12

Whereas "all nations" indicates the extensive area of

authority ofthe exalted Lord, "all that I have commanded

you" contains a reference to the intensive range of author-

ity: all life and the whole man is claimed by Christ.13

I am with you always. After the proclamation and the

commandment, the promise now follows. The presence of

Christ is the great gift to His disciples. The promise of the

presence is the fulfilment but now for all nations of the

promise expressed in the name Yahweh (Exod. 3). In

other words, the God of Israel has now made His presence

in Israel into a presence among all nations at all times, till

the day of consummation.

This reference to the consummation is not so much an

indication that the call to mission will keep its authority

until the consummation ofthe world (though I believe one

might deduce this), as it is an indication of the character of

the presence ofJesus Christ: it is a presence which is directed

to the "consummation of the world". Proclamation, com-

mandment to preach and make disciples,are carried and

sent along not only by the promise of Christ's own presence

but also by His own glance toward the consummation of

the world. Therefore the attributes of discipleship are not

only obedience to His command to proclamation, bap-

tism and instruction to all nations, but also orientation to

the consummation of the world as the last and deepest

goal of Christ's work.

Here, then, is an implicit answer as to why, given

Christ's resurrection, the Kingdom of God has not yet

come, nor the complete end of all things. Christ's gaze is

certainly directed toward this consummation (cf.Acts i :

6-8), but this consummation is preceded by the preaching

law. In this respect what Jesus has commanded is reminiscent of what had had validity even "in the beginning"(cf. 1 John 2: 7). But i t receives new authority because it

is now commanded by Him who has received all authority.This "commanding" is a reference to the royal and divine

-glory which is spoken ofin verse 18.12

Whereas "all nations" indicates the extensive area of

authority of the exalted Lord, "all that I have commandedyou" contains a reference to the intensive range of authority: all life and the whole man is claimed by Christ.13

I am with you always. Mter the proclamation and the

commandment, the promise now follows. The presence of

Christ is the great gift to His disciples. The promise of the

presence is the fulfilment-but now for all nations--of the

promise expressed in the name Yahweh (Exod. 3). In

other words, the God ofisrael has now made His presencein Israel into a presence among all nations at all times, till

the day of consummation.

This reference to the consummation is not so much anindication that the call to mission will keep its authorityuntil the consummation of the world (though I believe onemight deduce this), as it is an indication of the character ofthe presence ofJesus Christ: it is a presence which is directedto the "consummation of the world". Proclamation, commandment to preach and make disciples, are carried and

sent along not only by the promise ofChrist's own presencebut also by His own glance toward the consummation of

the world. Therefore the attributes of discipleship are not

o ~ l y obedience to His command to proclamation, bap

tism and instruction to all nations, but also orientation tothe consummation of the world as the last and deepest

goal of Christ's work.

Here, then, is an implicit answer as to why, givenChrist's resurrection, the Kingdom of God has not yetcome, nor the complete end of all things. Christ's gaze iscertainly directed toward this consummation (cf. Acts I :

6-8), but this consummation is preceded by the preaching

87



of the gospel. On the other hand, this commission itself

belongs to the signs and the consequences of this consum-

mation (forMatt. 28: 18 speaks

ofthe eschatological royal

lordship of Christ).

14

The convincing power ofthe proclamationof the gospel

in the world is laid in the firm certainty of Christ's presence

as a presence directed toward the consummation of the

world. The promise of Christ's presence always gives rest

and confidence anew each day, at every time, and under

all circumstances, to do the work which He has com-

manded.15

From this short summary of the rich contents of the

"great commission",its mighty significance

and its abiding

actuality are already apparent.

In the other Gospels the accent of the resurrection and

mission accounts is different. In Mark 16: 14-20, the con-

cern is for the world ofmen ("the whole creation" is here

the world of

men).

This account thus misses the dimension

ofMatthew (heavenand earth),

and in any case the differ-

entiation of the latter. On the other hand, Mark accentu-

ates more the intensive, comprehensive authority ofJesus

(as superior power over unbelief, powers, sickness).In

Luke 24: 44-53, the emphasis lies on the surprising ele-

ment in God's activity, which makes victories out of

defeats, changes sadness into joy,liberates us from sin

and guilt,and enables us to sing praises.

In the synoptics

there is thus a difference ofaccent between royal authority,

liberating authority,forgiving authority (Matt., Mark, Luke

respectively).

John also takes his own place in comparison with the

other Gospels; in 20: 21-23, he indicates the continuity of

the sending ofJesus Christ by the Father and the sending

ofthe disciples byJesus; man is,as it were, the arm ofGod

by which He directs His saving acts, man is taken up

actively in God's design of salvation.16

From all the accounts, it is clear that the resurrection,

as the crowning of Christ's work, is the first and great pre-

88

of the gospel. On the other hand, this commission itself

belongs to the signs and the consequences of this consummation (for Matt. 28: 18 speaks ofthe eschatological royal

lordship of Christ).14

The convincing power of the proclamation of the gospelin the world is laid in the firm certainty of Christ's presence

as a presence directed toward the consummation of the

world. The promise of Christ's presence alwqys gives restand confidence anew each day, at every time, and under

all circmnstances, to do the work which He has commanded.10

From this short summary of the rich contents of the

"great commission", its mighty significance and its abiding

actuality are already apparent.

In the other Gospels the accent of the resurrection and

mission accounts is different. In Mark 16: 14-20, the concern is for the world of men ("the whole creation" is here

the world ofmen). This account thus misses the dimension

of Matthew (heaven and earth), and in any case the differ

entiation of the latter. On the other hand, Mark accentu

ates more the intensive, comprehensive authority ofJesus(as superior power over unbelief, powers, sickness). In

Luke 24: 44-53, the emphasis lies on the surprising element in God's activity, which makes victories out of

defeats, changes sadness into joy, liberates us from sin

and guilt, and enables us to sing praises. In the synopticsthere is thus a difference ofaccent between royal authority,

liberating authority,forgiving authority (Matt., Mark, Luke

respectively).

John also takes his own place in comparison with the

other Gospels; in 20: 21-23, he indicates the continuity of

the sending ofJesus Christ by the Father and the sending

of the disciples byJesus; man is, as it were, the arm of God

by which He directs His saving acts, man is taken up

actively in God's design of salvation.1s

From all the accounts, it is clear that the resurrection,

as the crowning of Christ's work, is the :first and great pre-

88



supposition and condition for the proclamation of the

gospel among the nations. The second is the gift of the

Holy Spirit, with which we must now deal.17

B. The enduring presence ofChrist which waspromisedin Matt. 28 : 20, will be a presence in and through the Holy

Spirit. If the resurrection of Christ is called a return, a

parousia, then one could say this with as much, or even

more justification, of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.

John, in particular, refers to the coming ofthe Holy Spirit

as a return: John 14: 1-6, 15-19, 25-28, 15: 26, 16: 22;

and Paul, too, in a very compact declaration: "now the

Lord is the Spirit5

', 2 Cor. 3: 17.

This enduring presence of Christ in and through the

Holy Spirit is to enable the disciples now in their turn to

carry out the commission to preach the gospel to all

nations. Emphasis is rightly laid by all sorts ofpublications

on the fact that Christ Himselfdoes His work ofproclama-

tion ofthe gospel through the Holy Spirit. He charges them

to mission, certainly, but He does not delegate it to them.

It is solely by the authority of the Holy Spirit that the

disciples will be in a position to be witnesses of Christ to

the uttermost parts of the earth, Acts i : 6-8(cf.

Luke 24:

47 and John 20: 21). The Church's work of mission is

bound both to Easter and to Pentecost. The Easter mes-

sage can be brought to the nations only by the reality of

Pentecost.18 The Holy Spirit first makes man an instrument

of God, His "arm" (cf.Isa. 8: u, Ezek. i : 3, etc.).

He is

the life-giving breath of God (Ezek. 37: 9, Heb. n : 3).19

"The powers of the coming age" become visible in the

power ofthe Holy Spirit. Therefore the Holy Spirit is both

a fulfilment of the promise and the promise of fulfilment:

He is the guarantee that the new world ofGod has already

begun, as well as a sign that this new world is still to come.

The close connection between call to mission and Holy

Spirit cannot be exaggerated. If the disciples,in Acts i :

6-8, ask about the "restoration ofthe kingdom to Israel",

they receive the answer: "you shall receive the power of

89

supposition and condition for the proclamation of the

gospel among the nations. The second is the gift of the

Holy Spirit, with which we must now deal.J7B. The enduring presence ofChrist which was promised

in Matt. 28: 20, will be a presence in and through the HolySpirit. If the resurrection of Christ is called a return, aparousia, then one could say this with as much, or evenmore justification, of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.John, in particular, refers to the coming of the Holy Spiritas a return: John 14: r-6, 15-Ig, 25-28, I5: 26, I6: 22;and Paul, too, in a very compact declaration: "now the

Lord is the Spirit", 2 Cor. 3: I 7.This enduring presence of Christ in and through the

Holy Spirit is to enable the disciples now in their turn to

carry out the commission to preach the gospel to allnations. Emphasis is rightly laid by all sorts ofpublicationson the fact that Christ Himself does His work ofproclamation of the gospel through the Holy Spirit. He charges them

to mission, certainly, but He does not delegate it to them.It is solely by the authority of the Holy Spirit that thedisciples will be in a position to be witnesses of Christ tothe uttermost parts of the earth, Acts I: 6-8 (cf. Luke 24:47 and John 20: 2I). The Church's work of mission isbound both to Easter and to Pentecost. The Easter message can be brought to the nations only by the reality of

Pentecost.18 The Holy Spirit first makes man an instrumentof God, His "arm" (cf. Isa. 8: I I, Ezek. I : 3, etc.). He isthe life-giving breath of God (Ezek. 37: g, Heb. I I : 3).19

"The powers of the coming age" become visible in the

power of the Holy Spirit. Therefore the Holy Spirit is both

a fulfilment of the promise and the promise of fulfilment:He is the guarantee that the new world ofGod has already

begun, as well as a sign that this new world is still to come.The close connection between call to mission and Holy

Spirit cannot be exaggerated. If the disciples, in Acts I :

6-8, ask about the "restoration of the kingdom to Israel",they receive the answer: "you shall receive the power of

8g



the Holy Spirit andyou shall be my witnesses". This "and"

(kai)here has the same consecutive power as the "then"

(aim) in Matt. 28: 19, and one might almost translate : you

shall receive the

power

of the Holy Spirit in order to be

mywitnesses.

[The signs, too, under which the Holy Spirit was poured

out. Acts 2 : i-i i, are not insignificant for the course ofthe

Gospel in the world : the Holy Spirit shall make His waywith irresistible and life-giving power (the rush of wind,

cf. Ezek. 37 : 9) ;He shall conquer resistance and make the

Church into living and powerful witnesses of His presence

(the tongues of fire, cf. Exod. 3 : 2, Matt. 3 : 11) ; He shall

make Himself intelligible in the world, and so establish

unity and fellowship (the speaking in tongues, cf. Gen.

")The Holy Spirit guarantees the power of life in the

Church, the presence of God in the world, and the pub-

licizing of the Gospel. Nothing is left to men, not even to

the apostles; that, however, is why everything can be dele-

gated to the Church, and the Holy Spirit and the apostles

can be drawn as close together as possible (see e.g. John

15: 26, Acts 5: 32, 15: 28)20 as a "symbiosis". The Holy

Spirit is the living promise and also the true presence of

God (in Christ) in the world. So He is the first-fruits (Rom.8: 23) and guarantee (2 Cor. i : 22) of the future.]

C. By the resurrection of Christ and the gift ofthe Holy

Spirit the way has now been freely given to the world of

nations. But the gospel does not enter the world along

capricious, arbitrary paths but in accordance with an

unchanging pattern: Jerusalem Israel the Gentiles.

Acts i : 8 says this in clear words (this passage still names

the Samaritans, too, as the portion of the world of Gen-

tiles which is present, as it were, in the land of Israel

itself). In spite of Israel's rejection ofJesus Christ (Acts 2 :

36), Israel has not been rejected; she has complete pre-

cedence as regards the proclamation of the gospel. This

precedence is still understood initially by many (by Peter

90

the Holy Spirit and you shall be my witnesses". This "and"

(kai) here has the same consecutive power as the "then"

(oun) in Matt. 28: Ig , and one might almost translate: you

shall receive the power of the Holy Spirit in order to be my

witnesses.[The signs, too, under which the Holy Spirit was poured

out, Acts 2: I - I I , are not insignificant for the course of the

Gospel in the world: the Holy Spirit shall make His waywith irresistible and life-giving power (the rush of wind,cf. Ezek. 37: g); He shall conquer resistance and make the

Church into living and powerful witnesses of His presence

(the tongues of fire, c£ Exod. 3: 2, Matt. 3: I I) ; He shallmake Himself intelligible in the world, and so establishunity and fellowship (the speaking in tongues, cf. Gen.II).

The Holy Spirit guarantees the power of life in the

Church, the presence of God in the world, and the pub

licizing of the Gospel. Nothing is left to men, not even to

the apostles; that, however, is why everything can be delegated to the Church, and the Holy Spirit and the apostlescan be drawn as close together as possible (see e.g. John

I5: 26, Acts s: 32, IS: 28) 20 as a "symbiosis". The HolySpirit is the living promise and also the true presence of

God (in Christ) in the world. So He is the first-fruits (Rom.8: 23) and guarantee (2 Cor. I : 22) of the future.]

C. By the resurrection of Christ and the gift of the HolySpirit the way has now been freely given to the world of

nations. But the gospel does not enter the world alongcapricious, arbitrary paths but in accordance with an

unchanging pattern: Jerusalem-Israel-the Gentiles.Acts I: 8 says this in clear words (this passage still names

the Samaritans, too, as the portion of the world of Gen

tiles which is present, as i t were, in the land of Israelitself). In spite of!srael's rejection ofJesus Christ (Acts 2:

36), Israel has not been rejected; she has complete pre

cedence as regards the proclamation of the gospel. This

precedence is still understood initially by many (by Peter

go



himself, among others) as exclusiveness (Acts 10: 1-48,

1 1 : 2, 3, i8),21 and it is only in Antioch that the Christian

Church loses altogether her character of a Jewish revival

congregation (Acts n: 20, 21, 26). Paul also

goes

to the

Jews first before going to the Gentiles (Acts 13: 5, 14: i,

etc.) The Jews have first priority from aheilesgeschichtlich

point of view, Rom. 3 : iff., but the Gentiles ("Greek"

often represents the world of Gentiles) now follow as

fellow-partners (cf. Rom. i : 16, Eph. 3:6).

The "progressive reduction" which the Old Testament

image of history showed forth, mankind Israel the

remnant of Israel the One Servant of the Lord, now be-

comes a "progressive expansion" : the One Messiah the

apostles as the nucleus and beginning ofthe new Israel and

the Messianic congregation Israel the Gentiles=man-

kind.22

The whole structure ofthe Acts of the Apostles is deter-

mined by this course of the Gospel through the world,

from the centre of Israel to the centre of the world, from

Jerusalem to Rome.

Jerusalem remains the centre of Israel too, but with this

difference, that the point of departure is no longer the

Temple but rather the congregation at Jerusalem. In

Jerusalem the disciples wait for the outpouring ofthe Holy

Spirit, and the decisions for the whole Church are made

out ofJerusalem (Acts n: 22, 15: 1-22). The sending of

Paul and Barnabas to the Gentiles may have taken place

out of Antioch, but it was prepared by a decision of the

Jerusalem congregation (cf.Acts 13: 2-3 with n: 22,

see also Gal. 2 : 1-2).23 Under the influence of the preach-

ing among the Gentiles, however, we find the new outlines

of another course of thought, which substitutes for the

earthly Jerusalem a heavenly one (GaL 4: 25-26, cf. Rev.

21 : 10). In this regard, too, there is continuity in Heils-

geschichte, and at the same time a progression and a cor-

responding "new" addition in the revelation ofsalvation.24

This fact is also clearly reflected in the prediction regard-

himself, among others) as exclusiveness (Acts 10 : 1-48,1I: 2, 3, 18),21 and it is only in Antioch that the ChristianChurch loses altogether her character of a Jewish revivalcongregation (Acts I I : 20, 21, 26). Paul also goes to the

Jews first before going to the Gentiles (Acts 13: 5, 14: I,

etc.) The Jews have first priority from a heilesgeschichtlichpoint of view, Rom. 3: I ff., but the Gentiles ("Greek"often represents the world of Gentiles) now follow as

f e l l o w ~ p a r t n e r s (c£ Rom. I: I6, Eph. 3: 6).The "progressive reduction" which the Old Testament

image of history showed forth, mankind-Israel-the

remnant of Israel-the One Servant of the Lord, now becomes a "progressive expansion" : the One Messiah-the

apostles as the nucleus and beginning of the new Israel and

the Messianic congregation-Israel-the Gentiles=mankind.22

The whole structure of the Acts of the Apostles is determined by this course of the Gospel through the world,

from the centre of Israel to the centre of the world, fromJerusalem to Rome.

Jerusalem remains the centre of Israel too, but with thisdifference, that the point of departure is no longer the

Temple but rather the congregation at Jerusalem. In

Jerusalem the disciples wait for the outpouring of the HolySpirit, and the decisions for the whole Church are made

out ofJerusalem (Acts II: 22, IS: 1-22) . The sending ofPaul and Barnabas to the Gentiles may have taken placeout of Antioch, but it was prepared by a decision of the

Jerusalem congregation (cf. Acts 13: 2-3 with II: 22,see also Gal. 2 : 1-2) . 23 Under the influence of the preaching among the Gentiles, however, we find the new outlinesof another course of thought, which substitutes for the

earthly Jerusalem a heavenly one (Gal. 4: 25-26, c£ Rev.21 : I o). In this regard, too, there is continuity in Heils-geschichte, and at the same time a progression and a corresponding "new" addition in the revelation ofsalvation.24

This fact is also clearly reflected in the prediction regard-

91



ing the destruction ofJerusalem (Luke 13: 34, 19: 41-44,

21 : 20-124, 23: 28-31 and parallels).

Jesus Christ Himself takes over the place ofJerusalem.26

He is the central

point

around whom the nations will

gather. To this they must be summoned and invited.

It is not the fact that one belongs to Israel, but one's

beliefin Jesus Christ as Him who was sent by God that is

of decisive importance.An appeal to Abraham has no

value unless one shares Abraham's faith and his works

(Matt. 3: 9, John 8: 33-40)-

This does not mean that the great significance of Israel

as God's people is denied5but it means that from now on

only those who belong to Christ are Israel in the sense of

the history of salvation. The continuity of the history of

salvation does not get lost, but the line is bent. This puts

the controversy between a centripetal and a centrifugal

movement, mentioned in the preceding chapters, in a new

light; it is as it were put in its proper perspective by the

muchmore importantquestion what think ye of Christ ?26

Yet it is this very question that forces us to consider the

question as to whether the community of Christ should be

looked upon as the continuation of Israel or as an entirely

new entity? Are the nations being gathered up unto the new

Israel, or are the children ofthe Kingdom being scattered

over the world like seed in order that they shall call all

nations into the Kingdom? (Cf. Matt. 13: 28.)27

In the synoptic Gospels the idea of the new Israel, in

and through Christ the salt of the earth and the light of

the world, clearly predominates, even though the synop-

tics themselves hold different opinions and have different

aims. In the Gospel according to St. John, however, the

term "Jews95

as used there clearly indicates strangeness and

even hostility towards Jesus. It is significant, however, that

in their negative attitude, too, it is the Jews who represent

"the world". Paul's Epistles are based on several different

lines of thought. Some say that he follows two lines of

thought.28

92

ing the destruction ofJerusalem (Luke I 3 : 34, I 9: 41-44,21: 20-24, 23: 28-31 and parallels).

Jesus Christ Himself takes over the place ofJerusalem.25

He is the central point around whom the nations willgather. To this they must be summoned and invited.

It is not the fact that one belongs to Israel, but one'sbeliefinJesus Christ as Him who was sent by God that isof decisive importance. An appeal to Abraham has no

value unless one shares Abraham's faith and his works

(Matt. 3: g, John 8 : 33-40).This does not mean that the great significance of Israel

as God's people is denied, but it means that from now on

only those who belong to Christ are Israel in the sense of

the history of salvation. The continuity of the history of

salvation does not get lost, but the line is bent. This putsthe controversy between a centripetal and a centrifugalmovement, mentioned in the preceding chapters, in a newlight; it is as it were put in its proper perspective by the

much more important question-what think ye of Christ? 26

Yet it is this very question that forces us to consider the

question as to whether the communiry of Christ should be

looked upon as the continuation of Israel or as an entirelynew entity? Are the nations being gathered up unto the new

Israel, or are the children of the Kingdom being scatteredover the world like seed in order that they shall call all

nations into the Kingdom? (Cf. Matt. I3: 28.) 27

In the synoptic Gospels the idea of the new Israel, in

and through Christ the salt of the earth and the light of

the world, clearly predominates, even though the synoptics themselves hold different opinions and have different

aims. In the Gospel according to St. John, however, the

term 'jews" as used there clearly indicates strangeness and

even hostility towards Jesus. I tis significant, however, thatin their negative attitude, too, it is the Jews who represent"the world". Paul's Epistles are based on several different

lines of thought. Some say that he follows two lines ofthought.za

92



The congregation of Christ is to be understood first of

all as the true Israel. The old nation is Israel at the level

ofthe old dispensation; the new nation is also Israel, at the

level of the new dispensation. Christians who were

Jewsare the "remnants of Israel", and only by unity with this

remnant do the Gentile Christians also belong to Israel.

So it would appear that for Paul there are two points of

view: (i) the Christians, not the Jews, are the congrega-

tion of God, because the important thing is not Israel

according to the flesh, but Israel according to the Spirit

(so strong, e.g. in Galatians) ; (2) there is only one peopleof God, namely Israel, and the Gentile Christians are

taken into this one people as proselytes (so especially, e.g.

in Romans).The first accentuates the new creation which has begun

in and through Christ, the second theheilsgeschichtlich con-

tinuity. The first indicates the severity and the freedom of

God, the second the faithfulness to His promises. But the

most important thing is that over against Jews and Gen-

tiles something new has come, the third race(i Cor. 10:

32) that is particularly characterized by the fact that it is

the body of Christ and the temple of the Holy Spirit.

Therefore the opposition between Jews and Gentiles has

lost its particular significance both inside and outside

the Church. The Church, as the new people of God, has

taken over the place of Israel and the (hidden) centre of

history and of the world, and this new people is still only

the beginning of both the new manhood and the

whole new creation (2 Cor. 5: 17, Gal. 6: 15, i Cor. 15:

28).

In Paul's apostleship the continuity of God's work in

and for Israel, as well as the newness of the new era, be-

come apparent in an unusual way. One can only obtain

the right insight into the complicated relationship be-

tween Israel, the community of Christ and the world of

nations if one considers this apostleship in its own and

quite unique significance.

93

The congregation of Christ is to be understood first of

all as the true Israel. The old nation is Israel at the levelof the old dispensation; the new nation is also Israel, at the

level of the new dispensation. Christians who were Jewsare the "remnants of Israel", and only by unity with thisremnant do the Gentile Christians also belong to Israel.So it would appear that for Paul there are two points of

view: (I) the Christians, not the Jews, are the congrega-tion of God, because the important thing is not Israelaccording to the flesh, but Israel according to the Spirit(so strong, e.g. in Galatians); (2) there is only one peopleof God, namely Israel, and the Gentile Christians are

taken into this one people as proselytes (so especially, e.g.in Romans).

The first accentuates the new creation which has begunin and through Christ, the second the heilsgeschichtlich con-tinuity. The first indicates the severity and the freedom of

God, the second the faithfulness to His promises. But the

most important thing is that over against Jews and Gen-tiles something new has come, the third race (r Cor. 10 :

32) that is particularly characterized by the fact that it isthe body of Christ and the temple of the Holy Spirit.Therefore the opposition between Jews and Gentiles haslost its particular significance both inside and outsidethe Church . The Church, as the new people of God, has

taken over the place of Israel and the (hidden) centre ofhistory and of the world, and this new people is still onlythe beginning of both the new manhood and the

whole new creation (2 Cor. 5: 17, Gal. 6: 15, I Cor. 15:28).

In Paul's apostleship tP.e continuity of God's work in

and for Israel, as well as the newness of the new era, be-

come apparent in an unusual way. One can only obtainthe right insight into the complicated relationship be-tween Israel, the community of Christ and the world of

nations if one considers this apostleship in its own and

quite unique significance.

93



3, Paul's Apostleship

Ifwe want to understand the significance of Paul as the

apostle of the heathen we depend on two sources, namely

the Acts of the Apostles and Paul's own epistles.This is

not the place to go deeply into the structure and construc-

tion of that magnificent book by the architect among the

Evangelists, St. Luke, whose Acts is as beautifully com-

posed as his Gospel is. We shall only underline that which

is of importance to our subject.

A. The route of the Gospel is the road from Jerusalem,

the centre of Israel, to Rome, the centre ofthe world. This

journey, however much a matter of course it may seem to

us, is so strange and unprecedented that it can only be

explained by repeatedly pointing to the intervention of

God Himself.

Preaching the gospel to Samaria is already a trans-

gression of the boundaries of Israel, pointing to the nature

of the gospel, which crosses all boundaries (cf. Acts i : 8),

but it still takes place within reach of Israel's old country

boundaries (Acts 8: 4-25). The baptism of the Ethiopian,

who came from the end ofthe earth to adore Israel's God,

still lies within Israel's spiritual horizon (Acts 8 : 26-40) .

Peter's being sent to the heathen Cornelius, who admit-

tedly lives within the confines ofIsrael but apparently does

not live within the horizon of the greatest of the apostles,

announces the great turning point. It is pointed out to us

emphatically and repeatedly (which is characteristic of

the book of Acts) that God Himself intervenes. He indi-

cates to Peter that a new era has begun, in which the dis-

tinction between Jew and heathen vanishes as far as the

preaching of the gospel is concerned. In our opinion it is

no coincidence that Luke places this occurrence, related

in Acts 10-11:17, after Saul's conversion. He, too, has

been called direct from heaven, through a particular

revelation of Christ "for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to

bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the

94

3. Paul's Apostleship29

I fwe want to understand the significance of Paul as theapostle of the heathen we depend on two sources, namely

the Acts of the Apostles and Paul's own epistles. This isnot the place to go deeply into the structure and o n s t r u e ~tion of that magnificent book by the architect among theEvangelists, St. Luke, whose Acts is as beautifully c o m ~posed as his Gospel is. We shall only underline that which

is of importance to our subject.A. The route of the Gospel is the road from Jerusalem,

the centre of Israel, to Rome, the centre of the world. Thisjourney, however much a matter of course it may seem tous, is so strange and unprecedented that it can only be

explained by repeatedly pointing to the intervention of

God Himsel£Preaching the gospel to Samaria is already a t r a n s ~

gression of the boundaries of Israel, pointing to the nature

ofthe gospel, which crosses all boundaries (cf. Acts r: 8),but it still takes place within reach of Israel's old countryboundaries (Acts 8: 4-25). The baptism of the Ethiopian,who came from the end of the earth to adore Israel's God,still lies within Israel's spiritual horizon (Acts 8: 26-40).Peter's being sent to the heathen Cornelius, who a d m i t ~tedly lives within the confines oflsrael but apparently does

not live within the horizon of the greatest of the apostles,announces the great turning point. It is pointed out to usemphatically and repeatedly (which is characteristic of

the book of Acts) that God Himself intervenes. He indicates to Peter that a new era has begun, in which the distinction between Jew and heathen vanishes as far as the

preaching of the gospel is concerned. In our opinion it is

no coincidence that Luke places this occurrence, relatedin Acts IO - I I : r 7, after Saul's conversion. He, too, hasbeen called direct from heaven, through a particularrevelation of Christ "for he is a chosen vessel unto me, tobear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the

94



children of Israel*5

(Acts 9: 15). When Saul has been

called to be God's tool, Peter (and through him the com-

munity at Jerusalem) is warned to accept this turning to-

wards the world of the heathen that God wants. This ex-

plains two things :

(i)the particular charismatic nature of

the apostleship to the heathen, which is of an almost

violent character Paul becomes an apostle after he, who

strongly opposed Christ, has been arrested by Him on the

road to Damascus; (ii)it is the community itselfthat actu-

ally supports this apostleship to the heathen, for they are

convinced by divine intervention (Peter's vision) and byPeter's authority: thus God granted also to the Gentiles

the repentance unto life (Acts n : 18).

When the Jewish Christians from Cyprus and Gyrenealso preach the gospel to the Greeks (which in this case

is practically synonymous with gqyyim, ethne, heathen) the

hand of the Lord is with them and a great number are

converted. In view of this rush ofheathen Barnabas is sent

from Jerusalem ( !)to Antioch and Barnabas in his turn

requisitions Saul of Tarsus. They work in Antioch for a

full year and are then sent to Jerusalem with giftsof love

donated by the community (Jews and Gentile Christians),

they return and are then, by a special indication of the

Holy Spirit, separated and sent forth; that is when the

missionary work among the nations actually starts (Acts

13:1-5) , 11 is clear that Paulwas not exclusively thepreacher

ofthe gospel among the Gentiles. The reference in Gal. 2 :

9 to the arrangement between the apostles in Jerusalem

on the one hand and Paul and Barnabas on the other, that

the former were to work among the Jews and the latter

among the Gentiles, is to be understood geographically,

not ethnographically and not exclusively.30 This tallies

with the fact that from the very beginning Paul and Barna-

bas preached the gospel first to the Jews (Acts 13: 5, cf.

9: 15) and only afterwards go to the Gentiles. It seems to

me that this fact should not be overestimated in a theo-

logical sense; Paul goes to the synagogue not only because

95

children of Israel') (Acts 9: 15). When Sa:ul has beencalled to be God's tool, Peter (and through him the community at Jerusalem) is warned to accept this turning towards the world of the heathen that God wants. This explains two things: (i) the particular charismatic nature of

the apostleship to the heathen, which is of an almostviolent character-Paul becomes an apostle after he, whostrongly opposed Christ, has been arrested by Him on the

road to Damascus; (ii) it is the community itself that actually supports this apostleship to the heathen, for they are

convinced by divine intervention (Peter's vision) and by

Peter's authority: thus God granted also to the Gentilesthe repentance unto life (Acts II: 18).

When the Jewish Christians from Cyprus and Cyrenealso preach the gospel to the Greeks (which in this caseis practically synonymous with gqyyim, ethne, heathen) the

hand of the Lord is with them and a great number are

converted. In view of this rush ofheathen Barnabas is sent

from Jerusalem ( !) to Antioch and Barnabas in his turn

requisitions Saul of Tarsus. They work in Antioch for afull year and are then sent to Jerusalem with gifts of lovedonated by the community (Jews and Gentile Christians),they return and are then, by a special indication of the

Holy Spirit, separated and sent forth; that is when the

missionary work among the nations actually starts (Acts

13: 1-5). It is clear that Paulwasnotexclusive[ythepreacherof the gospel among the Gentiles. The reference in Gal. 2 :

9 to the arrangement between the apostles in Jerusalemon the one hand and Paul and Barnabas on the other, that

the former were to work among the Jews and the latteramong the Gentiles, is to be understood geographically,not ethnographically and not exclusively.30 This tallies

with the fact that from the very beginning Paul and Barnabas preached the gospel first to the Jews (Acts 13: 5, c£9: 15) and only afterwards go to the Gentiles. It seems tome that this fact should not be overestimated in a theological sense; Paul goes to the synagogue not only because

95



Israel has a priority in the history of salvation, but also

because there, among the proselytes, he finds points ofcon-

tact for the preaching of the gospel among the Gentiles.31

The conclusion that Paul's

apostleship among

the Gen-

tiles has a pronounced geographical component is obvious;

he is not the only apostle ofthe Gentiles but he is the most

prominent one. That is why he can be contrasted with the

twelve apostles; he does in the world ofnations what they

do among the Jews in their own country he is the great

world-witness for Jesus Christ.

Much has been written about Paul's apostleship as com-

pared with that ofthe twelve apostles.It cannot be denied

that it is characterized by a (certain amount of) ex-

centricity.*2 Antioch (be it with the sanction ofJerusalem

Acts ii : 22) becomes a second centre, beside Jerusalem.

The term "Christians" originated in Antioch, for it was

there that it became clear through the large number of

Gentile Christians in the community for the first time

that those who believed in Christ constituted a third group

beside Jews and Gentiles (Acts n : 26). Paul is sent forth

from Antioch. He himself always saw his own apostleship

as something unique, he refers to himself as to someone

born untimely, who is not worthy to bear the name of

apostle (iCor. 15: 8).

33 In other words, his apostleship is

something out of the usual, but not therefore less valid. It

is well known that in almost all his epistles he places great

emphasis on his lawful apostleship, given to him by God

Himself.34 His unusual calling to the apostleship accentu-

ates its uniqueness and he is strongly aware of being an

apostle of the Gentiles.35

B. It cannot be said often enough that Paul's apostle-

ship is not only based on an abnormal calling but also has

an abnormal nature and abnormal contents; in the first

place to Paul as aJew, but also to allJews, for they partly

"expected Israel's consolation" and knew of "a light for

the Gentiles", but they could not but experience the

"mission among the Gentiles" as something unprece-

96

Israel has a priority in the history of salvation, but alsobecause there, among the proselytes, he finds points ofcontact for the preaching of the gospel among the Gentiles.31

The conclusion that Paul's apostleship among the Gentiles has a pronounced geographical component is obvious;he is not the only apostle of the Gentiles but he is the mostprominent one. That is why he can be contrasted with the

twelve apostles; he does in the world of nations what theydo among the Jews in their own country-he is the great

world-witness for Jesus Christ.Much has been written about Paul's apostleship as com

pared with that of the twelve apostles. It cannot be deniedthat it is characterized by a (certain amount of) ex-centricity.32 Antioch (be it with the sanction ofJerusalem

Acts I I : 22) becomes a second centre, beside Jerusalem.The term "Christians" originated in Antioch, for it wasthere that it became clear-through the large number of

Gentile Christians in the community-for the first time

that those who believed in Christ constituted a third groupbeside Jews and Gentiles (Acts II: 26). Paul is sent forthfrom Antioch. He himself always saw his own apostleshipas something unique, he refers to himself as to someoneborn untimely, who is not worthy to bear the name of

apostle (1 Cor. 15: 8).33 In other words, his apostleship issomething out of the usual, but not therefore less valid. It

is well known that in almost all his epistles he places greatemphasis on his lawful apostleship, given to him by God

Himself. 34 His unusual calling to the apostleship accentuates its uniqueness and he is strongly aware of being an

apostle of the Gentiles.as

B. It cannot be said often enough that Paul's apostleship is not only based on an abnormal calling but also has

an abnormal nature and abnormal contents; in the firstplace to Paul as a Jew, but also to allJews, for they partly

"expected Israel's consolation" and knew of "a light forthe Gentiles", but they could not but experience the

"mission among the Gentiles" as something unprece-g6



dented and unknown. Was it not Jesus Himself who had

admonished the disciples to address themselves to the lost

sheep of the house of Israel only?

Surpriseand amazement about the fact that the Gen-

tiles, too, are "fellow heirs, members ofthe same body and

partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus" (Eph. 3: 6) can

clearly be heard in Eph. 2 : 11-3: 21, one of the most im-

portant testimonies regarding Paul's apostleship among

the Gentiles. It is made clear here, if anywhere, that the

mission among the Gentiles cannot possibly be seen as a

continuation oftheJudaic making ofproselytes during the

diaspora.38 Then it was only a matter of a few individuals

from the world ofnations and for them there would always

have been room in Israel, geographically as well as spiritu-

ally. If Paul had been only the Jewish-Christian inheritor

of a Judaic missionary tradition, there would have been

no cause for him to speak so emotionally and ecstatically

about his calling as an apostle of the Gentiles. The prose-

lytic mission originated in the conviction of the unique

nature of Israel as the people of God, the elect nation.

Paul's apostleshipbecame possible when the wall that

separated Israel and the nations fell. In Christ the fullness

of the times began (Eph. i: 10, n) and that means the

unity of everything, in heaven and earth, under His

dominion. No contrast, no break, no alienation can go on

existing and remain valid. They who used to be "alien-

ated from the commonwealth ofIsrael and strangers to the

covenants of promise, having no hope and without God

in the world55

(Eph. 2: 12) are now made nigh by the

blood of Christ (Eph. 2:13). The wall between Israel and

the Gentiles, a wall that also means hostility, was de-

molished by Christ. He is peace (skalom, eirene]and now

there is no longer any difference; the former strangers and

aliens are now fellow-citizens with the saints and are ofthe

household of God (Eph. 2: 19). A new temple arises, not

an Israelitic temple but an oecumenical one (Eph. 2: 21,

22), an habitation ofGod through the Spirit.

o 97

dented and unknown. Was it not Jesus Himself who had

admonished the disciples to address themselves to the lostsheep of the house ofisrael only?

Surprise and amazement about the fact that the Gentiles, too, are "fellow heirs, members of the same body and

partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus" (Eph. 3: 6) can

clearly be heard in Eph. 2: I 1-3: 2 I , one of the most important testimonies regarding Paul's apostleship amongthe Gentiles. It is made clear here, if anywhere, that the

mission among the Gentiles cannot possibly be seen as acontinuation of the Judaic making ofproselytes during the

diaspora. 36 Then it was only a matter of a few individualsfrom the world ofnations and for them there would alwayshave been room in Israel, geographically as well as spiritu

ally. I f Paul had been only the Jewish-Christian inheritorof a Judaic missionary tradition, there would have beenno cause for him to speak so emotionally and ecstaticallyabout his calling as an apostle of the Gentiles. The prose

lytic mission originated in the conviction of the uniquenature of Israel as the people of God, the elect nation.Paul's apostleship became possible when the wall that

separated Israel and the nations fell. In Christ the fullnessof the times began (Eph. I: ro, II) and that means the

unity of everything, in heaven and earth, under Hisdominion. No contrast, no break, no alienation can go on

existing and remain valid. They who used to be "alienated from the commonwealth oflsrael and strangers to thecovenants of promise, having no hope and without Godin the world" (Eph. 2: 12) are now made nigh by the

blood of Christ (Eph. 2: I 3). The wall between Israel and

the Gentiles, a wall that also means hostility, was demolished by Christ. He is peace (shalom, eirene) and now

there is no longer any difference; the former strangers andaliens are now fellow-citizens with the saints and are of thehousehold of God (Eph. 2 : rg). A new temple arises, notan Israelitic temple but an oecumenical one (Eph. 2: 21,

22), an habitation of God through the Spirit.

G 97



It is difficultfor us now to realizehow revolutionarythese

things must have sounded to Israelitic and non-Israelitic

ears. Paul deduced this unprecedented turn in history

frompromises

in the Old Testament(cf., e.g.

Rom.15:

9-13, 10: 4-21), but that did not lessen the surprise and

joy, because their fulfilment far surpasses all ideas, ex-

pectations and promises. It is the'

'justification ofthe god-

less", thejustification by faith, that opened the road to the

nations (Rom. 3 : 27-29). Israel looked for it in vain in the

works of the law. Abraham already lived from his faith

and thus became the prototype of the believers among the

Gentiles (Rom. 4: 11),

a father ofmany nations (Rom. 4:

1 8) and heir of the world (Rom. 4: 13). The Scriptures

foresaw that God justifies the heathen through faith (Gal.

3 : 8) and preaches before the gospel unto Abraham In

thee shall all nations be blessed. That is why everyone,

Jew or Greek, slave or freeman, male or female, can be a

child ofGod by faith in ChristJesus (Gal. 3 : 26-28).

We cannot get away from the conclusion that from now

on only he who belongs to Christ can be of the seed of

Abraham, i.e. member of the people of God; "And if ye

be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs accord-

ing to the promise" (Gal. 3: 29).

In a theological sense Paul did here what to Jewish ears

was incredible; the line ofdescent runs from Abraham via

Christ to the world of the Gentiles and Abraham himself

has become the prototype of the Gentile Christian! This

was an Umwertung aller Werte (revaluation of all values), a

setting aside of Israel according to the flesh, a relocation

of the centre of God's acts from Israel to the world of the

Gentiles; that which used to be ex-centric turns out to be

central in God's design for salvation.

Paul now knows himself to be the herald of this newreality in Christ. In Eph. 3 : 1-13, he refers to the preach-

ing entrusted to him by the grace of God; the mystery of

Christ that used to be unknown has been made known to

him by a revelation and he, in his turn, is allowed to make

98

t tis difficuit for us now to realize how revolutionary thesethings must have sounded to Israelitic and non-Israeliticears. Paul deduced this unprecedented turn in historyfrom promises in the Old Testament (c£, e.g. Rom. 15:g-13, ro: 4-21), but that did not lessen the surprise and

joy, because their fulfilment far surpasses all ideas, expectations and promises. It is the "justification of the godless", the justification by faith, that opened the road to the

nations (Rom. 3: 27-29). Israel looked for it in vain in the

works of the law. Abraham already lived from his faithand thus became the prototype of the believers among the

Gentiles (Rom. 4: I I), a father of many nations (Rom. 4:

r8) and heir of the world (Rom. 4: 13). The Scripturesforesaw that Godjustrfies the heathen through faith (Gal.3: 8) and preaches before the gospel unto Abraham-In

thee shall all nations be blessed. That is why everyone,Jew or Greek, slave or freeman, male or female, can be achild of God by faith in Christ Jesus (Gal. 3 : 26-28).

We cannot get away from the conclusion that from now

on only he who belongs to Christ can be of the seed of

Abraham, i.e. member of the people of God; "And if yebe Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise" (Gal. 3 : 29).

In a theological sense Paul did here what to Jewish earswas incredible; the line ofdescent runs from Abraham via

Christ to the world of the Gentiles and Abraham himselfhas become the prototype of the Gentile Christian! This

was an Umwertung alter Werte (revaluation of all values), asetting aside of Israel according to the flesh, a relocationof the centre of God's acts from Israel to the world ofthe

Gentiles; that which used to be ex-centric turns out to be

central in God's design for salvation.

Paul now knows himself to be the herald of this newreality in Christ. In Eph. 3: 1-13, he refers to the preach

ing entrusted to him by the grace of God; the mystery of

Christ that used to be unknown has been made known tohim by a revelation and he, in his turn, is allowed to make

g8



known to the people this mystery as the gospel, as a mes-

sage ofjoy. This preaching of the mystery ("economy of

the mystery") does not only pass across the boundaries of

Israel and the world of the Gentiles but even across the

boundaries of the world of men; the principalities and

powers in heavenly places are informed by the com-

munity (=the oecumenical community, consisting of

Jews and non-Jews) ofthe manifold wisdom ofGod (Eph.

3: 10).

The exalted words that Paul uses when he talks about

the grace that fell to his share, ofpreaching to the Gentiles

the inscrutable riches of Christ, show clearly how strange,

how surprising and how full of mystery the preaching of

the gospel to the Gentiles is(cf.

also Col. i : 26-27). The

strangeness, the abnormal nature of Paul's calling to the

apostleship correspond to the strangeness, the abnormal

nature of his preaching as preaching among the Gentiles. In

his letter to the Ephesians, Paul rises to an almost ecstatic

culmination in the affirmation that from now on a man,

whether Jew or Gentile, can "be filled with all the fullness

ofGod" only as a fellow-saint, in community with all others

(Eph. 3: 18). There is one community, one body, one

Spirit, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and

Father of all (Eph. 4: 3-6). And it is only from this unity

that the variety of gifts and services can be made to serve

the "fulness of Christ" (Eph. 4: 7-16).

In this letter to the Ephesians we are confronted with an

exalted and profound credo concerning Christ as the

turning point in history, the break-through of the new

world. As the riches and wisdom of God He is at one and

the same time the mystery and the power of the new

creation. It is the community of the world of nations which

makes Him known as the manifold wisdom of God to the

heavenly powers.

Paul writes to the Romans that as Jesus Christ's minis-

ter to the Gentiles he has to bring an offering from the

Gentiles that is acceptable in the eyes of God (Rom, 15:

99

known to the people this mystery as the gospel, as a message of joy. This preaching of the mystery ("economy of

the mystery") does not only pass across the boundaries of

Israel and the world of the Gentiles but even across the

boundaries of the world of men; the principalities and

powers in heavenly places are informed by the community (=the oecumenical community, consisting of

Jews and non-Jews) ofthe manifold wisdom of God (Eph.

s: 10).The exalted words that Paul uses when he talks about

the grace that fell to his share, of preaching to the Gentiles

the inscrutable riches of Christ, show clearly how strange,how surprising and how full of mystery the preaching of

the gospel to the Gentiles is (cf. also Col. 1 : 26-27). The

strangeness, the abnormal nature of Paul's calling to the

apostleship correspond to the strangeness, the abnormalnature of his preaching as preaching among the Gentiles. In

his letter to the Ephesians, Paul rises to an almost ecstatic

culmination in the affirmation that from now on a man,whether Jew or Gentile, can "be filled with all the fullnessofGod" only as a fellow-saint, in community with all others(Eph. 3: 18). There is one community, one body, oneSpirit, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and

Father of all (Eph. 4: 3-6). And it is only from this unitythat the variety of gifts and services can be made to serve

the "fulness of Christ" (Eph. 4: 7-16).In this letter to the Ephesians we are confronted with an

exalted and profound credo concerning Christ as the

turning point in history, the break-through of the new

world. As the riches and wisdom of God He is at one and

the same time the mystery and the power of the new

creation. It is the communiry of the world of nations which

makes Him known as the manifold wisdom of God to theheavenly powers.

Paul writes to the Romans that as Jesus Christ's minis

ter to the Gentiles he has to bring an offering from the

Gentiles that is acceptable in the eyes of God (Rom. I 5:

99



16).

This consists in effecting obedience to the faith (Rom.

16: 26) among all nations, thus making Paul's apostleship,

even more than that of the twelve apostles, a sign of the

fulfilment ofthe times, of God's eschatological acting.

C. This shows the ex-centricity of Paul's apostleship,

but also the ex-centricity of God's acting in Jesus Christ;

the former centre, Israel, has lost its significance as a centre.

The Gentiles now take itsplace,

or rather the community

consisting of Jews and Gentiles does. Paul's well-known

explanation in Rom. 9-11, in which he stresses the

strangeness, the ex-centricity of his preaching to the Gen-

tiles, which is at the same time a sign and a warning of

the end, shows how hard it was even for him to under-

stand this ex-centricity of God's acting.

Eph. 2-3 looks upon the community formed from the

world of nations as the fruit of the revelation of the

mystery that Gentiles will also be fellow-heirs of the

promise in ChristJesus, while Rom. 9-1 1 affirms that these

riches of the Gentiles arise from Israel's fall and failure

(Rom. n : 11-12).

One should not conclude from the fact that the Gentiles

have been accepted that Israel has been rejected. Paul

himselfwith the remnant according to the election (Rom.1 1 : 1-6) is the proofthat God has not rejected His people.

That which is happening in the world of the Gentiles is

directed towards the salvation of Israel itself; just as Israel

has not received its place in the history ofsalvation because

of itself but because of the Gentiles, so the communityformed out of the Gentiles has not received its place in the

history of salvation because of itself, but because of Israel

in order to arouse it to jealousy.37 There is an interdepend-

ence between the salvation of the Gentiles and that of

Israel; they cannot and may not be detached from each

other.38

Just as the fall of Israel opened the road to the

"fullness of the Gentiles", so this fullness of the Gentiles

will, in its turn, lead to the fullness, the acceptance, the

salvation of Israel (Rom. n : 12, 25, 26). This is a divine

100

I 6). This consists in effecting obedience to the faith (Rom.

16: 26) among all nations, thus making Paul's apostleship,even more than that of the twelve apostles, a sign of the

fulfilment of the times, of God's eschatological acting.C. This shows the ex-centricity of Paul's apostleship,

but also the ex-centricity of God's acting in Jesus Christ;the former centre, Israel, has lost its significance as a centre.The Gentiles now take its place, or rather the communityconsisting of Jews and Gentiles does. Paul's well-knownexplanation in Rom. g-u, in which he stresses the

strangeness, the ex-centricity of his preaching to the Gentiles, which is at the same time a sign and a warning of

the end, shows how hard it was even for him to under

stand this ex-centricity of God's acting.Eph. 2-3 looks upon the community formed from the

world of nations as the fruit of the revelation of the

mystery that Gentiles will also be fellow-heirs of the

promise in Christ Jesus, while Rom. g-1 I affirms that these

riches of the Gentiles arise from Israel's fall and failure(Rom. II: I 1-12).

One should not conclude from the fact that the Gentileshave been accepted that Israel has been rejected. Paul

himself with the remnant according to the election (Rom.I I : I -6) is the proofthat God has not rejected His people.That which is happening in the world of the Gentiles is

directed towards the salvation ofisrael itself; just as Israelhas not received its place in the history ofsalvation becauseof itself but because of the Gentiles, so the communityformed out of the Gentiles has not received its place in the

history of salvation because of itself, but because of Israelin order to arouse it to jealousy.37 There is an interdependence between the salvation of the Gentiles and that of

Israel; they cannot and may not be detached from eachother.33 Just as the fall of Israel opened the road to the

"fullness of the Gentiles", so this fullness of the Gentileswill, in its turn, lead to the fullness, the acceptance, the

salvation of Israel (Rom. I I : I 2, 25, 26). This is a divine

100



mystery which cannot be fathomed or gauged; one can

only stammer about it in amazement (Rom. n: 34-36).

It is clear from Rom. 9-1 1 that to Paul the reconcilia-

tion of the world

(Rom.n:

15),

of which the

preachingof the gospel among the Gentiles is the sign and prelude

(Rom. 10 : 16-18), is at the same time a penultimate reality.

The mission to the Gentiles, of which Paul is the charac-

teristic and principal representative, cannot be appreci-

ated except as the great happening "between the times";

the coming ofJesus Christ in the flesh and His return at

the end. God has already revealed His last plans and

carried them out in Christ. All that is left now is for the

revelation of the mystery to be completed and finished.

The closed world of nations that God has allowed to

walk in their own ways is now confronted with the great

salvation which calls upon all people everywhere to

repent (Acts 14: 16, 17: 30).

Ifwe compare what has been said so far in this section,

it appears that according to Eph. 2-4, as well as to Rom.

9-11, the preaching of the gospel among the Gentiles is a

strange, unexpected, surprising occurrence. In Eph. 2-4,

the emphasis is on the execution of a divine plan of salva-

tion for the world; in Rom. 9-11, it is on the temporary

nature of the coming of the Gentiles that will find its end

in the salvation of the whole of Israel. We shall have to

accept these two ideas without wanting to make them into

one whole that fits. In Paul's own person the centripetal

and centrifugal aspects of the preaching are brought to-

gether. It is he, as the apostle of the Gentiles, who passes

all boundaries to be Christ's minister everywhere in the

world, who calls upon the Gentiles to bring offerings that

find favour in God's eyes (Rom. 15: 1 6),it is he, as the

son of Israel, who even when he is preaching among the

Gentiles is still gathering Israel, taking the nations home

and arousing the jealousy ofhis flesh and blood (Rom. 1 1 :

i, 13, 14).

D. When Christ is the centre of the preaching and be-

101

mystery which cannot be fathomed or gauged; one can

only stammer about i t in amazement (Rom. I I: 34-36).It is clear from Rom. g - I I that to Paul the reconcilia

tion of the world (Rom. II I 5), of which the preachingof the gospel among the Gentiles is the sign and prelude(Rom. ro: r6-I8), is at the same time a penultimate realiv.

The mission to the Gentiles, of which Paul is the characteristic and principal representative, cannot be appreciated except as the great happening "between the times";the coming ofJesus Christ in the flesh and His return at

the end. God has already revealed His last plans and

carried them out in Christ. All that is left now is for the

revelation of the mystery to be completed and finished.The closed world of nations that God has allowed to

walk in their own ways is now confronted with the greatsalvation which calls upon all people everywhere torepent (Acts 14: r6, 17: 30).

I f we compare what has been said so far in this section,it appears that according to Eph. 2-4, as well as to Rom.g- I r, the preaching of the gospel among the Gentiles is astrange, unexpected, surprising occurrence. In Eph. 2-4,the emphasis is on the execution of a divine plan of salvation for the world; in Rom. g-u, it is on the temporarynature of the coming of the Gentiles that will find its end

in the salvation of the whole of Israel. We shall have to

accept these two ideas without wanting to make them intoone whole that fits. In Paul's own person the centripetaland centrifugal aspects of the preaching are brought together. It is he, as the apostle of the Gentiles, who passesall boundaries to be Christ's minister everywhere in the

world, who calls upon the Gentiles to bring offerings that

find favour in God's eyes (Rom. 15: I6), it is he, as the

son of Israel, who even when he is preaching among the

Gentiles is still gathering Israel, taking the nations homeand arousing the jealousy ofhis flesh and blood (Rom. I I:r, 13, 14).

D. When Christ is the centre of the preaching and beIOI



lief in Him is of decisive importance, the community

which is gathered around Him becomes itself a "preacher

ofthe joyful message". Even though the apostles, and par-

ticularlyPaul, are the first to

spread

the gospel, they are

not the only ones to do so. Even the term "apostle" is

flexible and is not restricted to Paul and the twelve(cf.

e.g. Rom. 16: 7).The community in Thessalonica be-

came an example to all believers in Macedonia and

Achaia(i

Thess. i :7, 8). During his imprisonment Paul's

task is taken over by others (Phil, i : 14). It is part of a

Christian's armour to be "shod with the equipment of the

gospel of peace" (Eph. 6: is).39

The community of Christ also takes over Israel's task

in that the mission from Israel to the Gentiles now becomes

the mission from the Gentiles (Christians) to Jews and

Gentiles (heathen) . The progress ofthe gospel in the world

of Paul's time was made possible not only by his apostle-

ship but also by this activity of the community. It is re-

markable that so little is said in the New Testament about

the obligation, the task of preaching the gospel. Appar-

ently it was so obvious that the glad tidings were to be

passed on, that it was hardly necessary to remind anyoneof it. It does appear, though, that some were particularly

charged with the preaching among the Gentiles. One is

involuntarily reminded of the evangelists (Eph. 4: n)and the prophets (i

Cor. 12: 28). One rarely finds an

admonition to preach the gospel in Paul's epistles. What

he does ask for is intercession in order that the word ofthe

Lord may speed on (2 Thess. 3:1).

In the haste which becomes apparent from these words,

Paul professes his belief and expresses the hope that Jesus

Christ will come soon. His preaching is characterized bythe glow and tenseness of expectation.

40 This also deter-

mines the aim of his preaching. When in his letters he

stresses time and again that one should live as a follower

ofGod (Eph. 5: i), of Christ (Eph. 5: 2, Phil. 2: 3-11), of

himself as an apostle (iCor. 4: 16, n: i, Phil. 3: 17,

102

lief in Him is of decisive importance, the communitywhich is gathered around Him becomes itself a "preacher

of the joyful message". Even though the apostles, and par

ticularly Paul, are the first to spread the gospel, they arenot the only ones to do so. Even the term "apostle" isflexible and is not restricted to Paul and the twelve (cf.e.g. Rom. I6: 7). The community in Thessalonica be-came an example to all believers in Macedonia and

Achaia (1 Thess. I : 7, 8). During his imprisonment Paul'stask is taken over by others (Phil. I: I4)· It is part of aChristian's armour to be "shod with the equipment of the

gospel ofpeace" (Eph. 6: I5).39

The community of Christ also takes over Israel's taskin that the mission from Israel to the Gentiles now becomesthe mission from the Gentiles (Christians) to Jews and

Gentiles (heathen). The progress of the gospel in the worldof Paul's time was made possible not only by his apostle-ship but also by this activity of the community. It is re-

markable that so little is said in the New Testament about

the obligation, the task of preaching the gospel. Appar-ently it was so obvious that the glad tidings were to be

passed on, that it was hardly necessary to remind anyoneof it. It does appear, though, that some were particularlycharged with the preaching among the Gentiles. One is

involuntarily reminded of the evangelists (Eph. 4: I I)

and the prophets (I Cor. I 2 : 28). One rarely finds an

admonition to preach the gospel in Paul's epistles. What

he does ask for is intercession in order that the word of the

Lord may speed on (2 Thess. 3 : 1).

In the haste which becomes apparent from these words,Paul professes his belief and expresses the hope that JesusChrist will come soon. His preaching is characterized by

the glow and tenseness of expectation.40 This also deter-mines the aim of his preaching. When in his letters he

stresses time and again that one should live as a follower

ofGod (Eph. s: I), ofChrist (Eph. s: 2, Phil. 2.: 3-u), of

himselfas an apostle (I Cor. 4: 16, I I : I , Phil. 3: I7,I02



I Thess. i : 6, 2: 14)3 he does so because of the Second

Coining of Christ, the coming of the Kingdom (Eph. 5: 5,

i Thess. 5: 23, 2 Cor. 11:2). The contents and aim of his

preaching can be summarized as follows :

Jesus

Christ is

Lord, Lord of the community and therefore of the world,

the Lord who has come and will come, who must be

known, expected and honoured among all nations. That

is why he, Paul, wants to preach the gospel in each and

every province of the Roman Empire, and particularly in

every large town, and as far as "the ends of the earth"

(Spain), in order that the name of Christ shall be men-

tioned everywhere (Rom. 15: 22-24, f- I 5 : 19-20).

The eschatological connection of the Pauline mission

must be taken into account. The activity of the apostles is

a fragment of the history of the end. Rapidly the fashion of

this world passes away, and at the time St. Paul writes the

letter to the Romans, the daybreak of the new era is already

nearer than when he came unto belief. The generation to

which he and his readers belong is the one during which the

aeons coincide. For what has happened in Christ and what

goes on with the Church, is the breakthrough of the future.

That is why one must speed up : salvation must be preached

to all nations, carried forward to the ends ofthe earth, before

the end comes. Here is the reason for the bold plan of a

mission to Spain, which is for ancient ideas even the utmost

part

of the earth. The event to which the mission belongs is

therefore not a transitory period but it is to serve immedi-

ately the realization of God's world-purpose; it binds one

to full commitment and calls for a decision for eternity.

Where this calling is obeyed, there is anticipated and

realized a fragment of God's eternal world.41

103

I Thess. I: 6, 2: 14), he does so because of the Second

Coming of Christ, the coming of the Kingdom (Eph. 5: 5,

I Thess. 5: 23, 2 Cor. I I: 2). The contents and aim of hispreaching can be summarized as follows: Jesus Christ is

Lord, Lord of the community and therefore of the world,

the Lord who has come and will come, who must be

known, expected and honoured among all nations. That

is why he, Paul, wants to preach the gospel in each and

every province of the Roman Empire, and particularly in

every large town, and as far as "the ends of the earth"

(Spain), in order that the name of Christ shall be men

tioned everywhere (Rom. I5: 22-24, cf. 15: 19-20).

The eschatological connection of the Pauline missionmust be taken into account. The activity of the apostles is

a fragment of the history of the end. Rapidly the fashion of

this world passes away, and at the time St. Paul writes the

letter to the Romans, the daybreak of the new era is alreadynearer than when he came unto belief. The generation to

which he and his readers belong is the one during which theaeons coincide. For what has happened in Christ and what

goes on with the Church, is the breakthrough of the future.That is why one must speed up: salvation must be preachedto all nations, carried forward to the ends of the earth, beforethe end comes. Here is the reason for the bold plan of amission to Spain, which is for ancient ideas even the utmostpart of the earth. The event to which the mission belongs is

therefore not a transitory period but i t is to serve immediately the realization of God's world-purpose; it binds oneto full commitment and calls for a decision for eternity.Where this calling is obeyed, there is anticipated and

realized a fragment of God's eternal world. 41

103



CHAPTER 7

TOWARDS A THEOLOGY OF MISSION?

i. Mission and World History1

TF WE ARE TO DO JUSTICE TO THE BIBLICAL DATA

jLregarding mission, and thereby take account of the

opinions of many theological directions and convictions,

it is healthy to remember the wise word of O. Michel:

All genuine theology is in battle against theologizing,

abstracting, theorizing, and against the attempt to replace

the genuine Biblical and historical motive by a philosophical

transformation. Genuine theology is acquainted with in-

soluble tensions and self-defining thought-forms of the holy

Scriptures, which cannot become a part of any humanscheme nor of any theological system. At present we are in

love with simplifications, while the Bible glorifies humble

simplicity; at present we wish easy solutions, while the

Bible strengthens us with solutions for travelling; at presentwe wish again and again to hear ourselves, while the Bible

would invite us to the hearing of the naked word. 2

Now if we attempt to set forth the present state of dis-

cussion regarding the place ofmission in world history, wemust take special account of the "insoluble tensions" to

which the foregoing quotation refers.

A. In the first place, the Holy Scriptures make clear to

us that the proclamation of the gospel among the nations

is possible only

(i) By the voluntary sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the

cross, which is both a sign of God's pity and of

Israel's obstinacy;

(ii) By the resurrection of Christ from the dead, throughwhich He has received the dominion of the world;

104

CHAPTER 7

TOWARDS A THEOLOGY OF MISSION?

I. Mission and World HistotfI F WE ARE TO DO JUSTICE TO THE BIBLICAL DATA

regarding mission, and thereby take account of the

opinions of many theological directions and convictions,it is healthy to remember the wise word ofO. Michel:

All genuine theology is in battle against theologizing,abstracting, theorizing, and against the attempt to replacethe genuine Biblical and historical motive by a philosophicaltransformation. Genuine theology is acquainted with insoluble tensions and self-defining thought-forms of the holy

Scriptures, which cannot become a part of any humanscheme nor of any theological system. At present we are in

love with simplifications, while the Bible glorifies humblesimplicity; at present we wish easy solutions, while the

Bible strengthens us with solutions for travelling; at presentwe wish again and again to hear ourselves, while the Biblewould invite us to the hearing of the naked word.z

Now if we attempt to set forth the present state of discussion regarding the place ofmission in world history, wemust take special account of the "insoluble tensions" towhich the foregoing quotation refers.

A. In the first place, the Holy Scriptures make clear tous that the proclamation of the gospel among the nationsis possible only

(i) By the voluntary sacrifice of Jesus Christ on thecross, which is both a sign of God's pity and of

Israel's obstinacy;(ii) By the resurrection of Christ from the dead, through

which He has received the dominion of the world;

104



(iii) Through thegift

of the Holy Spirit, which enables

the apostles and the community to witness.

One might say that by this means a new period in world

history

has dawned and a new creation has arisen around

Christ. Christ is theend ofthe Old Testament and the First-

born ofthe new creation, the end ofa world, the beginning

of a new one, "the hinge of history".3Mission, seen under

this aspect of the new world, is not only a consequence of

Christ's dominion of the world, but it is also the actualiza-

tion of it. The proclamation of the gospel is thejform ofthe

Kingdom of God. Acts i : 6-8 must surely be viewed in

this light: the expected establishment of the Kingdom for

Israel will take place at a point of time determined by

God, but the manifestation of the Kingdom is an affair

of the witness ofmen by the power of the Holy Spirit. In

the Holy Spirit it is Christ Himself who witnesses, but at

the same time it is the disciples who witness. Strange

things are being said to us about this unity-in-tension of

divine and human witness, over and over again in the

New Testament.

[Compare, for example, Acts 15 : 28 : "For it has seemed

good to the Holy Spirit and to us," with Rom. 8: 16: "It

is the Spirit himselfbearing witness with our spirit." In the

first passage the Holy Spirit leads and men follow; in the

second the witness ofthe Holy Spirit is an accompaniment

of human witness!]

In the light of this new beginning the proclamation of

the gospel among the nations must be understood as the

actualization of the eschatological prospects. The new

world already is, but it is so only for him who sees the

actuality of Christ's dominion in the proclamation of the

gospel in the world.

Here one might say (though in one sense it is too strongly

put) : the proclamation is not dependent on world history,

but rather world history is dependent on proclamation,

because and in so far as this is the manifestation of Christ's

dominion over the world. But it is important not to accen-

105

(iii) Through the gift of the Holy Spirit, which enablesthe apostles and the community to witness.

One might say that by this means a new period in worldhistory has dawned and a new creation has arisen aroundChrist. ChrististheendoftheOld Testament and the Firstborn of he new creation, the end ofa world, the beginningof a new one, "the hinge ofhistory". 3 Mission, seen underthis aspect of the new world, is not only a consequence of

Christ's dominion of the world, but it is also the actualiza-tion of it. The proclamation of the gospel is the form of the

Kingdom of God. Acts 1 : 6-8 must surely be viewed in

this light: the expected establishment of the Kingdom forIsrael will take place at a point of time determined by

God, but the manifestation of the Kingdom is an affairof the witness of men by the power of the Holy Spirit. In

the Holy Spirit i t is Christ Himself who witnesses, but at

the same time it is the disciples who witness. Strangethings are being said to us about this unity-in-tension of

divine and human witness, over and over again in theNew Testament.

[Compare, for example, Acts 15: 28: "For it has seemedgood to the Holy Spirit and to us," with Rom. 8: 16: "Itis the Spirit himselfbearing witness with our spirit." In thefirst passage the Holy Spirit leads and men follow; in the

second the witness of the Holy Spirit is an accompaniment

of human witness!]In the light of this new beginning the proclamation of

the gospel among the nations must be understood as the

actualization of the eschatological prospects. The newworld already is, but it is so only for him who sees the

actuality of Christ's dominion in the proclamation of thegospel in the world.

Here one might say (though in one sense it is too stronglyput): the proclamation is not dependent on world history,but rather world history is dependent on proclamation,because and in so far as this is the manifestation of Christ'sdominion over the world. But it is important not to accen-

105



tuate the reality of Christ's dominion at the expense of the

tentativeness and hiddenness of this dominion.

[In Roman Catholic and High Church thinking, the

dominion of Christ and the

Kingdom

of God are under-

stood as realized in the Church, so that the Church takes

over the place of the Kingdom almost wholly. So both the

hiddenness and the tentativeness of Christ's dominion are

robbed of their realityand one loses sight of the fact that

"the form of this world is passing away" (i Cor. 7: 31).

The same one-sidedness lies at the basis of the "social

gospel"

idea and of its offshoots, and in general of the

idealistic, social-ethical narrowing of the Kingdom of

God. "The New Testament knows no other progression in

history than that the end is coming nearer. Therefore all

ideas of a gradual actualization of the Kingdom of God

in this world, or of a Christianization of the world, have

been banished to the area of illusions."4]

B. In the publications ofthe last few decades (at least on

the European continent), the proclamation of the gospel

is seen much more as a sign of the end than as a sign of

fulfilment. We have been greatly influenced in this regard

by the observations of Oscar Cullmann. "The missionary

proclamation of the Church, her preaching of the Gospel,

gives to the time between resurrection and the Second

Coming of Christ its heilsgeschichtlich meaning in connec-

tion with Christ's present dominion."5 The evidence for

this thesis lies in Mark 13:10 and Matt. 24: 14, in which

mission is named among divine signs along with woes such

as wars, famine, etc. "It is not true that the coming of the

Kingdom depends upon the result ofthis preaching; rather

upon thefact ofthe preaching."6

By this view, mission too, like all "signs", allows not a

single calculation nor any single limitation upon this or

any other generation. According to this early Christian

idea, the Church must proclaim the gospel to "the whole

world in every generation".7

[The remark regarding calculation is obviously directed

106

tuate the reality of Christ's dominion at the expense of thetentativeness and hiddenness of this dominion.

[In Roman Catholic and High Church thinking, the

dominion of Christ and the Kingdom of God are under-

stood as realized in the Church, so that the Church takesover the place of the Kingdom almost wholly. So both the

hiddenness and the tentativeness of Christ's dominion are

robbed of their reality and one loses sight of the fact that

"the form of this world is passing away" (I Cor. 7: 3I).

The same one-sidedness lies at the basis of the "socialgospel" idea and of its offshoots, and in general of the

idealistic, social-ethical narrowing of the Kingdom of

God. "The New Testament knows no other progression in

history than that the end is coming nearer. Therefore allideas of a gradual actualization of the Kingdom of God

in this world, or of a Christianization of the world, havebeen banished to the area of illusions."4]

B. In the publications of the last few decades (at least on

the European continent), the proclamation of the gospelis seen much more as a sign of the end than as a sign of

fulfilment. We have been greatly influenced in this regardby the observations of Oscar Cullmann. "The missionaryproclamation of the Church, her preaching of the Gospel,gives to the time between resurrection and the SecondComing of Christ its heilsgeschichtlich meaning in connec

tion with Christ's present dominion." 5 The evidence forthis thesis lies in Mark 13: 10 and Matt. 24: 14, in which

mission is named among divine signs along with woes suchas wars, famine, etc. "It is not true that the coming of the

Kingdom depends upon the result ofthis preaching; rather

upon the fact of the preaching."6

By this view, mission too, like all "signs", allows not a

single calculation nor any single liinitation upon this or

any other generation. According to this early Christianidea, the Church must proclaim the gospel to "the wholeworld in every generation" '2

[The remark regarding calculation is obviously directed106



against the apocalyptic narrowing ofthe Kingdom ofGod,as if one could force the end closer either by calculation

or by great activity. Matt. 24: 14 does not speak of the

"must" ofprockmation but

simply

of the future

actualityof proclamation. Future is different from imperative.

Further, Acts i: 8: "you shall be my disciples" this is

future, not imperative. Man is only a producing instru-

ment and the commandment emerges only in the second

place. Mark 13: 10, too ("must", followed by a passive),

is an indication of aheilsgeschichtlich necessity rather than

of a commandment laid upon man. This does not mean

that the command is denied, but it certainly renders im-

possible every human convulsion and over-exertion of

human activity.8]

Since about 1930 the eschatological character ofmission

has been receiving more and more emphasis. Some even

explain the theological impasse of the LM.C. conference

at Willingen in 1952 by this tension between the character

of mission as expectation and fulfilment, ofKingdom and

Church.9

The resistance against this, especially from the Anglo-

Saxon side,10 and to a lesser degree from the Eastern

Orthodox side,11

is not yet free from misunderstandings.

Church and mission are still often contrasted with each

other as static and dynamic, introverted and extraverted,

and the eschatological character of mission is still often

confused with apocalyptic agitation and overhastiness.

The blame for this should certainly not be placed on those

who during the past few decennia have pleaded for this

eschatological foundation Hartenstein, Freytag, Hoeken-

dijk, Manson, Warren and others.

Nevertheless, during the past few years the uncertainty

as to whether missionary work is justified has been in-

creasing. It is more and more widely recognized

(i)That from its beginning the Church of Christ as a

whole has been of an eschatological nature. Since

the resurrection of Christ and the descent of the

107

against the apocalyptic narrowing ofthe Kingdom ofGod,as if one could force the end closer either by calculationor by great activity. Matt. 24: I4 does not speak of the

"must" of proclamation but simply of the future actualityof proclamation. Future is different from imperative.Further, Acts I : 8: "you shall be my disciples"- this isfuture, not imperative. Man is only a producing instrument and the commandment emerges only in the secondplace. Mark I 3: 10 , too ("must", followed by a passive),is an indication of a heilsgeschichtlich necessity rather than

of a commandment laid upon man. This does not mean

that the command is denied, but i t certainly renders impossible every human convulsion and over-exertion of

human activity.s]

Since about 1930 the eschatological character ofmissionhas been receiving more and more emphasis. Some evenexplain the theological impasse of the I.M.C. conferenceat Willingen in r952 by this tension between the character

of mission as expectation and fulfilment, of Kingdom and

Church.9

The resistance against this, especially from the AngloSaxon side,10 and to a lesser degree from the EasternOrthodox side,11 is not yet free from misunderstandings.Church and mission are still often contrasted with eachother as static and dynamic, introverted and extraverted,

and the eschatological character of mission is still oftenconfused with apocalyptic agitation and overhastiness.The blame for this should certainly not be placed on thosewho during the past few decennia have pleaded for thiseschatological foundation-Hartenstein, Freytag, Hoekendijk, Manson, Warren and others.

Nevertheless, during the past few years the uncertainty

as to whether missionary work is justified has been increasing. It is more and more widely recognized

(i) That from its beginning the Church of Christ as awhole has been of an eschatological nature. Since

the resurrection of Christ and the descent of the

I07



Holy Spirit, the Church and the world are both in

the same eschatological circumstances in all their

actions and responsibilities the end ofthe ages has

come(i

Cor. 10:

n);(ii)

That during the whole of its existence the Church

of Christ is the servant of the world, sent forth into

the world. The community exists for the world,

because it is the community ofJesus Christ.

Its existence is not purpose in itself, however wonderful

and glorious it may be as such, also in all that it comprises

for its individual members. Theilluminating power of the

Holy Spirit draws, drives and pushes [the congregation]

away from its existence as such, away also from all that its

members receive, experience and go through; away also

from all that has been promised to them personally. And

only in following this guidance and impact, it is and becomes

the true congregation ofJesus Christ.12 The real congrega-

tion ofJesus Christ is the congregation which is, in and with

its foundation, sent into the world by God. Just as such it is

there for the world. Not because of value, authority and

power, which is immanent in its nature as creature, as a

nation among others, but because of a given power of

attorney, given to her in and with its special foundation as

this people and therefore as a genuine power.13

Now the question forcibly arises what is specific or

unique in missionary work as dussere Mission, as "foreignmission

(s)

5>

. Norman Goodall has formulated this questionas follows:

What is the theological significance of "foreign" mission

within the total responsibility ofthe Church? The more this

total responsibility is emphasized the less easy it is to retain

for the foreign obligation a unique element of call and

separation. Have the ends of the earth a theological signifi-cance comparable with the end of time? In the vocational

experience of countless missionaries (of varying races andfrom younger and older Churches) there appears to be a

convincing testimony to this unique element in the call of

foreign service. This being so, can it be articulated theo-

108

Holy Spirit, the Church and the world are both in

the same eschatological circumstances in all their

actions and responsibilities-the end of the ages has

come (1 Cor. 10: u);(ii) That during the whole ofits existence the Church

ofChrist is the seiVant of the world, sent forth into

the world. The community exists for the world,

because it is the community ofJesus Christ.

Its existence is not purpose in itself, however wonderfuland glorious it may be as such, also in all that it comprises

for its individual members. The illuminating power of theHoly Spirit draws, drives and pushes [the congregation]away from its existence as such, away also from all that itsmembers receive, experience and go through; away alsofrom all that has been promised to them personally. And

only in following this guidance and impact, it is and becomesthe true congregation ofJesus Christ.12 The real congregation ofJesus Christ is the congregation which is, in and with

its foundation, sent into the world by God. Just as such it isthere for the world. Not because of value, authority and

power, which is immanent in its nature as creature, as anation among others, but because of a given power of

attorney, given to her in and with its special foundation asthis people and therefore as a genuine power.13

Now the question forcibly arises what is specific or

unique in Inissionary work as iiussere Mission, as "foreignInission(s)". Norman Goodall has formulated this question

as follows:

What is the theological significance of "foreign" missionwithin the total responsibility of the Church? The more thistotal responsibility is emphasized the less easy it is to retainfor the foreign obligation a unique element of call and

separation. Have the ends of the earth a theological significance comparable with the end of time? In the vocationalexperience of countless missionaries (of varying races and

from younger and older Churches) there appears to be aconvincing testimony to this unique element in the call offoreign service. This being so, can it be articulated theo-

xo8



logically in a manner which will illumine afresh Its signifi-

cance for the whole Church?14

In my opinion those who have advocated the eschato-

logical foundation of missionary work with so much forceshould be given lasting credit for having drawn the con-

clusions from the academic theological discussion in favour

of missionary work that were to be more generally recog-

nized later on. Does this mean that they have understood

the essence and the calling of the Church of Christ in the

world better and sooner than others have?

Whatis

the connection between this new vision of theChurch as it appears, for instance, in the above words of

Karl Earth, and in missionary work? And in what wayhas an answer been looked for and found to the question as

to the nature and the intrinsic right of missionary work in

the whole of the work of the community of Christ during

the past few years?

2. Current Questions

In our attempt to understand the basis and motive of

mission from the Bible, what we have thus far discovered

can be summarized in a statement by Walter Freytag:

Without mission, history is nothing but human history

whose progress consists at best in the intensifying of its

catastrophe. But if we know of the coming Kingdom, wecannot rejoice in the promise without proclaiming it. The

Lord is near.15

But the word "mission", even in this quotation, must be

detached from an all too narrow conception of it. We shall

have to be aware of a double danger which Bishop Neill

has pointed out: the word mission can be made so broad

that it becomes almost meaningless: "If everything is

mission, nothing is mission."16 On the other hand, we dare

not seek a "theology of missionary societies" as "a theo-

logical justification ofwhat we have done in the past and

ofwhat we are trying to do in the present."17

109

logically in a manner which will illumine afresh its signifi-cance for the whole Church ?14In my opinion those who have advocated the eschato-

logical foundation of missionary work withso

much forceshould be given lasting credit for having drawn the con-clusions from the academic theological discussion in favourof missionary work that were to be more generally recog-nized later on. Does this mean that they have understoodthe essence and the calling of the Church of Christ in the

world better and sooner than others have?

What is the connection between this new vision of theChurch as it appears, for instance, in the above words of

Karl Barth, and in missionary work? And in what way

has an answer been looked for and found to the question asto the nature and the intrinsic right of missionary work in

the whole of the work of the community of Christ duringthe past few years?

2. Current Questions

In our attempt to understand the basis and motive of

mission from the Bible, what we have thus far discoveredcan be summarized in a statement by Walter Freytag:

Without mission, history is nothing but human historywhose progress consists at best in the intensifying of its

catastrophe. But if we know of the coming Kingdom, wecannot rejoice in the promise without proclaiming it. The

Lord is near.15

But the word "mission", even in this quotation, must bedetached from an all too narrow conception of it. We shallhave to be aware of a double danger which Bishop Neill

has pointed out: the word mission can be made so broad

that it becomes almost meaningless: " I f everything ismission, nothing is mission." 16 On the other hand, we dare

not seek a "theology of missionary societies" as "a theo-logical justification of what we have done in the past and

of what we are trying to do in the present."17

109



We may formulate the questions, put in the previous

paragraph, in this way:18

Is there a relation between the

eschatological and geographical character of the mis-

sionary's

task?

(Consider,

for instance, the meanings ofthe

expression "the ends of the earth".) In the light of these

Biblical considerations are "foreign missions" a theological

necessity or a historical contingency? Ifthe former is true,

does it include the obligation to preach the gospel in

foreign lands ?

It is these questionsin particular which have been the

occasion for writing the preceding chapters, and we shall

deal with the topics in this order:

A. The connection between the eschatological and the

geographical character of the task of the Church;

B. The character of foreign missions as a theological

necessity and as a historical contingency;

C. The peculiar significance of the preaching of the

gospel in foreign lands.

A. The question ofthe connection between the eschato-

logical and the geographical character of the task of the

Church has often been answered. Wilhelm Andersen

represents general opinion when he remarks: "The mis-

sionary enterprise is an eschatological entity, in the sense

of future eschatology as much as in that of realized

eschatology. . . . The geographical and temporal com-

ponents belong to the very essence of missionary

service."19

Andersen bases this, as many have done before him, on

the expressions "ends of the earth" and "end of days". I

think it must be recognized that the expression "the last

of days" occurs much more often in the Bible than "the

last" or "the uttermost parts of the earth".

Furthermore, we noticed in Chapter 2 that the eschato-

logical character of the Old Testament expressions "the

end of days", or "in coming days", is not so strict as was

once thought; they do refer to a decisive moment in the

future, but they can also be used with another meaning.

no

We may formulate the questions, put in the previousparagraph, in this way :18 Is there a relation between the

eschatological and geographical character of the mis-sionary's task? (Consider, for instance, the meanings of the

expression "the ends of the earth".) In the light of theseBiblical considerations are "foreign missions" a theological

necessity or a historical contingency? I f he former is true,does it include the obligation to preach the gospel in

foreign lands?It is these questions in particular which have been the

occasion for writing the preceding chapters, and we shalldeal with the topics in this order:

A. The connection between the eschatological and thegeographical character of the task of the Church;

B. The character of foreign missions as a theologicalnecessity and as a historical contingency;

C. The peculiar significance of the preaching of the

gospel in foreign lands.

A. The question of the connection between the eschato-logical and the geographical character of the task of the

Church has often been answered. Wilhelm Andersenrepresents general opinion when he remarks: "The mis-sionary enterprise is an eschatological entity, in the senseof future eschatology as much as in that of realizedeschatology.... The geographical and temporal com-

ponents belong to the very essence of missionaryservice."19

Andersen bases this, as many have done before him, on

the expressions "ends of the earth" and "end of days". Ithink it must be recognized that the expression "the lastof days" occurs much more often in the Bible than "the

last" or "the uttermost parts of the earth".

Furthermore, we noticed in Chapter 2 that the eschato-logical character of the Old Testament expressions "the

end of days", or "in corning days", is not so strict as wasonce thought; they do refer to a decisive moment in the

future, but they can also be used with another meaning.IIO



In the New Testament, "the last days55

can mean the days

which have broken forth with Christ (Heb. i : i) and the

Holy Spirit (Acts 2: 17), but also the time of the Last

Judgmentand the Second

Coming (e.g. Johnn :

24,12:

483 i Pet. 1:5). The accent in the New Testament, as we

have seen, lies at least as much on Him who has come as

upon that which was expected. The expression "ends of

the earth" occurs in the New Testament only twice, in

Acts i : 8, and in Matt. 12 : 42 (Luke has a parallel in 1 1 :

31); but in the synoptic passage the word eschata is not

used. The connection between "the end of

days"

and "the

ends of the earth" is no doubt inspired mostly by Matt.

24: 14 and Mark 13: 10, though here the reference is to

"the whole world". But this expression refers to the whole

non-Israelitic world, like the expression "all nations". It

occurs to me that we are to see in the expression "the ends

of the earth", which occurs in connection with the call to

mission only in Acts i : 8, a synonym of "the whole world"

and "all nations".

Therefore our first thought as we hear the expression

must be that it is an indication of the intensive and exten-

sive universality of salvation. This universality includes

geographical comprehensiveness, but the latter is not em-

phasized. The emphasis in the New Testament is always

on the "going", but this indicates a crossing ofthe bound-

ary between Israel and the Gentiles rather than geographi-

cal boundaries, though the first naturally does not exclude

the second. We are concerned here with emphases, but

these may become very important, as is the case with the

expression "uttermost parts of the earth". I think this is

why the latter has received so much emphasis because in

missionary circles the phrase echoes the i.dea of "far-away

places", particularly the lands of the "Orient". Missions

were only missions if it was a matter of far countries,

"overseas", particularly in Asia and Africa.

Now to be consistent with this line of thinking, the

countries of Europe and America should be considered by

in

In the New Testament, "the last days,, can mean the dayswhich have broken forth with Christ (Heb. I : I) and the

Holy Spirit (Acts 2: 17), but also the time of the LastJudgment and the Second Coming (e.g. John I I : 24, I2 :

48, I Pet. I: 5). The accent in the New Testament, as we

have seen, lies at least as much on Him who has come asupon that which was expected. The expression "ends of

the earth" occurs in the New Testament only twice, in

Acts I : 8, and in Matt. I2 : 42 (Luke has a parallel in I I :

3I) ; but in the synoptic passage the word eschata is notused. The connection between "the end of days" and "the

ends of the earth" is no doubt inspired mostly by Matt.24: 14 and Mark 13: 10, though here the reference is to"the whole world". But this expression refers to the wholenon-Israelitic world, like the expression "all nations". It

occurs to me that we are to see in the expression "the endsof the earth", which occurs in connection with the call tomission only in Acts I: 8, a synonym of"the whole world"and "all nations".

Therefore our first thought as we hear the expressionmust be that it is an indication of the intensive and extensive universality of salvation. This universality includesgeographical comprehensiveness, but the latter is not emphasized. The emphasis in the New Testament is alwayson the "going", but this indicates a crossing of the boundary between Israel and the Gentiles rather than geographical. boundaries, though the first naturally does not excludethe second. We are concerned here with emphases, but

these may become very important, as is the case with the

expression "uttermost parts of the earth". I think this is

why the latter has received so much emphasis-because in

missionary circles the phrase echoes the idea of "far-away

places", particularly the lands of the "Orient". Missionswere only missions if it was a matter of far countries,"overseas", particularly in Asia and Africa.

Now to be consistent with this line of thinking, the

countries of Europe and America should be considered by

I I I



the younger Churches In Asia and Africa as the "utter-

most parts of the earth". I think, therefore, it is best to

confine the term "ends of the earth" to its Biblical value

(and

not to conceive of it too strictly in

geographicalterms) : the world, indeed the whole world to the very

farthest corners. For Jesus5

disciples, Europe belonged to

the "uttermost parts ofthe earth", and at that time it did,

too! And this "uttermost" reached no farther than the

western coasts of the Mediterranean Sea.

Therefore, it seems to me illegitimate theologically to

found mission as "foreign mission" on a correlation be-

tween the "end of days" and the "ends of the earth", un-

less the latter is purged ofits non-Biblical "Western" signi-

ficance. It is a boundary notion which indicates that

Christ's dominion knows no geographical boundaries

either. In other words, the missionary commission is from

the very beginning an ecumenical commission, a commis-

sion which concerns the whole inhabited world. Thus the

criterion is simply: that one must have heard of Christ in

order to be able to believe in Him. Thus He must be

preached everywhere, and to that end the messengers of

the gospel must be sent (Rom. 10: 1 1-15).

We may therefore summarize by remarking: (i) that

the Biblical eschatology certainly has a geographical

component, to the extent that the whole world belongs to

Christ and He must thus be preached to the whole world;

(2)that the theology of mission makes valid use of these

eschatological and geographical factors only when it has

completely detached itselffrom schemes such as East-West,

white-coloured, etc. The only distinction which is relevant

"to the uttermost parts of the earth" is whether one has

heard of Christ or not. If not, then there is a concern for

mission, whether far off or near. In the Bible, "far off"

and "near" are much more heilsgeschichtlich than geograph-

ical distinctions ! (Eph. 2: 13), confined by the historical

place of Israel and Jerusalem (Acts i: 8).20

B. The next question is how are we really to think of

the younger Churches in Asia and Africa as the "utter-

most parts of the earth". I think, therefore, it is best toconfine the term "ends of the earth" to its Biblical value(and not to conceive of it too strictly in geographicalterms) : the world, indeed the whole world to the veryfarthest corners. For Jesus' disciples, Europe belonged tothe "uttermost parts ofthe earth", and at that time it did,too! And this "uttermost" reached no farther than the

western coasts of the Mediterranean Sea.Therefore, it seems to me illegitimate theologically to

found mission as "foreign mission" on a correlation between the "end of days" and the "ends of the earth", unless the latter is purged ofits non-Biblical "Western" significance. It is a boundary notion which indicates that

Christ's dominion knows no geographical boundarieseither. In other words, the missionary commission is fromthe very beginning an ecumenical commission, a commission which concerns the whole inhabited world. Thus the

criterion is simply: that one must have heard of Christ in

order to be able to believe in Him. Thus He must bepreached everywhere, and to that end the messengers of

the gospel must be sent (Rom. 10: II-15).We may therefore summarize by remarking: (1) that

the Biblical eschatology certainly has a geographicalcomponent, to the extent that the whole world belongs to

Christ and He must thus be preached to the whole world;(2) that the theology of mission makes valid use of theseeschatological and geographical factors on(y when it hascompletely detached itselffrom schemes such as East-West,white-coloured, etc. The only distinction which is relevant"to the uttermost parts of the earth" is whether one hasheard of Christ or not. If not, then there is a concern for

mission, whether far off or near. In the Bible, "far off"

and "near" are much more heilsgeschichtlich than geographical distinctions! (Eph. 2: 13), confined by the historicalplace of Israel and Jerusalem (Acts x: 8).zo

B. The next question is how are we really to think of

112



mission: as a theological necessity or as a historical con-

tingency?

To begin with the latter alternative: the missionary

work of the Western Churches

during

the last three cen-

turies obviously cannot be considered apart from the

historical constellation. So much has been written about

this that we need not say a word about it here. But it is

not right to speak ofhistorical contingency. History is any-

thing but contingent. "The whole idea of history takes its

rise from Christian theology, from the gospel and its pro-

clamation, from God's revelation in Israel and in Jesus

Christ. Revelation has made existence historical."21 For in

the historical activity of mission by Western Christendom

the God of history has had a hand, and the whole signifi-

cance of the so-called Vasco da Gama period (from a

heilsgeschichtlich point of view) could have lain in the fact

that the name of Christ was declared among the manynations which had not known Him theretofore. One must

not underrate the significance of this: the "oecumene" of

the twentieth century is inconceivable without the missions

of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. For this

reason one can be both ashamed and surprised that only

a very small proportion of the Christian Church in the

West has shouldered the burden of missions. It is my con-

viction that the Church has been manifested more clearly

in the much-defamed groups of "friends of mission" than

in the "official Church", which at best accepted a bene-

volently neutral attitude toward mission (at least on the

European continent but was it really so much better in

the Anglo-Saxon lands?).

The "colonial period" in world history has also been the

period of the proclamation of the gospel, and although

this proclamation has suffered under the "colonial infec-

tion", and has even degenerated here and there under it,

nevertheless, the gospel is no longer to be thought of

apart from the lands which were once colonized: the name

of Christ has been named, His Church established, and the

H 113

mission: as a theological necessity or as a historical contingency?

To begin with the latter alternative: the missionarywork of the Western Churches during the last three centuries obviously cannot be considered apart from the

historical constellation. So much has been written aboutthis that we need not say a word about it here. But it isnot right to speak ofhistorical contingency. History is anything but contingent. "The whole idea of history takes itsrise from Christian theology, from the gospel and its proclamation, from God's revelation in Israel and in Jesus

Christ. Revelation has made existence historical."21 For in

the historical activity of mission by Western Christendomthe God of history has had a hand, and the whole significance of the so-called Vasco da Gama period (from aheilsgeschichtlich point of view) could have lain in the factthat the name of Christ was declared among the manynations which had not known Him theretofore. One must

not underrate the significance of this: the "oecumene" of

the twentieth century is inconceivable without the missionsof the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. For thisreason one can be both ashamed and surprised that onlya very small proportion of the Christian Church in the

West has shouldered the burden of missions. It is my conviction that the Church has been manifested more clearly

in the much-defamed groups of "friends of mission" thanin the "offiCial Church", which at best accepted a benevolently neutral attitude toward mission (at least on the

European continent-but was it really so much better in

the Anglo-Saxon lands?).The "colonial period" in world history has also been the

period of the proclamation of the gospel, and although

this proclamation has suffered under the "colonial infection", and has even degenerated here and there under it,nevertheless, the gospel is no longer to be thought of

apart from the lands which were once colonized: the nameof Christ has been named, His Church established, and the

H II3



Kingdom of God is at hand in the lands which were

formerly "far off". That this could have happened in the

midst of the aloofness of the greater portion of Christen-

dom is one more indication that the

proclamation

of the

gospel among the nations is not a human but a divine act,

a work ofthe exalted Christ and His Spirit. Therefore "the

West" has no reason to boast about what has arisen in "the

East", but "East and West" shall both "sing of the ways

ofthe Lord, for great is the glory ofthe Lord" (Ps. 138: 5).

Furthermore, it seems to me of the greatest possible

significance, from the heilsgeschichtlich point of view, that

the Church across the world is now learning anew to

understand that Jesus Christ is the hope of the world, and

thereforethe meaning ofhistory, the Alpha and the Omega.

The proclamation of the gospel must therefore make pro-

gress even if the pattern of present-day mission work be

completely forgotten. It is gradually becoming clear that

the pattern which has been followed up to now (one-way

traffic in missions, spiritual and financial dependence of

the younger Churches, and the like) is old, obsolete, and

thus about to disappear (cf. Whitby-Willingen-Ghana) .

The sooner we are ready to follow the God of history, the

more clearly will He show us the image of future mission-

ary activity of His whole people over the whole earth. It

appears to me that when expressions are used such as

"partnership in obedience" and "mission in unity", these

coming relationships are still only very vaguely indicated.

Did not Paul see more when he (Eph. 3: 18, 19) saw the

unity ofthe Church in the joyful expectation ofthe fullness

of God, which can be achieved only together with all the

saints? The progress ofthe proclamation ofthe gospel over

the whole world by the whole Church has this deep impulse :

the love of Christ is so great, so wide, so long, so high, so

deep, and it reaches so far above all knowledge, that it can

be conceived only "together with all the saints". The all-

embracing love of Christ demands a "comprehensive

approach".

114

Kingdom of God is at hand in the lands which wereformerly "far off". That this could have happened in the

midst of the aloofness of the greater portion of Christendom is one more indication that the proclamation of the

gospel among the nations is not a human but a divine act,a work of the exalted Christ and His Spirit. Therefore "the

West" has no reason to boast about what has arisen in "the

East", but "East and West" shall both "sing of the waysof the Lord, for great is the glory of the Lord" (Ps. I 38: 5).

Furthermore, it seems to me of the greatest possiblesignificance, from the heilsgeschichtlich point of view, that

the Church across the world is now learning anew tounderstand that Jesus Christ is the hope of the world, and

therefore the meaning ofhistory, the Alpha and the Omega.The proclamation of the gospel must therefore make progress even if the pattern of present-day mission work becompletely forgotten. It is gradually becoming clear that

the pattern which has been followed up to now (one-way

traffic in missions, spiritual and financial dependence of

the younger Churches, and the like) is old, obsolete, and

thus about to disappear (cf. Whitby-Willingen-Ghana).

The. sooner we are ready to follow the God of history, the

more clearly will He show us the image of future missionary activity of His whole people over the whole earth. It

appears to me that when expressions are used such as

"partnership in obedience" and "mission in unity", thesecoming relationships are still only very vaguely indicated.Did not Paul see more when he (Eph. 3: 18, 19) saw the

unity of the Church in the joyful expectation of the fullnessof God, which can be achieved only together with all the

saints? The progress of the proclamation of the gospel overthe whole world by the whole Church has this deep impulse:

the love of Christ is so great, so wide, so long, so high, sodeep, and it reaches so far above all knowledge, that it can

be conceived only "together with all the saints". The allembracing love of Christ demands a "comprehensiveapproach".



In summary we would formulate the answer to the

question we have posed, as follows: Missions in the last

three centuries have been a theological necessity, because

the proclamation of the

gospel

in the world is

always

so.

Therefore it was not a historical contingency but rather a

heilsgeschichtlich progression of the word and work of God

on earth. The theological necessity of the proclamation

remains the same, but theheilsgeschichtlich hour has become

another hour. And if we are not to weaken all too greatly

the eschatological character of the time of the expectation

of the fullness, we must also dare to say that the salvation

of the world is nearer to us now than in the generations

which were before us !

C. The third question is that concerning the specific

significance ofthe preaching of the gospel in foreign lands.

We begin once more with a word from Walter Freytag:

Because Christian proclamation witnesses not only to the

Kingdomwhich has

come, butalso to the

Kingdom whichis coining, foreign mission has abiding right amongst the

task of proclamation in the space and range of our own

Church. The Kingdom of God concerns the whole, and the

view of the end embraces the whole world. The congregation

which waits for the Lord cannot keep its nature if it lets

itself be inclosed within the space of one people and does

not participate in work and prayer in the proclamation

among all nations.22

Alongside this passage we may cite a statement from the

Evanston committee for the main theme of the second

Assembly of the W.G.C.:

How necessary it is, then, that the Church's obedience to

the gospel should also involve a determination on the part

of the Church in

every countryto take this

gospel

to other

lands. There are frontiers which the gospel must cross within

each land, areas oflife which must be brought into subjection

to the mind of Christ. But it is of special significance when

the gospel crosses geographical frontiers, for it is when a

Church takes the gospel to another people and another land

1*5

In summary we would formulate the answer to the

question we have posed, as follows: Missions in the last

three centuries have been a theological necessity, because

the proclamation of the gospel in the world is always so.

Therefore it was not a historical contingency but rather a

heilsgeschichtlich progression of the word and work of God

on earth. The theological necessity of the proclamation

remains the same, but the heilsgeschichtlich hour has become

another hour. And if we are not to weaken all too greatly

the eschatological character of the time of the expectation

of the fullness, we must also dare to say that the salvation

of the world is nearer to us now than in the generationswhich were before us!

C. The third question is that concerning the specific

significance of the preaching of the gospel in foreign lands.We begin once more with a word from Walter Freytag:

Because Christian proclamation witnesses not only to the

Kingdom which has come, but also to the Kingdom whichis coming, foreign mission has abiding right amongst thetask of proclamation in the space and range of our ownChurch. The Kingdom of God concerns the whole, and theview of the end embraces the whole world. The congregationwhich waits for the Lord cannot keep its nature if it letsitself be inclosed within the space of one people and doesnot participate in work and prayer in the proclamation

among all nations.22Alongside this passage we may cite a statement from the

Evanston committee for the main theme of the second

Assembly of the W.C.C.:

How necessary it is, then, that the Church's obedience tothe gospel should also involve a determination on the part

of the Church in every country to take this gospel to otherlands. There are frontiers which the gospel must cross withineach land, areas oflife which must be brought into subjectionto the mind of Christ. But it is of special significance whenthe gospel crosses geographical frontiers, for it is when aChurch takes the gospel to another people and another land

II5



that it bears its witness to the fact that the new age has

dawned for all the world.23

In the third place we refer to a statement by Max

Warren, who sees the significance offoreign missions, par-

ticularly in the healing work of the gospel in

a world deeply riven by the divisions of class and race, of

nation and ideology: No Church can afford to be without

the inspiration of a foreigner's obedience to the missionary

imperative, just as no Church can itself be fully obedient to

that imperative without being committed to a foreign

mission.24

A. A. van Ruler typifiesthe special place of mission in

this way: it has the intentional and positive going ofpeople

to people and of continent to continent. . . . Mission must

be seen as the proclamation ofthe Kingdom ofGod as the

Kingdom of Christ to each new people and in each new

time. Thus time becomes historically understood from its

eschaton: the Kingdom of God.25

Karl Earth describes mission as follows :

"Mission", understood now in the narrower which is,

however, the real, original sense of the word, means

"sending", a sending out into the nations for the purpose of

testifying to the gospel, that represents the root of existence

and at the same time also the root of the whole task of the

people of Christ. In the "Mission" the Church breaks out,

sets out on its road (poreuthentes Matt. 28: 19), and takes

the step which is necessary to it in the very depths of its

being, the step beyond its own self and also beyond its own

environment (which from the Christian point of view raises

so many problems) out into that humanity which is en-

trapped in so many false, wilful and powerless beliefs, and

boundto

so manyfalse

gods (false, because they simplyreflect mankind's own glory and misery) of both older and

newer invention and authority that world ofmen who are

still strangers to the word of God concerning His bond of

mercy which also includes them, the word which in Jesus

Christ was sent to them too. Therefore this word must first

116

that l.t bears its w!tness to the fact that the new age has

dawned for all the world.23

In the third place we refer to a statement by Max

Warren, who sees the significance of foreign missions, particularly in the healing work of the gospel in

a world deeply riven by the divisions of class and race, of

nation and ideology: No Church can afford to be withoutthe inspiration of a foreigner's obedience to the missionaryimperative, just as no Church can itself be fully obedient tothat imperative without being committed to a foreign

mission. 24

A. A. van Ruler typifies the special place of mission in

this way: it has the intentional and positive going of people

to people and of continent to continent. . . . Mission must

be seen as the proclamation of the Kingdom of God as the

Kingdom of Christ to each new people and in each new

time. Thus time becomes historically understood from its

eschaton: the Kingdom of God.25

Karl Barth describes mission as follows:

"Mission", understood now in the narrower-which is,however, the real, original-sense of the word, means"sending", a sending out into the nations for the purpose of

testifying to the gospel, that represents the root of existenceand at the same time also the root of the whole task of the

people of Christ. In the "Mission" the Church breaks out,sets out on its road (poreuthentes-Matt. 28: 19), and takesthe step which is necessary to it in the very depths of itsbeing, the step beyond its own self and also beyond its ownenvironment (which from the Christian point of view raisesso many problems) out into that humanity which is en-trapped in so many false, wilful and powerless beliefs, and

bound toso

many false gods (false, because they simplyreflect mankind's own glory and misery) of both older and

newer invention and authority-that world ofmen who arestill strangers to the word of God concerning His bond of

mercy which also includes them, the word which in JesusChrist was sent to them too. Therefore this word must first

II6



be carried to man as a message new to him. The call which

constitutes the community is precisely the command to

carry this message to the world of men, to the nations, to

the heathen. In that it obeys this command, the communityis undertaking "mission to the heathen". 26

Finally let me quote the statement of Paul S. Minear:

The unity of the Church can be seen as embodied in the

activity of glorifying God with one voice (Rom. 15: 6) and

the mission ofthe Church can be described as the method bywhich men, through enabling others to glorify God for His

mercy (Rom. 15: 9), participate in the multiplication of

thanksgiving to the glory of God (2 Cor. 4: is).27

We have intentionally chosen definitions and formula-

tions of the special nature of mission which have been

given in the last few decades, and we have placed con-

tinental European, British, and American witnesses side

by side.

Common to all is the linking ofmission and eschatology.

Here we could speak of a communis opinio.It is remark-

able that only Freytag and Barth exhibit this eschato-

logical feature in dark "kulturcritisch"(culture-critical)

colours, while the others strike only the white keys. This

is undoubtedly connected with the fact that for Freytag

(and to a lesser degree also Barth) the element of expecta-

tion is dominant, while the others give more weight to the

element offulfilment. The distinction emerges most clearly

between the formulation of Freytag and the Evanston

statement; the eschatological accent seems to me weakest

in Minear's statement. But we must take note of the fact

that only Minear calls attention in his article to a feature

which has thus far been greatly neglected, as regards the

foundation and motivation of mission.28

To answer the question which concerns us at the

moment, however, it is important that everyone should

recognize the characteristic of mission to lie in going out

to other nations (Freytag, Evanston report, Warren, van

117

be carried to man as a message new to him. The call whichconstitutes the community is precisely the command tocarry this message to the world of men, to the nations, tothe heathen. In that it obeys this command, the community

is undertaking "mission to the heathen". 26

Finally let me quote the statement of Paul S. Minear:

The unity of the Church can be seen as embodied in theactivity of glorifYing God with one voice (Rom. 15: 6) andthe mission of the Church can be described as the method bywhich men, through enabling others to glorify God for His

mercy (Rom. 15: g), participate in the multiplication ofthanksgiving to the glory of God (2 Cor. 4: 15)Y

We have intentionally chosen definitions and formulations of the special nature of mission which have beengiven in the last few decades, and we have placed continental European, British, and American witnesses sideby side.

Common to all is the linking ofmission and eschatology.Here we could speak of a communis opinio. It is remarkable that only Freytag and Barth exhibit this eschatological feature in dark "kulturcritisch" (culture-critical)colours, while the others strike only the white keys. Thisis undoubtedly connected with the fact that for Freytag(and to a lesser degree also Barth) the element of expecta

tion is dominant, while the others give more weight to theelement ofjulfilment. The distinction emerges most clearlybetween the formulation of Freytag and the Evanstonstatement; the eschatological accent seems to me weakestin Minear's statement. But we must take note of the factthat only Minear calls attention in his article to a featurewhich has thus far been greatly neglected, as regards the

foundation and motivation ofmission. 28To answer the question which concerns us at the

moment, however, it is important that everyone shouldrecognize the characteristic of mission to lie in going out

to other nations (Freytag, Evanston report, Warren, van

II7



Ruler), to other men who do not know God (Earth,

Minear). Ifwe are to understand the idea of "nations" in

the purely Biblical sense, that is, in contrast with Israel,

exclusively

in the

meaning

of "men who do not know

God", then we are no farther along toward an answer to

the special question with which we are now dealing. The

word "nations" really has, however, a secondary meaning,

of "inhabitants ofother countries". The accent falls on the

geographical area as a typifying and even a constitutive

element of mission. Furthermore, Freytag, Earth, and van

Ruler obviously mean to make a distinction between the

proclamation of the gospel to the de-Christianized en-

vironment and to those in the non-Christianized world.29

It seems to me that Freytag has made a decisive observa-

tion: "the congregation which waits for its Lord cannot

keep its nature ... if it lets itself be enclosed within the

space of one people ... if it does not participate in the

proclamation among all nations" Christ's dominion over the

world presses to a proclamation across all boundaries, be-

cause there are no boundaries for those who confess Christ

as the Lord of the world and as the Hope of the world. Is

there not something of an ideological shifting of emphases

whenever the ethnic-geographical factors are brought to the

forefront, or sometimes even substituted in place of the

Biblical message of the intensive and extensive universality

ofsalvation ? Unconsciously and unintentionally, then, the

old contrasts like East-West, white-coloured, primitive-

developed, etc., begin to take on a greater role than they

have in the Biblical witness. The geographical factor makes

sense only as a sign ofthe recognition ofJesus Christ as the

Saviour of the world.

The Evanston statement says that when the Church

brings the joyous message to another land, she bears wit-

ness to the fact that the new age has dawned for the whole

world. In the midst of the boundaries between groups,

nations, and races, and over against the various powers, to

witness to God, who has put everything under the feet of

118

Ruler), to other men who do not know God (Barth,Minear). Ifwe are to understand the idea of"nations" in

the purely Biblical sense, that is, in contrast with Israel,exclusively in the meaning of "men who do not knowGod", then we are no farther along toward an answer tothe special question with which we are now dealing. The

word "nations" really has, however, a secondary meaning,of"inhabitants ofother countries". The accent falls on the

geographical area as a typifying and even a constitutiveelement of mission. Furthermore, Freytag, Barth, and van

Ruler obviously mean to make a distinction between the

proclamation of the gospel to the de-Christianized environment and to those in the non-Christianized world. 29

It seems to me that Freytag has made a decisive observation: "the congregation which waits for its Lord cannotkeep its nature ... if it lets itself be enclosed within the

space of one people ... if it does not participate in the

proclamation among all nations." Christ's dominion over the

world presses to a proclamation across all boundaries, because there are no boundaries for those who confess Christas the Lord of the world and as the Hope of the world. Is

there not something of an ideological shifting of emphaseswhenever the ethnic-geographical factors are brought to the

forefront, or sometimes even substituted in place of the

Biblical message of the intensive and extensive universality

ofsalvation? Unconsciously and unintentionally, then, the

old contrasts like East-West, white-coloured, primitivedeveloped, etc., begin to take on a greater role than theyhave in the Biblical witness. The geographical factor makessense only as a sign of the recognition ofJesus Christ as the

Saviour of the world.

The Evanston statement says that when the Church

brings the joyous message to another land, she bears witness to the fact that the new age has dawned for the whole

world. In the midst of the boundaries between groups,nations, and races, and over against the various powers, towitness to God, who has put everything under the feet of

II8



Christ (Eph. i: 22), means not only to have a share in

being drawn into the struggle for the world, but also in the

triumph of Christ. The knowledge of the power of His

resurrection, as well as the

fellowship

in Hissuffering,

is

guaranteed to theapostolic Church (Phil. 3: 10). That is

why the knowledge of Christ as Saviour ofthe world is the

condition of the missionary activity which recognizes the

whole world as "my parish". The reality ofJesus Christ as

Saviour and Hope of the world is not only a matter of

faith, it is also a matter of seeing that Christ builds His

community as a community among all nations. Therefore

the Church which is faithful to her Lord (in witness, ser-

vice, and thanksgiving) will search the horizons to con-

tinue to discover new signs of the Kingdom of God in the

midst of this world.

Whoever has seen Christ cannot do other than see the

world, and whoever sees the world also sees the map of the

world. This is equally valid for both older and younger

Churches. The Church is a witness of Christ in the world,

or else she is not an obedient Church of Christ. She is the

light of the world, the salt of the earth (Matt. 5: 14, 13).

We shall, however, have to detach ourselves, in so far as

we are concerned with the foundation and motivation of

mission, from the typical eighteenth- and nineteenth-

century associations which expressions like "all nations"

and the "ends of the earth" called forth. Only then and

thus is the geographical component a legitimate component

for mission.

3. Church and Mission

Particularly in the last ten years there has been much

discussion in missionary circles of "Church and mission".

This discussion need not detain us here since it has been

described elsewhere.30 But we shall have to discuss the

question of the extent to which the Biblical investigation

gives us the occasion and the right to contrast Church and

mission. Thus far in the discussion we have been more led

119

Christ (Eph. I: 22), means not only to have a share in

being drawn into the struggle for the world, but also in the

triumph of Christ. The knowledge of the power of Hisresurrection, as well as the fellowship in His suffering, isguaranteed to the apostolic Church (Phil. 3: IO). That iswhy the knowledge of Christ as Saviour of the world is the

condition of the missionary activity which recognizes the

whole world as "my parish". The reality ofJesus Christ asSaviour and Hope of the world is not only a matter of

faith, it is also a matter of seeing that Christ builds Hiscommunity as a community among all nations. Thereforethe Church which is faithful to her Lord (in witness, service, and thanksgiving) will search the horizons to continue to discover new signs of the Kingdom of God in themidst of this world.

Whoever has seen Christ cannot do other than see the

world, and whoever sees the world also sees the map of theworld. This is equally valid for both older and younger

Churches. The Church is a witness of Christ in the world,or else she is not an obedient Church of Christ. She is the

light of the world, the salt of the earth (Matt. 5: 14, 13).We shall, however, have to detach ourselves, in so far as

we are concerned with the foundation and motivation of

mission, from the typical eighteenth- and nineteenthcentury associations which expressions like "all nations"

and the "ends of the earth" called forth. Only then andthus is the geographical component a legitimate componentfor mission.

3· Church and Mission

Particularly in the last ten years there has been muchdiscussion in missionary circles of "Church and mission".

This discussion need not detain us here since i t has beendescribed elsewhere.30 But we shall have to discuss the

question of the extent to which the Biblical investigationgives us the occasion and the right to contrast Church and

mission. Thus far in the discussion we have been more ledug



by the historical growth of the state of affairs than by the

light of the gospel. But a remarkable development has

taken place in Biblical theology in the last few decades

which has led to the rediscovery of the Church as a com-

munity ofthe Kingdom, as a witnessing and serving com-

munity in and for the world. Outside the existing mis-

sionary movement, the conviction that the Church is a

missionary Church or it is no Church is accepted by the

great majority. The centuries-old ecclesiology which has

remained so static is now gradually being replaced by a

moredynamic

one which is both eschatological and mis-

sionary.

Is there, in the light of the present state of theology of

the Old and New Testament, any occasion to speak of a

separate "theology of mission" ? One can maintain this, it

seems to me, only ifone misunderstands the Church as well

as mission. It appears to me that the studies mentioned in

Chapter i regarding election as election for service have

opened the way to a new insight into the being and calling

ofthe Church. The Church which has been chosen out of

the world is chosen for this end that she performs for the

world the service of giving witness to the Kingdom of

God which has come and is coming in Jesus Christ. If

theology is really theo-logiaa speaking about God, then

she cannot do otherwise than speak ofthe God who "is not

a statue but an overflowing fountain of good".31 The

triune God who is involved with the world in thesending

of the prophets, ofJesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit,

also sends the apostles and the Church.32I think that it

would be a "back-translation" into old and theologically

abandoned categories, if one were to vindicate the "theo

logy of mission" as a separate field of theology. "Segrega-

tion" is always a precarious affair in a world which has

been brought by the saving activity of God "under one

Head".

It is no coincidence that in the last thirty years there has

been a recognition that the unity of the ecumenical and

120

by the historical growth of the state of affairs than by the

light of the gospel. But a remarkable development hastaken place in Biblical theology in the last few decadeswhich has led to the rediscovery of the Church as a community of the Kingdom, as a witnessing and serving community in and for the world. Outside the existing missionary movement, the conviction that the Church is amissionary Church or it is no Church is accepted by the

great majority. The centuries-old ecclesiology which hasremained so static is now gradually being replaced by amore dynamic one which is both eschatological and missionary.

Is there, in the light of the present state of theology of

the Old and New Testament, any occasion to speak of aseparate "theology ofmission" ? One can maintain this, it

seems to me, on!J! ifone misunderstands the Church as wellas mission. It appears to me that the studies mentioned inChapter I regarding election as election for service have

opened the way to a new insight into the being and callingof the Church. The Church which has been chosen out of

the world is chosen for this end-that she performs for the

world the service of giving witness to the Kingdom of

God which has come and is coining in Jesus Christ. If

theology is really theo-logia-a speaking about God, then

she cannot do otherwise than speak of he God who "is not

a statue but an overflowing fountain of good".31 The

triune God who is involved with the world in the sending

of the prophets, ofJesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit,also sends the apostles and the Church.32 I think that it

would be a "back-translation" into old and theologicallyabandoned categories, if one were to vindicate the "theo

logy ofinission" as a separate field of theology. "Segrega

tion" is always a precarious affair in a world which hasbeen brought by the saving activity of God "under oneHead".

It is no coincidence that in the last thirty years there hasbeen a recognition that the unity of the ecumenical and

J20



the missionary movements is a unity theologicallyjustified

and commanded. "To fill the world with the message of

Christ, is a task beyond the power ofindividual Churches.

Andvictory

and defeat of the individual Churches in this

service is the victory of us all and the defeat of us all."38

There is a remarkable coincidence between theological

development and historical occurrences. They work on

each other and they strengthen each other.

The unity between Church and mission, the unity, that

is, between mission as a service of the Church and the

Church as sent into the world, does not mean that there is

no longer room for a basic reflection regarding the condi-

tions and manner and extent of the service of the Church to

the world. But every separate "theology of mission" will

make acute the old danger of the separation of things

which God has joined together in His Word. This can be

nothing but a source of difficulties and problems.34

When we see the unity of "Church and mission" in

Biblical light, then I think the misunderstanding that

there are two stages, first the stage of mission, and after

that the stage ofthe Church, will disappear. I remember a

slogan from Dutch student circles: "Mission out, the

world-church in". One must allow students such shouts,

but at the same time we must do our utmost to liberate

them from this ideological distortion of "mission" as well

as of the "world-church".

There is no other Church than the Church sent into the

world, and there is no other mission than that of the

Church of Christ. The consequence for theology, I think,

is that a theological reflection of missionary service is

possible and extremely necessary, but not a "theology of

missions".

We must now return to an expression used by Bishop

Stephen Neill, quoted earlier in this chapter, which

has almost become a slogan in the discussion of a

"theology ofmissions" "Ifeverythingis mission, nothing,

is mission".

121

the missionary movements is a unity theologically justifiedand commanded. "To fill the world with the message of

Christ, is a task beyond the power of individual Churches.And victory and defeat of the individual Churches in thisservice is the victory of us all and the defeat of us all."33

There is a remarkable coincidence between theologicaldevelopment and historical occurrences. They work on

each other and they strengthen each other.

The unity between Church and mission, the unity, that

is, between mission as a service of the Church and the

Church as sent into the world, does not mean that there isno longer room for a basic reflection regarding the condi-

tions and manner and extent of the service of the Church tothe world. But every separate "theology of mission" willmake acute the old danger of the separation of thingswhich God has joined together in His Word. This can be

nothing but a source of difficulties and problems.34

When we see the unity of "Church and mission" in

Biblical light, then I think the misunderstanding that

there are two stages, first the stage of mission, and afterthat the stage of the Church, will disappear. I remember aslogan from Dutch student circles: "Mission out, theworld-church in". One must allow students such shouts,but at the same time we must do our utmost to liberatethem from this ideological distortion of "mission" as well

as of the "world-church".There is no other Church than the Church sent into the

world, and there is no other mission than that of theChurch of Christ. The consequence for theology, I think,is that a theological reflection of missionary service is

possible and extremely necessary, but not a "theology of

missions".

We must now return to an expression used by BishopStephen Neill, quoted earlier in this chapter, whichhas almost become a slogan in the discussion of a"theology ofmissions"-"Ifeverything is mission, nothing,is mission'' .

I2 I



We should not pass too lightly over the phrase "ifevery-

thing is mission". The conviction is indeed gaining ground

that everything that the community of Christ does on

earth should be considered in the light of its "mission".

This conviction is far from being expressed in the practical

attitude and acts of the Church. Many Churches are

characterized by "nothing is mission5 '

rather than by

"everything is mission".

The one-sidedness with which the eschatological func-

tion of missionary work as "foreign mission(s)" has been

emphasized

in the missionary thinking of the past few

decennia can, however, help the Church in finding itself

again as Church-in-the-world and Church-for-the-world,

in its fresh encounter with the world which the Church

has been called upon to face everywhere.

Ifone wants to maintain a specifically theological mean-

ing of the term mission as "foreign mission(s)", its signifi-

cance is, in my opinion, that it keeps calling the Church

to think over its essential nature as a community sent forth

into the world. Seen in that light missionary work is not

just one of its activities, but the criterionfor all its activities.

Missionary work reflects in a unique way, particularly in

its passing of boundaries in space andspirit,

the very

essence of the Church as a Church. It returns (as it were)

to its origin, and is confronted with its basis and its justi-

fication by being confronted with its missionary calling.

It is exactly by going outside itself that the Church is

itself and comes to itself.

This complete reflection of the life of the Church in its

missionary work will keep it from becoming introspective

and introverted, from becoming narrow-minded and small-

minded, forit

bringsit

into contact with the completelife

of the world.35

"Whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or

life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are

yours; and ye are Christ's; and Christ is God's" (iCor.

122

We should not pass too lightly over the phrase "ifeverything is mission". The conviction is indeed gaining groundthat everything that the community of Christ does on

earth should be considered in the light of its "mission".This conviction is far from being expressed in the practicalattitude and acts of the Church. Many Churches are

characterized by "nothing is mission" rather than by

"everything is mission".The one-sidedness with which the eschatological func

tion of missionary work as "foreign mission(s)" has beenemphasized in the missionary thinking of the past fewdecennia can, however, help the Church in finding itselfagain as Church-in-the-world and Church-for-the-world,in its fresh encounter with the world which the Church

has been called upon to face everywhere.I fone wants to maintain a specifically theological mean

ing of the term mission as "foreign mission(s)", its significance is, in my opinion, that i t keeps calling the Church

to think over its essential nature as a community sent forthinto the world. Seen in that light missionary work is not

just one of its activities, but the criterion/or all its activities.

Missionary work reflects in a unique way, particularly in

its passing of boundaries in space and spirit, the veryessence of the Church as a Church. It returns (as it were)to its origin, and is confronted with its basis and its justi

fication by being confronted with its missionary calling.I t is exactly by going outside itself that the Church is

itself and comes to itself.

This complete reflection of the life of the Church in itsmissionary work will keep it from becoming introspectiveand introverted, from becoming narrow-minded and small

minded, for it brings it into contact with the complete lifeof the world.35

"Whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or

life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are

yours; and ye are Christ's; and Christ is God's" (1 Cor.

122



3: 22, 23). These words express the privilege and the

right, thecalling and the joy of the Church as Christ's

servant. It is at one and the same time the secret of its

being sent forthinto the world and ofits

being independentof "old and new" situations in missionary work.

The days when missionary work was the Cinderella of

the Church seem to be past. When, in 1950, the Reformed

Church of the Netherlands took over the work of the

various missionary societies that had lived and worked

independent of the official Church since 1800, the then

managing director ofmissions, Dr. K. J. Brouwer, used the

following figure of speech. Once missionary work, though

the legitimate child of the Church, was abandoned bythe Church. Now the one-time foundling is again adopted

as its legitimate and beloved child.

He who studies the history ofthe missionary work ofthe

past few centuries cannot escape the impression that practi-

cally everywhere in Europe and America missionary work

has been treated more as a foundling than as a legitimate

child. It is not superfluous to ask whether in again being

accepted by the official Church its strangeness has been

overcome.

Could it not be that this strangeness is inherent in mis-

sionary work, just because it, and it in particular, repre-

sents the Church in its real and essential shape as the

Church which has been sent forth into the world? Christ's

Church is in this world as a sign of and a summons to the

world to come, a phenomenon which is so impossible that it

is always in danger of losing its own nature. It has been

said of Jesus Christ that He is "a sign which shall be

spoken against" (Luke 2: 34). The Church of Christ,

which is simultaneously His body and His servant, shares

with Him that it is spoken against.

This contradiction does not come from outside only but

also from inside. It has been the great temptation for the

Church throughout all ages to conform to this world. If it

does, it becomes just another society, a "club for religious

123

3: 22, 23). These words express the privilege and the

right, the calling and the joy of the Church as Christ'sservant. It is at one and the same time the secret of itsbeing sent forth into the world and ofits being independentof "old and new" situations in missionary work.

The days when missionary work was the Cinderella of

the Church seem to be past. When, in rgso, the ReformedChurch of the Netherlands took over the work of the

various missionary societies that had lived and workedindependent of the official Church since r8oo, the thenmanaging director ofmissions, Dr. K.J. Brouwer, used the

following figure of speech. Once missionary work, thoughthe legitimate child of the Church, was abandoned by

the Church. Now the one-time foundling is again adoptedas its legitimate and beloved child.

He who studies the history of the missionary work of thepast few centuries cannot escape the impression that practically everywhere in Europe and America missionary work

has been treated more as a foundling than as a legitimatechild. It is not superfluous to ask whether in again being

accepted by the official Church its strangeness has beenovercome.

Could it not be that this strangeness is inherent in missionary work, just because it, and it in particular, represents the Church in its real and essential shape as the

Church which has been sent forth into the world? Christ'sChurch is in this world as a sign of and a summons to theworld to come, a phenomenon which is so impossible that it

is always in danger of losing its own nature. It has beensaid of Jesus Christ that He is "a sign which shall bespoken against" (Luke 2: 34). The Church of Christ,which is simultaneously His body and His servant, shares

with Him that it is spoken against.This contradiction does not come from outside only but

also from inside. It has been the great temptation for theChurch throughout all ages to conform to this world. If it

does, it becomes just another society, a "club for religious

123



folk-lore" (Hoekendijk) . During the past few centuries

missionary work has again and again fulfilled in the "old

Christian countries" the task of rebelling in a positive

sense against all institutional, denominational and reli-

gious rigidity and against the desire to conform to the

powers of this world. It will only be able to go on doing so

in future if it manages to withdraw itselffrom the suction

power of this conformity. The conservatism and rigidity

ofmany missionary corporations that were once alive and

mobile, the smell of colonialism which makes the atmo-

sphere ofmany old mission posts unbearable, are so many

proofs ofhow great the suction power of conformity is.

We must accept the facts as they are, and give up every

defensive attitude. The missions are in danger in the same

way as the Churches. We are always tempted to identify

our empirical, human and therefore imperfect realizations,

in this case the empirical Church, as it is, and the empirical

missions, as they are, with the Church we believe, and with

the Mission, which is commanded to us. What was in

former times a historic expression of true obedience, be-

comes then independent and looses itself from the nature of

obedience and hampers the new expression ofthat obedience

which is required from us today.36

Man who is "no longer a Christian" and man who is "not

yet a Christian", both belong to the world that needs the

gospel and for whom it is intended. That is why Churches

everywhere in the world can understand each other better

and better, why they should understand each other better

and better in the service of witnessing.

In this situation the apostleship of Paul, which is un-

usual and in a sense irregular as compared with the regular

apostleship of the twelve, who represent eschatological

Israel, can give us a new outlook (cf. Chapter 6, 3). The

great significanceof the gospel, which was to renew life

and the world, became clear to himjust because he was the

apostle ofthe Gentiles. It was mainly Paul's epistles to the

Gentile Christian communities that revealed the real

124

folk-lore" (Hoekendijk). During the past few centuriesmissionary work has again and again fulfilled in the "old

Christian countries" the task of rebelling in a positivesense against all institutional, denominational and religious rigidity and against the desire to conform to the

powers of this world. It will only be able to go on doing soin future if it manages to withdraw itselffrom the suctionpower of this conformity. The conservatism and rigidityof many missionary corporations that were once alive and

mobile, the smell of colonialism which makes the atmosphere of many old mission posts unbearable, are so many

proofs of how great the suction power of conformity is.

We must accept the facts as they are, and give up everydefensive attitude. The missions are in danger in the sameway as the Churches. We are always tempted to identifyour empirical, human and therefore imperfect realizations,in this case the empirical Church, as it is, and the empiricalmissions, as they are, with the Church we believe, and with

the Mission, which is commanded to us. What was informer times a historic expression of true obedience, becomes then independent and looses itself from the nature of

obedience and hampers the new expression of that obediencewhich is required from us today. ss

Man who is "no longer a Christian" and man who is "not

yet a Christian", both belong to the world that needs the

gospel and for whom it is intended. That is why Churcheseverywhere in the world can understand each other better

and better, why they should understand each other better

and better in the service of witnessing.In this situation the apostleship of Paul, which is un-

usual and in a sense irregular as compared with the regularapostleship of the twelve, who represent eschatological

Israel, can give us a new outlook (c£ Chapter 6, §3). Thegreat significance of the gospel, which was to renew lifeand the world, became clear to him just because he was the

apostle of the Gentiles. It was mainly Paul's epistles to the

Gentile Christian communities that revealed the real

124



nature of both the community of Christ and the world.

Humanly speaking the Christian Church would without

Paul have remained a Jewish sect. Is it too far-fetched to

assume that it is also because Paul'sapostleship

had

brought the whole world within their horizon that the

authors of the four Gospels (which were all written later

than Paul'sepistles!) had them culminate in the descrip-

tion of a task that encompasses the whole world ? Have

they not also come to a better understanding ofthe importof Jesus' words and work through the expansion of the

Church over all ofthe world that lay within their horizon,

the oecumene?

These are questions to which the answers lie far beyondthe scope of this study. There is no doubt, however, that

Paul's reflection of the gospel is the fruit of his missionary

activities(i Cor. 15: 10). The "irregular" apostle has done

more work than all the other apostles, even though he

does not give himself credit for it but ascribes it to "the

grace of God that was bestowed upon me". The ex-

centricity that is characteristic of Paul's apostleship has a

deep meaning also for the missionary task of the present.

Just as to Paul the light arose over the mystery ofthe salva-

tion of all humanity (Eph. 3 : 4-6) which had not been

known to previous generations, so the Church of today

will not be able to understand the "divine economy"

(Eph. 3: 9) in any other way, nor preach the mystery

(Eph. 3 : 9) in any other way than by its continued "pre-

paration of the gospel of peace" (Eph. 6: 15). Missionary

work is like a pair of sandals that have been given to the

Church in order that it shall set out on the road and keep

on going to make known the mystery ofthe gospel (Eph. 6 :

19). Only thus will this mystery be revealed more and

more to the Church itself. Serving among the Gentiles

enabled Paul to serve the Church; the Church lives mainly

on his missionary epistles!

Perhaps the missionary service of the Church will only

be given a more or less "irregular" place in future, and

125

nature of both the community of Christ and the world.Humanly speaking the Christian Church would withoutPaul have remained a jewish sect. Is it too far-fetched to

assume that it is also because Paul's apostleship had

brought the whole world within their horizon that the

authors of the four Gospels (which were all written laterthan Paul's epistles!) had them culminate in the description of a task that encompasses the whole world? Havethey not also come to a better understanding ofthe importof Jesus' words and work through the expansion of the

Church over all of the world that lay within their horizon,the oecumene?

These are questions to which the answers lie far beyondthe scope of this study. There is no doubt, however, that

Paul's reflection of the gospel is the fruit of his missionaryactivities ( r Cor. 15: ro). The "irregular" apostle has donemore work than all the other apostles, even though hedoes not give himself credit for it but ascribes it to "the

grace of God that was bestowed upon me". The excentricity that is characteristic of Paul's apostleship has adeep meaning also for the missionary task of the present.Just as to Paul the light arose over the mystery of he salvation of all humanity (Eph. 3 : 4-6) which had not beenknown to previous generations, so the Church of todaywill not be able to understand the "divine economy"

(Eph. 3: g) in any other way, nor preach the mystery(Eph. 3: g) in any other way than by its continued "preparation of the gospel of peace" (Eph. 6: 15). Missionarywork is like a pair of sandals that have been given to theChurch in order that it shall set out on the road and keep

on going to make known the mystery of the gospel (Eph. 6:

rg). Only thus will this mystery be revealed more and

more to the Church itself. Serving among the Gentilesenabled Paul to serve the Church; the Church lives mainlyon his missionary epistles!

Perhaps the missionary service of the Church will onlybe given a more or less "irregular" place in future, and

125



many may continue to regard the emphasis on the fact

that the Church was sentforth into the world as something

ex-centric, even as something incidental. Let missionary

work remain aware of its charismatic nature in an activity

and mobility that are as great as possible in order that

of missionary work, too, it can be said that "I laboured

more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace

of God which was with me" (iCor. 15: 10).

Let us not forget that the great prime mover of the

preaching of the gospel does not come from outside (the

"need of the world") and not from within either (the

"religious impulse") but from above, as a divine coercion

"woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel!" (i Cor. 9 :

16),

as a matter of life and death, not for the world, but

for the Church itself "And this I do for the gospel's sake,

that I might be partaker thereofwith you" (iCor. 9: 23).

Epilogue: The Miracle of the Community

Let us now in conclusion summarize the results of our

investigation. In order to remain faithful to the character

of this survey as a summary of the Biblical data regarding

the foundation and the motivation of mission, however,

we will not formulate a number of theses, but keep to the

word of the Bible itself.

In a somewhat more detailed exegesis ofthe well-known

passage i Pet. 2 : 9-10, we will, then, illustrate the purpose

of the argument in the previous paragraph, viz. that a

"theology ofmission" cannot be other than a "theology of

the Church" as the people of God called out of the world,

placed in the world, and sent to the world. This passage is

as follows : "But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood,

a holy nation, a people for God's own possession, that you

may declare the wonderful deeds of him who called youout of darkness into his marvellous light. Once you were

no people but now you are God's people; once you had

not received mercy but now you have received mercy."37

A. The first letter ofPeter is characterized by an eschat-

126

many may continue to regard the emphasis on the factthat the Church was sent forth into the world as somethingex-centric, even as something incidental. Let missionarywork remain aware of its charismatic nature in an activityand mobility that are as great as possible in order that

of missionary work, too, it can be said that "I labouredmore abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace

of God which was with me" (r Cor. 15: ro).Let us not forget that the great prime mover of the

preaching of the gospel does not come from outside (the"need of the world") and not from within either (the"religious impulse") but from above, as a divine coercion-"woe is unto me, if! preach not the gospel!" (I Cor. g:

I6), as a matter of life and death, not for the world, but

for the Church itself-"And this I do for the gospel's sake,that I might be partaker thereof with you" (I Cor. 9: 23).

Epilogue: The Miracle of the Community

Let us now in conclusion summarize the results of our

investigation. In order to remain faithful to the characterof this survey as a summary of the Biblical data regardingthe foundation and the motivation of mission, however,we will not formulate a number of theses, but keep to the

word of the Bible itsel£In a somewhat more detailed exegesis of the well-known

passage I Pet. 2: g-ro, we will, then, illustrate the purposeof the argument in the previous paragraph, viz. that a"theology of mission" cannot be other than a "theology of

the Church" as the people of God called out of the world,placed in the world, and sent to the world. This passage isas follows: "But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood,a holy nation, a people for God's own possession, that you

may declare the wonderful deeds of him who called youout of darkness into his marvellous light. Once you wereno people but now you are God's people; once you had

not received mercy but now you have received mercy." 37

A. The first letter of Peter is characterized by an eschat-

126



ological trait, and by a word usage which is closely con-

nected with that of the Old Testament. "There is no book

in the New Testament where the eschatology is more

closelyintegrated

with the

teachingof the document as a

whole." 38

Verses 9-10 form the climax and the closing ofthe peri-

cope 2 : i-i o.Jesus Christ is called the corner-stone by the

use ofan image borrowed from Isa. 28 : 16. Whoever builds

his faith on Him will not be put to shame, 2 : 6. But not

everyone believes that, besides being the corner-stone,

Jesus Christ is also the stone that will make men stumble

and the rock that will make them fall, 2 : 8. There is a

disobedience to the word on the part of many. We are

referring here to the people of Israel which Jesus Christ

has rejected, as well as to the Gentiles who have rejected

the gospel. The letter is in the first place directed to the

Gentile Christians "in the dispersion", i: i. Verses 9-10

proceed from the great contrast between those who reject

the gospel and the Church which has accepted it. The

description of the Church bears the character of a hymn.In this hymn of praise, man comes to his destiny, and

with him the whole creation(cf.

Rom. n : 25-26, 14: n,

15: 7-13). This description of the Church, however, does

not bear an impersonal, contemplative character. The

Church is not spoken of as an objective entity, but is

addressed as the community which believes in Jesus

Christ.

Can one, may one, really speak about the Church in any

other way than in a praising and glorifying address to the

Church herself? Butyou who are you?In four expressions it is stated who one is if he believes

in Christ. These expressions are all borrowed from the

Old Testament. In other words, they are designations

which were given to Israel from of old. But this means it

is clearly indicated that the community of Jesus Christ

participates in and may bear the names of Israel. Those

who believe inJesus Christ from Israel are the true Israel,

127

ological trait, and by a word usage which is closely connected with that of the Old Testament. "There is no bookin the New Testament where the eschatology is moreclosely integrated with the teaching of the document as awhole."38

Verses g-Io form the climax and the closing of the pericope 2 : I- I o. Jesus Christ is called the corner-stone by the

use ofan image borrowed from !sa. 28: 16. Whoever buildshis faith on Him will not be put to shame, 2 : 6. But not

everyone believes that, besides being the corner-stone,Jesus Christ is also the stone that will make men stumbleand the rock that will make them fall, 2 : 8. There is adisobedience to the word on the part of many. We arereferring here to the people of Israel which Jesus Christhas rejected, as well as to the Gentiles who have rejectedthe gospel. The letter is in the first place directed to theGentile Christians "in the dispersion", I: I . Verses g-10proceed from the great contrast between those who reject

the gospel and the Church which has accepted it. The

description of the Church bears the character of a hymn.In this hymn of praise, man comes to his destiny, and

with him the whole creation (cf. Rom. I I : 25-26, 14: I I ,

15: 7-I3). This description ofthe Church, however, doesnot bear an impersonal, contemplative character. The

Church is not spoken of as an objective entity, but is

addressed as the community which believes in JesusChrist.

Can one, may one, really speak about the Church in anyother way than in a praising and glorifying address to theChurch herself? Butyou-who are you?

In four expressions it is stated who one is if he believesin Christ. These expressions are all borrowed from the

Old Testament. In other words, they are designationswhich were given to Israel from of old. But this means it

is clearly indicated that the community of Jesus Christparticipates in and may bear the names of Israel. Thosewho believe in Jesus Christ from Israel-are the true Israel,

127



and those who come to Him from the Gentiles are incor-

porated into Israel.

The names of Israel, borrowed from Exod. 19: 5-6,

Isa.

43:

20,

61 : 6, make it clear once and for all that God's

plan for the world is not frustrated by the disobedience

of Israel, but that it is being fulfilled in the fact that the

Church is taking the place of Israel and receives the

honour of Israel. Only in Christ does Israel come to her

right; to put it even more strongly only in the community

of Christ do God's intentions for Israel become quite clear.

Togain

a full understanding of the significance and

range of the four designations of the community, we must

take account of the fact that they are most emphatically

and intentionally in afinal context: the Greek hopos (which

is stronger than the usual pos) must not be neglected or

weakened in any respect. Perhaps it can best be rendered

by the translation: in order that you thus, with the qualifica-

tions here stated^ may proclaim the great acts of Him who

has called you. In Christian usage the designations which

occur here have often been applied to the Church herself,

as if she had a valid right to these designations apart

from the purpose for which they have here been given.

In other words: only as a community which understands

the purpose for which it has received the lovely names of

Israel may it really appropriate these names. The "(in

order) that" in verse 9, is the hinge on which the door

turns that gives entrance to the treasures which lie piled

up in these names. "In the progress ofverse 9 there is talk

ofproclamation. In this way it becomes clear that all the

designations stated, as well as those implied in the hiera-

teuma (priesthood),are limited not only to the inner

Christian fellowship, as often happens in the common

Christian usage of the "general priesthood', but also that

they are to be considered as a service of witness (in the

sense of Isa. 61 : 6 cf. verse 9) for mankind."39

Only when we remember this directedness to the "ser-

vice ofwitness for mankind" is it possible for us to under-

128

and those who come to Him from the Gentiles are incorporated into Israel.

The names of Israel, borrowed from Exod. I 9 : 5-6,Isa. 43: 20, 61: 6, make it clear once and for all that God'splan for the world is not frustrated by the disobedienceof Israel, but that it is being fulfilled in the fact that the

Church is taking the place of Israel and receives the

honour of Israel. Only in Christ does Israel come to her

right; to put it even more strongly-only in the communityof Christ do God's intentions for Israel become quite clear.

To gain a full understanding of the significance and

range of the four designations of the community, we musttake account of the fact that they are most emphaticallyand intentionally in a final context: the Greek hopos (whichis stronger than the usual pos) must not be neglected or

weakened in any respect. Perhaps it can best be renderedby the translation: in order that you thus, with the qualifica-tions here stated, may proclaim the great acts of Him who

has called you. In Christian usage the designations whichoccur here have often been applied to the Church herself,as if she had a valid right to these designations apart

from the purpose for which they have here been given.In other words: only as a community which understandsthe purpose for which i t has received the lovely names of

Israel may it really appropriate these names. The "(in

order) that" in verse g, is the hinge on which the doorturns that gives entrance to the treasures which lie piledup in these names. "In the progress ofverse g there is talkofproclamation. In this way it becomes clear that all the

designations stated, as well as those implied in the hiera-teuma (priesthood), are limited not only to the inner

Christian fellowship, as often happens in the common

Christian usage of the 'general priesthood', but also thatthey are to be considered as a service of witness (in the

sense of Isa. 6r: 6-c£ verse g) for mankind."39

Only when we remember this directedness to the "service of witness for mankind" is it possible for us to under

~ ~ 8



stand what is characteristic of the community of Christ.

What does this mean except that the Church of JesusChrist has the

right, solely as a missionary Church, to eall

herself "Church" at all? She is

assaulting

the salvation of

God when she usurps these titles "for her own use59

.

B. Let us look more closely at the designations in the

light of the service of witness for mankind which we have

had in view.

"Tou are a chosen race" This expression has been bor-

rowed from Isa. 43 : 20, and is used to typify Christians in

the New Testament only here that is to say, the word

"race". The word (Greek: genos] here means "nation",

with the accent on origin. This origin lies in the world out

of which election has taken place. The miracle and the

riddle of election, which Israel has been neither able nor

willing to understand, still exists. Whoever is offended bythe election of Israel as one particular nation out of all

others will also be offended by the Church ofJesus Christ.

God does not undo the fact of election. Must not this

Israelite designation be a sign that God has always

remained the God of Israel ?

In the community of Christ as a chosen race, there now

emerges the intention of God's plan for Israel as an elec-

tion for service to the world : you are a chosen race, called

out of the world, in order to proclaim the great acts of

God in the world.

"Tou are a royal priesthood" The expression has been

borrowed from Exod. 19: 6, and says positively what

"chosen race" has said negatively: the Church of Christ

is chosen for a royal priesthood.40

The priesthood receives the major emphasis; it is more

closely defined by "royal". In Old Testament usage, cer-

tainly in the usage of Exod. 19: 6, the meaning of priest-

hood is not in the first place to indicate the service of

sacrifice, but the mediating ofdivine instruction and direc-

tives for living to the whole people. In this way the priest

stood in a certain sense over against the people, because he

i 129

stand what is characteristic of the community of Christ.What does this mean except that the Church of JesusChrist has the right, solely as a missionary Church, to eallherself "Church" at all? She is assaulting the salvation of

God when she usurps these titles "for her own use".B. Let us look more closely at the designations in the

light of the service of witness for mankind which we havehad in view.

"You are a chosen race." This expression has been bor-rowed from Isa. 43: 20, and is used to typify Christians in

the New Testament only here-that is to say, the word"race". The word (Greek: genos) here means "nation'',

with the accent on origin. This origin lies in the world out

of which election has taken place. The miracle and the

riddle of election, which Israel has been neither able norwilling to understand, still exists. Whoever is offended by

the election of Israel as one particular nation out of allothers will also be offended by the Church ofJesus Christ.

God does not undo the fact of election. Must not thisIsraelite designation be a sign that God has alwaysremained the God of Israel?

In the community of Christ as a chosen race, there nowemerges the intention of God's plan for Israel as an elec-tion for service to the world: you are a chosen race, calledout of the world, in order to proclaim the great acts of

God in the world."You are a royal priesthood." The expression has been

borrowed from Exod. 19: 6, and says positively what

"chosen race" has said negatively: the Church of Christis chosen for a royal priesthood.40

The priesthood receives the major emphasis; it is moreclosely defined by "royal". In Old Testament usage, cer-

tainly in the usage of Exod. I 9: 6, the meaning of priest-hood is not in the first place to indicate the service of

sacrifice, but the mediating ofdivine instruction and direc-

tives for living to the whole people. In this way the prieststood in a certain sense over against the people, because he

I 129



stood "before God's face" on behalf of the people. The

word "priesthood" is however applied here to the com-

munity of Christ as a whole. In view ofthe "service ofwit-

ness for the world", one must here take it to mean that the

Church of Christ as a whole stands before God serving. By

serving in dedication to God, she is enabled to do priestly

service in the world: her serving God is service to the

world, because God is not now to be detached from His

world! He is not just "simply-God", "God-in-Himself",

but is the God of His people and the God of the whole

earth. The deus otiosus of the Gentiles and the god of the

philosophers are alone, in themselves, for themselves; but

the God ofAbraham andJacob, the living God (Matt. 22 :

32), is never without men. Therefore the priestly serving of

Him is also service to His world; it is witness to the gospel

that "God so loved the world, that he gave his only be-

gotten Son". By belonging to God in this kind of priestly

service, the new people of God also receives the predicate

"royal". This means first of all that this people has God as

king, but also that they share in His royal glory. Man is

royal man, because he is God's man, in His image, in His

likeness.

The priestly serving of God is service in royal freedom;

here priesthood and kingship interpenetrate reciprocally,

as in Jesus Christ Himself. This royal freedom of the

priestly service exists for the sake of witness in the world;

yes, the life of the community as a royal priesthood is

already a witness in itself. The proclamation of the mar-

vellous deeds ofGod occurs not only by word and deed; it

already takes place in the existence of the community."Tou are a holy nation." The expression used here is a

wholly unusual combination of nation (in the sense of

belonging to the world of nations or Gentiles Greek

ethnos, Hebrew gdy) and holy. In the Old Testament the

combination was always of "holy" with "the people of

Israel". Both Hebrew and Greek have a special word for

people (Israel) and people (nation, Gentiles). Here the

130

stood "before God's face" on behalf of the people. The

word "priesthood" is however applied here to the community of Christ as a whole. In view of the "service ofwitness for the world", one must here take it to mean that the

Church of Christ as a whole stands before God serving. Byserving in dedication to God, she is enabled to do priestlyservice in the world: her serving God is service to the

world, because God is not now to be detached from Hisworld! He is not just "simply-God", "God-in-Himself",but is the God of His people and the God of the wholeearth. The deus otiosus of the Gentiles and the god of the

philosophers are alone, in themselves, for themselves; but

the God ofAbraham andJacob, the living God (Matt. 22:

32), is never without men. Therefore the priestly serving of

Him is also service to His world; it is witness to the gospelthat "God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son". By belonging to God in this kind of priestlyservice, the new people of God also receives the predicate

"royal". This means first ofall that this people has God asking, but also that they share in His royal glory. Man is

royal man, because he is God's man, in His image, in Hislikeness.

The priestly serving of God is service in royal freedom;here priesthood and kingship interpenetrate reciprocally,as in Jesus Christ Himsel£ This royal freedom of the

priestly service exists for the sake ofwitness in the world;yes, the life of the community as a royal priesthood isalready a witness in itself. The proclamation of the mar

vellous deeds ofGod occurs not only by word and deed; it

already takes place in the existence of the community."rou are a holy nation." The expression used here is a

wholly unusual combination of nation (in the sense of

belonging to the world of nations or Gentiles-Greekethnos, Hebrew gay) and holy. In the Old Testament the

combination was always of "holy" with "the people of

Israel". Both Hebrew and Greek have a special word forpeople (Israel) and people (nation, Gentiles). Here the

130



predicate of Israel(holy) is combined with the word for

"Gentiles". This must be understood first of all as an indi-

cation that the community of the Gentiles has taken over

the place of Israel; this antithetic

tendency,

as we have

already seen, is not alien to the first letter of Peter and

particularly to the pericope 2 : i-io* But it further suggests

the positive intention that the Gentiles, unholy in them-

selves, have been sanctified by coming to Christ. By this

means they have separated themselves from the others,

the disobedient, and now stand in a positive relation to

God. Although the cultic character that is at bottom pecu-

liar to the Hebrew and the Greek words (qadhos and hagios

respectively) may have been weakened and spiritualized,

nevertheless it is not lacking here altogether. The com-

munity from the world of nations is also a cultus commun-

ity, separated for service to God. One might say that the

expression "holy nation" is here a further definition ofthe

word "priesthood33

. The community is not only priest, but

also a temple of God in thespirit (cf.

also i Pet. 2 :5,

Eph. 2: 22).

A "holy Gentile people" is really a contradiction, but

this human impossibility has been made a divine reality

in Christ.

"You are a peoplefor God's possession" In contrast to the

previous expression,"a holy nation", this word which is

now used is a technical term in the New Testament for

Israel (Greek laos, Hebrewc

am). The use of both words for

the same community again underlines the fact that the

dividing wall which separates has been broken down in

Christ(cf. Eph. 2: 14).

But the addition of "for God's possession" says some-

thing else : the community of Christ can only be God's

people because He Himself has made her His possession.

The Greek word and the context(eis peripoiesiri) suggest an

active intervention of God Himself: the dynamic of love

which acquires and keeps His possession: "No one is able

to snatch them out of my hand; no one is able to snatch

13*

predicate of Israel (holy) is combined with the word for"Gentiles". This must be understood first of all as an indi-cation that the community of the Gentiles has taken overthe place of Israel; this antithetic tendency, as we havealready seen, is not alien to the first letter of Peter and

particularly to the pericope 2: r-ro. But it further suggeststhe positive intention that the Gentiles, unholy in them-selves, have been sanctified by coming to Christ. By thismeans they have separated themselves from the others,the disobedient, and now stand in a positive relation toGod. Although the cultic character that is at bottom pecu-liar to the Hebrew and the Greek words (qadMs and hagiosrespectively) may have been weakened and spiritualized,nevertheless it is not lacking here altogether. The com-munity from the world of nations is also a cultus commun-ity, separated for service to God. One might say that theexpression "holy nation" is here a further definition of the

word "priesthood". The community is not only priest, but

also a temple of God in the spirit (cf. also I Pet. 2 : 5,Eph. 2: 22).

A "holy Gentile people" is really a contradiction, but

this human impossibility has been made a divine realityin Christ.

"1"ou are a people for God's possession." In contrast to the

previous expression, "a holy nation", this word which is

now used is a technical term in the New Testament forIsrael (Greek laos, Hebrew 'am). The use of both words forthe same community again underlines the fact that thedividing wall which separates has been broken down in

Christ (cf. Eph. 2 : 14).But the addition of "for God's possession" says some-

thing else: the community of Christ can only be God's

people because He Himself has made her His possession.The Greek word and the context (eis peripoiesin) suggest an

active intervention of God Himself: the dynamic of lovewhich acquires and keeps His possession: "No one is ableto snatch them out of my hand; no one is able to snatch

131



anything out of my Father's hand5 '

(John 10: 28,

29)-

One man might give names to every living being

(Gen.

2: 19): now God gives names to His community,

and this name-giving is a seal on ownership. We may

see, then, in the names here received nothing less than

a sealing, a confirmation of the Church of Christ. So

was she in God's thoughts in time of old, so is she now

in and for the world, so shall she be in the completion of

the ages.

C."That you may declare the wonderful deeds of him who

calledjou"

We have already referred to the particularly heavy em-

phasis the "(in order) to" (Greek hopos) receives in the

context. Only as the chosen race, as the royal priesthood,

as the holy nation, as God's own people is the Church of

Christ called and able to proclaim the wonderful deeds of

God. What is more, she can be a chosen race only in and

through this proclamation, and only thus does she appear

to be so.

It is really incomprehensible that so often in the history

of the Christian Church this clear and obvious statement

has not been understood in its unity-duality, but has been

split apart, or even that the proclamation ofthe wonderful

deeds of God has been confined merely to a hymn of

praise behind thick church walls. No doubt the "churchly"

hymn of praise is also asked and intended. The praise of

God in the sense of creation and thankfulness is closely

connected with praise.41 But the true praise is not only an

internal Christian affair; it is witness in and for the world.

In the praise of the community of Christ, God(finally)

receives from His world the answer which He has awaited

from the beginning, as the human echo to His divine

approval (the "very good" ofGen. 1:31) ofthe work ofHis

hands.42

But we must not remain too long with the raising of

songs of praise in the narrower sense. The real praise is

132

anything out of my Father's hand" (John 10: 28,

29)·One man might give names to every living being

(Gen. 2: 19): now God gives names to His community,and this name-giving is a seal on ownership. We may

see, then, in the names here received nothing less than

a sealing, a confirmation of the Church of Christ. Sowas she in God's thoughts in time of old, so is she nowin and for the world, so shall she be in the completion of

the ages.C. " That you mqy declare the wonderful deeds of him who

calledyou."We have already referred to the particularly heavy em

phasis the "(in order) to" (Greek hopos) receives in the

context. Only as the chosen race, as the royal priesthood,as the holy nation, as God's own people is the Church of

Christ called and able to proclaim the wonderful deeds of

God. What is more, she can be a chosen race only in and

through this proclamation, and only thus does she appear

to be so.It is really incomprehensible that so often in the history

of the Christian Church this clear and obvious statementhas not been understood in its unity-duality, but has beensplit apart, or even that the proclamation of the wonderfuldeeds of God has been confined merely to a hymn of

praise behind thick church walls. No doubt the "churchly"hymn of praise is also asked and intended. The praise of

God in the sense of creation and thankfulness is closelyconnected with praise.41 But the true praise is not only an

internal Christian affair; it is witness in and for the world.In the praise of the community of Christ, God (finally)receives from His world the answer which He has awaited

from the beginning, as the human echo to His divineapproval (the "very good" ofGen. I : 31) of the work ofHishands.42

But we must not remain too long with the raising of

songs of praise in the narrower sense. The real praise is

132



the declaration ofthe wonderful deeds ofGod in the world.

These deeds (Greek arete]are the only deeds spoken of in

the community of Christ; the deeds by which He has

carried

through

His

plan

for the world; the deeds which

are indicated in the four names by which the community

of Christ has just been addressed. The proclamation ofthe

gospel in the world can, may, and must never be anything

else than the speaking of the deeds of God. As soon as the

Church of Christ starts proclaiming other deeds than

God's deeds, she is unfaithful and can no longer be a

blessing and a service to the world. Herein there also lies

an adversejudgment against all motives for mission which

have played a role in history, either as major or minor

motives. We cannot be careful enough of the motive for

mission. Perhaps one may on the other hand venture to

say that the motive ofthe proclamation ofGod's wonderful

deeds is so broad and powerful that it overshadows all

other motives.

Although it is obviously not necessary for the writer of

the first letter of Peter to specify in detail what he means

by the transparent self-revelation ofGod in His deeds (this

is perhaps the best rendering of the word arete),neverthe-

less he gives some further indication in the next phrase,

"who called you out of darkness". It has been a callingof

God by which the community has come into being, the

same creative calling by which He once called the world

into being (cf.Ps. 33 : 9).

In Christ a new creation has arisen. The world must

hear from the community of Christ that the new world of

God has begun. The "chosen race, the royal priesthood,

the holy nation, the people of God's own possession"is

itself the beginning of this new world. And the "loud

proclamation" of the Church is a continuation of the

calling of God. Just as God's sending of the Son continues

in the sending of the Spirit and the sending of the com-

munity into the world (John 20: 21), so the calling ofGod

continues in the proclamation of the Church. This pro-

133

the declaration ofthe wonderful deeds ofGod in the world.These deeds (Greek arete) are the only deeds spoken of in

the community of Christ; the deeds by which He hascarried through His plan for the world; the deeds whichare indicated in the four names by which the communityof Christ has just been addressed. The proclamation of the

gospel in the world can, may, and must never be anythingelse than the speaking of the deeds of God. As soon as the

Church of Christ starts proclaiming other deeds than

God's deeds, she is unfaithful and can no longer be ablessing and a service to the world. Herein there also liesan adverse judgment against all motives for mission whichhave played a role in history, either as major or minormotives. We cannot be careful enough of the motive for

mission. Perhaps one may on the other hand venture tosay that the motive ofthe proclamation ofGod's wonderfuldeeds is so broad and powerful that it overshadows allother motives.

Although it is obviously not necessary for the writer of

the first letter of Peter to specify in detail what he meansby the transparent self-revelation of God in His deeds (thisis perhaps the best rendering of the word arete), nevertheless he gives some further indication in the next phrase,"who called you out of darkness". It has been a calling of

God by which the community has come into being, the

same creative calling by which He once called the worldinto being (cf. Ps. 33 : 9).

In Christ a new creation has arisen. The world musthear from the community of Christ that the new world of

God has begun. The "chosen race, the royal priesthood,the holy nation, the people of God's own possession" is

itself the beginning of this new world. And the "loud

proclamation" of the Church is a continuation of thecalling of God. Just as God's sending of the Son continuesin the sending of the Spirit and the sending of the community into the world (John 20: 2 1), so the calling of Godcontinues in the proclamation of the Church. This pro-

133



clamation is of course nothing else but making known

what this calling of God has amounted to.

"Out ofthe darkness into his marvellous light." The darkness

is the alienation from God. It stands here as the undefined,

the unbound (the article is lacking) over against the one,

only light (the article has special power in connection with

the possessive pronoun). The surprising and astonishing

aspect of this calling to the light evokes wonder at the

admirable offer.

"Onceyou were no people but nowjou are God}

speople." These

and the following words have been borrowed from Hos. i :

6-1 1, 2: 23. There the "ld-(

ammi" has reference only to

Israel; here the prophetic work is also applied to the

Gentiles: the Gentile Christians receive Israel's inheri-

tance even in the fact that they may view the word of the

prophet as directed to them. In Christ the Scriptures are

opened (cf.Luke 24: 25, 27, 32, 2 Cor. 3: 14-16) to the

Gentiles, just as they are closed for Israel because she

rejects Christ. This surprising use of Scripture also belongs

to the marvellous light to which God calls His community.

Therefore the Old Testament, though it appears to speak

chiefly of Israel, is ofsuch outstanding significance for the

community of Christ.

By the application of the word from Hosea, "not-my-

people", it is further made clear that God's disappoint-

ment over Israel has really been His disappointment over

all nations, and the judgment which Israel has sustained

by her apostasy has been thejudgment of all.

The darkness out of which God has called the com-

munity by Christ is thus the darkness of being "not~my-

people"; cf. Eph. 2: 12, "separated from Christ, thatis,

alienated from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers

to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without

God in the world". The light is fellowship with God, the

fact ofhaving "been brought nigh in the blood of Christ"

(Eph. 2: 13). The "formerly, but now" accentuates all the

more the great contrast between formerly and the meaning

134

clamation is of course nothing else but making knownwhat this calling of God has amounted to.

"Out of he darkness into his marvellous light." The darknessis the alienation from God. It stands here as the undefined,the unbound (the article is lacking) over against the one,

only light (the article has special power in connection withthe possessive pronoun). The surprising and astonishingaspect of this calling to the light evokes wonder at the

admirable offer."Onceyou were no people but nowyou are God's people." These

and the following words have been borrowed from Hos. I :6-rr, 2: 23. There the "lo-'ammi" has reference only toIsrael; here the prophetic work is also applied to the

Gentiles: the Gentile Christians receive Israel's inheritance even in the fact that they may view the word of the

prophet as directed to them. In Christ the Scriptures areopened (cf. Luke 24: 25, 27, 32, 2 Cor. 3: q.-r6) to the

Gentiles, just as they are closed for Israel because she

rejects Christ. This surprising use ofScripture also belongsto the marvellous light to which God calls His community.Therefore the Old Testament, though it appears to speakchiefly of Israel, is ofsuch outstanding significance for the

community of Christ.By the application of the word from Hosea, "not-my

people", it is further made clear that God's disappoint

ment over Israel has really been His disappointment overall nations, and the judgment which Israel has sustainedby her apostasy has been the judgment of all.

The darkness out of which God has called the community by Christ is thus the darkness of being "not-mypeople"; cf. Eph. 2: 12, "separated from Christ, that is,alienated from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers

to the covenants of promise, having no hope and withoutGod in the world". The light is fellowship with God, the

fact of having "been brought nigh in the blood of Christ"(Eph. 2: 13). The "formerly, but now" accentuates all the

more the great contrast between formerly and the meaning

134



(which changes everything) of the eschatological hour

"now".

In God's nearness the life offellowship begins to flourish

too, so that the

community

of Christ drawn from all

nations can rightly be called a "people" (or nation). All

other national community in the world can be nothing

but a reflex of this fellowship. In the light of this being a

"people of God", our belonging to any other nation be-

comes supremely unimportant; and a man can be a bless-

ing within any other specific nation only when he remains

faithful to his citizenship in the people ofGod. God's mar-

vellous light also conquers the "powers" of nationalism,

like all other powers which would overcome the light (cf.

John 1:5).

"Once you had not received mercy but now you have received

mercy" These words are also borrowed from the prophecyof Hosea, and they repeat what has already been said in

regard to "not-my-people" and God's people. Further,

this repetition characterizes in another way the contents

of the proclamation of God's marvellous deeds. Thepity,

the grace, ofGod is to the community of Christ what light

is for the earth. The darkness of alienation from God has

lasted long (the perfect participle has a pluperfect meaningand indicates the long duration of a situation), but now

God's pity becomes living and powerful in Christ over

the newly accepted people of God. (The aorist of "accep-

ted" has an inchoative sense.) The long night is passed

and the day has dawned.

As long as it is day, the community of Christ may and

must proclaim the deeds of God, and therewith, in her

turn, call men out of darkness into light; out of alienation

into true fellowship with God and man; out of a twilight

situation of mercilessness into the joy of mercy.

So long as there are in this world men in darkness, with-

out God and without mercy, so long will the task ofmission

of the Christian, Church endure. But she can complete

this only when she remains powerfully conscious that she

135

(which changes everything) of the eschatological hour"now".

In God's nearness the life offellowship begins to flourishtoo, so that the community of Christ drawn from allnations can rightly be called a "people" (or nation). Allother national community in the world can be nothingbut a reflex of this fellowship. In the light of this being a"people of God", our belonging to any other nation becomes supremely unimportant; and a man can be a blessing within any other specific nation only when he remainsfaithful to his citizenship in the people of God. God's mar

vellous light also conquers the "powers" of nationalism,like all other powers which would overcome the light (c£John I : 5).

"Once you had not received mercy but now you have received

mercy." These words are also borrowed from the prophecyof Hosea, and they repeat what has already been said in

regard to "not-my-people" and God's people. Further,

this repetition characterizes in another way the contentsof the proclamation of God's marvellous deeds. The pity,the grace, of God is to the community of Christ what lightis for the earth. The darkness of alienation from God haslasted long (the perfect participle has a pluperfect meaningand indicates the long duration of a situation), but now

God's pity becomes living and powerful in Christ over

the newly accepted people of God. (The aorist of "accepted" has an inchoative sense.) The long night is passedand the day has dawned.As long as it is day, the community of Christ may and

must proclaim the deeds of God, and therewith, in her

turn, call men out of darkness into light; out of alienationinto true fellowship with God and man; out of a twilight

situation of mercilessness into the joy of mercy.So long as there are in this world men in darkness, with

out God and without mercy, so long will the task ofmissionof the Christian Church endure. But she can completethis only when she remains powerfully conscious that she

I35



herself shared In the same darkness and alienation, and

that out of this she is called to proclaim to others the

marvellous deeds of the God oflight, fellowship, and

mercy.

There is no other

"theologyof

mission",no other

oracle, than this.

136

herself shared in the same darkness and alienation, and

that out of this she is called to proclaim to others the

marvellous deeds of the God of light, fellowship, and

mercy. There is no other "theology of mission", no other

oracle, than this.



NOTES

Introduction

1. The Ghana Assembly of the International Missionary Council, edited

by R. K. Orchard, Edinburgh House Press, London 1958, p. 138.

2. A survey of, and an insight into, the variety of motives for mis-

sion is given, for Great Britain, by J. v. d. Berg, Constrained by Jesus'

Love, An Inquiry into the Motives of the Missionary Awakening in Great

Britain in the Period between 1698 and r&rj, J. H. Kok, Kampen 1956.

For Germany in the second half of the nineteenth century: Seppo A,

Teinonen, Gustav Warneckin varhaisen Idketysteorian teologiset perusteet,

Helsinki 1959. This work, written in the Finnish language, was acces-

sible to me only in the English summary, pp. 1238-58. By the same

writer there is: Warneck Tutkielmia, Helsinki 1959, with a summary in

German, pp. 47-56. For the motives for missions on the European

continent, see further: Joh. Durr, Sendende und Werdende Kirche in der

MissionstheologieGustav

Warnecks,Basler Missions

Buchhandlung,Basel 1947; J. G. Hoekendijk, Kerk en Volk in de Duitse Zjsndingsweten-

schap, Ned. Zendingsraad, Amsterdam 1948.

3. See the little work of H. Scharer, strongly influenced by the

theology of K. Barth: Die Begrundung der Mission in der katholischen und

evangelischen Missionswissenschqft, Theol. Studien, Heft 16, Zollikon

Verlag, Zurich 1944;Joh. Durr, Die Reinigung der Missionsmotive,EMM,19514

4. On the relation of theology to mission in general, see O. G.

Myklebust, The Study of Missions in Theological Education^ Egede

Instittute, Oslo, I 1955, II 1957. Further: O. Kiibler, Mission und

TheologieiEine Untersuchung liber den Missionsgedanken in der systematischen

Theologie seit Schleiermacher, T. G. Hinrichsche Buchhandlung, Leip-

zig 1929; E. zur Nieden, Der Missionsgedanke in der systematischen

Theologie seit Schleiermacher9 Bertelsmann, Gutersloh 1928. I am not

acquainted with similar summarizing works for Great Britain and

North America.

Chapter i

i. For this older literature, see for example E. Riehm, Der Mis-

sionsgedanke im Alien Testament, AMZ, 1880; M. Lohr, Der Missions-

gedanke im Alten Testament, A, K. VerlagsbuchhandlungJ. C. B. Mohr,

Freiburg, Leipzig 1896; A. Bertholet, Die Stettung der Israeliten und der

137

NOTES

Introduction

I. The Ghana Assembly of the International Missionary Council, editedby R. K. Orchard, Edinburgh House Press, London I 958, p. I g8.

2. A survey of, and an insight into, the variety of motives for mis-

sion is given, for Great Britain, by J. v. d. Berg, Constrained by Jesus'Love, An Inquiry into the Motives of the Missionary Awakening in Great

Britain in the Period between 1698 and r8r5, J. H. Kok, Kampen 1956.For Germany in the second half of the nineteenth century: Seppo A.Teinonen, Gustav Warneckin varhaisen liiketysteorian teologiset perusteet,

Helsinki I959· This work, written in the Finnish language, was accessible to me only in the English summary, pp. 238-58. By the samewriter there is: Warneck Tutkielmia, Helsinki 1959, with a summary in

German, pp. 47-56. For the motives for missions on the Europeancontinent, see further: Job. Durr, Sendende und Werdende Kirche in der

Missionstheologie Gustav Warnecks,Basler Missions Buchhandlung,Basel 1947; J. C. Hoekendijk, Kerk en Volk in de Duitse Zendingsweten-

schap, Ned. Zendingsraad, Amsterdam 1948.3· See the little work of H. Scharer, strongly influenced by the

theology of K. Barth: Die Begriindung der Mission in der katholischen undevangelischen Missionswissenschcift, Theol. Studien, Heft r6, ZollikonVerlag, Zurich I 944;Joh. Durr,Die Reinigung der Missionsmotive, E MM,1951.

4· On the relation of theology to mission in general, see 0. G.

Myklebust, The Study of Missions in Theological Education, EgedeInstittute, Oslo, I 1955, II I957· Further: 0. Kubler, Mission undTheologie, Eine Untersuchung uber den Missionsgedanken in der systematischen

Theologie seit Schleiermacher, T. C. Hinrichsche Buchhandlung, Leipzig I929; E. zur Nieden, Der Missionsgedanke in der systematischen

Theologie seit Schleiermacher, Bertelsmann, Giitersloh I928. I am notacquainted with similar summarizing works for Great Britain and

~ o r t h A m e r i c a .Chapter r

r. For this older literature, see for example E. Riehm, Der Mis-sionsgedanke im Alten Testament, AMZ, I88o; M. Lohr, Der Missions-gedankeimAlten Testament, A. K. VerlagsbuchhandlungJ. C. B. Mohr,Freiburg, Leipzig I896; A. Bertholet, Die Stellung der Israeliten und der

137



Juden zu denFremden, Tubingen, J. C. B. Mohr, 1896; B. Kleinpaul,

Die Mission in der Bibel, H. G. Wallmann, Leipzig 1901 ;E. Sellin, Der

Missionsgedanke im Alien Testament, NAMZ, 1925; W. Staerk, Ursprung

und Grenzen der Missionskrqft der alttestamentlichen Religion, Theol.

Blatter IV, 1925; J. Reinhard, Der Heihuniversalismusder

Bibel,

NAMZ, 1926; F. M. Th. Bohl, Oud-Israelen de pending, Mededeelingen,

Tijdsclirift voor Zendingswetenschap, Oegstgeest 1929. From English

language material the following older works are known to me: W. O.

Carver, The Bible as a Missionary Message, Revell, New York 1921;

H. A. Lapham, The Bible as a Missionary Handbook, Heffer, Cambridge

1925.

2. E.g. J. Pedersen, Israel, Oxford Univ. Press 1926 (I, II), 1940

(III, IV), Copenhagen; L. Kohler, Theologie des Alien Testaments, 1936

(E.T. Old Testament Theology) ; J. Hempel, Gott und Mensch im Alien

Testament, 2, Kohlhammer, Stuttgart 1936; O. Procksch, Theologie

des Alien Testaments, Bertelsmann, Gutersloh 1950; Th. C. Vriezen,

Hoofdlijnen der Theologie van het Oude Testament, 2, H. Veenman,

Wageningen 1955 (E.T. Old Testament Theology); E.Jacob, Thfologie

de VAncien Testament, Delachaux & Niestle, Neuchatel & Paris 1956

(E.T. The Theology of the Old Testament], and others. In Great Britain

and North America introductions from the point of view of historical

criticism are preponderant; so, for example, H. E. Fosdick, AGuide

to the Understanding of the Bible, Harper Bros., New York, and London,

1938; R. H. Pfeiffer, Introduction to the Old Testament, Harper Bros.,

New York, and London, 1941 ;the works of W. F. Albright. But on

the other hand, note G. D. Wright, The Challenge ofIsrael's Faith, 2nd

ed., Univ. of Chicago Press 1946. Closer to the continental European

development stands H. H. Rowley. See, e.g., his The Biblical Doctrine

of Election, Lutterworth Press, London 1950, 1953; The Unity of the

Bible, Carey Kingsgate Press, London 1953; The Faith ofIsrael, S.C.M.

Press, London 1956.

3 Op. cit., p. 114. "Historical research seeks a critically guaranteed

minimum; the kerygmatic image tends to a theological maximum."

4. Op. cit., p. 126.

5. See the works already cited of S. A. Teinonen and also, for

example, W. Kunze, Der Missionsgedanke beij. T. Beck, EMM, 1930.

6. Here reference is also to the Biblicism ofJ. A. Bengel, J. T. Beck

et al. See R. B. Evenhuis, De biblizistisch-eschatologische Theologie von

J. A. Bengel, H. Veenman, Wageningen 1931. Critique ofthis

theologyin G. von Rad, Theologie des Alien Testaments II, Ch. Kaiser Verlag,

Munich 1960, p. 375 (E.T. in preparation, Theology of the Old Testa-

ment}.

7. EL Hartenstein, Heidentum undKirche, EMM, 1936, p. 5.

8. I hope I may be excused from the duty of listing all accessible

138

Juden zu den Fremden, Tubingen, J. C. B. Mohr, t8g6; B. Kleinpaul,Die Mission in der Bibel, H. G. Wallmann, Leipzig xgor; E. Sellin, DerMissionsgedanke im Alten Testament, NAMZ, I925; W. Staerk, Ursprung

und Grenzen der Missionskraft der alttestamentlichen Religion, Theol.

Blatter IV, I 925; J. Reinhard, Der Heilsuniversalismus der Bibel,NAMZ, Ig26; F. M. Th. Bohl, Oud-Israelen de :(,ending, Mededeelingen,Tijdschrift voor Zendingswetenschap, Oegstgeest 1929. From Englishlanguage material the following older works are known to me: W. 0 .

Carver, The Bible as a Missionary Message, Revell, New York I 92 I;

H. A. Lapham, The Bible as a Missionary Handbook, Heffer, Cambridge

1925.2. E.g.]. Pedersen, Israel, Oxford Univ. Press 1926 (I, II), 1940

(III, IV), Copenhagen; L. Kohler, Theologie des Alten Testaments, 1936

(E.T. Old Testament Theology);]. Hempel, Gott und Mensch im AltenTestament, 2, Kohlhammer, Stuttgart 1936; 0. Procksch, Theologiedes Alten Testaments, Bertelsmann, Gutersloh 1950; Th. C. Vriezen,Hoofdlijnen der Theologie van het Oude Testament, 2, H. Veenman,Wageningen 1955 (E.T. Old Testament Theology); E. Jacob, TMologiede l'Ancien Testament, Delachaux & Niestle, Neuchatel & Paris 1956(E.T. The Theology of he Old Testament), and others. In Great Britainand North America introductions from the point of view of historical

criticism are preponderant; so, for example, H. E. Fosdick, A Guideto the Understanding of he Bible, Harper Bros., New York, and London,1938; R. H. Pfeiffer, Introduction to the Old Testament, Harper Bros.,New York, and London, 1941; the works of W. F. Albright. But on

the other hand, note G. D. Wright, The Challenge of Israel's Faith, 2nd

ed., Univ. of Chicago Press 1946. Closer to the continental European

development stands H. H. Rowley. See, e.g., his The Biblical Doctrine

of Election, Lutterworth Press, London 1950, 1953; The Unity of the

Bible, Carey Kingsgate Press, London 1953; The Faith of srael, S.C.M.

Press, London r 956.3 Op. cit., p. rr4. "Historical research seeks a critically guaranteed

minimum; the kerygmatic image tends to a theological maximum."

4· Op. cit., p. 126.

5· See the works already cited of S. A. Teinonen and also, forexample, W. Kunze, Der Missionsgedanke beiJ. T. Beck, EMM, 1930.

6. Here reference is also to the Biblicism ofJ. A. Bengel, J. T. Becket al. See R. B. Evenhuis, De biblizistisch-eschatologische Theologie von

J. A. Bengel, H. Veenman, Wageningen 1931. Critique of his theologyin G. von Rad, Theologie des Alten Testaments II, Ch. Kaiser Verlag,Munich rg6o, p. 375 (E.T. in preparation, Theology of the Old Testa-ment).

7· K. Hartenstein, Heidentum und Kirche, EMM, 1936, p. 5·8. I hope I may be excused from the duty of listing all accessible

rs8



commentaries. Surely of special significance for our purpose is the

explication of Gen. i~i i in G. von Rad, Das erste Buck Mose, Kap.

1-12: 9, "Das Alte Testament Deutsch", Teilband 2, Vandenhoeck

& Rupprecht, Gottingen 1950 (E.T. Genesis). Further mention must

be made ofW.Eichrodt, Theologie

des AlienTestaments, Abhandlungen

zur Theologie des Alten und Neuen Testaments, No. 4, 2nd ed.,

Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, Berlin 1948 (E.T. Theology of the Old

Testament}. See also F. J. Leenhardt, La Situation de VHomme d'apres le

Genese, in Das Menschenbild im Lichte des Evangeliums, Festschrift E.

Brunner, Zwingli Verlag, Zurich 1950, pp. 1-30; W. Zimmerli, Die

Urgeschichte, Erster Teil, Zwingli Verlag, Zurich 1943; etc.

9. Besides G. von Rad, Theologie des Alten Testaments (see note 6

above), we may mention Th. G. Vriezen, Onderzoek naar de Paradijsvoor~

sidling bij de oude Semietische Volken, H. Veenman, Wageningen 1957,

p. 17, etc. Counter to the habit accepted in the last half century of

separating Gen. i-ii as "primeval history" (German, Urgeschichte)

from the historical portions of the Old Testament, there has arisen a

resistance under the influence of the "form criticism'9

type of exegesis

of the Old Testament and of heilsgeschichtliche exegesis. We must not

forget that these early chapters of Genesis also deal with the God who

rules, leads, and turns history. At this point see K. Cramer, Gen. i-n

Urgeschichte?, J. C. B. Mohr, Tubingen 1959; P. Morant, Die Anfdngeder Menschheit, Raber & Cy., Lucerne 1960 (R.C.).

10. Because this whole section of the Bible is written in the light

ofthe fact ofthe alienation between God (the God of Israel, Yahweh)and man, the world of nations, one is forced to these chapters in

coming to an answer to the difficult question of the relation between

religion and revelation. In the extensive literature, I believe not

enough attention has heretofore been paid to this problem. It would

repay our effort, it seems to me, to approach the issue (which is be-

coming more and more acute because of the renaissance of the old

religions) of the relation of religion and revelation from the data in

Gen. 1-12. Nowhere else in the Old Testament is the bond with God,

the alienation of man from God, and God's constant covenantship

with man more deeply and minutely professed than here. For the

theological anthropology in my opinion the best and most pene-

trating book is still E. Brunner, Der Mensch im Widerspruch, Zwingli

Verlag, Zurich 1937 (E.T. Man in Revolt).

11. See G. von Rad, Theologie des Alten Testaments, I, p.168.

12. See H. H. Rowley, The Missionary Message of the Old Testament,

Carey Kingsgate Press, London, pp. 24-26; and his The Biblical

Doctrine of Election, pp. 65-67.

13. I have referred to another aspect of the primeval history of

Gen. i- 1 1, in The Mission of the People ofGod, in The Missionary Church

139

commentaries. Surely of special significance for our purpose is the

explication of Gen. I-I I in G. von Rad, Das erste Buck Mose, Kap.1 - 12 : 9, "Das Alte Testament Deutsch", Teilband 2, Vandenhoeck& Rupprecht, Gottingen I950 (E.T. Genesis). Further mention must

be made ofW. Eichrodt, Theologie des Alten Testaments, Abhandlungenzur Theologie des Alten und Neuen Testaments, No. 4, 2nd ed.,Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, Berlin I948 (E.T. Theology of the OldTestament). See also F.]. Leenhardt, La Situation de l'Homme d'apres le

Genese, in Das Menschenbild im Lichte des Evangeliums, Festschrift E.Brunner, Zwingli Verlag, Zurich I950, pp. I-3o; W. Zimmerli, DieUrgeschichte, Erster Teil, Zwingli Verlag, Zurich I943; etc.

g. Besides G. von Rad, Theologie des Alten Testaments (see note 6above), we may mention Th. C. Vriezen, Onderzoek naar de P a r a d i j s v o o r ~stelling hij de oude Semietische Volken, H. Veenman, Wageningen I957,p. 17, etc. Counter to the habit accepted in the last half century of

separating Gen. I- I I as "primeval history" (German, Urgeschichte)

from the historical portions of the Old Testament, there has arisen aresistance under the influence of the "form criticism" type of exegesisof the Old Testament and of heilsgeschichtliche exegesis. We must notforget that these early chapters of Genesis also deal with the God whorules, leads, and turns history. At this point seeK. Cramer, Gen. 1-11

Urgeschichte?,]. C. B. Mohr, Tiibingen I959; P. Morant, Die Anfiingeder Menschheit, Raber & Cy., Lucerne I96o (R.C.).IO. Because this whole section of the Bible is written in the light

of the fact of the alienation between God (the God oflsrael, Yahweh)and man, the world of nations, one is forced to these chapters in

coming to an answer to the difficult question of the relation betweenreligion and revelation. In the extensive literature, I believe not

enough attention has heretofore been paid to this problem. It wouldrepay our effort, it seems to me, to approach the issue (which is be

coming more and more acute because of the renaissance of the oldreligions) of the relation of religion and revelation from the data in

Gen. r-I2. Nowhere else in the Old Testament is the bond with God,the alienation of man from God, and God's constant covenantshipwith man more deeply and minutely professed than here. For the

theological anthropology in my opinion the best and most penetrating book is still E. Brunner, Der Mensch im Widerspruch, Zwingli

Verlag, Ziirich I937 (E.T. Man in Revolt).

II. See G. von Rad, Theologie des Alten Testaments, I, p. I68.I2. See H. H. Rowley, The Missionary Message of the Old Testament,Carey Kingsgate Press, London, pp. 24-26; and his The Biblica[

Doctrine of Election, pp. 65-67.Ig. I have referred to another aspect of the primeval history of

Gen. I- I r, in The Mission of the People of God, in The Missionary Church

139



in East and West, ed. by Ch. G. West and D. M. Paton, S.G.M. Press,

London 1959, pp. 91-93.

14. See R. Martin-Achard, Israel et les Nations, La Perspective Mis-

sionnaire de I'Ancien Testament, Cahiers Theologiques 42, Delachaux &

Niestle,Neuchatel

&Paris

1959, p. 33.Those who translate "bless

themselves" in Gen. 12:3, instead of "will be blessed", also recognize

the great significance of this declaration. The minimum is certainly

stated in the words "something like the note ofuniversalism is already

struck in these words". G. F. North, The Old Testament Interpretation of

History, Epworth Press, London 1946, p. 26.

15. H. H. Rowley, The Biblical Doctrine ofElection, 3rd ed., 1953.

1 6. Rowley, op. cit. } p. 39.

17. Another who is opposed to the "fitness" of Israel is N. W.

Porteous, Volk und Gottesvolk im Alien Testament, in Theologische Aufsatze,

Festschrift K. Earth, Ch. Kaiser Verlag, Munich 1936, pp. 146-163.

Gf. also my Goden en Mensen,J. G. Niemeyer, Groningen 1950, pp.

11-18.

1 8. Rowley, op. cit., p. 52.

19. Zwingli Verlag, Zurich 1953.

20. Vriezen, op. cit., p. 32; a particularly important study, which,

more than the work of Rowley, also investigates word usage in the

Old Testament regarding election.21. Ibid., p. 34.

22. For thisJewish distortion ofthe doctrine of election see, among

others, G. Boess, Altsynagogale Palestinische Theologie und Mission, Alg.

Miss. Zeitung, 1885, pp. 190 ff.; K. H. Miskotte, Het Wezen derjoodse

Religie, H. J. Paris, Amsterdam 1933.

23. This observation is from Th. G. Vriezen, op. cit., p. 50, who

also points out that in Deutero-Isaiah baMr is a nominal form which

is often used for names ofan office and therefore also has more of an

active than a passive meaning. Compare also the declaration on

p. 33 : "Therefore Christian dogmatics can treat of those who are

chosen (passive), whereas this is unknown to the Old Testament."

24. On the notions of "people" and "nation" in relation to the

Old Testament, see G. Bertram in the entry "ethnos" in TWNT II,

P. 362 ; L. Rost, Die Bezeichnungenfur Land und Volk im Alien Testament,

Festschrift 0. Procksch, A. Deichert & J. G. Hinrichs, Leipzig 1934;

W. Eichrodt, Gottes Volk und die Volker, EMM, 1942, speaks of a "yes"ofGod

to thenationality (Volkstum) of Israel while at the same time

God speaks a "no" to the nationality of the heathen. This otherwise

absorbing and instructive article would have gained in worth, to myway of thinking, ifEichrodt had confined himself to the heilsgeschicht-

liche opposition between 'am and gqy, Israel and the heathen, instead

ofoperating with the doubtful concept of "nationality", which comes

140

in East and West, ed. by Ch. C. West and D. M. Paton, S.C.M. Press,

London 1959, pp. 91-93.14. SeeR. Martin-Achard, Israel et les Nations, La Perspective Mis-

sionnaire de !'Ancien Testament, Cahiers Theologiques 42, Delachaux &

Niestle, Neuchatel&

Paris 1959, p. 33· Those who translate "blessthemselves" in Gen. 12: 3, instead of"will be blessed", also recognizethe great significance of this declaration. The minimum is certainlystated in the words "something like the note ofuniversalism is already

struck in these words". C. F. North, The Old Testament Interpretation of

History, Epworth Press, London 1946, p. 26.15. H. H. Rowley, The Biblical Doctrine ofElection, 3rd ed., 1953.16. Rowley, op. cit., p. 39·17. Another who is opposed to the "fitness" of Israel is N. W.

Porteous, Volk und Gottesvolk im Alten Testament, in Theologische Aufsiitze,Festschrift K. Barth, Ch. Kaiser Verlag, Munich 1936, pp. 146-163.Of. also my Coden en Mensen, J. C. Niemeyer, Groningen 1950, pp.

I 1-18.18. Rowley, op. cit., p. 52.

19. Zwingli Verlag, ZUrich 1953·20. Vriezen, op. cit., p. 32; a particularly important study, which,

more than the work of Rowley, also investigates word usage in the

Old Testament regarding election.2 I . Ibid., p. 34·22. For this Jewish distortion of the doctrine of election see, among

others, C. Boess, Altsynagogale Palestinische Theologie und Mission, Alg.Miss. Zeitung, 1885, pp. 190 ff.; K. H. Miskotte, Het Wezen der JoodseReligie, H. J. Paris, Amsterdam 1933·

23. This observation is from Th. C. Vriezen, op. cit., p. 50, whoalso points out that in Deutero-Isaiah bt'ihfr is a nominal form whichis often used for names of an office and therefore also has more of an

active than a passive meaning. Compare also the declaration onp. 33: "Therefore Christian dogmatics can treat of those who are

chosen (passive), whereas this is unknown to the Old Testament."

24. On the notions of "people" and "nation" in relation to the

Old Testament, see G. Bertram in the entry "ethnos" in TWNT II,

p. 362; L. Rost, Die BezeichnungenfiirLand und Volk im Alten Testament,Festschrift 0. Procksch, A. Deichert & J. C. Hinrichs, Leipzig 1934;W. Eichrodt, Gottes Volk und die Volker, EMM, 1942, speaks of a "yes"

of God to the nationality (Volkstum) of Israel while at the same timeGod speaks a "no" to the nationality of the heathen. This otherwiseabsorbing and instructive article would have gained in worth, to my

way of thinking, i f Eichrodt had confined himself to the heilsgeschicht-liche opposition between 'am and giiy, Israel and the heathen, insteadofoperating with the doubtful concept of "nationality", which comes

140



out of Germanic rather than Biblical thinking. G. v. d. Leeuw,

Phaenomenologie der Religion, r, J. C. B. Mohr, Tubingen 1933, 2nd ed.

19563 even names the Jewish people as the first historical example of

a nation, but he thoroughly distorts the Biblical witness in regard to

thepeople Israel,

in

my opinion, byso

doing.See also

myGoden en

Mensen (note 17 above), pp. 7-10.

The proper statement of affairs has been made with particular

clarity, I believe, by K. Emmerich, Die Juden, Theologische Studien

und Kritiken 7, 1939, p. 20: "But the children of Israel are a people

only in so far as they are a people of God. This means that neither a

natural bond nor human will and realization has linked these people

together, but only the establishment of a fellowship. It means further

that to this nation the option is not open, to want to become a nation

like other nations, since it did not become a nation the way other

nations did. It means finally that this nation lives should it wish to

become a nation like others under the threat that God will cease to

call ite

my people' and will call it 'not my people'. If God should

recognize this nation as His no longer, then it becomes a non-people,

for only as the people ofGod did they become a people, or remain so."

25. For the investigation of the meaning of the "people of God",

see G. von Rad, Das Gottesvolk in Deuteronomium, Kohlhammer, Stutt-

gart 1929, andhis

Deuteronomium-Studien, 2nd ed. 1948 (E.T.Studies

in Deuteronomy) ;L. Rost, Die Vorstufe von Kirche und Synagogue im Alien

Testament, Kohlhammer, Stuttgart 1938; N. A. Dahl, Das Volk

Gottes, Fine Untersuchung zum Kirchenbewusstseins des Urchristentums,

Norske Videnskaps Akademi, Oslo 1941. This last book especially,

excellently documented, offers a storehouse of data for those who

wish to understand the problem of"Church and people" in a Biblical

light. I doubt whether H. H. Rowley, op. cit., pp. 86-87, ^ right if in

connection with the "remnant" he voices the thought of "transition

from the conception of a nation to that of a Church". Does the Old

Testament really know the "conception ofa nation" ? The constitutive

element of Israel is not the common descent (although the call of

Abraham, etc., is not wanting), but the act of having been called

(qahal) by Yahweh. See, among others, J. D. W. Kritzinger, Qehal

Jahwe, wot dit is en wie daaraan mag behoort (with a summary in English),

J. H. Kok, Kampen 1957. In my opinion it is totally unfruitful in

referring to Israel to fasten the word "people" or "nation" on to her

apart from her belonging to Yahweh.26. Vriezen, op. cit., pp. 73 fT.

27. R. B. Y. Scott, A Kingdom ofPriests, Oudtestamentische Studien

VIII, E. J. Brill, Leiden 1950, pp. 213-219. R. Martin-Achard, Israel

et les Nations, pp. 35-37, concurs with Scott's exegesis.

28. An example of this psychological use of the scheme of particu-

141

out of Germanic rather than Biblical thinking. G. v. d. Leeuw,Phaenomenologie der Religion, r, J. C. B. Mohr, Tubingen I 933, 2nd ed.1956, even names the Jewish people as the first historical example of

a nation, but he thoroughly distorts the Biblical witness in regard to

the people Israel,in my

opinion,by so

doing. See also myGoden en

Mensen (note 17 above), pp. 7-10.The proper statement of affairs has been made with particular

clarity, I believe, by K. Emmerich, Die Juden, Theologische Studienund Kritiken 7, 1939, p. 20: "But the children of Israel are a peopleonly in so far as they are a people of God. This means that neither anatural bond nor human will and realization has linked these peopletogether, but only the establishment of a fellowship. It means furtherthat to this nation the option is not open, to want to become a nation

like other nations, since i t did not become a nation the way othernations did. It means finally that this nation lives-should it wish tobecome a nation like others-under the threat that God will cease tocall it 'my people' and will call i t 'not my people'. I f God shouldrecognize this nation as His no longer, then it becomes a non-people,for only as the people ofGod did they become a people, or remain so."

25. For the investigation of the meaning of the "people of God",see G. von Rad, Das Gottesvolk in Deuteronomium, Kohlhammer, Stutt

gart 1929, and his Deuteronomium-Studien, 2nd ed. 1948 (E.T. Studiesin Deuteronomy) ; L. Rost, Die Vorstuft von Kirche und Synagogue im AltenTestament, Kohlhammer, Stuttgart 1938; N. A. Dahl, Das VolkGottes, Eine Untersuchung zum Kirchenbewusstseins des Urchristentums,Norske Videnskaps Akademi, Oslo 1941. This last book especially,excellently documented, offers a storehouse of data for those whowish to understand the problem of"Church and people" in a Biblicallight. I doubt whether H. H. Rowley, op. cit., pp. 86--87, is right i f nconnection with the "remnant" he voices the thought of "transition

from the conception of a nation to that of a Church". Does the OldTestament really know the "conception ofa nation"? The constitutiveelement of Israel is not the common descent (although the call of

Abraham, etc., is not wanting), but the act of having been called(qahal) by Yahweh. See, among others, J. D. W. Kritzinger, QehalJahwe, wat dit is en wie daaraan mag behoort (with a summary in English),J. H. Kok, Kampen 1957. In my opinion it is totally unfruitful inreferring to Israel to fasten the word "people" or "nation" on to her

apart from her belonging to Yahweh.26. Vriezen, op. cit., pp. 73 ff.

27. R. B. Y. Scott, A Kingdom ofPriests, Oudtestamentische StudienVIII, E.J. Brill, Leiden 1950, pp. 213-219. R. Martin-Achard, Israelet les Nations, pp. 35-37, concurs with Scott's exegesis.

28. An example of this psychological use of the scheme of particu-

141



larism and umversalism is still found, for example, in A. Amiet,

Origines de la Mission Chrdtienne, in Le monde non Chretien, Paris 1950,

p. 860. See further B. Sundkler, Contributions h I*etude de lapensde mission-

naire dans le Nouveau Testament, Paris 1936. (Idem, Jesus etlesPaiens,

Revued'Histoire et de

Philosophic Religieuses, 1936.)29. See TWNT I under "hagios". J. Hempel, Das Ethos des Alien

Testaments, A. Lorentz, Leipzig 1938.

30. L. Rost, Die Bezeichnungenfur Land und Volk, p. 147; G. Bertram,

TWNT II, p. 362.

31. K. L. Schmidt, Israels Stellung zu den Fremdlingen und Beisassen,

Judaica, Heft I, 1945, p. 284; G. Stahlin, TWNT V under "xenos",

p. 26; G. Rosen/G. Bertram, Juden und Phonizier, 1929. Still of value

is the older work ofA. Bertholet, Die Stellung der Israeliten und der Juden

zu denFremden, J. G. B. Mohr, Tubingen 1896.

32. A clear description of the mutual differences and the funda-

mental agreement in the prophets in his regard is given by M.

Schmidt, Prophet und Tempel, Eine Studie zum Problem der Gottesnahe im

Alien Testament, Zollikon Verlag, Zurich 1948.

33. In a contribution which M. Buber has given to a collective

Dutch work on religions of the world, Godsdiensten der Wereld (edited

by G. v. d. Leeuw, H. MeulenhofF, Amsterdam, 3rd ed. 1954) on

"The Faith of Israel", he emphasizesthe

fact that Exod. 3:

14 mustbe understood not in an ontological but in an historical sense. It is

not a question of the being of God, but a question of God's being

present; I am (shall be) who I am (shall be) =1 am there, and I shall

be there, as I shall be.

34. M. Schmidt, op. cit., p. 67.

35. For the rest, the traditional distinction between the historical

and the prophetic books in the Old Testament is not without objec-

tion. The historical books have to do with a prophetic view ofhistory;

the prophetic books with prophecy concerning history. This is em-

phasized by G. von Rad, Theologie des Alien Testaments, I (see note 6

above), and by K. Barth, Kirchliche Dogmatik, IV, 3, i Halfte, pp.

58-59 (Zollikon Verlag, Zurich; E.T. Church Dogmatics).

36. The only exception to this might perhaps be the well-known

passage, Mai. i : 1 1. The meaning of this verse must not, however, be

given too much weight. The intent of this oft-disputed passage is first

and foremost to accentuate the faithlessness of Israel; compared with

Israel, the heathen are upright worshippers of Yahweh. We must,therefore, be cautious about any declaration of the positive meaning.Here I differ from the opinion of H. H. Rowley, The Missionary Mes-

sage of the Old Testament: "Perhaps the extreme of broadmindedness

found in the Old Testament is found in Malachi" (p. 72) ;"men who

are accepted by God because they have lived up to the light they

142

larism and universalism is still found, for example, in A. Amiet,Origines de la Mission Chretienne, in Le monde non Chretien, Paris 1950,p. 86o. See further B. Sundkler, Contributions a 'etude de la pensee mission-

naire dans le Nouveau Testament, Paris 1936. (Idem, Jesus et les Paiens,

Revue d'Histoire et de Philosophic Religieuses, 1936.)29. See TWNT I under "hagios". J. Hempel, Das Ethos des Alten

Testaments, A. Lorentz, Leipzig 1938.

30. L. Rost, Die Bezeichnungenjur Landund Volk, p. 147; G. Bertram,TWNT II, p. 362.

31. K. L. Schmidt, lsraels Stellung zu den Fremdlingen und Beisassen,

Judaica, Heft I, 1945, p. 284; G. Stahlin, TWNT V under "xenos",p. 26; G. Rosen/G. Bertram, Juden und PhOnizier, rg2g. Still of valueis the older work ofA. Bertholet, Die Stellung der Israeliten und der Juden

zu den Fremden,J. C. B. Mohr, Tiibingen 18g6.32. A clear description of the mutual differences and the funda

mental agreement in the prophets in his regard is given by M.Schmidt, Prophet und Tempel, Eine Studie zum Problem der Gottesniihe imAlten Testament, Zollikon Verlag, Zurich 1948.

33· In a contribution which M. Buber has given to a collectiveDutch work on religions of the world, Godsdiensten der Wereld (editedby G. v. d. Leeuw, H. Meulenhoff, Amsterdam, srd ed. 1954) on

"The Faith of Israel", he emphasizes the fact that Exod. 3: 14 mustbe understood not in an ontological but in an historical sense. It isnot a question of the being of God, but a question of God's beingpresent; I am (shall be) who I am (shall be) =I am there, and I shallbe there, as I shall be.

34· M. Schmidt, op. cit., p. 67.35· For the rest, the traditional distinction between the historical

and the prophetic books in the Old Testament is not without objection. The historical books have to do with a prophetic view ofhistory;

the prophetic books with prophecy concerning history. This is emphasized by G. von Rad, Theologie des Alten Testaments, I (see note 6above), and by K. Barth, Kirchliche Dogmatik, IV, 3, I Halfte, pp.

58-59 (Zollikon Verlag, Ziirich; E.T. Church Dogmatics).36. The only exception to this might perhaps be the well-known

passage, Mal. r : 1 . The meaning of this verse must not, however, be

given too much weight. The intent of this oft-disputed passage is firstand foremost to accentuate the faithlessness of Israel: compared with

Israel, the heathen are upright worshippers of Yahweh. We must,therefore, be cautious about any declaration of the positive meaning.Here I differ from the opinion of H. H. Rowley, The Missionary Mes-

sage of the Old Testament: "Perhaps the extreme of broadmindednessfound in the Old Testament is found in Malachi" (p. 72); "men whoare accepted by God because they have lived up to the light they

142



had" (p. 74). But an undervaluation of this text, I think, is to be seen

in confining it to proselytes and to Jews of the Dispersion. Cf. also

R. Martin-Achard, Israel et les nations, p. 41 : "Malachi is not here

pronouncing any absolute judgment on the pagan cult; he is con-

demningthe attitude ofthe Levites." I believe this

can beour reaction :

a risky prophetic exclamation which, however, in the light of Israel's

attitude and of the promises of salvation to the nations, is not too

risky. But it is plain that no theory of general revelation or of general

grace can be built on this passage.

37. The literature on eschatology in the Old Testament is most

extensive. We may cite here, from the older literature, H. Gressmann,

Der Ursprungderlsraelitisch-judischenEschatologie, igo^;DerMessias9Van-

denhoeck, Gottingen 1929; L. Diirr, Ursprung undAusbau derjildischen

Heilandserwartungy C. A. Schwetschke, Berlin 1925. More recent

literature: L. Cerny, The Day of Jahweh and Some Relevant Problems,

Filosoficke Fakulta Univ. Karlovy, Prague 1948; H. H. Rowley, The

Relevance of Apocalyptic^ 4, Lutterworth Press, London 1952; M.

Schmidt, Prophet und Tempel> Zollikon Verlag, Zurich 1948; etc. Con-

sult also the literature (just as extensive) on Deutero-Isaiah and the

Servant of the Lord. We shall cite only: O. Eissfeldt, Der Gottesknecht

bei Deutero Jesaja> etc., Halle (Saale) 1933; J. Begrich, Studien zu

Deuterojesaja, Beitrage zur Wissenschaft vom A. und JV.jT., 4 Folge, Heft25, 1 938 ; J. v. d. Ploeg, Les chants du Serviteur de Jahve* dans la seconde

partie du lime d'Isaie, Librairie LecofFre, Paris 1936; and C. R. North,

The Suffering Servant in Deutero-Isaiah, Oxford Univ. Press, 1948 (this

work gives an extensive bibliography) ;H. H. Rowley, The Servant of

the Lord, Lutterworth Press, London 1952; etc.

38. On the Messianic expectation in the Old Testament, a mono-

graph appeared in the Netherlands in 1941 from the hand of A. H.

Edelkoort: De Christusverwachting in het Oude Testament, H. Veenman,

Wageningen. Further, F. E. Konig, Messianische Weissagungen,

G. Belser Verlag, Stuttgart 1925; H. Gressmann, Der Messias, 1929;

H. W. Wolff, Herrschaft Jahwes und Messiasgestalt im Alien Testament,

ZAW, 1936; W. Vischer, Das Christuszeugnis des Alien Testaments,

I-III, Zollikon Verlag, Zurich 1934- (E.T. vol. I, The Witness of the

Old Testament to Christ] ;M. Buber, Das Konigtum Gottes, B. Schocken

Verlag, 1932; K. Barth, Kirchliche Dogmatik, IV, 3, i Halfte, p. 60;

see also pp. 61-65 and (2 Halfte) pp. 788-792. (E.T. Church Dog-

matics.)

Chapter 2

i. So, e.g., E. Riehm, Der Missionsgedanke im Alien Testament,

AMZ, 1880; M. Lohr, Der Missionsgedanke im Alten Testament, 1896;

had" (p. 74). But an undervaluation of this text, I think, is to be seenin confining it to proselytes and to Jews of the Dispersion. Cf. alsoR. Martin-Achard, Israel et les nations, p. 4I : "Malachi is not herepronouncing any absolute judgment on the pagan cult; he is con

demning the attitudeof the

Levites." I believe thiscan be our

reaction:a risky prophetic exclamation which, however, in the light of Israel'sattitude and of the promises of salvation to the nations, is not too

risky. But it is plain that no theory ofgeneral revelation or of generalgrace can be built on this passage.

37· The literature on eschatology in the Old Testament is mostextensive. We may cite here, from the older literature, H. Gressmann,Der Ursprung der Israelitisch-jiidischenEschatologie, I 905; Der Messias, Vandenhoeck, Gottingen I 929; L. Diirr, Ursprung und Ausbau der jiidischen

Heilandserwartung, C. A. Schwetschke, Berlin I925. More recentliterature: L. Cerny, The Day of Jahweh and Some Relevant Problems,Filosoficke Fakulta Univ. Karlovy, Prague 1948; H. H. Rowley, TheRelevance of Apocalyptic, 4, Lutterworth Press, London 1952; M.Schmidt, Prophetund Tempel, Zollikon Verlag, Zi.irich I948; etc. Consult also the literature (just as extensive) on Deutero-Isaiah and theServant of the Lord. We shall cite only: 0. Eissfeldt, Der Gottesknecht

bei Deutero Jesaja, etc., Halle (Saale) 1933; J. Begrich, Studien zu

Deuterojesaja, Beitriige zur Wissenschqfi vom A. und N.T.,

4 Folge, Heft25, 1938; J. v. d. Ploeg, Les chants du Serviteur de Jahve dans la seconds

partie du livre d'lsaie, Librairie Lecoffre, Paris 1936; and C. R. North,The Suffiring Servant in Deutero-lsaiah, Oxford Univ. Press, 1948 (thiswork gives an extensive bibliography); H. H. Rowley, The Servant of

the Lord, Lutterworth Press, London I 952; etc.38. On the Messianic expectation in the Old Testament, a mono

graph appeared in the Netherlands in 1941 from the hand of A. H.

Edelkoort: De Christusverwachting in het Oude Testament, H. Veenman,

Wageningen. Further, F. E. Konig, Messianische Weissagungen,C. Belser Verlag, Stuttgart I925; H. Gressmann, Der Messias, 1929;H. W. Wolff, Herrschaft Jahwes und Messiasgestalt im Alten Testament,

ZAW, 1936; W. Vischer, Das Christuszeugnis des Alten Testaments,I-III, Zollikon Verlag, Ziirich I934- (E.T. vol. I, The Witness of the

Old Testament to Christ); M. Buber, Das Konigtum Gottes, B. SchockenVerlag, 1932; K. Barth, Kirchliche Dogmatik, IV, 3, I Halfte, p. 6o;see also pp. 61-65 and (2 Halfte) pp. 788-792. (E.T. Church Dog

matics.)

Chapter 2

r. So, e.g., E. Riehm, Der Missionsgedanke im Alten Testament,AMZ, r88o; M. Lohr, Der Missionsgedanke im Alten Testament, r8g6;

143



A. Bertholet, Die Stellung der Israeliten und der Juden zu den Fremden,

J. G. B. Mohr, Tubingen 1896. Further, F. M. Th. Bohl, Oud-Israel

en de pending; Mededeelingen, Tijdschrift voor Zendingswetenschap,

1929. Otherwise the distinction between universal and missionary is

notalways kept clear; M. Lohr, op. cit., p. 2, neglects

it

entirely.2. Thus, e.g., E. Sellin, Der Missionsgedanke im Alien Testament,

NAMZ, 1925. So also H. H. Rowley, The Missionary Message of the

Old Testament, 1944, pp. 9-27, although, in regard to Moses' mono-

theism, he does say, "For whether Moses regarded other gods as

real or not, he certainly regarded them as negligible," p. 21, and

later: "it is improbable that Moses attained full monotheism," p. 27.

3. So also Rowley, op. cit. : "The man who was the first missionary

known to History," p. 27.

4. Cf. H. H. Rowley, The Faith of Israel, 1956, p. 185: "With him

(Deutero-Isaiah) universalism was the corollary of monotheism and

the world-wide mission of Israel the corollary of her election."

5. E. Sellin, op. cit., p. 70; H. H. Rowley, Missionary Message, pp.

46-64; E. Jacob, Theologie de VAncwn Testament, 1956, pp. 177-179

(see note 2, Chapter i above).

6. So Th. G. Vriezen, Die Erwdhlung Israels, 1953, PP- 62-72, and

also H. H. Rowley, The Biblical Doctrine of Election:, Th. G. Vriezen,

De pendingin het

Oude Testament, De Heerbaan, 1954, pp. 98-110.Further see: J. Blauw, Goden en Mensen, 1950, pp. 46-57; M. Schmidt,

Prophet und Tempel, 1948, pp. 172-191; 221-229.

7. There is too much literature on Deutero-Isaiah and the Servant

of the Lord to be listed here. G. R. North, The Suffering Servant in

Deutero-Isaiah, 1948, gives a good bibliography. Of more recent

literature we will cite only: N. H. Snaith, The Servant of the Lord in

Deutero-Isaiah in Studies in Old Testament Prophecy (to Th. H. Robinson,)

Ed. Glark, Edinburgh 1950; H. H. Rowley, The Servant of the Lord,

etc., Lutterworth Press, London 1952; P. A. H. de Boer, Second

Isaiah*s Message, Oudtestamentische Studien XI, 1956; R. Martin-

Achard, Israel et les nations, Delachaux & Niestle*, Neuchatel & Paris,

1959-

8. So Vriezen, op. cit., p. 67.

9. Op. cit., Chapter II, pp. 13-30, and especially 23-29.

10. Op. dt., p. 30.

1 1 . Besides the commentaries, introduction and theologies of the

Old Testament,see

among others, H. H. Rowley, The Biblical Doctrine

ofElection, pp. 67, 86; The Missionary Message ofthe Old Testament, p. 67.

12. H. H. Rowley, The Faith of Israel, p. 186.

13. The statement by H. Schmidt, Die grossen Propheten, 2nd ed.,

pp. 483-487 (Van den Hoeck, Gottingen 1923) remains a remarkable

one; in this citation he elaborates the opinion he stated as early as

144

A. Berthelet, Die Stellung der Israeliten und der Juden zu den Fremden,

J. C. B. Mohr, Tiibingen I896. Further, F. M. Th. Bohl, Oud-Israel

en de Zending; Mededeelingen, Tijdschrift voor Zendingswetenschap,I929. Otherwise the distinction between universal and missionary is

not always kept clear; M. Lohr, op.cit.,

p. 2, neglects it entirely.2. Thus, e.g., E. Sellin, Der Missionsgedanke im Alten Testament,NAMZ, I925. So also H. H. Rowley, The Missionary Message cif the

Old Testament, I944, pp. 9-27, although, in regard to Moses' monotheism, he does say, "For whether Moses regarded other gods asreal or not, he certainly regarded them as negligible," p. 2I, and

later: "it is improbable that Moses attained full monotheism," p. 27.3· So also Rowley, op. cit. : "The man who was the first missionary

known to History," p. 27.

4· Of. H. H. Rowley, The Faith cif Israel, I956, p. I85: "With him(Deutero-Isaiah) universalism was the corollary of monotheism and

the world-wide mission of Israel the corollary of her election."5· E. Sellin, op. cit., p. 70; H. H. Rowley, Missionary Message, pp.

46-64; E. Jacob, TMologie de l'Ancien Testament, I956, pp. I77-I79

(see note 2, Chapter I above).6. So Th. C. Vriezen, Die Erwiihlung Israels, I953, pp. 62-72, and

also H. H. Rowley, The Biblical Doctrine cif Election; Th. C. Vriezen,

De Zendingin

het Oude Testament, De Heerbaan, I954, pp. 98-Iro.Further see:J. Blauw, Goden en Mensen, 1950, pp. 46-57; M. Schmidt,Prophet und Tempel, 1948, pp. 172-19I; 22I-229·

7· There is too much literature on Deutero-Isaiah and the Servantof the Lord to be listed here. C. R. North, The Suffering Servant in

Deutero-Isaiah, I948, gives a good bibliography. Of more recentliterature we will cite only: N. H. Snaith, The Servant cif the Lord in

Deutero-Jsaiah in Studies in Old Testament Prophecy (to Th. H. Robinson,)Ed. Clark, Edinburgh 1950; H. H. Rowley, The Servant cif the Lord,

etc., Lutterworth Press, London I952; P. A. H. de Boer, SecondIsaiah's Message, Oudtestamentische Studien XI, I956; R. Martin

Achard, Israel et les nations, Delachaux & Niestle, NeucM.tel & Paris,

1959·8. So Vriezen, op. cit., p. 67.

g. Op. cit., Chapter II, pp. I3-30, and especially 23-29.IO. Op. cit., p. 30.I I. Besides the commentaries, introduction and theologies of the

Old Testament, see among others, H. H. Rowley, The Biblical Doctrinei fElection, pp. 67, 86; The Missionary Message cifthe Old Testament, p. 67.12. H. H. Rowley, The Faith cif Israel, p. r86.13. The statement by H. Schmidt, Die grossen Propheten, 2nd ed.,

pp. 483-487 (Van den Hoeck, Gottingen 1923) remains a remarkableone; in this citation he elaborates the opinion he stated as early as

I44



1906 (Absicht und Entstehungszeit des Bitches Jona, Theol. Studien und

Kritiken, 1906, pp. 180-199): Jonah is a polemic against the false

prophets; Nineveh is a figure for Jerusalem; if even a godless pagan

city is spared, how much more, then, Jerusalem?

14. Op. cit., pp. 45-47. The opinionofA. Feuillet is

foundin

RevueBiblique 54, Paris, Rome 1957, Le sense du livre de Jonas, pp. 340-361.

15. Almost every theology of the Old Testament gives a treatment

of the characteristic contrast in the Old Testament between nature

and history, between naturalism and Heilsgeschichte.

1 6. So the outlook of R. Bultmann regarding the Old Testament.

It is the history ofthe failure ofGod's covenant with Israel; the failure

was unavoidable, because a people of God like Israel is not a real

quantity, nor can it be, but only an eschatological one. The sense of

the Old Testament is the manifestation of this failure. This conception

of Bultmann is closely connected with his eschatological outlook on

the New Testament. See R. Bultmann, Weissagung und Erfullung,

Zeitschrift fur Theologie und Kirche, 1950, pp. 360 fF.

17. W. Vischer, Das Christuszeugnis des Alien Testaments, II, 1941,

p. 8; K. Barth, Kirchliche Dogmatik, IV, 3, p. 792.

1 8. See G. von Rad, Theologie des Alien Testaments) I, pp. 414-415.

For the significance of the chokma, see Chapter 4, 3.

19.E.

Sellin, Der Missionsgedanke im Alien Testament'-,

pp. 68-72;P. Volzyjesaja II (Komm. z. A. T.), p. 169, A. Deicherischen Verlags-

buchhandlung, Leipzig; W. Eichrodt, Gottes Volk und die Volker,

EMM, 1942, Chapter 3; Th. C. Vriezen, Die Erwdhlung Israels, p. 65;

H. H. Rowley, The Missionary Message ofthe Old Testament, pp. 46-64;

E. Jacob, Theologie de PAncien Testament, p. 179.

20. P. A. H. de Boer, Second Isaiah's Message, Oudtestamentische

Studien, XI, 1956, p. 90; N. H. Snaith, The Servant of the Lord in

Deutero-Isaiah, in Studies in Old Testament Prophecy, p. 191; R. Martin-

Achard, Israel et les nations, pp. 2130.

21. Particularly Snaith, op. cit., p. 191 : "We find . . . this prophet

to be essentially nationalistic in attitude. He is actually responsible

for the narrow and exclusive attitude ofpost-exilic days. The so-called

Universalism of Deutero-Isaiah needs considerable qualification." It

seems to me that Snaith, in his reaction against the missionary ex-

egesis and against a one-sided emphasis on the universalistic character

of Deutero-Isaiah, goes however too far. For example, when he

explains the waiting of the nations inIsa.

42:

4, as a waitingin.

fear,then he concedes that he is going against the ordinary meaning of the

Hebrew word; he must .appeal to the "Syriac root" of the word to

support his thesis! op. cit., pp. 193-194. In 42: 6, he eliminates

"light to the nations" as a gloss, p. 194. In 49: 6, he keeps "light to

the nations" but he interprets it as follows: the Servant will be a

K 145

tgo6 (Absicht und Entstehungszeit des Buches Jona, Theol. Studien und

Kritiken, tgo6, pp. 180-199): Jonah is a polemic against the falseprophets; Nineveh is a figure for Jerusalem; if even a godless pagan

city is spared, how much more, then, Jerusalem?

14.

Op. cit., pp. 45-47. The opinion ofA.

Feuillet is found in RevueBiblique 54, Paris, Rome 1957, Le sense du livre de Jonas, pp. 340-361.15. Almost every theology of the Old Testament gives a treatment

of the characteristic contrast in the Old Testament between nature

and history, between naturalism and Heilsgeschichte.16. So the outlook of R. Bultmann regarding the Old Testament.

It is the history of the failure ofGod's covenant with Israel; the failurewas unavoidable, because a people of God like Israel is not a realquantity, nor can it be, but only an eschatological one. The sense of

the Old Testament is the manifestation of this failure. This conceptionof Bultmann is closely connected with his eschatological outlook on

the New Testament. See R. Bultmann, Weissagung und Erfiillung,Zeitschrift fur Theologie und Kirche, 1950, pp. s6o ff.

17. W. Vischer, Das Christuszeugnis des Alten Testaments, II, 1941,p. 8; K. Barth, Kirchliche Dogmatik, IV, 3, p. 792.

18. See G. von Rad, Theologie des Alten Testaments, I, pp. 414-415.For the significance of the chokma, see Chapter 4, 3·

19.E. Sellin, Der Missionsgedanke im Alten Testament, pp. 68-72;P. Vo!z,Jesaja II (Komm. z. A. T.), p. r6g, A. Deicherischen Verlags

buchhandlung, Leipzig; W. Eichrodt, Gottes Volk und die Volker,

EMM, 1942, Chapter g; Th. C. Vriezen, Die Erwiihlung Israels, p. 65;H. H. Rowley, The Missionary Message of the Old Testament, pp. 46-64;E. Jacob, Thiologie de !'Ancien Testament, p. 179.

20. P. A. H. de Boer, Second Isaiah's Message, OudtestamentischeStudien, XI, 1956, p. go; N. H. Snaith, The Servant of the Lord inDeutero-Isaiah, in Studies in Old Testament Prophecy, p. 191; R. Martin

Achard, Israel et les nations, pp. 21-30.2 r. Particularly Snaith, op. cit., p. 191: "We find . . • this prophet

to be essentially nationalistic in attitude. He is actually responsiblefor the narrow and exclusive attitude ofpost-exilic days. The so-calledUniversalism of Deutero-Isaiah needs considerable qualification." It

seems to me that Snaith, in his reaction against the missionary exegesis and against a one-sided emphasis on the universalistic characterof Deutero-Isaiah, goes however too far. For example, when he

explains the waiting of the nations in !sa. 42: 4, as a waiting inftar,then he concedes that he is going against the ordinary meaning of theHebrew word; he must.appeal to the "Syriac root" of the word to

support his thesis!-op. cit., pp. 193-194. In 42: 6, he eliminates"light to the nations" as a gloss, p. 194. In 49: 6, he keeps "light tothe nations" but he interprets it as follows: the Servant will be a

K 145



light to guide every Israelite wanderer home, p. 198, etc. In the

same way the strong item of evidence against Snaith's thesis, in 45 :

122, is treated thus "verse 22 refers to all the scattered Israelites

amongst the heathen everywhere/' p. 197.

22.

Onethinks

here,for

example,ofLuke

2 :

32,"a

lightfor revela-

tion to the Gentiles/' an expression strongly reminiscent of Deutero-

Isaiah; likewise Phil. 2 : IQ-II, etc. Of course it can be said that the

New Testament interpretation of Old Testament passages has dis-

torted their original intention. But one might reply that the passages

in the New Testament regarding the Old Testament contain the

oldest interpretations we have, and on that account commend them-

selves a priori.

23. B. Sundkler, Jesus et Us Patens, Revue d'Histoire et de Philo-

sophic Religieuses, 1936, pp. 462499. See also M. Schmidt, Prophet

und Tempel, 1948, passim. My objection to Sundkler's idea is that he

puts too much stress, I believe, on the Temple and the mount of the

Temple as the centre, as the "navel of the earth". I believe it would

have been sufficient to name Israel here, because, with a few excep-

tions, such as Ezekiel, the Temple does not play the role in the pro-

phets which Sundkler ascribes to it. But Sundkler is quite right in

what he says at the end of his article about the problem of Jesus

and the Gentiles (and this goes also, mutatis mutandis,for

the problemof mission in the Old Testament) "Only the centripetal interpreta-

tion furnishes us with the possibility of a solution to the problem of

Jesus and the Gentiles." Op. cit. 3 p. 499.

24. R. Martin-Achard, op. cit., p. 48.

25. Ibid.,, pp. 71-72.

Chapter 3

1. See, for example, what a relatively slight place Messianism

receives in the theologies of the Old Testament of Eichrodt, Kohler,

Procksch, von Rad, and Vriezen.

2. One thinks here of the resistance which arose against the

Christocentric exegesis of the first chapters of Genesis, for example,

by K. Barth, Kirchliche Dogmatik III;and especially ofthe often sharp

criticism which has been levelled on the European continent against

the work (which is indeed quite controversial) of W. Vischer, Das

Christuszeugnisdes Alien

Testaments) 19351942. See G. von Rad, DasChristuszeugnis des Alien Testaments, Theologische Blatter, 1935; W.

Eichrodt, gur Frage der theologischen Exegese des Alien Testaments,

Theologische Blatter, 1938; A. H. Edelkoort, De Christusverwachting

in het Oude Testament, 1941; N. W. Porteous, Towards a Theology of the

Old Testament, Scottish Journal of Theology, 1948, etc.

146

light to guide every Israelite wanderer home, p. 198, etc. In thesame way the strong item of evidence against Snaith's thesis, in 45:22, is treated thus-"verse 22 refers to all the scattered Israelites

amongst the heathen everywhere," p. I97·

22. One thinks here, for example, ofLuke 2: 32, "a light for revelation to the Gentiles," an expression strongly reminiscent of DeuteroIsaiah; likewise Phil. 2: IO-I I, etc. Of course it can be said that the

New Testament interpretation of Old Testament passages has distorted their original intention. But one might reply that the passagesin the New Testament regarding the Old Testament contain the

oldest interpretations we have, and on that account commend themselves a priori.

23. B. Sundkler, Jesus et les Paiens, Revue d'Histoire et de Philo

sophie Religieuses, I936, pp. 462-499. See also M. Schmidt, Prophetund Tempel, 1948, passim. My objection to Sundkler's idea is that he

puts too much stress, I believe, on the Temple and the mount of the

Temple as the centre, as the "navel of the earth". I believe it wouldhave been sufficient to name Israel here, because, with a few exceptions, such as Ezekiel, the Temple does not play the role in the prophets which Sundkler ascribes to it. But Sundkler is quite right in

what he says at the end of his article about the problem of Jesus

and the Gentiles (and this goes also, mutatis mutandis, for the problemof mission in the Old Testament)-"Only the centripetal interpretation furnishes us with the possibility of a solution to the problem of

Jesus and the Gentiles." Op. cit., p. 499·24. R. Martin-Achard, op. cit., p. 48.25. Ibid., pp. 7I-72.

Chapter 3

I . See, for example, what a relatively slight place Messianismreceives in the theologies of the Old Testament of Eichrodt, Kohler,Procksch, von Rad, and Vriezen.

2. One thinks here of the resistance which arose against theChristocentric exegesis of the first chapters of Genesis, for example,by K. Barth, Kirchliche Dogmatik III; and especially of the often sharp

criticism which has been levelled on the European continent againstthe work (which is indeed quite controversial) of W. Vischer, Das

Christuszeugnis des Alten Testaments, I935-I942- See G. von Rad, DasChristuszeugnis des Alten Testaments, Theologische Blatter, I 935; W.Eichrodt, Zur Frage der theologischen Exegese des Alten Testaments,Theologische Blatter, I938; A. H. Edelkoort, De Christusverwachtingin het Oude Testament, I94I; N. W. Porteous, Towards a Theology of he

Old Testament, Scottish Journal of Theology, I 948, etc.

146



3. So, for example, G. Holscher, Die Ursprunge derjudischen Eschato-

logie, 1925. One fact which tells against this theory has been pointed

out by the majority of critics : the Messiah is rarely designated "King",

mostly as "Ruler'*. Is this to avoid too great a similarity or identifica-

tion with Israel's kings or with the non-Israelite gods whowere

called "kings"? (Cf. TWNT I, pp. 563 ff.)

4. This is pointed out by Edelkoort, op. cit., p. 13, where there is a

reference to J. Brierre Marbonne, Les prophetes messianiques de I'Ancien

Testament dans la litteraturejuive, Paul Geuthner Librairie Orientaliste,

Paris 1933.

5. Gf. TWNT I, p. 565.

6. This is emphatically stated by H. H. Rowley, The Unity of the

Bible, Carey Kingsgate Press, London 1953. In the recent little book

by G. von Rad, Moses, World Christian Books, no. 32, Lutterworth

Press, London 1960, there is visible this synthesis after the analysis;

likewise, of course, in his Theologie des Alien Testaments. Highly impor-

tant are von Rad's expositions in Vol. II, pp. 329-424 (1960. E.T. in

preparation) .

7. See here the important exposition by K. Barth, Kirchliche Dog-

matik, IV, 3, i Halfte, pp. 52-78.

8. Cf. H. Gressmann, Der Messias, pp. 472 fF.

9. So G. von Rad in TWNT I, p. 565, "basileus".10. Though the Messianic exegesis of Gen. 3: 15 has been aban-

doned in many circles, and even quite strongly contested, I think it is

not out ofline to remark that an early Messianic note is indeed struck

here in the promise of the destruction of the serpent (ifthis is under-

stood as an anti-godly power). In any case, Gen. 3:15 must be read

as a promise ofsomething to be enacted in the future history of man.

Gen. 3 must also be read as a confession of the Geschichtsmdchtigkeit

(power in history) of the God of Israel. In the light of the New Testa-

ment fulfilment, this passage certainly takes on Messianic significance.

u. The Messianic significance of the priesthood in Israel must be

interpreted negatively; the impotence of the priestly sacrifice, the limits

of priestly service are more Messianic than the priesthood itself. The

impotence of the priestly sacrifice really to effect forgiveness "keeps

the wound open". Cf. TWNT III, "archiereus," p. 278.

12. Against Edelkoort, op. cit., p. 76, and others, it is my intention

to hold fast to the Messianic exegesis of this passage. Cf. also G. von

Rad, Moses, p. 78.

13. So H. W. Wolff, Herrschaft Jahwehs, p. 174; Vriezen, Theologie,

p. 239; Gressmann, Messias, p. 271 ;von Rad, TWNT I, pp. 563 ff.;

and others.

14. Von Rad, TWNT I, p. 566, note: "The Servant of the Lord

songs in Deutero-Isaiah do not refer to the Messiah." There is no

147

3· So, for example, G. Holscher, Die Urspriinge der jiidischen Eschatologie, I925. One fact which tells against this theory has been pointedout by the majority ofcritics: the Messiah is rarely designated "King",mostly as "Ruler". Is this to avoid too great a similarity or identifica

tion with Israel's kings or with the non-Israelite gods who werecalled "kings"? (Of. TWNT I, pp. 563 ff.)4· This is pointed out by Edelkoort, op. cit., p. I3, where there is a

reference to J. Brierre Marbonne, Les prophetes messianiques de l'AncienTestament dans la litterature juive, Paul Geuthner Librairie Orientaliste,

Paris I933·5· Of. TWNT I, p. 565.6. This is emphatically stated by H. H. Rowley, The U n i ~ of the

Bible, Carey Kingsgate Press, London I953· In the recent little book

by G. von Rad, Moses, World Christian Books, no. 32, LutterworthPress, London Ig6o, there is visible this synthesis after the analysis;likewise, of course, in his Theologie des Alten Testaments. Highly important are von Rad's expositions in Vol. II, pp. 329-424 (Ig6o. E.T. inpreparation).

7· See here the important exposition by K. Barth, Kirchliche Dog-matik, IV, 3, I Halfte, pp. 52-78.

8. Of. H. Gressmann, Der Messias, pp. 472 ff.

g. So G. von Rad in TWNT I, p. 565, "basileus".IO. Though the Messianic exegesis of Gen. 3: I5 has been abandoned in many circles, and even quite strongly contested, I think it is

not out ofline to remark that an early Messianic note is indeed struckhere in the proinise of the destruction of the serpent (if this is understood as an anti-godly power). In any case, Gen. 3 : I 5 must be readas a proinise ofsomething to be enacted in the future history of man.Gen. 3 must also be read as a confession of the Geschichtsmiichtiglceit(power in history) of the God ofisrael. In the light of the New Testa

ment fulfilment, this passage certainly takes on Messianic significance.I I. The Messianic significance of the priesthood in Israel must be

interpreted negatively; the impotence of the priestly sacrifice, the limitsof priestly service are more Messianic than the priesthood itsel£ The

impotence of the priestly sacrifice really to effect forgiveness "keepsthe wound open". Cf. TWNT III, "archiereus," p. 278.

I2. Against Edelkoort, op. cit., p. 76, and others, it is my intentionto hold fast to the Messianic exegesis of this passage. Cf. also G. von

Rad, Moses, p.78.

Ig. So H. W. Wolff, HerrschaftJahwehs, p. I74; Vriezen, Theologie,p. 239; Gressmann, Messias, p. 27I; von Rad, TWNT I, pp. 563 ff.;and others.

I4. Von Rad, TWNT I, p. 566, note: "The Servant of the Lord

songs in Deutero-Isaiah do not refer to the Messiah." There is no

147



need here for us to discuss the point. The literature is indicated in

note 37, Chapter I, and further in the summary in TWNT V,

pp. 653-654.

15. In all likelihood the Servant of the Lord was interpreted Mes-

sianicallyeven in

pre-Christiantimes.

For this,see

among others,

J. Hering, Le rqyaume de Dieu et sa venue, Delachaux & Niestle, Neu-

chatel & Paris, 1937, p. 67; C. W. North, The Suffering Servant, p. 7.

See also TWNT V, pp. 685 ff.

1 6. Zimmerli, TWNT V, p. 669.

17. On the significance of the remnant an important Old Testa-

ment item into which we have not been able to enter because of

shortness ofspace H. H. Rowley has written in The Biblical Doctrine

of Election, 3rd ed. 1953, PP- 69-94. We object to his remark on

pp. 86-87: "Not all Israel was elect, and not all the elect were of

Israel, There was thus the transition from the conception of a nation

to that of a Church, from the thought of a body of people held to-

gether by their common descent to that of a people held together bya common faith." For it does not seem right to me to call Israel a

"nation with a common descent". It is the election that prohibits any

emphasis on this element; from the very beginning Israel is "a people

held together by a common faith". It seems to me a shifting of the

Biblicalwitness to compare the relationship of Israel and the remnant

to that of nation and Church. I think one might have to speak of a

faithful and unfaithful people of God, an unfaithful people and a

remnant made faithful. This is not to deny that Israel has not known

the tension of "nation and Church", but it is to deny that the Old

Testament recognizes any Church-people opposition as we under-

stand it (with the background ofthe history ofour national Churches).

See also TWNT IV, pp. 148-173 under "eklegomai" (Quell);

O. Cullmann, Christus und die %eit, Zollikon Verlag, Zurich 1946,

pp. 99 ff. (E.T. Christ and Time).

18. J- Jeremias, TWNT VI, p. 537, points out that "many" occurs

five times, so that this word becomes a characteristic of this passage

of Scripture.

19. In the light of the Messianic appropriation of the Servant of

the Lord songs, I am inclined to approve ofR. Martin-Achard in his

exegesis of Isa. 42 : 4: The nations shall look upon the work that Godhas done to Israel. So Israel et Us nations, p. 26. Apart from that,

Martin-Achard,like

many recent exegetes (P.A.H. de Boer, N. H.Snaith, and others) ignores the Messianic character of the songs.

20. I pass by the question as to an individual or collective con-

ception of the Son of Man (in connection with Dan. 7: 27). For this

see F. E. Konig, Messianische Weissagungen, 3rd ed., 1925, p. 309;

Edelkoort, Christusverwachting, pp. 497 ff., and the commentaries.

148

need here for us to discuss the point. The literature is indicated in

note 37, Chapter I, and further in the summary in TWNT V,

PP· 653-654.15. In all likelihood the Servant of the Lord was interpreted Mes

sianically even in pre-Christian times. For this, see among others,J. Hering, Le r ~ a u m e de Dieu et sa venue, Delachaux & Niestle, Neuchatel & Paris, 1937, p. 67; C. W. North, The Suffering Servant, p. 7·See also TWNT V, pp. 685 ff.

r6. Zimmerli, TWNT V, p. 66g.17. On the significance of the remnant-an important Old Testa

ment item into which we have not been able to enter because of

shortness of space-H. H. Rowley has written in The Biblical Doctrine

of Election, srd ed. 1953, pp. 6g-g4. We object to his remark on

pp. 86-87: "Not all Israel was elect, and not all the elect were ofIsrael. There was thus the transition from the conception of a nation

to that of a Church, from the thought of a body of people held together by their common descent to that of a people held together by

a common faith." For it does not seem right to me to call Israel a"nation with a common descent". I t is the election that prohibits anyemphasis on this element; from the very beginning Israel is "a peopleheld together by a common faith". It seems to me a shifting of the

Biblical witness to compare the relationship of Israel and the remnantto that of nation and Church. I think one might have to speak of afaithful and unfaithful people of God, an unfaithful people and aremnant made faithful. This is not to deny that Israel has not knownthe tension of "nation and Church", but it is to deny that the Old

Testament recognizes any Church-people opposition as we understand it (with the background of he history ofour national Churches).See also TWNT IV, pp. I48-173 under "eklegomai" (Quell);0 . Cullmann, Christus und die Zeit, Zollikon Verlag, Zurich 1946,

pp. 99 ff. (E.T. Christ and Time).r8. ].Jeremias, TWNT VI, p. 537, points out that "many" occurs

five times, so that this word becomes a characteristic of this passageof Scripture.

rg. In the light of the Messianic appropriation of the Servant of

the Lord songs, I am inclined to approve ofR. Martin-Achard in hisexegesis of Isa. 42: 4: The nations shall look upon the work that God

has done to Israel. So Israel et les nations, p. 26. Apart from that,

Martin-Achard, like many recent exegetes (P.A.H. de Boer, N. H.Snaith, and others) ignores the Messianic character of the songs.20. I pass by the question as to an individual or collective con

ception ofthe Son of Man (in connection with Dan. 7: 27). For thissee F. E. Konig, Messianische Weissagungen, srd ed., 1925, p. sag;

Edelkoort, Christusverwachting, pp. 497 ff., and the commentaries.

148



Personally, I believe that we must take account here of a certain

fluidity, just as we must in the figure of the Servant in Deutero-

Isaiah. Furthermore, the representative function of both the Servant

ofthe Lord and ofthe Son ofMan forms a link between the individual

and the collective"poles". This conception renders superfluous the

forced solution of the difficulties in Dan. 7 as presented by Edelkoort

(op. cit.y p. 500 non-Messianic elaboration of originally Messianic

material). See also G. von Rad, Theologie des A.T. II, pp. 264-274.

21. H. Gressmann, Der Messias, pp. 344 ff.

22. There is a remarkable exegesis from the hand of the Jewish

exegete M. Buber regarding the matter ofthe bearing ofsin in Isa. 53 ;

this is found in Het Geloofvan Israel (The Faith of Israel) in the Dutch

symposium edited by G. v. d. Leeuw, De Godsdiensten der Wereld, 2nd

ed., 1948, p. 300. According to Buber, this sin cannot refer to the

transgressions of Israel, for these are borne by God Himself. Buber

refers to Hos. 14: 3, Jer. 33: 24. The gods of the nations do not do

this; the gods bow under the load, but they cannot carry it. (So

Buber explains Isa. 46: 2.) Now the Servant of the Lord will do what

the gods cannot do, namely, bear the ills and the painful evil of the

sins ofthe nations, Isa. 53 : 4. "My people", then, in Isa. 53 : 8, is put

in the mouth of each of the kings who, as it appears from Isa. 52 :

13-15,is

onhis feet.

Althoughthis

exegesis appearsto

me forced anduntenable, it certainly has this much truth that the bearing of sin

also includes those of the nations. In this respect the exegesis of this

son of Israel is an unsuspected witness for the Old Testament preach-

ing of the world-redeeming power of Messianic suffering (even

though Buber himself conceives of the Servant of the Lord not as

personally Messianic, but as collectively or individually Israelite).

23. The contrast existing here with the older directly missionary

exegesis is not so irreconcilable as it perhaps seems at first glance.

We are much further along, I believe, when we can come to the

following communis opinio in regard to the Old Testament :

(a) There is no explicit, but only at best an implicit indication of

mission in the centrifugal sense. The idea of mission can in

consequence only be derived (at best) from the eschatological

and Messianic passages and is never to be read directly.

(b) Mission as an act of men lies quite outside the Old Testament

circle of concern.

(c) Only in the liturgy of Israel (the Psalms) doesIsrael

rise,as it

were, above herself and call the nations to universal praise,

which still, however, finds its inspiration in the acts of God in

and with Israel.

24. For this, see TWNT II, pp. 400-405, under "eirene"; J. C,

Hoekendijk, The Call to Evangelism, IRM, 1950, pp. 162-175.

Personally, I believe that we must take account here of a certainfluidity, just as we must in the figure of the Servant in DeuteroIsaiah. Furthermore, the representative function of both the Servantof the Lord and of the Son of Man forms a link between the individual

and the collective "poles". This conception renders superfluous theforced solution of the difficulties in Dan. 7 as presented by Edelkoort(op. cit., p. sao-non-Messianic elaboration of originally Messianicmaterial). See also G. von Rad, Theologie des A.T. II, pp. 264-274.

2r. H. Gressmann, Der Messias, pp. 344 ff.

22. There is a remarkable exegesis from the hand of the Jewishexegete M. Buber regarding the matter of the bearing ofsin in Isa. 53;this is found in Het Geloofvan Israel (The Faith of Israel) in the Dutchsymposium edited by G. v. d. Leeuw, De Godsdiensten der Wereld, 2nd

ed., 1948, p. 300. According to Buber, this sin cannot refer to thetransgressions of Israel, for these are borne by God Himself. Buberrefers to Hos. 14: 3, Jer. 33:.24. The gods of the nations do not do

this; the gods bow under the load, but they cannot carry it. (SoBuber explains Isa. 46: 2.) Now the Servant of the Lord will do what

the gods cannot do, namely, bear the ills and the painful evil of the

sins of the nations, Isa. 53: 4· "My people", then, in Isa. 53: 8, is put

in the mouth of each of the kings who, as it appears from Isa. 52:

13-15,is

on his feet. Although this exegesis appears to me forced anduntenable, it certainly has this much truth-that the bearing of sinalso includes those of the nations. In this respect the exegesis of thisson of Israel is an unsuspected witness for the Old Testament preaching of the world-redeeming power of Messianic suffering (eventhough Buber himself conceives of the Servant of the Lord not aspersonally Messianic, but as collectively or individually Israelite).

23. The contrast existing here with the older directly missionaryexegesis is not so irreconcilable as it perhaps seems at first glance.

We are much further along, I believe, when we can come to thefollowing communis opinio in regard to the Old Testament:

(a) There is no explicit, but only at best an implicit indication of

mission in the centrifugal sense. The idea of mission can in

consequence only be derived (at best) from the eschatologicaland Messianic passages and is never to be read directly.

(b) Mission as an act of men lies quite outside the Old Testamentcircle of concern.

(c) Only in the liturgy ofisrael (the Psalms) does Israel rise, as itwere, above herself and call the nations to universal praise,which still, however, finds its inspiration in the acts of God inand with Israel.

24. For this, see TWNT II, pp. 400-405, under "eirene"; J. C.Hoekendijk, The Call to Evangelism, IRM, 1950, pp. 1 6 2 ~ 1 7 5 .

149



Chapter 4

I. Of the earlier literature (before 1930) on this subject I only

mention (in chronological order) :

A.Bertholet, Die Stellung

der Israeliten und der

Juden zuden

Fremden,1896.

K. Axenfeld, Diejudische Propaganda als Vorlduferin und Wegbereiterin der

urchristlichen Mission. Festschriftfur G. Warneck, 1904.

P. Wendland, Die hellenistisch-romische Kultur in ihren Beziehungen zu

Judentum und Christentum, 2. AufL J. G. B. Mohr, Tubingen 1912.

A. Causse, La propaganda juive et Vhellenisme, Revue d'Histoire et de

Philosophic religieuses, II, 1923.

W. Bousset, Die Religion des Judentums im spathettenistischen eitalter,

3. Aufl. J. G. B. Mohr, Tubingen 1926.

A. Causse, Les disperses d Israel. Etudes Strassbourg 19, Paris 1929.

G. Rosen, Das antike Judentum als Missionsreligion und die Entstehung der

judischen Diaspora. Neu bearbeitet und erweitert von Fr. Rosen

und G. Bertram. Tubingen 1929;

and of the literature from 1930 onwards:

F. M. Derwacter, Preparing the Wayfor Paul, The Proselyte Movement in

later Judaism. The Macmillan Company, New York 1930.

A. Causse, Lejudaisme avantjtsusChrist.

Paris 1931.Paul Volz, Fr. Stummer, Joh. Hempel (Herausgeber), Werden und

Wesen des A.T.: Vortrdge gehalten auf der internationalen Tagung a.t.

licher Forscher zu Gottingen vom 410 Sept. 1935, Alfred Topelmans,

Berlin 1936. In this work especially: A. Causse, La Sagesse et la

propagandajuwe & Vlpoque perse et hellenistique, pp. 148-154.

B. J. Bamberger, Proselytism in the Talmudic Period^ Hebrew Union

College Press, Cincinnati 1939.

R. H. Charles, Religious development between the Old and New Testaments.

Oxford Univ. Press, revised ed. 1945.

P. Dalbert, Die Theologie der hellenistisch-judischen Missionsliteratur unter

Ausschluss von Philo und JosephuS) Theol. Forschung, Herausgeber

H. W. Bartsch IV Herb. Reich, Evang. Verlag Hamburg Volks-

dorf 1954.

The works of E. StaufFer are of importance to those who want to

understand Judaism at the time of the beginning of the Christian

Church in the light of the Qumran literature. StaufFer gives a good

and popular surveyin:

Jerusalem und Rom im %eitalter Jesu Christi9

Dalp Taschenbiicher Band 331, Francke Verlag, Berne & Munich

1957, with 32 pages of notes.

2. Derwacter, op. cit.3 p. 119.

3. Ibid., p. 76.

4. Bamberger, op. cit.9 pp. 17-19.

150

Chapter 4

I . Of the earlier literature (before 1930) on this subject I onlymention (in chronological order):

A. Berthelet, Die Stellung der Israeliten und der Juden zu den Fremden,1896.K. Axenfeld, Diejiidische Propaganda als Vorliiufirin und Wegbereiterin der

urchristlichen Mission. Festschrift fur G. Warneck, 1904.P. Wendland, Die hellenistisch-romische Kultur in ihren Beziehungen zu

Judentum und Christentum, 2. Aufl. J. C. B. Mohr, Ti.ibingen 1912.A. Causse, La propaganda juive et l'hellenisme, Revue d'Histoire et de

Philosophie religieuses, II, I923.W. Bousset, Die Religion des Judentums im spiithellenistischen :{:,Citalter,

3· Aufl. J. C. B. Mohr, Tiibingen I926.A. Causse, Les disperses d'Israel. Etudes Strassbourg 19, Paris I929·G. Rosen, Das antike Judentum als Missionsreligion und die Entstehung der

jiidischen Diaspora. Neu bearbeitet und erweitert von Fr. Rosenund G. Bertram. Ti.ibingen 1929;

and of the literature from I 930 onwards:F. M. Derwacter, Preparing the Way for Paul, The Prose(yte Movement in

later Judaism. The Macmillan Company, New York 1930.

A. Causse, Le judaisme avant Jesus Christ. ParisI93

I.Paul Volz, Fr. Stummer, Joh. Hempel (Herausgeber), Werden und

Wesen des A.T.: Vortriige gehalten auf der internationalen Tagung a.t.licher Forscher zu Gottingen vom 4-10 Sept. 1935, Alfred Topelmans,Berlin 1936. In this work especially: A. Causse, La Sagesse et lapropagandajuive a 'epoque perse et hellenistique, pp. 148-154·

B. J. Bamberger, Prose(ytism in the Talmudic Period, Hebrew Union

College Press, Cincinnati 1939·R. H. Charles, Religious development between the Old and New Testaments.

Oxford Univ. Press, revised ed. 1945·P. Dalbert, Die Theologie der hellenistisch-judischen Missionsliteratur unter

Ausschluss von Philo und Josephus, Theol. Forschung, HerausgeberH. W. Bartsch IV Herb. Reich, Evang. Verlag Hamburg Volks

dorf I954·The works of E. Stauffer are of importance to those who want to

understand Judaism at the time of the beginning of the ChristianChurch in the light of the Qumran literature. Stauffer gives a good

and popular survey in: Jerusalem und Rom im Z,eitalter Jesu Christi,Dalp Taschenbiicher Band 33I, Francke Verlag, Berne & MunichI957, with 32 pages of notes.

2. Derwacter, op. cit., p. I I g.

3· Ibid., p. 76.4· Bamberger, op. cit., pp. 17-19.

150



5. Dalbert, op. cit., p. 22.

6. Derwacter, op. cit., p. 21.

7. G. Rosen, etc., op. cit., p. 25.

8. A. v. Harnack, Die Mission und Ausbreitung des Christentums in den

ersten drei

Jahrhunderten. 4.Aufl,

J.C.

Hinrichs, Leipzig 1924, p.12.

9. We refer to the important work of P. Dalbert. We cannot go anyfurther into it.

10. Bamberger in particular resists the accepted idea that the

Christian Church dislodged and expelled Jewish missionary effort.

He supports his opinion by references to the Halaga and the Haggada.n. Bamberger, op. cit., pp. 267-273. The words cited are on page

272.

12. P. Dalbert, op. cit., pp. 23-26.

13. G. Bertram injuden und Phonizier, p. 36.

14. Ibid., p. 49.

15. Ibid., p. 141.

1 6. Ibid., p. 36.

17. Ibid., pp. 49-50.

1 8. Jewish Sibylle III, 195.

19. Horace, Satires I, 4, 143. G. Bertram, op. cit., p. 151.

20. P. Dalbert, op. cit., passim, and particularly pp. 124-143.

21. Forearlier

literature

werefer to

W. Baumgartner's survey,Die Israelitische Weisheitsliteratur, Theologische Rundschau 1933,

pp. 259-300; K. Galling, Stand und Aufgabe der Kohelet Forschung,

Theol. Rundschau 1934; pp. 355-373. See also the notes in R. H.

Pfeiffer, Introduction to the Old Testament, Harper Bros., New York and

London, 1941, pp. 873-875; C. Rylarsdam, Revelation in Jewish

wisdom literature, 1951; H. J. Kraus, Die Verkundigung der Weisheit,

Bibl. Studien Heft 2, 1951; G. von Rad, Theologie des A.T. I, 1957,

pp. 439-451. For general information: see the introductions to the

comments on Proverbs.

22. Von Rad, op. cit., p. 442.

23. Ibid., p. 444.

24. This was mainly inspired by Ecclesiasticus 1 7, and in particular

by 17 v. 17 (Septuagint Alfir. Rahlfs ed. Vol. II, p. 405: "He ordered

that each nation should have a leader but the Lord inherits Israel").

25. Von Rad, op. cit., p. 449.

26. I thought at first that I would have to restrict myself to the

data to be found in the Bible in thesurvey

that the I.M.G. asked

meto write. However, during the "European Consultation" on the first

draft ofmy survey, held in Geneva (July 1 1-14, 1960), I was asked to

add something about the period between Old Testament and New

Testament and particularly about the wisdom literature. This short

chapter was written to comply with that request. I did not have time,

5· Dalbert, op. cit., p. 22.

6. Derwacter, op. cit., p. 21.

7· G. Rosen, etc., op. cit., p. 25.8. A. v. Harnack, Die Mission und Ausbreitung des Christentums in den

ersten drei Jahrhunderten. 4· Aufl. J. C. Hinrichs, Leipzig I924, p.12.

g. We refer to the important work ofP. Dalbert. We cannot go any

further into it.10. Bamberger in particular resists the accepted idea that the

Christian Church dislodged and expelled Jewish missionary effort.He supports his opinion by references to the Halaga and the Haggada.

1 I . Bamberger, op. cit., pp. 267-273. The words cited are on page272.

12. P. Dalbert, op. cit., pp. 23-26.

13. G. Bertram inJuden und PMnizier, p. g6.14· Ibid., p. 49·I 5· Ibid.' p. 141.16. Ibid., p. 36.

17. Ibid., pp. 49-50.18. Jewish Sibylle III, 195.19. Horace, Satires I, 4, 143· G. Bertram, op. cit., p. I5I.

20. P. Dalbert, op. cit., passim, and particularly pp. 124-143.2 I .

For earlier literature we refer to W. Baumgartner's survey,Die Israelitische Weisheitsliteratur, Theologische Rundschau 1933,pp. 259-300; K. Galling, Stand und Atifgabe der Kohelet Forschung,

Theol. Rundschau I934; pp. 355-373. See also the notes in R. H.Pfeiffer, Introduction to the Old Testament, Harper Bros., New York and

London, 1941, pp. 873-875; C. Rylarsdam, Revelation in Jewish

wisdom literature, I 95 I; H. J. Kraus, Die Verkiindigung der Weisheit,

Bibl. Studien Heft 2, I951; G. von Rad, Theologie des A.T. I, 1957,pp. 439-451. For general information: see the introductions to the

comments on Proverbs.22. Von Rad, op. cit., p. 442.

23. Ibid., p. 444·24. This was mainly inspired by Ecclesiasticus 17, and in particular

by 17 v. I7 (SeptuagintAlfr. Rahlfs ed. Vol. II, p. 405: "He orderedthat each nation should have a leader but the Lord inherits Israel").

25. Von Rad, op. cit., p. 449·26. I thought at first that I would have to restrict myself to the

data to befound

inthe Bible

in thesurvey that

the I.M.C.asked

me

to write. However, during the "European Consultation" on the firstdraft of my survey, held in Geneva (July u-14, 1960), I was asked toadd something about the period between Old Testament and NewTestament and particularly about the wisdom literature. This shortchapter wa$ written to comply with that request. I did not have time,

151



however, to deal extensively with either the diaspora mission or the

chokma of the Old Testament. In my opinion the brief mention I

made of it is sufficient for the purpose for which this survey was

written. However, in a study of the relation between revelation and

religion ("the Wordof

Godand the

livingfaiths of

men")the chokma

would have to be dealt with in great detail !

3 has been incorporated in this chapter and not in Chapter 3, in

spite ofthe fact that it, unlike i and 2, deals with data from the Bible

itself, for the following reasons:

It seems to me that in the present state of the investigation into the

chokma (c.q. my limited knowledge ofthis investigation) it cannot very-

well be decided whether chapters 1-9 of Proverbs should be con-

sidered to be (late) post-exile. I think that the nature of the chokma,

particularly when seen as the starting point and stimulus for apocalyp-

tics and missionary activity after the exile, partly justify 3*3 being

incorporated in this chapter. I hope I may be forgiven this irregularity

(from the point ofview of composition). In a survey like the present,

in which considerations of the history of salvation play an important

role, the phenomenon of the almost "a-historic" chokma is a healthy

counterbalance to a too rectilinear idea of the history of salvation.

27. See the document of the World Council of Churches on

proselytism:Christian

Witness, Proselytismand

Religious Libertyin the

Sitting ofthe World Council ofChurches, 1956.

Chapter 5

i . A survey and discussion of the older conceptions is given byB. Sundkler in Jdsus et Us Patens, Revue d'Histoire et de Philosophic

Religieuses, 16, 1936, pp. 462-499, also published in 1937 in Arbeiten

und Mitteilungen aus dem neutestamentlichen Seminar zu Uppsala, 1937,

pp. 1-38.

Because these older conceptions are perhaps still thought to be

tenable in certain quarters, we may call some attention to them here.

In the nineteenth century various scholars (Strauss, Weiss, Holz-

mann, among others) maintained that Jesus gradually came from a

particularistic point of view to a conviction of universalism. This

evolutionary idea, typical of the nineteenth century, was stigmatized

by Gustav Warneck as a fantasy; for this conviction he depended

uponthe

systematicwork of

M.Kahler.

A. v. Harnack (1906) emphasized the "intensive universalism" of

Jesus, though Jesus kept mission beyond His horizon. Against this

view F. Spitta (1908) protested, by suggesting that Jesus Himself

worked and preached beyond the borders of Israel. Following him

the Roman Catholic scholar M. Meinertz (1908) also opposed the

152

however, to deal extensively with either the diaspora mission or thechokma of the Old Testament. In my opinion the brief mention Imade of it is sufficient for the purpose for which this survey waswritten. However, in a study of the relation between revelation and

religion("the

Wordof

Godand the

living faithsof

men") thechokma

would have to be dealt with in great detail!§3 has been incorporated in this chapter and not in Chapter 3, in

spite of the fact that it, unlike §1 and 2, deals with data from the Bibleitself, for the following reasons:It seems to me that in the present state of the investigation into the

chokma (c.q. my limited knowledge of this investigation) it cannot verywell be decided whether chapters 1-9 of Proverbs should be considered to be (late) post-exile. I think that the nature of the chokma,

particularly when seen as the starting point and stimulus for apocalyptics and missionary activity after the exile, partly justifY §3's beingincorporated in this chapter. I hope I may be forgiven this irregularity(from the point of view of composition). In a survey like the present,in which considerations of the history of salvation play an important

role, the phenomenon of the almost "a-historic" chokma is a healthycounterbalance to a too rectilinear idea of the history of salvation.

27. See the document of the World Council of Churches on

proselytism: Christian Witness, Proselytism and Religious Liberty in theS1tting ofthl World Council ofChurches, 1956.

Chapter 5

1. A survey and discussion of the older conceptions is given by

B. Sundkler in Jesus et les Paiens, Revue d'Histoire et de PhilosophicReligieuses, 16, 1936, pp. 462-499, also published in 1937 in Arbeitenund Mitteilungen aus dem neutestamentlichen Seminar zu Uppsala, 1937,

pp. 1-38.Because these older conceptions are perhaps still thought to be

tenable in certain quarters, we may call some attention to them here.In the nineteenth century various scholars (Strauss, Weiss, Holz

mann, among others) maintained that Jesus gradually came from aparticularistic point of view to a conviction of universalism. Thisevolutionary idea, typical of the nineteenth century, was stigmatizedby Gustav Warneck as a fantasy; for this conviction he dependedupon the systematic work of M. Kahler.

A. v. Harnack (1906) emphasized the "intensive universalism" of

Jesus, though Jesus kept mission beyond His horizon. Against thisview F. Spitta (rgo8) protested, by suggesting that Jesus Himselfworked and preached beyond the borders of Israel. Following him

the Roman Catholic scholar M. Meinertz ( rgo8) also opposed the

152



"intensive universalism" of Harnack, proposing in its stead "explicit

universalism". Meinertz later (1926) clarified his position by suggest-

ing clearly that Jesus willed the mission to the Gentiles.

A. Schweitzer (1930) attacked the problem from a completely

differentangle, by emphasizing

theeschatological

character ofJesus'

universalism: "Jesus thought universalistically and acted particu-

laristically." B. Sundkler, by contrast, suggests that the solution of the

problem can only be found (i) by dropping the false alternative be-

tween particularism and universalism; (2) by turning our attention

to the eschatological significance of Zion, Jerusalem and especially

the Temple as the reintegration centre of the world.

The most important studies on this question which have appearedsince Sundkler's essay are the following: N. A. Dahl, Das Volk Gottes,

Skrifter Utgitt ar det Norske Videnskaps Akademi, Oslo 1941, pp.

143-167; A. G. Hebert, The Throne of David\ 2nd ed., 1942; H.

Stoevesandt, Jesus und die Heidenmission, 1943 (ofwhich only a resume

is accessible, in Theologische Literaturzeitung 1949, p. 242); R.

Liechtenhan, Die Urchristliche Mission, Zwingli Verlag, Zurich 1946;

T. W. Manson, Jesus and the Non-Jews, Athlone Press, London 1955;

and particularly J. Jeremias, jfesu Verheissung fur die Volker, Kohl-

hammer Verlag, Stuttgart 1956 (E.T. Jesus' Promise to the Nations').

Thelast-named work

givesa

bibliographyin

chronological order,which is virtually complete; however, the above-cited works of

Sundkler and Jeremias are missing, as is O. Gullman, Christus und die

%eit, 1946 (E.T. Christ and Time).

Subsequent to the work ofJeremias there appeared: O. Gullmann,

Die Christologie des Neuen Testaments, J. C. B. Mohr, Tubingen 1957

(E.T. The Christology of the New Testament), which opens new ap-

proaches to this problem; and H. W. Bartsch, Die Passions- und

Osiergeschichten bei Matthdus in Basileia, 1959 (W. Freytag zum 60.

Geburtstag], pp. 27-41. The extensive work by H. N. Ridderbos, DeKomst van het Konirikrijk, J. H. Kok, Kampen 1950, which has since

appeared in the U.S.A. under the title The Coming of the Kingdom

(Presbyterian and Reformed Publ. Cy., Philadelphia 1961) also

gives much material.

I think in the main we can now speak of a consensus in missionary

circles regarding the problem before us, particularly, I believe, thanks

to the writings of Sundkler and Jeremias, which have attracted great

attention everywhere.The observations made in this chapter are inspired in particular by

the publications which have appeared since Sundkler's essay in 1936.

2. This is pointed out by Jeremias, op. tit. 9 p. 35.

3. An excellent discussion of these two passages is found in Jere-

mias, op. cit., pp. 16-22 and pp. 9-16.

"intensive universalism" of Harnack, proposing in its stead "explicit

universalism". Meinertz later (1926) clarified his position by suggesting clearly that jesus willed the mission to the Gentiles.

A. Schweitzer (1930) attacked the problem from a completely

different angle,by

emphasizing the eschatologicalcharacter of esus'

universalism: "Jesus thought universalistically and acted particu

laristically." B. Sundkler, by contrast, suggests that the solution of the

problem can only be found (1) by dropping the false alternative between particularism and universalism; (2) by turning our attention

to the eschatological significance of Zion, Jerusalem and especiallythe Temple as the reintegration centre of the world.

The most important studies on this question which have appeared

since Sundkler's essay are the following: N. A. Dahl, Das Volk Gottes,

Skrifter Utgitt ar det Norske Videnskaps Akademi, Oslo 1941, pp.143-167; A. G. Hebert, The Throne of David, 2nd ed., 1942; H.

Stoevesandt, Jesus und die Heidenmission, 1943 (of which only a resumeis accessible, in Theologische Literaturzeitung 1949, p. 242); R.

Liechtenhan, Die Urchristliche Mission, Zwingli Verlag, Zurich 1946;T. W. Manson, Jesus and the Non-Jews, Athlone Press, London 1955;and particularly J. Jeremias, Jesu Verheissung fiir die Volker, Kohl

hammer Verlag, Stuttgart 1956 (E.T. Jesus' Promise to the Nations).

The last-named work gives a bibliographyin

chronological order,which is virtually complete; however, the above-cited works of

Sundkler and Jeremias are missing, as is 0. Cullman, Christus und die

Zeit, 1946 (E.T. Christ and Time).Subsequent to the work ofJeremias there appeared: 0. Cullmann,

Die Christologie des Neuen Testaments, J. C. B. Mohr, Tiibingen 1957(E.T. The Christology of the New Testament), which opens new ap

proaches to this problem; and H. W. Bartsch, Die Passions- undOstergeschichten bei Matthiius in Basileia, I 959 (W. Freytag zum 6o.

Geburtstag), pp. 27-41. The extensive work by H. N. Ridderbos, DeKomst van het Koninkrijk, ]. H. Kok, Kampen 1950, which has sinceappeared in the U.S.A. under the title The Coming of the Kingdom(Presbyterian and Reformed Pub!. Cy., Philadelphia 1961) also

gives much material.I think in the main we can now speak of a consensus in missionary

circles regarding the problem before us, particularly, I believe, thanksto the writings of Sundkler and Jeremias, which have attracted great

attention everywhere.The observations made in this chapter are inspired in particular by

the publications which have appeared since Sundkler's essay in 1936.

2. This is pointed out by Jeremias, op. cit., p. 35·3· An excellent discussion of these two passages is found in Jere

mias, op. cit., pp. 16-22 and pp. g-r6.

l53



4. Jeremias, op. cit., pp. 22-32.

5. J. Hempel, Der synoptischeJesus und das Alte Testament, ZAW 1938,

pp. 1-33, particularly p. 29: "Jesus has erected no 'national'

barriers; He has removed in a lasting manner the basis of the national

exclusiveness ofJudaism,

when it was able to make proselytes, but He

has not shattered the historical continuity ofrevelation."

6. Jeremias, op. tit., pp. 34-39. Jeremias' interpretation of Luke

4: 22 is noteworthy. He sees in this verse the resistance of the Jews

against Jesus' preaching of grace for the Gentiles. The inhabitants of

Nazareth would have resented it because Jesus had eliminated the

thought of vengeance from the eschatological expectation (cf.Luke

4: 18 and Isa. 61 : 2). He points out the analogy in Matt. 1 1 : 5 ff.

(Luke 7: 22 ff.), where the prophetic promises are quoted from Isa.

35: 4 ff., 29: 18 ff., 61 : 1-2, without a mention of the vengeance of

God which is explicitly stated in the Isaiah passages.

In spite of the arguments, I cannot agree in this respect with the

study of Jeremias, which in other respects is so excellent. Is it not

quite beyond debate that Nazareth objected particularly to the

Messianic declarations ofJesus ("Is this notJoseph's son?" Luke 4 : 22)

and thus also to His appropriation of the eschatological promises of

salvation? I do not deny that Jesus, in His proclamation of salvation

for the Gentiles, wasalso

touchingavery

raw nationalistic nerve.

7. Jeremias, op. cit., pp. 40-44.

8. H. N. Ridderbos, Zelfopenbaringen Zelfverberging, J. H. Kok,

Kampen 1950, passim; De Komst van het Koninkrijk, 1954, pp. 35~68

(see note i above) ;O. Cullmann, Die Christologie des Neuen Testaments,

J 957^ PP- 138-198 (see note i above) where further bibliography is

given.

9. For the complex of questions surrounding (Messianic) expecta-

tion and fulfilment, see also: W. G. Kiimmel, Verheissung undErfullung,

1945, 2nd ed. 1953; Untersuchungen zur eschatologischen Verkundigung

Jesu (Abhandlungen zur Theologie des Alten und Neuen Testaments

6), Zwingli Verlag, Zurich. (E.T. Promise and Fulfilment; the Eschato-

logical Message ofJesus.)

10. For this see Chapter 6.

11. From the extensive literature aboutJesus as the Servant of the

Lord only a few recent works are cited here (and in these one can

find reference to further literature, particularly older works) : E. Loh-

meyer, Gottesknecht und Davidssohn, SymbolaeBiblicae

UpsaliensesE. Muukogaard, Hafulae, Sweden, 1945, 2nd ed. 1953; H. W. Wolff,

Jesaja 53 im Urchristentum, Evang. Verlagsanstalt, Berlin, 2nd ed.

1950; M. Buber, Jesus und der Knecht in Pro Regno Pro Sanctuario,

Feestbundel G. v. d. Leeuw, G. F. Callenbach, Nijkerk 1950; J. Jeremias,

"Pais Theou" in TWNT V, 1952, pp. 676-713; T. W. Manson, The

4· Jeremias, op. cit., pp. 22-32.5· J. Hempel, Der synoptische Jesus und das Alte Testament, ZAW 1938,

pp. 1-33, particularly p. 29: ''Jesus has erected no 'national'

barriers; He has removed in a lasting manner the basis of the nationalexclusiveness of udaism, when it was able to make proselytes, but He

has not shattered the historical continuity ofrevelation."6. Jeremias, op. cit., pp. 34-39. Jeremias' interpretation of Luke

4: 22 is noteworthy. He sees in this verse the resistance of the Jews

against Jesus' preaching of grace for the Gentiles. The inhabitants of

Nazareth would have resented i t because Jesus had eliminated thethought of vengeance from the eschatological expectation (cf. Luke

4: r8 and Isa. 6r: 2). He points out the analogy in Matt. r 1: 5 ff.(Luke 7: 22 ff.), where the prophetic promises are quoted from Isa.

35: 4 ff., 29: r8 ff., 6r: 1-2, without a mention of the vengeance ofGod which is explicitly stated in the Isaiah passages.

In spite of the arguments, I cannot agree in this respect with the

study of Jeremias, which in other respects is so excellent. Is it not

quite beyond debate that Nazareth objected particularly to the

Messianic declarations ofJesus ("Is this notJoseph's son?" Luke 4: 22)and thus also to His appropriation of the eschatological promises of

salvation? I do not deny thatJesus, in His proclamation of salvationfor the Gentiles, was also touching a very raw nationalistic nerve.

7· Jeremias, op. cit., pp. 40-44.8. H. N. Ridderbos, Zelfopenbaring en Zelfverberging, J. H. Kok,

Kampen 1950, passim; De Komst van het Koninkrijk, 1954, pp. 35-68(see note I above); 0. Cullmann, Die Christologie des Neuen Testaments,1957, pp. 138-rg8 (see note r above) where further bibliography isgiven.

g. For the complex of questions surrounding (Messianic) expectation and fulfilment, see also: W. G. Ki.immel, Verheissung und Erfilllung,

1945, 2nd ed. 1953; Untersuchungen zur eschatologischen Verkilndigung:Jesu (Abhandlungen zur Theologie des Alten und Neuen Testaments6), Zwingli Verlag, ZUrich. (E.T. Promise and Fulfilment; the Eschato-logical Message ofJesus.)

10. For this see Chapter 6.

II. From the x t ~ i v e literature aboutJesus as the Servant of the

Lord only a few recent works are cited here (and in these one can

find reference to further literature, particularly older works): E. Loh

meyer, Gottesknecht und Davidssohn, Symbolae Biblicae UpsaliensesE. Muukogaard, Hafulae, Sweden, 1945, 2nd ed. 1953; H. W. Wolff,Jesaja 53 im Urchristentum, Evang. Verlagsanstalt, Berlin, 2nd ed.1950; M. Buber, Jesus und der Knecht in Pro Regno--Pro Sanctuario,

Feestbundel G. v. d. Leeuw, G. F. Callenbach, Nijkerk rgso;J.Jeremias,

"Pais Theou" in TWNT V, 1952, pp. 676-713; T. W. Manson1 The

154



Servant Messiah, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1953; O. Cullmann, Die

Christologie des Neuen Testaments, 1957, pp. 50-81 (see note i above).

12. So, for example, Liechtenhan (Urchr. Mission, p. 40), Ridder-

bos (Komst van het Koninkrijk, p. 328), Jeremias (TWNT V, p. 713,

VI, pp. 536-545).13. See also E. Lohse, Mdrtyrer und Gottesknecht, etc., Vanden-

hoeck & Rupprecht, Gottingen 1955; J. Jeremias, Jesu Verheissung

fur die Volker, p. 45 (E.T. Jesus' Promise to the Nations).

14. Ibid., pp. 45-46.

15. Ibid., pp. 48-53.

1 6. Doesn't Sundkler lay too much emphasis on the Temple as the

"navel of the earth"? Though this general oriental image may not

have been foreign to Israel, I do not think it right to impute to the

Temple so much significance. Outside of Ezekiel, nowhere in the Old

Testament do we find the Temple called the centre. Jerusalem and

Zion, we do. I think this is not without significance in relation to the

dying out of the Temple service in Israel in the first century A.D.

The criticism of the overemphasis on the Temple which I levelled in

my Goden en Mensen, 1950, p. 1 10, 1 would now make stronger. In the

same spirit, see Liechtenhan, op. cit., p. 37.

It occurs to me that Jeremias, op. cit., p. 52, has taken over and

underlined Sundkler's centripetal idea, but withouthis

conception ofthe central and all-important significance of the Temple. He is right

in naming the Temple as one of the eschatological images, p. 55.

17. After the example ofH. Stoevesandt, op. cit., p. 53,

1 8. Jeremias, op. cit., p. 54. In this respect his exegesis ofJohn 8 : 56

is especially illuminating and, I think, convincing: "When the gospel

ofJohn has Jesus say that Abraham rejoiced that he was to see Jesus*

day, this echare includes the joy ofAbraham over the imminent fulfil-

ment of the promise made to him, that he would be the father of a

multitude of nations (Gen. 17: 4, Rom. 4: 17)." For the parables of

Jesus see among others H. N. Ridderbos, De Komst van het Koninkrijk9

pp. 124 ff.; J. Jeremias, Die Gleichnisse Jesu, 3rd ed., 1954 (E.T. The

Parables ofJesus).

19. Jeremias, Jesu Verheissung, pp. 54-56.

20. Ibid., pp. 57-58.

21. Ibid., p. 59.

22. K. Earth, Kirchliche Dogmatik, TV, 3, p. 1047.

23. J. Jeremias, op. cit., pp. 60-62; H. N. Ridderbos, De Komstvan

het Koninkrijk, pp. 161166; V. Taylor, Jesus and His Sacrifice, Mac-

millan, London 1948, pp. 82-200.

24. In this I am thinking of the school of the so-called consistent

or radical eschatology, which has emerged since Joh. Weiss published

his Die Predigt vom Reiche Gottes in 1892 and which has received the

Servant Messiah, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1953; 0 . Cullmann, DieChristologie des Neuen Testaments, 1957, pp. 50-8! (see note I above).

12. So, for example, Liechtenhan (Urchr. Mission, p. 40), Ridderbos (Komst van het Koninkrijk, p. 328), Jeremias (TWNT V, p. 713,

VI, pp. 536-545).13. See also E. Lohse, Miirtyrer und Gottesknecht, etc., Vandenhoeck & Rupprecht, Gottingen 1955; J. Jeremias, Jesu Verheissung

fur die Volker, p. 45 (E.T. Jesus' Promise to the Nations).

14. Ibid., pp. 45-46.15. Ibid., pp. 48-53.16. Doesn't Sundkler lay too much emphasis on the Temple as the

"navel of the earth"? Though this general oriental image may not

have been foreign to Israel, I do not think it right to impute to the

Temple so much significance. Outside of Ezekiel, nowhere in the OldTestament do we find the Temple called the centre. Jerusalem and

Zion, we do. I think this is not without significance in relation to thedying out of the Temple service in Israel in the first century A.D.

The criticism of the overemphasis on the Temple which I levelled in

my Coden en Mensen, 1950, p. uo, I would now make stronger. In thesame spirit, see Liechtenhan, op. cit., p. 37·

I t occurs to me that Jeremias, op. cit., p. 52, has taken over and

underlined Sundkler's centripetal idea, but without his conception ofthe central and all-important significance of the Temple. He is rightin naming the Temple as one of the eschatological images, p. 55·

17. After the example ofH. Stoevesandt, op. cit., p. 53·r8. Jeremias, op. cit., p. 54· In this respect his exegesis ofJohn 8: 56

is especially illuminating and, I think, convincing: "When the gospelofJohn has Jesus say that Abraham rejoiced that he was to see Jesus'day, this echare includes the joy of Abraham over the imminent fulfilment of the promise made to him, that he would be the father of a

multitude of nations (Gen. 17: 4, Rom. 4: 17)." For the parables ofJesus see among others H. N. Ridderbos, De Komst van het Koninkrijk,

pp. 124 ff.; J. Jeremias, Die Gleichnisse Jesu, 3rd ed., 1954 (E.T. TheParables ofJesus).

19. Jeremias, Jesu Verheissung, pp. 54-56.20. Ibid., pp. 57-58.21. Ibid., p. 59·22. K. Barth, Kirchliche Dogmatik, IV, g, p. 1047.

23. J. Jeremias, op. cit., pp. 6o-62; H. N. Ridderbos, De Komst vanhet Koninkrijk, pp. 161-166; V. Taylor, Jesus and His Sacrifice, Mac

millan, London 1948, pp. 82-200.24. In this I am thinking of the school of the so-called consistent

or radical eschatology, which has emerged sinceJoh. Weiss publishedhis Die Predigt vom Reiche Gottes in 1892 and which has received the

I 55



greatest attention through the work of A. Schweitzer, Die Geschichte

der Leben Jesu Forschung, 1906, 4th ed. with another title, 1933 (E.T.

The Quest ofthe Historical Jesus),, and in modified form by M. Dibelius,

and in even tighter form by R. Bultmann, G. H. Dodd, and others.

Criticism and reaction to this

pointof view

maybe found

(witha

strong emphasis on the heilsgeschichtliche character of the gospels) in

J. Jeremias, E. Stauffer, W. G. Kiimmel, O. Gullmann, T. W. Man-

son, and others. See among others F. Buri, Die Bedeutung der neutesta-

mentlichen Eschatologiefur die neuere protestantische Theologie, Feldegg A.

G., Zurich 1934; H. D. Wendland, Die Eschatologie des Reiches Gottes

bei Jesus, Bertelsmann, Giitersloh 1931; O. Gullmann, Christus und die

Zeit, 1946, etc. H. N. Ridderbos, De Komst van het Koninkrijk, 1950,

p. 62, points out that detracting from the idea of vicarious suffering

is one of the ultimate causes of the foreshortening of the New Testa-

ment perspective in the so-called consistent eschatology.

See E. Stauffer, Jerusalem und Rom im Jfyitalter Jesu Christi, DalpTaschenbiicher 331, Francke Verlag, Berne & Munich 1960, p. 7;

also Chapter 7 in the same book, "Die jiidische Naherwartung", pp.

74-87 and 145147,

25. There is no theological distinction between the designations

"Kingdom of God", "Kingdom of Heaven", "Kingdom of the

Father", "Kingdom of Christ". We must viewvarious earlier

at-

tempts to discover a real theological difference as a failure, and almost

all of these attempts have now been given up. See TWNT I, "basi-

leia", p. 582. Further H. D. Wendland, Die Eschatologie des Reiches

Gottes bei Jesus, Bertelsmann, Giitersloh 1931; H. M. Matter, Meuwere

Opvattingen omtrent het Koninkrijk Gods in Jezus9

Prediking naar de Synop-

tici, J. H. Kok, Kampen 1942; and also the various theologies of the

New Testament.

26. See, for example, Mark i : 14, 15.

27. We take our stand once more against the views ofR. Bultmann,

C. H. Dodd, and others, who will not recognize a new expectation in

historical perspective. Here we cannot go into the whole discussion

around the consistent, radical, or "realized" eschatology. For this,

see, for example, W. G. Kiimmel, Verheissung und Erfiillung, 1945;

O. Cullmann, Christus und die %eity 1946; H. N. Ridderbos, De Komst

van het Koninkrijk^ 1950.

It is impossible, I believe, to obtain a correct view of the purport

and range ofthecall

to mission when we take the standpoint ofradicaleschatology. I think this is an abridgment of the heilsgeschichtlich

perspective and, what is worse, in fact a denial of it. An attempt to

build a science ofmissions and ofreligions from a kerygma understood

"existentially" was made by W. Holsten in his Das Kerygma und der

Mensch, Ch. Kaiser Verlag, Munich 1958.

156

greatest attention through the work of A. Schweitzer, Die Geschichte

der Leben Jesu Forschung, I9o6, 4th ed. with another title, 1933 (E.T.The Quest of he Historical Jesus), and in modified form by M. Dibelius,and in even tighter form by R. Bultmann, C. H. Dodd, and others.

Criticismand

reaction to this pointof

viewmay

be found (with astrong emphasis on the heilsgeschichtliche character of the gospels) inJ. Jeremias, E. Stauffer, W. G. Kiimmel, 0. Cullmann, T. W. Man-

son, and others. See among others F. Buri, Die Bedeutung der neutesta-

mentlichen Eschatologie fiir die neuere protestantische Theologie, Feldegg A.

G., Zurich 1934; H. D. Wendland, Die Eschatologie des Reiches Gottes

bei Jesus, Bertelsmann, Giitersloh r 93 I; 0. Cullmann, Christus und die

Zeit, 1946, etc. H. N. Ridderbos, De Komst van het Koninkrijk, 1950,p. 62, points out that detracting from the idea of vicarious suffering

is one of the ultimate causes of the foreshortening of the New Testament perspective in the so-called consistent eschatology.

See E. Stauffer, Jerusalem und Rom im <;eitalter Jesu Christi, Dalp

Taschenbiicher 331, Francke Verlag, Berne & Munich 1960, p. 7;

also Chapter 7 in the same book, "Diejudische Naherwartung", pp.

74-87 and I45-I47·25. There is no theological distinction between the designations

"Kingdom of God", "Kingdom of Heaven", "Kingdom of the

Father", "Kingdom of Christ". We must view various earlier at-tempts to discover a real theological difference as a failure, and almostall of these attempts have now been given up. See TWNT I, "basiIeia", p. 582. Further H. D. Wendland, Die Eschatologie des ReichesGottes bei Jesus, Bertelsmann, Giitersloh I 931; H. M. Matter, NieuwereOpvattingen omtrent het Koninkrijk Gods in Jezus' Prediking naar de Synop-

tici, J. H. Kok, Kampen I942 ; and also the various theologies of the

New Testament.26. See, for example, Mark I: I4, 15.

27. We take our stand once more against the views ofR. Bultmann,C. H. Dodd, and others, who will not recognize a new expectation in

historical perspective. Here we cannot go into the whole discussionaround the consistent, radical, or "realized" eschatology. For this,see, for example, W. G. Kiimmel, Verheissung und Erfiillung, 1945;0. Cullmann, Christus und die Zeit, 1946; H. N. Ridderbos, De Komstvan het Koninkrijk, 1950.

It is impossible, I believe, to obtain a correct view of the purport

and range of the call to mission when we take the standpoint ofradicaleschatology. I think this is an abridgment of the heilsgeschichtlich

perspective and, what is worse, in fact a denial of it. An attempt tobuild a science ofmissions and ofreligions from a kerygma understood"existentially" was made by W. Holsten in his Das Kerygma und der

Mensch, Ch. Kaiser Verlag, Munich 1958.

156



28. The problem of the Second Coming, expected in the near

future, and of disappointment over its delay, has influenced and

sometimes controlled discussion concerning the synoptic gospels for

the last several decades. This discussion, which also carries great

importancefor the

theory of mission, does not yet seem to havereached a conclusion.

For a survey of earlier literature in this regard see F. Busch, %umVerstandnis der synoptischen Eschatologie, Markus 13 neu untersucht, Bertels-

mann, Giitersloh 1938. For more recent studies see the works cited

in note 27 above. A short survey of the various newer theories is

given by Ridderbos, op. cit., pp. 372-383.

29. So, for example, O. Cullmann, op. cit., p. 75. "Intensity [that

is, of expectation for the future (Blauw)] and central position, how-

ever, are not to be confused." (American edition, Westminster Press,

1950, p. 86.) Likewise pp. 77-78: "In the light of this Primitive

Christian outlook, the entire complex of questions concerning the

expectation of the imminent end and the delay of the Parousia has

lost its importance in interim Christianity." (American edition, pp.

89-90.)

30. This conception becomes visible in K. Earth's Auslegung von

Matth. 28: 1620, Easier Missionsbuchhandlung, Basel 1945, pp. 5-6.

Butlater

Barth has given evidence of a much more subtle, and,I

think, more acceptable conception, viz. in Kirchliche Dogmatik IV, 3,

i Halfte, pp. 341-342, where he speaks about three forms, appear-

ances, or stages of the one occurrence of Christ's Second Coming,

which none the less form a unity and which must be imagined as a

sort of perichoresis. He concludes his remarks carefully: "Plainly not

all locks are to be opened with this key. But it would be advisable

not to disdain this one alongside others," p. 342.

In the matter of the connection between resurrection and Parousia,

the view ofH. W. Bartsch is probably the most pronounced. But see his

contribution in Basileia (W. Freytag zum 60. Geburtstag), Evang.

Missionsverlag, Stuttgart 1959, pp. 2741, where, I think, he softens

his earlier statements himself when he ends: "The Parousia has

already happened and yet is awaited at the same time with every

manifestation of His lordship." Op. cit., p. 41. J. Jeremias also sees a

very close connection between resurrection and Parousia and wishes

in this way to solve the problem ofthe expectation for the near future.

See his contribution Eine neue Schau der %ukunftsaussagen Jesuin

Theo-logische Blatter, 1941, pp. 217-222.

31. Here, I think, there is an element of truth which will stand,

which the defenders of radical eschatology have brought out clearly,

when their starting-point is the assumption that the Kingdom ofGod

had come in Jesus; but it is this assumption which is not generally

157

28. The problem of the Second Coming, expected in the near

future, and of disappointment over its delay, has influenced and

sometimes controlled discussion concerning the synoptic gospels forthe last several decades. This discussion, which also carries great

importance for the theory of mission, does not yet seem to havereached a conclusion.

For a survey of earlier literature in this regard see F. Busch, ZumVerstiindnis der synoptischen Eschatologie, Markus I3 neu untersucht, Bertelsmann, Giitersloh 1938. For more recent studies see the works citedin note 27 above. A short survey of the various newer theories is

given by Ridderbos, op. cit., pp. 372-383.29. So, for example, 0 . Cullmann, op. cit., p. 75· "Intensity [that

is, of expectation for the future (Blauw)] and central position, how

ever, are not to be confused." (American edition, Westminster Press,1950, p. 86.) Likewise pp. 77-78: "In the light of this PrimitiveChristian outlook, the entire complex of questions concerning the

expectation of the imminent end and the delay of the Parousia haslost its importance in interim Christianity." (American edition, pp.

89-90.)go. This conception becomes visible in K. Barth's Auslegung von

Matth. 28: r6-:zo, Basler Missionsbuchhandlung, Basel 1945, pp. 5-6.

But later Barth has given evidence of a much more subtle, and, Ithink, more acceptable conception, viz. in Kirchliche Dogmatik IV, g,

I Halfte, pp. 341-342, where he speaks about three forms, appearances, or stages of the one occurrence of Christ's Second Coming,which none the less form a unity and which must be imagined as asort ofperichoresis. He concludes his remarks carefully: "Plainly not

all locks are to be opened with this key. But i t would be advisablenot to disdain this one alongside others," p. 342.

In the matter of the connection between resurrection and Parousia,

the view ofH. W. Bartsch is probably the most pronounced. But see hiscontribution in Basileia (W. Freytag zum 6o. Geburtstag), Evang.

Missionsverlag, Stuttgart 1959, pp. 27-41, where, I think, he softenshis earlier statements himself when he ends: "The Parousia hasalready happened and yet is awaited at the same time with everymanifestation of His lordship." Op. cit., p. 41. J. Jeremias also sees avery close connection between resurrection and Parousia and wishesin this way to solve the problem of the expectation for the near future.

See his contribution Eine neue Schau der Zukunftsaussagen Jesu in Theologische Blatter, 1941, pp. 217-222.31. Here, I think, there is an element of truth which will stand,

which the defenders of radical eschatology have brought out clearly,when their starting-point is the assumption that the Kingdom of Godhad come in Jesus; but it is this assumption which is not generally

I 57



recognized. Eschatology is destined to remain eschatology unto all

generations. By this means violence is done to the historical character

of the revelation of God, and this is exchanged for an idealistic inter-

pretation. The explanation of the fact that Jeremias, Bartsch, and

othersview

theSecond Coming of

Christ(as

the end ofdays)

as

already completed in the resurrection of Christ, lies, it seems to me, in

their acceptance of the character offulfilment of the gospels. From

this point of departure, however, which in itself is correct, a mistaken

conclusion has been drawn, I believe.

32. This has been emphasized particularly by O. Cullmann: "Un-

less we make the necessary limitation, it is false to assert that Primitive

Christianity had an eschatological orientation. That is true only of

Judaism. On the contrary, even for Jesus, while He is dwelling upon

earth, it no longer is true in the Jewish sense. The norm is no longer

that which is to come; it is He who has already come. Eschatology

is not put aside, but it is dethroned, and this holds good both chrono-

logically and essentially. The stripping away of eschatology, when

understood in the sense just indicated, is nevertheless linked with a

heightened intensity of expectation for the future : this stripping away

coincides with the appearance of Christ, and is conditioned by this

positive fact rather than by delay of the Parousia." Op. tit,, pp. 122-

123. (American edition, p. 139.)

33. No justice, I think, is done to this prevailing or new expecta-

tion for the future when so much weight is given to the heilsgeschicht-

liche fulfilment that the expectation grows pale or is hollow. I do not

think Cullmann, op. cit.} entirely avoids this danger. When he says

(see note 32) : "the norm is no longer that which is to come; it is Hewho has already come," this is correct only when we add, "and Hewho shall come again!"

The maintenance and underlining of the future element in the

preaching of the Kingdom of heaven and in the expectation of the

Church is also argued for by H. N. Ridderbos, op. cit.9 pp. 51-60,

361-443.

34. Ridderbos, op. cit., p. 124. In this passage he cites Bengel's

Gnomon, parabola de seminaprima acfundamentalis.

35. Ibid., p. 125.

36. Schniewind, Markus, p. 73, quoted in Ridderbos, op. cit., p. 126.

For other explanations of this parable, see op. cit., pp. 127-129.

37. Ibid., p. 132.

38. Ibid., pp. 134-135.

39. Ibid., p. 135.

40. Ibid., p. 141.

41. O. Cullmann, op. cit., pp. 96-97.

42. Another evidence that great significance must be attached to

recognized. Eschatology is destined to remain eschatology unto allgenerations. By this means violence is done to the historical character

of the revelation of God, and this is exchanged for an idealistic inter

pretation. The explanation of the fact that Jeremias, Bartsch, and

others view the Second Coming of Christ (as the end of days) asalready completed in the resurrection ofChrist, lies, it seems to me, intheir acceptance of the character of fulfilment of the gospels. From

this point of departure, however, which in itself is correct, a mistakenconclusion has been drawn, I believe.

32. This has been emphasized particularly by 0 . Cullmann: "Un

less we make the necessary limitation, it is false to assert that PrimitiveChristianity had an eschatological orientation. That is true only of

Judaism. On the contrary, even for Jesus, while He is dwelling upon

earth, it no longer is true in the Jewish sense. The norm is no longerthat which is to come; it is He who has already come. Eschatologyis not put aside, but it is dethroned, and this holds good both chronologically and essentially. The stripping away of eschatology, when

understood in the sense just indicated, is nevertheless linked with aheightened intensity of expectation for the future: this stripping away

coincides with the appearance of Christ, and is conditioned by thispositive fact rather than by delay of the Parousia." Op. cit., pp. 122-

123. (American edition, p. 139.)33· No justice, I think, is done to this prevailing or new expectation for the future when so much weight is given to the heilsgeschicht-liche fulfilment that the expectation grows pale or is hollow. I do not

think Cullmann, op. cit., entirely avoids this danger. When he says(see note 32): "the norm is no longer that which is to come; it is He

who has already come," this is correct only when we add, "and He

who shall come again!"

The maintenance and underlining of the future element in the

preaching of the Kingdom of heaven and in the expectation of theChurch is also argued for by H. N. Ridderbos, op. cit., pp. 51-6o,

361-443·34· Ridderbos, op. cit., p. 124. In this passage he cites Bengel's

Gnomon, parabola de semina prima acfundamentalis.

35· Ibid., p. 125.36. Schniewind, Markus, p. 73, quoted in Ridderbos, op. cit., p. 126.

For other explanations of this parable, see op. cit., pp. 127-129.

37· Ibid., p. 132.38. Ibid., pp. 134-135.

39· Ibid., p. 135.

40. Ibid., p. 141.

41. 0. Cullmann, op. cit., pp. g6-g7.

42. Another evidence that great significance must be attached to

158



this judgment as a characteristic and portion of the Messianic self-

revelation is found in Matt. 3: 12; for John the Baptist, the day of

the Messiah is the day of judgment. Thence comes his confusion,

Matt. 1 1 : 2-3. It is important here also to note that Jesus eliminates

judgmentfrom the

prophetic expectation in His preaching inNazareth; cf. J. Jeremias, Jesu Verheissungfur die Volker, pp. 35-39.

43. O. Cullmann, op. cit.,p. 122; cf. note 32 above.

44. On the functioning of eschatology and the resistance against it

in mission circles, see H. J. Margull, Theologie der missionarischen Ver~

kilndigung, Evangelisation als Oekumenisches Problem, Evang. Verlags-

werk, Stuttgart 1959, pp. 24-38.

45. On the place and function of the apostles in general: K. H.

Rengstorf in TWNT I, 1933, "apostolos", pp. 406-448. A survey of

the literature up to 1930 may be found here, p. 406; literature from

1930-50 maY be found in the survey by H. Mosbeck, Apostolos in the

New Testament (Studia Theologica 1949-50, pp. 167-200). For the

literature after 1950 see, among others, O. Cullmann, Petrus, Junger,

Apostel, Martyrer, Zwingli Verlag, Zurich 1952 (E. T. Peter: Disciple,

Apostle, Martyr) ; E. Lohse, Ursprung und Prdgung des christlichen Aposto-

lates, Theol. Zeitschrift, 1953. In Holland, since 1950: A. A. van

Ruler, Bijzonder en algemeen ambt, G. F. Callenbach, Nijkerk 1952;

H.N.

Ridderbos, De apostoliciteitder

kerk volgens het Nieuwe Testament,in: De Apostolische Kerk, J. H. Kok, Kampen 1954, pp. 39-97.

46. Rengstorf, op. cit., pp. 415-418, and also p. 421 : "The Greek

furnishes therefore only the form of the New Testament concept; the

content is determined by the *sdliah of late Judaism.5 *

H. Diirr also

turns against the employment of the concept ofapostolate for mission,

Kirche, Mission und Reich Gottes, EMM, September 1953, pp. 133-145.

47. Cf., for example, Acts 14: 4, where Paul and Barnabas are also

called apostles.

48. O. Gullmann, Petrus, p. 219.

49. Ridderbos, Apost. Kerk, pp. 54-55.

50. It seems unjust to me to apply the Old Testament idea of the

remnant to the apostles: (i) because this remnant is represented

rather by Jesus Himself the remnant who is a substitute for the

whole people; (2) because the apostles certainly occupy a unique

position in the early Christian Church as witnesses and founders, but

never, as far as I can see, a substituting one; (3) because in all the

continuity with the Old Testament, the new thing about the apostlesis the fact that they are just as much the beginning ofa new people as

they are the continuation of the old people. Therefore the miracle of

the Church cannot be understood if the fact of Israel's election is not

understood. For this, see N. A. Dahl, Das Volk Gottes, 1941, passim.

51. O. Michel, Menschensohn und Volkerwelt, EMZ, 1941, p. 266.

159

this judgment as a characteristic and portion of the Messianic selfrevelation is found in Matt. 3: I 2 ; for John the Baptist, the day of

the Messiah is the day of judgment. Thence comes his confusion,Matt. I I: 2-3. It is important here also to note that Jesus eliminates

judgment from the prophetic expectation in His preaching inNazareth; cf. J. Jeremias, Jesu Verheissungfilr die Volker, pp. 35-39.43· 0 . Cullmann, op. cit., p. I22; cf. note 32 above.44· On the functioning of eschatology and the resistance against it

in mission circles, see H. J. Margull, Theologie der missionarischen Ver-

kiindigung, Evangelisation als Oekumenisches Problem, Evang. Verlagswerk, Stuttgart I959, pp. 24-38.

45· On the place and function of the apostles in general: K. H.

Rengstorf in TWNT I, I933, "apostolos", pp. 406-448. A survey of

the literature up to I930 may be found here, p. 406; literature fromI930-50 may be found in the survey by H. Mosbeck, Apostolos in the

New Testament (Studia Theologica I949-50, pp. I67-200). For theliterature after I950 see, among others, 0 . Cullmann, Petrus, ]Unger,

Apostel, Miirtyrer, Zwingli Verlag, Zurich I952 (E. T. Peter: Disciple,Apostle, Martyr); E. Lohse, Ursprung und Priigung des christlichen Aposto-

lates, Theol. Zeitschrift, I953· In Holland, since 1950: A. A. van

Ruler, Bijzonder en algemeen ambt, G. F. Callenbach, Nijkerk 1952;

H. N. Ridderbos, De apostoliciteit der kerk volgens het Nieuwe Testament,in: De Apostolische Kerk, J. H. Kok, Kampen I954, pp. 39-97·46. Rengstorf, op. cit., pp. 415-418, and also p. 42 I : "The Greek

furnishes therefore only the form of the New Testament concept; the

content is determined by the salzah of late Judaism." H. Durr alsoturns against the employment of the concept ofapostolate for mission,Kirche, Mission und Reich Gottes, EMM, September 1953, pp. 133-145.

47· Cf., for example, Acts 14: 4, where Paul and Barnabas are alsocalled apostles.

48. 0 . Cullmann, Petrus, p. 219.49· Ridderbos, Apost. Kerk, pp. 54-55·

50. It seems unjust to me to apply the Old Testament idea of theremnant to the apostles: (I) because this remnant is representedrather by Jesus Himself-the remnant who is a substitute for thewhole people; (2) because the apostles certainly occupy a uniqueposition in the early Christian Church as witnesses and founders, but

never, as far as I can see, a substituting one; (3) because in all the

continuity with the Old Testament, the new thing about the apostlesis the fact that they are just as much the beginning ofa new people asthey are the continuation of the old people. Therefore the miracle of

the Church cannot be understood if the fact of Israel's election is not

understood. For this, see N. A. Dahl, Das Volk Gottes, 1941, passim.51. 0 . Michel, Menschensohn und Viilkerwelt, EMZ, 1941, p. 266.

159



52. It might be useful to note that wherever in this chapter the

word Church has been used, this refers exclusively to the ecclesia as

the community of the Kingdom as it occurs in the Gospels and not

to the Church in an institutional or even in a denominational sense.

One ofthe greatest and haughtiest heresies in the history ofthe

Churchis the identification of the institution with this community of the

Kingdom. A healthy ecclesiology does not identify these two but lets

the institutional Church be supplied with norms time and time again

by the N.T. community of the Kingdom. If the expectation of and

the direction towards the Kingdom should become the criterion for

the Church as an institution and denomination, there might be

quite a smaller number of "true" and "false" churches, and the

idea of "sect" might be handled with less assurance.

53. H. Diirr, op. ciL, p. 141.

Chapter 6

1. For the whole of the revelation of God in regard to Israel and

the nations see also: K. Earth, Kirchliche Dogmatik IV, 3, i Halfte,

pp. 54-67, 2 Halfte, pp. 788-792.

2. For this section in general, see: O. Michel, Gottesherrschaft

und Volkerwelt, EMZ 1941, pp. 225-232; Mensckensohn undVolkerwelt, EMZ, 1941, pp. 257-267; Gemeinde und Volkerwelt,

EMZ, 1941, pp. 289-295; Der Heilige Geist in der Volkerwelt, EMZ,

1941, pp. 321-328; Die Furbitte des Erlosers, EMZ, 1941, pp-353-s6o;

W. Freytag, Mission im Blick aufs Ende, EMZ, 1942, pp. 321-328;

K. Barth, Auslegung von Matth. 28: 16-20, 1945; R. Liechtenhan, Die

Urchristliche Mission, 1946; H. H. Rowley, The Relevance ofApocalyptic,

1947; J. Blauw, Goden en Mensen, 1950; G. Stahlin, Die Endschau Jesu

und die Mission, EMZ, 1950, pp. 97-105, 134-147; O. Michel, Der

Abschluss des Matthdusevangeliums, Evangelische Theologie 10, 1950-51,

pp. 16-26; E. Lohmeyer, Mir ist gegeben alle Gewalt, Eine Exegese von

Matth. 28: 16-20, in In memoriam E. Lohmeyer 1951, pp. 22-49; J.

Marsh, The Fullness of Time, 1952 ;P. S. Minear, Christian Hope and the

Second Coming, 1953; J. E. Fison, The Christian Hope, the Presence and the

Parousia, Longmans, London 1954; S. Knak, Neutestamentliche Mis-

sionstexte nach neuerer Exegese, Theologia Viatorum V, 1954, pp. 27-50;

K. G. Kuhn, Das Problem der Mission in der Urchristenheit, EMZ, 1954,

pp. 161-168; T. W. Manson, Jesus and the Non-Jews, 1955; G.F. Vice-

dom, Missio Dei, 1958; J. Hermelink, H. J. Margull, Basileia 1959,

pp. 27-59; > Bosch, Die Heidenmission in der %ukunftschau Jesu

(Abhandlungen zur Theologie des Alten und Neuen Testaments 36),

*959> PP* 184-192; K. Barth, Kirchliche Dogmatik, IV, 3, pp. 337-353.

3. O. Michel, Menschensohn und Volkerwelt, p. 258.

1 60

52. It might be useful to note that wherever in this chapter the

word Church has been used, this refers exclusively to the ecclesia asthe community of the Kingdom as it occurs in the Gospels and not

to the Church in an institutional or even in a denominational sense.

One of the greatest and haughtiest heresies in the history of he Churchis the identification of the institution with this community of the

Kingdom. A healthy ecclesiology does not identify these two but letsthe institutional Church be supplied with norms time and time again

by the N.T. community of the Kingdom. If the expectation of and

the direction towards the Kingdom should become the criterion forthe Church as an institution and denomination, there might be

quite a smaller number of "true" and "false" churches, and the

idea of "sect" might be handled with less assurance.

53· H. Durr, op. cit., p. 141.

Chapter 6

r. For the whole of the revelation of God in regard to Israel and

the nations see also: K. Barth, Kirchliche Dogmatik IV, 3, I Halfte,

pp. 54-67, 2 Halfte, pp. 788-792.2. For this section in general, see: 0. Michel, Gottesherrschaft

und Volkerwelt, EMZ 1941, pp. 225-232; Menschensohn undVolkerwelt, EMZ, 1941, pp. 257-267; Gemeinde und Volkerwelt,

EMZ, 1941, pp. 289-295; Der Heilige Geist in der Volkerwelt, EMZ,

1941, pp. 321-328; Die Fiirbitte des Erlosers, EMZ, 1941, pp.353-36o;W. Freytag, Mission im Blick auft Ende, EMZ, 1942, pp. 321-328;K. Barth, Auslegung von Matth. 28: I6-2o, 1945; R. Liechtenhan, Die

Urchristliche Mission, 1946; H. H. Rowley, The Relevance ofApocalyptic,

1947;]. Blauw, Coden en Mensen, 1950; G. Stahlin, Die EndschauJesu

und die Mission, EMZ, 1950, pp. 97-105, 134-147; 0. Michel, Der

Abschluss des Matthiiusevangeliums, Evangelische Theologie ro, 1950-51,pp. 16-26; E. Lohmeyer, Mir ist gegeben alle Gewalt, Eine Exegese von

Matth. 28: I6-2o, in In memoriam E. Lohmeyer 1951, pp. 22-49; J.

Marsh, The Fullness of Time, 1952; P. S. Minear, Christian Hope and theSecond Coming, I 953; J. E. Fison, The Christian Hope, the Presence and the

Parousia, Longmans, London 1954; S. Knak, Neutestamentliche Mis

sianstexte nach neuerer Exegese, Theologia Viatorum V, 1954, pp. 27-50;

K. G. Kuhn, Das Problem der Mission in der Urchristenheit, EMZ, 1954,

pp. r6r-r68; T. W. Manson, Jesus and the Nan-Jews, 1955; G. F. Vicedam, Missia Dei, 1958; J. Hermelink, H. J. Margull, Basileia 1959,pp. 27-59; D. Bosch, Die Heidenmission in der Zukuriftschau Jesu(Abhandlungen zur Theologie des Alten und Neuen Testaments 36),

1959, pp. 184-192; K. Barth, Kirchliche Dagmatik, IV, g, pp. 337-353.3· 0 . Michel, Menschensahn und Volkerwelt, p. 258.

x6o



4- I lack the opportunity to check as to whether the exegesis pro-

posed by O. Michel is supported by other exegetes. The connection

between Matt. 28: 16-20, and Dan. 7: 13-14, was of course recog-

nized earlier, but without its consequences being drawn. So, for

example, an observation in L. Goppelt, Typos> 1939, pp. 112-113:"The expressions by which the resurrected one speaks of his exousia

(authority), Matt. 28: 18, depend upon Dan. 7: 14." The exegesis

proposed by Michel is now almost universally recognized as correct.

In the text we quote Michel's exposition of the connection with the

Old Testament in extenso, but without the notes he adds. The original

passage may be found in O. Michel, EMZ, 1941, pp. 261-262. The

spacing is Michel's own.

5. E. Lohmeyer points this out, op. cit., ad hoc.

6. Michel, op. cit., p. 262, note 16.

7. Gf. Matt. 24: 14, Mark 13 : 10. Panta ta ethneis synonymous with

he hole oikoumene, cf. O. Michel, TWNT V, pp. 159-161 "oikoumene";M. Paeslack, Die Oikumene im Neuen Testament, Theologia Viatorum

(Berlin) II, 1950, pp. 33-47; D. Bosch, op. cit., pp. 161-163.

J. G. Hoekendijk, Kerk en Volk in de Duitse Zendingswetenschap, 1948,

p. 229, recalls how G. Warneck, M. Frick, and others "(have) heard

(in thepanta ta ethne) an invitation to lose oneselfin the ethnic structure

ofthe object ofmission". How little Matt. 28: 18-20 can be employedto find a Biblical foundation for "nation" or a "national mission"

appears in TWNT II "ethnos" (G. Bertram and K. L. Schmidt),

pp. 362-370.

R. K. Orchard, Out of Every Nation (I.M.G. Research Pamphlets,

no. 7, S.G.M. Press, London 1959), poses the question as to the signifi-

cance of the nations in the Bible. "For this is one of the points at

which missionary action is held up or is in uncertainty for lack of

theological clarification," p. 50. In continental European circles this

question has been under discussion for a long time. As early as 1929,

G. Bertram (in G. Rosen and G. Bertram, Juden und Phonizier, J. G. B.

Mohr, Tubingen) emphasized the fact that the concept "people"

(or "nation" German Volk) in the Old Testament does not have a

national but a religious significance; and in this way the significance

of peoples/nations or (!) the heathen/Gentiles is also characterized.

In the same direction we find G. von Rad, Das Gottesvolk in Deutero-

nomiuniy Kohlhammer, Stuttgart 1929, p. 19. The investigation of

L. Rost, Die Bezeichnungen fur Land und Volk im Alien Testament, Die

Vorstufen von Synagoge undKirche, 1938, points in the same direction.

W. Eichrodt deals in a noteworthy way with the concept "Volks-

tum" (nationality) in Gottesvolk und die Volker, where this eminent Old

Testament scholar operates in certainly a very uncritical way, and

in any event in a non-Biblical way, with a dialectical national con-

4· I lack the opportunity to check as to whether the exegesis pro

posed by 0 . Michel is supported by other exegetes. The connectionbetween Matt. 28: r6-2o, and Dan. 7: 13-14, was of course recognized earlier, but without its consequences being drawn. So, for

example, an observation in L. Goppelt, Typos, 1939, pp. rr2-II3:"The expressions by which the resurrected one speaks of his exousia

(authority), Matt. 28: 18, depend upon Dan. 7: 14." The exegesisproposed by Michel is now almost universally recognized as correct.In the text we quote Michel's exposition of the connection with theOld Testament in extenso, but without the notes he adds. The original

passage may be found in 0. Michel, EMZ, 1941, pp. 261-262. The

spacing is Michel's own.

5· E. Lohmeyer points this out, op. cit., ad hoc.

6. Michel, op. cit., p. 262, note 16.7· Cf. Matt. 24: 14, Mark 13: ro. Panta ta ethne is synonymous with

he hole oikoumene, cf. 0. Michel, TWNT V, pp. 159-r6r "oikoumene";

M. Paeslack, Die Oikumene im Neuen Testament, Theologia Viatorum

(Berlin) II, 1950, pp. 33-47; D. Bosch, op. cit., pp. r6r-r63.

J. C. Hoekendijk, Kerk en Volk in de Duitse Zendingswetenschap, 1948,p. 229, recalls how G. Warneck, M. Frick, and others "(have) heard(in thepanta ta ethne) an invitation to lose oneselfin the ethnic structure

of the object ofmission". How little Matt. 28: 18-20 can be employedto find a Biblical foundation for "nation" or a "national mission"appears in TWNT II "ethnos" (G. Bertram and K. L. Schmidt),

pp. 362-370.R. K. Orchard, Out qf Every Nation (I.M.C. Research Pamphlets,

no. 7, S.C.M. Press, London 1959), poses the question as to the significance of the nations in the Bible. "For this is one of the points at

which missionary action is held up or is in uncertainty for lack of

theological clarification," p. 50. In continental European circles this

question has been under discussion for a long time. As early as 1929,G. Bertram (in G. Rosen and G. Bertram,Juden und Phiinizier,]. C. B.

Mohr, Tiibingen) emphasized the fact that the concept "people"

(or "nation"-German Volk) in the Old Testament does not have anational but a religious significance; and in this way the significanceof peoples/nations or (!) the heathen/Gentiles is also characterized.In the same direction we find G. von Rad, Das Gottesvolk in Deutero-

nomium, Kohlhammer, Stuttgart 1929, p. 19. The investigation of

L. Rost, Die Bezeichnungen fur Land und Volk im Alten Testament, DieVorstufen von Synagoge und Kirche, 1938, points in the same direction.

W. Eichrodt deals in a noteworthy way with the concept "Volks-tum" (nationality) in Gottesvolk und die Volker, where this eminent Old

Testament scholar operates in certainly a very uncritical way, and

in any event in a non-Biblical way, with a dialectical national con-

L I6 I



cept, EMM, 1942. A good insight into this problem of Church and

nation (Volk) is given by N. A. Dahl, Das Volk Gottes, 1941. We must

further point out the significance of the Old Testament word qdhal

(see TWNT "ekklesia") and the New Testament words ethnos, laos,

and thelike.

For several years a Dutch-German study commissionhas been at work (on the initiative of the Deutsche Evangelische

Missionsrat) on the problem of Church and nation (Volk). But the

reports and discussion have never, alas, been published. With the

permission of the writer I quote here the following statements from

one of the reports: "Not what is suitable to a nation (Volk), but what

is suitable to revelation, dominates." "The Old Testament preaches

lastly a theocracy and not an ethnocracy" (A. Hulst, Kirche und Volk

im Alien Testament, unpublished report). Further, J. C. Hoekendijk,

op. cit., pp. 229-235 and passim; J. Blauw, Goden en Mensen, pp. 518.It seems out ofthe question to me that any other "clarification" can

be given from the theological side to the problem raised by Orchard.

Does it not solve itself when, in listening to the message of the gospel,

one does not allow himself to be disturbed by the extraneous noises

which come from the outside? The fierce struggle in the German

theory of mission around the concept of Volk (nation/people), as

Hoekendijk has sketched it, could be a beacon for every church

threatened by nationalistic temptations. "Nationalism is alwaysreligious" (G. v. d. Leeuw, Phaenomenologie, p. 250, quoted by

Hoekendijk, op. citf> p. 275). This is naturally not to deny that the

diversity of nations also has significance for the Kingdom of God. But

to employ an historical, political, sociological, or perhaps even racist

concept of "people" (Volk) is out of the question; in the light of the

Bible the nations are to be viewed as signs (i) of God's will to peace

(Gen. 10), (2) of His dominion over Israel (Deut. 32: 8, where the

LXX even thinks of angels). God's activity with the nations as politi-

cal powers has the purpose (i) of leading them to seek God (Acts 17:

s6f.), (2) ofleading them to express the variegated wisdom ofGod in

accepting the gospel (Eph. 3: 10) and to lift their voice in the many-voiced chorus that celebrates the praise of God (Rev. 7:9). But wemust note here that there is never any reference in the Bible to a con-

gregation of a nation (Volksgemeinde) but only to a congregation from

the nations. This has been rightly pointed out by K. Hartenstein and

W. Freytag in a courageous witness at the time of a demonic over-

excitement of nationalism in their land. The concepts of "people"(Volk) and "nation" are like so many other concepts which we accept

as almost self-evident (such as culture, art, and the like) : they take on

no emphasis in the Bible except in their significance (whether favour-

able or unfavourable) for the salvation which God brings about. They

belong to the area of the "powers" about which Paul speaks.

162

cept, EMM, I942. A good insight into this problem of Church and

nation (Volk) is given by N. A. Dahl, Das Volk Gottes, 194I. We mustfurther point out the significance of the Old Testament word qiihal

(see TWNT "ekklesia") and the New Testament words ethnos, laos,

and the like. For several years a Dutch-German study commissionhas been at work (on the initiative of the Deutsche EvangelischeMissionsrat) on the problem of Church and nation (Volk). But the

reports and discussion have never, alas, been published. With the

permission of the writer I quote here the following statements fromone of the reports: "Not what is suitable to a nation (Volk), but what

is suitable to revelation, dominates." "The Old Testament preacheslastly a theocracy and not an ethnocracy" (A. Hulst, Kirche und Volkim Alten Testament, unpublished report). Further, J. C. Hoekendijk,

op. cit., pp. 229-235 and passim; J. Blauw, Goden en Mensen, pp. 5-I8.It seems out of the question to me that any other "clarification" can

be given from the theological side to the problem raised by Orchard.

Does it not solve itself when, in listening to the message of the gospel,one does not allow himself to be disturbed by the extraneous noiseswhich come from the outside? The fierce struggle in the German

theory of mission around the concept of Volk (nation/people), asHoekendijk has sketched it, could be a beacon for every church

threatened by nationalistic temptations. "Nationalism is alwaysreligious" (G. v. d. Leeuw, Phaenomenologie, p. 250, quoted by

Hoekendijk, op. cit., p. 275). This is naturally not to deny that the

diversity of nations also has significance for the Kingdom of God. But

to employ an historical, political, sociological, or perhaps even racistconcept of "people" (Volk) is out of the question; in the light of the

Bible the nations are to be viewed as signs (I) of God's will to peace(Gen. IO), (2) of His dominion over Israel (Deut. 32: 8, where the

LXX even thinks ofangels). God's activity with the nations as politi

cal powers has the purpose (I) ofleading them to seek God (Acts I7:26f.), (2) ofleading them to express the variegated wisdom of God inaccepting the gospel (Eph. 3: I o) and to lift their voice in the manyvoiced chorus that celebrates the praise of God (Rev. 7: g). But wemust note here that there is never any reference in the Bible to a congregation of a nation (Volksgemeinde) but only to a congregation fromthe nations. This has been rightly pointed out by K. Hartenstein and

W. Freytag in a courageous witness at the time of a demonic over

excitement of nationalism in their land. The concepts of "people"(Volk) and "nation" are like so many other concepts which we acceptas almost self-evident (such as culture, art, and the like) : they take on

no emphasis in the Bible except in their significance (whether favourable or unfavourable) for the salvation which God brings about. They

belong to the area of the "powers" about which Paul speaks.

162



Theological discussion on this topic is coming more and more into

prominence, since the passing of the first halfof the century, in which

the only interest in this concept, so important in Paul's thinking, was

from a history-of-religion point of view. See, among others, O. Dehn,

Engelund

Obrigkeit,in

Theologische Aufsatze fur K. Earth zwn 50.Geburtstag, Gh. Kaiser Verlag, Munich 1936, pp. 90-106, in which

the "powers" are one-sidedly viewed as powers of the state; G. Kittel,

Christus und Imperator, Kohlhammer, Stuttgart 1939 (opposed to

Dehn's conception) ;O. Cullmann, Konigsherrschaft Christi und Kirche

im Neuen Testament, Zollikon Verlag, Zurich 1941 ;Christus und die ^eit,

1946, especially pp. 169-186; TWNT II "dynamis", pp. 286-328,

and the literature there cited (W. Grundmann) ; idem, pp. 568-570"exousia" (W. Foerster), etc. In the Netherlands, H. Berkhof has

given an excellent introduction, though it is perhaps too concise,

Christus en de machten, G. F. Callenbach, Nijkerk 1953, which would be

well worth translating into English, given the reality of the problem.

8. For the concept "make disciples", cf. K. H. Rengstorf, TWNTIV, "manthano," etc., pp. 417-464.

9. Here, it seems to me, we have a strong weapon against the

methods employed in various fundamentalist (and other!) missions

to make being a Christian dependent on the keeping of a series of

commandments which, apart from the bond to Jesus Christ, mustmean only a new enslavement to the powers of this world for those

who would be made disciples ofJesus. At the same time I think wehave here a contra-indication against those who conceive of the call

to mission simply as a proclamation, and who want even to avoid

any appearance of "conversion" or activity of conversion in missions!

10. This reference to the Sermon on the Mount is due to G. Eich-

holz in a meditation on Matt. 28 : 18-20, in Herr, tue meine Lippen auf,

pp. 282-294, E. Miiller Verlag, Wuppertal Barmen 1957.

11. So Michel, op. cit, p. 265.

12. Ibid., p. 265.

13. Here, I think, lies the most pregnant justification for what is

ordinarily called the "comprehensive approach". But at the same

time the character and the boundaries ofthis comprehensive approach

are shown in the personal form ("all that /have commanded you") :

the approach must be carried by and must lead to a more distinct

discipleship of the exalted Lord. Though personally I shrink a bit

from burdening Scriptural data such as these too heavily with ourpresent-day phrasing of questions (the danger of eisegesis is very

great!), .1 still think that we may find here a directive for the present

relationships between older and younger Churches. Can one, in the;

complicatedness of today's relationships, "teach them to observe alii

that I have commanded you" in every respect without the experiences;

163

Theological discussion on this topic is coming more and more intoprominence, since the passing of the first halfof the century, in whichthe only interest in this concept, so important in Paul's thinking, wasfrom a history-of-religion point ofview. See, among others, 0. Dehn,

Engel und Obrigkeit, in Theologische Azifsiitze fur K. Barth zum 50.Geburtstag, Ch. Kaiser Verlag, Munich 1936, pp. 90-ro6, in whichthe "powers" are one-sidedly viewed as powers of the state; G. Kittel,Christus und Imperator, Kohlhammer, Stuttgart 1939 (opposed toDehn's conception); 0. Cullrcimn, Kiinigsherrschqft Christi und Kircheim Neuen Testament, Zollikon Verlag, Zurich 1941; Christus und die Zeit,1946, especially pp. r69-r86; TWNT II "dynamis", pp. 286-328,and the literature there cited (W. Grundmann); idem, pp. 568-570"exousia" (W. Foerster), etc. In the Netherlands, H. Berkhof has

given an excellent introduction, though it is perhaps too concise,Christus en de machten, G. F. Callenbach, Nijkerk 1953, which would be

well worth translating into English, given the reality of the problem.8. For the concept "make disciples", cf. K. H. Rengstorf, TWNT

IV, "manthano," etc., pp. 417-464.g. Here, i t seems to me, we have a strong weapon against the

methods employed in various fundamentalist (and other!) missionsto make being a Christian dependent on the keeping of a series of

commandments which, apart from the bond to Jesus Christ, mustmean only a new enslavement to the powers of this world for thosewho would be made disciples ofJesus. At the same time I think we

have here a contra-indication against those who conceive of the callto mission simply as a proclamation, and who want even to avoidany appearance of "conversion" or activity of conversion in missions!

ro. This reference to the Sermon on the Mount is due to G. Eichholz in a meditation on Matt. 28: r8-2o, in Herr, tue meine Lippen auf,pp. 282-294, E. Muller Verlag, Wuppertal Barmen 1957.

r I . So Michel, op. cit., p. 265.12. Ibid., p. 265.13. Here, I think, lies the most pregnant justification for what is

ordinarily called the "comprehensive approach". But at the sametime the character and the boundaries of this comprehensive approachare shown in the personal form ("all that I have commanded you") :the approach must be carried by and must lead to a more distinctdiscipleship of the exalted Lord. Though personally I shrink a bit

from burdening Scriptural data such as these too heavily with ourpresent-day phrasing of questions (the danger of eisegesis is verygreat!),.! still think that we may find here a directive for the presentrelationships between older and younger Churches. Can one, in the:complicatedness of today's relationships, "teach them to observe allithat I have commanded you" in every respect without the experience;

163



ofthe whole Church in the whole world ? Even ifno "abridged gospel"

were passed on by the "older" Churches to the "younger" ones, never-

theless, the evangelical perspectiveis often abridged as a consequence

of a conception of "what is commanded" which is all too spiritual-

ized. Here a deficiency from the past can be made upwithout

the "older" Churches lapsing into a nineteenth-century method of

pedagogy in missions.

14. The expressed promise of Christ's presence till the consumma-

tion of the world seems to be more an argument against thanfor the

total or partial equalization ofresurrection and Parousia, as in H. W.

Bartsch, among others, in Basileia 1959, pp. 27-41, though he will-

ingly grants that "mission belongs to the epiphany". But it is precisely

the characteristic of the New Testament message that in spite of the

eschatological character of Christ's resurrection (and thus ofmission),

it is not anticipated at the consummation or the Parousia. In the

final conclusion of Bartsch's, "The Parousia has already happened

and yet is awaited at the same time with every manifestation of His

lordship" (p. 41), the problem is certainly put off, but not solved,

because the word "Parousia" here has another meaning than "the

Second Coming ofthe Lord" in the ordinary theological and (I think)

Biblical significance.

15. We are reproducing here systematically what hasalso

been

expressed in the Report regarding the Biblical foundations of Mission,

De Heerbaan, 1951, pp. 197-221, esp. pp. 207-208. See also W.

Freytag, Vom Geheimnis der Mission, EMZ, 1940, pp. 97~98 ;Mission im

Blick aufs Ende, EMZ, 1942, pp. 321-328; H. Schlier, Die Entscheidung

fur die Heidenmission in der Urchristenheit, EMZ, 1942, pp. 166-182, 208-

212 ;M. A. C. Warren, The Truth of Vision, Canterbury Press, London

1948; Warren (ed.),The Triumph of God, a symposium, Longmans,

London 1948; K. Hartenstein, Mission und Eschatologie, EMZ, 1950,

pp. 33-42; H. N. Ridderbos, De Komst van het Koninkrijk, 1950, passim.

For a survey of the development in international mission circles:

H. J. Margull, Theologie der missionarischen Verkundigung, i959?PP- 24-78

(with an excellent bibliography). In this context I thought it not

necessary to deal with the discussion on the authenticity of Matt. 28 :

18-20, since A. von Harnack, W. Bousset and others have written

about this subject. See the commentaries. For me the manifold

criticisms of this authenticity have never seemed convincing.

1 6. An extended discussion of the various types of"call

to mission"which have here been pointed out concisely is beyond the compass of

this survey. For the rest, I do not know ofany comparative discussion

of these loci classici up to now. Such a discussion, if one kept in mind

the particular character of the gospels and thus the varieties of back-

ground, would contribute not a little to the clarification ofour under-

164

of he whole Church in the whole world? Even ifno "abridged gospel"were passed on by the "older" Churches to the "younger" ones, nevertheless, the evangelical perspective is often abridged as a consequence

of a conception of "what is commanded" which is all too spiritual

ized. Here a deficiency from the past can be made up withoutthe "older" Churches lapsing into a nineteenth-century method of

pedagogy in missions.14. The expressed promise of Christ's presence till the consumma

tion of the world seems to be more an argument against than for the

total or partial equalization of resurrection and Parousia, as in H. W.Bartsch, among others, in Basileia 1959, pp. 27-41, though he willingly grants that "mission belongs to the epiphany". But it is precisely

the characteristic of the New Testament message that in spite of the

eschatological character of Christ's resurrection (and thus ofmission),it is not anticipated at the consummation or the Parousia. In the

final conclusion of Bartsch's, "The Parousia has already happened

and yet is awaited at the same time with every manifestation of Hislordship" (p. 41), the problem is certainly put off, but not solved,

because the word "Parousia" here has another meaning than "the

Second Coming of the Lord" in the ordinary theological and (I think)Biblical significance.

15. We are reproducing here systematically what has also beenexpressed in the Report regarding the Biblical foundations of Mission,

De Heerbaan, 1951, pp. 197-221, esp. pp. 207-208. See also W.

Freytag, Vom Geheimnis der Mission, EMZ, I940, pp. 97-98; Mission im

Blick atifs Ende, EMZ, I942, pp. 321-328; H. Schlier, Die Entscheidungfrir die Heiden:mission in der Urchristenheit, EMZ, I 942, pp. I66- r 82, 208-

212; M.A. C. Warren, The Truth ofVision, Canterbury Press, London1948; Warren (ed.), The Triumph of God, a symposium, Longmans,London I948; K. Hartenstein, Mission und Eschatologie, EMZ, 1950,

pp. 33-42; H. N. Ridderbos, De Komst van het Koninkrijk, r 950, passim.For a survey of the development in international mission circles:H.J. Margull, Theologie dermissionarischen Verkiindigung, 195g,pp. 24-78(with an excellent bibliography). In this context I thought it not

necessary to deal with the discussion on the authenticity of Matt. 28:

r8-2o, since A. von Harnack, W. Bousset and others have written

about this subject. See the commentaries. For me the manifoldcriticisms of this authenticity have never seemed convincing.

16.An

extended discussion of the various types of"call to mission"which have here been pointed out concisely is beyond the compass of

this survey. For the rest, I do not know of any comparative discussionof these loci classici up to now. Such a discussion, if one kept in mind

the particular character of the gospels and thus the varieties of background, would contribute not a little to the clarification of our under-

164



standing of the "Biblical foundations and motives" of mission.

17. Ifwe have emphasized the resurrection, the crowning ofChrist's

work as a condition for mission among the Gentiles, rather than the

rejection of the Messiah by Israel, as has happened in most publica-

tions todate,

thenwe

wishnow to express the fact that, as far as wecan see, the rejection of Jesus Christ by Israel is not as much the

condition for the mission to the Gentiles as the resurrection. By this

rejection the path is also opened to the resurrection, via the cross.

Furthermore, this rejection is partly revoked after the resurrection

and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit (see the Acts of the Apostles).

I think we must make a distinction between conditions for the

mission to the Gentiles and the path along which this condition has

come into being. Israel's rejection belongs to this path. I think we

do an injustice to the shadings of the New Testament image when weview Israel's rejection of the Messiah and His resurrection as identical

or similar conditions for the proclamation of the gospel among the

nations.

I should like to resist with still greater emphasis the conclusion,

drawn among others by H. Schlier, Die Entscheidung fur die Heiden-

mission in der Urchristenheit, EMZ, 1942, p. 167, that by the rejection

of the Messiah Israel herself is rejected as the chosen people. Further study

of the New Testament onthis

subject has made me realize that myapproval of H. Schlier at this point (in my Goden en Mensen, 1950, p.

115) was too rash and even incorrect. The problem ofpost-Christian

Israel is, however, too comprehensive to be dealt with in any satis-

factory way in this survey. I think it would be better to say that after

the resurrection and outpouring of the Holy Spirit, the exclusive

prerogatives of Israel as the people ofGod were (temporarily?) taken

away and withheld. But this is no rejection; cf. Rom. 911. Another

view is put forward by D. Bosch^ op. cit., in his (too) extreme conclu-

sions, p. 925 that are incompatible with his remarks on p. 91 : "Is the

Messiah now to reject his people too? The Acts of the Apostles an-

swers *NoV1 8. W. Michaelis, Geist Gottes und Mission nach dem Neuen Testament^

EMM, 1932, pp. 5-16.

19. O. Michel, DerHeilige Geist in der Volkerwelt, EMZ, 1941, p. 327;

K. Barth, Kirchliche Dogmatik, IV, 3, pp. 405-424.

20. H. Schlier, op. cit., pp. 179-180.

21. Otherwise: R. Liechtenhan, Dieurchristliche

Mission, p. 50:"There exists no evidence that the primitive community offered any

opposition on principle to the reception of Gentiles into member-

ship. ... It was only the concrete mission which the apostles did not

welcome." This "concrete mission" still exists, I think, in the fact

that the resistance had to be overcome.

165

standing of the "Biblical foundations and motives" of rrusswn.I7· I fwe have emphasized the resurrection, the crowning ofChrist's

work as a condition for mission among the Gentiles, rather than the

rejection of the Messiah by Israel, as has happened in most publica

tions to date, then we wish now to express the fact that, as far as wecan see, the rejection of Jesus Christ by Israel is not as much the

condition for the mission to the Gentiles as the resurrection. By thisrejection the path is also opened to the resurrection, via the cross.Furthermore, this rejection is partly revoked after the resurrectionand the outpouring of the Holy Spirit (see the Acts of the Apostles).I think we must make a distinction between conditions for the

mission to the Gentiles and the path along which this condition has

come into being. Israel's rejection belongs to this path. I think we

do an injustice to the shadings of the New Testament image when weview Israel's rejection of the Messiah and His resurrection as identicalor similar conditions for the proclamation of the gospel among the

nations.I should like to resist with still greater emphasis the conclusion,

drawn among others by H. Schlier, Die Entscheidung fur die Heiden-

mission in der Urchristenheit, EMZ, 1942, p. r67, that by the rejectionof the Messiah Israel herself is rejected as the chosen people. Further study

of the New Testament on this subject has made me realize that myapproval of H. Schlier at this point (in my Goden en Mensen, 1950, p.

I 15) was too rash and even incorrect. The problem ofpost-ChristianIsrael is, however, too comprehensive to be dealt with in any satisfactory way in this survey. I think i t would be better to say that afterthe resurrection and outpouring of the Holy Spirit, the exclusiveprerogatives of Israel as the people of God were (temporarily?) takenaway and withheld. But this is no rejection; cf. Rom. 9-1 I. Anotherview is put forward by D. Bosch, op. cit., in his (too) extreme conclu

sions, p. 92, that are incompatible with his remarks on p. 91: "Is theMessiah now to reject his people too? The Acts of the Apostles an

swers 'No'."

18. W. Michaelis, Geist Gottes und Mission nach dem Neuen Testament,

EMM, 1932, pp. s-r6.19. 0 . Michel, Der Heilige Geist in der Volkerwelt, EMZ, I941, p. 327;

K. Barth, Kirchliche Dogmatik, IV, 3, pp. 405-424.20. H. Schlier, op. cit., pp. 179-rSo.

2 I. Otherwise: R. Liechtenhan, Die urchristliche Mission, p. so:"There exists no evidence that the primitive community offered any

opposition on principle to the reception of Gentiles into member

ship.... It was only the concrete mission which the apostles did not

welcome." This "concrete mission" still exists, I think, in the fact

that the resistance had to be overcome.

165



22. This series has already been pointed out, particularly by O.

Cullmann in Christus und die ^eit, part I, pp. 3 1103, especially pp. 9 1

103.

23. Whether we are also to see in 2 Cor. 9 an evidence of the central

position of the congregationat

Jerusalem ('ebhydnimas a

designationof the congregation) seems to me too uncertain, still, in the present

state of the discussion, for us to be able to pass judgment on it.

24. On the eschatological role of Jerusalem see D. Bosch, Die

Heidenmission in der %ukunftschau Jesu, 1959, pp. 88-92, in which the

most important literature is also cited. Since the publication of this

survey there has appeared J. G. de Young's Jerusalem in the Mew

Testament. The significance of thecity

in the history of redemption and in

eschatology (Diss. Free University ofAmsterdam), J. H. Kok, Kampen

1960.

To what extentJerusalem will continue to play a role in the future

is a question which cannot be answered here. See R. Martin-Achard,

Israel et Us Nations, p. 71 : "Nevertheless it seems that, according to

the witness of the New Testament, Jerusalem is still to play a role in

the future. We would have to state in detail and examine how the

assembling of mankind around Christ is to be harmonized with the

eschatological function of the city of David." The study by Young,

mentioned above, does not give an answer to this question.

25. R. Martin-Achard, op. cit.> p. 71.

26. Ibid., p. 71: "The difference between the centripetal and

centrifugal movements is only relative." Another motive is stated in a

note: "If the mission of the New Testament seems at first glance

centrifugal, it is to enable it to be centripetal. We go out into the

world to gather it together; we cast the net to draw it in; we sow to

reap." (J. J. von Allmen, by letter.)

The question of centripetal and centrifugal seems to be more

important than it is represented here; see the text.

27. Note the nuance in comparison with Matt. 13: 19, where the

seed is the word of the Kingdom. Are the children of the Kingdom,

then, not the "word become flesh," as it were, of the Kingdom?28. On this point see N. A. Dahl, Das Volk Gottes, especially part

III, pp. 146-278. Further, G. von Rad, K. G. Kuhn, W. Gutbrod in

TWNT III, "Israel", pp. 356-394; K. Emmerich, Diejuden, Zollikon

Verlag, Zurich 1939; etc - etc - We have represented here the opinion

ofDahl, op. cit., pp. 213, 240, 243, 252, 253.

29. For this section see:

Joh. Warneck, Paulus im Lichte der heutigen Heidenmission, Berlin, 2nd

ed. 1914.

R. Allen, Missionary Methods: St. Paul's or ours^ London 1912, 4th ed.

1956-

1 66

22. This series has already been pointed out, particularly by 0.Cullmann in Christus und die Zeit, part I, pp. 31-103, especially pp. gx-

I03.

23. Whether we are also to see in 2 Cor. g an evidence of the central

position ofthe congregation at Jerusalem ('ebhyon£m as a designationof the congregation) seems to me too uncertain, still, in the presentstate of the discussion, for us to be able to pass judgment on it.

24. On the eschatological role of Jerusalem see D. Bosch, Die

Heidenmission in der Zukunftschau Jesu, 1959, pp. 88-g2, in which the

most important literature is also cited. Since the publication of this

survey there has appeared J. C. de Young's Jerusalem in the New

Testament. The significance of the ci!)! in the history of redemption and ineschatology (Diss. Free University ofAmsterdam), J. H. Kok, Kampen

1960.To what extent Jerusalem will continue to play a role in the future

is a question which cannot be answered here. See R. Martin-Achard,Israel et les Nations, p. 71: "Nevertheless it seems that, according tothe witness of the New Testament, Jerusalem is still to play a role in

the future. We would have to state in detail and examine how the

assembling of mankind around Christ is to be harmonized with the

eschatological function of the city of David." The study by Young,

mentioned above, does not give an answer to this question.25. R. Martin-Achard, op. cit., p. 71.26. Ibid., p. 71: "The difference between the centripetal and

centrifugal movements is only relative." Another motive is stated in anote: "If the mission of the New Testament seems at first glancecentrifugal, it is to enable i t to be centripetal. We go out into the

world to gather it together; we cast the net to draw it in; we sow to

reap." (J. J. von Allmen, by letter.)The question of centripetal and centrifugal seems to be more

important than it is represented here; see the text.27. Note the nuance in comparison with Matt. 13: xg, where the

seed is the word of the Kingdom. Are the children of the Kingdom,then, not the "word become flesh," as it were, of the Kingdom?

28. On this point see N. A. Dahl, Das Volk Gottes, especially part

III, pp. 146-278. Further, G. von Rad, K. G. Kuhn, W. Gutbrod in

TWNT III, "Israel", pp. 356-394; K. Emmerich, Die Juden, ZollikonVerlag, Zfuich 1939; etc. etc. We have represented here the opinion

of Dahl, op. cit., pp. 213, 240, 243, 252, 253·29. For this section see:

Joh. Warneck, Paulus im Lichte der heutigen Heidenmission, Berlin, 2nd

ed. 1914.R. Allen, Missionary Methods: St. Paul's or ours, London 1912, 4th ed.

1956.

166



A. Oepke, Die Missionspredigt des Apostels Paulus, Leipzig 1920.

R. Liechtenhan, Der Apostel Paulus, sein Werk und seine Welt, Basel 1928.

J. Richter, Die Briefe des Apostels Paulus als missionarische Sendschreiben,

Gutersloh 1929.

K.Pieper,

Paulus.

J. Holzner, Paulus, Herder & Co., Freiburg im Breisgau 1937.

R. Liechtenhan, Die urchristliche Mission, Zwingli Verlag, Zurich

1946.

G. F. Vicedom, Die Rechtfertigung als gestaltende Kraft der Mission,

Freimund Verlag, Neuendettelsau 1952.

D. v. Swigchem, Het missionair karakter van dechristelijke gemeente uol-

gens de brieven van Paulus en Petrus, J. H. Kok, Kampen 1955.

30. R. Liechtenhan, Die urchristliche Mission, p. 78.

See also: Clarence Tucker Craig, The Beginning of Christianity,

Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, New York Nashville 1943, p. 164: Weshould picture him (Paul) as one missionary among many, not yet

the pioneering leader.

31. F, W. Grosheide, De openbaring Gods in het Nieuwe Testament,

J. H. Kok, Kampen 1953, p. 136.

32. This expression was coined by N. A. Dahl during the European

Consultation on The Word of God and the Church's Missionary

Obedience, Geneva, July 11-14, 1960.

33. See Schneider, "ektrooma", TWNT II, pp. 463-465.

34. See R. Liechtenhan, Die urchristliche Mission, pp, 59-67.

35. Ibid., pp. 77-84.

36. This refers to the theological impossibility of linking proselyte

mission and Christian mission. This does not deny that in practice

the missionary tradition of proselytism made its influence felt. The

world of the gospel, however, is completely different from that of

post-exile Judaism. Please see : E. Stauffer, Jesus, Gestalt und Geschichte,

Dalp Taschenbucher 332, Francke Verlag, Berne & Munich 1960.

(E.T. Jesus and His Story.)

37. For the "conversation with Israel," "the Christian approach to

theJews," I think it is important to attend to the double line ofPaul's

thinking. One cannot defend the priority of "the approach to the

Jews" on the basis of Paul's declarations on the Gentile Christians

as proselytes of Israel, because other passages can be placed alongside

these which accentuate the quite special character of the Church over

against Israel. But for the same reasons one cannot defend the priorityof the mission to the Gentiles either. A theology which presses the

idea of "Israel" too far is liable to fall into the same error as did the

old Israel earlier: accentuating the chosenness instead of the act of

divine choosing (election), which election wasfor service. The correct

attitude is perhaps given in Rom. 15: 7-9. The whole problem of a

167

A. Oepke, Die Missionspredigt des Apostels Paulus, Leipzig 1920.R. Liechtenhan, Der Apostel Paulus, sein Werk und seine Welt, Basel xg28.J. Richter, Die Briefe des Apostels Paulus als missionarischt Senclschreiben,

Giitersloh 1929.K.

Pieper,Paulus.

J. Holzner, Paulus, Herder & Co., Freiburg im Breisgau I937·R. Liechtenhan, Die urchristliche Mission, Zwingli Verlag, Zfuich

1946.G. F. Vicedom, Die Rechifertigung als gestaltende Kraft der Mission,

Freimund Verlag, Neuendettelsau 1952.D. v. Swigchem, Het missionair karakter van de christelijke gemeente val-

gens de brieven van Paulus en Petrus, J. H. Kok, Kampen r 955·30. R. Liechtenhan, Die urchristliche Mission, p. 78.

See also: Clarence Tucker Craig, The Beginning of Christianity,Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, New York Nashville 1943, p. r64: Weshould picture him (Paul) as one missionary among many, not yet

the pioneering leader.

3r. F. W. Grosheide, De openbaring Gods in het Nieuwe Testament,J. H. Kok, Kampen I953, p. 136.

32. This expression was coined by N. A. Dahl during the EuropeanConsultation on The Word of God and the Church's Missionary

Obedience, Geneva, JulyI

1-14, rg6o.33· See Schneider, "ektrooma", TWNT II, pp. 463-465.34· SeeR. Liechtenhan, Die urchristliche Mission, pp. 59-67.

35· Ibid., pp. 77-84.36. This refers to the theological impossibility of linking proselyte

mission and Christian mission. This does not deny that in practicethe missionary tradition of proselytism made its influence felt. The

world of the gospel, however, is completely different from that of

post-exile Judaism. Please see: E. Stauffer, Jesus, Gestalt und Geschichte,

Dalp Taschenbiicher 332, Francke Verlag, Berne & Munich 1960.(E.T. Jesus and His Story.)

37· For the "conversation with Israel," "the Christian approach to

theJews," I think it is important to attend to the double line ofPaul'sthinking. One cannot defend the priority of "the approach to the

Jews" on the basis of Paul's declarations on the Gentile Christiansas proselytes of Israel, because other passages can be placed alongsidethese which accentuate the quite special character of the Church over

against Israel. But for the same reasons one cannot defend the priorityof the mission to the Gentiles either. A theology which presses the

idea of "Israel" too far is liable to fall into the same error as did the

old Israel earlier: accentuating the chosenness instead of the act of

divine choosing (election), which election was for service. The correctattitude is perhaps given in Rom. 15: 7-g. The whole problem of a

167



non-believing Israel must not take our attention here any further.

It seems plain to me, on the basis of Rom. 9-11, that Paul saw his

work among the Gentiles as the best and only way to continue to do

something with his days for an Israel which was for the most part

callous.See D.

v.

Swigchem,Het missionair karakter van de

christelijke

gemeente volgens de brieven van Paulus en Petrus.J. H. Kok, Kampen 1955,

pp. 203-204.

38. It seems to me that this interdependence has never been given

its due importance in the actual practice of Christian missionary

work. We cannot discuss the many and various interpretations of the*

'fullness of Israel" and "all of Israel"; I would refer to the commen-

taries: quot commentationes tot sententiae!

39. (X Weber, Kirchenmission? Eine Mission in gegliederter Vielfalt,

EMZ, 1960, pp. 129-140.

40. We refer for the question of the Naherwartung to E. Stauffer,

Jerusalem undRom, passim; Dalp Taschenbiicher 331, Francke Verlag,

Berne & Munich 1957.*

41. R. Liechtenhan, Die urchristliche Mission, pp. 75-76.

Chapter 7

1. For this section in general see, among others, the works citedin notes 2 and 15 ofchapter 6, and further, O. Gullmann, Christus und

die %eit, 1946; P. Althaus, Die letzten Dinge, 5th ed., 1949; G. Rosen-

kranz, Weltmission und Weltende, 1 95 1; J. Munck, Paulus und die Heils-

geschichte, 1954; K. Barth, Kirchliche Dogmatik, IV, 3, 1959, pp. 337-

424 and pp. 782-1034, and especially pp. 999-1007.

2. O. Michel, Grundlagen des Denkens Jesu, EMM, 1953, pp. 35-36.

3. The expression is from Jean Danielou, Essai sur le mystere de

Vhistoire, 1954, p. 193.

4. W. Freytag, Vom Sinn der Weltmission, EMM. 1950, p. 74. If I

see it correctly, this thought stands directly opposed to those which

have been expressed by A. A. van Ruler, who lays a very great em-

phasis in his publication on the Christianization of the world. See,

among others, his Theologie des Apostolates, EMZ, 1954, in which,

for the rest, the various aspects which are offered there mitigate and

define earlier publications in this area.

5. O. Gullmann, Christus und die %eit, p. 138.

6. Ibid., p. 141. See also O. Gullmann, Eschatology and Mission in

the New Testament, in: W. Davies and D. Daube (ed.), The Background

of the Mew Testament and its Eschatology, Studies in Honour ofC. H. Dodd,

Cambridge Univ. Press, 1956, pp. 409-422.

7. Ibid., p. 140, pp. 145-146.

8. See also W. Freytag, op. cit., p. 74; D. Bosch, op. cit., pp. 165-169,

168

non-believing Israel must not take our attention here any further.I t seems plain to me, on the basis of Rom. 9-u, that Paul saw hiswork among the Gentiles as the best and only way to continue to do

something with his days for an Israel which was for the most part

callous. See D. v. Swigchem, Het missionair karakter van de christelijkegemeente volgens de brieven van Paulus en Petrus.]. H. Kok, Kampen 1955,

pp. 203-204.38. It seems to me that this interdependence has never been given

its due importance in the actual practice of Christian missionarywork. We cannot discuss the many and various interpretations of the

"fullness of Israel" and "all of Israel"; I would refer to the commentaries: quot commentationes tot sententiae!

39· 0 . Weber, Kirchenmission? Eine Mission in gegliederter Vieljalt,

EMZ, 1960, pp. 129-140.40. We refer for the question of the Naherwartung to E. Stauffer,

:Jerusalem und Rom, passim; Dalp Taschenbiicher 331, Francke Verlag,

Berne & Munich 1957.' 41. R. Liechtenhan, Die urchristliche Mission, pp. 75-76.

Chapter 7

I.For this section in general see, among others, the works cited

in notes 2 and 15 ofchapter 6, and further, 0. Cullmann, Christus und

die Zeit, I946; P. Althaus, Die letzten Dinge, 5th ed., 1949; G. Rosenkranz, Weltmission und Weltende, I95 I ; J. Munck, Paulus und die Heils-geschichte, I954; K. Barth, Kirchliche Dogmatik, IV, g, 1959, pp. 337-

424 and pp. 782-1034, and especially pp. 999-1007.2. 0 . Michel, Grundlagen des Denkens :Jesu, EMM, 1953, pp. 35-36.3· The expression is from Jean Danielou, Essai sur le mystere de

l'histoire, I954, p. I93·4· W. Freytag, Vom Sinn der Weltmission, EMM. 1950, p. 74· I f I

see it correctly, this thought stands directly opposed to those whichhave been expressed by A. A. van Ruler, who lays a very great emphasis in his publication on the Christianization of the world. See,among others, his Theologie des Apostolates, EMZ, 1954, in which,for the rest, the various aspects which are offered there mitigate and

define earlier publications in this area.

5· 0. Cullmann, Christus und die Zeit, p. Ig8.

6. Ibid., p. 141. See also 0. Cullmann, Eschatology and Mission inthe New Testament, in: W. Davies and D. Daube (ed.), The Backgroundof the New Testament and its Eschatology, Studies in Honour ofC. H. Dodd,Cambridge Univ. Press, I956, pp. 409-422.

7· Ibid., p. 140, pp. 145-I46.8. See also W. Freytag, op. cit., p. 74; D. Bosch, op. cit., pp. 165-r6g,

I68



171. Bosch objects to calling mission a sign or portent, "because it is

completely unpredictable". It seems to me a misunderstanding of

the word "sign" to see in it any aspect of"predicting". I feel therefore

that Bosch's objection is invalid, or at least this basis for his objection.

9. So W. Andersen, Towards a Theology ofMission, I.M.C. ResearchPamphlet No. 2, S.G.M. Press, London 1955, pp. 36-40. See also:

H. J, Margull, Theologie der missionarischm Verkundigung, 1959? pp.

24-38.

10. Stephen Neill's book, Creative Tension, 1959, is, if I have under*

stood it rightly, an attempt to reconcile continental European and

Anglo-Saxon thought in a positive dialectic which arouses a "creative

tension". (Doubleday, New York.)

1 1 . See, for example, how a prominent spokesman from (Eastern)

Orthodoxy rejects missions on the ground of the divisions of the

Church which cripple witness and make it impossible (in Basileia

1959: The Metropolitan James of Melita, The Orthodox Concept of

Mission and Missions, pp. 76-80). To me, as a non-Orthodox reader,

this argument gives the impression that here history, particularly

Church history, though not undermining the normativeness and

validity ofthe Biblical witness, nevertheless makes it to a great degree

relative. Further, this article is an impressive illustration of how

indissolubly "mission and unity" are intertwined.12. K. Barth, Kirchliche Dogmatik, IV, 3, pp. 874-875. In the fol-

lowing pages Barth points out (pp. 875-878) the hiatus that charac-

terized the patristic, scholastic, and then the Reformation and post-

Reformation doctrines of the Church. I think Barth is the first, and

up to now the only, systematic theologian who sees the existence and

the task of the Christian to lie in witness. Of particular importance

in this regard is 72.2, "Die Gemeinde fur die Welt," pp. 872-910.

I believe, then, that in this passage the remark of Bishop Stephen

Neill is out of date, Creative Tension, p. 1 1 1 : "As far as I know, no one

has yet set to work to think out the theology of the Church in terms

of that one thing for which it exists."

13. K. Barth, op. cit., p. 878.

14. N. Goodall, Missions under the Cross, Edinburgh House Press,

London 1953, p. 22. W. Andersen, op. cit., p. 58, answers affirmatively

the question put by Goodall: "In our judgment an affirmative an-

swer must be given to this question. The work of all other activities

and responsibilitiesof the Church must be

judged byits

relationshipto the end. This work is in a twofold sense direction to the end

temporally to the time of the end, and geographically to the ends of

the earth." By this statement he repeats what has been said constantly

since the time ofHartenstein and others, but he overlooks the particu-

lar set ofproblems at which Goodall was aiming. The sentences here

169

171. Bosch objects to calling mission a sign or portent, "because it iscompletely unpredictable". It seems to me a misunderstanding of

the word "sign" to see in it any aspect of"predicting". I feel thereforethat Bosch's objection is invalid, or at least this basis for his objection.

g. SoW. Andersen, Towards a Theology ofMission, I.M.C. ResearchPamphlet No. 2, S.C.M. Press, London 1955, pp. 36-4o. See also:H. J. Margull, Theologie der missionarischen Verkiindigung, 1959, pp.

24-38.10. Stephen Neill's book, Creative Tension, 1959, is, if! have under

stood it rightly, an attempt to reconcile continental European and

Anglo-Saxon thought in a positive dialectic which arouses a "creativetension". (Doubleday, New York.)

I r. See, for example, how a prominent spokesman from (Eastern)

Orthodoxy rejects missions on the ground of the divisions of theChurch which cripple witness and make it impossible (in Basileia

1959: The Metropolitan James of Melita, The Orthodox Concept of

Mission and Missions, pp. 76-80). To me, as a non-Orthodox reader,this argument gives the impression that here history, particularlyChurch history, though not undermining the normativeness and

validity of the Biblical witness, nevertheless makes it to a great degreerelative. Further, this article is an impressive illustration of how

indissolubly "mission and unity" are intertwined.12. K. Barth, Kirchliche Dogmatik, IV, 3, pp. 874-875. In the following pages Barth points out (pp. 875-878) the hiatus that characterized the patristic, scholastic, and then the Reformation and postReformation doctrines of the Church. I think Barth is the first, and

up to now the only, systematic theologian who sees the existence and

the task of the Christian to lie in witness. Of particular importancein this regard is §72.2, "Die Gemeinde fiir die Welt," pp. 872-910.I believe, then, that in this passage the remark of Bishop Stephen

Neill is out of date, Creative Tension, p. III "As far as I know, no onehas yet set to work to think out the theology of the Church in termsof that one thing for which it exists."

13. K. Barth, op. cit., p. 878.14. N. Goodall, Missions under the Cross, Edinburgh House Press,

London 1953, p. 22. W. Andersen, op. cit., p. 58, answers affirmativelythe question put by Goodall: "In our judgment an affirmative an

swer must be given to this question. The work of all other activitiesand

responsibilitiesof the Church must be judged by

its relationshipto the end. This work is in a twofold sense direction to the end-

temporally to the time of the end, and geographically to the ends of

the earth." By this statement he repeats what has been said constantlysince the time ofHartenstein and others, but he overlooks the particular set of problems at which Goodall was aiming. The sentences here

169



quoted occur, further, at the end of the chapter which bears the title,

"Problems left unsolved at Willingen and their solution through the

new line of approach that Willingen has made possible". I think the

solution that is presented here is far too easy and too apodictic, and

furthermore Andersen's viewwill have to fall under the

criticism,offered in the text, in regard to eschatology as a prerogative of a

theological foundation of*

'foreign missions".

15. W. Freytag, Vom Sinn der Weltmission, EMM, 1950, p. 75. See

also his: Meaning and Purpose of the Christian Mission, IRM, April 1950.

pp. 189 ff. Further, for the general contents of this section, see:

M. A. G. Warren, The Truth of Vision, Canterbury Press, London

1948; The Christian Mission, S.G.M. Press, London 1951, 3rd ed. 1953;

The Christian Imperative, S.G.M. Press, London 1955.

1 6. Stephen C. Neill, Creative Tension, Doubleday, New York 1959,

pp. 81 fF.

17. Ibid., p. 82.

1 8. During a consultation of the Sub-committee on Theology of

Mission of the Study Department WGG/IMG in London, October

22-23, 1957-

19. W. Andersen, Towards a Theology of Mission, S.G.M. Press,

London 1955, 2nd ed. 1956, p. 58.

20. If I am not mistaken, the data of Biblical theology which havebeen offered here demonstrate what has been affirmed on other

grounds by such men as Hans Durr, Die Reinigung der Missionsmotive,

EMZ, 1951, pp. 2-10; Sendung, einige Fragen und Erwdgungen, EMM,1 954, pp. 146~i52 ;J. G.Hoekendijk, Mission heute, 1954 Studentenbund

fur Mission; Stephen G. Neill, Creative Tension, p. in.

21. A. A. van Ruler, Theologie van het Apostolaat, p. 46.

22. W, Freytag, op. cit., p. 75.

23. "Report of the Advisory Commission on the Main Theme of

the Second Assembly Christ, the Hope of the World," p. 18, in

The Christian Hope and the Task of the Church, Harper Bros., New York

1954-

24. M. A. G. Warren, The Christian Imperative, pp. 126, 127, 128.

25. A. A. van Ruler, Theologie van het Apostolaat, 1954, pp. 14, 15.

26. K. Earth, Kirchliche Dogmatik, IV, 3, 1959, p. 1002.

27. P. S. Minear, Gratitude and Mission in the Epistle to the Romans,

in Basileia, 1959, p. 47.

28. Neverthelessit is

not without significance that Minear, op. cit.,

p. 42, announces that Freytag was critical of locating the motive for

mission in thankfulness. This is connected, I think, with Freytag's

special emphasis on the element of expectation in the eschatological

foundation of mission.

29. The sharpest distinction between proclamation of the gospel

170

quoted occur, further, at the end of the chapter which bears the title,"Problems left unsolved at Willingen and their solution through thenew line of approach that Willingen has made possible". I think thesolution that is presented here is far too easy and too apodictic, and

furthermore Andersen's view will have to fall under the criticism,offered in the text, in regard to eschatology as a prerogative of atheological foundation of "foreign missions".

15. W. Freytag, Vom Sinn der Weltmission, EMM, 1950, p. 75· Seealso his: Meaning and Purpose of the Christian Mission, IRM, April I 950.pp. 189 ff. Further, for the general contents of this section, see:M. A. C. Warren, The Truth of Vision, Canterbury Press, London1948; The Christian Mission, S.C.M. Press, London 1951, 3rd ed. 1953;The Christian Imperative, S.C.M. Press, London 1955·

16. Stephen C. Neill, Creative Tension, Doubleday, New York 1959,pp. 81 ff.

I 7· Ibid., p. 82.I8. During a consultation of the Sub-committee on Theology of

Mission of the Study Department WCC/IMC in London, October

22-23, 1957·19. W. Andersen, Towards a Theology of Mission, S.C.M. Press,

London 1955, 2nd ed. 1956, p. 58.

20.I f

am not mistaken, the data of Biblical theology which havebeen offered here demonstrate what has been affirmed on othergrounds by such men as Hans Diirr, Die Reinigung der Missionsmotive,

EMZ, 1951, pp. 2-xo; Sendung, einige Fragen und Erwiigungen, EMM,

1954, pp. 146-152 ;J. C. Hoekendijk, Missionheute, I954 Studentenbundffu Mission; Stephen C. Neill, Creative Tension, p. II r.

2 I. A. A. van Ruler, Theologie van het Apostolaat, p. 46.22. W. Freytag, op. cit., p. 75·

23. "Report of the Advisory Commission on the Main Theme of

the Second Assembly-Christ, the Hope of the World," p. I8, inThe Christian Hope and the Task of the Church, Harper Bros., New York

1954·24. M. A. C. Warren, The Christian Imperative, pp. I26, 127, I28.25. A. A. van Ruler, Theologie van het Apostolaat, 1954, pp. 14, I5.26. K. Barth, Kirchliche Dogmatik, IV, 3, I959, p. 1002.27. P. S. Minear, Gratitude and Mission in the Epistle to the Romans,

in Basileia, I 959, p. 47.

28. Nevertheless itis

not without significance that Minear, op. cit.,p. 42, announces that Freytag was critical of locating the motive formission in thankfulness. This is connected, I think, with Freytag'sspecial emphasis on the element of expectation in the eschatologicalfoundation of mission.

29. The sharpest distinction between proclamation of the gospel

170



in the immediate environment of the Church and that in distant

lands is made by van Ruler in his Theologie van het Apostolaat, e.g. p. 44 :

"The relation of God to paganism is an entirely different one from

His relation to an apostate Christendom. Therefore one cannot, and

oneshould

not, reduce to a common denominator the two forms ofthe apostolate, say in Europe and in Asia. . . . There is more than a

practical, technical difference here. It is a deeply spiritual difference,

a difference of theological principle." I would like to make here only

a few observations, to raise questions:

(a) To what extent can one still speak, in the vast majority of

situations, of an apostate Christendom ? Can one not have be-

come so post-Christian that he is for all practical purposes

pre-Christian (though certainly not yet anti-Christian) ? Can

one make the judgment ofpost-Christian only when it is clear

that there has already been a confrontation with the gospel?

And how many areas are there not, where the Church has

lived in such an introverted fashion that, contrary to her

deepest nature and calling, she has not made known the truth

so that the Gospel is still hidden? (Cf. 2 Cor. 4: 2, 3.)

(b) To what extent is the*

'corpus christianum"(still) present as

a corpus, a body, and to what extent is it Christian? On the

answer to this question depends the decision, I think, as towhether one does accept a distinction in principle as well as in

practice between "mission" and "foreign mission".

(c) What significance has history had in Europe and America

as a "progressing Heilsgeschichte" ? To what extent does this

impose permanent obligations in regard to the other continents ?

Without falling into the error of the "white man's burden",

can one speak of a permanent vocation to service to the world

other than arising from the gospel that makes servants for

Christ's sake all of us over the whole world ?

30. See, e.g. H. J. Margull, Theologie der missionarischen Verkundigung,

Evang. Verlag, Stuttgart 1959, which gives an excellent bibliography;

W. Andersen, Towards a Theology of Mission, S.C.M. Press, London

1955; G. F. Vicedom, Missio Dei, Ch. Kaiser Verlag, Munich 1958.

31. The expression is from the Dutch theologian O. Noordmans. .

32. The trinitarian foundation of mission is accepted generally

and well known, too, I assume. See among others, Barth, Auslegung

von Matth. 28: i6~-so,

33. W. Freytag, Vom Sinn der Weltmission, EMM 1950, p. 75.

34. One thinks here of the tension between "Inter-church Aid"

and Mission, behind which there is sometimes an attempt even to

see a theological problem; and ofthe contrast which is often suggested

between "missionary" and "pastoral", and the like. Over against

171

in the immediate environment of the Church and that in distantlands is made by van Ruler in his Theologie van het Apostolaat, e.g. p. 44:"The relation of God to paganism is an entirely different one fromHis relation to an apostate Christendom. Therefore one cannot, and

one should not, reduce to a common denominator the two forms ofthe apostolate, say in Europe and in Asia...• There is more than apractical, technical difference here. It is a deeply spiritual difference,a difference of theological principle." I would like to make here onlya few observations, to raise questions:

(a) To what extent can one still speak, in the vast majority of

situations, of an apostate Christendom? Can one not have become so post-Christian that he is for all practical purposespre-Christian (though certainly not yet anti-Christian)? Can

one make the judgment of post-Christian only when it is clearthat there has already been a confrontation with the gospel?And how many areas are there not, where the Church haslived in such an introverted fashion that, contrary to her

deepest nature and calling, she has not made known the truth

so that the Gospel is still hidden? ( Cf. 2 Cor. 4: 2, 3·)(b) To what extent is the "corpus christianum" (still) present as

a corpus, a body, and to what extent is it Christian? On the

answer to this question depends the decision, I think, as towhether one does accept a distinction in principle as well as in

practice between "mission" and "foreign mission".(c) What significance has history had in Europe and America

as a "progressing Heilsgeschichte"? To what extent does thisimpose permanent obligations in regard to the other continents?Without falling into the error of the "white man's burden",

can one speak of a permanent vocation to service to the worldother than arising from the gospel that makes servants for

Christ's sake all of us over the whole world?30. See, e.g. H.J. Margull, Theologie dermissionarischen Verkiindigung,

Evang. Verlag, Stuttgart I 959, which gives an excellent bibliography;W. Andersen, Towards a Theology of Mission, S.C.M. Press, London1955; G. F. Vicedom, Missio Dei, Ch. Kaiser Verlag, Munich 1958.

31. The expression is from the Dutch theologian 0. Noordrnans• .

32. The trinitarian foundation of mission is accepted generallyand well known, too, I assume. See among others, Barth, Auslegung

von Matth.28:

r6-2o.33· W. Freytag, Vom Sinn der Weltmission, EMM 1950, p. 75·34· One thinks here of the tension between "Inter-church Aid"

and Mission, behind which there is sometimes an attempt even to

see a theological problem; and of the contrast which is often suggestedbetween "missionary" and "pastoral", and the like. Over against

171



the inclination in the past to undervalue the theological character of

missionary problems (Edinburgh 1910, Jerusalem 1928), it seems to

me now that the inclination is strong to overvalue it, such as framing

questions of administration as theological questions.

35. Thesewords are taken from a recent

pamphlet written by me:De Weg der pending,]. H. Kok, Kampen 1960, p. 48.

36. This quotation I took from a leaflet of the Ch. Kaiser Verlag,

Munich, who will publish before long selected writings of Professor

Freytag.

37. For this passage see, among others, the following commen-

taries: H. L. Strack and P. Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testa-

ment aus Talmud und Midrasch, Vol. IV, 19226; G. H. Beck, Munich,

2nd ed. 1956; H. Windisch, Handbuch zum Neuen Testament, Die

Katholischen Briefe, J. C. B. Mohr, Tubingen 1930; E. G. Selwyn, The

First Epistle ofSt. Peter, Macmillan, London 1947, 2nd ed. 1949; F. W.

Beare, The First Epistle of St. Peter, Basil Blackwell, Oxford 1947,

revised ed. 1958; A. Schlatter, Erlauterungen zum Neuen Testament,

9 Teil, Calwer Verlag, Stuttgart 1950; F. Hauck, Das Neue Testa-

ment Deutsch, 4 Band, Vandenhoeck & Rupprecht, Gottingen 1956;

TWNT I "hagios" (O. Procksch), "arete" (F. Buchsel), "basileia"

(K. L. Schmidt), "genos" (F. Buchsel); III "hiereus" (G. Schrenk).

Further: W. Bieder, Grund und Kraft der Mission nach dem I Petrusbrief,

Zollikon Verlag, Zurich 1950, pp. 3-17; E. G. Selwyn, Eschatology in

I Peter, in: W. Davies, D. Daube (ed.), The Background of the New

Testament and its Eschatologv, Studies in honour ofC. H. Dodd, CambridgeUniv. Press, 1956, pp. 394-401.

38. E. G. Selwyn, Eschatology in i Peter, p. 394.

39. G. Schrenk, op. cit., pp. 250-251.

40. Gf. what has been said about Exod. 19: 56 in Chapter i.

41. Cf. Rom. 1:21.

42. P. S. Minear has called attention to the proclamation amongthe Gentiles as doxology, and rightly so: Gratitude and Mission in the

Epistle to the Romans, in Basileia, 1959, pp. 42-48.

172

the inclination in the past to undervalue the theological character ofmissionary problems (Edinburgh I9IO, Jerusalem I928), it seems tome now that the inclination is strong to overvalue it, such as framingquestions of administration as theological questions.

35· These words are taken from a recent pamphlet written by me:De Weg der Zending, J. H. Kok, Kampen 1960, p. 48.36. This quotation I took from a leaflet of the Ch. Kaiser Verlag,

Munich, who will publish before long selected writings of ProfessorFreytag.

37· For this passage see, among others, the following commentaries: H. L. Strack and P. Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testa-ment aus Talmud und Midrasch, Vol. IV, I926; C. H. Beck, Munich,2nd ed. 1956; H. Windisch, Handbuch zum Neuen Testament, Die

KatholischenBriif8,J. C. B. Mohr, Ti.ibingen I930; E. G. Selwyn, TheFirst Epistle cifSt. Peter, Macmillan, London 1947, 2nd ed. 1949; F. W.Beare, The First Epistle cif St. Peter, Basil Blackwell, Oxford I 947,

revised ed. 1958; A. Schlatter, Erliiuterungen zum Neuen Testament,9 Teil, Calwer Verlag, Stuttgart I950; F. Hauck, Das Neue Testa-ment Deutsch, 4 Band, Vandenhoeck & Rupprecht, Gottingen 1956;TWNT I "hagios" (0. Procksch), "arete" (F. Bi.ichsel), "basileia"(K. L. Schmidt), "genos" (F. Bi.ichsel); III "hiereus" (G. Schrenk).

Further: W. Bieder, Grund und Kraft der Mission nach demI

Petrusbriif,Zollikon Verlag, Ziirich I950, pp. 3-I7; E. G. Selwyn, Eschatology in1 Peter, in: W. Davies, D. Daube (ed.), The Background cif the NewTestament and its Eschatologv, Studies in honour cifC. H. Dodd, CambridgeUniv. Press, rgs6, pp. 394-401.

38. E. G. Selwyn, Eschatology in 1 Peter, p. 394·39· G. Schrenk, op. cit., pp. 250-251.40. Cf. what has been said about Exod. I9: 5-6 in Chapter I.41. Cf. Rom. r : 2 r.42. P. S. Minear has called attention to the proclamation among

the Gentiles as doxology, and rightly so: Gratitude and Mission in the

Epistle to the Romans, in Basileia, 1959, pp. 42-48.

172



ABBREVIATIONS

AMZ Allgemeine Missions Zeitschrift

EMM Evangelisches Missions Magazin

EMZ Evangelische Missions Zeitschrift

IRM International Review of Missions

NAMZ NeueA M Z

TWNT Theologisches Worterbuch zum Neuen Testa-

ment, begun under G. Kittel

ZAW Zeitschrift fur die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft

173

ABBREVIATIONS

AMZ Allgemeine Missions Zeitschrift

EMM Evangelisches Missions Magazin

EMZ Evangelische Missions Zeitschrift

IRM International Review of Missions

NAMZ Neue A-M-ZTWNT Theologisches Worterbuch zum Neuen Testa-

ment, begun under G. KittelZAW Zeitschrift fur die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft

I73



GENERAL BIBLIOGRAPHY

H. H. Rowley (ed.),Eleven Years of Bible Bibliography

1946-1956, The Falcon's Wing Press, Indian Hills,

Colorado, U.S.A., 1957

G. H, Anderson, Bibliography of the Theology of Missions in

the zoth Century, Missionary Research Library, New

York, 1958

Raymond P. Morris, A Theological Book List, produced byThe Theological Education Fund of the International

Missionary Council, 1960, and distributed by Black-

well's, Oxford, England, and Allenson's, Napierville,

Illinois, U.S.A.

174

GENERAL BIBLIOGRAPHY

H. H. Rowley (ed.), Eleven Years of Bible Bibliography

1946-1956, The Falcon's Wing Press, Indian Hills,Colorado, U.S.A., 1957

G. H. Anderson, Bibliography of the Theoloi!J ofMissions inthe 2oth Century, Missionary Research Library, New

York, 1958Raymond P. Morris, A Theological Book List, produced by

The Theological Education Fund of the InternationalMissionary Council, 1g6o, and distributed by Blackwell's, Oxford, England, and Allenson's, Napierville,Illinois, U.S.A.

174



INDEX OF BIBLE REFERENCES

GENESISDEUTERONOMY

175

INDEX OF BIBLE REFERENCES

GENESIS DEUTERONOMY

18 7= 6-8 22

I : 3I I32 32:8 26, I62

I-I I 17, 19, 36, 139

I-12! 9 I39 2 SAMUEL

2 I8 23: I-7 462: r6, 17 20

2: I9 I32PSALMS

3 I8 22:27 70s: IS 4S, 46, 14722: 28; 24: r; 33:8 26

4-6: 7-8: 8, 9 Ig33! 9 I33g: I6 s647=8 26

IO Ig, 20, 38, 40, 81, 162

IO: I-32 3647:9 70

48: IO 2610-12: 9 I9II I9, 20, s8, 40, go SO! I 70

I2 ss,4o so:7 3S12: I-3 20 66: 7 26

12: 3 Ig, 20, 22 67 26

I4 46 67: I-2, 7 24

r4: x8-24 22 68: so, 32 70

I7: 4 155 71: S 3S

49= 8 4S 72 4749: IO 46 72: g-II 70

78 35

EXODUS 85 : IQ-I3, I I-I3 53

8786:9 26, 37, 70

387 2I , 26

3:2 go93-IOO 26

3: I4 I42g6 24Ig: 5 26g6: 3, IO 70I9: s-6 28, I28, 172IOO

24zg: 6 24, 129 IIO 46

II7 24,26NUMBERS 138: 5 ll4

24: I7 46 I 50 36

175



176

PROVERBS

I-98: rs, r6, 35

6I, 62

6r

2

2:2,2-4

2: 2-5

2:3

4:2

8: I I

g: r-6

9= 4-6

ISAIAH

I45

70

40,46

70

468g

46

6gr8:7; r9:23;2s:6,6-8

28: r670

127

154go, 31

29: r8 ff.; 35: 5 ff.

40-5542

42: I

42: I-7

42: 2, 442:4

42: 4· 642: 6

43= 20

32

31, 48

31, 48

3940, 48, 145, I48, r6r

51

31, I45128, 129

45: 14, 20, 22, 24

45= 22, 23

70

39

32

48

49

49: I49: 1-7

49= 6

49= 749= 12

50

so: 4-9

51: 4· 552: I3-I5

53

3 1, 49

31, 39, sr, 145

50

70

48

4970

49, so,149

48, 149

149

49

39, 71

ss: s; s6: 7; 6o: g, s-2o 706r: r-2 1546r: 6, 6-9 128

62: II ; 66: r8, 19 70

JEREMIAH

3: 17 70

I4: 8; 17: 13 35

23: 5-8; 3o: 9; 33 : 14-18 46

33= 24 149

I : 3

34= 21-3037=937= 24-28

EZEKIEL

DANIEL

2 : gr; 4: 6; s: 12

7: I-14

7-10

7: 137: 13-14

7= 14

7= 27

HOSEA

1: 6-rr; 2:23

3=5

14:3

3:2g: 7g: I I

4: I

AMOS

MICAH

4: 1-4; 5: 1-5

s : s

ZEPHANIAH

63

41, so

63

6983, r6rr6r

so, 148

53= 4, 853; I-I253: I I

54= 15 59 3= 9 70

176



M

HAGGAI I3! 38 852:7 70 13:47-50 742: 7--9 46 15: 2!-28 68, 85

!5: 24 67ZECHARIAH r6: 19, 20

78.2: II 70 16: 27 846: 9-15 46 r8: 18; I9: 28 788: 20, 21 40 22: I-I4 858: 21 70 22! 32 1308: 23 50 23! I5 57. 63, 68

9=9 6g .23: 37 6914: 16 40 .24: 14 85, 106, ro7, I6r

25! 31 68, 70

MALACHI 25!34 70I: I I I42 28: !6-20 I57, r6o, r6r

28: 18 87, 88ECCLESIASTICUS 28: I8-20 83, 85, 161, I63, 164

6: 24-30; 51: 23-27 62 28: 19 II6

MATTHEW MARK

I!I-I7;2:2 85 I: 14-15 71, 156

3=9 68, 79, 92 4!21 70g: II go 4= 26-2g 753! 12 159 10: 33 67s: 13, I4 IIg ro: 45 6g, 7I

s: I4, 15 70 II: I-IO 6g

6: 7, 32 67 I I ; 17 708: 5-13 68 I2! I 678: II 68, 70 I2: IO 708: I2 67 12: 35-37 6g

10: 5 86 I3! IO ro6, 107, I u , I6IIO: s-6 68, 7I, 78, 85 14! 24 6g, 71

10: 6 67 14! 58 70u:5ff . I 54 16: I4-20 88

II: 28-so 6.2

12: 15-21 6g LUKE

12: 41 68, 6g 2! 32 14612:42 III 2!34 123

13 74 4: 16-3o68

13: 19 I66 4: Ig, 22 I 54I3! 24-30 74 4! 25-27 6g

13: 3I-33 75 7= 22 15413! 32 70 8: 16 70

I3: 36-43 74 g:5r; 10:25-37 68

M I7J



178

II: 3I I II

I I: 33 7012: 30, 32 6713: I-3 6913: 6-9 68

13: 34 92I5 7517: II-Ig 68rg: 4I-44; 21: 20-24;

23: 28-31 g2

24: 25, 27, 32 13424:44-53 88

24:47 8g

JOHN

I: 5 135

4 68

7= 37 708: ro, 37-40, 56 798: 33-40 g2Io: I6 70

IO: 28, 2g I32I I: 24 III

I I: 51 7012 7612: 20 7012:48 III

14: r-6, 15-19, 25-28 8g15: 26 8g, go16: 22 8g

17: 18 7820: 21 78, 13320: 21-23 88

ACTS

I 112

I : 6-8 87, 8g, 105

I: 8 78, go, g4, 107, I II, II2

2:I-II ,36 go4: 27 675: 32 go8: 4-25, 26-40 94g: 15 g510: 1-48 gr

10-II

II: 2, 3, r8, 20, 21, 22, 26 gx

II: r8 g5II: 22, 26

13: 1-5 , 5

g6

gsI3: 2-3, 5; I4; I14:4

gi

I5gIOIgr

go, 105

I9, I62101

I4: r615: I-22

rs: 2817: 26

I7: 30

I : r6;3:1

3= 27-294: I I

4: I3, 18

4: I6, 17

4= I78: r6

8: 23g-II

IO : 4-2I

ro: II-15

ro: r6-I8

ROMANS

gi

g822, g8

g8

7gI 55I05

goIOO, IOI, I65, r68g8

II2

IOI

I I: I-6, I I-I2, 12, 25,26 roo, I27

I I: I, I3, I4, 15, 34-36 IOII5: 6, g II7

I5:g-I3 g8I5: 7-9 167I5: 19-20, 22-24 10315:26 ggr6: 7 102

r6:26 roo

I CORINTHIANS

3: 22, 23 122-1234: r6 102

7:31 ro6g: r6, 23 126IO: II 108

ro: 32 gs



179

u : r; 12:2B 102 g: IO 99, t6215:8 g6 g: 18 99, 11415: 10 125, 126 g: 19 II4

4: 7-16 99

2 CORINTHIANS 4: I I ;5 :1 ,2 102I: 22 go 5=5 1033: I4-16 I34 6: 15 I02, 125g: 17 8g 6: I9 1254= 2, 3 171

4= I5 II7 PHIUPPIANS

5: 17 64,93 I: J4; 2: 3-II !02

II: 2 !03 2: IQ-II 146g: 10 II9

GALATIANS 3: 17 I022: 1-2 912:g 95 COLOSSIANS

3=8 22,98 I: 26, 27 99g: 16 223= 26-28 98 I THESSALONIANS

3:28 79 I: 6 I03

3=29 22, 79, 98 I: 7, 8 102

4: 25, 26 9I z: 14; 5= 23 !036: 15 932 THESSALONIANS

EPHESIANS 3: I 102

I: IO, II 97I : 22 Il9 I PETER

2: II-3: 2I 97 I: 5 III

2: I2, I3 97, 134 2:5 I3I

2: I3 II2 2: 9-ro I26

2: 14 53, I37 z; IO 792: Ig, 2I, 22 972:20 79 I JOHN

2: 22 13I 2: 7 87

2-4 IOI

g: I-I3 98 REVELATION

g: 4-6, 9 125 7=9 162

g:6 9I, 97, 99 21: IO gr

179



INDEX OF AUTHORS

ALBRIGHT, W. F., 138

Allen, R., 166

von Allmen, J. J., 166

Althaus, P., 168

Amiet, A., 142

Andersen, W., no, 169, 170, 171

Axenfeld, K., 150

BAMBERGER, B. J., 56, 150

Barth, K., 28, 38, 70, 109, 116,

117, 118, 142, 143, 145, 146,

147, 155, 157, 1 60, 165, 168,

169, 170, 171

Bartsch, H. W.5 153, 157, 164

Baumgartner, W., 151

Beare, F. W., 172

Begrich,J., 143

Bengel,J.A., 138, 158

v. d. Berg, J., 137

Berkhof, H., 163

Bertholet, A., 137, 142, 144, 150

Bertram, G., 56, 59, 140, 142,

151, 161

Bieder, W., 172

Billerbeck, P., 172

Blauw, J., 7, 26, 140, 141, 144,

155, 1 60, 162, 165, 172

Bohl, F. M. Ph., 138, 144

de Boer, P. A. H., 144, 145, 148

Boess, G,, 140

Bosch, D., 1 60, 161,165,

166,

1 68, 169

Bousset, W., 150, 164

Brierre Marbonne, J., 147

Brouwer, K. J., 123

Brunner, E., 139

Buber, M., 142, 143, 149, 154

Biichsel, F., 172

Bultmann, R., 145, 156

Buri, F., 156

Busch, F., 157

CARVER, W. O., 138

Gausse, A., 150

Cerny, L., 143

Charles, R. H., 150

Craig, G. T., 167

Cramer, K., 139

Cullmann, O., 106, 148, 153,

I545 155. 156, i57> 158, 159.

163, 1 66, 1 68

DAHL, N. A., 141, 153, 159, 162,

1 66, 167

Dalbert, R. H., 58, 150, 151

Danielou,J., 168

Daube, D., 168, 172

Davies, W., 168, 172

Dehn, G., 163

Derwacter, F. M,, 55, 150, 151

Dibelius, M., 156

Dodd, G. H., 156

Diirr, H., 159, 160, 170

Durr,J., 137

Diirr, L., 143

EDELKOORT,A. H.,

143, 146, 147,148

Eicnholz, G., 163

Eichrodt, W., 15, 16, 39, 139,

140, 145, 146, 161

Eissfeldt, O*, 143

180

INDEX OF AUTHORS

ALBRIGHT, W. F., I38Allen, R., r66von Allmen, J. J., 166Althaus, P., I68Amiet, A., I42Andersen, W., IIO, I6g, 170, I7I

Axenfeld, K., ISO

BAMBERGER, B. J., 56, ISO

Barth, K., 28, 38, 70, Iog, n6,

II7, II8, I42, I43, 145, 146,147. I55. I57, I6o, I6s, I68,r6g, I70, 171

Bartsch, H. W., 153, I57, 164

Baumgartner, W., 151Beare, F. W., 172

Begrich, J., I43Bengel, J. A., I38, I58v. d. Berg, J., 137Berkhof, H., I63Berthelet, A., 137, 142, I44, I50Bertram, G., 56, 59, I4o, 142,

I51, 16IBieder, W., 172Billerbeck, P., 172

Blauw, J., 7, 26, qo, I4I, I44,I55, I6o, I62, r65, 172

Bi:ihl, F. M. Ph., 138, 144de Boer, P. A. H., I44, 145, I48Boess, C., 140Bosch, D., 160, r6I, r6s, r66,

r68, r6gBousset, W., rso, 164Brierre Marbonne, J., 147Brouwer, K. J., 123

Brunner, E., 139

Buber, M., 142, 143, I49, 154Biichsel, F., 172

Bultmann, R., I45, 156Buri, F., 156Busch, F., 157

CARVER, W. O., I38Causse, A., 150Cerny, L., 143Charles, R. H., 150Craig, C. T., 167Cramer, K., I39Cullmann, 0., ro6, I48,

154· 155· 156, 157, rs8,

I63, r66, r68

DAHL, N. A., 14I, 153, 159, 162,r66, 167

Dalbert, R. H., 58, I50, 151

Danielou, J., r68Daube, D., I 68, I 72Davies, W., r68, 172

Dehn, G., 163Derwacter, F. M., 55, 150, 151Dibelius, M., 156Dodd, C. H., 156

Diirr, H., 159, I6o, 170Diirr, J., 137Durr, L., I43

EDELKOORT, A. H., I43, 146, 147,I48

Eichholz, G., 163Eichrodt, W., 15, 16, 39, xgg,

140, I45, 146, I6rEissfeldt, 0., 143

I8o



Emmerich, K.., 141 , 166

Evenhuis, R. B., 138

FEUILLET, A., 34

Fison, J. E., 160Foerster, W., 163

Fosdick, H. E., 138

Freytag, W., 9, 107, 109, 115,

117, 162, 164, 168, 170, 171,

172

Frick, H., 161

GALLING, K., 151

Goodall, N., 108, 169

Goppelt, L., 161

Gressmann, H., 143, 147, 149

Grosheide, F. W., 167

Grundmann, W., 163

Gutbrod, W., 166

HARNACK, A. VON, 151, 152, 153,

164

Hartenstein, K., 17, 107, 138,

162, 164

Hauck, F., 172

Hebert, A. G., 153

Hempd, J., 138, 142, 154

Hering, J., 148

Hermelink, J., 160

Hoekendijk, J. G.5 107, 124, 137,

149, 161, 162, 170

Holscher, G., 147

Holsten, W., 156

Holzmann, H. S., 152

Holzner,J., 167

Horace, 60

Hulst, A., 162

JACOB, E., 39, 138, 144, 145

Jeremias, J., 70, 148, 153, 154,

155, 156, 157, 159

KAHLERj M., 152

Kittel, G., 163

Kleinpaul, B., 138

Eoiak, S., 1 60

KohlerJ,, 138, 146

Konig, F. E., 143, 148

Kraus, H. J., 151

Kritzinger, J. D. W., 141

Kubler, O., 137

Kiimmel, W. G., 154, 156

Kuhn, K. G,, 1 60, 1 66

Kunze, W., 138

LAPSHAM, H. A., 138

Leenhardt, F. J., 139

v. d. Leeuw, G., 141, 142, 149,

162

Liechtenhan, R., 153, 155, 160,

165, 167, 168

Lohr, M., 143, 144

Lohmeyer, E., 154, 160, 161

Lohse, E., 155, 159

MANSON,T.W., 107, 153, 154, 156,1 60

Margull, H. J., 159, 160, 164,

171

Marsh, J., 160

Martin-Achard, R., 32, 33, 42,

140, 141, 143, 144, 145, 146,

148, 166

Matter, H. M., 156

Meinertz, M., 152, 153

Michaelis, W., 165

Michel, O., 83, 104, 159, 160,

161, 163, 165, 168

Minear, P. S., 117, 160, 170, 172

Miskotte, K. H., 140

Morant, P., 139

Mosbeck, H., 159

Munck, J., 168

Myklebust, O. G., 137

NEILL, S. G., 109, 121, 169, 170

zur Nieden, E., 137

Niles, D. T., 7

181

Emmerich, K., 141, r66Evenhuis, R. B., 138

FEUILLET, A., 34

Fison, J. E., 160Foerster, W., 163

Fosdick, H. E., 138

Freytag, w., 9· 107, 109, I 15,

117, 162, 164, 168, 170, 171,172

Frick, H., 161

GALLING, K., 151

Goodall, N., ro8, r6gGoppelt, L., t6r

Gressmann, H., 143, 147, 149Grosheide, F. W., r67Grundmann, W., 163

Gutbrod, W., r66

HARNACK, A. VON, 151, 152, 153,

164Hartenstein, K., 17, 107, 138,r62, 164

Hauck, F., 172

Hebert, A. G., 153

Hempel, J., 138, 142, 154Hering, J., 148

Hermelink,J., r6oHoekendijk, J. C., 107, 124, 137,

149, 161, 162, 170Holscher, G., 147

Holsten, W., 156

Holzmann, H. S., 152

Holzner, ]., 167

Horace, 6o

Hulst, A., 162

JACOB, E., 39, 138, 144, 145Jeremias, J., 70, 148, 153, 154,

155. 156, 157· 159

KAHLER, M.' I 52

Kittel, G., 163

Kleinpaul, B., 138

Knak, S., 160

Kohler,]., 138, 146Konig, F. E., 143, 148

Kraus, H.]., 151Kritzinger, J. D. W., 141

Kubler, 0., 137

Kummel, W. G., 154, 156Kuhn, K. G., r6o, r66Kunze, W., 138

LAPSHAM, H. A., 138

Leenhardt, F.]., 139

v. d. Leeuw, G., 141, 142, 149,162

Liechtenhan, R., 153, 155, r6o,r65, 167, r68

Lohr, M., 143, 144Lohmeyer, E., 154, r6o, t6r

Lohse, E., 155, 159

MANSON, T. W., 107, 153, 154, 156,160Margull, H. J., 159, r6o, 164,

171

Marsh,]., r6oMartin-Achard, R., 32, 33, 42,

140, 141, 143· 144, 145. 146,148, 166

Matter, H. M., 156

Meinertz, M., 152, 153Michaelis, W., 165

Michel, 0., 8s, 104, 159· r6o,161, 163, 165, r68

Minear, P. S., I 17, r6o, I7o, 172

Miskotte, K. H., 140

Morant, P., 139

Mosbeck, H., 159

Munck,J., r68Myklebust, 0. G., 137

NEILL, S.C., 109, I21, 169, 170

zur Nieden, E., 137

Niles, D. T., 7

181



Noordmans, O., 171

North, G. R., 140, 143, 144, 148

OEPKE, A., 167

Orchard, R. K., 137, 161, 162

PAESLACK, M., l6l

Paton, D. M., 140

Pedersen, J., 138

Pfeiffer, R. H., 138, 151

Pieper, K., 167

v. d. Ploeg, J., 143

Porteous, N. W., 140, 146

Procksch, O., 138, 146, 172

V. RAD, G., l6, ig, 20, 138, 139,

141, 142, 145, 146, 147, 149,

151, 161, 166

Rahlfs, A., 151

Reinhard, J., 138

Rengstorf, K. H., 159, 163

Richter,J., 167

Ridderbos, H. N., 153, 154, 155,

156, i57> 158, i59> l64

Riehm, E., 137, 143

Rosen, Fr., 150

Rosen, G., 150, 151, 161

Rosenkranz, G., 168

Rost, L., 140, 141, 142, 161

Rowley, H. H., 22, 39, 138, 139,

140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145,

147, 148, 1 60

van Ruler, A. A., 116, 118, 159,

168, 170, 171

Rylarsdam, G., 151

SCHARER, H., 137

Schlatter, A., 172

Schlier, H., 164, 165

Schmidt, H., 144

Schmidt, K. L., 142, 161, 172

Schmidt, M., 142, 143, 144, 146

Schneider, J., 167

Schniewindj J., 158

Schrenk, G., 172

Schweitzer, A., 153, 156

Scott, R. B. Y., 24, 141

Sellin, E., 39, 138, 144, 145Selwyn, E. G., 172

Snaith, N. H., 144, 145, 148

Spitta, F., 152

Stahlin, G. 5 142, 160

Staerk, W., 138

Stauffer, E., 150, 156, 167, 168

Stoevesandt, H., 153, 155

Strack, H. L., 172

Strauss, D. F., 152

Stummer, F., 150

Sundkler, B., 40, 70, 142, 146,

I52 5 I53> 155

v. Swigchem, D., 167, 168

TAYLOR, V., 155

Teinonen, S. A., 137, 138

VICEDOM, G. F., 1 60, 167, 171

Vischer, W., 143, 145, 146

Volz, P., 39, 145, 150

Vriezen, Th. G., 22, 23, 39, 138,

140, 141, 144, 145, 146

WARNECK, G., 137, 152, l6l

Warneck, Joh., 166

Warren, M. A. G., 107, 1 16, 117,

164, 170

Weber, O., 168

Weiss, J., 152, 155

Wendland, H. D., 150, 156

Wendland, P., 150

Windisch, H., 172

Wolff, H. W., 143, 147

Wright, G. E., 138

DE YOUNG, J. C., 1 66

ZIMMERLI, W., 139, 148

182

Noordrnans, 0., J7I

North, C. R., 140, 143, 144, 148

OEPKE, A., 167

Orchard, R. K., 137, 161, r62

PAESLACK, M., r6r

Paton, D. M., 140

Pedersen, J., r38

Pfeiffer, R. H., 138, 151

Pieper, K., r67v. d. Ploeg, J., 143

Porteous, N. W., 140, 146

Procksch, 0., 138, 146, 172

v. RAD, G., r6, 19, 20, 138, 139,

141, 142, 145> 146, 147> 149·151, 161, r66

Rahlfs, A., 151

Reinhard, J., 138

Rengstorf, K. H., 159, r63

Richter, J., 167Ridderbos, H. N., 153, 154, 155,

rs6, 157> rs8, 159· r64Riehm, E., 137, 143

Rosen, Fr., 150Rosen, G., rso, rsr, r6rRosenkranz, G., r68

Rost, L., 140, 141, 142, r6r

Rowley, H. H., 22, 39, 138, 139,

140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145,147, 148, 160

van Ruler, A. A., I r6, I r8, I 59·168, 170, 171

Rylarsdam, C., 151

SCHARER, H ., 137Schlatter, A., 172

Schlier, H., 164, 165Schmidt, H., 144

Schmidt, K. L., 142, r6r, 172

Schmidt, M., 142, 143, 144, 146

Schneider, J., 167

Schniewind, J., 158

Schrenk, G., 172

Schweitzer, A., 153, rs6

Scott, R. B. Y., 24, 141

Sellin, E., 39, 138, 144, 145Selwyn, E. G., 172

Snaith, N. H., 144, 145, 148Spitta, F., 152

Stahlin, G., 142, 160Staerk, W., 138

Stauffer, E., rso, 156, 167, r68Stoevesandt, H., 153, rss

Strack, H. L., 172

Strauss, D. F., 152Stummer, F., 150

Sundkler, B., 40, 70, 142, 146,

152, 153· 155v. Swigchem, D., 167, 168

TAYLOR, V., 155

Teinonen, S. A., 137, 138

VICEDOM, G. F., 160, 167, 171

Vischer, W., 143, 145, 146

Volz, P., 39, 145, 150

Vriezen, Th. C., 22, 23, 39, 138,

140, 141, 144, 145· 146

WARNECK, G., 137, 152, 161

Warneck, Job., 166

Warren, M.A. C., 107, II6, II7,

164, 170Weber, 0., r68

Weiss, J., 152, 155

Wendland, H. D., 150, 156Wendland, P., 150

Windisch, H., 172

Wolff, H. W., 143, 147

Wright, G. E., 138

DE YOUNG, J. C., 166

ZIMMERLI, w., 139, 148











Another v&,';'*v praised volume

;

"

,*;(

',' V V^!' j?

ff

;

itl

t; ,'

' >ff

<<:\*il

>' 'VrV-'1\

'

jj''f

'

^''"f'!,

*'

''. i

P.



Documents

Missionary Nature 013246 Mbp