Christian Theology and Israel, Part 3

For those who have not read them, it is best to go back and read Parts 1 and 2 to understand what is being discussed here.

A quick summary and catch-up: I have been reading R. Kendall Soulen’s The God of Israel and Christian Theology for a class. He brilliantly notes a problem in Christian Theology, a problem that can be fixed without abandoning fundamental doctrines. The problem, as many theologians have noted, is supersessionism (the Church supercedes Israel) also know as Replacement Theology.

He identifies three kinds of supersessionism:
1. Punitive supersessionism–God is done with Israel and is punishing Jews. The Church may take an active part in helping God torment the Jews. If you’ve studied Church history and Jewish history, you’re all too familiar with this one (Crusades, Inquisitions, Pogroms, Ghettos, expulsions, the complicity of churches in the Holocaust, etc.).
2. Economic supersessionism–God is done with Israel and is now working exclusively with and through the Church.
3. Structural suppersessionism–The most subtle and hardest to eradicate. This view upholds Israel’s continuing place while subtly ignoring the centrality of Israel in this age and in the Bible.

The culprit behind structural supersessionism is what Soulen calls the Standard Canonical Narrative. That is a story about how the Bible hangs together. The SCN (as we will call it) is simple:
Creation
Fall
Redemption (Yeshua’s work on the cross and through the resurrection)
Consummation (God bringing all to perfection in the Age to Come)

What ever could be wrong with what seems like such a straightforward way of reading the Bible and seeing it fit together? The problem is that the SCN basically needs only Genesis 1-3 and the New Testament. What is the point of Genesis 4 through the end of the Old Testament? The whole history of Israel is basically just preparation and signs leading up to redemption. God’s work through Israel is sort of a footnote in history now that Yeshua has come. Some have said I am exaggerating to call Israel a footnote in Christian theology. I have a lot of experience in churches, even churches that are favorable to Israel. Believe me, the Old Testament is a footnote, except Genesis 1-3. I could (and may) write about practical ways the Old Testament is disrespected in churches.

So, I promised to throw my hand in the ring with a suggestion for improving the SCN. I was totally disappointed with Soulen’s suggestion for a better Canonical Narrative. So, at last …here it is:

Creation
Fall
Covenants
Redemption
Consummation

Now a little more explanation:
Creation (Not yet perfect, but good. God obviously has a plan to make perfect, Trees of Life and Knowledge.)
Fall (out of intimacy with God and into need for redemption).
Covenants (God’s working through the nations and Israel, especially Israel, to bring about both redemption and consummation).
Redemption (through Yeshua’s death and resurrection, has begun but is still being completed. Yeshua came from Israel).
Consummation (when Yeshua returns, will center in Israel and include the nations).

What is the difference, you might ask? What have you really added?
1. God’s work in human history and society is not a footnote. It is God’s work in this world. Gnosticism values the spiritual and disavows the physical. We are not Gnostics. God’s work in the world, through people, nations, and families, is vital.
2. God has worked not only redemption through Israel (virtually all Christian theologians agree with that). He is also working out Consummation (the perfecting of the world) through Israel even now. What God does in Israel in 2007 matters and is no footnote. The Age to Come will be centered in Israel. Israel is still God’s people (Rom 11).

Anyway, a few questions for discussion. I’d love to see your (brief) answers:
1. Have you ever felt that the Old Testament was disrespected in a church you attended? Why?
2. Do you agree that Israel is still God’s people? Do you believe God is working through Israel even now?
3. What will Israel’s role be in the Age to Come?

Derek

Luke’s Eight Messianic Banquets

Still thinking about the issues I raised regarding Christian theology and Israel. I will come back to that with a Part 3 soon.

Meanwhile, wanted to share another little gem I picked up from reading. I got this through N.T. Wright. Wright is as good a New Testament scholar as you will find. Unfortunately, he does not see a continuing role for Israel either. You might think, then, that he would not be at the top of my list. But the thing is, he is so helpful in other areas, I just cannot keep from reading his work. I highly recommend his three main books: The New Testament and the People of God, Jesus and the Victory of God, and The Resurrection of the Son of God. If you read only three books on the New Testament, let it be these three. Just remember to keep Israel in the picture and not buy into the idea that after Jesus Israel is obsolete.

Having said that, here is a little gem I picked up through N.T. Wright (which he picked up from a commentary–I intended to tell you which commentary, but I cannot find my notes on that).

Luke’s gospel seems to, more than the others, emphasize Messianic banquets. That is, you will find 8 times in Luke where Yeshua is seated at a table and teaches about the kingdom of God. Sometimes he is at the table with friends and sometimes with enemies (or both).

There is a concept of a banquet in the Age to Come. It starts in Isaiah 25:6. Revelation mentions it also in 19:9. 1 Enoch 62:15 shows that in apocalyptic Judaism this was also an expectation (“They will eat and rest and rise with that Son of Man forever.”). The Essenes also emphasized Messianic banquets, holding ritual meals themselves. In 1Qsa 2:11-22 they give instructions for what the etiquette should be when eating with Messiah!

So here is he cool thing in Luke: the seventh banquet is the Last Supper/Passover and the eighth, the first of the new age, is on the Road to Emmaus.

Another cool thing: one of the Pharisees starts to get it. Seated with Yeshua and hearing his compelling teaching about the kingdom of God, the unknown Pharisee blurts out, “Blessed is he who shall eat bread in the kingdom of God!” (Luke 14:15).

Here is the list of Messianic banquets in Luke:
1. Luke 5:29-35 Banquet at Levi’s House
2. Luke 7:36-50 Banquet at a Pharisee’s House
3. Luke 9:12-17 Feeding the Five Thousand
4. Luke 10:38-42 Dinner at Martha and Mary’s
5. Luke 11:37-54 Another Banquet at a Pharisee’s House
6. Luke 14:1-15 A Third Banquet at a Pharisee’s House
7. Luke 22:7-23 The Last Supper/Passover
8. Luke 24:30-32 The Road to Emmaus

Derek

Christian Theology and Israel, Part 2

Well, I have finished reading The God of Israel and Christian Theology by R. Kendall Soulen.

My impression? What started as a brilliant depiction of the problem of standard Christian theology ends with a resounding flop. I am grateful to Soulen for numerous insights (some of which will be reflected in what I have to say later on), but his solution is unappealing and unconvincing.

I will not attempt to summarize Soulen’s solutions, because I doubt you want to read pages of explanation. I will simply say that in the end he downplays redemption too much. In seeking to show that God is still Israel’s God and that Israel and the Hebrew Bible did not become obsolete after Yeshua’s death and resurrection, he has given too little place to Yeshua’s death and resurrection (in my opinion).

But you are not reading this blog to hear a book review. You are interested in how God works with Jew and Gentile and how the Bible is read as a Jewish book. So let me offer a few more thoughts:

1. Let me remind you what the problem with standard Christian theology is (see post from Dec 19, Christian Theology and Israel). The problem is that Christian theology almost completely skips over the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament). There is a certain way that people see the Bible (Old and New) hanging together. It is called the Standard Canonical Narrative. The Standard Canonical Narrative (SCN) is:
Creation
Fall
Redemption
Consummation
That is, God made the world perfect, we screwed it up, God sent a redeemer, that redeemer is coming back some day to consummate (make perfect) everything in creation.
Where does the entire history of Israel fit into this SCN? It is only a footnote. Israel is simply the vessel through whom God brings the Bible (Jews wrote it) and Messiah (born as a Jew).

2. Does the New Testament seem to agree that Israel’s place has largely disappeared? No. Rom 11:2 says God still has a covenant with Israel. Rom 11:28-29 is clear that this covenant is with Israel even in unbelief.
Furthermore, the promises for the end times continue to show Israel as the center (not periphery) of God’s plan. The famous New Covenant passage in Jeremiah 31:31-34 is a perfect example. This is about Israel (not a code word for Christianity). It involves the Law (written on the heart, not abolished). Jeremiah 31:31-34 is perfectly compatible with Christianity, just not with the SCN. God’s blessing of the nations comes through Israel, not apart from Israel. God is still working through Israel to bless the nations. Remember? The blessing comes through Abraham’s descendants, not in spite of them.

3. In a future blog (in other words, after I have had some meditative time to think about it), I will suggest a better way of looking at the Bible and how it hangs together (not the SCN, but an alternative Canonical Narrative). Meanwhile, I offer these observations:

a. God is doing more in the world than just forgiving sin. The forgiveness of sin is crucial, but not the highpoint of God’s work. Soulen makes this point well by saying that “Redemption is for the sake of Consummation, not Consummation for the sake of Redemption” (p.175). In other words, the salvation that was made available in Yeshua’s death and resurrection is not the end of God’s work. It is the turning point (Soulen says this also on p.175), but not the final goal. God has so much more to do with us and with creation than simply forgive sin. All has not been accomplished. Messiah has not ended the place of Israel or God’s work through Israel and the nations. He has taken it on the last and greatest part of what God is going to do.

b. If we are true to the Bible, then we must believe what the Bible says instead of ignoring the majority of the Bible in favor of our own theology. If the Bible makes Israel central to God’s plan and shows Israel having a continuing role, then we cannot ignore Israel in our view of how God is working. Christian theology consistently finds too little place for Israel. We must attempt to be more biblical and less attached to historic Christian theology. Historic Christian theology should not be ignored, but neither should it be granted a status even close to that of the Bible as authoritative.

c. Yeshua is Israel’s Messiah as well as the savior of the nations. Whatever our solution to the problem of the SCN will be, we cannot simply ignore Israel’s need to know Messiah. Soulen doesn’t exactly ignore it, but gives this too little place. He does not state explicitly his opinion about Israel’s current standing with God. He overlooks questions of salvation. Perhaps he is simply emphasizing what has been ignored (that there is more to God’s work than mere salvation). Or perhaps he does not see an individual obtaining salvation as important. In answer to that, I offer my final point.

4. God’s work is national and corporate, but the individual needs to join in. Soulen and others rightly criticize standard Christian theology for being too much about individuals. The Bible, they rightly point out, deals with people as nations and families. I think it would be fair to say, Yeshua did not die on the cross for you and me, but for all Israel and the nations. We need to see our place not just as saved individuals, but part of the people of God. Those who are “saved” but have nothing to do with God’s communities (churches, synagogues) are out of fellowship with God and must change or answer to God who forms communities.
But here is my big point, though God works with nations and families, individuals must join in. Let me use as my example circumcision. In Gen 17, God says his covenant with Israel is unconditional, but in order to be part of the covenant, each individual Jewish male must be circumcised (women are assumed to join in through their father/husband). God is doing something with the nation of Israel, but if you want to be part of it, you have to join through circumcision.
Thus, standard Christian theology has not been wrong to emphasize the need of each individual to come to faith in Messiah and secure Messiah’s sacrifice for forgiveness. We as individuals must join in to God’s blessing of Israel and the nations. If you want to be part of it, you have to do something.

Well, enough thoughts for one day. I hope tomorrow or in the next few days to write a sugestion for a better way of seeing the Bible as a unity. I will try to be clear and concise. Hopefully these scrambled thoughts from today will not deter you from reading further later.

Derek

“The Law of Christ”

For those who read yesterday about the standard way Christendom has looked at the Bible, you may be wondering: if the usual pattern (creation, fall, redemption, consummation) is not the most accurate, what do you suggest in its place? We will get to that soon.

First, another thought inspired by my reading of Soulen. I was reading about Justin Martyr, the very early Christian theologian who already, before 150 C.E., had explained our faith with Israel only as a footnote in God’s plan. Justin said that Christ had come with a new law, that this new law is, in fact, Christ himself, and that the tenets of the new law are the right and wrong that all men through history have known all along in their hearts.

I thought about the issue of the Law of Christ, as it is called. The phrase occurs in two biblical texts, which we will quote later. But first, I think about about some ways I have heard people use the idea of the Law of Christ:
“The Jews were under the (oppressive/primitive/obsolete/fleshly/unspiritual) Law of Moses which was done away with by Christ and replaced by the Law of Christ.”

Well, to those who would say that: what is the Law of Christ?

I think people generally have one of two answers:
1. It is the commandments of the New Testament which could themselves be formed into a law code.
2. It is natural law, which means morality as determined by human reason and experience.

I would like to give the lie to both of these answers.

First, the Law of Christ cannot mean the commandments of the New Testament. Paul uses the term in Galatians, one of (if not the) earliest Christian writings. There was no New Testament corpus of laws. Also, the New Testament books were written as letters to specific situations. They are not, like the Torah of Moses, a corpus of laws.

Second, the Law of Christ cannot be natural law (morality as determined by human reason). This appeals to people because it easily dismisses such things as Sabbath (not a command we could reason on our own) and dietary law. The Law of Christ cannot be natural law for several reasons: (1) we would not need a Bible if we could just follow our own reason, (2) we need God’s revelation to settle disputes about what is right and wrong (homosexuality?), and (3) while natural law is a sign of God’s work inside humankind it is not sufficient and never could be.

What is the Law of Christ? He told us himself. Read Matthew 5:17-20 carefully. Note that the word “fulfill” is misunderstood. It is the simple verb for “fill.” Messiah came to “fill up” the law, not abolish it. Too many people make the word “fulfill” mean the same thing as abolish (clearly going against the intention of Yeshua’s saying). Yeshua then goes on to show us what his law is in the rest of the Sermon on the Mount. It is not just to avoid adultery, but lusting. Not just murder, but hatred. Messiah’s law is the Law of Moses interpreted in its fullest sense, spirit and letter, so that we imitate God by avoiding all evil.

Now let’s think about the places where Paul uses the term “Law of Christ.” In 1 Cor. 9:20-21, Paul is contrasting Jews and Gentiles. He notes that Gentiles are not under the law. Why? Because the Law was given to Israel. Does this mean Gentiles can sin freely? No, they are under the Law of Christ.

This is the key to understanding 1 Cor. 9:20-21: the coming of Christ extended the borders of Israel to include Gentiles by faith. That does not mean Gentiles become Jews or that they must live the special calling of Israel (see my book Paul Didn’t Eat Pork for a detailed case of Jew-Gentile distinction). It does mean they receive the spiritual blessings of Israel and must follow the Law that applies universally (commands of the Torah which are not limited to Jews as a sign).

Let me say it simply, in 1 Cor. 9:20-21, Paul refers to Gentiles as not being under the law, but he notes they are under the Law of Christ. This means, in Christ, Gentiles must keep the majority of the Law interpreted in its fullest spiritual sense.

In Galatians 6:2 Paul says we should bear one another’s burdens and thus fulfill the Law of Christ. He does not mean that bearing one another’s burdens is the sum-total of the Law. He means that if we interpret the Law the way Messiah taught us to, we will love our brother deeply and bear his or her burden together. This is evident from Genesis: “Am I my brother’s keeper?”. This is evident from other parts of the Torah: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”

Here is the sum of what I am saying, the Law of Christ is the Law of Moses interpreted in its fullest sense, spirit and letter, and applied properly with distinction to Jew and Gentile. I know this raises thousands of questions. I try to be concise on this blog and I’ve already run a little long. If you grasp what I am saying, good. If not, perhaps as time progresses this will begin to make sense.

Derek

Christian Theology and Israel

Occasionally I may put some of my own ideas on this blog, but I read so many great ideas in other people’s books, why not use them?

I’m reading R. Kendall Soulen’s The God of Israel and Christian Theology right now. This does not constitute a complete endorsement, but he wowed me with an idea. As the leader of a Messianic Jewish congregation and yet someone who is quite often in churches and friends with countless pastors, I always look for ways to express what is unique about Messianic Judaism. I also hope to get pastors and Christians in general thinking in some different ways about Israel’s place in the Bible.

Soulen has a great way of seeing this issue. He talks about the standard Christian canonical narrative. What is a canonical narrative? It is a story or way of looking at how the Bible fits together, Old and New Testament.

What is the standard Christian canonical narrative? In short form it is:
Creation
Fall
Redemption
Consummation
That is, God created and humankind immediately caused the fall making the world imperfect and subject to evil. Along comes Jesus to redeem humankind and he will return to consummate (bring to an end) all things and at that time redeem the whole world.

Sounds so standard that questioning it is ludicrous, right? But notice anything about this canonical narrative? That’s right. It completely omits Israel. Israel is sort of an unnecessary middle step in the process. If Israel fits in at all, it is basically, “In order to bring the redeemer, God chose one people, brought Messiah and the scriptures through them, and now their role is complete and over with.”

Okay, for now I am simply stating the problem. In a later post, I will suggest better ways to see how the Bible hangs together. For now, though, note that what Soulen is saying is this: Israel is irrelevant to most Christian theology even though Israel is second only to God in its place in the Bible. Problematic isn’t it?

Let me close with some quotes Soulen provides from Melito of Sardis, a second century bishop. Before you read the quote, consider that Melito said this in the region where John the Apostle, a Jew himself, was a revered teacher until the beginning of the second century. That blows my mind, that in far less than 100 years, in a city to which one of the original Jewish apostles had come, a bishop would spout these words:

The people of Israel were precious before the church arose,
and the law was marvelous until the gospel was elucidated.
But when the church arose and the gospel took precedence
the model was made void, conceding it’s power to the reality . . .
the people was made void when the church arose.

. . . Therefore, O Israel, you did not quake in the presence of the Lord [when Jesus came],
so you quaked at the assault of foes [in 70 C.E. when the temple was destroyed] . . .
you did not lament over the Lord,
so you lamented over your firstborn;
you did not tear your clothes when the Lord was hung,
so you tore them over those who were slain . . .
you did not accept the Lord,
you were not pitied by him.
(Melito of Sardis, On Pascha, trans. S.G. Hall (Oxford:Clarendon Press, 1979), 21, 55, 57.)

Derek Leman

Day 1 of My New Blog, Dec 19, 2006.

Not that I expect anyone to notice for at least 3 months or for there to any great fanfare, but here is my new blog. Check out the About page for more info.
This will be a blog with Messianic Jewish theology, Biblical backgrounds, and Messianic Jewish issues. It might be a fun read for Christians, Jews, Messianic Jews, and anyone interested in theology or Bible.
See my books at mtolivepress.com and hopeofdavid.com.

Derek