sonofwilliam_reads's review against another edition
4.0
Introduction
“You shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.” (Exod 19:6) These words delineate, for the most part, ancient Israel’s unique calling as revealed in the Old Testament. What has been of critical debate in recent times is the question as to whether or not this calling was a passive or active one; put differently, was Israel’s calling to be a kingdom of priests centripetal, meaning in-ward moving, or centrifugal, that is, out-ward moving? Walter C. Kaiser Jr. is no stranger to this ongoing debate, having already contributed to this subject elsewhere. Kaiser serves as president emeritus of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary; over and above these duties he is an active preacher, speaker, researcher, and writer and is the author of more than forty books. In this second edition of Mission in the Old Testament: Israel as a Light to the Nations, Kaiser seeks to cement his position that Israel’s calling to be a “kingdom of priests” entails their serving, not just Israel alone, but the entire world. They were to be active witnesses, centrifugal in their sharing of the Man of Promise who was to come (xiii–xiv).
Summary
In this second edition of Mission in the Old Testament, Kaiser’s argument that Israel’s calling was centrifugal in nature is argued for from eight case studies. Each case study seeks to show that the goal of the Old Testament was to see both Jews and Gentiles come to a saving knowledge of the Messiah who was to come (xiv). The argument begins with the reality that Genesis 1–11 is universal in scope, including all people, cultures and languages (1). In particular, God’s “Man of Promise” to Eve, and consequently all who followed, highlighted God’s deliverance for all peoples. The promise that God would again dwell with humanity begins to be delineated through the Semitic line (6), finally becoming clearer in God’s promises to Abraham (Gen 12:1–3) that God’s gift of blessing was to be experienced by nations, clans, tribes, people groups and individuals through the instrumentality of Abraham (11). Vital to this argument in its seed form is the matter of instrumentality: God’s blessing of one people was so that they might be a “channel through which all the nations of the earth might receive a blessing.” (12) The election of Israel conferred on them a two-fold purpose: that of being kings of God as well as serving a priestly function on behalf of the nations (15). Kaiser uses examples from Moses and Pharaoh (13), Mosaic legislation (16), the Davidic covenant (19–26), and evidence from the Psalms to iterate this priestly function of Israel; that they were in fact elect for the very purpose of spreading the name of LORD (Exod 7:5; 1 Kings 8:43; Josh 2:11; 2 Sam 7:19; Ps 9:11; 105:1). Additionally, Kaiser presents examples from the Old Testament of Gentile individuals and nations who heeded—in varying degrees—this call from Israel to “know the LORD.” Among these are Melchizedek, Jethro, Balaam, Rahab, Ruth, Nineveh (through Jonah) and Naaman; as Kaiser states, “Yahweh was truly calling all the families of the earth.” (48)
Of great importance in Kaiser’s argument is the subject of the “servant of the Lord” from Isaiah 40:66. It is from this Messianic figure’s mediation that “salvation was to come to the Gentiles.” (62) This figure serves to embody God’s election and purpose of the nation Israel.
Finally, Kaiser’s argument closes with a cursory reading of Paul’s mission in the New Testament which Kaiser deems to further substantiate Israel’s centrifugal witness to the nations; indeed “there could be no mistaking where Paul got his marching orders: they came from the Old Testament.” (81)
Critical Evaluation
Whilst brief, Kaiser certainly provides a thorough and faithful overview of the subject in question. The overall argument is a compelling one. In particular, I personally was edified by the width of his study, as questions surrounding figures such as Melchizedek, Balaam, and Naaman had perturbed me in the past. From these outside characters it is clear that not only was Yahweh’s name known, but that that was always God’s intention.
One aspect of the argument that I thought Kaiser appropriately—and necessarily so—established was that of properly defining Israel’s vocation, that is, their election. As Kaiser asserts, “The election of Israel, therefore, far from meaning the rejection of the other nations of the world, was the very means of salvation in those nations. Election was not a call to privilege but a choosing for service to God.” (14) In my reading and conversations with others on this very subject, the typical response is one of separating ontology from functionality, that Israel can be ‘called’ without that however implicating them. Of course, this is at the heart of the question surrounding this book, but I believe Kaiser appropriately brought the discussion to consider the very central issue at stake.
Furthermore, integral to Kaiser’s argument, is the role of the “servant of the Lord” as found in Isaiah’s servant songs (42:1–7; 49:1–6; 50:4–9; 52:13–53:12). Since Jesus—as far as the New Testament authors are concerned—comes as true Israel (One representing the many) in order to establish the remnant of Israel so that they might “bring salvation to the ends of the earth,” firmly solidifies the initial intention of Israel’s calling. Israel was to be a centrifugal entity simply because Jesus, true Israel, did just that in himself offering up his life as the covenant for the people and securing a people indwelt by the Spirit, sent out to the ends of the earth (64). For this, I commend Kaiser’s analysis of the “servant of the Lord” and how this figure fits into the biblical narrative.
That being said, I would have loved to have seen one other thing from Kaiser: a more comprehensive interaction with the role of Adam in the discussion of Israel’s vocation. There is little to no talk of Adam in the conversation. Kaiser surveys the fall of humanity in Adam (2–3), but the question must be asked, a fall from what? There is much in the text of Gen 12:1–3 to suggest strong parallels between Abram and Adam. Could it be that the promise to Abraham was not just an extension of Gen 3:15 but also a redeeming of the initial Adamic role assigned to humanity: that of ruling as co-gents and functioning as priests to humanity? Let us also not forget the obvious connection between Jesus and Adam (Rom 5:14); the former proving to be the archetype of the latter’s ectype.
Conclusion
Mission in the Old Testament offers an accessible and sufficient survey of Israel’s mission in the Old Testament. From the Man of Promise, to the seed of Abraham, all the way to the “servant of the Lord,” Kaiser shows how the calling of Israel to be a “kingdom of priests” entails a centrifugal witness to the majesty and grace of God in the provision of his Son, Jesus Christ. “Mission,” Kaiser asserts, “cannot be an afterthought for the Old Testament: it is the true heart and core of the plan of God.” (36) This read certainly spurred my own love for missions and evangelism, as I was reminded of God’s steadfast love from of old to all peoples. It also has challenged me personally knowing that as united to Christ, true Israel, I am part of God’s redemptive purposes for this world, called for the very purpose of taking his name to the ends of the earth. Mission in the Old Testament is a great introduction to the subject of God’s worldwide concern for the nations.
“You shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.” (Exod 19:6) These words delineate, for the most part, ancient Israel’s unique calling as revealed in the Old Testament. What has been of critical debate in recent times is the question as to whether or not this calling was a passive or active one; put differently, was Israel’s calling to be a kingdom of priests centripetal, meaning in-ward moving, or centrifugal, that is, out-ward moving? Walter C. Kaiser Jr. is no stranger to this ongoing debate, having already contributed to this subject elsewhere. Kaiser serves as president emeritus of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary; over and above these duties he is an active preacher, speaker, researcher, and writer and is the author of more than forty books. In this second edition of Mission in the Old Testament: Israel as a Light to the Nations, Kaiser seeks to cement his position that Israel’s calling to be a “kingdom of priests” entails their serving, not just Israel alone, but the entire world. They were to be active witnesses, centrifugal in their sharing of the Man of Promise who was to come (xiii–xiv).
Summary
In this second edition of Mission in the Old Testament, Kaiser’s argument that Israel’s calling was centrifugal in nature is argued for from eight case studies. Each case study seeks to show that the goal of the Old Testament was to see both Jews and Gentiles come to a saving knowledge of the Messiah who was to come (xiv). The argument begins with the reality that Genesis 1–11 is universal in scope, including all people, cultures and languages (1). In particular, God’s “Man of Promise” to Eve, and consequently all who followed, highlighted God’s deliverance for all peoples. The promise that God would again dwell with humanity begins to be delineated through the Semitic line (6), finally becoming clearer in God’s promises to Abraham (Gen 12:1–3) that God’s gift of blessing was to be experienced by nations, clans, tribes, people groups and individuals through the instrumentality of Abraham (11). Vital to this argument in its seed form is the matter of instrumentality: God’s blessing of one people was so that they might be a “channel through which all the nations of the earth might receive a blessing.” (12) The election of Israel conferred on them a two-fold purpose: that of being kings of God as well as serving a priestly function on behalf of the nations (15). Kaiser uses examples from Moses and Pharaoh (13), Mosaic legislation (16), the Davidic covenant (19–26), and evidence from the Psalms to iterate this priestly function of Israel; that they were in fact elect for the very purpose of spreading the name of LORD (Exod 7:5; 1 Kings 8:43; Josh 2:11; 2 Sam 7:19; Ps 9:11; 105:1). Additionally, Kaiser presents examples from the Old Testament of Gentile individuals and nations who heeded—in varying degrees—this call from Israel to “know the LORD.” Among these are Melchizedek, Jethro, Balaam, Rahab, Ruth, Nineveh (through Jonah) and Naaman; as Kaiser states, “Yahweh was truly calling all the families of the earth.” (48)
Of great importance in Kaiser’s argument is the subject of the “servant of the Lord” from Isaiah 40:66. It is from this Messianic figure’s mediation that “salvation was to come to the Gentiles.” (62) This figure serves to embody God’s election and purpose of the nation Israel.
Finally, Kaiser’s argument closes with a cursory reading of Paul’s mission in the New Testament which Kaiser deems to further substantiate Israel’s centrifugal witness to the nations; indeed “there could be no mistaking where Paul got his marching orders: they came from the Old Testament.” (81)
Critical Evaluation
Whilst brief, Kaiser certainly provides a thorough and faithful overview of the subject in question. The overall argument is a compelling one. In particular, I personally was edified by the width of his study, as questions surrounding figures such as Melchizedek, Balaam, and Naaman had perturbed me in the past. From these outside characters it is clear that not only was Yahweh’s name known, but that that was always God’s intention.
One aspect of the argument that I thought Kaiser appropriately—and necessarily so—established was that of properly defining Israel’s vocation, that is, their election. As Kaiser asserts, “The election of Israel, therefore, far from meaning the rejection of the other nations of the world, was the very means of salvation in those nations. Election was not a call to privilege but a choosing for service to God.” (14) In my reading and conversations with others on this very subject, the typical response is one of separating ontology from functionality, that Israel can be ‘called’ without that however implicating them. Of course, this is at the heart of the question surrounding this book, but I believe Kaiser appropriately brought the discussion to consider the very central issue at stake.
Furthermore, integral to Kaiser’s argument, is the role of the “servant of the Lord” as found in Isaiah’s servant songs (42:1–7; 49:1–6; 50:4–9; 52:13–53:12). Since Jesus—as far as the New Testament authors are concerned—comes as true Israel (One representing the many) in order to establish the remnant of Israel so that they might “bring salvation to the ends of the earth,” firmly solidifies the initial intention of Israel’s calling. Israel was to be a centrifugal entity simply because Jesus, true Israel, did just that in himself offering up his life as the covenant for the people and securing a people indwelt by the Spirit, sent out to the ends of the earth (64). For this, I commend Kaiser’s analysis of the “servant of the Lord” and how this figure fits into the biblical narrative.
That being said, I would have loved to have seen one other thing from Kaiser: a more comprehensive interaction with the role of Adam in the discussion of Israel’s vocation. There is little to no talk of Adam in the conversation. Kaiser surveys the fall of humanity in Adam (2–3), but the question must be asked, a fall from what? There is much in the text of Gen 12:1–3 to suggest strong parallels between Abram and Adam. Could it be that the promise to Abraham was not just an extension of Gen 3:15 but also a redeeming of the initial Adamic role assigned to humanity: that of ruling as co-gents and functioning as priests to humanity? Let us also not forget the obvious connection between Jesus and Adam (Rom 5:14); the former proving to be the archetype of the latter’s ectype.
Conclusion
Mission in the Old Testament offers an accessible and sufficient survey of Israel’s mission in the Old Testament. From the Man of Promise, to the seed of Abraham, all the way to the “servant of the Lord,” Kaiser shows how the calling of Israel to be a “kingdom of priests” entails a centrifugal witness to the majesty and grace of God in the provision of his Son, Jesus Christ. “Mission,” Kaiser asserts, “cannot be an afterthought for the Old Testament: it is the true heart and core of the plan of God.” (36) This read certainly spurred my own love for missions and evangelism, as I was reminded of God’s steadfast love from of old to all peoples. It also has challenged me personally knowing that as united to Christ, true Israel, I am part of God’s redemptive purposes for this world, called for the very purpose of taking his name to the ends of the earth. Mission in the Old Testament is a great introduction to the subject of God’s worldwide concern for the nations.
More...