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 




266 B645H1 62-16307 

Blauw 

The missionary nature of 

the Church 




THE MISSIONARY NATURE OF THE CHURCH 




FOUNDATIONS OF THE CHRISTIAN MISSION 
Studies in the Gospel and the World 

Advisory Board 

HENDRIK KRAEMER 

Driebergen, Holland, late Director of Ecumenical 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 

General Secretary, East Asia Christian Council, Ceylon 

PAUL MINEAR 

Director, World Council of Churches Faith and Order 
Commission, Geneva 



FOUNDATIONS OF THE CHRISTIAN MISSION 

THE 

MISSIONARY NATURE 
OF THE CHURCH 

A Survey of the Biblical Theology of Mission 



JOHANNES BLAUW 

Secretary y Netherlands Missionary Council 



McGRAW-HILL BOOK COMPANY, INC. 

NEW YORK: TORONTO: LONDON 



First edition, 1962 

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 62-8829 
05B75 

COPYRIGHT 1962 JOHANNES BLAUW 



" The Missionary Nature of the Church" is published in 

co-operation with the Department of Missionary Studies 

of the World Council of Churches 9 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 Bibliography 1 74 

Index of Bible References 175 

Index of Authors 180 



' 



FOREWORD 

As A PART of their current study on "The Word of God 
and 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, of the 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 by the writing, and 
careful theological scrutiny, of a book by Dr. D. T. Niles 1 
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 



study. We have pleasure in commending this constructive 
presentation of a critical survey of Biblical theology in this 
field, believing it to be a real contribution to ecumenical 
thinking which concerns itself equally with the mission 
and the unity of the Church. 

VICTOR E. W. HAYWARD 

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: "Then 
missions had problems, but they were not a problem 
themselves." 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 of missions. 
Not only the method but even the right of missions to 
exist at all is at stake. For those who see the missionary 
movement of the 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 



these is plain to see in the history of missionary theory and 
knowledge. 2 

During the last thirty years, however, a growing resist- 
ance has been noted to a multiple foundation for missions, 
especially on the European continent. The plea has been 
made with ever greater emphasis for a "purification of the 
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 quite narrow, 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 of the 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 missionary 
circles 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 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 



the theological research of the last thirty years concerning 
the 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 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 of dispute 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 of the 
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 



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 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 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 ventriloquy through the medium of the 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 



main revelation. I hasten to declare that I, too, 
consider the Scriptures precious because they 
testify of Jesus Christ (John 5 : 39), and are realized 
in Him. The Scriptures 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 
of salvation. That is why this book 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. 

(/) 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 
himself into a cosmopolitan in theologicis. The litera- 
ture he used was also for the major part of European 
(continental) origin. There is no doubt that more 
British and American theological literature now 
exists 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 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 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 



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 danger of 
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 of this 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 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 of Bible references and of authors 
have been prepared by my eighty-years old father and my 
twenty-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 



CHAPTER I 

THE POINT OF DEPARTURE AND GENERAL 

PERSPECTIVE OF UNIVERSALISM IN THE 

OLD TESTAMENT 

i. Introduction 

WHEN THE 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 of introduction. 

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 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 new 
direction, in his Theologie des Alten Testaments, which 
appeared in 1933-35 (E.T. Theology of the Old Testament}. 

15 



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. von Rad: Theologie des Alien Testaments, Band I: Die 
Theologie der geschichtlichen Uberlieferungen, Ch, Kaiser Ver- 
lag, Munich, 1957-60 (E.T. in preparation, Theology of the 
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 draw up a dogmatic 
scheme, thereupon to go looking in the Old Testament 
for answers to the questions asked 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 most legitimate 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 peculiar character of Israel and its 
"religion" in the midst of the nations, the message of Israel 
and the place of 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 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 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 



"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 of Departure 

As our point of departure 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 



(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 up this 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 (as is 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 especially as 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 of man. We shall have 
to dispense with this philosophical terminology and mode 
of thinking, in order not to lose sight of the true intentions 
of 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 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" may 
be summed up as follows. 

In the beginning God created the heavens and the 
earth. The whole creation has been instituted upon man 
and for man (Gen. i). In consequence the centre of 
creation is man (Gen. 2), but man misuses this centrality 
and does not understand his responsibility (Gen. 3). Then 
there begins the guilty alienation from God which assumes 

18 



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 of Abraham. 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: 3 12 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. 12 ff.) 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 filling of the earth 
with a multitude of the nations. The joy of the Creator has 
won out over his sadness and wrath (cf. Acts 17: 26). The 

19 



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 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, 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 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 of the Tower of Babel. 
The promise to Abraham reflects both the salvation of God 
(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 of knowledge of good 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 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 disobedience 
towards God are judged against the background of those 
people'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 of the 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 of Jerusalem, 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 same 
time 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 nations 
appear as constant arch-enemies of Israel 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 loves Jerusalem 
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 



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. 12:3. 

[Paul names 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 of salvation for 
all peoples, and placed in a Ghristological light (Gal. 3: 

8,16,29).] . . 

The great 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- 
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 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 of salvation, 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 God 20 . . . 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, "chosen 35 . 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 responsibility is refused, election can 
even become the motiye for divine punishment: "You only 
have I known of all the families of the earth, therefore I 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 



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 of God 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 of God 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 my 
own possession among all peoples; for all the earth is 
mine." Verse 6 says: "And you shall be to me a kingdom 
of 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 is 
for the world. 

No doubt the Old Testament is "particularistic", in the 
sense that salvation and the service of God are confined to 
one special people; but this "particularism" is the instru- 
ment for the universal ends of God 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 of the theology 
of the Old Testament in our days. 28 

Alongside of declarations such as Exod. 19 : 6, we might 
further cite such Psalms as 67, 96, 100, 117, 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 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 whom 
Yahweh 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 place 
and 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 of the passive definition 
(that Israel is the chosen people), but the active announce- 
ment that Yahweh chooses, makes it impossible to speak 
of 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 people 
of 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 of their 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 



cannot withstand the temptation to consort with the gods 
of the nations, and whenever it has let itself be yoked with 
them, it has lost its sense and right of existence, and has 
been threatened and conquered by them. This is the way 
the judgment of Yahweh 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 of the 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 



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 



universalism in the Old Testament in general, we cannot 
do better than quote the words of one of the few systematic 
theologians who have given attention to the problem that 
confronts us, 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 precisely the 
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 of the prophecy of Jesus 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) of the missionary character of the 
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 



CHAPTER 2 

THE OLD TESTAMENT MESSAGE OF 
UNIVERSALISM AS A MISSIONARY MESSAGE 

/. 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 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 recent years 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 



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 off in the wrong 
direction. And, in particular, the idea of a postulate is 
surely more of a 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 of the Old Testa- 
ment. If we direct our thoughts in this chapter exclusively 
to the missionary character of the 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 of Jonah 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 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 



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 of universalism 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 



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 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 



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 by 
which 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 period 13 and more recently, 
deny that the book is concerned with the commission to 
proclaim to all nations the message of salvation. The 
opposition to a Jewish exclusivism consists only, according 
to this view, in accentuating the infinite and ample mercy 
of Yahweh. Martin-Achard 14 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 of Jonah; 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 of a 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 of the 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 will be realized only in the future. During the 
Old Testament period no one could arrive at mission as an 
act of going out for proclamation among the nations. If the 
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 "mission 35 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 between centripetal and 
centrifugal missionary consciousness. I believe that those 
who advocate a missionary exegesis of Deutero-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 
of the expectation of Israel. The content of this 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 of the acts of Yahweh 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 



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 
earth after 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 of the 
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 of the 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 of the 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 of the 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 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 



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 
fortiori Israel'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 of Yahweh. 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 



Neither the activity of Israel nor that of the nations 
stands in the foreground of eschatology, but exclusively the 
activity of Yahweh, 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 of this conception of the 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 of God and as the Kingdom of God. 

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 



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 of the Servant of the Lord, is fully justified 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" of the Servant 
of Yahweh, 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 many 
words 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 Sundkler 23 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 the world, whither the nations shall turn their steps. 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 of the 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 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 Old 
Testament between: (a) the thought of universalism; (b] 
the thought of mission in the centripetal sense; (c) the 
thought of mission 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 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 of Jerusalem, 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 of the Servant of the 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 of Jonah has to be classified among 
the 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 
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 of the world. 
The Church evangelizes to the extent that her Lord inspires 
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 dependent on 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 of the Old 
Testament, we shall want to turn our attention, in the 
following chapter to the connection of both these elements 
with the expectation of the Messiah in the Old Testament. 



43 



CHAPTER 3 

THE OLD TESTAMENT MESSAGE OF 
UNIVERSALISM AS A MESSIANIC MESSAGE 

/. Expectation of Salvation and Expectation of the 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 



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 of David. 5 But if not 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 paying 
attention 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, 7 nevertheless 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 



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 Epistle to 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 of the 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 of the nations. 12 

Also striking is the formulation in the so-called testa- 
ment of David, 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 



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 royal lordship of God in the future. 
Therefore the Messiah is not so much the bringer and 
author of salvation 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 provided 
with 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 of salvation. 

B. Now it is in this light that we must refer again to 
the well-known Songs of the Servant of the 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 of royal 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 



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 of God 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 of the songs themselves argues 
very 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 for 
the people and a light to the nations. The order of law, 
the reign of peace, and complete human well-being as a 



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 of this 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 of His 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 of the righteousness of God must 
suffer as someone without rights. 

In the fourth 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 of nations 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 nations 19 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 emphasis falls on the fact that 
the world of nations 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 



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 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 occasion^ those princes to acknow- 
ledge Yahweh. 

Here, too, if we 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 of every tongue shall take hold of the 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 of Man 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 of Man, 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 of the dominion of the 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 of Man 
(verse 14, cf. verse 27). Here also there is no reference to 
the way the nations will come to this obedient service. One 



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 a light, but not to the way this light shall be spread 
and the expectation shall be fulfilled. 

In the apocalyptic vision of the Son of Man, together 
with the figure of the 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 Royal 
Dominion 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 of Israel but of the world of nations 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 



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 of departure 
for a theology of mission. 

Thus we should again be mistaken if we 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 of the 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 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 no 
concern in the Old Testament for any human activity for 
the cultivation or acquisition of salvation. 23 The salvation 

52 



of God for the world is a gift whose joy can be savoured in 
the Old Testament period only by anticipation, as hope 
or 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 himself is 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 of view 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 



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 



CHAPTER 4 

THE INTER-TESTAMENTAL PERIOD 
/. Diaspora and Proseljtism 1 

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 the Jews 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 



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 propaganda 
was "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 of monotheism 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 Jewish 
mission. 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 



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 of salvation had been 
deepened and extended in a missionary sense by the 
preaching of Christ and the apostles, 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 of the 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 Jesus 5 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 of Hellenis- 
tic, Roman and Rabbinic sources that the official leaders 
of Judaism 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 of Judaic missionary 
effort during the diaspora. The causes are partly those 
which 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 of Judaism, 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 of the 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 of the translation of the 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 significance only as the language of the Holy 
Books. 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. A 
well-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 of Isa. 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, the origin 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 of Jewry, which owes its origin to the Persians and 
its world-wide activity to its Hellenistic rulers. Therefore 

59 



one spirit is 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 of divine 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: "If you 
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 

If Jewish 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 of the book of Proverbs 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 of wisdom. But nowhere else in the Old Testa- 
ment is wisdom referred to as a person who is at one and 

60 



the same time princeps and principle of the creation of 
the world. This personification of wisdom even goes to the 
length of representing it as a seductive woman. 22 

It is worth noting that wisdom viewed in this way be- 
comes important from the point of view of the history of the 
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. By 
me 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 of the 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 



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, 
a bridge between Israel and the nations. The way of think- 
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 of the 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 of Jesus Christ. Did He not Him- 
self make use of this wisdom if not identify Himself with 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 



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, 7-10 
passim) . 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 the Judaic propaganda of the 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 of the Christian Church 
did 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 
Christ 5 '. 

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 of how 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 of view. 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. 



CHAPTER 5 

THE NEW TESTAMENT MESSAGE OF 

UNIVERSALISM 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 of Jesus 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 and 
intention 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 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 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 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 a form, 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 



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 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 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 Himself in favour 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: i ff.), 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 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). 

67 



He forbids His disciples emphatically: "Go nowhere 
among the Gentiles, and enter no town of the Samaritans, 
but go rather ta the lost sheep of the house of Israel" 
(Matt. 10 : 5-6). His judgment on 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 by Jesus Himself: the healings of Matt. 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 Jewish areas rather than directed 
to the Gentiles. 4 

B. Attempts to ascribe this state of affairs to Jesus 9 
nationalism or "particularism" have now been almost 
completely abandoned. We recognize all this and I 
believe correctly as a sign that Jesus kept Himself within 
the "historic context of revelation". 5 

This context also implies that salvation for the Gentiles 
was expected at the time of the end, when God's Kingdom 
would be fully revealed 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. 3 10: 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 of God 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 



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 of Jesus* Messianic commission, 9 
which first becomes fully clear during the trial before 
Caiaphas and after 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). u By 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 of David" 
must, in the light of Ps. 1 10, be seen as an indication of the 
world dominion of Jesus as Messiah (Mark 12: 35-37) * 18 
The account of Jesus' entry into Jerusalem on an ass 
instead of on 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 of peace over all 
nations: Zech. 9: 9 f., cf. Isa. 9: 4-6. 14 

Among the parables of Jesus 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 



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. Jeremias 15 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 : 1 1) ; (b) the summons of God (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 of the 
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 of the 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 of the pilgrimage of the nations is that of a 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: 
20 ff.), 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 of life (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. 21 Although 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 



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 and parables 
in 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 of God 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 of salvation 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 of the 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 of God (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 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 

7 1 



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 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 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 an identification of Jesus 
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 the expectation 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 undoubtedly 
contain the universal dominion of God, 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 



foe understood its range before the work of Jesus had 
received its fulfilment in cross and resurrection. Jesus 
opposes the expectations of a narrowly Israelite sort (coloured 
in part by nationalism) by opening out prospects of uni- 
mrsalism. Aside from the title "Son of Man", this fact 
also becomes clear in the preaching of Jesus, particularly 
in the parables which reveal their secret only if we 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 of Jesus 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 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 of the 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 



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 of Jesus 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 of Jesus, 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 of salvation, but not the end of the 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 Kingdom 
of 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 thought 
lies 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 
a factor 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 way the 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 of the end as a special gift of the 
Messianic time. There is an interval of time between the 
revelation of the Kingdom of God and the Last Judgment, 
an interval which becomes the great characteristic of the 
Messianic self-revelation of Jesus. Jesus is Saviour before 
He is Judge. The parables of the 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 vicarious suffering 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 of the historical Jesus are only 
to be understood in the light of His consciousness of ful- 
filling 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 of God and as the Son of Man 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 of Man, 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 



world. 42 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 post- 
poned 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 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 the preaching of the 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 of a "dethronement" 
of eschatology 43 in the message of the New Testament, be- 
cause the 'last things 55 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. 



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 of the Old Testament expectation and as 
the point of departure for the dawning of a new era for the 
nations, is further clarified if we 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 

First of all, 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 "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 is lastgever}. 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 of Jesus 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 



their missionary vocation. Although the twelve apostles 
do not represent 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 Messiah 48 (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 from Jesus 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 of the 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 of the 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 of His resurrection to the uttermost parts 

of the 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 of the new age and a new people 

78 



of God. 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 progression of Heilsgeschichte which is here 
found continues, in that the "last of the days" does not mean the 
end of the days, but a great 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 of the 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 of Abra- 
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 by 
Christ (and by the apostles who are proxy for Him). She 
is not herself the 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 of the Kingdom of God, 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. If 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 

If this confession of the Church as the form and anticipation 
of the Kingdom of God is correct, then it implies that the 
Church has substituted for the Old Testament's "not yet 5 ' 
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 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 of proclamation 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 
of mission in the strict and only sense of the word. Yet how 
can one distinguish and evaluate the "new", if he does not 
know the "old"? 



80 



CHAPTER 6 

THE MISSIONARY MESSAGE OF THE 
NEW 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 of His manifold divine wisdom in the multitude 
of 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 over 
the 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 recognized 
as judgment, just like the deluge and the expulsion from 
the 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 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 



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 Kingdom 
over 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 of history 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 



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 



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 of Jesus. 

"Nowitis also understandable why our 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 of Man 
and Lord, and now He summons them to proclaim the 
Lordship among the nations which has now begun. The 
proclamation of the Gospel is thus the proclamation of the Lordship 
of Christ 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 of Jesus 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 among 
the 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 



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 the fact 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 a gift 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 of the abased and exalted Servant of God. 

Go therefore and make disciples 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 of Jesus (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 



lated from the whole of the Biblical witness. For it cannot 
be denied that here, and here for the first 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 commanded you. The total dominion over the 
total world of men must also come to expression in a total 
dedication and submission to what Jesus 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 
of Jesus", 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 



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 of in verse i8. 12 

Whereas "all nations" indicates the extensive area of 
authority of the 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 of the world (though I believe one 
might deduce this), as it is an indication of the character of 
the presence of Jesus 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 



of the gospel. On the other hand, this commission itself 
belongs to the signs and the consequences of this consum- 
mation (for Matt. 28: 1 8 speaks of the eschatological royal 
lordship of Christ). 14 

The convincing power of the proclamation of 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 of men ("the whole creation" is here 
the world of men). 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 of Jesus 
(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 of accent 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 of Jesus Christ by the Father and the sending 
of the disciples by Jesus; 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. 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 



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 of Christ which was promised 
in 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 of the 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 Spirit 5 ', 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 of publications 
on the fact that Christ Himself does His work of proclama- 
tion 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 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 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 of God 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 

89 



the Holy Spirit and you 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 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 way 
with 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 : 1 1) ; 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 of the 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 of Jesus 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 



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 a heilesgeschichtlich 
point of view, Rom. 3 : i ff., 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 of the new Israel and 
the Messianic congregation Israel the Gentiles =man- 
kind. 22 

The whole structure of the 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 of the Holy 
Spirit, and the decisions for the whole Church are made 
out of Jerusalem (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 of salvation. 24 
This fact is also clearly reflected in the prediction regard- 



ing the destruction of Jerusalem (Luke 13: 34, 19: 41-44, 
21 : 20-124, 23: 28-31 and parallels). 

Jesus Christ Himself takes over the place of Jerusalem. 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 
belief in 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 denied 5 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 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 
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 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 of the 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 "Jews 95 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 



The congregation of Christ is to be understood first of 
all as the true Israel. The old nation is Israel at the level 
of the old dispensation; the new nation is also Israel, at the 
level of the new dispensation. Christians who were Jews 
are 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 people 
of 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 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 (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 



3, Paul's Apostleship 

If we 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 of the 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 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 admit- 
tedly lives within the confines of Israel 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 



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 itself that actu- 
ally 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 Gentiles 
the repentance unto life (Acts n : 18). 

When the Jewish Christians from Cyprus and Gyrene 
also 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 of heathen 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 gifts of 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) , 1 1 is clear that Paul was not exclusively the preacher 
of the 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 



Israel has a priority in the history of salvation, but also 
because there, among the proselytes, he finds points of con- 
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 of the Gentiles but he is the most 
prominent one. That is why he can be contrasted with the 
twelve apostles; he does in the world of nations 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 of the twelve apostles. It cannot be denied 
that it is characterized by a (certain amount of) ex- 
centricity.* 2 Antioch (be it with the sanction of Jerusalem 
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 (i Cor. 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 a Jew, but also to all Jews, 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 



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? 

Surprise and amazement about the fact that the Gen- 
tiles, 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 : 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 of the Judaic making of proselytes during the 
diaspora. 38 Then it was only a matter of a few individuals 
from the world of nations 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 apostleship became 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 of Israel and strangers to the 
covenants of promise, having no hope and without God 
in the world 55 (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 of the 
household of God (Eph. 2: 19). A new temple arises, not 
an Israelitic temple but an oecumenical one (Eph. 2: 21, 
22), an habitation of God through the Spirit. 

o 97 



It is difficult for us now to realize how revolutionary these 
things must have sounded to Israelitic and non-Israelitic 
ears. Paul deduced this unprecedented turn in history 
from promises 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 of the god- 
less", 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 faith 
and thus became the prototype of the believers among the 
Gentiles (Rom. 4: 1 1), a father of many 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 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 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 of descent 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 new 
reality 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 



known to the people this mystery as the gospel, as a mes- 
sage 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 com- 
munity (=the oecumenical community, consisting of 
Jews and non-Jews) of the manifold wisdom of God (Eph. 
3: 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. 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 
of God" only as a fellow-saint, in community with all others 
(Eph. 3: 1 8). 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 



1 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 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 Christ Jesus, 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 
himself with the remnant according to the election (Rom. 
1 1 : 1-6) is the proof that 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 of salvation because 
of itself but because of the Gentiles, so the community 
formed 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 



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 preaching 
of 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 of Jesus 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). 

If we 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 of his flesh and blood (Rom. 1 1 : 
i, 13, 14). 

D. When Christ is the centre of the preaching and be- 

101 



lief in Him is of decisive importance, the community 
which 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 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 of the 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 anyone 
of 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 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 Jesus 
Christ 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 
of God (Eph. 5: i), of Christ (Eph. 5: 2, Phil. 2: 3-11), of 
himself as an apostle (i Cor. 4: 16, n: i, Phil. 3: 17, 

1 02 



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 of the 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 



CHAPTER 7 

TOWARDS A THEOLOGY OF MISSION? 
i. Mission and World History 1 

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 human 
scheme 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 present 
we 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 of mission in world history, we 
must 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, through 
which He has received the dominion of the world; 
104 



(iii) Through the gift 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 the end of the Old Testament and the First- 
born of the new creation, the end of a world, the beginning 
of a new one, "the hinge of history". 3 Mission, 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 of the 
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 of men 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 himself bearing witness with our spirit." In the 
first 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 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 



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 reality and 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 of the 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 of this 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 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 

1 06 



against the apocalyptic narrowing of the Kingdom of God, 
as if one could force the end closer either by calculation 
or by great activity. Matt. 24: 14 does not speak of the 
"must" of prockmation but simply of the future actuality 
of 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 a heilsgeschichtlich 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 of mission 
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, of Kingdom 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 



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 (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 of Jesus 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. The illuminating 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 of Jesus Christ. 12 The real congrega- 
tion of Jesus 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 "foreign 
mission (s) 5> . Norman Goodall has formulated this question 
as follows: 

What is the theological significance of "foreign" mission 
within the total responsibility of the 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 and 
from 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 



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 force 
should 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? 

What is the connection between this new vision of the 
Church as it appears, for instance, in the above words of 
Karl Earth, and in missionary work? And in what way 
has 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, we 
cannot 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 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 of the 
expression "the ends of the earth".) In the light of these 
Biblical considerations are "foreign missions" a theological 
necessity or a historical contingency? If the 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 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 of the 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 



In the New Testament, "the last days 55 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 
Judgment and the Second Coming (e.g. John n : 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 of the 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 



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 geographical 
terms) : the world, indeed the whole world to the very 
farthest corners. For Jesus 5 disciples, Europe belonged to 
the "uttermost parts of the 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 of its 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 itself from 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 



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 of historical 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 many 
nations 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 



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 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 ways 
of the Lord, for great is the glory of the 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 
therefore the meaning of history, 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 of the Church in the joyful expectation of the fullness 
of God, which can be achieved only together with all the 
saints? The progress of the proclamation of the 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 



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 generations 
which 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 which 
is 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 country to take this gospel to other 
lands. There are frontiers which the gospel must cross within 
each land, areas of life 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 



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 of foreign 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 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 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 
bound to so many false gods (false, because they simply 
reflect mankind's own glory and misery) of both older and 
newer invention and authority that world of men 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 



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 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 the 
activity of glorifying God with one voice (Rom. 15: 6) and 
the mission of the Church can be described as the method by 
which 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 of mission 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 of fulfilment. 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 



Ruler), to other men who do not know God (Earth, 
Minear). If we 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 of other 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 
of salvation ? 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 of the recognition of Jesus 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 



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 His suffering, is 
guaranteed to the apostolic Church (Phil. 3: 10). That is 
why 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 of Jesus 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 



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 of the 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 
more dynamic 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 if one 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 
of 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 coming in Jesus Christ. If 
theology is really theo-logia a speaking about God, then 
she cannot do otherwise than speak of the 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, of Jesus 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 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 



the missionary movements is a unity theologically justified 
and 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 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 of the 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 of missions" "If everythingis mission, nothing, 



is mission". 



121 



We should not pass too lightly over the phrase "if every- 
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 mission 5 ' 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. 

If one 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 criterion for all its activities. 
Missionary work reflects in a unique way, particularly in 
its passing of boundaries in space and spirit, 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, for it brings it into contact with the complete life 
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" (i Cor. 

122 



3: 22, 23). These words express the privilege and the 
right, the calling and the joy of the Church as Christ's 
servant. It is at one and the same time the secret of its 
being sent forth into the world and of its being independent 
of "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 of missions, Dr. K. J. Brouwer, used the 
following figure of speech. Once missionary work, though 
the legitimate child of the Church, was abandoned by 
the Church. Now the one-time foundling is again adopted 
as its legitimate and beloved child. 

He who studies the history of the missionary work of the 
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 



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 itself from the suction 
power of this conformity. The conservatism and rigidity 
of many missionary corporations that were once alive and 
mobile, the smell of colonialism which makes the atmo- 
sphere 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 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 of that 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 significance of the gospel, which was to renew life 
and 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's apostleship had 
brought the whole world within their horizon that the 
authors of the four Gospels (which were all written later 
than Paul's epistles!) had them culminate in the descrip- 
tion of a task that encompasses the whole world ? Have 
they not also come to a better understanding of the import 
of 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 beyond 
the 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 of the 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 of the 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 



many may continue to regard the emphasis on the fact 
that the Church was sent forth 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" (i Cor. 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 : 
1 6), 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 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 of the 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 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 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 you 
out 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 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 
closely integrated with the teaching of the document as a 
whole." 38 

Verses 9-10 form the climax and the closing of the peri- 
cope 2 : i-i o.Jesus Christ is called the corner-stone by the 
use of an 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? But you 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 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. 

To gain 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 a final 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 of verse 9 there is talk 
of proclamation. 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 of witness for mankind" is it possible for us to under- 

128 



stand what is characteristic of the community of Christ. 
What does this mean except that the Church of Jesus 
Christ 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 use 59 . 

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 by 
the election of Israel as one particular nation out of all 
others will also be offended by the Church of Jesus 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 of divine 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 



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 of the "service of wit- 
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 of Abraham and Jacob, 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 of God 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 



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 of the 
word "priesthood 33 . 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 reality 
in Christ. 

"You 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 for 
Israel (Greek laos, Hebrew c 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* 



anything out of my Father's hand 5 ' (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 of the 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" of Gen. 1:31) of the work of His 
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 



the declaration of the wonderful deeds of God 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 of the 
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 adverse judgment 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 of the proclamation of God'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 of God 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 calling of 
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 of God 
continues 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 of the 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 } s people." 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 of such 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 the judgment 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, that is, 
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 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 of fellowship 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 of God. 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 prophecy 
of 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. The pity, 
the grace, of God 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 meaning 
and 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 of mission 
of the Christian, Church endure. But she can complete 
this only when she remains powerfully conscious that she 

135 



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. 



136 



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 
Missionstheologie Gustav 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 
Theologie i Eine 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 Schleiermacher 9 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 



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 Heihuniversalismus der 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, A Guide 
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 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 Israel, 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 of J. A. Bengel, J. T. Beck 
et al. See R. B. Evenhuis, De biblizistisch-eschatologische Theologie von 
J. A. Bengel, H. Veenman, Wageningen 1931. Critique of this theology 
in 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 



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 of W. Eichrodt, Theologie des Alien Testaments, 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 Anfdnge 
der Menschheit, Raber & Cy., Lucerne 1960 (R.C.). 

10. Because this whole section of the Bible is written in the light 
of the fact of the 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 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 of universalism 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 of Election, 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 this Jewish distortion of the 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 of an 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" 
of God to the nationality (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 my 
way of thinking, if Eichrodt had confined himself to the heilsgeschicht- 
liche opposition between 'am and gqy, Israel and the heathen, instead 
of operating 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 
the people Israel, in my opinion, by so doing. See also my Goden 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 it e 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 of God 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. 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 of a 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 of Priests, 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 



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, 
Revue d'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 Bezeichnungen fur 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 of A. 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 emphasizes the fact that Exod. 3 : 14 must 
be 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 of history; 
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 



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- 
demning the attitude of the Levites." I believe this can be our 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^;DerMessias 9 Van- 
denhoeck, Gottingen 1929; L. Diirr, Ur sprung und Ausbau 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, Heft 
25, 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; 



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 
not always 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 pending in 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 
of Election, pp. 67, 86; The Missionary Message of the 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 



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 opinion of A. Feuillet is found in Revue 
Biblique 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 of the failure of God'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 of the 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. 2 130. 

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 of post-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 in Isa. 42 : 4, as a waiting in. 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 



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. One thinks here, for example, of Luke 2 : 32, "a light for 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 problem 
of 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 of the often sharp 
criticism which has been levelled on the European continent against 
the work (which is indeed quite controversial) of W. Vischer, Das 
Christuszeugnis des Alien Testaments) 19351942. See G. von Rad, Das 
Christuszeugnis 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 



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 who were 
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 litter ature juive, 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 of line to remark that an early Messianic note is indeed struck 
here in the promise of the destruction of the serpent (if this is under- 
stood as an anti-godly power). In any case, Gen. 3:15 must be read 
as a promise of something 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 



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 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 of space 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 by 
a 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 
Biblical witness 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 of the history of our 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 of R. Martin-Achard in his 
exegesis of Isa. 42 : 4: The nations shall look upon the work that God 
has 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 



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 
of the Lord and of the Son of Man 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 of the bearing of sin 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 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 and 
untenable, 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) does Israel 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. 



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 zu den Fremden, 

1896. 
K. Axenfeld, Diejudische Propaganda als Vorlduferin 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. 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 Way for Paul, The Proselyte Movement in 

later Judaism. The Macmillan Company, New York 1930. 

A. Causse, Lejudaisme avantjtsus Christ. 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 
propaganda juwe & 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 survey in: Jerusalem und Rom im %eitalter Jesu Christi 9 
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 



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 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. 

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. For earlier literature we refer 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 the survey that the I.M.G. asked me 
to write. However, during the "European Consultation" on the first 
draft of my 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, 



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 Word of God and the living faiths 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 of the 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 of this 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 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 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, Proselytism and Religious Liberty in the 
Sitting of the World Council of Churches, 1956. 

Chapter 5 

i . A survey and discussion of the older conceptions is given by 
B. 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 
upon the systematic work 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 



"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 
different angle, by emphasizing the eschatological character of Jesus' 
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 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 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'). 
The last-named work gives a bibliography in 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 of Jeremias 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 
Osier geschichten bei Matthdus in Basileia, 1959 (W. Freytag zum 60. 
Geburtstag], pp. 27-41. The extensive work by H. N. Ridderbos, De 
Komst 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. 



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 national 
exclusiveness of Judaism, when it was able to make proselytes, but He 
has not shattered the historical continuity of revelation." 

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 of Jesus ("Is this not Joseph'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, 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) ; 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 of Jesus.) 

10. For this see Chapter 6. 

11. From the extensive literature about Jesus 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 Upsalienses 
E. 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 



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 without his conception of 
the 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 of H. Stoevesandt, op. cit., p. 53, 

1 8. Jeremias, op. cit., p. 54. In this respect his exegesis of John 8 : 56 
is especially illuminating and, I think, convincing: "When the gospel 
of John has Jesus say that Abraham rejoiced that he was to see Jesus* 
day, this echare includes the joy of Abraham 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 Koninkrijk 9 
pp. 124 ff.; J. Jeremias, Die Gleichnisse Jesu, 3rd ed., 1954 (E.T. The 
Parables of Jesus). 

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 Komst van 
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 



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 of the 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 point of view may be found (with a 
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 Eschatologie fur 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, Dalp 
Taschenbiicher 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 view various 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 Jezus 9 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 of R. 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 %eit y 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 of the call to mission when we take the standpoint of radical 
eschatology. 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 of missions and of religions 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 
importance for the theory of mission, does not yet seem to have 
reached a conclusion. 

For a survey of earlier literature in this regard see F. Busch, %um 
Verstandnis 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. 
But later 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 of H. 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 of the expectation for the near future. 
See his contribution Eine neue Schau der %ukunftsaussagen Jesu in 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 of God 
had come in Jesus; but it is this assumption which is not generally 

157 



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 
others view the Second Coming of Christ (as the end of days) as 
already completed in the resurrection of Christ, lies, it seems to me, in 
their acceptance of the character of fulfilment 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 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 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 



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 
judgment from the prophetic expectation in His preaching in 
Nazareth; cf. J. Jeremias, Jesu Verheissung fur 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 
1 930-50 ma Y 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 apostoliciteit der 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 of apostolate 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 apostles 
is the fact that they are just as much the beginning of a 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 



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 of the greatest and haughtiest heresies in the history of the Church 
is 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 und 
Volkerwelt, 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 of Apocalyptic, 
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 



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 oneself in the ethnic structure 
of the object of mission". How little Matt. 28: 18-20 can be employed 
to 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- 



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 the like. For several years a Dutch-German study commission 
has 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 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 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 always 
religious" (G. v. d. Leeuw, Phaenomenologie, p. 250, quoted by 
Hoekendijk, op. cit f> 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) of leading them to express the variegated wisdom of God 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 we 
must 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 



Theological discussion on this topic is coming more and more into 
prominence, since the passing of the first half of 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, 
Engel und 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, TWNT 
IV, "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, must 
mean only a new enslavement to the powers of this world for those 
who would be made disciples of Jesus. At the same time I think we 
have 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 of this 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 our 
present-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 



of the whole Church in the whole world ? Even if no "abridged gospel" 
were passed on by the "older" Churches to the "younger" ones, never- 
theless, 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 without 
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 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 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 of mission), 
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 of the Lord" in the ordinary theological and (I think) 
Biblical significance. 

15. We are reproducing here systematically what has also 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. 97~9 8 ; 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 of any 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 of our under- 

164 



standing of the "Biblical foundations and motives" of mission. 

1 7. If we have emphasized the resurrection, the crowning of Christ'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 we 
can 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 we 
view 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 on this subject has made me realize that my 
approval of H. Schlier at this point (in my Goden en Mensen, 1950, p. 
115) was too rash and even incorrect. The problem of post-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 of God 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 *NoV 

1 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, Die urchristliche 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 



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 congregation at Jerusalem ('ebhydnim as a designation 
of 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 the city in the history of redemption and in 
eschatology (Diss. Free University of Amsterdam), 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 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 
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- 

1 66 



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 de christelijke 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: We 
should 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 
the Jews," I think it is important to attend to the double line of Paul'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 priority 
of 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 correct 
attitude is perhaps given in Rom. 15: 7-9. 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 und Rom, 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 cited 
in notes 2 and 15 of chapter 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 



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 of Mission, I.M.C. Research 
Pamphlet 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 of the 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 responsibilities of the Church must be judged by its relationship 
to 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 of Hartenstein and others, but he overlooks the particu- 
lar 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 view will 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 have 
been 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. 1 46~i 52 ; J. G. Hoekendijk, Mission heute, 1 954 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. Nevertheless it 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 Frey tag's 
special emphasis on the element of expectation in the eschatological 
foundation 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 
one should not, reduce to a common denominator the two forms of 
the 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 of post-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 to 
whether 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 of the contrast which is often suggested 
between "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. These words 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. S track 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 Brief e, J. C. B. Mohr, Tubingen 1930; E. G. Selwyn, The 
First Epistle of St. 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, Cambridge 
Univ. 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 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 



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 by 
The 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 



INDEX OF BIBLE REFERENCES 



GENESIS 



DEUTERONOMY 



I 


18 


7: 6-8 


22 


1:31 


132 


32: 8 


26, l62 


I-II 


J 7> i& 36, 139 






1-12:9 


139 


2 SAMUEL 




2 


18 


23: I-7 


46 


2: 16, 17 


20 




*J.V 


2: 19 


jrtg 








o 


PSALMS 




3 


lo 






4-6: 7-8: 


45, 46, 147 
8, 9 19 


22: 27 
22: 28; 24: i;33:8 


70 
26 


9: 16 


*6 


33-9 


133 


10 19, 20, 38, 40, 81, 162 


47:8 


26 


10 : 1-32 


36 


47^9 


70 


10-12: 9 




48: 10 


26 


n 


J 9> 20, 38, 40, 90 


50: i 


70 


12 


38,40 


50-7 


35 


12: 1-3 


20 


66: 7 


26 


12:3 


19, 20, 22 


67 


26 


14 


4 6 


67: 1-2, 7 


24 


14: 18-24 


22 


68:30, 32 


70 


17:4 


155 


71: 5 


35 


49:8 


45 


72 


47 


49- 10 


46 


72:9-11 


70 






78 


35 




EXODUS 


85: 10-13, "-IS 


53 


3 
3: 2 


8 7 
90 


86:9 
87 


26, 37, 70 
21, 26 


3: 14 


142 


93-100 

r* 


26 


19-5 


26 


96 


24 


i9-'5-6 


28, 128, 172 


96: 3> 10 


70 


19:6 


24, 129 


100 


24 






no 


46 






117 


24, 26 




NUMBERS 


138:5 


114 


24: 17 


4 6 


150 


36 



175 





PROVERBS 


55 : 5^ 5 6: 71 60: 3 5 


5-20 70 


i-9 


6 1, 62 


61: 1-2 


154 


8: 15, 1 6, 


35 6l 


61: 6, 6-9 


128 






62: ii ; 66: 18, 19 


70 




ISAIAH 






2 




JEREMIAH 




2:2, 2-4 
2: 2-5 


70 

40,46 


3: 17 
14:8; 17: 13 

23:5-8; 3o:9;33 : ] 


70 

35 
[4-18 46 


2: 3 


70 
/j 


33:24 


149 


4:2 


46 






8: ii 


89 


EZEKIEL 




o : i 6 


4 6 


i: 3 


89 


9:4-6 
18:7519: 


69 
23;25:6,6-8 70 


34: 21-30 
37:9 


46 
89.90 


28: 16 


127 


37: 24-28 


46 


29: i8ff.; 


35*5^- !54 






40-55 


30,31 


DANIEL 




42 


32 


2: 31; 4: 65 5: 12 


63 


42: i 


3i,48 


7: 1-14 


41.50 


42: 1-7 


3i,48 


7-10 


63 


42:2,4 


39 


7 : r 3 


69 


42:4 


40, 48, 145, 148, 161 


7: 13-14 


83, 161 


42: 4, 6 


51 


7: 14 


161 


42: 6 


3i, 145 


7:27 


50, 148 


43: 20 


128, 129 






45 : 14, 20 


9 22, 24 70 






45: 22, 23 

49 
49: i 


39 
32 

48 


HOSEA 

i : 6-1 1 ; 2:23 
3:5 


134 
46 


49: i-7 


3^49 


X 4 : 3 


149 


49: 6 


3i, 39, 5 1 , J 45 


AMOS 




49: 7 


50 


3: 2 


23 


49 : 12 


70 


9 : 7 


22 


50 


48 


9: ii 


46 


50: 4-9 


49 






5i: 4, 5 


70 


MICAH 




52: 13-15 


49, 50, H9 


4: I 


40 


53 


48, 149 


4: 1-4; 5: 1-5 


4 6 


53 ' 4, 8 


149 


5:5 


53 


53: 1-12 


49 






53: ii 


39, 7i 


ZEPHANIAH 




54: 15 


59 


3:9 


70 



176 



HAGGAI 




13:38 


85 


2:7 


70 


13:47-50 


74 


2:7-9 


46 


15: 21-28 


68,85 






15:24 


67 


ZECHARIAH 




16: 19, 20 


78 


2: II 


70 


16: 27 


84 


6:9-15 


46 


18: 18; 19:28 


78 


8: 20, 21 


40 


22: 1-14 


85 


8: 21 


70 


22: 32 


130 


8:23 


50 


23: 15 


57, 63, 68 


9*9 


6 9 


23:37 


69 


14: 16 


40 


24: 14 85, 


1 06, 107, 161 






25:31 


68,70 


MALACHI 




25:34 


70 


i: ii 


142 


28: 16-20 


157, 160, 161 






28: 18 


87,88 


ECGLESIASTICUS 




28: 18-20 83,85, 


161, 163, 164 


6:24-30; 51:23-27 


62 


28: 19 


116 


MATTHEW 


MARK 


i: 1-17; 2:2 


85 


i: 14-15 


7i> 156 


3=9 68, 


79.92 


4:21 


70 


3: II 


90 


4: 26-29 


75 


3: 12 


159 


10 : 33 


67 


5: 13. 14 


H9 


10:45 


69.71 


5: 14, 15 


70 


n: i-io 


69 


6: 7, 32 


6 7 


n: 17 


70 


8:5-13 


68 


12: i 


67 


8: n 


68,70 


12: 10 


70 


8: 12 


67 


12:35-37 


69 


10:5 


86 


13: 10 106, 


107, in, 161 


10: 5-6 68, 71, 


78,85 


14:24 


69,71 


10: 6 


67 


14:58 


70 


n: 5 fF. 


154 


16: 14-20 


88 


1 1 : 28-30 


62 






12: 15-21 


69 


LUKE 




12: 41 


68,69 


2: 32 


146 


12: 42 


in 


2:34 


123 


13 


74 


4: 16-30 


68 


13: 19 


1 66 


4: 19, 22 


154 


13: 24-30 


74 


4: 25-27 


69 


13:31-33 


75 


7: 22 


i54 


13:32 


70 


8: 16 


70 


13: 36-43 


74 


9:51; 10:25-37 


68 



M 



n: 31 


in 


10-11 


17 


n:33 


70 


II : 2, 3, l8, 20, 21, 22, 26 


9i 


12: 30, 32 


67 


11: 18 


95 


13: i-3 


69 


ii : 22, 26 


96 


13 : 6-9 


68 


13: 1-5.5 


95 


13:34 


92 


*3: 2-3.55 14: i 


9^ 


15 


75 


14:4 


159 


17: 11-19 


68 


14: 16 


101 


19: 41-44; 21:20-24; 




15: 1-22 


9i 


23: 28-31 


92 


15:28 90, 


105 


24: 25, 27, 32 


134 


17:26 19, 


162 


24: 44-53 


88 


17:30 


IOI 


24:47 


% 










ROMANS 




JOHN 




i: 1653: i 


91 


*:5 


135 


3:27-29 


98 


4 


68 


4:11 22,98 


7:37 


70 


4: 13, 18 


98 


8: 10,37-40,56 


79 


4: 1 6, 17 


79 


8:33-40 


92 


4: 17 


J 55 


10: 16 


70 


8: 16 


105 


10: 28, 29 


132 


8:23 


90 


ii : 24 


in 


9-1 1 ioo, 101, 165, 


1 68 


11:51 


70 


10 : 4-21 


98 


12 


76 


10: 11-15 


112 


12: 2O 


70 


10: 16-18 


IOI 


12: 48 


in 


ii : 1-6, u-12, 12, 25, 




14: 1-6, 15-19, 25-28 


89 


26 100, 


127 


15: 26 


89,90 


ii : i, 13, 14, 15,34-36 


IOI 


16: 22 


89 


15:^,9 


117 


17: 18 


78 


15:9-13 


98 


2O: 21 


78, 133 


*5: 7-9 


167 


20: 21-23 


88 


15: 19-20, 22-24 


I0 3 






15: 26 


99 


ACTS 




16:7 


1 02 


I 


112 


16: 26 


IOO 


i : 6-8 87, 


89, 105 






i: 8 78, 90, 94, 107, in, 112 


I CORINTHIANS 




2: 1-11,36 


90 


3: 22, 23 122-123 


4:27 


6 7 


4: 16 


102 


5:32 


90 


7.*3I 


1 06 


8: 4-25, 26-40 


94 


9: 16,23 


126 


9: 15 


95 


10 : ii 


1 08 


10 : 1-48 


9 1 


10: 32 


93 



178 



ii: i, 4 12 
15:8 
15: 10 


: 28 102 

96 
125, 126 


3: 10 
3:18 
3: 19 


99, l6 2 
99, 114 
114 


2 

T * 99 


CORINTHIANS 


4: 7-16 
4:n;5 


99 
: i, 2 102 


i 44 
3: I4-I6 
3: 17 
4^2,3 


9 

89 
171 


5:5 
6:15 
6: 19 


103 

102, 125 
125 


4 : 15 


117 




PHILIPPIANS 


5 : 17 


64, 93 


i: 14; 2: 


; 3~ ll IO2 


11:2 


103 


2: 10-11 


146 






3: 10 


I IQ 




GALATIANS 


3: 17 


102 


2: 1-2 


n T 








9 1 






2:9 


95 




GOLOSSIANS 


3:8 

3: 16 


22,98 

22 


i : 26, 27 


99 


3: 26-28 


98 


i 


THESSALONIANS 


3: 28 
3:29 
4: 25, 26 
6:15 


79 
22, 79, 98 
9 1 
93 


i: 6 
1:7,8 
2: 14,- 5: 


IO3 
102 
23 103 






2 


THESSALONIANS 




EPHESIANS 


3: I 


102 


i: 10, ii 


97 






i: 22 


"9 




I PETER 


2: 11-3: 2 


1 97 


i: 5 


III 


2: 12, 13 


97, 134 


2:5 




2: 13 


112 


2: 9-10 


126 


2: 14 


53, 137 


2: 10 


79 


2:19,21,22 97 




2: 20 


79 




I JOHN 


2: 22 


131 


2:7 


87 


2-4 


IOI 






3 : I- i3 


98 




REVELATION 


3:4-6,9 




7:9 


l62 


3:6 


9i, 97, 99 


21: 10 


91 



179 



INDEX OF AUTHORS 



ALBRIGHT, W. F., 138 

Allen, R., 166 

von Allmen, J. J., 166 

Althaus, P., 1 68 

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, 1 66, 
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, 

I54 5 155. 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 



Emmerich, K.., 141 , 166 
Evenhuis, R. B., 138 

FEUILLET, A., 34 

Fison, J. E., 1 60 

Foerster, 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., 1 66 

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, 1 68 
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, 1 66 

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 



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> l6 4 
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, 145 

Selwyn, 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 



Another v&,';'*v praised volume 




; " ,*; ( ',' V V^!' j? ff ; itl t; ,' ' >ff <<:\* il >' 'VrV-'1\ ' jj '' f ' ^''"f '!, *' ''. i 



P. 




34430