1. Three Views on Israel and the Church: Perspectives on Romans 9-11
    Andrew Naselli
    Kregel Academic & Professional / 2019 / Trade Paperback
    Our Price$17.08 Retail Price$23.99 Save 29% ($6.91)
    4.0 out of 5 stars for Three Views on Israel and the Church: Perspectives on Romans 9-11. View reviews of this product. 2 Reviews
    Availability: In Stock
    Stock No: WW5444067
4 Stars Out Of 5
4 out of 5
(1)
(0)
(1)
(0)
(0)
Quality:
out Of 5
( out of 5)
Value:
out Of 5
( out of 5)
Meets Expectations:
out Of 5
( out of 5)
100%
of customers would recommend this product to a friend.
SORT BY:
SEE:
Displaying items 1-2 of 2
Page 1 of 1
  1. Gary Cangelosi
    5 Stars Out Of 5
    A Must Read for Students of Eschatology
    March 5, 2019
    Gary Cangelosi
    The book focuses on Paul's elaborate discourse in Romans 9-11, which pertains to the Jews of his day (who were largely hostile to their own Messiah) and a future Jewish conversion and potential impact of this conversion on the nation of Israel and all Gentile nations. This topic of discussion is long overdue, and the book does an outstanding job of addressing it. The various interpretations of Romans 9-11 are presented in the format of three different interpretations from different contributing authors with a point-counterpoint response. This is a very effective way to explore doctrinal issues where there are major differences in interpretation by conservative evangelical theologians. The book is not light reading; the authors are recognized theologians, and they examine the text in a detailed, analytical manner, often debating the meaning of certain Greek pronouns and verbs.

    The contributing authors do not explain their respective eschatology (even though they should have), but it does not take long for the reader to discern that the author is representing an amillennial, premillennial, or dispensational premillennial interpretation of Romans 9-11. I would not characterize the authors as being biased because of their a priori understanding of the millennium and God's endgame, for that has a negative connotation. But their overall eschatological framework does inform their reading of Paul's discourse, as it should. A biblical theology of the future requires a grand synthesis of the biblical revelation from Genesis to Revelation, and Paul's discourse should indeed be read through the lens of one's understanding of God's plan of redemption for this age and the age to come.

    As the authors note, Paul references and interprets over twenty-five Old Testament verses in his discourse on the salvation of Jews and Gentiles in his day and any future salvation of the Jews and the nation of Israel. As such, the authors read Paul's letter in the context of how they understand the Old Testament prophetic vision of a Jewish-led messianic kingdom and any New Testament reference to a future fulfillment of that vision. The question, of course, is what do the Scriptures teach about the geopolitical ramifications of a future conversion of the Jews? Do the future repentant Jews chosen by God merely join the body of Christ along with their Gentile brethren chosen by God whereby all believers are destined to inherit the eternal new heavens and new earth on the last day? Or does a future large-scale revival among the Jews first lead to a literal restoration of the civil nation of Israel and a 1,000-year messianic kingdom on this earth before the eternal kingdom? Paul's teachings are read through the lens of the author's respective eschatology. But if they have a bad pair of glasses and the lenses adversely affect what they read in Romans, their interpretations will surely be impaired.

    For example, Benjamin Merkle, who represents the amillennial view, states: "In the NT, however, we discover that Christ was the promised Messiah and that he fulfills what God promised in the OT to ethnic Israel" (page 200). This is an astonishing claim given that the vision of Isaiah and the prophets is that the Jewish Messiah would one day usher in an earthly kingdom on a restored Edenic earth during an age of righteous humanity in which Israel and all nations would be characterized by peace, justice, righteousness, and abundant prosperity. Christ's death and resurrection as the suffering servant may have ushered in the critically important means of reconciliation between sinners and a holy God and the hope for a resurrection and eternal life in the eternal kingdom of heaven, but Christ ascended to heaven without ushering in his messianic kingdom as the prophets envisioned. That is why the world remains characterized by strife and war, injustice, unrighteousness, and systemic poverty during an evil age of unrighteous humanity. We may have been rescued from Satan's dominion of darkness and brought into Christ's kingdom, but Satan has obviously not yet been removed from influencing the world we live in, for the cosmic forces of demonic evil are evident in all nations. Admittedly, New Testament references to a future restoration of righteous humanity during Christ's reign over this earth when Satan is removed from this realm may be brief and even obscure, but they do exist (e.g., Matt. 19:28-30; Acts 1:6-7; Rev. 5: 9-10; Rev. 20).

    According to Merkle's amillennial reading of Romans 9-11, since the Scriptures teach that there is no future 1,000-year messianic kingdom when Satan is totally removed from this world before the eternal kingdom, then Paul cannot be predicting a future restoration of a righteous nation of Israel after a remnant of Jews experience some type of future conversion; otherwise, Paul would be teaching a false doctrine that contradicts other Scriptures. It seems to me that the premillennial authors would first have to convince Merkle of their views on the millennial reign of Christ before Merkle could logically interpret Romans 9-11 to include a future restoration of Israel in a real earthly messianic kingdom. That rarely happens among theologians who are resolute in their eschatology, however, and it did not happen in this case. Despite an excellent presentation of the respective views of each author, the book unfortunately ends with no resolution and neither party convincing the other to change their interpretation of Romans or their eschatology.

    One very important consideration that the authors do not address is the likelihood that Paul was being intentionally obscure when he references a future period when "the Deliverer will come from Zion" and "all Israel will be saved," as described by Isaiah and the prophets. Does that deliverance by the Messiah entail only spiritual deliverance while they remain in a fallen, demonic world, or does it entail deliverance and restoration of the nation of Israel itself in a messianic kingdom? Paul obviously wants to avoid the subject of Israel's restoration, for he does not reveal the consequences of what happens on this earth when the Jews are grafted back in as believers in their own Messiah. This may explain why theologians are still arguing about the subject. Paul does, however, create a subtle and clever hyperlink to the vision of Isaiah and the prophets. Therefore, and if the reader really wants to understand the geopolitical ramifications of the eventual repentance of the Jews, then one must go read and understand the prophets to determine the results of this future conversion of the Jews.

    But why would Paul want to avoid an exposition of the Old Testament prophecy, "The Deliverer will come from Zion"? The reason is simple. During Paul's day, all roads led to Rome, bringing the spoils of war and the wealth of the nations. But during the messianic kingdom led by the Jewish Messiah, all roads will lead to Jerusalem, bringing gifts of appreciation for the abundant prosperity the Messiah will bring to the nations. If Paul had articulated a clear message of the political and governmental ramifications of a worldwide empire led by the Jewish Messiah, then the Romans would have surely accused Paul and his followers of being insurrectionists for promoting another Caesar. And Paul and the early church would have been crushed for advocating a competing earthly empire. Instead, Paul and the Jewish evangelists shifted the focus to the Father's eternal kingdom of heaven, which did not pose a real geopolitical threat to the Roman authorities. I am surprised the authors do not address this aspect of Paul's predicament and limitations. The book of Revelation and its description of a millennial reign of Christ is intentionally obscure for this same reason. So, another generation of believers not under the thumb of Roman rule (like us) must follow the link to the Old Testament vision of the messianic kingdom to understand how a Jewish revival fits into Christ's future reign over the nations as King of kings and Lord of lords.

    Merkle's interpretation may be problematic for omitting Christ's all-important messianic kingdom, but the premillennial authors, too, make some assumptions in their interpretations that do not have a biblical basis. They claim that the phrase "the Deliverer will come from Zion" is a reference to Christ's second coming at the beginning of the millennium to establish his earthly kingdom, even though Paul makes no reference to Christ's second coming in this passage. But, as amillennialists correctly point out, Paul clearly associates Christ's second coming with Judgment Day on the last day when the saints are raptured into transformed, eternal bodies and inherit their citizenship in heaven (Phil. 3:20-21). Paul does not associate Christ's second coming with the raptured saints inheriting a citizenship on a restored Edenic earth for a thousand years. But that is another subject for another time. My own work in the field of eschatology addresses the issue of Christ's second coming and presents an alternative view on "God's Endgame"; the free video series on this topic are available online. Despite these omissions and shortcomings, however, this is an excellent book and a must-read for any serious student of eschatology. Review by Gary S. Cangelosi

  2. Dr. David R. Bess
    3 Stars Out Of 5
    More for the Academic Reader than the Average Reader
    March 10, 2020
    Dr. David R. Bess
    The three views described here of Israel and the Church are quite technical and involved. They are well-presented but are more for the academic reader than the average reader. It's a title to be read more than once, perhaps even to be used as a reference work. I was a bit disappointed in the conclusion that the author found problems with each view, but didn't recommend one over the others. He really doesn't appear to have an opinion but sees each position as having equal merit. As someone having a good grasp of each argument, a final recommendation would have been helpful. I give this one three stars. It's very detailed, but not that helpful for the average reader.
Displaying items 1-2 of 2
Page 1 of 1