Incarnation and Israel: A Supralapsarian Account of Israel’s Chosenness

Abstract

In its first part, this essay maps various ways in which Christian theology has tried to make sense of the notion of Israel’s election: as simply an expression of Israel’s religious self‐consciousness (Friedrich Schleiermacher, Naim Ateek), as serving a larger goal in the divine economy (N.T. Wright, missional hermeneutics), and as the result of a divine falling in love (Michael Wyschogrod, Jon D. Levenson, R.W.L. Moberly). Finding all these approaches theologically wanting, in its second part the article develops an alternative approach, embedded in a supralapsarian Christology. The third part of the essay refutes the idea that supralapsarian Christology leads to supersessionism (R. Kendall Soulen) and argues that rather the opposite is the case: on the account of Israel’s election offered here, the covenant with Israel cannot be superseded because it is rooted in the very being of the incarnate One himself.

Israel’s priority in Old Testament missiology

“… 2. The present article takes its place alongside several other recent critiques of prominent evangelical (biblical) theologians of mission, for example Soulen (2022: 71–95), van Driel (2023: 5–7), and Kaminsky and Reasoner (2019). Because its onus is mainly exegetical, this article does not defend or define the project of “post-supersessionist” Christian theology.…”

“… 10. For a recent, significant negotiation of the election of Israel, correlated and indeed set within the election of the eternal Son, see van Driel (2023). …”