Israel and the Apostolic Mission: A Post-Supersessionist Reading of Ephesians and Colossians
1. An Evangelical Post-Supersessionist Reading Strategy
1.1. Positively: Situating Ephesians and Colossians within the Apostolic Mission
1.2. Negatively: Questioning Supersessionist Over-Readings
2. The Framing of Ephesians: A Priestly Dynamic (Ephesians 1:1, 3)
2.1. The Original Designation for the Addressees (1:1)
2.2. A Priestly Dynamic of Blessing (1:3)
3. The Apostolic Mission in Focus (Ephesians 1:11–14)
4. Israel and the Nations in Focus (Ephesians 2:11–22)
4.1. Reconciliation between Israel and the Nations as a Distinct Topic
4.2. Circumcision (2:11)
4.3. The Mosaic Law (2:14–15)
4.4. Jewish Identity (2:14–16)
5. The Apostolic Mission as a Priestly Dynamic (Ephesians 2:17–3:21)
5.1. Jew-Gentile Contours to the Apostolic Mission (2:17–22)
5.2. The Pauline Mission as a Priestly Dynamic (3:1–21)
6. Implications for Gentile Readers (Ephesians 4—6)
6.1. Ephesians 4:9–12 and the Narrative of Acts
6.2. Gentile Halakhah in the Jewish Christos/Messiah
7. An Evangelical Post-Supersessionist Reading of Colossians
7.1. Colossians and the Apostolic Mission
7.2. The Nature of the Threat
7.3. Circumcision (Colossians 2:11–13)
7.4. The Mosaic Law (Colossians 2:13–23)
7.5. Jewish Identity (Colossians 3:9–11)
8. Conclusions and Implications
Conflicts of Interest
The ensuing content in its revised form is used with permission (www.wipfandstock.com, accessed on 19 October 2022). I have also included some more recent scholarship and made some minor updates.
In this context, “evangelical” does not denote a confessional commitment, although the interpretive approach outlined is consistent with such a commitment.
This does not necessarily assume historical Pauline authorship of the letters. I am approaching Colossians and Ephesians as documents aligned with concerns evident in Acts—which was not written by Paul—and in Romans—which was written by Paul. Nevertheless, the findings presented here are consistent with historical Pauline authorship and might provide evidence in its favor.
Cf. Campbell (2014, pp. 254–338), who provocatively argues for an early (50 CE) date for Philemon, Colossians, and Ephesians and locates them within the historical contingencies of Paul’s mission. According to Campbell, Paul wrote all three letters during an imprisonment in Asia near the east of the Lycus valley. Ephesians was originally the letter to the Laodiceans (so Marcion’s text of Eph 1:1; cf. Col 4:16). Paul wrote it to new converts whom he knew about but had not met, for the purpose of “construction” of their “Christian identity” (p. 325). Viewed this way, Ephesians (or “Laodiceans”) provides “a relatively straightforward account of Paul’s missionary agenda in relation to pagan conversion” (p. 314). The material on Jew-gentile relations in the letter fits the issues raised just previously in meetings at Syrian Antioch and Jerusalem (pp. 329–30). Even if we do not accept all of Campbell’s (controversial) conclusions, his argument exemplifies how many details of both Colossians and Ephesians can be read in a way that is plausibly consistent with a location within Paul’s missionary endeavors rather than outside them.
The aorist indicative (i.e., past tense) is the default verbal form for narratives. The existence of such narrative constructions in Ephesians and Colossians suggests that the author is not simply describing timeless theological truths but locating the readers within a shared history.
This argument does not depend on an early date for Acts, Ephesians, or Colossians. Acts, whether written early or late, portrays the progress of the apostolic mission as an Israel-centric dynamic. Ephesians and Colossians, whether authentically Pauline or deutero-Pauline, display a range of features that align with this perspective found in Acts. This is evidence that the non-supersessionist perspective in Acts is shared by the author(s) of Ephesians and Colossians.
The terminology includes “the word” (ὁ λόγος) (Eph 1:13; Col 1:5; Acts 10:36, 44; 11:1) “gospel”/“evangelize” (εὐαγγέλιον/εὐαγγελίζω) (Eph 1:13; Col 1:5, 23; Acts 10:36), “hear” (ἀκούω) (Eph 1:13; Col 1:6, 23; Acts 10:22, 33, 44), “faith”/“believe” (πίστις/πιστεύω) (Eph 1:13; Col 1:4, 23; Acts 10:43; 11:17), “salvation”/”save” (σωτηρία/σῴζω) (Eph 1:13; Acts 11:14), “the Holy Spirit” (τὸ πνεῦμα … τὸ ἅγιον) (Eph 1:13; Acts 10:44–45, 47; 11:15), and “glorify”/“glory” (δοξάζω/δόξα) (Eph 1:14; Acts 11:18).
While Lopez (2008) presents an impressive array of evidence that the phrase “the nations” would have been understood by the average inhabitant of the Roman Empire as a reference to people groups violently conquered by the Empire, Ephesians pointedly defines the phrase with reference to Israel and explicitly calls on readers to consider themselves from that viewpoint (Eph 2:11–13). Colossians also describes “the nations” in relation to “the holy ones” (Col 1:26). Thus, the usage in Ephesians and Colossians is more consistent with the Israel-centric use of the term in Acts than with the political understanding highlighted by Lopez.
Several of these commonalities between Ephesians and Acts were noted earlier by Käsemann (1968). Käsemann saw these connections as demonstrating that Ephesians “most clearly marks the transition from the Pauline tradition to the perspectives of the early Catholic era” (288). Interestingly, over the last half-century, prevailing views concerning the differences between Ephesians and the undisputed Pauline epistles on supersessionism have reversed. Käsemann (1968) argued that the historical Paul was supersessionist, but the author of Ephesians, along with Acts, was non-supersessionist (pp. 296–97). By contrast, Lincoln (1990) argues that the historical Paul was non-supersessionist, but the author of Ephesians was supersessionist (xcii–xciii). The fact that these views are opposed highlights the extent to which prevailing presuppositions can influence scholarly pronouncements concerning supersessionism in disputed and undisputed Pauline epistles, underlining the need for careful and nuanced reading.
Korner (2020, pp. 185–87) observes that the phrases used in Eph 2:20 (τῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ προφητῶν) and 3:5 (τοῖς ἁγίοις ἀποστόλοις αὐτοῦ καὶ προφήταις) do not include the article before the second noun and so may be read as a hendiadys: “apostle-prophets.” Conversely, the expression used in Eph 4:11 (τοὺς μὲν ἀποστόλους, τοὺς δὲ προφήτας) includes both an article (τούς) and a development marker (δέ) before the second noun and so must be referring to two separate groups “the apostles, the prophets, etc.” Korner suggests that there are two groups: “Ephesians presents the first group (‘apostle-prophets’) as being foundational to the universal ekklēsia (2:20; 3:5) while the second set [i.e., apostles and prophets] (4:11) fulfill similar functions but for regional ekklēsiai without the attendant spiritual authority characteristic of the first” (p. 187). I follow a different line of interpretation regarding Eph 4:11, seeing it as a further reference to key figures in the original Israelite apostolic community (see below). Hence, following Sandnes (1991, pp. 234–36), I regard the “apostles” and “prophets” in all three places (Eph 2:20; 3:5; 4:11) as non-identical yet closely related—and possibly overlapping—groups who are foundational to the apostolic mission. Nevertheless, on either understanding, Eph 2:20 highlights the prophetic authority of the apostles and the ongoing foundational relevance of the original Israelite apostolic community for the gentile ekklēsiai.
I have made a more detailed comparison of Ephesians and Barnabas elsewhere (Windsor 2018).
The KJV translates the original of Eph 2:15 (ἵνα τοὺς δύο κτίσῃ ἐν αὐτῷ εἰς ἕνα καινὸν ἄνθρωπον) fairly literally as “for to make in himself of twain one new man.” The RSV updates this to read: “that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two.”
𝔓46 (which omits τοῖς), ℵ*, B*, 6, 424c, 1739, etc.
ℵ2, A, B2, D, F, G, 33, 81, etc.
Rom 1:7; 1 Cor 1:2; 2 Cor 1:1; Phil 1:1.
The suggestions listed by Best (1997a, pp. 4–5) do not explain the resulting grammatical awkwardness. The suggestion that this was originally a circular letter with a space to write different destinations is “conjectural” and has “considerable difficulties” along with other conjectures (Best 1997a, p. 10).
See Gen 9:26; 24:27; 1 Sam 25:32; 1 Kgs 1:48; 8:15; 1 Chr 16:36; 29:10; 2 Chr 2:12; 6:4; Ezra 7:27; Pss 41:13; 68:35; 72:18; 106:48; Tob 8:5; 1 Macc 4:30; 3 Macc 7:23; 1QM 13.2; Luke 1:68.
There is also a transition from “you” (ὑμῖν) to “us” (ἡμᾶς) in 1:2–3.
On the close connection (if not identity) between apostles and prophets, see note 13.
The grammatical apposition of “the dividing wall” (τὸ μεσότοιχον) and “the hostility” (τὴν ἔχθραν) implies that the two phrases have the same referent. The simplest explanation for this is that the dividing wall is a metaphor for the hostility.
The reference to the “yoke that neither our fathers nor we were able to bear” (Acts 15:10) is difficult, but it need not be understood as circumcision per se. The issue in this context is not circumcision itself, but gentile circumcision as a requirement for eschatological salvation. Hence the “yoke” may simply be a reference to an impossibly strict interpretation of the Law requiring gentile circumcision.
In 2:5–6, the readers are described as “made alive together” (συνεζωοποίησεν), “raised together” (συνήγειρεν), and “seated together” (συνεκάθισεν) with the christos. The use of the syn-compounds indicates that believers share in the status of the risen christos, not that they have merged with or replaced the christos.
Elsewhere, depending on the context, the phrase “the holy ones”/“the saints” (οἱ ἅγιοι) can refer either to the original apostolic community in Jerusalem (Acts 9:13; Rom 15:25–26, 31; 1 Cor 16:1; 2 Cor 8:4; 9:1, 12) or to all believers (e.g., Phil 1:1) (cf. Trebilco 2012, pp. 122–63). Since the point here is that gentile believers share in the holiness of the original apostolic community, it is difficult to decide which meaning fits best here.
The genitive construction “the foundation of the apostles and prophets” (τῷ θεμελίῳ τῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ προφητῶν) is best understood as a genitive of source, i.e., the foundation laid by the apostles and prophets through their gospel preaching (Sandnes 1991, pp. 227–29).
This phrase has previously been defined in explicitly Israel-centric terms (2:11–13); cf. note 11.
An early interpretation regards this as a reference to Jesus’ post-crucifixion descent to Hades, either to conquer Satan, to proclaim the gospel to the dead, or to draw faithful departed Israelites to himself before ascending (e.g., Tertullian, An. 55.2; cf. the addition of “first” (πρῶτον) after “he descended” (κατέβη) in several witnesses such as ℵ2, B, C3, K, L) (see Thielman 2010, pp. 268–72). Calvin (1965, p. 176) saw it as Jesus’ incarnation, leading to his humility death; this is followed by many modern interpreters (e.g., Barth 1974, vol. 2, pp. 433–34; Best 1998, pp. 383–86; Hoehner 2002, pp. 533–36). While these possibilities have an impressive pedigree, the reading presented in this article also has significant support, with the added benefit that it is more closely integrated with the concerns of the discourse concerning gift-giving and the ekklēsia as the “body” of Christ in Eph 4.
As noted above, depending on the context, the phrase “the holy ones”/“the saints” (οἱ ἅγιοι) can refer either to the original apostolic community in Jerusalem or to all believers who share in their holiness.
Allen (2018) has offered an alternative post-supersessionist interpretation worthy of careful consideration. In Allen’s view, the author has a positive view of specifically Jewish food practices and calendrical observances (cf. Martin 1996, pp. 124–34). The author urges the recipients not to allow adherents of non-Jewish ascetic religion to judge them for following such observances. This is because these observances are a (positive) shadow/outline of the future eschatological kingdom. Rather than being judged by others for their participation in the Jewish festivals, the recipients should pay due regard to “the corporate body of messiah” (p. 143). While this interpretation is possible, it does not fully explain the very close grammatical parallel between “shadow” and “body” (2:17). This parallel appears to be invoking a common double-sided metaphor. Furthermore, it does not easily account for the negative mention of “circumcision” in 2:11 which suggests that there were at least some Jewish elements in the religious philosophy.
- Allen, Brian L. 2018. Removing an Arrow from the Supersessionist Quiver: A Post-Supersessionist Reading of Colossians 2:16–17. Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters 8: 127–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aquinas, Thomas. 1966. Commentary on Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians. Translated by Matthew L. Lamb. Aquinas Scripture Series 2; Albany: Magi. [Google Scholar]
- Arnold, Clinton E. 1996. The Colossian Syncretism: The Interface Between Christianity and Folk Belief at Colossae. Grand Rapids: Baker. [Google Scholar]
- Arnold, Clinton E. 2010. Ephesians. Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament 10. Grand Rapids: Zondervan. [Google Scholar]
- Barclay, John M. G. 1996. Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora from Alexander to Trajan (323 BCE–117 CE). Edinburgh: T&T Clark. [Google Scholar]
- Barth, Markus. 1960. The Broken Wall: A Study of the Epistle to the Ephesians. London: Collins. [Google Scholar]
- Barth, Markus. 1969. Israel and the Church: Contribution to a Dialogue Vital for Peace. Research in Theology. Richmond: John Knox. [Google Scholar]
- Barth, Markus. 1974. Ephesians. 2 vols. The Anchor Bible 34, 34A. Garden City: Doubleday. [Google Scholar]
- Barth, Markus. 1983. The People of God. Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 5; Sheffield: JSOT. [Google Scholar]
- Bauer, Walter, Frederick W. Danker, William F. Arndt, and F. Wilbur Gingrich. 2000. “δόγμα”. In A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, p. 254. [Google Scholar]
- Beale, Gregory K. 2019. Colossians and Philemon. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic. [Google Scholar]
- Best, Ernest. 1955. One Body in Christ: A Study in the Relationship of the Church to Christ in the Epistles of the Apostle Paul. London: SPCK. [Google Scholar]
- Best, Ernest. 1997a. Ephesians 1.1. In Essays on Ephesians. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, pp. 1–16. [Google Scholar]
- Best, Ernest. 1997b. Ephesians 1.1 Again. In Essays on Ephesians. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, pp. 17–24. [Google Scholar]
- Best, Ernest. 1998. Ephesians. International Critical Commentary. London: T&T Clark. [Google Scholar]
- Bevere, Allan R. 2003. Sharing in the Inheritance: Identity and the Moral Life in Colossians. Library of New Testament Studies 226. London: Sheffield Academic. [Google Scholar]
- Bevere, Allan R. 2009. The Cheirograph in Colossians 2:14 and the Ephesian Connection. In Jesus and Paul: Global Perspectives in Honor of James D.G. Dunn for His 70th Birthday. Edited by Brisio J. Oropeza, Charles K. Robertson and Douglas C. Mohrmann. Library of New Testament Studies 414. London: T&T Clark, pp. 199–206. [Google Scholar]
- Bird, Michael F. 2009. Colossians and Philemon. New Covenant Commentary Series 12; Eugene: Wipf and Stock. [Google Scholar]
- Boyarin, Daniel. 1994. A Radical Jew: Paul and the Politics of Identity. Contraversions: Critical Studies in Jewish Literature, Culture and Society 1. Berkeley: University of California Press. [Google Scholar]
- Bruce, Frederick Fyvie. 1984. The Epistles to the Colossians, to Philemon and to the Ephesians. The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. [Google Scholar]
- Buell, Denise Kimber. 2005. Why This New Race: Ethnic Reasoning in Early Christianity. New York: Columbia University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Caird, George B. 1976. Paul’s Letters from Prison: Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Philemon, in the Revised Standard Version. The New Clarendon Bible. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Calvin, John. 1965. The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians and Colossians. Edited by David W. Torrance and Thomas F. Torrance. Translated by Thomas H. L. Parker. Original ca. 1548. Calvin’s Commentaries. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd. [Google Scholar]
- Campbell, Douglas A. 2014. Framing Paul: An Epistolary Biography. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. [Google Scholar]
- Campbell, William S. 2008. Unity and Diversity in the Church: Transformed Identities and the Peace of Christ in Ephesians. Transformation 25: 15–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Chrysostom, John. 1840. Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians, and Homilies on the Epistle to the Ephesians. Translated by William J. Copeland. Original text ca. 390. Library of Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church 5. Oxford: Parker. [Google Scholar]
- Cohick, Lynn H. 2010. Ephesians. New Covenant Commentary Series 10; Eugene: Wipf and Stock. [Google Scholar]
- De Boer, Martinus C. 2007. The Meaning of the Phrase τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου in Galatians. New Testament Studies 53: 204–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Dunn, James D. G. 1996. The Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon: A Commentary on the Greek Text. The New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. [Google Scholar]
- Dunning, Benjamin H. 2006. Strangers and Aliens No Longer: Negotiating Identity and Difference in Ephesians 2. Harvard Theological Review 99: 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Engberg-Pedersen, Troels. 2010. Cosmology and Self in the Apostle Paul: The Material Spirit. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Esler, Philip F. 2007. ‘Remember My Fetters’: Memorialisation of Paul’s Imprisonment. In Explaining Christian Origins and Early Judaism: Contributions from Cognitive and Social Science. Edited by Risto Uro, Ilkka Pyysiäinen and Petri Luomanen. Biblical Interpretation. Leiden: Brill, pp. 231–58. [Google Scholar]
- Foster, Paul. 2016. Colossians. Black’s New Testament Commentaries. London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark. [Google Scholar]
- Foster, Robert L. 2007. ‘A Temple in the Lord Filled to the Fullness of God’: Context and Intertextuality (Eph. 3:19). Novum Testamentum 49: 85–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fowl, Stephen E. 2012. Ephesians: A Commentary. The New Testament Library. Louisville: Westminster John Knox. [Google Scholar]
- Gnilka, Joachim. 1977. Der Epheserbrief, 2nd ed. Herders Theologischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament 10/2. Freiburg: Herder. [Google Scholar]
- Goldsworthy, Graeme. 2012. Christ-Centred Biblical Theology: Hermeneutical Foundations and Principles. Nottingham: Apollos. [Google Scholar]
- Hoch, Carl B. 1982. The Significance of the Syn-Compounds for Jew-Gentile Relationships in the Body of Christ. Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 25: 175–83. [Google Scholar]
- Hoch, Carl B. 1992. The New Man of Ephesians 2. In Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church: The Search for Definition. Edited by Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, pp. 98–126. [Google Scholar]
- Hoehner, Harold W. 2002. Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic. [Google Scholar]
- Käsemann, Ernst. 1968. Ephesians and Acts. In Studies in Luke-Acts: Essays Presented in Honor of Paul Schubert. Edited by Leander E. Keck and J. Louis Martyn. London: SPCK, pp. 288–97. [Google Scholar]
- Kennedy, Lindsay John. 2018. Review of Reading Ephesians and Colossians after Supersessionism, by Lionel J. Windsor. Kesher: A Journal of Messianic Judaism 33. Available online: https://www.kesherjournal.com/article/reading-ephesians-and-colossians-after-supersessionism-by-lionel-j-windsor/ (accessed on 19 October 2022).
- Kinzer, Mark. 2005. Postmissionary Messianic Judaism: Redefining Christian Engagement with the Jewish People. Grand Rapids: Brazos. [Google Scholar]
- Kinzer, Mark. 2015. Searching Her Own Mystery: Nostra Aetate, the Jewish People, and the Identity of the Church. Eugene: Cascade. [Google Scholar]
- Korner, Ralph J. 2017. The Origin and Meaning of Ekklēsia in the Early Jesus Movement. Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity 98. Leiden: Brill. [Google Scholar]
- Korner, Ralph J. 2020. Reading Revelation after Supersessionism: An Apocalyptic Journey of Socially Identifying John’s Multi-Ethnic Ekklēsiai with the Ekklēsia of Israel. New Testament After Supersessionism. Eugene: Cascade. [Google Scholar]
- Lincoln, Andrew T. 1987. The Church and Israel in Ephesians 2. Catholic Biblical Quarterly 49: 605–24. [Google Scholar]
- Lincoln, Andrew T. 1990. Ephesians. Word Biblical Commentary 42. Dallas: Word. [Google Scholar]
- Lohse, Eduard. 1971. Colossians and Philemon: A Commentary on the Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon. Translated by William R. Poehlmann, and Robert J. Karris Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress. [Google Scholar]
- Lopez, Davina C. 2008. Apostle to the Conquered: Reimagining Paul’s Mission. Minneapolis: Fortress. [Google Scholar]
- MacDonald, Margaret Y. 2004. The Politics of Identity in Ephesians. Journal for the Study of the New Testament 26: 419–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martin, Neil. 2018. Returning to the stoicheia tou kosmou: Enslavement to the Physical Elements in Galatians 4.3 and 9? Journal for the Study of the New Testament 40: 434–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martin, Ralph P. 1991. Ephesians, Colossians and Philemon. Interpretation. Louisville: John Knox. [Google Scholar]
- Martin, Troy W. 1996. By Philosophy and Empty Deceit: Colossians as Response to a Cynic Critique. Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 118; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic. [Google Scholar]
- Perkins, Pheme. 2000. The Letter to the Ephesians. In The New Interpreter’s Bible. Nashville: Abingdon,, vol. 11, pp. 349–466. [Google Scholar]
- Rader, William H. 1978. The Church and Racial Hostility: A History of Interpretation of Ephesians 2:11-22. Beitrage zur Geschichte der Biblischen Exegese 20. Tübingen: Mohr. [Google Scholar]
- Robinson, Donald W. B. 1996. Faith’s Framework: The Structure of New Testament Theology. Blackwood: New Creation. [Google Scholar]
- Robinson, Donald W. B. 2008. Jew and Greek: Unity and Division in the Early Church. In Donald Robinson Selected Works Vol. 1: Assembling God’s People. Edited by Peter G. Bolt and Mark D. Thompson. Camperdown: Australian Church Record, pp. 79–109. [Google Scholar]
- Sandnes, Karl Olav. 1991. Paul—One of the Prophets? A Contribution to the Apostle’s Self-Understanding. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen Zum Neuen Testament 2/43. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. [Google Scholar]
- Seesemann, Heinrich, and Georg Bertram. 1967. πατέω, καταπατέω, περιπατέω, ἐμπεριπατέω. In Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Edited by Gerhard Kittel. Translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, vol. 5, pp. 940–45. [Google Scholar]
- Shkul, Minna. 2009. Reading Ephesians: Exploring Social Entrepreneurship in the Text. Library of New Testament Studies 408. London: T&T Clark. [Google Scholar]
- Soulen, R. Kendall. 1996. The God of Israel and Christian Theology. Minneapolis: Fortress. [Google Scholar]
- Soulen, R. Kendall. 2005. Post-Supersessionism. In A Dictionary of Jewish-Christian Relations. Edited by Edward Kessler and Neil Wenborn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 350–51. [Google Scholar]
- Staples, Jason A. 2011. What Do the Gentiles Have to Do with ‘All Israel’?: A Fresh Look at Romans 11:25–27. Journal of Biblical Literature 130: 371–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Starling, David I. 2011. Not My People: Gentiles as Exiles in Pauline Hermeneutics. Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 184. Berlin: De Gruyter. [Google Scholar]
- Suh, Robert H. 2007. The Use of Ezekiel 37 in Ephesians 2. Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 50: 715–33. [Google Scholar]
- Talbert, Charles H. 2007. Ephesians and Colossians. Paideia. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic. [Google Scholar]
- Thielman, Frank. 2010. Ephesians. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker. [Google Scholar]
- Trebilco, Paul. 2012. Self-Designations and Group Identity in the New Testament. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Tucker, J. Brian. 2011. Remain in Your Calling: Paul and the Continuation of Social Identities in 1 Corinthians. Eugene: Pickwick. [Google Scholar]
- Von Harnack, Adolf. 1908. The Mission and Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centuries. Translated by James Moffatt. Translated from Die Mission und Ausbreitung des Christentums in den Ersten Drei Jahrhunderten (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1906). London: Williams & Norgate. [Google Scholar]
- Windsor, Lionel J. 2017. Reading Ephesians and Colossians After Supersessionism: Christ’s Mission through Israel to the Nations. New Testament After Supersessionism. Eugene: Cascade. [Google Scholar]
- Windsor, Lionel J. 2018. The Formation of Gentile Christ-Believing Identity Vis-à-Vis Israel in Ephesians and Barnabas. Biblica et Patristica Thoruniensia 11: 377–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Woods, David B. 2014. Jew-Gentile Distinction in the One New Man of Ephesians 2:15. Conspectus 18: 95–135. [Google Scholar]
- Wright, Nicholas Thomas. 1986. The Epistles of Paul to the Colossians and to Philemon: An Introduction and Commentary. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press. [Google Scholar]
- Yee, Tet-Lim N. 2004. Jews, Gentiles and Ethnic Reconciliation: Paul’s Jewish Identity and Ephesians. Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 130; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
© 2022 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Windsor, L.J. Israel and the Apostolic Mission: A Post-Supersessionist Reading of Ephesians and Colossians. Religions 2023, 14, 44. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel14010044
Windsor LJ. Israel and the Apostolic Mission: A Post-Supersessionist Reading of Ephesians and Colossians. Religions. 2023; 14(1):44. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel14010044Chicago/Turabian Style
Windsor, Lionel J. 2023. "Israel and the Apostolic Mission: A Post-Supersessionist Reading of Ephesians and Colossians" Religions 14, no. 1: 44. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel14010044