Peter Oakes' Review in its entirety

In terms of NT scholarship, this London School of Theology PhD thesis is essentially a defence of a Lloyd Gaston-type reading of πρῶτον in Rom. 1.16, combined with a Wirkungsgeschichte of the term in relation to Christian mission to Jews. The book is in four main sections. The first is the Wirkungsgeschichte which concludes that, until 1809, this πρῶτον was interpreted temporally, with or without a theological overlay that the gospel had gone to Jews first because of their election as a people. The 1809 formation of The London Society for Promoting Christianity Amongst the Jews (also called The London Jews Society) saw the first use of the πρῶτον as expressing the idea of a permanent priority for mission to Jews, a usage that later became particularly popular in the Jews for Jesus organization, from its foundation in 1973. The second section is a survey of scholarship on arguments (from various biblical texts) that have been used to support what Fritz calls the ‘missional priority’ reading of πρῶτον. The third section is exegesis of Rom. 1.16-17. The kernel of the book is a 14-page study of πρῶτον. Fritz particularly favours 3.2 as a clue to interpreting 1.16. He supports Gaston’s view that Paul’s stress is actually on ‘but also to the Greek’, i.e., defence of mission to the Gentiles, and that the preceding clause can be rendered ‘To the Jews of course’ (cf. Gaston, Paul and the Torah, p. 118) or, with Calvin, ‘to the Jew especially...’, although without losing the idea that it had actually happened – been already given to the Jews first. Romans 3.2 then provides Paul’s justification for this point: the Jews were entrusted with the gospel beforehand (cf. Gal. 3.6-9) in the scripture. The fourth section is an exegetically and theologically rather broader and looser defence of Christian mission to Jews based especially on Rom. 9–11 and the ‘first’/‘last’ sayings in the gospels.

Fritz has worked for Jews for Jesus (although he is not a Jew) but arrived at a central exegetical conclusion contrary to the organization’s normal use of Rom. 1.16. His arguments for doing so look reasonable, although are not especially original. Fritz also somewhat undermines missional use of that verse by tracing that back only to 1809. Most interest in this book will probably be in the Wirkungsgeschichte itself. Many libraries will be interested to have evidence of this usage brought together and analysed, a task that Fritz has tackled very effectively.

Peter Oakes, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 37.5, August 2015