Christ in all Scripture:
an Old Testament Perspective1
RICHARD M. DAVIDSON2
Abstract: Recent studies are challenging the hypothesis that NT writers mis-interpreted earlier
Biblical writings, taking them out of context, and using interpretational techniques which are
today considered “eisegesis”. However, biblical research is now confirming that the NT writers
used the OT contextually, in continuity with the meaning found in the OT passages. It is the thesis
of this article that the later Bible writers were exegetes in their biblical hermeneutics, remaining
true to the Messianic meaning of those earlier biblical passages seen in their original context. I
organize my discussion of “Christ in all Scripture” following Hasel’s synthesis of approaches, and
under each of them I provide examples of how this approach has been utilized by Jesus and NT
writers to see Christ in all OT Scripture. In light of the indicators of Christ in the Old Testament,
Jesus’ sweeping claim in Luke 24 needs to be taken seriously.
Keywords: Christ; Old Testament; Messiah; Exegesis.
Cristo em toda Escritura: uma
perspectiva veterotestamentária
Resumo: Estudos recentes desafiam a hipótese de que os escritores no NT interpretaram mal
as Escrituras, tirando-as do contexto, e utilizando técnicas interpretativas que são, atualmente,
consideradas como “eisegesis”. Porém, a pesquisa bíblica confirma, neste momento, que os
escritores do NT utilizaram o AT de forma contextualizada, em continuidade com o significado
das passagens do AT. A tese deste artigo é a de que os escritores mais recentes da Bíblia eram
exegetas na sua hermenêutica bíblica, permanecendo fieis ao significado messiânico de passagens
bíblicas anteriores observadas no seu contexto original. Eu organizo minha discussão sobre
“Cristo em toda Escritura” a partir da síntese de abordagens apresentada por Hasel, e sob cada
uma delas ofereço exemplos de como a abordagem foi utilizada por Jesus e pelos escritores do
1
This article is based upon my paper by the same title, presented at the annual meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, San Diego, California, November 21, 2019, and also uses a substantial amount of material from my chapter “Inner-biblical Hermeneutics: The Use of Scripture
by Bible Writers” (DAVIDSON, 2020, p. 235-264).
2
Ph.D. Old Testament Scholar at Andrews University and Professor of Old Testament Interpretation at the same institution. E-mail: davidson@andrews.edu
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
NT para enchergar Cristo em toda a Escritura do AT. À luz dos indicadores de Cristo no AT, a
afirmação abrangente de Jesus em Lucas 24 precisa ser levada a sério.
Palavras-chave: Cristo; Antigo Testamento; Messias; Exegese.
On the wall of our Old Testament department suite at Andrews University Theological Seminary, hangs an old painting that was rescued from being discarded when the Seminary building was
remodeled some years ago. I was OT department chair at that time, and had memories of looking
up at that painting in the classroom where as a seminary student I had studied biblical hermeneutics and the NT use of the Old Testament. It may seem odd to some to have a picture of a NT scene
as the main piece of art hanging in an OT department suite. But I think it is very appropriate.
It is a picture of the scene described in Luke 24, where Jesus is walking with two of His disciples on the road to Emmaus the afternoon of His resurrection. In this scene, Jesus gives what I
like to call the first lecture on biblical hermeneutics, as recorded in v. 27 (ESV): “And beginning
with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.” The word translated here as “interpreted” in Greek is diermeneuō, from which we
derive our English word “hermeneutics.” What was the specific topic of Jesus’ hermeneutics lecture? “Christ in All Scripture!” For Jesus, a central concern in biblical hermeneutics was to see
Christ in the Old Testament Scriptures. My professional title at Andrews University is “Professor
of Old Testament Interpretation.” I specifically changed the title originally assigned to me—from
“Professor of Old Testament Exegesis,” to “Professor of Old Testament Interpretation”—because I
believe the primary purpose of my study of the OT is to interpret it, to diermeneuō it, and in this
enterprise, Jesus leads the way in Luke 24—He opened the disciples’ understanding to be able to
see Christ in all Scripture! Hence the picture of a NT scene on the wall of an OT department suite!
If I could have only one digital recording of Jesus’ teaching ministry, it would be the hermeneutical lectures He gave to the two disciples on the way to Emmaus. And if I could inclue a second
digital recording, it would be what he said later that night to the disciples in the upper room.
Luke records His statement to the assembled disciples (v. 44): “These are the words which I spoke
to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law
of Moses and the Prophets, and the Psalms concerning Me.”3 Then Luke summarizes Jesus’ message (v. 45): “And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures.”
Luke also records that when the disciples on the way to Emmaus heard Jesus sharing Christ in all
Scripture, they recounted later that night to one another (v. 32, ESV), “Did not our hearts burn
within us while He talked to us on the road, and while He opened to us the Scriptures?” Jesus the
Master Hermeneut not only wished for His disciples to understand intellectually the reality of
Christ in all Scripture, but to have that “burning-heart” experience of the disciples in having the
Hebrew scriptures opened to them. This has been a major quest of mine for much of my 40 years
of teaching. How can I synthesize what I have found in a single article? With the help of the charts
throughout the article, I can at least give an overview.
I had the good fortune to have as my major professor for my doctoral studies the late Dr.
Gerhard F. Hasel. A prominent biblical scholar, his books on OT and NT theology were standard
3
Scripture citations in this article are from the NKJV unless otherwise indicated.
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
14
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
textbooks for some 90 seminaries across North America and internationally for many years (HASEL, 1991; 1978).4 My favorite chapter in his OT Theology: Basic Issues in the Current Debate, was
the one dealing with the relationship between the Testaments. In that chapter he traces the history of the debate over this subject5 and then suggests seven patterns of historical and theological
relationships that characterize the connection between the OT and the NT: (1) the continuous
history of God’s people and the picture of God’s dealings with humankind; (2) quotations (and
allusions); (3) key theological terms; (4) unity of major themes; (5) typology; (6) promise/prediction and fulfillment; and (7) the “big picture” of salvation history. Unfortunately, Hasel’s untimely
death prevented him from exploring further this multiplex relationship between the Testaments.
Even though Hasel focused primarily on describing the relationship between the Testaments, I have found that his multiplex approach also accurately describes the basic ways the NT
writers used the OT, and more specifically for the purposes of this study, it accurately summarizes
the ways Jesus and the NT writers pointed to Christ in all Scripture. In this article I will organize
my discussion of “Christ in all Scripture” following Hasel’s multiplex synthesis of approaches,6
and under each of the approaches I will provide examples of how this approach has been utilized
by Jesus and NT writers, and may be used by us as well, to see Christ in all OT Scripture. A fundamental question first to be raised in this study is whether or not the NT Bible writers remain faithful to the original contexts in their use of earlier biblical material. Many modern biblical scholars have claimed that the NT writers often do not incorporate sound exegesis, but rather “twist
the Scriptures” (ver MCCASLAND, 1961) by utilizing Christological reapplication based upon
first-century interpretational techniques such as rabbinic midrash,7 Hellenistic allegory, and/or
Qumran-style raz pesher (“mystery interpretation”).8 It is further suggested by these scholars that
since the NT writers (and Jesus) were inspired, they had the right and authority under the Holy
Spirit’s guidance to reinterpret and reapply to Jesus what originally in the OT did not refer to Him,
or to see a “fuller meaning” (sensus plenior) in Scripture that cannot be discovered by exegesis but
must depend upon later authority.9
However, recent studies are challenging the hypothesis that later Biblical writers mis-interpreted earlier Biblical writings, taking them out of context, and using interpretational techniques
common to their culture which are today considered “eisegesis” (reading into the text a meaning
4
Hasel’s OT theology book was translated into Korean (1984), Portuguese (1987), and Indonesian (1986).
5
Hasel (1991, p. 172-193) describes how some scholars (e.g., Rudolph Bultmann and Friedrich Baumgärtel), following in the footsteps of the
2nd century heretic Marcion, have seen a radical discontinuity between the OT and the NT, even regarding the OT as a book of a non-Christian
religion. Others (e.g., Wilhelm Vischer and A. A. van Ruler) have gone to the opposite extreme, suggesting that the OT is the only true Scripture, and the NT is only its “explanatory glossary” (VAN RULER, 1971, p. 74). In his chapter (and this one) it is affirmed that the OT and NT are
equally inspired and equally important, with a basic continuity between the Testaments.
6
To my knowledge, no one has attempted to organize the material concerning the relationship between the Testaments, inner-biblical
hermeneutics, and in particular, Christ in all Scripture, around these seven approaches, and I offer this attempt in memory of my Doktorvater,
Gerhard Hasel.
7
Rabbinic Jewish interpretation, particularly after A.D. 70, separated between peshat (the plain sense of the text) and midrash (the meaning
beneath the text). See David Instone-Brewer (1992), who demonstrates that the rabbis before AD 70 “did not interpret Scripture out of context,
did not look for any meaning in Scripture other than the plain sense, and did not change the text to fit their interpretation, though the later
rabbis did all these things.”
8
For discussion of these methods, and the claim that the NT writers utilized these approaches, see, e.g., Richard N. Longenecker (2015, p. 133134, 142-143).
9
Enns, Inspiration and Incarnation, 149, describes the essence of the “sensus plenior” (fuller sense) of Scripture: “The New Testament writers
were so consumed by Christ their minds were illumined to see what was largely hidden to the human authors of the Old Testament, but was
always the goal and intention of the divine author.” (ver MOO, 1986, p. 325-356).
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
15
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
that is not there). Insightful biblical research is now confirming (with illustrative biblical evidence) that the NT writers used the OT contextually, in continuity and harmony with the meaning found in the OT passages they cite.10 It is the thesis of this study that the later Bible writers
were faithful exegetes and theologians in their inner-biblical hermeneutics, remaining true to the
Messianic meaning of those earlier biblical passages seen in their larger original context, even as
they under inspiration revealed the further significance of those passages for their own times and
ours. We turn now to the major ways that later Biblical writers used earlier Scripture and there
found Christ revealed.
Continuous History of God’s People
Later biblical writers consistently remain faithful to the writings of earlier Scripture in their
references to the history of God’s people.
Paragenealogies of the godly Messianic line. With regard to the early history of God’s people in Gen 1–11, the chrono-genealogies (Gen 5–11) covering the complete line of descendants
from Adam to Abraham11 are repeated accurately by the writer of Chronicles toward the end of
the OT period (1 Chr 1), and again by Luke at the beginning of his gospel (Luke 3). The main
stories of this period are alluded to by the OT Writings and the Prophets.12 Jesus and all New
Testament writers refer to Gen 1–11, with the underlying assumption that it is literal, reliable history, and every chapter of Gen 1–11 is referred to somewhere in the New Testament (MORRIS,
1972, Appendix B, p. 9-101).More importantly for our concerns in this article, these genealogies
of the OT ultimately had a Messianic focus. A recent study of the genealogical lines from Adam
to Joshua shows that “What at first glance appear to be unconnected genealogical and chronological elements are, in reality, part of a single, overarching genealogy—a paragenealogy—unified
thematically by this idea of a godly line, and technically by the dedetails of age and chronology”
(WHITE, 2016, p. 14). The author concludes that in the twenty-seven generations represented in
this genealogy “Scripture thus presents us with a distinct period defined by a single, unbroken
genealogy that begins with Adam and ends with Joshua” (WHITE, 2016, p. 14). This godly line is
driven largely by the Protoevangelium promise of the Messiah in Gen 3:15, and the promises of
the Messiah to Abraham in Gen 12, and continually narrows toward the Messiah as the paragenealogy is carred forward: Adam [Gen 5] → Noah [Gen 11] → Abaham [Gen 17] → Isaac → Jacob/
Israel [Gen 49:10] → Judah → Boaz [Ruth 4:18-22] → David [2 Sam 7:12-19] → Solomon → Messiah
[Matt 1; Luke 3].
Christ the center of salvation history. Jesus and the NT writers frequently allude to
various events in the OT history of God’s people Israel, remaining accurate to the facts of
that history, and building upon that history to draw lessons and implications for the people
of God in their time and ours. The NT church is regarded by the NT writers as in basic continuity with the OT Israel, the church being the eschatological remnant of faithful Israel (see
10
See esp. Walter C. Kaiser Jr. (1993, p. 95-114; 1994, p. 14-39); G. K. Beale (1994, p. 387-390); James M. Hamilton Jr. (2006, p. 30-32); Darrell
Bock (2008, p. 105-151); Walter C. Kaiser Jr. (2008, p. 45-89); Michael Rydelnik (2010, p. 95-111); and Abner Chou (2018).
11
See esp. Gerhard F. Hasel (1980, p. 23-37); Travis R. Freeman (2015, p. 253-277).
12
See, e.g., the reference to the Fall of Adam in Hos 6:7 and to Noah and the Flood in Isa 54:9 and Ezek 14:14, 20. For allusions to the sons of
Adam and Eve, see aso Radiša Antić (2006, p. 203-211).
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
16
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
esp. Rom 9-11), by virtue of their connection with the Representative Israelite, Jesus Christ. 13
Thus Christ is the midpoint of salvation history, as argued years ago by Oscar Cullmann
(1950; 1965) and George Elden Ladd (1974), among others. Christ is the center and focus of
both OT and NT history.14
The same God of history: Yahweh, I AM. A corollary of this continuity of history in OT
and NT is that we find the same God of history in both OT and NT. The Yahweh of the OT is
none other than the Jesus of the NT! We see this set forth especially in OT references to the
“Angel of the Lord” (mal’ak Yahweh). This expression is used frequently in the HB with reference to a divine being: e.g., Gen 16:7, 13; 22:11, 16; Judg 6:11, 14, 22; Exod 3:2; 13:21; 14:19.
Notice the usage in Exod 3:2. Some have suggested that the construction is a genitive of apposition: “the Angel that is Yahweh” or “Angel Yahweh” (STUART, 2006, p. 110-111). But, with the
meaning of mal’ak being “messenger,” the best rendering is in this context is “The Angel [Messenger] from the Lord [Yahweh].” The successive verses in Exod 3:4, 6, and 7 make clear that
this Angel is none other than God, whose name is both Elohim and Yahweh. Yahweh has sent
Yahweh! This passage is one of the strongest passages in the HB to show that often the Angel
of the Lord is God Himself—the pre-incarnate Son of God—and not one of the angels standing in for God or speaking with His authority. This is an indication of more than one Person
in the Godhead already in the OT. 15 The usage of different names for God in the respective
verses are not an indication of different sources, as claimed by proponents of the Documentary
Hypothesis, but are the way that Moses emphasizes different aspects of the divine character:
Elohom underscores the divine transcendence while Yahweh highlights divine covenant intimacy (CASSUTO, 1961, p. 15-41). Later in Exod 3, this “Angel of the Lord” reveals Himself as
the great “I Am” (v. 14) (ver WILKINSON, 2015; SANER, 2015).
In John 8:58, Jesus announces, “Before Abraham was, I AM.” Thus Jesus and the NT writers recognize that Jesus appears throughout the OT! In this sense, the entire OT is a revelation
of Jesus, because He is the Yahweh of the OT. There is one and the same God, Yahweh, that is
God of both OT and NT. It is not always clear in the Hebrew Scriptures whether it is the Father
or the Son who are appearing. When we find the phrase “Angel of the Lord” referring to a divine being being sent from Yahweh, it is clearly the Son. And most likely it is the Son who is
most often serving as the “mediator” between the infinite God and finite creatures in the OT
narratives, since He was inaugurated to that mediatorial role (as the “Word”) from the beginning of Creation (Prov 8:22-31; John 1:1-3) (DAVIDSON, 2006, p. 33-54).
Quotations and Allusions
A second approach used by the NT writers is to recognize the Messiah in various quoatations from and allusions to the Hebrew Scriptures. The hermeneutic of NT writers makes use of
13
See Richard M. Davidson (2013, p. 375-428). As these articles show, there are also discontinuities, because of Israel’s withdrawal from the
theocracy by the decisions of its leaders, but God’s original ultimate plan for Israel will ultimately be fulfilled to the faithful “Israel” of all ages in
the New Earth.
14
For a recent simple, but not simplistic, presentation of the evidence for this position, see Trent Hunter and Stephen Wellum (2018).
15
See discussion in Jiří Moskala (2010, p. 245-275). Sometimes these appearances of the pre-incarnate Christ in the OT are called Christophanies. See, e.g., James A. Borland (1978).
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
17
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
both quotations and allusions. A quotation may be defined as “a direct citation of an OT passage
that is easily recognizable by its clear and unique verbal parallelism” (BEALE, 2012, p. 29). An
allusion is “a brief expression consciously intended by an author to be dependent on an OT passage” (BEALE, 2012, p. 31). In other words, “In contrast to a quotation of the OT, which is a direct
reference, allusions are indirect references (the OT wording is not reproduced directly as in a
quotation)” (BEALE, 2012, p. 31). Helpful criteria have been established for recognizing allusions
(sometimes distinguished from “echoes”)16 to the OT by NT writers, which criteria also apply to
allusions by later OT writers to earlier ones.17 G. K. Beale (2012, p. 31, italic his) summarizes:
“The telltale key to discerning an allusion is that of recognizing an incomparable or unique parallel
in wording, syntax, concept, or cluster of motifs in the same order or structure.”
In the NT, the number of separate OT quotations has been calculated to be about 295, occupying some 352 verses or more than 4.4 % of the NT, averaging one verse in every 22.5 verses
as quotations (NICOLE, 1994, p. 13).18 The number of allusions is much higher, ranging from
various estimates of about 600 to over 4000 (TOY; DITTMAR; HÜHN, 1900 apud NICOLE, 1994,
whose allusions [Reminiscenzen] add up to 4105). Regarding the form of the NT quotations of
OT passages, they are sometimes verbatim the same as the OT passage in Hebrew, while other
times they differ slightly, probably due to one or more of several factors: (1) the NT writers had
to translate their quotations from Hebrew to Greek, or use the LXX or a combination of both; (2)
they were no doubt often quoting from memory, without the same rules for verbal precision as in
today’s conventions for quotations; (3) they were sometimes paraphrasing their quotations; and
(4) they were sometimes alluding to OT passages without intending to quote them.19
Regarding the meaning of the NT quotations or allusions to the OT, Chou and others have
argued that the NT writers “used the OT contextually”— that is, in harmony with the original
meaning in light of its larger context (CHOU, 2018, p. 121; BEALE, 1994, p. 387-390; DAVIDSON, 1994, p. 34-35; HAMILTON, 2006, p. 30-32; KAISER, 2008, p. 88-89). Multiple case studies
have been provided to document this conclusion (see DAVIDSON, 1994, p. 16-35; CHOU, 2018,
p. 131-154, 160-198; HAMILTON, 2006, p. 30-54; KAISER, 2008, p. 88-89). This is in contrast to
those who claim that the NT writers are misinterpreting the OT quotations using faulty contemporary hermeneutical methods such as rabbinic midrash. A large portion of the examples where
it is claimed that the NT writers have “twisted the Scriptures” in their citation of OT passages
involve the issue of typology or predictive prophecy, with the fulfillment in Jesus Christ, and will
be discussed below. We present one Messianic case study here that involves a elusive quotation
that turns out to be a fascinating allusion.
16
Those who distinguish between “allusion” and “echo” usually consider the “echo” to be a more subtle reference to the OT than an allusion,
with less volume from or verbal coherence with the OT (ver BEALE, 2012, p. 32).
17
See Jon Paulien (1988, p. 155-186), who suggests three main criteria of verbal, thematic, and structural parallels (the latter being strongest);
and Richard B. Hays (1989, p. 29-32). Beale (2012, p. 32-34), builds largely on Hays’ criteria, and he summarizes them under seven heads: (1)
availability; (2) volume; (3) recurrence; (4) thematic coherence; (5) historical plausibility; (6) history of interpretation; and (7) satisfaction.
18
Of these 295 OT quotatations, Nicole (1994) counts about 85% (250) of these which utilize an introductory formula explicitly indicating the
author’s intent to cite the OT. Chou (2018, p. 123) counts nearly 200.
19
See Nicole (1994, p. 18-25) for examples and discussion of all of these approaches. Cf. Gleason Archer and Gregory Chirichigno (1983, p.
xxviii), who categorize all the NT quotations as to whether the source of the citation was the Hebrew Bible, the LXX, or some combination of
both. Out of the 410 entries, only 13 on the surface “give the impression that unwarranted liberties were taken with the Old Testament text in
the light of its context. But when due consideration is given to the basic message of the Hebrew passage and the particular purpose that the New
Testament author had in mind (under the guidance of God’s Spirit), in each case it will be seen that, far from wresting or perverting the original
verse, the inspired servant of Jesus brings out in a profound and meaningful way its implications and connotations.”
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
18
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
Case study: “He shall be called a Nazarene”: Matt 2:23, citing “the prophets”.
Matt 2:23 reads: “And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth, that it might be fulfilled
which was spoken by the prophets, ‘He shall be called a Nazarene.’” In the case of this apparent
citation, no specific OT passage is cited. Many scholars have seen here a reference to the law of
the Nazirite in Numbers 6 (cf. Judg 13:4-5), and they have pointed out how the context simply
does not fit the situation of Jesus.
It is true that Jesus was no Nazirite! He did not refrain from drinking the juice of the grapes
nor from shaving His head. But the problem of this passage is not with Matthew in mistakingly
connecting Nazareth with the Nazirites; it is rather with those scholars who mistakenly see Matthew making such a connection.
What needs to be recognized is that the Greek letter zeta or “z” is used to transliterate two
Hebrew letters, zayin (or “z”) and tsade (or “ts”). The Hebrew for the town Nazareth comes the
Hebrew root natsar, not nazar. The OT noun built on this stem is netser, which means “sprout,
shoot, branch.” This Hebrew word is the technical term for the Messiah utilized in the prediction
of Isa 11:1: “There shall come forth a Rod from the stem of Jesse, and a Branch [netser] out of his
roots.”Matthew, far from positing a false connection between Jesus and the Nazirite, is instead
recognizing the connection between the name of the town “Nazareth” and the title of the Messiah! Messiah, the Branch [netser], grows up [natsar] in the City of the Branch [netseret]! Again,
Matthew is remaining faithful to the original Messianic context of the Volume of Immanuel, Isaiah 7-12, in his allusion to Isa 11:1.
Key Theological Terms
The inner-biblical hermeneutic of Bible writers also included the use of key theological
terms in their interpretation of Christ in the Hebrew Scriptures. Studies on the use of various
theological terms in Scripture have demonstrated the underlying continuity between OT and NT
in the fleshing out of the meaning and implications of these terms, “implications often defined
and refined by previous scriptural writers” (DAVIDSON, 1994, p. 153). Samples of these studies include examination of theological terms for “servant,” “remnant,” (see HASEL, 1972; 1976,
p. 735-736; MULZAC, 1995; POLLARD, 2007) and “righteousness/justification,” (see DAVIDSON, 2018, p. 58-102; 1996, p. 107-119) to name a few. In each of these examples the key term
used throughout the OT ultimately focuses upon the Messiah: the Messianic Servant (Isaiah’s
four messianic “Servant Songs” in Isa 42-53), the Messianic Remnant, the embodiment of the
Covenant, and “My Righteous Servant” who “will justify the many” (Isa 53:11). As a case study
of a key theological term over which controversy has raged concerning its inner-biblical hermeneutics, and Christological focus, we look at the term “seed” (Heb. zera‘; Gk. sperma) throughout
Scripture in its Messianic contexts.
Case study: the Messianic Seed of Gen 3:15 and its inner-biblical interpretation by later
biblical writers. Genesis 3:15 has been widely regarded as “the locus classicus of Old Testament
intertextuality” (CHOU, 2018, p. 83; see also KAISER JR., 1995, p. 37-38; HAMILTON JR., 2010,
p. 76-77). In his exegetical and intertextual study of Gen 3:15, Afolarin Ojewole has categorized
the many different kinds of interpretation of this verse (OJEWOLE, 2002, p. 12-49). The traditional interpretation until the rise of the historical-critical method was that the text pointed
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
19
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
toward the coming of the Messianic Seed who would crush the head of the Serpent, representing
Satan, but liberal-critical scholars have tended to see in this verse “an aetiological myth which attempts to explain the natural hostility between mankind and the serpent world” (WIFALL, 1972,
p. 361). Recently, even some evangelical scholars have begun to question the Messianic interpretation of this passage, suggesting that it simply speaks generally of good eventually triumphing
over evil (see WALTON, 2001, p. 234), or that the Messianic meaning is only based on later NT
revelation via sensus plenior” (WENHAM, 1987, p. 80).
However, recent scholarship has provided solid exegetical evidence for the Messianic interpretation of Gen 3:15, as the protoevangelium or “first gospel promise” (OJEWOLE, 2002, p.
50-220; Cf. ROBERTSON, 1980, p. 93-100; CHOU, 2018, p. 129-145). Afolarin Ojewole shows
how in this verse the conflict narrows from many descendants (a collective “seed”) in the first
part of the verse to a masculine singular pronoun in the last part of the verse—“He”—fighting
against the serpent. Elsewhere in Scripture whenever the term “seed” (Heb. zera‘) is modified by
a singular pronoun, it is a single individual that is in view (see COLLINS, 1997, p. 139-148). Thus
here God promises victory centered in a Person. “He”—the ultimate representative Seed of the
woman, later to be revealed as the Messiah, shall bruise your head, Satan, and you shall bruise
His heel (OJEWOLE, 2002, p. 190-207). Ojewole traces the intra-textual use and referent of the
word “seed” (zera‘) and related pronouns throughout the rest of the Pentateuch, showing how
Moses carries forward the messianic interpretation of the term Seed. This is especially evident
in Gen 22:17, where the word zera‘ “seed” clearly has a plural (collective singular) idea in the
context of “the stars of heaven” and “the sand which is on the seashore,” but in v. 17b the zera‘
narrows to a singular Messianic “Seed” who would “possess the gate of His [singular] enemies.”
This is in parallel to Gen 3:15, where we find the same narrowing of the referent of the word “seed”
from collective to Messianic singular (for further discussion see OJEWOLE, 2002, p. 271-285;
ALEXANDER, 1997, p. 363-367). The allusion to Gen 3:15 is also apparent in the Balaam oracle
prophesying a Star rising for Jacob will crush the forehead of Moab (Num 24:17), in parallel to
the Messianic Seed of Gen 3:15 crushing the head of the Serpent (HAMILTON, 2006, p. 34).
The intertextual allusions to the “seed” of Gen 3:15 are found elsewhere in the OT, including
the book of Ruth (4:10-22), 2 Samuel (7:4-19), Psalms (2; 18; 68; 72; 89; 110), and Micah (7:17)
(OJEWOLE, 2002, p. 296-352; CHOU, 2018, p. 87-89), giving evidence that OT prophets recognized in Gen 3:15 the passage which “established God’s agenda for the battle of good and evil,
culminating in a seed/champion who would vanquish the evil one. Later prophets do not change
those ideas but flesh out the ramifications of those ideas on redemptive history” (CHOU, 2018,
p. 89). These later prophets have caught and further develop the messianic import of the protoevangelium. Allusions to the Seed of Gen 3:15 (and its parallel passages in the divine promises to
Abraham’s seed in Gen 12 and 22) continue in the NT, in Rom 16:20 and Rev 12 (see OJEWOLE,
2002, p. 342-344, 348-349), as well as Gal 3. Regarding this latter passage, some NT scholars have
claimed that Paul’s citation of the Abrahamic “seed” passages in Gal 3:16 is a good example of his
“twisting the Scriptures” by means of some kind of midrashic or rabbinic principle of interpretation (see DAUBE, 1965, p. 440; ELLIS, 1981, p. 70-73). In Gal 3:16 Paul writes, “Now to Abraham
and his seed were the promises made. He does not say, ‘And to seeds,’ as of many, but as of one,
‘And to your Seed,’ who is Christ.” A surface reading of this verse may suggest that Paul is indeed
citing the Abrahamic promises in a way that is not faithful to the Hebrew, since in Hebrew the
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
20
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
word zera‘ (“seed”) always appears in the singular form, never the plural, just as in English the
word “seed” (singular in form) can refer to either one or many seeds. However, a close reading
reveals that Paul is citing Gen 12:7 in light of Gen 22:17-18, since this latter verse is the one cited
in Gal 3:8,20 and he does so in a way showing he understands that the use of the Hebrew word zera‘
“seed” in Gen 22:17 moves from a collective (plural) idea to a single “Seed,” the Messiah, as noted
earlier. Then a few verses later (Gal 3:29) Paul correctly points to the collective plural aspect of
this same term, referring to those who are in Christ as “Abraham’s seed,” also in the wider context
of Gen 22:18.
I conclude with Dale Wheeler, who wrote his doctoral dissertation on the issue of Paul’s
citation of the OT in Gal 3:16: “rather than twisting the Old Testament to prove a point Paul is
using the passage in exactly the way it was intended, following its original sense and understanding the nature of who might be its referents” (WHEELER, 1987, p. 332-333).
Major Theological Themes
This approach of biblical writers in their inner-biblical hermeneutic somewhat overlaps
with the previous one, inasmuch as key theological terms are often part of a larger biblical theme
or motif. Here we point out that various themes are developed in OT and NT, focusing on the
broader theme or motif21 beyond a specific biblical term. There are many themes showing the
unity of the Bible, such as the following: “creation,” covenant,” “law,” “Sabbath,” “worship,” “ethics,”
“wisdom,” “prophecy,” and “eschatology” (see DYRNESS, 1979 for an incisive discussion of each
of these themes). It is fascinating to see how most, if not all, of these major themes not only demonstrate a basic continuity between the Torah and Prophets and between the OT and NT, but also
ultimately center upon the Messiah already in the OT, and is recognized as such by NT writers.
Individual themes. The theme of creation centers upon the identity of the Creator, who
already in the OT (Prov 8) focuses upon Christ, the “Mastercraftsman and Co-Creator” with His
Father, and the embodiment of Wisdom in creation (Prov 8:30-31; cf. Isa 11:2).22 Christ as Creator
and Wisdom is re-inforced in the NT (e.g., John 1:1-3; Col 1:16-17, 30). A study of the covenant
theme in Scripture (see ROBERTSON, 1980; HASEL, 2012; MCCOMISKEY, 1985; MACCARTHY, 2007) reveals that the Messiah is at the heart of the covenant throughout the OT (cf. Gen
3:15; 12:1-3; 15:17; Jer 31:31-34; Dan 9:27), and is in fact the embodiment of the covenant (Isa
42:6; 49:8). The NT reinforces the Christocentric nature of the everlasting covenant (e.g. Galatians 3; Hebrews 8-10; 12:24). Studies on the Sabbath in Scripture show how the later biblical
writers build upon the foundational Sabbath passages earlier in Scripture, remain in continuity
with these passages as they expand on the significance of the Sabbath in their time and ours, and
center upon Christ the Lord of the Sabbath (STRAND, 1982).23 Recent study on OT Law sets
20
Of all the promises of seed made to Abraham, only in Gen 22:17-18 is reference made to “nations,” and Paul’s citation “In you all the nations
shall be blessed” clearly refers to this passage. For the summary of evidence that Paul in Galatians 3 is not simply citing Genesis 12, but in particular had Gen 22:17-18 in mind, see the discussion of Gal 3:8 in Max Wilcox (1977, p. 94-97).
21
A “motif ” is usually more narrowly focused than a theme; a motif is a recurring image or symbol or idea in a literary wok that explains or
develops a central idea or message called a theme.
22
See Richard M. Davidson (2006, p. 33–54); cf. Gerald Klingbeil (2015), passim, and the companion volume examining the reverberations of
creation in the New Testament (forthcoming).
23
Cf. the forthcoming series of volumes on the Sabbath sponsored by the Biblical Research Institute.
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
21
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
forth a biblical based, practical method for applying the values and practices and principles of
Old Testament laws to Christian life today. This study confirms the basic continuity between the
Testaments while recognizing valid elements of discontinuity (GANE, 2017).24 The One who is
the embodiment of these laws is the Messiah (Isa 42:21; Rom 10:4; Heb 10:1).25
Case study: the grand central theme of the OT (and all Scripture). A Christocentric focus
is found not only in isolated themes of Scripture. Elsewhere I have argued that a multi-faceted
“center” of Scripture emerges out of the “introductions” (both canonical and chronological) and
“conclusion” of Scripture, i.e. Gen 1-3 (and Job, probably written about the same time as Genesis, by Moses26) and Rev 20-22 (DAVIDSON, 2009, p. 5-29; 2000, p. 102-119). The seven major
themes that are found in Scripture’s “book-ends” and appear together to form the “grand central
theme” (or “plot-line” or “grand metanarrative”) of Scripture are these: (1) creation and the divine
design for this planet; (2) the character of the Creator (with implications for theodicy); (3) the
rise of the cosmic moral conflict concerning the character of God; (4) the Gospel covenant promise centered in the Person of the Messianic Seed, Jesus Christ; (5) the substitutionary atonement
of the Messiah; (6) the eschatological windup of the moral conflict with the end of the serpent
(Satan) and evil; and (7) the sanctuary setting of the moral conflict.27 The following chart summarizes the biblical evidence for this theological “grand central theme” of Scripture:
The “Grand Central Theme” of Scripture Revealed in Its Introductions
(Canonical and Chronological) and Conclusion
Major Themes
Genesis 1-3
Job
Revelation
Creation of new heavens and
earth
1) Creation and Original;
Divine Design
1-2
38-41
Creation of heaven and
earth; Sabbath, provisions for
humankind
Creation by the Almighty
(Shaddai)
2)Character of God
1-2
1-2; 42:7-8
21-22 (especially 22:4)
Elohim/Yahweh
Satan”s attack against
God’s character; Job speaks
“right” of God
God’s character revealed;
God’s name (character) on
foreheads of saints
3
1-2
20
Beginning on earth
Satan versus God, cosmic
setting
Windup of cosmic conflict
3)Moral Conflict (Concerning God’s character/law)
24
Gane shows how the elements of continuity are embedded in the OT itself.
For further discussion, see esp. MacCarty (2007), In Granite or Ingrained? passim.
26
Babylonian Talmud, Baba Bathra 14b, 15a: “Moses wrote his own book, and the passages about Balaam and Job.” The Syriac Peshitta places
the book of Job after the book of Deuteronomy, in honor of the ancient Jewish tradition that Moses was its author. See SDABC, 3:493–494, 1140.
For example, the expression ’El-Shaddai (“Almighty God”) is found 31 times in Job, 6 times in Genesis, and nowhere else in the Hebrew Bible.
Many other expressions, including a number of Egyptianisms, link together the two books. The Egyptian connection between these two books,
and additional evidence for Mosaic authorship of both, is explored further in the recent unpublished research of Jacques Doukhan. See also, A.
S. Yahuda (1933-); Nili Shupak (1993); and Hans Strauss (2003, p. 25–37). Cf. Ellen G. White Signs of the Times, 19 February 1880; quoted in
idem, “Job,” SDABC, 3:1140: “The long years amid desert solitudes were not lost. Not only was Moses gaining a preparation for the great work
before him, but during this time, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, he wrote the book of Genesis and also the book of Job, which would
be read with the deepest interest by the people of God until the close of time.”
27
For discussion and biblical substantiation of each facet, see Davidson (2009, p. 11-24, 24-26) where it is shown that Ellen White pinpoints
just these seven facets as she describes the “grand central theme” of Scripture (see Ed 125-126, 190; GC 299, 423; 678; GW 315; PP 44, 596; 1 SM
259, 383; and 8T 77).
25
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
22
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
21:6; 22:16, 17
3:15
19:25-27
Supernatural enmity
against the Serpent
The Messianic Seed
“I know that my Redeemer
liveth...” The Redeemer/Vindicator
3:15, 21
1:5; 19:25; 42:8
21:22, 23
Heel of Seed crushed; Clothing of sacrificial skins
Job’s sacrifices for
family and friends;
The Redeemer (Go’el)
The Lamb
6)Final Climax and End
of Evil
3:15
19:25
Serpent’s head crushed
Eschatological
resurrection
7) Sanctuary
1-3
1:6; 2:1; 19:29
20:12, 13; 21:3, 16, 22
Eden as sanctuary;
Investigative Judgment of
Adam and Eve;
Sacrificial system
Sons of God come
“before the Lord” to the heavenly sanctuary;
Final judgment
Final judgment;
The “tabernacle of God is
with men”; God and Lamb
as temple; New Jerusalem as
Most
Holy Place (cube)
4)Gospel/Covenant
Promise of Messianic Seed
5)Substitutionary Atonement
“I will give the water of life
freely.”
“I, Jesus—Root and Offspring
of David, Bright and Morning Star”
21:6
“It is done.”
The epicenter of this multifaceted metanarrative is Jesus Christ, who fulfils the OT types
and promises.28 This may be diagrammed in the following way:
A growing consensus of scholars now recognize the same basic outline of this “big picture”
of Scripture (DAVIDSON, 2009, p. 28-29, and passim), emphasizing its major “plot-line” which
moves from Creation to Fall and then to Redemption in Christ and a New creation (see CHOU,
2018, p. 227; MOSKALA, 2015, p. 1-38). Recent studies illustrate how the biblical writers not only
28
For an excellent discussion of how Jesus is the very center of inner-biblical interpretation, see Ganoune Diop (2005, p. 141-145).
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
23
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
were faithful exegetes of biblical passages, but they “thought through Scripture in terms of the big
picture” (CHOU, 2018, p. 159). Chou traces this “big picture” in each major era of the OT prophets and in each of the NT writers, showing the biblical writers’ understanding of the overarching
plan of God in salvation history, and the continuity and consistency of their inner-biblical hermeneutic (CHOU, 2018, p. 93-105, 130-131, 155-196). The biblical writers were not only faithful
to individual antecedent passages that they interpreted; they also had a grasp of the “big picture”
of Scripture, and faithfully expounded on the meaning and significance of individual passages in
light of this grand biblical metanarrative, centered in Jesus Christ.
Typology
Based upon an examination of the passages in Scripture where the object of a biblical writer’s
hermeneutical endeavor is specifically labeled a “type” (Gk. typos) or “antitype,”29 the following
definition summarizes the nature of biblical typology: typology is the study of persons, events, and
institutions which God has divinely designed to prefigure (point forward) to their eschatological
(end time) fulfillment in connection with Christ and/or the Gospel realities brought about by Him
(DAVIDSON, 1981, passim). According to the hermeneutical principles that emerge from the Bible’s use of typology, the OT already identifies which persons, events, or institutions are typological,
and the NT simply announces the fulfillment of what the OT had indicated.30 Studies have been
conducted on various strands of biblical typology, including the typology of Adam, the Flood, the
Exodus, and the sanctuary, among many others, and how each of these strands of Messianic typology find their basic fulfillment in Christ.31 See the following chart for seven examples of Messianic
typology in the OT, with the indicators already in the OT that these are typological:32
Typological interpretation of the old testament: prophetic indicators identifying the types
Old Testament Type
(Person/Event/
Institution)
Old Testament Verbal
Indicator of Typology
New Testament
Announcement of Antitype
1. Adam
New Adam
Antitypical Adam
Genesis 1-5
Immediate context: Gen 1:26-27; 2:5-7, 18-23;
3:15, 17; 5:1-2 (corporate solidarity of Adam
with “humanity” and with the Messianic
seed).
Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21-22, 45-49; Heb 2:68; cf. Matt 24:30; 26:64; etc. (see DAVIDSON,
1981, p. 297-316).
Later OT indicators: Ps 8:4-8; Dan 7:13-14
(see DAVIDSON, 2011, p. 23-28).
2. Flood
New Cosmic Judgment/Salvation
Antitype of the Flood
Genesis 6-9
Immediate Context: Gen 6:13; 7:23; 8:1 (see
GAGE, 1984, p. 7-16).
1 Pet 3:18-21; cf. Matt 24:37-39; Lk 17:26-27;
2 Pet 2:5, 9; 3:5-7 (see DAVIDSON, 1981,
316-336).
Later OT indicators: Isa 24:18; 28:2; 43:2;
54:8-9; Nah 1:8; Dan 9:26 (see DAVIDSON,
2011, p. 29-31).
29
30
31
32
These NT passages are: Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 10:6, 11; 1 Pet 3:21; Heb 8:5 and 9:23; cf. the LXX of Exod 25:40.
For a recent overview of nine criteria for discerning types of Christ in the OT, see G. K. Beale (2020, p. 30-43).
For an overview of the principles of biblical typology, see Richard M. Davidson (2011, p. 5-48; 1992, p. 99-130); Beale (2020, p. 25-50).
This chart is revised from Davidson (2011, p. 19-23; for discussion of the first four of these examples, p. 23-36).
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
24
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
New Exodus
Antitypical Exodus
Immediate Context: Exod 15:14-17; Numbers
23-24 (esp. 23:22; 24:8, 14-17; see SAILHAMER, 1992, p. 408).
1 Cor 10: 1-13; cf. Matt 1-5; Luke 9:31; etc.
(see DAVIDSON, 1981, p. 193-297; BALENTINE, 1961; KENNEDY, 2008; BEALE, 2012,
p. 697-715).
Later OT indicators: Hos 2:14-15; 12:9, 13;
13:4-5; Jer 23:4-8; 16:14-15; 31:32; Isa 11:1516; 35; 40:3-5; 41:17-20; 42:14-16; 43:1-3,
14-21; 48:20-21; 49:8-12; 51:9-11; 52:3-6,
11-12; 55:12-13 (see DODD, 1952, p. 75-133;
NINOW, 2001).
Antitypical Heavenly Sanctuary
4. Earthly Sanctuary
Earthly a Copy of the Heavenly Sanctuary
Exodus 25-40
Heb 8:5; 9:24; cf. Rev 8:1-5; 11:19; 16:1;
etc. (see NUNES, 2020; PAPAIOANNOU;
Later OT indicators: Ps 11:4; 18:6, 60:8; 63:2;
GIANTZAKLIDIS, 2017, p. 109-263).
68:35; 96:6; 102:19; 150:1; Isa 6; Jonah 2:7;
Mic 1:2; Hab 2:20; etc. (see DAVIDSON, 1981,
p. 367-388; SOUZA, 2006).
5. Moses
New Moses
Pentateuch
Immediate context: Deut 18:15-19
John 1:21; 6:14; 8:40; etc.
Later OT indicator: Deut 34:10 (added probably by Ezra) (see SAILHAMER, 1992, p. 456,
478-9).
(see ALLISON, JR., 1993).
6. Joshua
New Joshua
Antitypical Joshua
The Book of Joshua
Immediate context: Exod 23:23; Num 13:8,
16; 27:17, 21; Deut 3:28; 18:15-17; 31:3, 23;
34:10-12; Josh 1:2-5; 3:7; 4:14 (Joshua does
the same work as the Angel of the Lord, and
of Moses, but is clearly not the New Moses)
Hebrews 4; cf. Matt 11:28; Eph 1:11, 14, 18;
Col 2:15; 3:24; Heb 1:4; 9:15; 12:22-24 (see
DAVIDSON, 1995, p. 32-35; BEALE, 2020, p.
41).
Immediate context: Exod 25:9, 40;
Antitypical Moses
Later OT indicator: Isa 49:8 (the Messiah does
the same work as Joshua in Deut 31:7; Josh
1:6) (see DAVIDSON, 1995, p. 24-35).
Antitypical David
7. David
New David
The Psalms
Immediate Context: Ps 2 (esp. vs. 12); 16:8-11; Matt 1:1-18 (14 is the gematria number of Da22; 40:6-8; etc. (language goes beyond histori- vid); John 19:24; Acts 2:29-33; 13:31-37; Heb
1:5; 5:5; 10:5-9; etc. (see DAVIDSON, 1994, p.
cal David).
23-26; NOVAKOVIC, 1997, p. 148-191; HAYS,
Later OT indicators: Jer 23:5; Ezek 34:23;
37:24; Dan 9:26 (echoing Ps 22:11); Isa 9:5, 6; 2016, p. 146-53; JOHNSON, 2018, p. 247-272).
11:1-5; Hos 3:5; Amos 9:11; Zech 8:3; etc. (see
DAVIDSON, 1994, p. 23-28; [forthcoming
in the volume 2 of Psalms Studies published
by ATS and Peruvian Union University];
HAMILTON JR., 2012, p. 4-25).
8. Jonah
The Book of Jonah
New Jonah
Immediate context: Jonah 1:17; 2:2, 6 (death-resurrection language, 3 days/nights; description goes beyond historical Jonah).
Antitypical Jonah
Matt 12:39-41; 16:4; Luke 11:29-32.
(See SOULEN, 2008, p. 331-343).
Later OT indicators: Hos 6:1-3 (= Israel’s death-resurrection experience, third day); Hos
7:11 (Israel is like silly “Jonah” [dove]); Isa
41-53 (Messiah represents and recapitulates
experience of Israel, especially in death-resurrection) Isa 41:8; 42:1; 44:1; 49:3-6; 52:1353:11; etc.) (see DAVIDSON, 1994, p. 29-30).
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
25
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
Other OT typological persons, events, and institutions which have been analyzed include
such examples as: Abraham and Isaac (DAVIDSON, 2000, p. 232-247); Melchizedek (BIRD,
2000, p. 36-52); Joseph (EMADI, 2016; SIGVARTSEN, 2018); Ruth and Boaz (CHISHOLM JR.,
2013, p. 566-567; BLOCK, 2015, p. 55-57); Solomon and Shulamit (MITCHELL, 2003, p. 67-97);
Elijah (LEAL, [forthcoming]; BRODIE, 1990, p. 78-85; 2000; Cf. KLOPPENBORG; VERHEYDEN, 2014) and Elisha (BROWN, 1971, p. 84-104; BRODIE; 1981, p. 39-42; Cf. KLOPPENBROG; VERHEYDEN, 2014, passim); Eliakim (BEALE, 2012, p. 15, 143-144); Ezekiel (BULLOCK, 1982, p. 23-31); Cyrus (and the fall of Babylon) (see WERE, 1983); Esther (LATCHMAN,
2012; DAVIDSON, 2019); and the office of prophet, priest, and king (BEALE, 2020, p. 38-39).
Thus the OT types reveal Christ throughout all the OT Scriptures where these types are found.
More work still needs to be done in examining other persons, events, and institutions in the OT
that are indicated to be types or foreshadowings of Christ. Recognizing the principles of typology unlocks many seemingly irresponsible or unfaithful usages of the OT by NT writers, and
allows the portrait of Jesus in the OT to shine forth in all its brilliance and exegetical soundness.
This will be illustrated by a case study of Messianic Exodus typology, set forth in the OT, and
proclaimed as fulfilled in the NT.
Case study: “Out of Egypt I called My Son”: Matt 2:15, citing Hos 11:1. Matthew 2:15
represents another instance in which the critical scholars who have charged Matthew with unfaithfulness to the OT context33 have themselves failed to discern the larger context of Hos 11:1,
which unfolds the Exodus typology of the Bible writers.34
It is true that Hos 11:1 in its immediate historical context refers to the past historical Exodus of ancient Israel from Egypt. The verse reads: “When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out
of Egypt I called My son.” The next verse describes the historical circumstances of national Israel’s
turning away from Yahweh to serve the Baals.
However, it is crucial to see not only the immediate context but also the wider context of
this verse. C. H. Dodd, in his book According to the Scriptures, has demonstrated how the NT
writers often cite a single OT passage as a pointer for the reader to consider the whole larger
context of that passage. Dodd has shown that the larger context of Hos 11:1—both in the book of
Hosea itself and in other contemporary eighth-century prophets—describes a future New Exodus
connected with Israel’s return from exile and the coming of the Messiah (DODD, 1952, p. 74133).35 In fact, the typological interconnection between ancient Israel’s Exodus and the Messiah’s
Exodus from Egypt is already indicated in the Pentateuch. In the oracles of Balaam in Numbers
23-24, there is an explicit shift from the historical Exodus to the Messianic Exodus. In Num 23:22
Balaam proclaims, “God brings them out of Egypt; He [God] has strength like a wild ox.” In the
next oracle, Balaam shifts to the singular, “God brings him out of Egypt” (Num 24:8), and in the
next and final oracle, referring to the “latter days” (24:14), Balaam indicates the Messianic identi33
See, e.g., S. Marion Smith (1965, p. 239), who states that in citing Hos 11:1 Matthew employs “a method that can be rejected outright as an
untenable use of Scripture.” Cf. Enns (2015, p. 122): “It would take a tremendous amount of mental energy to argue that Matthew is respecting
the historical context of Hosea’s words, that is, that there actually is something predictive in Hosea 11. In the end such arguments serve only to
support one’s assumptions rather than challenge them.”
34
For the OT basis and development of Exodus typology, see esp. Friedbert Ninow (2001). More recently, regarding this specific passage of
Hos 1:11 and its use by Matthew, see G. K. Beale (2012, p. 697-715; 2020, p. 30-35).
35
Note especially the following passages: Hos 2:14-15; 12:9, 13; 13:4-5; Isa 11:15-16; 35; 40:3-5; 41:17-20; 42:14-16; 43:1-3, 14-21; 48: 20-21;
49:3-5, 8-12; 51:9-11; 52:3-6, 11-12; 55:12-13; Amos 9:7-15; Mic 7:8-20. Cf. Jer 23:4-8; 16:14-15; 31:32.
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
26
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
fication of the “him”: “I see Him, but not now; I behold Him, but not near; a Star shall come out
of Jacob; a scepter shall arise out of Israel, and batter the brow of Moab, and destroy all the sons of
tumult” (24:17) (see SAILHAMER, 1992, p. 137-144).Thus the Pentateuch and the latter prophets
(especially Hosea and Isaiah) clearly recognized that Israel’s Exodus from Egypt was a type of the
new Exodus, centering in the Representative Israel, the Messiah. Matthew remains faithful to this
larger OT context in his citation of Hos 11:1. In harmony with the OT predictions, Matthew depicts Jesus as the Representative Israel, recapitulating in His life the experience of ancient Israel,
but succeeding where the first Israel failed. The first five chapters of Matthew describe in detail
Jesus as the New Israel experiencing a New Exodus.36 Matthew and the other Synoptic Gospels
also depict the death and resurrection of Jesus as a New Exodus.37
Thus, far from distorting the original OT context of Hos 11:1, Matthew “quoted a single
verse not as a proof text, but a pointer to his source’s larger context. Instead of interrupting the
flow of his argument with a lengthy digression, he let the words of Hosea 11:1 introduce that
whole context in Hosea” (KAISER JR., 1985). Matthew faithfully captured the wider eschatological, Messianic context of this passage as portrayed by Hosea and his prophetic contemporaries.
Promise/prediction and Fulfillment
The OT contains numerous predictive prophecies, estimated to comprise nearly thirty percent of the OT (PAYNE, 1973, p. 13, 674-675),38 not to speak of the plethora of OT promises.
Here we look particularly at the Messianic prophecies. Although critical scholars have usually
rejected out of hand the promise/prediction of the coming Messiah in the OT, as we have seen
already Jesus Himself leads the way in affirming Messianic prophecies all through the OT, when
he says to the disciples that resurrection evening in the upper room: “These are the words which
I spoke to you while I was still with you, and all things must be fulfilled which were written in
the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me” (Luke 24:34). Numerous
studies have examined the many specific Messianic prophecies in the Bible, revealing how later
OT writers understood the core Messianic promises/predictions about the Messiah in the Torah,
and how the NT writers testified concerning the fulfillment of these and other OT prophecies in
Jesus.39 James Smith examines some 73 OT promises/predictions about the Messiah.40 We look
36
Jesus comes out of Egypt after a death decree (Matt 2:15), and going through His antitypical Red Sea experience in His baptism (Matthew
3; cf. 1 Cor 10:1, 2). This is followed by His wilderness experience of 40 days paralleling the 40 years of ancient Israel in the wilderness. During
this time Jesus indicates His own awareness of His role as the New Israel in the New Exodus by consistently meeting the devil’s temptations with
quotations from Deuteronomy 6-8 (where ancient Israel’s temptations in the wilderness are summarized). Finally, Jesus appears on the Mount
as a new Moses, with His 12 disciples representing the tribes of Israel, and repeats the Law as Moses did at the end of the wilderness sojourn
(see DAVIDSON, 1994, p. 19-21).
37
Note, e.g., how at the Transfiguration the first Moses speaks to the New Moses about His exodus which He was to accomplish at Jerusalem (Luke 9:31). Jesus’ death is His ultimate Red Sea experience. After His resurrection He remains in the wilderness of this earth 40 days
(like Israel’s 40 years in the wilderness) and then as the New Joshua enters heavenly Canaan as the pioneer and perfector of our faith (see
ESTELLE, 2018, p. 208-262).
38
According to Payne’s count, out of 23,210 verses of the OT, 6,641 (or 28 ½ percent) contain predictive material.
39
For a review of literature showing the different views with regard to Messianic prophecy, and upholding the traditional understandingI of
Messianic peophecy (see RYDELNIK, 2010, p. 13-128). Some other helpful studies of the OT Messianic prophecies include: Gerhard Van Groningen (1990); James E. Smith (1993); Kaiser Jr. (1995); Herbert W. Bateman IV, Darrell L. Bock, and Gordon H. Johnston (2012); and Jacques
Doukhan (2012).
40
These include the following passages: Gen 3:15; 9:26-27; 12:3; 49:10-12; Num 24:17; Deut 18:15, 18; 32:43a; 1 Sam 2:10; 2 Sam 2:35; 7:12-16;
Job (9:33; 16:19-21; 17:3; 33:23-28); 19:23-27; Pss 2; 8; 16; 40; 45; 68; 69; 72; 78:1-2; 89; 109; 102; 110; 118; 132; Isa 4:2-6; 7:14-16; 8:17, 18; 9:1-7;
11:1-16; 16:5; 28:16; 30:19-26; 32:1-2; 33:17; 42:1-17; 49:1-13; 50:4-11; 52:13–53:12; 55:3-5; 61:1-11; Jer 23:5-6; 30:9, 21; 31:21, 22; Ezek 17:22-24;
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
27
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
at one case-study, the prediction of Isa 7:14, which many critical scholars consider to have been
misinterpreted by Matthew (Matt 1:23). This example involves both prediction and typology.
Case study: the Virgin Birth? Matt 1:23, citing Isa 7:14. Isaiah 7:14 has been called “the
most difficult of all Messianic prophecies” (TERRY, 1883, p. 331; PAYNE, 1973, p. 291) and is
perhaps the most studied text in biblical scholarship (for bibliography, see WATTS, 1985, p. 95103). Elsewhere I have examined the relevant exegetical issues in this passage, focused on the
question: Does Matthew remain faithful to the OT context of this passage when in Matt 1:23 he
cites it as a prediction of the virgin birth of the Messiah? (see DAVIDSON, 2007, p. 85-96). Here
is a brief summary of the evidence. A careful look at the immediate context of Isa 7:14 seems to
reveal a local dimension to the fulfillment of the prophecy, within the historical setting of the
Syro-Ephraimite War of ca. 734 B.C., with the birth of Isaiah’s son, Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz.
But there are major hints that the passage also points forward to an ultimate typological fulfillment in the Messiah: (1) the prophecy and sign of Isa 7:14 is addressed not only to Ahaz, but
more widely to “you” in the plural, to the “house of David” (v. 13); (2) the Hebrew word ‘almah
(“virgin, young woman”), translated in the LXX and Matt 1:23 by parthenos or “virgin,” refers to a
“young woman of marriageable age, sexually ripe, but unmarried,” and therefore (unless she is an
immoral woman) a virgin, a description indeed true of Mary, the mother of Jesus, at the time of her
conception, but not neatlly fitting the circumstances of Isaiah’s wife; (3) there are no markers of time
in the entire verse;41 the sign thus could refer to past, present, or future (or both), as the time when
the virgin/young woman would be pregnant, making room for a typological fulfillment.
What is hinted at in the text is made explicit in the larger context of Isaiah 7-12, called the
Volume of Immanuel: (4) When Isaiah’s son was born, he was not named “Immanuel” as the
prophecy of Isa 7:14 predicted; (5) The name Immanuel is used later in chapter 8 in a context that
seems to move from the local to the cosmic level (see vs. 8); (6) in chapter 8 Isaiah and his sons
are said to be “signs” in Israel (vs. 18) for future events to be brought about by God; (7) these
events move from the local level at the end of Isaiah 8 to the eschatological Messianic level in
Isaiah 9: the land which was in gloom and darkness (8:22) will become a land where the gloom
is removed (9:1) and “the people who walked in darkness have seen a great light” (9:2). Most significantly, (8) while Isaiah’s son was a sign to Israel, Isaiah predicts that in the Messianic age the
greater Son, the ultimate fulfillment of Isa 7:14, will appear: “For unto us a Child is born, unto us
a Son is given, and the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace” (Isa 9:6). (9) This Messianic
motif is further expanded in Isa 11:1-9, the matching passage in the chiastic structure of Isa 7-12.
Finally, in summary, (10) within the wider context of Isa 7:14, Isaiah himself, under divine
inspiration, indicates that although the prediction will have local fulfillment in the birth of a son
in the time of Ahaz, yet this local fulfillment is a type of the ultimate Messianic fulfillment in the
divine Son, Immanuel. We may diagram the typological relationships in Isaiah’s volume of Immanuel as following:
21:25-27; 34:23-31; 37:21-28; 44-48; Dan 7:13, 14; 9:24-27; Hos 1:10–2:1; 3:5; 11:1; Joel 2:23; Mic 2:12-13; 5:1-5; Hab 3:12-13; Hag 2:6-9, 21-23;
Zech 3:8-10; 6:12-13; 9:9-11; 10:4; 11:4-14; 12:10; 13:7; Mal 3:1; 4:5.
41
The verse is literally translated: Behold, an ‘almah [was/is/will be] pregnant, and [was/is/will being] bearing a son and she has called / is
calling / will call his name Immanuel [meaning God was/is/will be with us] (see explanation of the grammar in DAVIDSON, 2007, p. 87-88).
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
28
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
1. Type
2. Antitype
Isa 7:14 (Immanuel prophecy)
Isa 8:1-4 (local fulfillment of Isa 7:14 in Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz)
Isa 9:1-7 (ultimate fulfillment in the Messiah)
Isa 11:1-9 (further description of the Messiah)
Matthew, therefore, far from taking Isa 7:14 out of context, has recognized the larger Messianic context of Isaiah 7-12, which critical scholarship has usually ignored.
The Eschatological-Messianic
Macrostructure of the Old Testament
Messianic prophecies have too often been limited to specific passages which predict the
coming of the Messiah, as in the previous section. But a case can be made that the entire OT is
cast in an eschatological, messianic framework (SAILHAMER, 1987, p. 307-315; DAVIDSON,
2000, p. 349-366, this section uses material from the published articles cited above).
Case study: The eschatological-messianic macrostructure of the Old Testament. The
Pentateuch is composed of four major literary types: narrative, poetry, law and genealogy. While
the genealogies and legal portions provide structure to some parts of the Torah, they do not serve
to structure the Pentateuch as a whole. The whole of the Pentateuch is structured by the juxtaposition the two remaining literary genres, i.e., narrative and poetry.
Already in the opening chapters of Genesis, a three-fold literary sequence may be observed:
(1) narrative, (2) poetic speech, and (3) epilogue. The creation account of Gen 1–2:22 is narrative,
followed by the poetic speech of Adam (2:23) and a short epilogue (2:24). Likewise, the account
of the Fall in Gen 3:1-13 is a narrative, followed by a divine poetic speech (Gen 3:14-19) and an
epilogue (Gen 3:20-24). There are numerous other examples of this technique in the microstructures of the Pentateuch (Gen 4:1-26; 6:5—9:17; 9:18-29; 14:1-24; 16:1-16; 24:1-67; 25:1-26; 27:145; 37:1—48:22).
The fact that the three-fold structuring sequence of narrative→poetic speech→epilogue is
found so frequently in the Pentateuch on the microstructural level suggests the possibility that
this same technique may be employed in structuring the Pentateuch as a whole. Old Testament
scholar John Sailhamer has shown that indeed such is the case. The major blocks of narrative
in the Pentateuch are punctuated by four major sections of poetic speech, each then followed
by an epilogue (See outline below). First, the patriarchal narratives of Genesis are concluded
by a major block of poetic text in Genesis 49 followed by an epilogue (Genesis 50). Second, the
Exodus narrative block (Exodus 1-14) is capped off by another major poetic text (Moses’ and
Miriam’s songs in Exod 15:1-21) followed by an epilogue (Exod 15:22-27). Third, the narrative
block of Israel’s experience in the wilderness (Numbers 1-22) is climaxed by the poetic oracles of
Balaam (Numbers 23-24) and an epilogue (Numbers 25). Finally, the pattern embraces the whole
of the Pentateuch, as the overarching narrative of the Pentateuch which stretches from Genesis 1
through Deuteronomy, is concluded by the poetic Song of Moses (Deuteronomy 32-33) and the
epilogue of chap. 34.
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
29
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
In three of these “macro-structural junctures” in the Pentateuch (Genesis 49; Numbers 24;
and Deuteronomy 31) the material which connects the poetic sections to the preceding narrative
sections contains similar terminology and motifs. In each there is:
(1) a central narrative figure (Jacob, Balaam, Moses), who
(2) calls together an audience in the imperative (Gen 49:1; Num 24:14; Deut 31:28),
(3) to proclaim (Gen 49:1; Num 24:14; Deut 31:28)
(4) what will happen (Gen 49:1; Num 24:14; Deut 31:29)
(5) in “the end of days [be’akharit hayyomim]” (Gen 49:1; Num 24:14; Deut 31:29).
The phrase “end of days” (be’akharit hayyomim, i.e. “last days”) provides an indication that
the meaning of the poetic passages is “eschatological”—the passages point to an indefinite future
time, which also embraces the ultimate end-time wind-up of the plan of salvation. By placing the
“eschatological” poetic speeches after the narrative sections, Moses is also highlighting the point
out that the narratives are likewise to be seen as ultimately having end-time significance. The narrative texts describing God’s dealings with His people in the past may be seen to foreshadow the
end-time divine acts of salvation.
The three poetic seams coming at the three macro-structural junctures in the Pentateuchal
narratives (Genesis 49, Numbers 23-24, and Deuteronomy 32-33) not only refer to the “last days,”
but also highlight the coming of the Messiah. These passages reveal that the very heart of the eschatological focus in the Torah is upon the coming Messiah.
In the first poetic passage (Genesis 49), Jacob’s last words of blessing are introduced as being
given to his 12 sons individually (v. 1), but the conclusion of the blessing reveals that Jacob also
had in mind “the twelve tribes of Israel,” not just the individual sons (v. 28). Among the blessings
upon each tribe, two tribes are singled out by Jacob for extended blessing: viz., Judah and Joseph.
Close reading of these two extended blessings indicates that both point beyond the tribe to a
future Messianic figure that will come “in the last days.” The Messiah will be a royal figure from
the tribe of Judah, Shiloh— “Provider of peace/prosperity [Heb. sh-l-h]” (Gen 49:10-12)—and a
divine, suffering servant, the antitypical Joseph (vv. 22-26; note especially the motif of suffering
in v. 23, and the abrupt aside referring to the divinity of the Messiah in v. 24: “from there [i.e.,
from the Mighty One of Jacob] is the Shepherd, the Stone of Israel [i.e., the divine Messiah]”) (see
SIGVARTSEN, 2018, passim). See the accompanying chart at the end of this section.
Deuteronomy 32-33, the last of the major Pentateuchal poetic passages, contains a second
blessing of the twelve tribes, paralleling that of Genesis 49, but this time given by Moses before
his death. This blessing also occurs in context of the “end of the days” (Deut 31:22), which points
to the indefinite future but also ultimately includes the Messianic Age to Come. In his blessing
Moses (like Jacob) singles out two tribes for extended attention, again Joseph, but also Levi (not
Judah as in Genesis 49). Again, close reading of these two extended blessings indicates that both
point beyond the tribe to a future Messianic figure who will come “in the last days” (see chart
below). The Messiah will be the New (antitypical) Joseph (Deut 33:8-11), and also the antitypical
Levitical priest Deut 33:13-17). Thus Genesis 49 and Deuteronomy 32-33 form a pair of poetic
passages in the Pentateuch, both comprising blessings upon the twelve tribes, both emphasizing
the “last days” and the coming of the Messiah.
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
30
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
In a similar way, the Song of Moses (Exodus 15) and the Oracles of Balaam (Numbers
23–24) form a pair of poetic passages, highlighting the eschatological future and the role of the
Messiah in the New Exodus (see chart). As noted above, the oracles of Balaam portray the Messiah as a future King bringing a new eschatological Exodus, recapitulating in His life the events of
historical Israel in their Exodus from Egypt and conquest of their enemies. Note how Num 23:22
speaks of Israel’s past Exodus: “God brought them [plural] out Egypt”; and Num 24:8 repeats the
exact same line in Hebrew, except with singular forms, applying it to the future king introduced
in vs 7: “God brings Him [singular, not them] out of Egypt.” The identity of the “Him” as conquering king is further clarified in vv. 8b-9 with the description of His conquering His enemies,
the nations. Numbers 24:17, in the context of the “the last days” (v. 14), confirms the Messiah’s
eschatological royal reign and victory over the forces of evil: “I see Him, but not now; I behold
Him, but not near; a Star shall come out of Jacob; a Scepter shall rise out of Israel […] and destroy
all the sons of tumult” (v. 17). Exodus 15 does not contain the same eschatological phrase “in the
last days” as the other three poetic passages located at the macro-structural junctures of the Pentateuch. But whereas Genesis 49 and Deuteronomy 32-33 form an outer pair of poetic passages,
both comprising blessings upon the twelve tribes, Exodus 15 and Numbers 23-24 comprise an
inner pair of poetic passages with a common theme—the Exodus. Exodus 15 is the Song of Moses,
celebrating the Exodus of Israel from Egypt and deliverance from their enemies at the Red Sea.
Already in Exodus 15, the Exodus is open-ended toward the future, with a description, placed in
a cosmic context, of a future safe passage of Israel through the midst of their enemies instead of
the expected portrayal of passage through the Red Sea (vv. 14-17), climaxing in a description of
the reign of Yahweh (ultimately the Messiah) “forever and ever” (v. 18) (see CHEN, 2013). This
forward-reaching movement in the Song of Moses finds its counterpart in the Balaam oracles,
where the Exodus of Israel from Egypt is viewed as pre-figuring the Exodus of the Messianic king
and His conquest of His enemies. When viewed together, the Song of Moses (Exodus 15) and the
Oracles of Balaam (Numbers 23-24) form a pair highlighting the eschatological future and the
role of the Messiah.
Thus the four poetic passages which form macro-structural seams in the Pentateuch are all
eschatological in nature, and together they point to the Messiah at the heart of the last-day fulfillment. The four poetic passages are framed in a chiastic arrangement, ABBA, with the matching
outer pair focusing on the motif of blessing the twelve tribes, and the matching inner pair focusing on the motif of the Exodus/New Exodus:
A. Blessing of the Twelve Tribes: Judah and Joseph (Gen 49)
B. Exodus and New Exodus (Exod 15)
B’ Exodus and New Exodus (Num 22-24)
A’ Blessing of the Tribes: Joseph and Levi (Deut 33)
Taken together, all of these poetic passages, placed after blocks of narrative, indicate that
the preceding narrative portions are also to be seen as prefigurative of the eschatological Messianic future. Thus, in the compositional strategy of Moses, under the inspiration of God, the large
narrative blocks of the Pentateuch are juxtaposed with the poetic seams so as to be read eschatologically, and the eschatology ultimately focuses upon the Messiah.
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
31
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
In the compositional strategy of Moses (inspired by God), the major legal portion of the
Pentateuch which is clustered in its center, i.e., the book of Leviticus, is also framed to highlight
Christ-centered eschatology. [Refer to the center of the chart below.] The book of Leviticus is
organized in a chiastic structure. Members A and A’ (chaps. 1-7 and 24-27) deal with sanctuary
legislation; members B and B’ (chaps. 8-10 and 21-23) deal with priestly legislation; members C
and C’ (chaps 11-15 and 17-20) deal with personal legislation. And member D, at the chiastic
climax of Leviticus (and of the whole Pentateuch), is Leviticus 16, the chapter dealing with Yom
Kippur, the Day of Atonement. Leviticus 16 is also shown to be the literary center of the book
by means of the 37 divine speeches that structure the book—18 on each side, framing the divine
speech in Leviticus 16 in the very center.42
The Day of Atonement came at the end of the Hebrew ritual year. Its more accurate name
(from Scripture) is not yom kippur, but yom hakkippurîm—the “Day of Atonements” (plural),
which in Hebrew syntax implies the “Day of Complete or Final/Ultimate Atonement” (Lev 23:28).
All during the year, atonement was made for sins, but this day was the climax of the yearly ritual,
in which the high priest made final atonement “for all the sins of Israel” (v. 16) and for the entire
sanctuary which had been defiled during the year. On the holiest day of the year (Day of Final
Atonement) the holiest person in the world (the high priest) went into the holiest spot on earth
(the Most Holy Place of the sanctuary) to conduct the holiest work of the year (the work of “ultimate atonement”). The high priest is a type of Christ (see Heb 8:1-5), and this final cleansing
work in its antitypical fulfillment takes place at the time of the end (see Daniel 7:9-14; 8:14; Heb
10:25-30; Rev 11:19–20:15).
It may be concluded, therefore, that Moses, under divine inspiration, had a compositional
strategy which cast the entire Pentateuch into an eschatological framework, with the person and
work of the coming Messiah at the heart of that eschatological frame. In a sense, then, the Pentateuch as a whole, from beginning to end, may be seen as Messianic eschatology.
The following chart provides a visual display of the eschatological, Christ-centered macrostructure of the Pentateuch:
42
For the overall chiastic structure of the Pentateuch, see Yehuda Radday (1972, p. 21–23 1981, p. 84–86). For the chiastic structure of the
central book of Leviticus, with its theological and structural center in Lev 16, see William Shea (1986, p. 131–168). For additional evidence that
Leviticus 16 is both the structural and theological center of Leviticus, see Wilfried Warning (1999, p. 86–87,178). For further evidence that Lev
16 is the center of Torah (the Pentateuch), see, e.g., Rolf Rendtorff (2003, p. 252–258).
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
32
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
Períod
Prologue
Patriarchal
narrative
Poetry
Epilogue
Exodus
narrative
Poetry
Epilogue
Wilderness
narrative (a)
Scripture
Gn 1–11
Gn 12–18
Gn 49
Gn 50
Ex 1–14
Ex 15a
Ex 15b
Ex 16–40
Gn 1:1
Eschatological "Beginning"
time
Gn 6:13
"End"
Person of the
Messiah
vv. 16-17
Future orientation
Gn 49:1
"In the last days"
Gn 3:15
The "Seed"
Gn 22:17-18
The "Seed"
v. 10
Shiloh (King)
vv. 22, 24
Suffering one
vv. 22, 24
Divine
Períod
Wilderness
narrative (b)
Poetry
Epilogue
Wilderness
narrative (c)
Scripture
Nm 1–22
Nm 23–24
Nm 25
Nm 26 – Dt 31
Eschatological
time
24:14
"In the last days"
Person of the
Messiah
23:22; 24:8,
17-19
Conquering
King (star,
scepter)
New exodus
Poetry
Epilogue
Dt 32–33
Dt 34
31:29
"In the last days"
Dt 18:15, 18;
34:10
The prophet
like Moses
33:8
The levitical
priest
Moving briefly to the rest of the Old Testament, we see a similar stiching that connects the
Torah to the Prophets and the Prophets to the Writings. The stitching that connects Torah to Prophets is “the last 8 verses of the Torah” (as the Talmud calls it), Deut 34:5-12, which describe the death
of Moses, and succession by Joshua. The crucial verse for our purposes in this passage is v. 10: “But
since then there has not arisen in Israel a prophet like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face.”
This verse is clearly an echo of Deut 18:15-16, which predicts an eschatological prophet to arise in
the future. The individualistic description of this prophet in Deut 34:5-7 indicates that this passage
was written long after Moses’ time and the next generations after him, and pointed to a specific eschatological prophet, not just the prophetic office. As Sailhamer summarizes, “In the last eight verses of Deuteronomy, however, Moses’ words in chap. 18 are read futuristically and individualistically.
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
33
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
In other words, these verses appear to interpret the words of Moses in chap. 18 typologically and
eschatologically, precisely the way these words are read in the NT (Acts 3:22; 7:37)” (SAILHAMER,
1987, p. 315). Sailhamer does not examine the relationship between the last eight verses of the Torah
and Joshua (the person and his book). I suggest that by the positioning of this announcement that
no prophet had arisen like Moses immediately after the verse describing Moses’ successor Joshua
(Deut 34:9), it is clear that Joshua was not that predicted prophet. At the same time, by juxtapositioning the last eight verses of the Torah just before the book of Joshua, and in harmony with the
repetition of numerous descriptions of Joshua in the book of Joshua that are fashioned after those of
Moses, it becomes apparent that the final editor of the canon (probably Ezra) considered Joshua to
be a pre-figuration along the way to the messianic New Moses that was to arise (see my discussion
in DAVIDSON, 1995, p. 24-35; and the passages listed on chart 2, p. 19).
Furthermore, if God’s central charge to Joshua as he took up his responsibilities was to
focus upon the Torah (Josh 1:7), and if (as we have already seen) the compositional strategy of
Moses throughout the Torah was to highlight messianic eschatology, then this call to focus on the
Torah at the beginning of Joshua (and the Former Prophets) may provide another eschatological
link at the seam between the Torah and the Prophets.
Sailhamer also briefly looks at Mal 3:22-24 [English, 4:4-6], the final verses of the Prophets,
which he suggests the final shaper of the canon consciously placed at the stitching between the
Prophets and the Writings.43 He rightly notes the eschatological focus of these last verses of Malachi with its description of the Day of the Lord. I would suggest we can go further by recognizing
the messianic emphasis of the final chapter of Malachi (3:1-2, Hebrew and English) with the Messenger of the Covenant, as well as the messianic reference to the Sun of Righteousness (Mal 3:20;
English, 4:2). In the final verses of the Prophets, we can also see the same call to remember the
Torah as appears in the first verses of the Prophets (Josh 1:7-8). Thus an emphasis upon Torah and
messianic eschatology emerges from the end of the Prophets.
We may move even further by looking at the beginning of the Writings, with which the
Prophets are spliced in the canon. The first book of the Writings is the Psalms. The introduction
to the Psalms is comprised of Psalms 1-2, the only psalms in the first book of the Psalms (1-42)
which have no superscription. These Psalms are clearly set at the doorway of the Psalms, and in
effect, at the doorway of the Writings. It is not without significance that these two introductory
psalms highlight the same themes with which the Prophets end — the Torah (Psalm 1) and Messianic eschatology (Psalm 2). Here again at the juncture of the major canonical blocks of books,
attention is drawn back to the Torah (and implicitly its eschatological framework), and explicitly
to the Final Eschatological Battle centered in King Messiah.44
As a final aspect of the eschatological-Messianic literary structure of the Old Testament,
we may note the canonical “conclusion” of the Hebrew Bible, which is open-ended and actually
“begs” to be spliced onto the eschatological and messianic fulfillment of salvation history yet to
43
I don’t understand Sailhamer to mean that the final shaper of the canon added these words to Malachi, but that he chose Malachi to be the
last book of Prophets at least partly because its final verses provided the perfect stitch with the Writings.
44
For discussion of the Messianic character of Psalms 1-2, see Robert Cole (2013); cf. Christine M. Vetne (2018, p. 6-7). According Richard M.
Davidson and Edgard A. Horna (forthcoming): “Psalms 1-2 thereby introduce the Psalter with a unique and life-saving invitation for all people
to seek refuge in the Messiah and to follow in his footsteps. The rest of the Psalter develops these concepts, explaining how the Messiah is able to
save humanity and give them access to the kingdom of God.”
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
34
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
come. 2 Chronicles 36, the final chapter in the Hebrew Bible, like the other junctures we have
examined thus far, climaxes in the eschatological deliverance of Israel from Babylon after the land
had “kept Sabbath, to fulfill seventy years” (2 Chr 36:21). And it ends with the decree of Cyrus,
who elsewhere in Scripture is shown to be a type of the Messiah in His Final Eschatological Battle
(Isa 44:28; 45:1; Rev 16:12). These connections may be diagrammed as follows:
The Eschatological Literary Structure of the Old Testament: Prophets and Writings
Writings (Kethubim)
Prophets (Nebui’im)
Introduction
Conclusion
Introduction
Joshua
Malachi 3-4
Psalms 1-2
Conclusion
2 Chronicles 36
Eschatological
Time
Focus on (eschatological)
Eschatological deliveTorah (Ps 1)
rance of Israel from
Focus on (eschatological)
Day of the Lord (4:1, 5)
Babylon
Torah (1:7)
Final Eschatological
(36:22-23)
Battle (Ps 2)
Person of the
Messiah
Joshua: A type of the
eschatological prophet
like Moses (1:5; cf. Num
13:8, 16; Deut 18:15-17;
34:10-12; Exod 23:23;
Deut 31:3, 23; Isa 49:8)
Messenger of the covenant (3:1-3)
Messianic king
(Ps 2)
Cyrus a type of the
Messiah (36:22; cf. Isa
44:28; 45:1)
In summary for this section, the overarching literary macrostructure of the entire Old Testament may be said to be eschatological, centered in the end-time appearance and work of the
Messiah, and thus all the OT Scriptures ultimately are centered in the Messiah.
Conclusion
In light of the multi-faceted indicators of Christ in the Old Testament which have been illustrated in this study, Jesus’ sweeping claim in Luke 24 needs to be taken seriously. While we do
not know in detail what Jesus said to the two disciples on the way to Emmaus on Resurrection
Sunday, when Luke records that He “expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself ” (Luke 24:27), this statement proves not be a hyperbole after all. Moreover, instead
of Jesus (and the NT writers) reading back into the Old Testament a meaning foreign to the original context, as often claimed, Jesus’ “hermeneutic” (diermeneuō, explicitly used in this verse) on
the way to Emmaus, and that of the NT writers who followed His example of interpretation, was
not different, after all, than the original eschatological-messianic hermeneutic of the Old Testament writers themselves. Indeed, ultimately, Christ is found in all Old Testamant Scripture!
Referências
ALEXANDER, T. D. Further Observations on the Term “Seed” in Genesis. Tyndale Bulletin, v. 48,
p. 363-367, 1997.
ALLISON JR., D. C. The New Moses: A Matthaen Typology. Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1993.
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
35
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
ANTIĆ, R. Cain, Abel, Seth, and the Meaning of Human Life as Portrayed in the Books of Genesis
and Ecclesiastes. Andrews University Seminary Studies, v. 44, p. 203-211, 2006.
ARCHER, G.; CHIRICHIGNO, G. Old Testament Quotations in the New Testament. Chicago:
Moody, 1983.
BALENTINE, G. The Concept of the New Exodus in the Gospels. Th.D. dissertation, Southern
Baptist Theological Seminary,1961.
BATEMAN IV, H. W.; BOCK, D. L.; JOHNSTON, G. H. Jesus the Messiah: Tracing the Promises,
Expectations, and Coming of Israel’s King. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2012.
BEALE, G. K. Did Jesus and His Followers Preach the Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? An
Examination of the Presuppositions of Jesus’s and the Apostles’ Exegetical Method. In: BEALE, G. K.
(Ed.). The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the
New. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994.
BEALE, G. K. Finding Christ in the Old Testament. Journal of Evangelical Theological Society, v.
63, n. 1, p. 30-43, 2020.
BEALE, G. K. Handbook on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament: Exegesis and
Interpretation. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2012.
BEALE, G. K. The Use of Hosea 11:1 in Matthew 2:15: One More Time. Journal of Evangelical
Theological Society, v. 55, p. 697-715, 2012.
BIRD, C. L. Typological Interpretation within the Old Testament: Melchizedekian Typology.
Concordia Journal, v. 26, n. 1, p. 36-52, 2000.
BOCK, D. Single Meaning, Multiple Contexts and Referents: The New Testament’s Legitimate,
Accurate, and Multifaceted Use of the Old. In: BERDING, K.; LUNDE, K. (Ed.). Three View on the
New Testament Use of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2008.
BORLAND, J. A. Christ in the Old Testament. Chicago: Moody, 1978.
BLOCK, D. I. Ruth, Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the Old Testament: A Discourse
Analysis of the Hebrew Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2015.
BRODIE, T. L. Jesus as the New Elijah: Cracking the Code. The Expository Times, v. 93, n. 2, 1981.
BRODIE, T. L. Luke-Acts as an Imitation and Emulation of the Elijah-Elisha Narrative. In: RICHARD,
E. (Ed.). New Views on Luke and Acts. Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1990.
BRODIE, T. L. The Crucial Bridge: The Elijah-Elisha Narrative as an Interpretive Synthesis of
Genesis-Kings and a Literary Model for the Gospels. Collegeville: Liturgical, 2000.
BROWN, R. Jesus and Elisha. Perspective (Pittsburg), v. 12, n. 1-2, p. 84-104, 1971.
BULLOCK, C. H. Ezekiel, Bridge between the Testaments. Journal of Evangelical Theological
Society, v. 25, n. 1, 1982.
CASSUTO, U. The Documentary Hypothesis. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1961.
CHEN, K. Eschatological Sanctuary in Exodus 15:17 and Related Texts. New York: Peter Lang,
2013. (Studies in Biblical Literature, 154.)
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
36
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
CHISHOLM JR., R. B. A Commentary on Judges and Ruth. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2013. (Kregel
Exegetical Library.)
CHOU, A. The Hermeneutics of the Biblical Writers: Learning to Interpret Scripture from the
Prophets and Apostles. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2018.
COLE, R. Psalms 1-2: Gateway to the Psalter. Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, 2013.
COLLINS, J. A Syntactical Note (Genesis 3:15): Is the Woman’s Seed Singular or Plural? Tyndale
Bulletin, v. 48, p. 139-148, 1997.
CULLMANN, O. Christ and Time: The Primitve Christian Conception of Time and History.
Philadelphia: Westminster, 1950.
CULLMANN, O. Salvation in History.New York: Harper & Row, 1965.
DAUBE, D. The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism. London: Athlone, 1965.
DAVIDSON, J. A. Eschatology and Genesis 22. Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, v. 11,
n. 1-2, p. 232-247, 2000.
DAVIDSON, J. A. Gospel and Queen: Esther’s Christological Narrative Theology. Paper presented
at the ETS annual meetings, San Diego, CA, Nov 20, 2019.
DAVIDSON, R. M. Back to the Beginning: Genesis 1–3 and the Theological Center of Scripture. In:
HEINZ, D.; MOSKALA, J.; VAN BEMMELEN, P. M. (Eds.). Christ, Salvation, and the Eschaton.
Berrien Springs: Old Testament Publications, 2009.
DAVIDSON, R. M. Cosmic Metanarrative for the Coming Millennium. Journal of the Adventist
Theological Society. v. 11, n. 1–2, 2000.
DAVIDSON, R. M. How Shall a Person Stand before God? What is the Meaning of Justification? In:
MOSKALA, J. (Ed.). God’s Character and the Last Generation. Nampa: Pacific Press, 2018.
DAVIDSON, R. M. In the Footsteps of Joshua. Hagerstown: Review and Herald Publishing
Assoc., 1995.
DAVIDSON, R. M. Inner-biblical Hermeneutics: The Use of Scripture by Bible Writers. In: HASEL,
F. M. (Ed.). Biblical Hermeneutics: An Adventist Approach. Silver Springs: Biblical Research
Institute; Review & Herald Academics, 2020.
DAVIDSON, R. M. Interpreting Scripture: An Hermeneutical ‘Decalogue. Journal of the Adventist
Theological Society, v. 4, n. 2, p. 95-114, 1993.
DAVIDSON, R. M. Israel and the Church: Continuity and Discontinuity—I and II. In: RODRIGUEZ,
A. M. Message, Mission, and the Unity of the Church. 2. ed. Silver Spring: Biblical Research
Institute, 2013. (Biblical Research Institute Studies in Adventist Ecclesiology.)
DAVIDSON, R. M. New Testament Use of the Old Testament. Journal of the Adventist Theological
Society, v. 5, p. 23-28, 1994.
DAVIDSON, R. M. Proverbs 8 and the Place of Christ in the Trinity. Journal of the Adventist
Theological Society, v. 17, n. 1, p. 33-54, 2006.
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
37
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
DAVIDSON, R. M. Sanctuary Typology. In: HOLBROOK, F. B. (Ed.). Symposium on Revelation–
Book I. Silver Spring: Biblical Research Institute, 1992. (Daniel and Revelation Committee Series, 6.)
DAVIDSON, R. M. The Eschatological Hermeneutic of Biblical Typology. TheoRhēma, v. 6, n. 2,
p. 5-48, 2011.
DAVIDSON, R. M. The Eschatological Literary Structure of the Old Testament. In: MOSKALA, J.
Creation, Life, and Hope: Essays in Honor of Jacques B. Doukhan. Berrien Springs: Old Testament
Department, Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, Andrews University, 2000
DAVIDSON, R. M. The Meaning of Nitsdaq in Daniel 8:14. Journal of the Adventist Theological
Society, v. 7, n. 1, p. 107-119, 1996.
DAVIDSON, R. M. The Messianic Hope in Isaiah 7:14 and the Volume of Immanuel (Isaiah 7–12).
In: PRÖBSTLE, M.; KLINGBEIL, G. A.; KLINGBEIL, M. G. “For You Have Strengthened Me”:
Biblical and Theological Studies in Honor of Gerhard Pfandl in Celebration of His Sixty-Fifth
Birthday. St. Peter am Hart: Seminar Schloss Bogenhofen, 2007.
DAVIDSON, R. M. Typology in Scripture: A Study of Hermeneutical Τύπος Structures. Berrien
Springs: Andrews University Press, 1981.
DAVIDSON, R. M.; HORNA, E. A. The Messiah Paves the Way: An Outline of the Psalter’s Shape
and Purpose. In: DAVIDSON, R. M.; HORNA, E. A. (Ed.). When He Calls On Me, I will Answer
Him: Selected Studies in the Psalms. Berrien Springs: Adventist Theological Society, (forthcoming).
DAVIDSON, R. New Testament Use of the Old Testament. Journal of the Adventist Theological
Society, v. 5, n. 1, p. 14-39, 1994.
DIOP, G. Innerbiblical Interpretation: Reading the Scriptures Intertextually. In: REID, G. W. (Ed.).
Understanding Scripture: An Adventist Approach. Silver Springs: Biblical Research Institute, 2005.
DODD, C. H. According to the Scriptures. London: Collins, 1952.
DOUKHAN, J. On the Way to Emmaus: Five Major Messianic Prophecies Explained. Clarksville:
Lederer Books, 2012.
DYRNESS, W. Themes in Old Testament Theology. Downers Grove: InterVArsity, 1979.
ELLIS, E. E. Paul’s Use of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1981.
EMADI, S. C. Christ, Typology, and the Story of Joseph: A Literary-Canonical Examination of
Genesis 37-50. PhD dissertation, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 2016.
ENNS, P. Inspiration and Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament. Grand
Rapids: Baker, 2015.
ESTELLE, B. Echoes of Exodus: Tracing a Biblical Motif. Downers Grove: IVP Academics, 2018.
FREEMAN, T. R. A New Look at the Genesis 5 and 11 Fluidity Problem. Andrews University
Seminary Studies, v. 42, p. 259-286, 2004.
GAGE, W. The Gospel in Genesis. Winona Lake: Carpenter, 1984.
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
38
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
GANE, R. E. Old Testament Law for Christians: Original Context and Enduring Application.
Grand Rapids: Baker, 2017.
HAMILTON JR., J. M. God’s Glory in Salvation through Judgment: A Biblical Theology. Wheaton:
Crossway, 2010.
HAMILTON JR., J. M. The Skull Crushing Seed of the Woman: Inner-Biblical Interpretation of
Genesis 3:15. Southern Baptist Journal of Theology, v. 10, 2006.
HAMILTON JR., J. M. The Typology of David’s Rise to Power: Messianic Patterns in the Book of
Samuel. Southern Baptist Journal of Theology, v. 16, v. 2, p. 4-25, 2012.
HASEL, G. F. Covenant in Blood. Mountain View; Nampa: Pacific Press, 2012.
HASEL, G. F. Genesis 5 and 11: Chronogenealogy in the Biblical History of Beginnings. Origins, v.
7, p. 23-37, 1980.
HASEL, G. F. New Testament Theology: Basic Issues in the Current Debate.Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1978.
HASEL, G. F. Old Testament Theology: Basic Issues in the Current Debate. 4. ed. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1991.
HASEL, G. F. Remnant. In: CRIM, K. (Ed.). The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible,
Supplementary Volume. Nashville: Abigdon Press, 1976.
HASEL, G. F. The Remnant: The History and Theology of the Remnant Idea from Genesis to Isaiah.
2. ed. Berrien Springs: Andrews University Press, 1972.
HAYS, R. B. Echoes of Scripture in the Gospels. Waco: Baylor University Press, 2016.
HAYS, R. B. Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989.
HUNTER, T.; WELLUM, S. Christ from Beginning to End: How the Full Story of Scripture Reveals
the Full Glory of Christ. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2018.
INSTONE-BREWER, D. Techniques and Assumptions in Jewish Exegesis before 70 CE. Tübingen:
J. C. B. Mohr, 1992.
JOHNSON, N. C. The Passion according to David: Matthew’s Arrest Narrative, Absalom’’ Revolt,
and Militant Messianism. Catholic Biblical Quarterly, v. 80, n. 2, p. 247-272, 2018.
KAISER JR., W. C. Single Meaning, Unified Referents: Accurate and Authoritative Citations of the
Old Testament by the New Testament. In: BERDING, K.; LUNDE, K. (Eds.). Three View on the
New Testament Use of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2008.
KAISER JR., W. C. The Messiah in the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995.
KAISER JR., W. C. The Uses of the Old Testament in the New. Chicago: Moody Press, 1985.
KENNEDY, J. The Recapitulatiopn of Israel: Use of Israel’s History in Matthew 1:1—4:11. Tübingen:
Mohr Siebeck, 2008.
KLINGBEIL, G. Genesis Creation Account and Its Reverberations in the Old Testament. Berrien
Springs: Andrews University Press, 2015.
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
39
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
KLOPPENBORG, J. S.; VERHEYDEN, J. (Eds.). The Elijah-Elisha Narrative in the Composition
of Luke. Tondon: Bloomsbury Academic, 2014.
LADD, G. E. The Presence of the Future: The Eschatology of Biblical Realism. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1974.
LATCHMAN, G. G. The Revelation of Jesus Christ according to Esther. Unpublished paper, 2012.
LEAL, J. Indicators of Typology in the Narrative of Elijah: An Investigation into the Predictive
Nature of the Typological Use of the Old Testament in the New Testament. PhD dissertation,
Andrews Unversity [forthcoming].
POLLARD, L. N. The Function of Loipos [remnant] in Contexts of Judgment and Salvation in
the Book of Revelation. PhD dissertation, Andrews University, 2007.
LONGENECKER, R. N. Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975.
MACCARTY, S. In Granite or Ingrained? What the Old and New Covenants Reveal about the
Gopel, the Law, and the Sabbath. Berrien Springs: Andrews University Press, 2007.
MCCASLAND, S. V. Matthew Twists the Scriptures. Journal of Biblical Literature, v. 80, p. 143-148,
1961.
MCCOMISKEY, T. E. The Covenants of Promise: A Theology of the Old Testament Covenants.
Grand Rapids: Baker, 1985.
MITCHELL, C. W. The Song of Songs. St. Louis: Concordia, 2003. (Concordia Commentary.)
MOO, D. J. The Problem of Sensius Plenior. In: CARSON, D. A.; WOODBRIDGE, J. D. (Eds.).
Hermeneutics, Authority, and Canon. Grand Rapids: Zonzervan, 1986.
MORRIS, H. The Remarkable Birth of Planet Earth. Minneapolis: Bethany Fellowship, 1972.
MOSKALA, J. Toward Consistent Adventist Hermeneutics: From Creation through De-Creation
to Re-Creation. In: REEVE, J. W. (Ed.). Women and Ordination: Biblical and Historical Studies.
Nampa: Pacific Press, 2015.
MOSKALA, J. Toward Trinitarian Thinking in the Hebrew Scriptures. Journal of the Adventist
Theological Society, v. 21, n. 1-2, p. 245-275, 2010.
MULZAC, K. D. The Remnant Motif in the Context of Judgment and Salvation in the Book of
Jeremiah. PhD dissertation, Andrews University, 1995.
NINOW, F. Indicators of Typology within the Old Testament: the Exodus Motif. Frankfort am
Main, New York: P. Lang, 2001.
NICOLE, R. The New Testament Use of the Old Testament. In: BEALE, G. K. (Ed.). The Right Doctrine
from the Wrong Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994.
NOVAKOVIC, L. Jesus as the Davidic Messiah in Matthew. Horizonts in Biblical Theology, v. 19,
n.1, p. 148-191, 1997.
NUNES, L. Function and Nature of the Heavenly Sanctuary/Temple in the New Testament: A
Motif Study. PhD dissertation, Andrews University, 2020.
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
40
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
OJEWOLE, A. O. The Seed in Genesis 3:15: An Exegetical and Intertextual Study. Berrien Springs:
ATS Publications, 2002.
PAPAIOANNOU, K.; GIANTZAKLIDIS, I. (Eds.). Earthly Shadows, Heavenly Realities: Temple/
Sanctuary Cosmology in Ancient Near Eastern, Biblial, and Early Jewish Literature. Berrien Springs:
Andrews University Press, 2017.
PAULIEN, J. Decoding Revelation’s Trumpets: Literary Allusions and the Interpretation of
Revelation 8:7-12. Berrien Springs: Andrews University Press, 1988.
PAYNE, J. B. Encyclopedia of Biblical Prophecy. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1973.
RADDAY, Y. Chiasm in Tora. Linguistica Biblica, v. 19, p. 21-23, 1972.
RADDAY, Y. Chiasmus in Hebrew Biblical Narrative. In: WELCH, J. (Ed.). Chiasmus in Antiquity.
Hildesheim: Gerstenberg Verlag, 1981.
RENDTORFF, R. Leviticus 16 als Mitte der Tora. Biblical Interpretation, v. 11, p. 252-258, 2003.
ROBERTSON, O. P. Christ of the Covenants. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1980.
ROBERTSON, O. P. The Christ of the Covenants. Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed
Publishing Co., 1980.
RYDELNIK, M. The Messianic Hope: Is the Hebrew Bible Really Messianic? Nashville: Broadman
and Holman, 2010. (NAC Studies in Bible and Theology.)
SAILHAMER, J. H. The Canonical Approach to the Old Testament: Its Effect on Understanding
Prophecy. Journal of Evangelical Theological Society, v. 30, n. 3, 1987.
SAILHAMER, J. H. The Pentateuch as Narrative: A Biblical-Theological Commentary. Grand
Rapids: Zondervan, 1992.
SAILHAMER, J. The Pentateuch as Narrative. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992.
SANER, A. D. Too Much to Grasp: Exodus 3:13-15 and the Reality of God. Winona Lake:
Eisenbrauns, 2015. (Journal of Theological Interpretation Supplement, 11.)
SHEA, W. Literary Form and Theological Function in Leviticus. In: HOLBROOK, F. (Ed.). Seventy
Weeks, Leviticus, and the Nature of Prophecy. Washington: Biblical Research Institute, 1986.
(Daniel and Revelation Committee Series, 3).
SHUPAK, N. Where Can Wisdom Be Found? The Sage’s Language in the Bible and in Ancient
Egyptian Literature. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1993.
SIGVARTSEN, J. Å. Messiah ben Joseph: A Type in both Jewish and Christian Traditions, Wilmore:
GlossaHouse, 2018. (GlossaHouse Studies in Texts and Languages, 1.)
SMITH, J. E. What the Bible Teaches about the Promised Messiah. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1993.
SMITH, M. New Testament Writers Use the Old Testament. Enc, v. 26, 1965.
SOULEN, R. K. The Sign of Jonah. Theology Today, v. 65, p. 331-343, 2008.
STRAND, K. A. (Ed.). The Sabbath in Scripture and History. Washington: Review and Herald, 1982.
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
41
REVISTA KERYGMA | Christ in all Scripture: an Old Testament Perspective
STRAUSS, H. Motif und Strukturen von Umkehrungssprüchen in Ägypten und im Alten Testament
(Buch Hiob). Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, v. 115, p. 25-37, 2003.
STUART, D. K. Exodus. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2006. (The New American
Commentary, v. 2.)
VAN GRONINGEN, G. Messianic Revelation in the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1990.
VAN RULER, A. A. The Christian Church and the Old Testament.Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1971.
VETNE, C. M. El Mesías allana el camino: Un bosquejo de la forma y la estructura del Salterio. In:
DAVIDSON, R. M.; HORNA, E. A. (Eds.). “Me invocarás, y yo te responderé”: Estudios selectos
en el Salterio. Lima: Ediciones Theologika, 2018.
WALTON, J. H. Genesis. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001.
WARNING, W. Literary Artistry in Leviticus. Leiden: Brill, 1999. (Biblical Interpretation Series, 39).
WATTS, J. D. Isaiah 1-33. Waco: Word, 1985. (World Biblical Commentary.)
WENHAM, G. J. Genesis 1-15. Waco: Word, 1987. (World Biblical Commentary).
WERE, L. The Kings that Come from the Sunrising: A Survey a Challenge, a Prophecy. Berrien
Springs: First Impressions, 1983.
WHEELER, D. M. Paul’s Use of the Old Testament in Gal 3:16. Th.D. dissertation, Dallas
Theological Seminary, 1987.
WHITE, B. Adam to Joshua: Tracing a Paragenealogy. Andrews University Seminary Studies, v.
54, n. 1, 2016.
WHITE, B. Revisiting Genesis 5 and 11: A Close Look at the Chronogenealogies. Andrews
University Seminary Studies, v. 53, p. 253-277, 2015.
WIFALL, W. R. Gen 3:15: A Protoevangelium? Catholic Biblical Quarterly, v. 36, 1972.
WILCOX, M. “Upon the Tree”—Deut 21:22-23 in the New Testament. Journal of Biblical Literature,
v. 96, p. 94-97, 1977.
WILKINSON, R. J. Tetragrammation: Western Christians and the Hebrew Name of God: From the
Beginnings to the Seventeenth Century. Leiden: Brill, 2015.
YAHUDA, A. S. The Language of the Pentateuch in its Relation to Egyptian. London: Oxford, 1933.
Kerygma, Engenheiro Coelho, SP, volume 16, número 1, p. 13-42, 1º semestre de 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.19141/1809-2454.kerygma.v16.n1.p13-42
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo - Unasp
42