CYPRESSWOOD CHURCH OF CHRIST
August 30, 2009
25424 Aldine-Westfield, Spring, TX. 77373
www.blakehart.com/cypresswoodbulletin.htm
www.cypresswoodchurchofchrist.com
BLESSINGS AND REQUESTS:
God’s will for our congregation Various friends, relatives and co-workers
Our nation, military and leaders For all that God has done for us
HAPPY SEPTEMBER BIRTHDAYS TO:
Sherry Everett (5th), Patteye Bricher (5th), Don Henderson (6th), Coco Ingram (6th), Heather Mearns (8th), Wilma Davenport (10th)
THE OLD IN THE NEW
“And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself” (Luke 24:27).
Modern Biblical studies by Bible believing scholars are really becoming exciting. In the last few decades we have seen theologians looking at scripture in exciting ways that not only challenge our views but also open up a better understanding of God’s word. As I have said before, theologians have looked at three areas in recent years; the political influences of the first century world, the Jewish aspects found in Jesus and Paul, and the importance of the Old Testament in New Testament studies.
Sometime last year, I read someone who stated that when we study the Gospel of John we should also keep open the Torah or first five books of scripture. John often refers to Moses, either directly or indirectly, in his study of Jesus. We can see it in a number of stories such as “In the beginning…” (John 1), the snake in the wilderness (John 3), Jacob’s well (John 4), the manna (John 6), and the mention of three Passovers. This is not to say that John did not refer to other Old Testament texts; these too should be looked at in there context.
Recently I read a little discussion online about Isaiah in Matthew (1). Isaiah seems to be prominently used in Matthew, Mark, and Luke as well as Acts (2). This background is important in helping us to understand the Gospels (2). Some will call it the New Exodus or refer to it as Israel still being in Exile looking for the new Moses, the Messiah, to lead them out of bondage. In churches of Christ in the past, we have not been that interested in the Old Testament. It is not that we have not studied the Old, we have, but rather we have emphasized the New in such a way that we really do not know the Old Testament as well as we should. That is changing.
Part of the problem for this is how we have seen scripture and our statement that we are New Testament Christians. We need to understand that the scriptures of the first century church was the Old Testament. That might help us realize why the Gospel writers appealed directly or indirectly to various Hebrew texts. With these new studies, one conclusion that can be drawn is that the early church had a much better knowledge of the Hebrew scriptures than what we might have thought. Paul defended himself with an appeal to Moses and the Prophets (Acts 26:22-23).
How we have seen the Old has also affected how we have interpreted scripture. Many Bible believers have read the Old in order to find out what prophecies Jesus fulfilled, and then declared those texts Messianic (that is, about the Messiah). One example would be Isaiah 7:14. Matthew uses this text and applies it to Jesus. We then call this a Messianic text, which it is. However, when reading Isaiah 7 (and it’s context from 7:1 through 9:7), in Isaiah’s day, they would not have seen it that way; and even in Jesus’ day, they would not have seen it that way either. To say this could get one in trouble. Jim McGuiggan related an article he read on Isaiah 7:14 where the author stated that anyone who did not see Isaiah 7:14 as a direct reference to Jesus was a false teacher. Jim disagreed with the author and found such a comment offensive. It is easy for us to look back and see these texts as Messianic because we have the New Testament to tell us. But that was not always the case even for the Gospel writers. In the opening text above from Luke 24:27, Jesus had to explain the scriptures to the two fellows that were with Him. This means He unfolded the meaning from verse to verse or interpreted the Old Testament texts. Then in Luke 24:44, Jesus said, “This is what I told you while I was still with you; Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.” Since their expectations was in a conquering Messiah, not a crucified One, they must come to understand those texts. “Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures” (verse 45). Jesus caused them to understand the scriptures about the suffering Messiah and the resurrection.
That helps explain why the Gospel writers could refer to Isaiah and other Old Testament texts and relate it to the fulfillment of scripture by Jesus. Keep in mind that the Gospels were written after the resurrection to the church. Each had an intended audience. Matthew wrote to Jewish believers about the Jewish Messiah, and in my opinion was the earliest written somewhere in the 40s A.D. (3). Mark wrote to Gentiles, possibly as the Gospel carried by Barnabas into the Gentile world to explain or introduce Jesus, though already establish churches would benefit from reading Mark.
Luke explains why he writes and to whom (1:1-4). Luke was the historian who investigated what was believed among the early Christians. Acts is a continuation of his history of what Jesus began to do and say (1:1). Luke was the only Gentile writer of scripture, yet he too appealed to the Hebrew scriptures to form his story of Jesus. Interests and purposes focus on the differences in the same stories told in all three Gospels.
John too has a purpose in writing around 80 A.D. He is probably writing to churches in Asia Minor wanting to cause belief, even among Christians who had not experienced the earlier days of the church, and to depend the belief of those believers (John 20:30-31). If John appeals to Moses frequently, then those to whom he is writing must have had an understanding of Moses. Again, if the Hebrew scriptures were the Bible of the early church, then it is understandable that the Gospel writers would refer to them directly and indirectly in their Gospels.
I am thankful that scholars in churches of Christ are opening up the Old Testament to examination and study that should impact our understanding of the New Testament. It is indeed an exciting time in Biblical studies.
Lord willing, we will look at Isaiah in Matthew next.
George B. Mearns
(1) Peter Wilkerson, Isaiah and Matthew’s Gospel, www.opensourcetheology.net
(2) Among scholars who have been looking at this are David Pao on Luke/Acts, Rikki Watts on Mark, and G.K. Beale in general on the Old Testament in the New.
(3) While this is a minority view in scholarly circles, I think it makes sense. The general view is that the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke are written before A.D. 70.