Theo Todman's Web Page - Notes Pages

Write-ups

David Allen - The New Testament’s Use of the Jewish Scriptures

(Text as at 01/07/2025 11:31:12)

Colour ConventionsPrevious VersionsNote ReferencesNon-Note ReferencesNon-Note Citations

Introductory Notes

  1. This is a short and cheap, but fairly dense, booklet1. It assumes the reader is very familiar with the Scriptures as they are often alluded to by verse without actual quotation. This can make it difficult to follow when reading while walking the dog.
  2. While the author deals with many interesting theoretical – and some technical – matters, the author’s primary aim is to persuade his readers that they will get more out of reading the NT if they know their OT – and take the time to follow up the quotations or allusions (without falling into what he calls ‘parallelomania’).
  3. This booklet is hardly the last word on the subject. The author is an expert and has written extensively on the topic. The booklet includes a brief bibliography, which isn’t the last word either. I didn’t (and don’t, apart from two2) have any of the works on the list, but did have others3 not mentioned.
  4. I’d read – and forgotten – a slightly eccentric OBT booklet on the topic by Roy Ginn4. Follow the link!
  5. I suppose the main utility of the Booklet is in the examples chosen, more of which later.
  6. In brief, the author points out the following important factors:-
    1. The NT authors were almost all Jews, steeped in the OT Scriptures. They therefore tried to make sense of the ‘Christ event’ in the light thereof. More on this later.
    2. The references to the OT in the NT presume familiarity on the part of the reader with the OT text and context.
    3. The NT authors use the expository techniques in common use at the time. Parallels are made with the Pseudepigrapha, Philo and the Dead Sea Scrolls.
  7. While the author has a high view of Scripture, he’s not a dispensationalist and has some opinions the readers of this Note are unlikely to share.
    1. He believes that Daniel is pseudonymous and refers to the time of Antiochus Epiphanes. This is hardly ‘out on a limb’ in academic circles.
    2. He thinks that 1 Corinthians is written exclusively to Gentiles so that when ‘our Fathers in the Wilderness’ are mentioned, he assumes this is because Israel according to the flesh has been replaced by ‘the Church’ (though he doesn’t actually use this term – just that ethnicity no longer has any relevance).
    3. The NT authors wrote in Greek and used the LXX5, the text of which was somewhat fluid and so gave the NT authors some quotational flexibility.
  8. In what follows, I pick out points of particular interest by Section of the Booklet, adding comments as I go along.
  9. I had added some contentious thoughts of my own at the end of this Note, but as these motivate my reading of this booklet, and reflect my concerns, I’ve moved them to the front – immediately below – lest the reader dies of exhaustion before getting that far. Not all my concerns are addressed by the Booklet.

My Own Contentious Thoughts
  1. The NT writers alluded to – or quoted from – the OT frequently, but what is their purpose in so doing, and is it as is often supposed by Christian apologists ancient and modern?
  2. I note first of all that there is a difference between – or at least no necessary connection between – the way the NT writers refer to the OT and the way modern (and ancient) believers might use it for devotional purposes, finding therein various levels of meaning – see my Note on "Ginn (Roy) - According to the Scriptures". For private purposes it doesn’t much matter whether the ‘echoes’ are really there or not.
  3. It is often suggested6 that there are thousands of OT ‘prophesies’ that have been fulfilled and that the probability of this happening is infinitesimal. If so, how come the Jews have never been convinced? Is it simply, as is sometimes claimed7, because Satan has blinded their eyes – hardly an argument to be applied in other contexts, IStM8.
  4. When we actually look at the quotations, they very rarely – IStM – follow the ‘Myles Coverdale’ injunction9 to consider the context. IStM that insisting that ‘this is what the Scripture really means’ (or is its deeper meaning, or some such) does a disservice. Faith is not a ‘work’ with the believer rewarded for believing six impossible things before breakfast10. After all, Biblical literalists tend to accuse ‘spiritualisers’ of not attending to the plain text of Scripture when they adopt fanciful exegesis. As is often said – ‘don’t try this at home’. I add here that it’s not just quotations that are at issue, but the use of Biblical passages
  5. I had wanted to discuss a couple of NT references to the book of Zechariah. Briefly …
    1. Zech 9:9 – Jesus evidently knew this ‘prophesy’ and adopted this mode of entry to Jerusalem to demonstrate his claim to kingship. So, it’s not a prophesy as such. There’s also some confusion in the NT as to whether he rode on one or two beasts, because of the Hebrew ambiguity in the ‘vav’ (‘and’ or ‘even’).
    2. Zech 11:13 – The potter and 30 pieces of silver. These were Zechariah’s wages and nothing to do with Judas. It wasn’t a prophesy. Also, Matthew 27:9 expands the quotation and attributes it to Jeremiah. There are various wheezes confidently posited – it was ‘spoken’ by Jeremiah, for instance, not written. But how is this supposed to work? How did Matthew know this, and how would his reader know how he knew it?
  6. So, how are we to explain things – assuming we don’t go along with those Jews who reject the Gospel on the grounds that the ‘Scriptural proofs’ are unsound?
  7. I have a couple of radical proposals:-
    1. Christianity is a ‘new religion’ that arose in the fertile soil of Judaism and the first believers – including, maybe, Jesus himself11 used their Scriptures to explain their response to what Jesus did and taught. That is, in response to ‘the Christ Event’.
    2. The NT writers – when they are arguing with Jews – use the standard argumentative techniques of the day which they hoped their interlocutors would find sympathetic and convincing.
  8. I find the first suggestion too radical, one to be adopted unless all else fails.
  9. The second suggestion has to be carefully handled. There can be valid ad hominem arguments12. Those with a high view of Scripture are not supposed to query some of Paul’s arguments even when they are – IStM – transparently dud13.

Sections and Main Points of Interest
  1. Introduction:
    • 1 Cor. 15.3-4: Jesus’ death and resurrection were In accordance with the Scriptures, but Paul cites no actual texts here – our author wishes he had!
    • Mark’s Gospel’s ‘retelling’ of the death of John the Baptist: Mark is usually the most succinct Gospel, but makes a point of stressing the connection between John the Baptist & Elijah. Our author sees parallels with this account and the travails of Elijah at the hands of Jezebel and John’s at the hands of Herodias, and between Ahab and Herod.
    • Eight ways the NT uses the OT:
      1. Formal Citation – ‘It is written’
      2. Allusion or Echo
      3. Catena of Passages
      4. Extended quotation
      5. Thematic as much as Lexical
      6. Appeal to a particular character
      7. Appeal to a wider narrative
      8. More subtle narratival invocation.
    • Choice of Text: Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic? Can have interpretive significance. Citation from 1 Enoch in Jude 14-15 raises the question of what texts count as Scripture14 and for whom.
    • Matthew’s Birth Narrative: The parallels between Jesus and Israel.
      1. Micah 5.2 in Matt. 2:5-6: Is Bethlehem ‘the least’ (Hebrew) or ‘by no means the least’ (LXX; and do we care)?
      2. Matt. 2:23: ‘He will be called a Nazorean’: No extant text.
      3. ‘Out of Egypt I have called my son’ (Matt 2:15, Hos. 11:1): Clearly Hosea originally refers to Israel as God’s son, so it’s not a prophecy as such. But, it’s introduced as a parallel, as is the whole descent into Egypt and return.
      4. Immanuel: Matt. 1:23 / Is. 7:14. Second naming (Jesus + Immanuel: Salvation and Judgement). Again, this isn’t a prophecy as such. ‘Virgin’ is in the Greek LXX, not the Hebrew; a mistranslation. In any case Is. 7:14 refers to Isaiah’s time. But, again, it’s a parallel.
    • Basically, our author thinks that the OT background to the passages alluded to amplifies or clarifies what the NT authors have to say, without necessarily justifying that usage.
  2. Sources: What Scriptural Texts are Used and in Which Form? :
    • Consider the significance for the NT to explain:-
      1. Change to the text cited.
      2. Whether / how the OT context affects the NT usage.
      3. Whether a source even existed.
    • Original OT Location: German Vorlage.
      • Melchizedek: Ps. 110.1ff – Heb. 1:13, etc. The most quoted15 OT passage? A specifically Christian – rather than Jewish16 – Messianic ‘go to’ passage.
      • Luke 4:18-21 (Jesus reading from the Isaiah scroll): Omission and inclusion – variation of the text17 to fit the situation.
      • Matt. 2:23: ‘He will be called a Nazorean’: No Vorlage. As noted above.
      • Mark 1:2-3: Attributed to Isaiah, but only part of it is (the rest is most likely Mal 3:1). Deceit, carelessness or vagueness? Fixed in later manuscripts.
    • Text Form:
      • Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT); but the NT writers wrote in Greek and used the Greek translations then in circulation.
      • Septuagint (LXX): Strictly-speaking no such thing as there were various textual forms18.
      • Deut. 32.4 has God personified as a Rock, but the LXX of this verse omits the reference. Our author says this implies that Paul – a Pharisee who knew Hebrew – had the Hebrew MT in mind19 when he suggests in 1 Cor. 10:4 that the Rock that followed the Israelites was Christ (an idea foreign to the OT text; more on which later).
      • While textual fluidity might allow a NT author to choose a text that suits his purposes, but he might not always have this option – he might only know one text20.
      • Ps. 40.6 / Heb. 10.5-6. MT of Ps. 40.6 has ‘You have given me an open ear’ whereas Heb. 10.5-6 has ‘a body you have prepared for me’ which reflects the LXX21 and is more suitable to the context in Hebrews.
      • Luke 22:37 and Is. 53:12 – Jesus was ‘counted amongst the transgressors’ – Isaiah is quoted to justify the ‘sword’, but Isaiah makes no mention of swords.
      • Quotations from the Song of Moses (Deut. 32.) in Hebrews: parallels between the handover from Moses to Joshua and to Jesus. I wasn’t sure of the relevance of this to the choice of Source.
      • 1 Cor. 15:3 ‘according to the Scriptures’ (mentioned earlier): no actual citations because there are none! A crucified Messiah was a contradiction in Jewish understanding, and the challenge to the early Church was to provide scriptural warrant. Our author suggests Dan 9:26 or Ps. 89:50-51, but neither is cited in the NT. But – overall – it’s an undisclosed amalgam of Scriptural texts and concepts that is appealed to.
      • Use of Amos 9:11-12 in Acts 15 (the Council of Jerusalem): Scriptural warrant is required for the inclusion of the Gentiles (rather than just the successes recounted by Peter, Barnabas & Paul). James cites the LXX version – which has the restoration of Israel leading to the inclusion of the Gentiles, the MT has it as the possession of the Gentiles. It’s possible that possession might ultimately lead to inclusion, but the author’s suggestion is that – rather than the LXX being a translation of the MT – it is a self-standing authority that the NT writers can appeal to when it suits their purposes.
  3. Methods: How are the Scriptural Texts Used in the New Testament? :
    • Two questions:-
      1. What techniques were open to the NT writers that were acceptable parameters for interpreting the OT in their time?
      2. Why are certain of these methods – rather than others – chosen by the NT authors?
    • Contemporary Methods of Reading and Interpreting Scripture
      • By ‘contemporary’, the author means – of course – the then contemporary methods open to the NT writer, not our own favoured methods!
      • He initially mentions several NT-contemporary methodologies; we can then look to see if there are any novel approaches introduced by the NT writers.
      • The contemporary methodologies are evidenced in the following sets of sources:-
        1. The Qumran Scrolls22.
        2. Helenistic Jewish interpreters, such as Philo of Alexandria23.
        3. The Pseudepigrapha24.
        4. What appears to be now called the ‘Rewritten Bible’: re-writing or reworking of Biblical texts; for example Jubilees25, a reworking Genesis / Exodus.
      • Reworking of the text seems to have been not only permissible but encouraged by various groups. Our author thinks this widens the scope of possible quotation or allusion.
      • Pesher:
        1. ‘Pesher’ means ‘interpretation’ and the Pesharim on the Prophets and Psalms are effectively verse-by-verse commentaries with application to the then present situation. The focus is on the fulfilment of prophecy26 in the here and now.
        2. The most famous Pesher is that on Habakkuk27. Our author focuses on this – in particular Hab. 2:4 as interpreted in Rom. 1:17, Gal. 3:11-12 and Heb. 10:38). Does the righteous person live by his own exercise of faith or as the result of Christ’s faithfulness? It seems the Qumran commentary has the faith to be in the Teacher of Righteousness28; all somewhat analogous to faith in Jesus. These ideas were evidently ‘in the air’, at least in some sects of Judaism.
        3. There are parallels to the NT approach – re-reading OT texts in the light of their own experience, in particular of Jeus Christ.
    • Why Read Scripture in a Particular Way?
      • Our author seeks to contrast the ways that Paul and James use the same Scriptures but find different messages therein. This all has to do with Abraham’s faith or faithfulness in Gen. 15.6 in Rom. 4.3, Gal. 3:6 and Jas. 2:23. He says that the consensus at the time was of faithfulness, so Paul’s approach is somewhat ‘innovative’. I note that the discussion is based on the Greek LXX. It looks to me as though the Hebrew is more to do with trust.
      • As an aside, "Goldberg (David) - This Is Not the Way: Jews, Judaism and Israel", which I’ve been reading in connection with Gaza and all that, claims that Judaism has always been a religion of deeds rather than beliefs29
    • Example: The Use of the Wilderness Narratives in 1 Corinthians 10.1–13
      • Our author thinks that Paul has taken a familiar text and reinterpreted it Christologically.
      • He takes it that it’s addressed to Gentiles, and considers – partly on this account – that there are various innovations, even though the core of the story is standard:-
        1. Israel is identified as the ancestors of30 Corinthian church.
        2. Israel’s wilderness experiences occurred ‘for us’ (1 Cor. 10.6). This is standard Pesher interpretation ‘ whatever happened in the past has relevance to31 the present situation.
        3. There is some reworking – with the ‘sustenance’ spiritualised.
      • Our author takes the reference to the ‘wandering rock’ being Christ as the most striking reworking. This is interesting!
        1. It seems this idea isn’t entirely innovatory32.
        2. Even so, what are we supposed to believe? That Christ (the pre-incarnate Jesus) wandered around in the wilderness for 40 years disguised as a rock? Or is the ‘was’ used figuratively – in the sense of ‘represented’ – as in ‘this is my body’?
  4. Presenting Issues :
    • I don’t know what the technical term ‘presenting issues’ means, but the author wants to know ‘What questions arise and what sort of matters should contemporary interpreters be attentive to when working with the biblical text?’.
    • He answers this by answering three further questions:-
      1. How Do We Know That the OT is Being Utilized?:
        • The author sees three options:-
          1. Direct signalling via a formal citation
          2. A phrase of image sufficiently familiar to the readership
          3. A more subtle echo.
        • For the ‘echoes’, the author cites Richard Hayes33, as below:-
          1. Availability: was the proposed source text available to the author and/or readers?
          2. Volume: how many points of connection are there? How loud is the mooted echo?
          3. Recurrence: does the author make similar appeal elsewhere?
          4. Thematic coherence: how does the echo accord with the overall argument being made?
          5. Historical plausibility: could the readers have reasonably understood or appropriated the echo?
          6. History of interpretation: have other subsequent interpreters heard the echo?
          7. Satisfaction: does the reading make sense—does it yield explanatory power?
        • The author thinks all this is somewhat subjective and thinks the ‘satisfaction’ criterion the most important – does it work and make an interpretive difference?
        • I suppose the real issue – if there is one – is whether it is us – the modern reader – who is finding these echoes useful for devotional reasons or whether either we – or the original NT writer – intends the echoes for doctrinal reasons.
      2. What ‘Extra’ Context Comes with the OT Citation?
        • There are basically two issues:-
          1. There’s an assumption that the readers ‘get it’, that they recognise the OT reference.
          2. There’s a question as to how much of the wider OT context of the reference is relevant in the NT context. Often none, in my view.
        • The author cites ‘1966’ and ‘To be or not to be’ as modern parallels. Not everyone will recognise the significance of 1966, and not everyone will remember or even know the context of Hamlet, nor will it often be relevant34.
        • The author cites 1 Cor. 10:7 where there’s reference to Israel ‘rising up to play’. This only has meaning if you know the original context.
      3. What About the OT Context — Can it Change?:
        • I’ve not had time to follow up the threads here, so just cite the first two paragraphs, which are worthy of consideration:-
        • When an OT text is cited or referenced in the NT, it assumes a new context. This raises a further question for us — can the meaning of an OT text change or develop when it is used by a NT author? Specifically, must its usage — and meaning — necessarily be consistent with the OT precedent, or can it instead progress or evolve? Or can it even change and do something quite different from its prior usage?
        • At the very least, something changes in/with the OT text when the NT author references it. Because the cited text assumes a different context, it is necessarily invested with new or fresh meaning, and with meaning that might seem inconsistent with the prior OT context. But at the same time, to restrict the interpretation of the prior Scripture to merely one sense or understanding is itself problematic. OT authorial intent does not imply a singularity of meaning. Even within its original context, the scriptural text will be understood differently by different readers.
    • Example: Scriptural Usage in Mark 14.62
      • Again, I’ve not had time to follow up the threads here.
      • The reference is to Jesus’ claim before the high priest that he is both Daniel’s Son of Man (Dan. 7:13) and the one who sit’s at YWHW’s right hand (Ps. 110.1).
      • The question is how much of the context of these two implied references is brought forward into the present context.
  5. Concluding Thoughts : These are worth quoting in full:-
    • Broadly speaking, the NT authors read the OT in the light of the Christ event, and mediated by their faith in Jesus Christ. This generated a significant element of what we might term ‘reading backwards,’ namely reading Jesus Christ into the text of the Jewish Scriptures in ways that yielded some surprising claims. The fourth gospel, for example, avers that Moses specifically wrote about Jesus (John 5.46), or Hebrews ventures that Moses suffered abuse for Christ whilst in Egypt (Heb 11.26). But equally their scriptural reading might operate forwards too, with Christ understood as the telos or goal of the Law (Rom 10.4). Either way, their Christological lens is the focal interpretive one.
    • This means that differences emerge between how respective NT interpreters read Israel’s Scriptures — and reminds us that there is not just one ‘correct’ meaning to an OT text. There is a plurality of OT textual meaning, and the NT writers’ varying usage of Israel’s Scriptures testifies to this.
    • Therefore, just because the NT author has read an OT text in a particular fashion, it need not mean that that is the only — or even the best — way to read it. But their reading can be helpful nonetheless; the NT authors enable us to understand the OT better, to recognize and assess the various interpretative options an OT text might (or might not) yield. We are encouraged to engage with the OT for ourselves and to make sense of it in our own context, just as the NT authors themselves did in the light of Jesus Christ.
    • And when assessing how a NT author utilises an OT text, we will want to be attentive to textual fluidity — to the source of the citation and to its wider context. Asking why and how the OT is being used will be interpretatively fruitful for us as modern readers of both Testaments.


In-Page Footnotes:

Footnote 1: Footnote 2: Footnote 3: Footnote 4: Footnote 5: Footnote 6: Footnotes 7, 9: Footnote 8: Footnote 10: Footnote 11: Footnote 12: Footnote 13: Footnote 14: Footnote 15: Footnote 16: Footnote 17: Footnote 18: Footnote 19: Footnote 20: Footnote 21: Footnote 22: Footnote 23: Footnote 24: Footnote 25: Footnote 26: Footnote 27: Footnote 28: Footnote 29: Footnote 30: Footnote 31: Footnote 32: Footnote 33: Footnote 34:

Previous Version of this Note:

Date Length Title
19/05/2025 09:07:12 21049 David Allen - The New Testament’s Use of the Jewish Scriptures


Note last updated Reading List for this Topic Parent Topic
01/07/2025 11:31:12 None available None

Summary of Notes Referenced by This Note

Intuition        

To access information, click on one of the links in the table above.



Authors, Books & Papers Citing this Note

Author Title Medium Extra Links Read?
Allen (David) The New Testament’s Use of the Jewish Scriptures Book High Quality Abstract   Yes


References & Reading List

Author Title Medium Source Read?
Ginn (Roy) According to the Scriptures Book - Cited Medium Quality Abstract Ginn (Roy) - According to the Scriptures Yes
Goldberg (David) This Is Not the Way: Jews, Judaism and Israel Book - Cited Medium Quality Abstract Goldberg (David) - This Is Not the Way: Jews, Judaism and Israel Yes
Harris (J.G.) The Qumran Commentary on Habakkuk Book - Cited Medium Quality Abstract Harris (J.G.) - The Qumran Commentary on Habakkuk Yes
Instone-Brewer (David) Techniques and Assumptions in Jewish Exegesis before 70 CE Book - Cited Medium Quality Abstract Instone-Brewer (David) - Techniques and Assumptions in Jewish Exegesis before 70 CE 3%
Jobes (Karen H.) & Silva (Moises) Invitation to the Septuagint Book - Cited Medium Quality Abstract Jobes (Karen H.) & Silva (Moises) - Invitation to the Septuagint Yes
Lanier (Gregory R.) & Ros (William A.) Septuaginta: A Reader's Edition - Volume 1 Book - Cited Medium Quality Abstract Lanier (Gregory R.) & Ros (William A.) - Septuaginta: A Reader's Edition - Volume 1 38%
Lanier (Gregory R.) & Ros (William A.) Septuaginta: A Reader's Edition - Volume 2 Book - Cited Medium Quality Abstract Lanier (Gregory R.) & Ros (William A.) - Septuaginta: A Reader's Edition - Volume 2 0%
Longenecker (Richard) Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period Book - Cited High Quality Abstract Longenecker (Richard) - Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period 11%
McDowell (Josh) Evidence That Demands a Verdict - Historical Evidences For the Christian Faith: Volume 1 Book - Cited Low Quality Abstract McDowell (Josh) - Evidence That Demands a Verdict - Historical Evidences For the Christian Faith: Volume 1 No
McDowell (Josh) The Messianic Prophesies of the Old Testament Fulfilled in Jesus Christ Paper - Cited McDowell (Josh) - Evidence That Demands a Verdict: Volume 1 No
Moyise (Steve) Was the Birth of Jesus According to Scripture? Book - Cited Medium Quality Abstract Moyise (Steve) - Was the Birth of Jesus According to Scripture? 6%
Penny (Michael) The Most Quoted Old Testament Prophecy Book - Cited Penny (Michael) - The Most Quoted Old Testament Prophecy No
Tomson (Peter J.) 'If This be from Heaven...': Jesus and the New Testament Authors in their Relationship to Judaism Book - Cited High Quality Abstract Tomson (Peter J.) - 'If This be from Heaven...': Jesus and the New Testament Authors in their Relationship to Judaism 2%
Wolpert (Lewis) Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast: The Evolutionary Origins of Belief Book - Cited Medium Quality Abstract Wolpert (Lewis) - Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast: The Evolutionary Origins of Belief 20%


Text Colour Conventions

  1. Blue: Text by me; © Theo Todman, 2026
  2. Mauve: Text by correspondent(s) or other author(s); © the author(s)



© Theo Todman, June 2007 - July 2026.Please address any comments on this page to theo@theotodman.com.File output:
Website Maintenance Dashboard
Return to Top of this PageReturn to Theo Todman's Philosophy PageReturn to Theo Todman's Home Page