What do you think?
Rate this book
Knowing God Through the Old Testament
Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament
We cannot know Jesus without knowing his story. Today the debate over who Jesus is rages on. Has the Bible bound Christians to a narrow and mistaken notion of Jesus? Should we listen to other gospels, other sayings of Jesus, that enlarge and correct a mistaken story? Is the real Jesus entangled in a web of the church's Scripture, awaiting liberation from our childhood faith so he might speak to our contemporary pluralistic world? To answer these questions we need to know what story Jesus claimed for himself. Christopher Wright is convinced that Jesus' own story is rooted in the story of Israel. In this book he traces the life of Christ as it is illuminated by the Old Testament. And he describes God's design for Israel as it is fulfilled in the story of Jesus.
267 pages, Paperback
First published November 1, 1992
198 people are currently reading
1,193 people want to read
About the author
Christopher J.H. Wright
102books194followersChristopher J.H. Wright, (born 1947) is a Anglican clergyman and an Old Testament scholar. He is currently the director of Langham Partnership International. He was the principal of All Nations Christian College. He is an honorary member of the All Souls Church, Langham Place in London, UK.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 92 reviews
November 30, 2013
Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament is an eloquently insightful, although fundamentally flawed, text written by Dr. Christopher J. Wright whose intention was to place Jesus within the intellectually historical context of the Old Testament. The author was raised as a Presbyterian and was later ordained as a minister in the Anglican Church of England. Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament has a thoroughly missiological emphasis which flows naturally from Wright’s experience as an “evangelical Anglican� missionary in India and as a dean, and later principal, of a missions-training institution, All Nations Christian College in the United Kingdom. Wright’s work is an interesting primer to the consideration of Old Testament insights into Jesus, but his work is severely hampered by a humanist perspective which limits Jesus� omniscient divinity.
Wright delineated his manuscript into five areas in which Jesus is considered in light of the Old Testament: the Old Testament story, promise, identity, mission, and values. He emphasized that the Old Testament sheds light and additional “levels of significance� on the “full understanding� of Jesus, just as He in turn “sheds light backwards� on the Old Testament. The history of Israel is particularly unique and relevant to the understanding of Jesus as a series of “redemptive acts of God in [H:]is dealings with a people in a covenant relationship with [H:]imself�. The unique salvation history of the Old Testament has “universal effects� and is directly connected to and completed by Jesus.
The Old Testament story which Jesus completed also declares the promise which Jesus fulfilled, according to Wright. Israel’s existence “was the substance of the promise�, and that promise extended to a “universal blessing to all the nations� through Israel. The Old Testament promise is inherently interactive because that promise requires an act of acceptance on the part of the people. God repeatedly took the initiative by making a promise and the humans involved responded to that promise. The Old Testament portrays a strong history of covenants which follow a consistent pattern of a promise made, the acceptance of the promise by the people, the fulfillment of that promise, and a fresh promise made in response. Wright is definitive in his determination that the promises of the Old Testament were figurative in nature, not literal; the as yet unfulfilled promises of the Old Testament are not literal predictions of things to come, but rather have been transformed into new living promise fulfillments in God’s “unwavering intention to bless�.
Wright clearly expressed that Jesus determined His identity through an interactive understanding with the Old Testament. Jesus absorbed three Old Testament figures into His identity: the Davidic King, the Son of God, and the Servant. Although Jesus was aware of being God’s Son, the baptismal experience affirmed that reality. The Old Testament further contributes to an understanding of Jesus� identity as a macrocosmic metaphor which depicts Jesus� relationship to God the Father via the sonship of Israel.
The key to Wright’s understanding of Jesus is in a study of His mission as seen through His titles. Wright purports that Jesus “derived� His Messiahship from reading the Scriptures; a Messiahship which was radical in that, ultimately, Jesus was the personification of Israel. Jesus learned of and claimed His titles from the Old Testament, including that of the Son of Man from Daniel 7, while He “interpreted [H:]is mission [�:] in terms of Isaiah 53.�
The values of Jesus were innately the values of the Old Testament, according to Wright, for Jesus placed Himself in relative place of the law while restoring its essence. The teachings of Jesus were essentially Old Testament teachings, including to love one’s neighbor, to imitate God’s mercy, to be different from the world, and the need for a full reorientation to enter the Kingdom of God. The law, which is by design a universal blessing, follows a scale of values which Wright argued that Jesus affirmed. That scale of Old Testament law places God first, emphasizes that people “matter more than things�, and that “needs matter more than rights�.
Wright’s intention with Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament was to establish the Old Testament as the source of Jesus� insights into God the Father and Jesus� roots to His personal identity and mission. Wright purported that Jesus saw Himself in constant relation to the Old Testament; indeed, that Jesus determined His very path by reading the Old Testament texts. Wright broached a curiously humanist perspective in his presentation of Jesus� relationship with the Scriptures. The occasional element of humanism can be explained by the culture of the modern Anglican Church in which Wright teaches and ministers, but his overriding approach to Jesus� self-consciousness was consistent in its assertion of His lack of omniscience. Wright’s perspective guided his research, and subsequently the entire text suffers from an awkward and theologically errant attempt to establish Jesus� historical self-awareness.
Wright argued extensively that Jesus determined his identity, mission, and values from the Old Testament. Such a stance removes from Jesus the omniscience accountable to Him as a co-equal part of the triune Godhead. Jesus is proclaimed by Wright as “Lord� and indicates that He is deserving of worship only in the concluding paragraph of the book, while the Jesus presented throughout the rest of Wright’s text is remarkably human. Wright even went as far as to narrate an imagined scenario in which a traveling, yet studious, Jesus observed the inadequacies of His contemporary society, entered a synagogue and read a passage of Scripture, and “launched his new ministry on the basis� of that Scripture. Jesus is depicted as an incredibly good human whose relationship with God is such that it demands the use of father/son language and who deliberately, and voluntarily, chooses to step into the role of the Messiah. The reader is left to wonder: to what extent does Wright consider Jesus to be God?
Jesus is said to have interpreted, absorbed, and learned from the Old Testament, and almost no indication is given that as part of the Godhead Jesus was integral to the origination, inspiration, and writing of the Old Testament. Wright therefore places Jesus in direct subjugation to the Scriptures, whereas sound biblical theology demands that Jesus was their true author and then fulfilled that which He had written. Wright’s humanist perspective weighs heavily on his work and significantly limits its theological impact.
Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament does, however, benefit from Wright’s well-written and clearly presented links between Old Testament concepts and Jesus� purpose. Wright implemented a frequently wonderful clarity in his articulation of the Old Testament grounds and references for Jesus� many titles, the unique moral value scales in biblical theology, and the Bible’s covenantal history. Additional elements were included into the work, including a brief but sufficient overview of the role of typology in biblical analysis as it relates to Jesus in light of the Old Testament.
Peer reviews of Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament find little middle ground in the consideration of Wright’s work. V. Philips Long of Regent College in Vancouver wrote in the Presbyterion that Wright’s book was “clear�, “informative�, and “exhilarating�, and was “ideal� for “Christian students embarking on a course of biblical and theological study�. Stanley M. Horton of Springfield, Missouri, however, wrote in his review for the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society that Wright took too great a liberty in his expression of replacement theology and labeling of many Old Testament promises as being figurative � “‘living� and ‘transformable’� � rather than literal. Frank Thielman, of Beeson Divinity School of Birmingham, Alabama, published a review in Christianity Today in which he described Wright’s work as “illuminating� but less detailed in analysis than Walter Kaiser’s The Messiah in the Old Testament.
Ministers can find insights in eloquent passages which frequently present familiar ideas in relatively fresh contexts. One such example, seemingly tucked into the latter regions of the text, would have served as an excellent introductory passage to the book as it proclaims monotheism to be a “fighting faith� which demands a basic reorientation of humanity towards God and relates to the law under God’s terms � an orientation which Jesus proclaimed and fulfilled. All such insights must always be held in check, however, by remembrance that Wright both limited Jesus� self-awareness of divinity and labeled swaths of covenantal promises as being figurative, not literal, when the biblical texts themselves make no such indications. The mature reader should be capable of discerning between valuable insights and illogical misrepresentations of Scriptures. The scholastic usefulness of Wright’s book is limited to an additional degree by Wright’s determination to eschew the use of footnotes. His included bibliography is to be appreciated, but scholars will be stymied in their pursuit for further depth. Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament does not present new information or ideas, but rather provides interesting insights into preexisting content. Footnotes to his work would have been valuable as they might have provided a bread trail guiding backwards into his bibliography with greater focus.
Christopher Wright achieved to an introductory degree his goal of expressing the placement of Jesus in the context of the Old Testament. Wright’s placement is off-target, however, because Jesus is depicted as being subservient to the Scriptures rather than their divine Author. The humanistic misrepresentation is significantly unsettling. When read with discernment, however, Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament can be a valuable primer for those new to evaluating Jesus in light of the Old Testament and for experienced Christians, ministers, and scholars the book can be a source for fresh insight from a perspective outside of modern conservative evangelicalism.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
"Biography: Langham Partnership International", (accessed 17 November 2009).
Horton, Stanley M. "Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40, no. 2 (1997): 287-287.
Long, V. Philips. "Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament." Presbyterion 19, no. 1 (1993): 61-62.
Thielman, Frank. "Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament." Christianity Today 40, no. 3 (1996): 58-58.
Wright, Christopher J. H. Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament. Downer's Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1992.
Wright delineated his manuscript into five areas in which Jesus is considered in light of the Old Testament: the Old Testament story, promise, identity, mission, and values. He emphasized that the Old Testament sheds light and additional “levels of significance� on the “full understanding� of Jesus, just as He in turn “sheds light backwards� on the Old Testament. The history of Israel is particularly unique and relevant to the understanding of Jesus as a series of “redemptive acts of God in [H:]is dealings with a people in a covenant relationship with [H:]imself�. The unique salvation history of the Old Testament has “universal effects� and is directly connected to and completed by Jesus.
The Old Testament story which Jesus completed also declares the promise which Jesus fulfilled, according to Wright. Israel’s existence “was the substance of the promise�, and that promise extended to a “universal blessing to all the nations� through Israel. The Old Testament promise is inherently interactive because that promise requires an act of acceptance on the part of the people. God repeatedly took the initiative by making a promise and the humans involved responded to that promise. The Old Testament portrays a strong history of covenants which follow a consistent pattern of a promise made, the acceptance of the promise by the people, the fulfillment of that promise, and a fresh promise made in response. Wright is definitive in his determination that the promises of the Old Testament were figurative in nature, not literal; the as yet unfulfilled promises of the Old Testament are not literal predictions of things to come, but rather have been transformed into new living promise fulfillments in God’s “unwavering intention to bless�.
Wright clearly expressed that Jesus determined His identity through an interactive understanding with the Old Testament. Jesus absorbed three Old Testament figures into His identity: the Davidic King, the Son of God, and the Servant. Although Jesus was aware of being God’s Son, the baptismal experience affirmed that reality. The Old Testament further contributes to an understanding of Jesus� identity as a macrocosmic metaphor which depicts Jesus� relationship to God the Father via the sonship of Israel.
The key to Wright’s understanding of Jesus is in a study of His mission as seen through His titles. Wright purports that Jesus “derived� His Messiahship from reading the Scriptures; a Messiahship which was radical in that, ultimately, Jesus was the personification of Israel. Jesus learned of and claimed His titles from the Old Testament, including that of the Son of Man from Daniel 7, while He “interpreted [H:]is mission [�:] in terms of Isaiah 53.�
The values of Jesus were innately the values of the Old Testament, according to Wright, for Jesus placed Himself in relative place of the law while restoring its essence. The teachings of Jesus were essentially Old Testament teachings, including to love one’s neighbor, to imitate God’s mercy, to be different from the world, and the need for a full reorientation to enter the Kingdom of God. The law, which is by design a universal blessing, follows a scale of values which Wright argued that Jesus affirmed. That scale of Old Testament law places God first, emphasizes that people “matter more than things�, and that “needs matter more than rights�.
Wright’s intention with Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament was to establish the Old Testament as the source of Jesus� insights into God the Father and Jesus� roots to His personal identity and mission. Wright purported that Jesus saw Himself in constant relation to the Old Testament; indeed, that Jesus determined His very path by reading the Old Testament texts. Wright broached a curiously humanist perspective in his presentation of Jesus� relationship with the Scriptures. The occasional element of humanism can be explained by the culture of the modern Anglican Church in which Wright teaches and ministers, but his overriding approach to Jesus� self-consciousness was consistent in its assertion of His lack of omniscience. Wright’s perspective guided his research, and subsequently the entire text suffers from an awkward and theologically errant attempt to establish Jesus� historical self-awareness.
Wright argued extensively that Jesus determined his identity, mission, and values from the Old Testament. Such a stance removes from Jesus the omniscience accountable to Him as a co-equal part of the triune Godhead. Jesus is proclaimed by Wright as “Lord� and indicates that He is deserving of worship only in the concluding paragraph of the book, while the Jesus presented throughout the rest of Wright’s text is remarkably human. Wright even went as far as to narrate an imagined scenario in which a traveling, yet studious, Jesus observed the inadequacies of His contemporary society, entered a synagogue and read a passage of Scripture, and “launched his new ministry on the basis� of that Scripture. Jesus is depicted as an incredibly good human whose relationship with God is such that it demands the use of father/son language and who deliberately, and voluntarily, chooses to step into the role of the Messiah. The reader is left to wonder: to what extent does Wright consider Jesus to be God?
Jesus is said to have interpreted, absorbed, and learned from the Old Testament, and almost no indication is given that as part of the Godhead Jesus was integral to the origination, inspiration, and writing of the Old Testament. Wright therefore places Jesus in direct subjugation to the Scriptures, whereas sound biblical theology demands that Jesus was their true author and then fulfilled that which He had written. Wright’s humanist perspective weighs heavily on his work and significantly limits its theological impact.
Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament does, however, benefit from Wright’s well-written and clearly presented links between Old Testament concepts and Jesus� purpose. Wright implemented a frequently wonderful clarity in his articulation of the Old Testament grounds and references for Jesus� many titles, the unique moral value scales in biblical theology, and the Bible’s covenantal history. Additional elements were included into the work, including a brief but sufficient overview of the role of typology in biblical analysis as it relates to Jesus in light of the Old Testament.
Peer reviews of Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament find little middle ground in the consideration of Wright’s work. V. Philips Long of Regent College in Vancouver wrote in the Presbyterion that Wright’s book was “clear�, “informative�, and “exhilarating�, and was “ideal� for “Christian students embarking on a course of biblical and theological study�. Stanley M. Horton of Springfield, Missouri, however, wrote in his review for the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society that Wright took too great a liberty in his expression of replacement theology and labeling of many Old Testament promises as being figurative � “‘living� and ‘transformable’� � rather than literal. Frank Thielman, of Beeson Divinity School of Birmingham, Alabama, published a review in Christianity Today in which he described Wright’s work as “illuminating� but less detailed in analysis than Walter Kaiser’s The Messiah in the Old Testament.
Ministers can find insights in eloquent passages which frequently present familiar ideas in relatively fresh contexts. One such example, seemingly tucked into the latter regions of the text, would have served as an excellent introductory passage to the book as it proclaims monotheism to be a “fighting faith� which demands a basic reorientation of humanity towards God and relates to the law under God’s terms � an orientation which Jesus proclaimed and fulfilled. All such insights must always be held in check, however, by remembrance that Wright both limited Jesus� self-awareness of divinity and labeled swaths of covenantal promises as being figurative, not literal, when the biblical texts themselves make no such indications. The mature reader should be capable of discerning between valuable insights and illogical misrepresentations of Scriptures. The scholastic usefulness of Wright’s book is limited to an additional degree by Wright’s determination to eschew the use of footnotes. His included bibliography is to be appreciated, but scholars will be stymied in their pursuit for further depth. Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament does not present new information or ideas, but rather provides interesting insights into preexisting content. Footnotes to his work would have been valuable as they might have provided a bread trail guiding backwards into his bibliography with greater focus.
Christopher Wright achieved to an introductory degree his goal of expressing the placement of Jesus in the context of the Old Testament. Wright’s placement is off-target, however, because Jesus is depicted as being subservient to the Scriptures rather than their divine Author. The humanistic misrepresentation is significantly unsettling. When read with discernment, however, Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament can be a valuable primer for those new to evaluating Jesus in light of the Old Testament and for experienced Christians, ministers, and scholars the book can be a source for fresh insight from a perspective outside of modern conservative evangelicalism.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
"Biography: Langham Partnership International", (accessed 17 November 2009).
Horton, Stanley M. "Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40, no. 2 (1997): 287-287.
Long, V. Philips. "Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament." Presbyterion 19, no. 1 (1993): 61-62.
Thielman, Frank. "Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament." Christianity Today 40, no. 3 (1996): 58-58.
Wright, Christopher J. H. Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament. Downer's Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1992.
April 20, 2021
If you want to understand Jesus and your Bible better and simultaneously set your brain on fire.. read this. I want to read it 83 more times.
February 28, 2019
This is not your typical “Christ in the OT� book. Rather than proceeding from the OT forward, he uses the Gospels as the primary structure, going back and forth from NT to OT, and vice versa. I found the book helpful in tracing the OT thematic elements through the Gospels. I would have liked to see more focus on the Christological nature of the temple and sacrificial system. Overall, a helpful book.
November 5, 2020
Wow, what a delightful read. A wonderful look at both the deity of Jesus and the humanity of Jesus. I learned a lot through this reading and was brought to a fuller appreciation for the way the man, Jesus, would have learned about who he was and his mission as he studied the Jewish sacred text. Highly recommend!
May 12, 2017
This is my second time reading this book and it's wonderful. The chapters can be a little long, and it can be a little academic at times but it has helped me understand the OT in clearer and deeper ways. You won't regret going through this book. Wright shows you how Jesus relationship to the OT is historical, covenantal, ethical, missional, and representational. Great read.
August 1, 2014
This review is for a previous edition published in 1992. There is no index or footnotes, which I regret, but Wright has done this on purpose to avoid making a "scholarly book." Thus, I did not take away any stars for it. This is a wonderful book that I think all Christians should read. Others interested in the Christian faith and Jesus' identity through the lens of the Old Testament will also find it valuable. A chapter-by-chapter review follows.
Chapter One: Jesus and the Old Testament Story
Wright opens his book by beginning at the beginning of the New Testament, using the genealogy of Matthew 1:1-17 to demonstrate the Old Testament qualifications of the Messiah. This genealogy serves as the segue between the testaments, so it is a good place to start. This first section provides more than a cursory reading implies. First, it demonstrates that Jesus was a real Jew. Genealogies were an important means of establishing Jewish identity. Christ was not an abstract figure, He was an actual Jewish person with the history and customs of His people. This identity helps people to understand His purpose and message, which are in the context of the Jewish and Old Testament culture (1-3).
Second, Jesus was a real man, more specifically, a “son of Abraham� (3). This places Him within the context of the real world complete with people and nations and geopolitical settings. God had promised a nation to Abraham that would be a blessing to all nations which would serve as the launch point for the universal plan of redemption for all the world (see Genesis 12). Jesus� birth into the family of Abraham means that He is participating in the mission of the nation to bless the world (3-4). Indeed, He is the culmination of this mission.
Third, Jesus is the Son of David. Matthew provides an official genealogy, tracing Jesus� descent through the line of kings to demonstrate that Christ has a legitimate claim to the throne. This messianic status means that Jesus� presence coincides with God’s redemptive plan for the nation of Israel and the world (5-6).
Fourth, Jesus represents the end of the time of preparation. Like Matthew’s genealogy, Jesus is the segue between the Old and New Testaments. He marks the end of the Old Testament story. The Old Testament is forward-looking, knowing that the Messiah will continue and fulfill the eschatological thrust of Scripture (6-7).
Fifth, although He represents an end, Jesus also represents a beginning. He initiates the New Testament story. He also begins the messianic fulfillment of the redemption of humankind (7-8).
All of these factors combine to demonstrate that Jesus has a unique status. He meets all messianic qualifications. Moreover, He is the prophesied one who will fulfill all the Old Testament prophecies and inexorably move the world forward in God’s plan of universal redemption as the culmination of salvation history. His incarnation supports the fact that God is in control of all history and that all the nations ultimately share the fate of Israel. His mission will fulfill the Abrahamic covenant of Genesis 12, demonstrating that God keeps His promises (39-49).
Chapter Two: Jesus and the Old Testament Promise
After laying out the basics in chapter one, Wright moves to show how the Old Testament promises a Messiah, which must be established before Jesus can be posited as the fulfillment of such promise. He begins with the infancy narrative and early childhood of Jesus to show that the story involves a broad range of people and nations. The different national and ethnic groups as well as the various nations demonstrate the universal scope of the narrative (55-63). The Old Testament features many promises that are ultimately fulfilled by Christ. These promises involve a commitment between two parties: God and humanity (64-67). They also require acceptance by both parties. God originated the promises and therefore accepted them in this sense; the Israelites and humanity are required to accept the promises. As Wright puts it, the “…initiative of his [God’s] grace (promise) calls forth a response of obedient faith…� (70). It is this faith that represents acceptance.
Old Testament promise also involves an ongoing level of commitment as evidenced by the covenants between God and humanity. These generally amplify progressively through history (70-72). Biblical covenants are initiated by God, involve one or more promises of God, and require acceptance by humanity (78-79). The process of amplification can be seen by comparing the Noahic (Genesis 6:18-21; 8:21-9:17), Abrahamaic (Genesis 12:1-3; 15:1-21; 17:1-27), Sinaitic covenants (Exodus 19:3-6, 24 and essentially all of Deuteronomy), and the covenant with David (II Samuel 7; 23:1-7; Psalms 82, 132), all of which culminate in the new covenant (Jeremiah 30, 31; Ezekiel 34, 35, 36; Isaiah 40-55) (81-95). This new covenant is both nationalist and universal in scope, involving both Israel and all nations (95-97). The substance of the new covenant is multi-faceted. First, it involves a new relationship with God in that it includes all the faithful of all people groups. Second, it involves a new experience of forgiveness and expanded cleansing from sin (Jeremiah 31:34; Ezekiel 36:25; 37:23; Isaiah 55:6-9). Third, it involves a new obedience to the law as this covenant features the law “written in the heart� (99) that will magnify knowledge and obedience. Fourth, there will be a future Davidic king. Fifth, there will be a new abundance of nature hearkening back to Eden (97-100). It is this new covenant the Messiah is to fulfill.
God’s intent is to bless the world. The promises of God are unwavering, and He fulfilled them all through Jesus Christ. This fulfillment was made possible by the existence of the Old Testament promises as best exemplified by the various covenants, which serve as a sort of road map to universal redemption. These promises were what allowed people to recognize Jesus for what He was and what He was going to do (100-102).
Chapter 3: Jesus and His Old Testament Identity
This chapter deals with the concept of sonship and what it meant in Old Testament times and addresses the idea of Jesus as the Son of God. Matthew 3:17 reads, “This is my son, whom I love, the one in whom I delight.� This verse sums up Jesus� identity. The surrounding people may have thought of Him as the carpenter’s son from Nazareth, but His true identity was the Christ (103-104). Jesus� identity and awareness of this identity were based upon His Father’s identification of Him as it appeared in the Scriptures. The authority of the Davidic king has been given Him. He further had a unique sonship to God the Father. Obedience was an important concept in literal father-son relationships and the more symbolic Father-son relationships between God and His people. Thus, this characteristic is one of the defining traits of the Messiah. Obedience also served as a link to the Servant aspects of Christ, an obedience so strong that He would sacrifice Himself for His Father’s will. These three aspects of Davidic sovereignty, obedience, and servanthood are the foundation of His identity (108-110).
The obedience of Jesus as the Son of God paves the way for the redemption of humanity and the universe. Christ’s sonship achieved the goal for which the God-Israel sonship had prepared: the redemption of all Israel and the ingathering of the nations. This was achieved via His death and resurrection, effectively winning the world for God and providing an expanded method for non-Israelites to become believers. Gentiles accepting the faith became the “sons of the living God� (Hosea 1:10) just like the Jews, acquiring sonship status along with them (126-133).
Chapter Four: Jesus and His Old Testament Mission
With His identity established, Wright turns to the mission corresponding with that identity. When Jesus came on the scene, the nation of Israel was expectant, awaiting the promised restoration of Israel and the nation’s vindication in light of the pagan nations as well as the consequent ingathering of the nations (Jeremiah 30-34; Ezekiel 40-48; Isaiah 40-55) (137-139). The agent of this redemption would be the anointed one, the Messiah, the true son of David (144). This messiah ushers in a new age of blessing, sacrificing Himself for fallen humanity (147), which involves Him serving as both the identity/representative—in the sense of a proxy for sinful humans—and destiny of the nation (148). The ushering in of the kingdom was often misunderstood by the populace of the time who frequently expected a political, national, or even military liberation from the Roman occupation and other physical enemies of the surrounding nations. In fact, Jesus was bringing a liberation and salvation that would ultimately stretch to the ends of the earth and beyond, but not in the form many of the Jewish people believed it would come (144-145).
Jesus realized His mission, broadly speaking, was to spend some time in earthly ministry, laboring without His full power by choice, and which culminated in rejection and suffering and dying and rising three days later (e.g. Mark 8:31). Finally, He recognized the eschatological dimensions of His purpose (150): the Second Coming, the future final judgment, and the New Heavens and New Earth. These categories encapsulate the Old Testament mission as Christ viewed it and were prefigured in the Old Testament predominantly by the “son of man� figure in Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 42 and 53 (153-155). Initially, Jesus keeps His earthly ministry almost exclusively to the nation of Israel, but the universal dimension of His plan is fully spelled out after His resurrection. He is to bring law and justice as ethical values and social priorities of God to the nations and saturate them with compassion, enlightenment, and freedom. In Luke 4:18 ff., Jesus explicitly acknowledges these qualities as part of His identity (180).
Chapter Five: Jesus and his Old Testament Values
In this chapter, Wright demonstrates how Jesus used Old Testament values to fulfill His mission. In particular, the books of Deuteronomy and Psalms were important to understanding the values God had inculcated in his people. In Deuteronomy, Moses calls for complete obedience and loyalty to God. In Psalm 91, the provision of God for His humble and obedient servant is found. These ideas form the core concept of what it means to live faithfully before the Lord. To obey God’s law whole-heartedly is the natural result of the redeemed status of the Jewish people and such obedience results in the blessings overflowing to other nations. This obedience to the moral and ethical values of the Old Testament is to be uncomplicated and motivated by love (182-190).
Jesus came to fulfill the law, not to abolish it (Matthew 5:17-20). Thus, the law is not going away with the coming of the Messiah, so it is important to see how He built His values and priorities around it. First, the law must be considered the response to redemption. It is not something people do in order to be saved, it is something people do because they are saved. Second, it is important to recognize the motivations underlying the law. One is gratitude for what God has done for His people and, indeed, the whole world. Another is to imitate God by modelling the traits He displays via the law. Holiness is also a motivation. This means being distinct or apart from the worldly society; this is achieved by modelling God. The assurance that the law is in place for the good of humanity is a further motivation. As the omniscient Creator, God knows what is best for His people, and the most humane and beneficent society is going to naturally result from following the tenets of a loving God (195-206).
In addition to motivations, it is important to understand the law’s value scale. The Golden Rule encapsulates the values of the system. God comes first and is to be place first in the lives of His people regardless of the cost in which that may result. People come second, and people matter more than any object. The sanctity of life is paramount. In fact, the importance of the first two ideas is to realize that the death penalty is permitted only in cases of violations against God or against other people—it is never allowed for property issues. Third, human needs come before rights. The protection of the weak, defenseless, and oppressed are important elements of the law (209-213).
By fulfilling the law, Jesus was bringing the underlying spirit, premises, and motivation to the fore. He is clarifying the inherent priorities and the values of the Torah. Christ, of course, expands and modifies the law, but He makes it better by elevating the original intent of the law is an easy to understand manner (219).
Wright proceeds to identify Jesus as being among the prophets in the sense He promoted the same agenda. There were three main areas of concern: spiritual loyalty to God, economic concerns, and political issues. Spiritual loyalty to God was compromised by apathy, idolatry, and a hypocritical practice. Economic concerns included abuses and exploitation that resulted in poverty, corruption, and persistent debt for the poor. Political issue included the misuse of power in the court, temple, and similar venues, all of which resulted in sin and oppression, especially for the poor and defenseless. Jesus, of course, was opposed to all this as it perverted the intention of the law designed to bring blessings to others (219).
The kingdom of God, especially as understood in the Psalms was another major value of Christ. The reign of God has three core dimensions. First, it is universal, encompassing not only Israel, but all people of all nations as well as nature and everything in it. Second, justice and compassion are the hallmarks of God’s reign as evidenced by the law provided for the good of His subjects. Third, there is the eschatological dimension that acknowledges that God will intervene in the future to bring the first two dimensions into their fullness (244-248).
Chapter One: Jesus and the Old Testament Story
Wright opens his book by beginning at the beginning of the New Testament, using the genealogy of Matthew 1:1-17 to demonstrate the Old Testament qualifications of the Messiah. This genealogy serves as the segue between the testaments, so it is a good place to start. This first section provides more than a cursory reading implies. First, it demonstrates that Jesus was a real Jew. Genealogies were an important means of establishing Jewish identity. Christ was not an abstract figure, He was an actual Jewish person with the history and customs of His people. This identity helps people to understand His purpose and message, which are in the context of the Jewish and Old Testament culture (1-3).
Second, Jesus was a real man, more specifically, a “son of Abraham� (3). This places Him within the context of the real world complete with people and nations and geopolitical settings. God had promised a nation to Abraham that would be a blessing to all nations which would serve as the launch point for the universal plan of redemption for all the world (see Genesis 12). Jesus� birth into the family of Abraham means that He is participating in the mission of the nation to bless the world (3-4). Indeed, He is the culmination of this mission.
Third, Jesus is the Son of David. Matthew provides an official genealogy, tracing Jesus� descent through the line of kings to demonstrate that Christ has a legitimate claim to the throne. This messianic status means that Jesus� presence coincides with God’s redemptive plan for the nation of Israel and the world (5-6).
Fourth, Jesus represents the end of the time of preparation. Like Matthew’s genealogy, Jesus is the segue between the Old and New Testaments. He marks the end of the Old Testament story. The Old Testament is forward-looking, knowing that the Messiah will continue and fulfill the eschatological thrust of Scripture (6-7).
Fifth, although He represents an end, Jesus also represents a beginning. He initiates the New Testament story. He also begins the messianic fulfillment of the redemption of humankind (7-8).
All of these factors combine to demonstrate that Jesus has a unique status. He meets all messianic qualifications. Moreover, He is the prophesied one who will fulfill all the Old Testament prophecies and inexorably move the world forward in God’s plan of universal redemption as the culmination of salvation history. His incarnation supports the fact that God is in control of all history and that all the nations ultimately share the fate of Israel. His mission will fulfill the Abrahamic covenant of Genesis 12, demonstrating that God keeps His promises (39-49).
Chapter Two: Jesus and the Old Testament Promise
After laying out the basics in chapter one, Wright moves to show how the Old Testament promises a Messiah, which must be established before Jesus can be posited as the fulfillment of such promise. He begins with the infancy narrative and early childhood of Jesus to show that the story involves a broad range of people and nations. The different national and ethnic groups as well as the various nations demonstrate the universal scope of the narrative (55-63). The Old Testament features many promises that are ultimately fulfilled by Christ. These promises involve a commitment between two parties: God and humanity (64-67). They also require acceptance by both parties. God originated the promises and therefore accepted them in this sense; the Israelites and humanity are required to accept the promises. As Wright puts it, the “…initiative of his [God’s] grace (promise) calls forth a response of obedient faith…� (70). It is this faith that represents acceptance.
Old Testament promise also involves an ongoing level of commitment as evidenced by the covenants between God and humanity. These generally amplify progressively through history (70-72). Biblical covenants are initiated by God, involve one or more promises of God, and require acceptance by humanity (78-79). The process of amplification can be seen by comparing the Noahic (Genesis 6:18-21; 8:21-9:17), Abrahamaic (Genesis 12:1-3; 15:1-21; 17:1-27), Sinaitic covenants (Exodus 19:3-6, 24 and essentially all of Deuteronomy), and the covenant with David (II Samuel 7; 23:1-7; Psalms 82, 132), all of which culminate in the new covenant (Jeremiah 30, 31; Ezekiel 34, 35, 36; Isaiah 40-55) (81-95). This new covenant is both nationalist and universal in scope, involving both Israel and all nations (95-97). The substance of the new covenant is multi-faceted. First, it involves a new relationship with God in that it includes all the faithful of all people groups. Second, it involves a new experience of forgiveness and expanded cleansing from sin (Jeremiah 31:34; Ezekiel 36:25; 37:23; Isaiah 55:6-9). Third, it involves a new obedience to the law as this covenant features the law “written in the heart� (99) that will magnify knowledge and obedience. Fourth, there will be a future Davidic king. Fifth, there will be a new abundance of nature hearkening back to Eden (97-100). It is this new covenant the Messiah is to fulfill.
God’s intent is to bless the world. The promises of God are unwavering, and He fulfilled them all through Jesus Christ. This fulfillment was made possible by the existence of the Old Testament promises as best exemplified by the various covenants, which serve as a sort of road map to universal redemption. These promises were what allowed people to recognize Jesus for what He was and what He was going to do (100-102).
Chapter 3: Jesus and His Old Testament Identity
This chapter deals with the concept of sonship and what it meant in Old Testament times and addresses the idea of Jesus as the Son of God. Matthew 3:17 reads, “This is my son, whom I love, the one in whom I delight.� This verse sums up Jesus� identity. The surrounding people may have thought of Him as the carpenter’s son from Nazareth, but His true identity was the Christ (103-104). Jesus� identity and awareness of this identity were based upon His Father’s identification of Him as it appeared in the Scriptures. The authority of the Davidic king has been given Him. He further had a unique sonship to God the Father. Obedience was an important concept in literal father-son relationships and the more symbolic Father-son relationships between God and His people. Thus, this characteristic is one of the defining traits of the Messiah. Obedience also served as a link to the Servant aspects of Christ, an obedience so strong that He would sacrifice Himself for His Father’s will. These three aspects of Davidic sovereignty, obedience, and servanthood are the foundation of His identity (108-110).
The obedience of Jesus as the Son of God paves the way for the redemption of humanity and the universe. Christ’s sonship achieved the goal for which the God-Israel sonship had prepared: the redemption of all Israel and the ingathering of the nations. This was achieved via His death and resurrection, effectively winning the world for God and providing an expanded method for non-Israelites to become believers. Gentiles accepting the faith became the “sons of the living God� (Hosea 1:10) just like the Jews, acquiring sonship status along with them (126-133).
Chapter Four: Jesus and His Old Testament Mission
With His identity established, Wright turns to the mission corresponding with that identity. When Jesus came on the scene, the nation of Israel was expectant, awaiting the promised restoration of Israel and the nation’s vindication in light of the pagan nations as well as the consequent ingathering of the nations (Jeremiah 30-34; Ezekiel 40-48; Isaiah 40-55) (137-139). The agent of this redemption would be the anointed one, the Messiah, the true son of David (144). This messiah ushers in a new age of blessing, sacrificing Himself for fallen humanity (147), which involves Him serving as both the identity/representative—in the sense of a proxy for sinful humans—and destiny of the nation (148). The ushering in of the kingdom was often misunderstood by the populace of the time who frequently expected a political, national, or even military liberation from the Roman occupation and other physical enemies of the surrounding nations. In fact, Jesus was bringing a liberation and salvation that would ultimately stretch to the ends of the earth and beyond, but not in the form many of the Jewish people believed it would come (144-145).
Jesus realized His mission, broadly speaking, was to spend some time in earthly ministry, laboring without His full power by choice, and which culminated in rejection and suffering and dying and rising three days later (e.g. Mark 8:31). Finally, He recognized the eschatological dimensions of His purpose (150): the Second Coming, the future final judgment, and the New Heavens and New Earth. These categories encapsulate the Old Testament mission as Christ viewed it and were prefigured in the Old Testament predominantly by the “son of man� figure in Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 42 and 53 (153-155). Initially, Jesus keeps His earthly ministry almost exclusively to the nation of Israel, but the universal dimension of His plan is fully spelled out after His resurrection. He is to bring law and justice as ethical values and social priorities of God to the nations and saturate them with compassion, enlightenment, and freedom. In Luke 4:18 ff., Jesus explicitly acknowledges these qualities as part of His identity (180).
Chapter Five: Jesus and his Old Testament Values
In this chapter, Wright demonstrates how Jesus used Old Testament values to fulfill His mission. In particular, the books of Deuteronomy and Psalms were important to understanding the values God had inculcated in his people. In Deuteronomy, Moses calls for complete obedience and loyalty to God. In Psalm 91, the provision of God for His humble and obedient servant is found. These ideas form the core concept of what it means to live faithfully before the Lord. To obey God’s law whole-heartedly is the natural result of the redeemed status of the Jewish people and such obedience results in the blessings overflowing to other nations. This obedience to the moral and ethical values of the Old Testament is to be uncomplicated and motivated by love (182-190).
Jesus came to fulfill the law, not to abolish it (Matthew 5:17-20). Thus, the law is not going away with the coming of the Messiah, so it is important to see how He built His values and priorities around it. First, the law must be considered the response to redemption. It is not something people do in order to be saved, it is something people do because they are saved. Second, it is important to recognize the motivations underlying the law. One is gratitude for what God has done for His people and, indeed, the whole world. Another is to imitate God by modelling the traits He displays via the law. Holiness is also a motivation. This means being distinct or apart from the worldly society; this is achieved by modelling God. The assurance that the law is in place for the good of humanity is a further motivation. As the omniscient Creator, God knows what is best for His people, and the most humane and beneficent society is going to naturally result from following the tenets of a loving God (195-206).
In addition to motivations, it is important to understand the law’s value scale. The Golden Rule encapsulates the values of the system. God comes first and is to be place first in the lives of His people regardless of the cost in which that may result. People come second, and people matter more than any object. The sanctity of life is paramount. In fact, the importance of the first two ideas is to realize that the death penalty is permitted only in cases of violations against God or against other people—it is never allowed for property issues. Third, human needs come before rights. The protection of the weak, defenseless, and oppressed are important elements of the law (209-213).
By fulfilling the law, Jesus was bringing the underlying spirit, premises, and motivation to the fore. He is clarifying the inherent priorities and the values of the Torah. Christ, of course, expands and modifies the law, but He makes it better by elevating the original intent of the law is an easy to understand manner (219).
Wright proceeds to identify Jesus as being among the prophets in the sense He promoted the same agenda. There were three main areas of concern: spiritual loyalty to God, economic concerns, and political issues. Spiritual loyalty to God was compromised by apathy, idolatry, and a hypocritical practice. Economic concerns included abuses and exploitation that resulted in poverty, corruption, and persistent debt for the poor. Political issue included the misuse of power in the court, temple, and similar venues, all of which resulted in sin and oppression, especially for the poor and defenseless. Jesus, of course, was opposed to all this as it perverted the intention of the law designed to bring blessings to others (219).
The kingdom of God, especially as understood in the Psalms was another major value of Christ. The reign of God has three core dimensions. First, it is universal, encompassing not only Israel, but all people of all nations as well as nature and everything in it. Second, justice and compassion are the hallmarks of God’s reign as evidenced by the law provided for the good of His subjects. Third, there is the eschatological dimension that acknowledges that God will intervene in the future to bring the first two dimensions into their fullness (244-248).
November 8, 2023
Read this for an OT class. This will certainly help improve your hermeneutic of the Old Testament, and see Jesus better when you read it. I thoroughly enjoyed and recommend this book.
August 12, 2011
In this book, Wright calls us back to the roots of the understanding of the Messiah. In doing this, Wright points out that Jesus was connected to his Jewish history and the Old Testament more than many people realize. Jesus gained much of his identity from the OT (Son of Man, Son of God, etc) Very good book if one is looking for a more holistic understanding of the Jewish identity possessed by Jesus.
October 22, 2019
This book is probably one of the most helpful books I have ever read when it comes to understanding Scripture and general biblical literacy. It helped to answer a ton of pressing questions that have been in the back of my mind for basically my whole life of faith until now, questions such as:
How should I, as a believer in Christ, relate to the Old Testament law?
What was, and is, the ultimate purpose of the law, and how does it relate to grace?
To what extent is it possible to "find Jesus in the Old Testament", how does outright prophecy come into play, and what about all those "creative" New Testament quotes of Old Testament texts?
How does Jesus conceive of himself and speak of himself in the New Testament (including the more specific question, did Jesus actually say that he was God)?
I had to read this for my seminary class, but I am so thankful that I did; it is readable and engaging, biblical and thorough. I highly, highly recommend it.
How should I, as a believer in Christ, relate to the Old Testament law?
What was, and is, the ultimate purpose of the law, and how does it relate to grace?
To what extent is it possible to "find Jesus in the Old Testament", how does outright prophecy come into play, and what about all those "creative" New Testament quotes of Old Testament texts?
How does Jesus conceive of himself and speak of himself in the New Testament (including the more specific question, did Jesus actually say that he was God)?
I had to read this for my seminary class, but I am so thankful that I did; it is readable and engaging, biblical and thorough. I highly, highly recommend it.
January 22, 2016
This book is phenomenal. Chris Wright has a gift for communicating the content of the Old Testament in clear and compelling language (his The Mission of God is a masterpiece). And in this book, he couples that with a focus on Jesus Christ. Wright doesn't unearth references to Jesus in every verse of the Old Testament. Instead, he looks at how the story, the teachings, and prophecies, and the values of the Old Testament lead inexorably to Christ. This focus sheds beautiful light on the Old Testament, as the text comes alive in his learned summaries, but it likewise brings Jesus and the New Testament to life, as the new covenant and its Lamb are given stunning depth and clarity because of the background provided by the Old Testament. So many times, his discussions of texts in the New Testament (and particularly Matthew's opening chapters) bring new depth to familiar stories. This second edition includes a new final chapter on the divinity of Christ (something he thought he could presuppose in his first writing, but which he came to feel required clear articulation in today's world).
This book is written at a great level. Those for whom this is new territory will find it accessible, as he writes clearly and without a lot of jargon. But this book is also worthwhile reading for experienced students, as Wright brings erudition and great knowledge to his study, even if he wears it lightly. This book is highly recommended. I've come to a deeper appreciation of Jesus Christ and of the stunning continuity between the two Testaments, even as I've also appreciated even more the surprising newness of Jesus Christ.
This book is written at a great level. Those for whom this is new territory will find it accessible, as he writes clearly and without a lot of jargon. But this book is also worthwhile reading for experienced students, as Wright brings erudition and great knowledge to his study, even if he wears it lightly. This book is highly recommended. I've come to a deeper appreciation of Jesus Christ and of the stunning continuity between the two Testaments, even as I've also appreciated even more the surprising newness of Jesus Christ.
December 17, 2015
A highly-readable volume on "Christology" through the Old Testament. I commend Wright for providing such an accessible work, which serves essentially as an intro to systematic theology, though those words are never actually mentioned outright. Someone familiar with work by writers like N.T. Wright and James Dunn will likely not find anything new or surprising here, but it is a clearly-written summary of that strain of thought. I personally found the chapters on ethics and mission very helpful, and his presentation of the Old Testament narrative is quite enjoyable to read. Overall, I will highly recommend this book to college students and lay-people with a bent towards theological thinking. Seminarians, ministers, or people who have already scoured the works of Witherington, Brueggeman, Wright and the like will probably be fine passing this one up.
January 3, 2025
This was Chris's BIG one. Really can't say enough about this book. It exemplifies how the Bible is truly and utterly in a literary class of its own. There's simply nothing as brilliantly woven and edited and narrated than the Bible and this book helps us to see how. Out of the thousands of pages I read this semester of divinity school-- THIS ate sooo bad. Definitely a book I will continue to pick up throughout my time on EARTH. The part when Wright gets into Jesus's quotations of Deuteronomy while being tested in the wilderness?? Mhm. It's text like these that stir up my faith in ways I can only raise a silent hand in praise. Thanks for writing this text Christopher!
June 21, 2021
Overall, this is a wonderful book that demonstrates the importance of the Old Testament for understanding the New. Wright's purpose is to help the reader to better understand Jesus through a better understanding of the entire Old Testament story. The strength of this approach is that the author does not lift out Old Testament proof texts apart from their context, but rather spends time in unpacking the Old Testament context of various supporting passages before applying them the Jesus. This results in a richer understanding of both the Old Testament as well as a greater understanding of who Jesus is and what he came to do.
Well worth the read for anyone interested in better understanding Jesus and the Old Testament.
Well worth the read for anyone interested in better understanding Jesus and the Old Testament.
January 10, 2009
Jesus is my favorite God and the Old Testament is one of my two favorite testaments. Thus it was only a matter of time before I read this book. It is well worth reading! Wright doesn't do what some commentators have done and seek to identify every unnamed angel in the biblical narrative as a pre-incarnational incarnation of Jesus. Instead he thoughtfully examines the old testament story, God's covenant, God's mission and the God's values in the Hebrew Bible and relates it to what Jesus was doing and how he fulfilled the law and the prophets.
While Wright is an academic, this book is written for a broad audience, is easily accessible and well written. I suggest you get it and read it.
While Wright is an academic, this book is written for a broad audience, is easily accessible and well written. I suggest you get it and read it.
June 15, 2016
By far, this is my favorite book I've read this year. Wright guides his reader through the Old Testament with Jesus at the forefront. It is broken down into five parts (Story, Promise, Identity, Mission, Values). Wright goes in depth on theological and historical points and yet keeps the book clear, organized, and interesting. I would consider this an essential read for any theology student, minister/pastor, or interested layperson.
November 23, 2022
This book lays out a clear, thorough, and highly scriptural explanation of how Jesus fulfills the Old Testament promise of Messiah. This fulfillment was not just ticking off some boxes of messianic prophesy, but saw Jesus actually embodying and filling up the promises of God in his life, ministry, death, and resurrection.
This book was incredibly helpful in exploring key elements of the Old Testament in light of Jesus and the New Testament.
This book was incredibly helpful in exploring key elements of the Old Testament in light of Jesus and the New Testament.
November 25, 2014
Anglican clergyman and prolific author on Old Testament scholarship, Christopher J. H. Wright, offers a unique piece of work in his Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament. The book itself revolves specifically around the figure of Jesus Christ as He is understood through the Tanakh. Wright tries to shed light on specific Old Testament passages and how they relate to the historical Christ –as primarily understood through the gospels –socially, politically, ethically, and theologically.
Withal the book itself is neatly divided into five neat sections dealing with Jesus as He relates to specific themes exegeted from Old Testament text; namely, the narrative of Israel, the covenants of God, Messianic identity, Messianic mission, and ethics. Although the book is supposed to be written for the layman –as Wright himself sought out to complete the book without any footnotes, endnotes, or citations –it lacks serious critical scholarship historically and theologically, as Wright thereupon inevitably falls into sophomoric errors of bad hermeneutic and anachronistic eisegetical fallacies.
Wright seems to do a great job at explaining the basic narrative of the Old Testament, but seems to fail to provide any information about the main thesis of his work in the entire first chapter, and instead spouts off a few a priori historical facts like “Jesus was Jew,� and “Jesus was the Son of David.� He furthermore offers arbitrary aphorisms throughout the rest of the chapter like “Israel was called by God, hence their unique.� The second chapter deals with the covenants found in the Old Testament, however, Wright overtly objects to the idea of a ‘covenant.� Rather, he prefers to call them all “promises� whereupon he describes the nature of these in relation to God. Chapter four deals with the mission of the historical Jesus; Wright weights parts of the gospel narrative in light of Old Testament passages.
He runs through how Jesus was the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophesies, however, it’s unclear whether he tries to show the prophesies being fulfilled in Jesus, or if Jesus fulfilled the prophesies, for he seemingly flip-flops throughout this chapter with his applied hermeneutic. Lastly, chapter five deals with the ethics of Jesus as understood through the Gospel narratives, as Wright tries to reconcile them with Mosaic ethics espoused in the Pentateuch.
Critical Analysis
Again, although Wright displays common themes and sub-themes and intertwines them through a common motif as he supports his thesis, he falls short in many areas within his themes in trying to support his points. As was stated before, the differentiation from fact, opinion, and supposition in Wright’s prose is not quite clear. Moreover, the assertion of various opinions as fact, and failure to recognize other basic orthodox hermeneutics, leaves the book replete with misinformation. For example, on page 67, Wright states, “There is no evidence that Cyrus ever acknowledged Yahweh (Isa 45:4, ‘you do not know me�, seems to rule it out)…it seems unlikely that he ever heard of the predictions concerning him made in Isaiah 40-45…he simply acted in the exercise of his own ambitions, thereby in the mystery of providence also carrying out God’s promise.� Nevertheless, this is just run of the mill historical scholarship on Wright’s part. As was stated before, it’s unsure whether Wright is stating this as a fact, supposition, or opinion, but he fails to accurately weigh the historical and biblical evidence to the contrary. Even still, we don’t know the ambitions or motives of Cyrus: whether they were all personal or self-sacrificial at all. Nevertheless, Ezra the scribe writes, “In the first year of Cyrus king of Persia (538 B.C.), in order to fulfill the word of the LORD spoken by Jeremiah, the LORD moved the heart of Cyrus king of Persia to make a proclamation throughout his realm� (Ezra 1:1). Certainly we can state with good confidence –historically through the Biblical records of Ezra, and archeologically through the ‘Cyrus cylinder� –that King Cyrus did in fact make such a proclamation upon his ascension to the Persian Empire as ‘king of the world.�
It moreover it can be established that in doing so, he fulfilled numerous biblical prophesies in Jeremiah, Daniel, and Isaiah–specifically ones bearing his exact name (c.f. Isa 44:28, 45:1-5). Although Wright objects to Cyrus ever having any knowledge whatsoever of the ‘Cyrus� prophesies in Isaiah –“you do not know me (Is 44:5)� � it’s clear that the context is speaking about Cyrus� knowledge of Yahweh from personal revelatory experience, or a posteriori knowledge through existential experience. To these ends, it’s not hard to affirm that he did not know the LORD in this way. Yada`, used as the word translated as ‘know� in Isaiah 45:4 affirms this as Strong’s acquaints it with “perceiving, knowing, recognizing, distinguishing, and knowing by experience.� However, this does not rule out the possibility that Cyrus, albeit still under the control of Divine Providence, did in fact know of the specific prophesies written about him the Hebrew Scriptures. Forsooth, to the contrary! Josephus, in his The Antiquities of the Jews, states of the first year of the reign of King Cyrus:
This was known to Cyrus by his reading the book which Isaiah left behind him of his prophecies; for this prophet said that God had spoken thus to him in a secret vision:
This was foretold by Isaiah one hundred and forty years before the temple was demolished. Accordingly, when Cyrus read this, and admired the Divine power, an earnest desire and ambition seized upon him to fulfill what was so written.�
This would make sense in light of how Cyrus is portrayed throughout the prophesies of Isaiah in comparison with other individuals or entities that God used and called by name to fulfill prophesy, but were painted in a much more negative light, and therefore still judged for their wicked actions notwithstanding the fulfillment of the aforementioned actions decreed by the will of God. An example of this would be Assyria as prophesied in Isaiah 10:5,6; for example, God desired to use Assyria to punish Israel (Samaria) for their rebellion against His Law, however, Assyria was merely a means whereby the end was brought about: they themselves were eventually punished (c.f. Nahum for example). It’s therefore not improbable nor implausible, in light of all the biblical inclinations and Josephus� ancient account heretofore discussed, to think that Cyrus did in fact know of the prophesies about him, and in fact acted upon them for that very reason!
Other serious objections can be raised concerning Wright’s understanding of prophesy. Albeit there certainly is not just one form of hermeneutic or interpretation concerning Old Testament prophesies, Wright appears to be shelving all other possibilities for his eclectic interpretive approach. On page 76 he writes, “There is a wide variety of such interpretations of prophesy held by many sincere Christian people. However, such expectations seem quite wide off the mark. Sometimes they simply make the mistake of taking [the Bible] literally� (Wright, 76).
Obviously it can be discussed here briefly why Wright may take this approach biblically, namely, his theological upbringing. With a Presbyterian upbringing, and an Anglican ordination, it’s easy to see how Wright can fall into an Alexandrian type theology of allegorizing and typifying many aspects of the Old Testament , specifically his eclectic view of prophesy or “promise.� Knowing Wright’s background helps the reader to understand the motive and goal of what he is trying to prove in his thesis; nevertheless, none of the aforementioned approaches are inherently bad at all! I’m not here to criticize one’s denominational creed, however, Wright seems to fall way off track in proving his thesis when he states dogmatically what type of hermeneutic needs to be used for all Old Testament prophesy.
Regardless, Wright’s framework still probably has nothing to do with denominational lines, and everything to do with higher criticism and post-modern theology; viz., writing a book about Jesus in the absence of a systematic theological arch. Sven so, he explains what he means on page 77: “To insist on literal fulfillment of prophesies can be to overlook their actual nature within the category of promise� (Wright, 77). How does he know this? Serious proof of his claims are severely lacking, notwithstanding the horse-to-car analogy, however, he raises no serious biblical evidence as sufficient warrant for his theological belief. For instance, he states, “to look for direct fulfillments of, say, Ezekiel in the 20th century Middle East is to bypass and short-circuit the reality and the finality of what we already have in Christ� (Wright, 77). One might raise the simply question to his proposition of: why?
While Wright himself may not see the latter prophesies of the new temple and sacrifices of Ezekiel as feasible in his theological worldview (Ezek 40-48), he’s hardly proven theologically that it’s not plausible or even possible given the nature of the prophetic vision itself. To the contrary! The new covenant theologian, and the dispensationalist alike, has no problem whatsoever recognizing both covenants being fulfilled in the latter days literally, just as described in Ezekiel, and Wright hardly presses any evidence to the contrary, save that he doesn’t really feel like it’s literal. To protestant covenant theologians, for hundreds of years, the idea of a literal fulfillment of the Old Testament prophesies concerning the re-gathering of the Jews and the creation of Israel seemed absurd. Nevertheless, lo and behold, Israel stands as a sovereign nation in the turmoil of surrounding nations that want to wipe it off the planet; this is the demonstration that God, in the words of Chuck Missler, “says what He means, and means what He says.�
Other serious objects lie in Wright’s understanding of Jesus� mission from a bad Christological perspective, as he masks Jesus divinity under sloppy New-Testament scholarship. Wright seems to imply Jesus as a mere historical human figure, (prophetic fulfillment of Christ’s eternality [Mic 5:2] is conspicuously absent) as he states things numerous times over like: “Jesus saw himself as fulfilling the mission of the Servant of God� (Wright, 157), and, “Jesus drew on another figure from his Hebrew Bible and that was the Servant of the Lord� (Wright, 154), and again, “Presumably God the Father knew that His son, by age thirty, was so steeped in his Hebrew scriptures that he would not only recognize the texts but also understand all that they were meant for his own self-identity� (Wright, 106), and once more, “The Old Testament set forth a mission, a mission which Jesus accepted as the driving aim of his own life� (180).
According to Wright, God the omniscient Father would only presumably know that His eternally begotten Son –the Second Person of the Trinity –would recognize prophesies about Himself (good thing Jesus studied His “Hebrew Scriptures� a lot or we might have not had a Messiah!) Wright’s book is replete with gross underlying erroneous statements, which directly cut into the heart of orthodox Christian Christology. He seems to see Jesus as the self-appointed fulfillment to the Old Testament prophesies rather than seeing the Old Testament prophesies as predictions (a word that Wright scoffs at in light of his horse-to-car ‘promise� theory) of the Second Person of the Trinity to come. Rather, he doesn’t see Christ as a contingent necessity because of the nature of God’s sovereignty and the divine functionality of the Trinity; nay, to the apparent contrary!
Wright continually views Jesus as the historical man who seemed to accept the ‘divine calling� from God in a form of Adoptionism or Arianism that, given the nature of his own assertions, can’t really be refuted with any other portion of his book. Incidentally enough, Wright avoids all Pauline theology that establishes these fundamental truths, and only side-steps out of the gospels to prove his ‘mission theology� of Christ.
Furthermore, he severely lacks objective perspective as his understanding of Ancient-Near Eastern ethics is widely off the mark. Nevertheless, this book review can only be so long in the critical analysis, and now is not the time for such a critique. In regards to the practicality of this text for laypeople and ministers alike, it can be supposed that such a book may be useful to the layperson insofar as they can increase their personal devotion and understanding of the Scriptures in relation to Jesus. Howbeit, I would not recommend this resource –given the numerous other resources on the topic which revolve around sound systematic theology –to a minister or layperson personally.
Wrights overall goal, however, did seem to adequately make it to the finish line, notwithstanding the serious flaws hitherto discussed. As far as the ‘point� of the book, it’s quite hard to write a book to a Christian demographic about how Jesus is seen through the Old Testament, and not prove your point, regardless of how bad one’s thesis, prose, and diction is. The book itself did not make me think, and left me with no questions save the curious thought of how an intelligent man –with a Ph.D from Cambridge University –could write such a misconstrued book. Even still, it’s therefore sufficient to say that Wright, in an overarching sense, amply proved his point satisfactorily: Jesus is seen through the Old Testament! The only question now hereby raised is, however: which Jesus?
Brent McCulley
Withal the book itself is neatly divided into five neat sections dealing with Jesus as He relates to specific themes exegeted from Old Testament text; namely, the narrative of Israel, the covenants of God, Messianic identity, Messianic mission, and ethics. Although the book is supposed to be written for the layman –as Wright himself sought out to complete the book without any footnotes, endnotes, or citations –it lacks serious critical scholarship historically and theologically, as Wright thereupon inevitably falls into sophomoric errors of bad hermeneutic and anachronistic eisegetical fallacies.
Wright seems to do a great job at explaining the basic narrative of the Old Testament, but seems to fail to provide any information about the main thesis of his work in the entire first chapter, and instead spouts off a few a priori historical facts like “Jesus was Jew,� and “Jesus was the Son of David.� He furthermore offers arbitrary aphorisms throughout the rest of the chapter like “Israel was called by God, hence their unique.� The second chapter deals with the covenants found in the Old Testament, however, Wright overtly objects to the idea of a ‘covenant.� Rather, he prefers to call them all “promises� whereupon he describes the nature of these in relation to God. Chapter four deals with the mission of the historical Jesus; Wright weights parts of the gospel narrative in light of Old Testament passages.
He runs through how Jesus was the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophesies, however, it’s unclear whether he tries to show the prophesies being fulfilled in Jesus, or if Jesus fulfilled the prophesies, for he seemingly flip-flops throughout this chapter with his applied hermeneutic. Lastly, chapter five deals with the ethics of Jesus as understood through the Gospel narratives, as Wright tries to reconcile them with Mosaic ethics espoused in the Pentateuch.
Critical Analysis
Again, although Wright displays common themes and sub-themes and intertwines them through a common motif as he supports his thesis, he falls short in many areas within his themes in trying to support his points. As was stated before, the differentiation from fact, opinion, and supposition in Wright’s prose is not quite clear. Moreover, the assertion of various opinions as fact, and failure to recognize other basic orthodox hermeneutics, leaves the book replete with misinformation. For example, on page 67, Wright states, “There is no evidence that Cyrus ever acknowledged Yahweh (Isa 45:4, ‘you do not know me�, seems to rule it out)…it seems unlikely that he ever heard of the predictions concerning him made in Isaiah 40-45…he simply acted in the exercise of his own ambitions, thereby in the mystery of providence also carrying out God’s promise.� Nevertheless, this is just run of the mill historical scholarship on Wright’s part. As was stated before, it’s unsure whether Wright is stating this as a fact, supposition, or opinion, but he fails to accurately weigh the historical and biblical evidence to the contrary. Even still, we don’t know the ambitions or motives of Cyrus: whether they were all personal or self-sacrificial at all. Nevertheless, Ezra the scribe writes, “In the first year of Cyrus king of Persia (538 B.C.), in order to fulfill the word of the LORD spoken by Jeremiah, the LORD moved the heart of Cyrus king of Persia to make a proclamation throughout his realm� (Ezra 1:1). Certainly we can state with good confidence –historically through the Biblical records of Ezra, and archeologically through the ‘Cyrus cylinder� –that King Cyrus did in fact make such a proclamation upon his ascension to the Persian Empire as ‘king of the world.�
It moreover it can be established that in doing so, he fulfilled numerous biblical prophesies in Jeremiah, Daniel, and Isaiah–specifically ones bearing his exact name (c.f. Isa 44:28, 45:1-5). Although Wright objects to Cyrus ever having any knowledge whatsoever of the ‘Cyrus� prophesies in Isaiah –“you do not know me (Is 44:5)� � it’s clear that the context is speaking about Cyrus� knowledge of Yahweh from personal revelatory experience, or a posteriori knowledge through existential experience. To these ends, it’s not hard to affirm that he did not know the LORD in this way. Yada`, used as the word translated as ‘know� in Isaiah 45:4 affirms this as Strong’s acquaints it with “perceiving, knowing, recognizing, distinguishing, and knowing by experience.� However, this does not rule out the possibility that Cyrus, albeit still under the control of Divine Providence, did in fact know of the specific prophesies written about him the Hebrew Scriptures. Forsooth, to the contrary! Josephus, in his The Antiquities of the Jews, states of the first year of the reign of King Cyrus:
“[God] stirred up the mind of Cyrus, and made him write this throughout all Asia: "Thus saith Cyrus the king: Since God Almighty hath appointed me to be king of the habitable earth, I believe that he is that God which the nation of the Israelites worship; for indeed he foretold my name by the prophets, and that I should build him a house at Jerusalem, in the country of Judea."
This was known to Cyrus by his reading the book which Isaiah left behind him of his prophecies; for this prophet said that God had spoken thus to him in a secret vision:
"My will is, that Cyrus, whom I have appointed to be king over many and great nations, send back my people to their own land, and build my temple."
This was foretold by Isaiah one hundred and forty years before the temple was demolished. Accordingly, when Cyrus read this, and admired the Divine power, an earnest desire and ambition seized upon him to fulfill what was so written.�
This would make sense in light of how Cyrus is portrayed throughout the prophesies of Isaiah in comparison with other individuals or entities that God used and called by name to fulfill prophesy, but were painted in a much more negative light, and therefore still judged for their wicked actions notwithstanding the fulfillment of the aforementioned actions decreed by the will of God. An example of this would be Assyria as prophesied in Isaiah 10:5,6; for example, God desired to use Assyria to punish Israel (Samaria) for their rebellion against His Law, however, Assyria was merely a means whereby the end was brought about: they themselves were eventually punished (c.f. Nahum for example). It’s therefore not improbable nor implausible, in light of all the biblical inclinations and Josephus� ancient account heretofore discussed, to think that Cyrus did in fact know of the prophesies about him, and in fact acted upon them for that very reason!
Other serious objections can be raised concerning Wright’s understanding of prophesy. Albeit there certainly is not just one form of hermeneutic or interpretation concerning Old Testament prophesies, Wright appears to be shelving all other possibilities for his eclectic interpretive approach. On page 76 he writes, “There is a wide variety of such interpretations of prophesy held by many sincere Christian people. However, such expectations seem quite wide off the mark. Sometimes they simply make the mistake of taking [the Bible] literally� (Wright, 76).
Obviously it can be discussed here briefly why Wright may take this approach biblically, namely, his theological upbringing. With a Presbyterian upbringing, and an Anglican ordination, it’s easy to see how Wright can fall into an Alexandrian type theology of allegorizing and typifying many aspects of the Old Testament , specifically his eclectic view of prophesy or “promise.� Knowing Wright’s background helps the reader to understand the motive and goal of what he is trying to prove in his thesis; nevertheless, none of the aforementioned approaches are inherently bad at all! I’m not here to criticize one’s denominational creed, however, Wright seems to fall way off track in proving his thesis when he states dogmatically what type of hermeneutic needs to be used for all Old Testament prophesy.
Regardless, Wright’s framework still probably has nothing to do with denominational lines, and everything to do with higher criticism and post-modern theology; viz., writing a book about Jesus in the absence of a systematic theological arch. Sven so, he explains what he means on page 77: “To insist on literal fulfillment of prophesies can be to overlook their actual nature within the category of promise� (Wright, 77). How does he know this? Serious proof of his claims are severely lacking, notwithstanding the horse-to-car analogy, however, he raises no serious biblical evidence as sufficient warrant for his theological belief. For instance, he states, “to look for direct fulfillments of, say, Ezekiel in the 20th century Middle East is to bypass and short-circuit the reality and the finality of what we already have in Christ� (Wright, 77). One might raise the simply question to his proposition of: why?
While Wright himself may not see the latter prophesies of the new temple and sacrifices of Ezekiel as feasible in his theological worldview (Ezek 40-48), he’s hardly proven theologically that it’s not plausible or even possible given the nature of the prophetic vision itself. To the contrary! The new covenant theologian, and the dispensationalist alike, has no problem whatsoever recognizing both covenants being fulfilled in the latter days literally, just as described in Ezekiel, and Wright hardly presses any evidence to the contrary, save that he doesn’t really feel like it’s literal. To protestant covenant theologians, for hundreds of years, the idea of a literal fulfillment of the Old Testament prophesies concerning the re-gathering of the Jews and the creation of Israel seemed absurd. Nevertheless, lo and behold, Israel stands as a sovereign nation in the turmoil of surrounding nations that want to wipe it off the planet; this is the demonstration that God, in the words of Chuck Missler, “says what He means, and means what He says.�
Other serious objects lie in Wright’s understanding of Jesus� mission from a bad Christological perspective, as he masks Jesus divinity under sloppy New-Testament scholarship. Wright seems to imply Jesus as a mere historical human figure, (prophetic fulfillment of Christ’s eternality [Mic 5:2] is conspicuously absent) as he states things numerous times over like: “Jesus saw himself as fulfilling the mission of the Servant of God� (Wright, 157), and, “Jesus drew on another figure from his Hebrew Bible and that was the Servant of the Lord� (Wright, 154), and again, “Presumably God the Father knew that His son, by age thirty, was so steeped in his Hebrew scriptures that he would not only recognize the texts but also understand all that they were meant for his own self-identity� (Wright, 106), and once more, “The Old Testament set forth a mission, a mission which Jesus accepted as the driving aim of his own life� (180).
According to Wright, God the omniscient Father would only presumably know that His eternally begotten Son –the Second Person of the Trinity –would recognize prophesies about Himself (good thing Jesus studied His “Hebrew Scriptures� a lot or we might have not had a Messiah!) Wright’s book is replete with gross underlying erroneous statements, which directly cut into the heart of orthodox Christian Christology. He seems to see Jesus as the self-appointed fulfillment to the Old Testament prophesies rather than seeing the Old Testament prophesies as predictions (a word that Wright scoffs at in light of his horse-to-car ‘promise� theory) of the Second Person of the Trinity to come. Rather, he doesn’t see Christ as a contingent necessity because of the nature of God’s sovereignty and the divine functionality of the Trinity; nay, to the apparent contrary!
Wright continually views Jesus as the historical man who seemed to accept the ‘divine calling� from God in a form of Adoptionism or Arianism that, given the nature of his own assertions, can’t really be refuted with any other portion of his book. Incidentally enough, Wright avoids all Pauline theology that establishes these fundamental truths, and only side-steps out of the gospels to prove his ‘mission theology� of Christ.
Furthermore, he severely lacks objective perspective as his understanding of Ancient-Near Eastern ethics is widely off the mark. Nevertheless, this book review can only be so long in the critical analysis, and now is not the time for such a critique. In regards to the practicality of this text for laypeople and ministers alike, it can be supposed that such a book may be useful to the layperson insofar as they can increase their personal devotion and understanding of the Scriptures in relation to Jesus. Howbeit, I would not recommend this resource –given the numerous other resources on the topic which revolve around sound systematic theology –to a minister or layperson personally.
Wrights overall goal, however, did seem to adequately make it to the finish line, notwithstanding the serious flaws hitherto discussed. As far as the ‘point� of the book, it’s quite hard to write a book to a Christian demographic about how Jesus is seen through the Old Testament, and not prove your point, regardless of how bad one’s thesis, prose, and diction is. The book itself did not make me think, and left me with no questions save the curious thought of how an intelligent man –with a Ph.D from Cambridge University –could write such a misconstrued book. Even still, it’s therefore sufficient to say that Wright, in an overarching sense, amply proved his point satisfactorily: Jesus is seen through the Old Testament! The only question now hereby raised is, however: which Jesus?
Brent McCulley
March 8, 2022
Notes: Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament
What Matthew is saying to us by beginning in this way is that we will only understand Jesus properly if we see him in the light of this story, which he completes and brings to its climax
They were all, from a Jewish point of view, foreigners. Tamar and Rahab were Canaanites (Gen 38; Josh 2); Ruth was a Moabitess (Ruth 1); Bathsheba was the wife of Uriah, a Hittite, so probably a Hittite herself (2 Sam 1). The implication of Jesus being the heir of Abraham and his universal promise is underlined: Jesus the Jew, and the Jewish Messiah, had Gentile blood!
Genesis 1�11 poses the question to which the rest of the Bible, from Genesis 12 to Revelation 22, is the answer.
-effects reaching from personal (Cain/Abel), to society (the flood), to global (tower of Babel)
He is known, and indeed chooses to be known, as “The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.� That description means he is the God of promise and fulfillment, and the God whose purpose ultimately embraced all nations.
-the problem
-the election
-the redemption
-the covenant
-the inheritance
It is important to see that this covenant was based on what God had already done for them (as they had just recently seen, Ex 19:4-6). God’s grace and redemptive action came first. Their obedience to the law and covenant was to be a grateful response, and in order to enable them to be what God wanted them to be as his people in the midst of the nations.
Possibly the most important achievement of David was that he at last gave to Israel complete and unified control over the whole of the land that had been promised to Abraham. Up to then it had been fragmentarily occupied by loosely federated tribes, under constant attack and invasion from their enemies.
Samuel had warned the Israelites when they asked for a king that having a king would eventually mean forced labor, taxation, conscription and confiscation (1 Sam 8:10-18). Solomon’s later reign proved all these things painfully true.
One affirmation was that Yahweh, the God of Israel, was in sovereign control of world history—not merely the affairs of Israel. The prophets had asserted this with incredible boldness.
The exile lasted fifty years (that is, from 587 B.C. to the first return of some Jews to Jerusalem in 538 B.C.). The period from the destruction of the temple to the completion of its rebuilding was approximately seventy years.
The clouds the people so much dread—the sudden rise of Cyrus, ruler of the new, expanding Persian Empire—would burst in blessings on their head. Babylon would be destroyed and they would be released, free to return to Jerusalem, which, sings the prophet, was already exulting in joy at the sight of God leading his captives home.
-the exile
-the restoration
-the intertestamental period
As the officially appointed Persian governor, Nehemiah was able to give the needed political patronage and authority to the reforms of Ezra, as well as engaging in some social and economic reforms of his own.
Twice during the early fifth century Persia tried, and failed, to conquer the Greek mainland and spread its power to Europe. It was heroically beaten back by the Spartans and Athenians—who then fell to fighting with each other. Not until the mid-fourth century were the Greek states forced into unity by the power of Macedon, which then turned its attention east to the wealth of the Persian Empire just across the Aegean Sea. Under Alexander the Great, Greek armies sliced through the Persian Empire like a knife through butter, with amazing speed. The whole vast area once ruled by Persia, including Judah, then came under Greek rule. This was the beginning of the “Hellenistic� (Greek) era, when the Greek language and culture spread throughout the whole Near East and Middle Eastern world.
From about 200 B.C. onward, however, control of Palestine passed into the hands of the Seleucid kings of Syria, who ruled from Antioch over the northern part of the old Alexandrian empire. Their rule was much more aggressively Greek, and Jews faced increasing pressure to conform religiously and culturally to Hellenism. Those who refused faced persecution.
The supreme insult was when Antiochus Epiphanes IV in 167 B.C. set up a statue of Zeus, the supreme god of Greek mythology, in the temple itself. This sacrilege sparked off a major revolt when Jews under the leadership of Judas Maccabeus took up arms. It ended with a successful struggle for independence, climaxing in the cleansing of the temple in 164 B.C. For the next century, the Jews more or less governed themselves under the leadership of the Hasmonean priestly dynasty. This lasted until the power of Greece was replaced by that of Rome.
Two features of this intertestamental period are worth noting in view of their influence on the world into which Jesus arrived. The first was an increasing devotion to the law, the Torah. This became the supreme mark of faithful Jews. � The second feature was the upsurge of apocalyptic, messianic hope. As persecution continued and as the nation experienced martyrdoms and great suffering, it began to hope for a final, climactic intervention by God himself, as the prophets had foretold. God would establish his kingdom forever by destroying his (and Israel’s) enemies.
So just imagine the stirring of hearts and quickening of pulses in Jewish homes and communities when, into this mixture of aspirations and hopes, dropped the message of John the Baptist, and then of Jesus himself: “The time is fulfilled! [what you have been waiting for as something future is now here and present]; the kingdom of God is at hand!
It is the same God. The God who in these last days has spoken to us by his Son (as the author of Hebrews puts it, Heb 1:2), also and truly spoke through the prophets. And those prophets were rooted in the earthy specifics of their own historical contexts. They spoke into history, and their words come to us out of that history. We cannot, must not, simply throw that history away, like a discarded ticket when you reach your destination at the end of a journey.
Taken together, both Testaments record the history of God’s saving work for humanity. Salvation history is a term that has been used by many scholars to refer to this, and some would regard it as the primary point of continuity or relationship between the two testaments of the Christian Bible.
At Mount Sinai, for example, at the very point where God is impressing on Israel their unique identity and role in the midst of the nations, he leaves no doubt that he is far from being a minor local deity or even your average national god. The scope of his concern and his sovereignty is universal: “the whole earth is mine� (Ex 19:5).
The rest of the world was not absent from the mind and purpose of God in all his dealings with Old Testament Israel. Indeed, to borrow a not unfamiliar phrase from John’s Gospel: God so loved the world that he chose Israel.
So Israel’s unique historical experience was not a ticket to a cozy state of privileged favoritism. Rather it laid upon the people a missionary task and a moral responsibility. If they failed in these, then in a sense they fell back to the level of any other nation. They stood, like all nations and all humanity, before the bar of God’s judgment, and their history by itself gave them no guaranteed protection.
Now when we consider Jesus in the light of this, the vitally important fact is that the New Testament presents him to us as the Messiah, Jesus the Christ. And the Messiah “was� Israel. That is, the Messiah was Israel representatively and personified. The Messiah was the completion of all that Israel had been put in the world for (i.e., God’s self-revelation and his work of human redemption). For this reason, Jesus shares in the uniqueness of Israel. What God had been doing through no other nation he now completed through no other person than the Messiah Jesus.
The saving acts of God within or on behalf of Israel, then, most certainly did not take place in sterile, vacuum-sealed isolation, but within the turbulent crosscurrents of international politics and the historical rise and fall of empires whose destinies Yahweh himself controlled.
Not only does the Old Testament tell the story that Jesus completes, it also declares the promise that Jesus fulfills.
By the end of the Old Testament, we are left expecting God to do again what he has done so often before.
The whole Bible bears witness to the mission of God to the fallen, suffering, sinful human race, and indeed ultimately to his whole creation as well. That is why God called Abraham, sent Jesus and commissioned his apostles. For there is one servant people, one Servant King and one servant mission.
The church was not a new Gentile phenomenon, even if it looked like that as its membership became increasingly Gentile. The community of Jesus followers was a new humanity, composed of both believing Jews and Gentiles. But it was also organically and spiritually continuous with the original people of God, as Paul’s olive tree picture in Romans 11 shows. Israel had been redefined and extended, but the Jewish roots and trunk were not replaced or uprooted just because unbelieving branches had been lopped off.
We have imagined that the best way to save the world is to rule the world, with the tragically ironic result that Christian mission in the name of the Servant has been indelibly associated in the minds of many with power—military, cultural, economic and political. It is an image that is hard to live down. But the historical abuse of mission is no reason to abandon it altogether. For the mandate of the Servant King still stands.
And now, Israel, what does the LORD your God ask of you but to fear the LORD your God, to walk in obedience to him, to love him, to serve the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, and to observe the LORD’s commands and decrees that I am giving you today for your own good?� (Deut 10:12-13).
He had not sent Moses with the Ten Commandments under his cloak to tell Israel that if it would keep the law, God would save it. Precisely the other way around. He saved it and then asked it to keep his law in response.
Obedience flows from grace; it does not buy it. Obedience is the fruit and proof and sustenance of a relationship with the God you already know.
It is a feature of the Torah that love is commanded. In other words, while it certainly has an emotional dimension, love is not merely an emotion. Love is an act of the will, which is demonstrated in obeying God’s commands. The same is true with gratitude. Of course it has an emotional dimension—the book of Psalms overflows with the emotion of thanksgiving. But the behavior that gratitude motivates is commanded. It is not just an optional preference for the more sensitive souls.
being holy did not mean what we might call being extra-specially religious. In fact only very few of the laws in the chapter are about religious rituals. Rather, it shows that the kind of holiness God has in mind, the kind that reflects God’s own holiness, is thoroughly practical and down to earth. Look at the details of Leviticus 19. Holiness means: generosity to the poor when you get returns on your agricultural investments (Lev 19:9-10; cf. Deut 24:19); fair treatment and payment of employees (Lev 19:13; cf. Deut 24:14); practical compassion for the disabled and respect for the elderly (Lev 19:14, 32; cf. Deut 27:18); the integrity of the judicial process (Lev 19:15; cf. Deut 16:18-20); safety precautions to prevent endangering life (Lev 19:16; cf. Deut 22:8); ecological sensitivity (Lev 19:23-25; cf. Deut 20:19-20); equality before the law for ethnic minorities (Lev 19:33-34; cf. Deut 24:17); and honesty in trade and business (Lev 19:35-36; cf. Deut 25:13-16). We call such matters “social ethics� or “human rights� and think we are very modern and civilized for doing so.
It was not so much wealth in and of itself that Jesus condemned but rather its tendency to produce an attitude of complacent self-sufficiency (Lk 12:15-21). Self-sufficiency is the diametric opposite of the prime quality needed for entrance to the kingdom of God—humble dependence on God in faith (Mt 6:19-34).
The relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus is historical, because the story of God with his people links them together with Christ as the climax. The relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus is covenantal, because the promise of God in the Old is fulfilled through Christ in the New. The relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus is representational, because the identity of Israel is embodied in Jesus as its Messiah King. The relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus is missional, because Jesus accomplished the great purpose of God for all nations and all creation that the Old Testament declared. The relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus is ethical, because the way of justice and compassion that the Old Testament holds up as pleasing to God is endorsed and amplified by Jesus in the New. And above all, the relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus is incarnational, because in Jesus of Nazareth, the LORD God, the Holy One of Israel, has walked among us. As we love, worship and obey him as our Savior and Lord, may we love, honor, read and understand the Scriptures that were so precious and formative in his heart and mind.
What Matthew is saying to us by beginning in this way is that we will only understand Jesus properly if we see him in the light of this story, which he completes and brings to its climax
They were all, from a Jewish point of view, foreigners. Tamar and Rahab were Canaanites (Gen 38; Josh 2); Ruth was a Moabitess (Ruth 1); Bathsheba was the wife of Uriah, a Hittite, so probably a Hittite herself (2 Sam 1). The implication of Jesus being the heir of Abraham and his universal promise is underlined: Jesus the Jew, and the Jewish Messiah, had Gentile blood!
Genesis 1�11 poses the question to which the rest of the Bible, from Genesis 12 to Revelation 22, is the answer.
-effects reaching from personal (Cain/Abel), to society (the flood), to global (tower of Babel)
He is known, and indeed chooses to be known, as “The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.� That description means he is the God of promise and fulfillment, and the God whose purpose ultimately embraced all nations.
-the problem
-the election
-the redemption
-the covenant
-the inheritance
It is important to see that this covenant was based on what God had already done for them (as they had just recently seen, Ex 19:4-6). God’s grace and redemptive action came first. Their obedience to the law and covenant was to be a grateful response, and in order to enable them to be what God wanted them to be as his people in the midst of the nations.
Possibly the most important achievement of David was that he at last gave to Israel complete and unified control over the whole of the land that had been promised to Abraham. Up to then it had been fragmentarily occupied by loosely federated tribes, under constant attack and invasion from their enemies.
Samuel had warned the Israelites when they asked for a king that having a king would eventually mean forced labor, taxation, conscription and confiscation (1 Sam 8:10-18). Solomon’s later reign proved all these things painfully true.
One affirmation was that Yahweh, the God of Israel, was in sovereign control of world history—not merely the affairs of Israel. The prophets had asserted this with incredible boldness.
The exile lasted fifty years (that is, from 587 B.C. to the first return of some Jews to Jerusalem in 538 B.C.). The period from the destruction of the temple to the completion of its rebuilding was approximately seventy years.
The clouds the people so much dread—the sudden rise of Cyrus, ruler of the new, expanding Persian Empire—would burst in blessings on their head. Babylon would be destroyed and they would be released, free to return to Jerusalem, which, sings the prophet, was already exulting in joy at the sight of God leading his captives home.
-the exile
-the restoration
-the intertestamental period
As the officially appointed Persian governor, Nehemiah was able to give the needed political patronage and authority to the reforms of Ezra, as well as engaging in some social and economic reforms of his own.
Twice during the early fifth century Persia tried, and failed, to conquer the Greek mainland and spread its power to Europe. It was heroically beaten back by the Spartans and Athenians—who then fell to fighting with each other. Not until the mid-fourth century were the Greek states forced into unity by the power of Macedon, which then turned its attention east to the wealth of the Persian Empire just across the Aegean Sea. Under Alexander the Great, Greek armies sliced through the Persian Empire like a knife through butter, with amazing speed. The whole vast area once ruled by Persia, including Judah, then came under Greek rule. This was the beginning of the “Hellenistic� (Greek) era, when the Greek language and culture spread throughout the whole Near East and Middle Eastern world.
From about 200 B.C. onward, however, control of Palestine passed into the hands of the Seleucid kings of Syria, who ruled from Antioch over the northern part of the old Alexandrian empire. Their rule was much more aggressively Greek, and Jews faced increasing pressure to conform religiously and culturally to Hellenism. Those who refused faced persecution.
The supreme insult was when Antiochus Epiphanes IV in 167 B.C. set up a statue of Zeus, the supreme god of Greek mythology, in the temple itself. This sacrilege sparked off a major revolt when Jews under the leadership of Judas Maccabeus took up arms. It ended with a successful struggle for independence, climaxing in the cleansing of the temple in 164 B.C. For the next century, the Jews more or less governed themselves under the leadership of the Hasmonean priestly dynasty. This lasted until the power of Greece was replaced by that of Rome.
Two features of this intertestamental period are worth noting in view of their influence on the world into which Jesus arrived. The first was an increasing devotion to the law, the Torah. This became the supreme mark of faithful Jews. � The second feature was the upsurge of apocalyptic, messianic hope. As persecution continued and as the nation experienced martyrdoms and great suffering, it began to hope for a final, climactic intervention by God himself, as the prophets had foretold. God would establish his kingdom forever by destroying his (and Israel’s) enemies.
So just imagine the stirring of hearts and quickening of pulses in Jewish homes and communities when, into this mixture of aspirations and hopes, dropped the message of John the Baptist, and then of Jesus himself: “The time is fulfilled! [what you have been waiting for as something future is now here and present]; the kingdom of God is at hand!
It is the same God. The God who in these last days has spoken to us by his Son (as the author of Hebrews puts it, Heb 1:2), also and truly spoke through the prophets. And those prophets were rooted in the earthy specifics of their own historical contexts. They spoke into history, and their words come to us out of that history. We cannot, must not, simply throw that history away, like a discarded ticket when you reach your destination at the end of a journey.
Taken together, both Testaments record the history of God’s saving work for humanity. Salvation history is a term that has been used by many scholars to refer to this, and some would regard it as the primary point of continuity or relationship between the two testaments of the Christian Bible.
At Mount Sinai, for example, at the very point where God is impressing on Israel their unique identity and role in the midst of the nations, he leaves no doubt that he is far from being a minor local deity or even your average national god. The scope of his concern and his sovereignty is universal: “the whole earth is mine� (Ex 19:5).
The rest of the world was not absent from the mind and purpose of God in all his dealings with Old Testament Israel. Indeed, to borrow a not unfamiliar phrase from John’s Gospel: God so loved the world that he chose Israel.
So Israel’s unique historical experience was not a ticket to a cozy state of privileged favoritism. Rather it laid upon the people a missionary task and a moral responsibility. If they failed in these, then in a sense they fell back to the level of any other nation. They stood, like all nations and all humanity, before the bar of God’s judgment, and their history by itself gave them no guaranteed protection.
Now when we consider Jesus in the light of this, the vitally important fact is that the New Testament presents him to us as the Messiah, Jesus the Christ. And the Messiah “was� Israel. That is, the Messiah was Israel representatively and personified. The Messiah was the completion of all that Israel had been put in the world for (i.e., God’s self-revelation and his work of human redemption). For this reason, Jesus shares in the uniqueness of Israel. What God had been doing through no other nation he now completed through no other person than the Messiah Jesus.
The saving acts of God within or on behalf of Israel, then, most certainly did not take place in sterile, vacuum-sealed isolation, but within the turbulent crosscurrents of international politics and the historical rise and fall of empires whose destinies Yahweh himself controlled.
Not only does the Old Testament tell the story that Jesus completes, it also declares the promise that Jesus fulfills.
By the end of the Old Testament, we are left expecting God to do again what he has done so often before.
The whole Bible bears witness to the mission of God to the fallen, suffering, sinful human race, and indeed ultimately to his whole creation as well. That is why God called Abraham, sent Jesus and commissioned his apostles. For there is one servant people, one Servant King and one servant mission.
The church was not a new Gentile phenomenon, even if it looked like that as its membership became increasingly Gentile. The community of Jesus followers was a new humanity, composed of both believing Jews and Gentiles. But it was also organically and spiritually continuous with the original people of God, as Paul’s olive tree picture in Romans 11 shows. Israel had been redefined and extended, but the Jewish roots and trunk were not replaced or uprooted just because unbelieving branches had been lopped off.
We have imagined that the best way to save the world is to rule the world, with the tragically ironic result that Christian mission in the name of the Servant has been indelibly associated in the minds of many with power—military, cultural, economic and political. It is an image that is hard to live down. But the historical abuse of mission is no reason to abandon it altogether. For the mandate of the Servant King still stands.
And now, Israel, what does the LORD your God ask of you but to fear the LORD your God, to walk in obedience to him, to love him, to serve the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, and to observe the LORD’s commands and decrees that I am giving you today for your own good?� (Deut 10:12-13).
He had not sent Moses with the Ten Commandments under his cloak to tell Israel that if it would keep the law, God would save it. Precisely the other way around. He saved it and then asked it to keep his law in response.
Obedience flows from grace; it does not buy it. Obedience is the fruit and proof and sustenance of a relationship with the God you already know.
It is a feature of the Torah that love is commanded. In other words, while it certainly has an emotional dimension, love is not merely an emotion. Love is an act of the will, which is demonstrated in obeying God’s commands. The same is true with gratitude. Of course it has an emotional dimension—the book of Psalms overflows with the emotion of thanksgiving. But the behavior that gratitude motivates is commanded. It is not just an optional preference for the more sensitive souls.
being holy did not mean what we might call being extra-specially religious. In fact only very few of the laws in the chapter are about religious rituals. Rather, it shows that the kind of holiness God has in mind, the kind that reflects God’s own holiness, is thoroughly practical and down to earth. Look at the details of Leviticus 19. Holiness means: generosity to the poor when you get returns on your agricultural investments (Lev 19:9-10; cf. Deut 24:19); fair treatment and payment of employees (Lev 19:13; cf. Deut 24:14); practical compassion for the disabled and respect for the elderly (Lev 19:14, 32; cf. Deut 27:18); the integrity of the judicial process (Lev 19:15; cf. Deut 16:18-20); safety precautions to prevent endangering life (Lev 19:16; cf. Deut 22:8); ecological sensitivity (Lev 19:23-25; cf. Deut 20:19-20); equality before the law for ethnic minorities (Lev 19:33-34; cf. Deut 24:17); and honesty in trade and business (Lev 19:35-36; cf. Deut 25:13-16). We call such matters “social ethics� or “human rights� and think we are very modern and civilized for doing so.
It was not so much wealth in and of itself that Jesus condemned but rather its tendency to produce an attitude of complacent self-sufficiency (Lk 12:15-21). Self-sufficiency is the diametric opposite of the prime quality needed for entrance to the kingdom of God—humble dependence on God in faith (Mt 6:19-34).
The relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus is historical, because the story of God with his people links them together with Christ as the climax. The relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus is covenantal, because the promise of God in the Old is fulfilled through Christ in the New. The relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus is representational, because the identity of Israel is embodied in Jesus as its Messiah King. The relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus is missional, because Jesus accomplished the great purpose of God for all nations and all creation that the Old Testament declared. The relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus is ethical, because the way of justice and compassion that the Old Testament holds up as pleasing to God is endorsed and amplified by Jesus in the New. And above all, the relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus is incarnational, because in Jesus of Nazareth, the LORD God, the Holy One of Israel, has walked among us. As we love, worship and obey him as our Savior and Lord, may we love, honor, read and understand the Scriptures that were so precious and formative in his heart and mind.
March 30, 2021
This book is an okay introduction to a Christological approach to the OT, but very, very basic. Great for readers unfamiliar with biblical studies and lack the knowledge and vocabulary for anything deeper. But for most others, I'd recommend other books.
February 25, 2016
This is a helpful book regarding the continuity between the Old Testament and Jesus. Rather than seeing the Old Testament as a collection of mere predictions, the author seeks to do justice to what Old Testament passages meant in their original context (which leads to a more complete picture of who Jesus was and is). Jesus continues the Old Testament story, "fulfills" OT promises, bears an identity shaped by OT models and paradigms, carries on the OT mission, restores OT values, and is the OT God incarnate.
One of the unique perspectives that Wight takes in this book is to see the Old Testament as the source where Jesus found His identity and mission. Jesus is God (see the last chapter), but as a human He grew in knowledge and understanding. Jesus studied the Old Testament and it shaped His view of Himself. A thought provoking concept.
The chapter "Jesus and His Old Testament Values" was good. It helpfully showed the strong continuity between Old and New Testament law, values, and ethic. Yet I couldn't help but think that it could be misused if read with socialistic presuppositions (which are foreign to Scripture).
One of the unique perspectives that Wight takes in this book is to see the Old Testament as the source where Jesus found His identity and mission. Jesus is God (see the last chapter), but as a human He grew in knowledge and understanding. Jesus studied the Old Testament and it shaped His view of Himself. A thought provoking concept.
The chapter "Jesus and His Old Testament Values" was good. It helpfully showed the strong continuity between Old and New Testament law, values, and ethic. Yet I couldn't help but think that it could be misused if read with socialistic presuppositions (which are foreign to Scripture).
April 6, 2020
I liked this book. It has some very insightful explanations of various passages as they relate to the topic. I really benefited from chapter 5.
I have two points of criticism. One is the organization. I don't know how I would have organized it differently (or if there even is a better way to organize it), but it was not exactly an organic flow from one concept to the next. The second is some of the Christological inferences made. If I understand Wright correctly, it sounds like he is saying Jesus only knew he was the Messiah by reading the Old Testament. If this is what Wright was implying, then I definitely disagree. I think that would be an affront to the divine nature of Jesus. However, I still believe there is much to glean from this work, even with such an assumption.
I have two points of criticism. One is the organization. I don't know how I would have organized it differently (or if there even is a better way to organize it), but it was not exactly an organic flow from one concept to the next. The second is some of the Christological inferences made. If I understand Wright correctly, it sounds like he is saying Jesus only knew he was the Messiah by reading the Old Testament. If this is what Wright was implying, then I definitely disagree. I think that would be an affront to the divine nature of Jesus. However, I still believe there is much to glean from this work, even with such an assumption.
October 11, 2013
In this book, Wright’s purpose show how integral Old Testament scripture and prophecy is to Jesus. To accomplish that goal he discusses how Jesus learned about His identity and God’s plan through Old Testament scripture; how Jesus was the culmination of everything in the Old Testament and that does not negate the value of the Old Testament or replace it. Although he does provide many scripture connections and valuable information, a good portion of the book is Wright’s perspective on how Jesus interpreted Old Testament scripture with regard to Himself and His mission which throws off the flow and adds confusion.
Wright makes the statement on page 2 that “The Old Testament tells the story that Jesus completes� - this is a perfect statement to set the stage to tie prophecy, Jesus and the Old and New Testaments together. He starts by using the first genealogy verses in Matthew to give brief Old Testament overview then proceeds to makes statements with brief explanations about whom and what Jesus was; Jesus was a real Jew; Jesus was a real man; Jesus was the son of David and so on. He then launches into an Old Testament historical summary (9-26) up to the point of Jesus’s birth. Much of the information in the historical summary is repeated, at least once, in the following sections which left me frustrated and with the feeling that Wright wasn’t sure I understood his point the first time. Incorporating the summary into each chapter, expanding as necessary as the book progressed, would have improved my enjoyment and the coherency of his work.
As a whole, the book does accomplish its mission - the reader’s knowledge of Jesus is enhanced by the Old Testament study. The scripture references and Wright’s context explanations alone are valid points to prove how Jesus was woven into God’s plan for Israel and humanity. But then he veers off and the premise changes to explaining how Jesus learned about Himself through studying Old Testament scripture. This comes across like the Old Testament is the primary source for Jesus’s understanding of who He was and His part in God’s plan; almost as if he had no innate knowledge of His divinity other than from studying scripture, which is unsettling in itself but also a disruption to the flow of the book to that point.
The reviewer for Huiothesian.Wordpress.com makes the statement that Wright, “rightly notes that the history of Israel “is where [Jesus] found the shape of his own identity and the goal of his own mission,� and thus believers would be foolish to disregard its serious study (ix)� (Book Review: Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament 2012) I agree up to the point, there is some truth to this but I feel it should not be presented as the primary or as this statement reads, the ‘only� way that Jesus learned about Himself and His mission. Wright takes a great deal of license with interpretation and there is not enough emphasis that we have no idea what knowledge Jesus, as God, knew.
Jesus learning as He went along is not in keeping with Wright’s earlier statement regarding Jesus as the ultimate fulfillment of the Old Testament. It gives the impression that Jesus needed to learn Old Testament scripture, interpret it, then figure out how it applied to His mission on earth instead of receiving all the information He needed from God. If Wright would have focused on the view that Jesus gained insight from Old Testament scripture but primarily used it to tie the Old Testament prophecies and teachings to current events, as well as for comfort, would be better support that idea and promote greater understanding.
The covenant promise to Abraham and the explanation Wright provides that:
“The idea that the difference between the Old and New Testaments is that in the Old salvation is by the law, whereas in the New it is by grace, sets up a totally false contract. In the book of Exodus eighteen chapters describing God’s might act of redemption, in fulfillment of his own love and promise, come before the giving of the law to a people already redeemed. Israel, in the Psalms and elsewhere, regarded the law itself as a further gift of grace to those already redeemed by grace.� (68) Wright goes on to include each covenant but doesn’t completely expand on this idea in each one or how Jesus fulfills it; though that is touched on in later chapters, there would be more clarity of it had been included with the covenants.
Wright correlates Old Testament and Gospel scripture extremely well throughout the book and, in most cases, does a thorough job of explaining how they tie together. Two especially significant ideas were well supported and thought provoking. The first was a section identifying Jesus as the Son that Israel was not (118-135). Wright carefully offers up the history of the rebellious, disobedient Israel and how through Jesus, Israel would be obedient after all. Wright states, “His [Jesus] obedient sonship fulfilled the mission which their [Israel] sonship prepared for but had failed in disobedience.�(132) Another important section expands upon the Servant of the Lord. Through several sections in the chapter; the mission of the Servant in the Old Testament (158), the Servant and the mission to the Gentiles (163) through Mission in Servanthood (177) to the end of the chapter Wright explains the purpose and shows the “continuity between Israel as the servant� (159) and Jesus as a Servant. He also shows how the servant is not just to serve Israel or the Jews but also the Gentiles and has a mission to the world. (162)
Conclusion:
The Huiothesian reviewer concluded with, “Wright is correct when he says that it is a book “for people who want to deepen their knowledge of Jesus and of the scriptures that meant so much to him� and I have to agree but only partially. (x) (Book Review: Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament 2012) There is too much of what Wright thinks Jesus thought or learned for it to be the best choice for someone truly interested in knowing Jesus through the Old Testament. In his review, Pastor Sean Harris states “Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament is a profitable contribution to a biblical academia. However, it certainly would not fall into the must read category for a new student of the Word of God. The primary value of Wright's work is to show that benefit of studying the Old Testament to enhance one's ability to understand and teach the especially Jewish portions of the New Testament.� (Harris 2008) This is a much better gauge. For a new student there would be great value in the scripture references that support Jesus as the culmination of the covenants in the Old Testament but some of the other aspects could be confusing.
There is little doubt that Wright is an accomplished writer and presents much of his extensive knowledge and research very well. With the exception of the historical summary at the beginning he handles the transition between Old and New Testament scripture and time periods fluidly and if he had not changed horses mid-stream, I believe the book would have been a much greater tool to truly understanding Jesus through the Old Testament.
Works Cited
Book Review: Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament. January 19, 2012. (accessed September 17, 2013).
Bookreporter.com. Biography - Christopher J. H. Wright. n.d. (accessed 9 17, 2013).
Harris, Pastor Sean. Pastor Sean's Blog. 2008. (accessed September 17, 2013).
Press, InterVarsity. Christopher J. H. Wright. n.d. (accessed 09 17, 2013).
Wright, Christopher J. H. Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1992 .
Wright makes the statement on page 2 that “The Old Testament tells the story that Jesus completes� - this is a perfect statement to set the stage to tie prophecy, Jesus and the Old and New Testaments together. He starts by using the first genealogy verses in Matthew to give brief Old Testament overview then proceeds to makes statements with brief explanations about whom and what Jesus was; Jesus was a real Jew; Jesus was a real man; Jesus was the son of David and so on. He then launches into an Old Testament historical summary (9-26) up to the point of Jesus’s birth. Much of the information in the historical summary is repeated, at least once, in the following sections which left me frustrated and with the feeling that Wright wasn’t sure I understood his point the first time. Incorporating the summary into each chapter, expanding as necessary as the book progressed, would have improved my enjoyment and the coherency of his work.
As a whole, the book does accomplish its mission - the reader’s knowledge of Jesus is enhanced by the Old Testament study. The scripture references and Wright’s context explanations alone are valid points to prove how Jesus was woven into God’s plan for Israel and humanity. But then he veers off and the premise changes to explaining how Jesus learned about Himself through studying Old Testament scripture. This comes across like the Old Testament is the primary source for Jesus’s understanding of who He was and His part in God’s plan; almost as if he had no innate knowledge of His divinity other than from studying scripture, which is unsettling in itself but also a disruption to the flow of the book to that point.
The reviewer for Huiothesian.Wordpress.com makes the statement that Wright, “rightly notes that the history of Israel “is where [Jesus] found the shape of his own identity and the goal of his own mission,� and thus believers would be foolish to disregard its serious study (ix)� (Book Review: Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament 2012) I agree up to the point, there is some truth to this but I feel it should not be presented as the primary or as this statement reads, the ‘only� way that Jesus learned about Himself and His mission. Wright takes a great deal of license with interpretation and there is not enough emphasis that we have no idea what knowledge Jesus, as God, knew.
Jesus learning as He went along is not in keeping with Wright’s earlier statement regarding Jesus as the ultimate fulfillment of the Old Testament. It gives the impression that Jesus needed to learn Old Testament scripture, interpret it, then figure out how it applied to His mission on earth instead of receiving all the information He needed from God. If Wright would have focused on the view that Jesus gained insight from Old Testament scripture but primarily used it to tie the Old Testament prophecies and teachings to current events, as well as for comfort, would be better support that idea and promote greater understanding.
The covenant promise to Abraham and the explanation Wright provides that:
“The idea that the difference between the Old and New Testaments is that in the Old salvation is by the law, whereas in the New it is by grace, sets up a totally false contract. In the book of Exodus eighteen chapters describing God’s might act of redemption, in fulfillment of his own love and promise, come before the giving of the law to a people already redeemed. Israel, in the Psalms and elsewhere, regarded the law itself as a further gift of grace to those already redeemed by grace.� (68) Wright goes on to include each covenant but doesn’t completely expand on this idea in each one or how Jesus fulfills it; though that is touched on in later chapters, there would be more clarity of it had been included with the covenants.
Wright correlates Old Testament and Gospel scripture extremely well throughout the book and, in most cases, does a thorough job of explaining how they tie together. Two especially significant ideas were well supported and thought provoking. The first was a section identifying Jesus as the Son that Israel was not (118-135). Wright carefully offers up the history of the rebellious, disobedient Israel and how through Jesus, Israel would be obedient after all. Wright states, “His [Jesus] obedient sonship fulfilled the mission which their [Israel] sonship prepared for but had failed in disobedience.�(132) Another important section expands upon the Servant of the Lord. Through several sections in the chapter; the mission of the Servant in the Old Testament (158), the Servant and the mission to the Gentiles (163) through Mission in Servanthood (177) to the end of the chapter Wright explains the purpose and shows the “continuity between Israel as the servant� (159) and Jesus as a Servant. He also shows how the servant is not just to serve Israel or the Jews but also the Gentiles and has a mission to the world. (162)
Conclusion:
The Huiothesian reviewer concluded with, “Wright is correct when he says that it is a book “for people who want to deepen their knowledge of Jesus and of the scriptures that meant so much to him� and I have to agree but only partially. (x) (Book Review: Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament 2012) There is too much of what Wright thinks Jesus thought or learned for it to be the best choice for someone truly interested in knowing Jesus through the Old Testament. In his review, Pastor Sean Harris states “Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament is a profitable contribution to a biblical academia. However, it certainly would not fall into the must read category for a new student of the Word of God. The primary value of Wright's work is to show that benefit of studying the Old Testament to enhance one's ability to understand and teach the especially Jewish portions of the New Testament.� (Harris 2008) This is a much better gauge. For a new student there would be great value in the scripture references that support Jesus as the culmination of the covenants in the Old Testament but some of the other aspects could be confusing.
There is little doubt that Wright is an accomplished writer and presents much of his extensive knowledge and research very well. With the exception of the historical summary at the beginning he handles the transition between Old and New Testament scripture and time periods fluidly and if he had not changed horses mid-stream, I believe the book would have been a much greater tool to truly understanding Jesus through the Old Testament.
Works Cited
Book Review: Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament. January 19, 2012. (accessed September 17, 2013).
Bookreporter.com. Biography - Christopher J. H. Wright. n.d. (accessed 9 17, 2013).
Harris, Pastor Sean. Pastor Sean's Blog. 2008. (accessed September 17, 2013).
Press, InterVarsity. Christopher J. H. Wright. n.d. (accessed 09 17, 2013).
Wright, Christopher J. H. Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1992 .
July 11, 2024
Christopher Wright's "Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament" is an illuminating and enriching read that seamlessly bridges the gap between the Old and New Testaments. Wright embarks on a journey that helps readers discover the profound connections between the life and mission of Jesus and the ancient texts of the Hebrew Scriptures.
From the outset, Wright's approach is both scholarly and accessible, making complex theological concepts understandable for a wide audience. He meticulously examines how the Old Testament provides the essential background and context for comprehending the person and work of Jesus Christ. This book is not merely a theological treatise but a compelling narrative that reveals the continuity and coherence of the biblical story.
One of the standout features of Wright's work is his ability to weave together historical, cultural, and literary analyses. He demonstrates how the themes of covenant, kingship, and prophecy found in the Old Testament are fulfilled in Jesus, thereby offering readers a deeper appreciation of the unity of Scripture. Wright's insights into the significance of Jesus' Jewish heritage and how it shapes his identity and mission are particularly enlightening.
Wright's writing is engaging and thought-provoking, encouraging readers to reflect on their own understanding of the Bible. His passion for the subject matter is evident throughout, and his pastoral tone ensures that the book is not just informative but also spiritually nourishing.
"Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament" is an invaluable resource for anyone seeking to deepen their understanding of the Bible and their relationship with Jesus. It is a testament to Wright's scholarship and his ability to make profound theological insights accessible to all. This book will undoubtedly inspire readers to explore the Scriptures with fresh eyes and a renewed sense of wonder.
In conclusion, Christopher Wright's "Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament" is a remarkable work that succeeds in making the Old Testament come alive with meaning and relevance for Christians today. It is a must-read for anyone interested in biblical studies, theology, or simply knowing Jesus more intimately. Highly recommended!
From the outset, Wright's approach is both scholarly and accessible, making complex theological concepts understandable for a wide audience. He meticulously examines how the Old Testament provides the essential background and context for comprehending the person and work of Jesus Christ. This book is not merely a theological treatise but a compelling narrative that reveals the continuity and coherence of the biblical story.
One of the standout features of Wright's work is his ability to weave together historical, cultural, and literary analyses. He demonstrates how the themes of covenant, kingship, and prophecy found in the Old Testament are fulfilled in Jesus, thereby offering readers a deeper appreciation of the unity of Scripture. Wright's insights into the significance of Jesus' Jewish heritage and how it shapes his identity and mission are particularly enlightening.
Wright's writing is engaging and thought-provoking, encouraging readers to reflect on their own understanding of the Bible. His passion for the subject matter is evident throughout, and his pastoral tone ensures that the book is not just informative but also spiritually nourishing.
"Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament" is an invaluable resource for anyone seeking to deepen their understanding of the Bible and their relationship with Jesus. It is a testament to Wright's scholarship and his ability to make profound theological insights accessible to all. This book will undoubtedly inspire readers to explore the Scriptures with fresh eyes and a renewed sense of wonder.
In conclusion, Christopher Wright's "Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament" is a remarkable work that succeeds in making the Old Testament come alive with meaning and relevance for Christians today. It is a must-read for anyone interested in biblical studies, theology, or simply knowing Jesus more intimately. Highly recommended!
April 16, 2019
As I sit here glancing over my Christian Standard Bible, one sad thing is starkly clear: too many people ignore the first 866 pages of the Bible (Old Testament) and primarily take their residence in the later 254 pages of the Bible. It is sad and hermeneutically disastrous. I will be as bold as to say that the New Testament cannot be rightly understood unless we understand the Old Testament. Consequently, Jesus cannot be properly understood if we hesitate pitching our tent in the Old Testament.
Christopher J. H. Wright has written Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament to encourage us to pitch our tents in the Old Testament on our journey to the great city of the New Testament. He wants us to see Jesus not as a random mixture of Gospel stories but as the Messiah who is soaked and deeply rooted in the Old Testament. In essence, Wright advocates against the butchery and severing of Jesus� story from its historical Jewish context. He wants us to see Jesus as He saw himself to be. Particularly, Wright wants us to see Jesus as the divine Son who is sent by God the Father and empowered by God the Spirit to fulfil the mission that God commissioned Israel to do. Additionally, Wright wants his readers to really comprehend the radical continuity between the Old Testament and the New Testament and to steer away from the simplistic ‘proof-text� approach to the Old Testament. It is much needed book for our context.
This second edition builds up on the previous edition. New material include a new chapter on the divinity of Jesus. Further, questions and exercises are added to help the curious minds.
Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament is written for general audience but scholars can also take advantage of this meaty book. Language used is not jargony or complicated. Thus, a lay-person can easily understand and digest the material.
Highly recommeded!
I thank IVP Academic for providing me with a complimentary copy of this book in exchange for an honest review.
Christopher J. H. Wright has written Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament to encourage us to pitch our tents in the Old Testament on our journey to the great city of the New Testament. He wants us to see Jesus not as a random mixture of Gospel stories but as the Messiah who is soaked and deeply rooted in the Old Testament. In essence, Wright advocates against the butchery and severing of Jesus� story from its historical Jewish context. He wants us to see Jesus as He saw himself to be. Particularly, Wright wants us to see Jesus as the divine Son who is sent by God the Father and empowered by God the Spirit to fulfil the mission that God commissioned Israel to do. Additionally, Wright wants his readers to really comprehend the radical continuity between the Old Testament and the New Testament and to steer away from the simplistic ‘proof-text� approach to the Old Testament. It is much needed book for our context.
This second edition builds up on the previous edition. New material include a new chapter on the divinity of Jesus. Further, questions and exercises are added to help the curious minds.
Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament is written for general audience but scholars can also take advantage of this meaty book. Language used is not jargony or complicated. Thus, a lay-person can easily understand and digest the material.
Highly recommeded!
I thank IVP Academic for providing me with a complimentary copy of this book in exchange for an honest review.
September 14, 2020
This book is absolutely fantastic. I’d recommend it for anyone to better understand the Old Testament and/or the person and work of Jesus.
The first chapter uses the genealogy in Matthew to give an overview of the Old Testament. It is a really powerful concise summary. He then shows how the New Testament adopts Old Testament themes, such as the Exodus. He also shows how the fate of all nations was tied to the fate of Israel.
The second chapter is provides an overview of the Biblical covenants and how they build upon each other leading to Jesus.
The third chapter focus on Jesus’s identity as the Son of God and provides an excellent overview of typology and ways it can be used rightly and wrongly. Then he digests what sonship meant in the OT.
The fourth chapter is, in my opinion, the best. Wright takes the angle (rightly) that Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, like all humans. Therefore, he asks the question of what texts did Jesus use to establish his mission and how did He apply those. He addresses the expectations of “the Messiah� at the time and the reason Jesus did not adopt that title. He addresses how judgment and salvation for Israel and the nations and how Christ brought that to pass. His explanation about the relationship between Jews, Gentiles, and Christ’s work is the best I have ever read.
The fifth chapter looks at OT ethics in Jesus’s teaching and works. The emphasis on the socioeconomic aspect of Christ’s ministry is something particularly relevant for today and many evangelicals need to consider this aspect much more so.
The final chapter shows how Jesus was indeed God in the flesh.
I found this work to be amazingly edifying and can not wait to pick up another volume by the author.
The first chapter uses the genealogy in Matthew to give an overview of the Old Testament. It is a really powerful concise summary. He then shows how the New Testament adopts Old Testament themes, such as the Exodus. He also shows how the fate of all nations was tied to the fate of Israel.
The second chapter is provides an overview of the Biblical covenants and how they build upon each other leading to Jesus.
The third chapter focus on Jesus’s identity as the Son of God and provides an excellent overview of typology and ways it can be used rightly and wrongly. Then he digests what sonship meant in the OT.
The fourth chapter is, in my opinion, the best. Wright takes the angle (rightly) that Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, like all humans. Therefore, he asks the question of what texts did Jesus use to establish his mission and how did He apply those. He addresses the expectations of “the Messiah� at the time and the reason Jesus did not adopt that title. He addresses how judgment and salvation for Israel and the nations and how Christ brought that to pass. His explanation about the relationship between Jews, Gentiles, and Christ’s work is the best I have ever read.
The fifth chapter looks at OT ethics in Jesus’s teaching and works. The emphasis on the socioeconomic aspect of Christ’s ministry is something particularly relevant for today and many evangelicals need to consider this aspect much more so.
The final chapter shows how Jesus was indeed God in the flesh.
I found this work to be amazingly edifying and can not wait to pick up another volume by the author.
September 23, 2023
Very helpful. Wright’s final summary at the end of his book is this:
“How can we summarize what we have seen? What kind of relationship exists between Jesus Christ and the Old Testament? How does it relate to him and how does he relate to it?
We can summarize our six chapters like this:
The relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus is historical, because the story of God with his people links them together with Christ as the climax.
The relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus is covenantal, because the promise of God in the Old is fulfilled through Christ in the New.
The relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus is representational, because the identity of Israel is embodied in Jesus as its Messiah King.
The relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus is missional, because Jesus accomplished the great purpose of God for all nations and all creation that the Old Testament declared.
The relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus is ethical, because the way of justice and compassion that the Old Testament holds up as pleasing to God is endorsed and amplified by Jesus in the New.
And above all, the relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus is incarnational, because in Jesus of Nazareth, the LORD God, the Holy One of Israel, has walked among us.
As we love, worship and obey him as our Savior and Lord, may we love, honor, read and understand the Scriptures that were so precious and formative in his heart and mind.�
“How can we summarize what we have seen? What kind of relationship exists between Jesus Christ and the Old Testament? How does it relate to him and how does he relate to it?
We can summarize our six chapters like this:
The relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus is historical, because the story of God with his people links them together with Christ as the climax.
The relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus is covenantal, because the promise of God in the Old is fulfilled through Christ in the New.
The relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus is representational, because the identity of Israel is embodied in Jesus as its Messiah King.
The relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus is missional, because Jesus accomplished the great purpose of God for all nations and all creation that the Old Testament declared.
The relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus is ethical, because the way of justice and compassion that the Old Testament holds up as pleasing to God is endorsed and amplified by Jesus in the New.
And above all, the relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus is incarnational, because in Jesus of Nazareth, the LORD God, the Holy One of Israel, has walked among us.
As we love, worship and obey him as our Savior and Lord, may we love, honor, read and understand the Scriptures that were so precious and formative in his heart and mind.�
December 6, 2024
This book has completely changed the way that I approach the Old Testament. Whereas before I always preferred the Epistles and Gospels, I have begun reading more into the Old Testament and I have found deep, enriching "soul food" there. It is so much more clear now how God's covenant relationship has extended naturally from the flood all the way through to Jesus's ministry. Truly, this book has re-shaped the way I conceptualize of Jesus in the light of creative interpretation of Old Testament scriptures.
I am particularly glad that I read this book in the Advent season, as it has given me a deeper appreciation for how Jesus came to know himself through the Old Testament scriptures, many of which will be read in the lectionary cycle on Sundays or are slated for daily office readings throughout the week. Particularly the distinction Wright makes between "prediction" and "promise," and how the promise of God stands unchanging throughout all of Scripture. (The "predictions" are much, much less important in comparison to the Gospel promise(s).)
I would recommend this book to any Christian who never grew up with a deep understanding of the continuity of the Bible, and who still unknowingly or knowingly distinguish the Old and New as the "less important" and the "more important".
I am particularly glad that I read this book in the Advent season, as it has given me a deeper appreciation for how Jesus came to know himself through the Old Testament scriptures, many of which will be read in the lectionary cycle on Sundays or are slated for daily office readings throughout the week. Particularly the distinction Wright makes between "prediction" and "promise," and how the promise of God stands unchanging throughout all of Scripture. (The "predictions" are much, much less important in comparison to the Gospel promise(s).)
I would recommend this book to any Christian who never grew up with a deep understanding of the continuity of the Bible, and who still unknowingly or knowingly distinguish the Old and New as the "less important" and the "more important".
February 20, 2021
It is refreshing to read an Old Testament scholar who does not have a bitter disposition toward a Christ-centered approach to reading the OT. Wright understands that the OT is important and is God’s Word in and of itself. We do not, as he puts it, have to think that in every passage “Jesus must be in here somewhere.� Nevertheless, Christian readers of the OT must still recognize that “the God who presents himself to us in these pages of the OT as Yahweh is the God whom we know and see in the face of Jesus in the New Testament.�
What I find so remarkable about this book is not necessarily Wright’s exegesis. He is a gifted scholar, but there are plenty of books that discuss the relationship of the OT and NT just as well. It’s Wright’s readability! It is hard, as a pastor, to recommend books on “intertextuality� to my congregants, because for however insightful the book may be (cf. Hays� work), it isn’t readable to, say, an insurer. Not so for Wright. I would (and will!) happily recommend this book to any and all who are interested in the general topic (Jesus and the OT). Well done! Five stars!
What I find so remarkable about this book is not necessarily Wright’s exegesis. He is a gifted scholar, but there are plenty of books that discuss the relationship of the OT and NT just as well. It’s Wright’s readability! It is hard, as a pastor, to recommend books on “intertextuality� to my congregants, because for however insightful the book may be (cf. Hays� work), it isn’t readable to, say, an insurer. Not so for Wright. I would (and will!) happily recommend this book to any and all who are interested in the general topic (Jesus and the OT). Well done! Five stars!
October 28, 2020
I've been searching for a book that ties Jesus into the Hebrew scriptures, and this is the best one yet. It's not just a comparison of the Testaments, but treats it as one cohesive Book—as it's supposed to be. It explains the covenants of God through the Old Testament, which then make it easier to understand why Jesus fulfills them.
It spends a lot of time in the Hebrew scriptures, making sure God's promises are understood, before even trying to tackle Jesus's arrival. It then explores these promises to the Israelites and Jesus's identity related to them. For a topic so many people struggle to explain, his explanations make it sounds deceptively simple. It is, if only we better understood the Old Testament.
For what was the Good News? Nothing other than God's commitment to bring blessing to all nations of humanity, as announced to Abraham.
It spends a lot of time in the Hebrew scriptures, making sure God's promises are understood, before even trying to tackle Jesus's arrival. It then explores these promises to the Israelites and Jesus's identity related to them. For a topic so many people struggle to explain, his explanations make it sounds deceptively simple. It is, if only we better understood the Old Testament.
November 12, 2023
I’M DONE!!!!!!!!!🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉
This is not a bad book. It’s just not what I was hoping or expecting.
I wanted a book that helped me see Jesus in the Old Testament. Where is He working? What is He doing? This is NOT that.
It’s also kind of a scholarly book. I found myself having to get settled in the author’s thoughts and flow of ideas every time I read, which is part of why it took so long, because I needed dedicated time to sit and dig in. This is not a book you can just pick up and put down at will.
And the chapters are FOREVER long, which means you either are stopping in the middle of the idea or you need like two hours to get through it.
This book is a scholarly look at how Jesus was shaped and influenced by the Old Testament and how He interpreted and lived out His mission as understood from those texts. If that’s what you’re looking for, then this is a great book.
But I do have to say, there were some very interesting parts and great nuggets that I underlined and marked.
This is not a bad book. It’s just not what I was hoping or expecting.
I wanted a book that helped me see Jesus in the Old Testament. Where is He working? What is He doing? This is NOT that.
It’s also kind of a scholarly book. I found myself having to get settled in the author’s thoughts and flow of ideas every time I read, which is part of why it took so long, because I needed dedicated time to sit and dig in. This is not a book you can just pick up and put down at will.
And the chapters are FOREVER long, which means you either are stopping in the middle of the idea or you need like two hours to get through it.
This book is a scholarly look at how Jesus was shaped and influenced by the Old Testament and how He interpreted and lived out His mission as understood from those texts. If that’s what you’re looking for, then this is a great book.
But I do have to say, there were some very interesting parts and great nuggets that I underlined and marked.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 92 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.