Does the Old Testament predict the Messiah or is this just an idea invented by New Testament authors?

DOES THE OLD TESTAMENT PREDICT THE MESSIAH OR IS THIS JUST AN IDEA INVENTED BY NEW TESTAMENT AUTHORS?

Followers of Jesus believe that the Old Testament predicted the future Messiah, there is a challenging view that has gained popularity. Some Bible teachers are saying that the New Testament authors just picked Old Testament verses out of context and tried to make them sound as if they were about the Messiah.

For example, Old Testament professor from one of the world’s leading Bible-believing seminaries presented his paper about whether or not the Old Testament prophets really predicted the Messiah. In fact, he argued that the whole idea of the Messiah was made up in the time period between the Old Testament and the New Testament. Since the New Testament maintains that Jesus is the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy, this scholar needed to come up with some sort of explanation, some way of dealing with that issue.

And he did. He argued that the human authors of the Old Testament only wrote about what was going on in their own day but that the Holy Spirit had a deeper and fuller meaning.

He believed the Divine Inspirer of Scripture intended it to mean something more than the human authors understood.

Similarly, another scholar says the New Testament authors were engaged in “creative exegesis,’ finding meanings in the Old Testament that weren't really there.

THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE PROPHETS

This “creative exegesis” approach has numerous flaws. First, it seems to maintain that the Hebrew prophets didn't know they were writing about the Messiah. This idea is rooted in a mistaken interpretation of 1 Peter 1:10-12. In this passage it says the Old Testament prophets “made careful searches and inquiries, seeking to know what person or time the Spirit of Christ within them was indicating as He predicted the sufferings of Christ [the Messiah] and the glories to follow.”

However, the passage doesn’t say the prophets didn’t know that they were writing or speaking of the Messiah. It says they didn’t know when the Messiah would come or who He would be. It is similar to our situation as believers today. We know there is a future false messiah, the Antichrist, coming. But we don’t know when he will come or who he will be. The passage goes on to say that it was revealed that they werent writing about their own day but about the Messiah’s arrival in the distant future.

THE PERSPECTIVE OF DIVINE INSPIRATION

Another problematic aspect of this view is an unusual perspective on biblical inspiration. The Bible is an inspired text (2 Tim. 3:16) because human authors were moved by the Holy Spirit to write the words God intended, using their own ideas, personalities, and styles (2 Peter 1:21). In other words, both the Divine Author and the human author had the same meaning when they wrote; they had the same intention. In fact, the Holy Spirit’s superintending of the human author guaranteed the truth of the human author's intentions and words. The Holy Spirit is the one who enabled biblical prophets to predict the future Messiah. This is what Peter meant when he wrote, “no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God” (2 Peter 1:21).

THE PERSPECTIVE OF JESUS THE MESSIAH

Yet another difficulty with this view is that the Lord Jesus, the Messiah Himself, disagrees with it. Think about when the Messiah Jesus met Cleopas and his friends on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:25-27). He told them that the only limitation that kept them from believing in messianic prophecy was that they were “foolish men and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken!” (v. 25). The resurrected Lord goes on to say that the Scriptures taught that it was necessary for the Messiah to suffer before entering into glory (or being and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures” (v. 27).

Just a short time later, the Lord Jesus had a resurrection appearance with His disciples (Luke 24:44-46). He met them in the upper room and told them, “These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled” (v. 44). And what did He say was written? That “the Christ would suffer and rise again from the dead” (v. 46). Clearly, the Lord Jesus taught His disciples that the Old Testament Scriptures were messianic and that they pointed to Him.

Additionally, just to be clear that the Old Testament authors understood their words, remember what Jesus told Israel’s leadership in John 5:45-47? There He said, “Do not think that I will accuse you before the Father; the one who accuses you is Moses... for if you believed Moses, you would believe Me, for he wrote about Me.” Jesus’ point was that, at the final judgment, Moses himself would convict them because they should have believed in his predictions of the Messiah. How could Moses do that if he himself did not understand that he was writing about the Messiah? According to Jesus, the authors of the Hebrew Bible understood they were predicting the Messiah.

FINAL THOUGHTS

Last century, biblical scholar A. T. Robertson commented on Luke 24, saying, “Jesus found himself in the Old Testament, a thing that some modern scholars do not seem to be able to do.” Robertson was pushing strongly the critical scholars of his own day, whose anti-supernaturalism kept them from recognizing any direct predictions of the Messiah in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament). Unfortunately, the views of these critics have become so influential that they have infiltrated even committed Bible-believing scholars today.

God used messianic predictions to lead me to faith in the Messiah Jesus and to have confidence in the inspiration of Scripture. As followers of Jesus, we need to reclaim messianic prophecy as one of the great evidences that Jesus is indeed the Messiah and that the Bible, both Old and New Testaments, is supernaturally and divinely inspired.

Continue Reading

THE RETURN OF CHRIST

Christians are not the only ones who believe that a great hero will return. So do many Muslims, Hindus and people of other faiths. But the difference between their beliefs and the doctrine of the return, or second coming, of Christ is that this belief is central to the Christian faith. It is one of the most widely taught doctrines in the NT and is firmly rooted in Jesus’ own words in all four Gospels.

He states that “all the peoples of the earth will … see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory” (Matt 24:30; see also Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27). In the Gospel of John, he promises, “I will come back and take you to be with me” (John 14:3). At his ascension, two men in white robes, presumably angels, told the disciples, “This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11).

Paul frequently refers to the second coming in his letters (see, for example, Phil 3:20-21; 1 Thess 4:15-16; 2 Thess 1:7, 10; Titus 2:13). It is also mentioned by the author of Hebrews (Heb 9:28) and by James (Jas 5:7-8), Peter (1 Pet 1:7, 13) and John (1 John 2:28). All these writers speak of the prospect of Christ’s return as the grounds for Christian hope and as an incentive for doing what is right. They teach that his return has been delayed in order to allow time for more people to turn to him (2 Pet 3:4-10).

While Scripture clearly states that Jesus will return, it does not say when that return will take place. Jesus indicated that neither he nor the angels knew the time of his return, and neither would his disciples (Mark 13:32-33, 35; see also Matt 24:36-44). It is thus foolish for some preachers to proclaim that the world will end on a specific date, and we are foolish if we believe them.

The most Jesus would offer are signs of his return. These include natural catastrophes such as famines and earthquakes, and wars and the appearance of false prophets and the antichrist. However, we should not leap to conclude that every such event heralds his immediate return. Jesus describes them as no more than “the beginning of birth pains” (Matt 24:8). They are reminders that he is coming. So are other, less dramatic, signs such as the Lord’s Supper, which we celebrate “until he comes” (1 Cor 11:26). The proclamation of God’s word also reminds us of his coming, and the forgiveness of sins allows us to anticipate his eternal kingdom. All of these signs are reminders of his return, and warnings to be alert and live with the awareness that he could return at any moment.

Though we are in the dark about the date of Christ’s return, what we do know is that it will be personal, physical, visible, unexpected, triumphant and glorious (Matt 25:31-46; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27; 1 Thess 4:16).

There is some disagreement among Christians about exactly how Christ’s return will unfold. Some believe that it will involve two stages. First, there will be the rapture, when Christ comes for his people; later, he will return with his people. These two events will be separated by the great tribulation, lasting approximately seven years.

Others, however, argue that Christ’s second coming will be a single unified event and will occur after the great tribulation.

Those who hold that Christ’s coming will precede the great tribulation constantly stress that the second coming is imminent and that we need to be prepared for it at all times (Matt 24-25; Jas 5:8-9; Jude 21). Those who expect it to come after the tribulation tend to think that Christ’s coming will be delayed to allow time for the gospel to be preached to all nations (Matt 24:14).

Christians are also united in believing that Christ’s return will be associated with a coming golden age of righteousness (Ps 86:9; Isa 2:2-4; 11:6-9; Jer 31:34; Dan 2:35, 44; Mic 4:1). However, some believe that this will happen only after he returns to reign, while others hold that he will return only after the prophecies of the golden age have been fulfilled.

Finny Philip

 

Continue Reading

THE NEW TESTAMENT WORLD

In the period covered by the NT, the Jews were an underclass in a Mediterranean world dominated by the political power of Rome. This world was also under the intellectual sway of the Greeks, whose language had come to dominate the region since the days of Alexander the Great in the fourth century BC.

The Jews had enjoyed a brief period of independence under the Maccabees, but this had ended in 63 BC when Pompey, a Roman general, invaded Jerusalem, made it a vassal state and appointed Antipater, an Idumean, as the vassal king. Antipater was succeeded by his son Herod, who ruled from 37 to 4 BC and became known to history as Herod the Great. He was an effective but cruel ruler (see, for example, Matt 2:16). In an attempt to establish his credentials as the true king of the Jews and to gain renown, he undertook an extensive restoration of the temple in Jerusalem, a process that was still going on in Jesus’ time, long after Herod’s death.

After the death of Herod the Great, his kingdom was divided among three of his sons. Judea and Samaria went to Archelaus, who proved a very unpopular ruler (Matt 2:22; Luke 19:14 may also allude to him). He eventually lost the support of Rome and was deposed in AD 6. Thereafter Judea was ruled by Roman governors like Pontius Pilate.

Meanwhile Galilee and Perea went to another son, Herod Antipas.

It was he who ordered the execution of John the Baptist (Mark 6:14- 29) and to whom Pilate sent Jesus (Luke 23:6-12). Herod the Great’s grandson Agrippa was the appointed king of Palestine between AD 41 and 44. It was he who killed the Apostle James (Acts 12). At the time of his death, his son was still a young man and Judea again became a Roman province. Eventually, this son, Agrippa II, was given some power by the Romans. It was he who presided over the Apostle Paul’s trial (Acts 25:23; 26:32).

While the Romans and the Herodian dynasty exercised political authority, religious authority rested with the Sadducees. This group accepted only the Torah (the first five books of the OT, which we know as the Pentateuch). By Jesus’ time, the Sadducees represented the wealthy aristocracy and controlled the Sanhedrin, the governing religious council. They exercised authority over the temple and the priesthood. They were generally satisfied with the status quo and their hold on the priestly institutions. They saw no need for a Messiah and did not believe in any resurrection of the dead (Mark 12:18). When the temple was destroyed in AD 70, the Sadducees ceased to exist.

But the Sadducees were not the only group within Judaism. Of the other groups, the most prominent were the Pharisees, who had great influence in the synagogues, where they were respected authorities on the interpretation of the law of Moses. The word “Pharisee” means “separatist” and reflects the fact that this group opposed Greek cultural influences and the combining of priesthood with political power. Not surprisingly, there were frequent conflicts between the Sadducees and the Pharisees.

The Pharisees believed in the direct application of the Scriptures to everyday life. They had developed a rich oral tradition on how to keep the law, a tradition which is known today as the Mishnah and forms part of the Talmud, the main text of Rabbinic Judaism. The Pharisees believed in the resurrection, heaven and hell, angels and demons. While Jesus opposed the legalism of the Pharisees, theologically he was much closer to the Pharisees than to the Sadducees. Paul the Apostle was a devout Pharisee prior to his experience on the Damascus road.

The Pharisees also believed in the coming of a Messiah, an anointed one, who would bring salvation and purify the nation and the temple. They interpreted salvation in terms of restoring the nation’s political and economic freedom, rather than in terms of salvation from sin.

As the longing for political deliverance from the Roman colonisers grew, so did the expectation that the Messiah would be a conqueror who would defeat the Romans and establish an earthly kingdom. These expectations led to the rise of groups like the Essenes, whose members withdrew from society and lived in isolation in a location near the Dead Sea, as well as activist groups like the Zealots. Simon, one of Jesus’ disciples, was a Zealot (Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13). Jesus’ presentation of himself as a suffering servant who would take away the sins of the people ran counter to the popular view that the Messiah would be a general who would lead the army into victory against the hegemonic occupiers of their land.

The rise of the Zealots and similar groups eventually resulted in a full-scale revolt against Roman rule in AD 66. The result was disaster.

Jerusalem was besieged by the Roman general Titus in AD 70. When the city fell, the inhabitants were massacred and both the city and the temple were destroyed. This destruction had been prophesied by Jesus in Mark 13:1-2. The loss of the city and of the temple, key markers of Jewish identity, struck a deep blow.

In the surrounding nations, the ferment was less political and more philosophical and religious. Various schools of thought, many of which originated in Greece, were in competition. Epicureanism taught that pleasure was the supreme good and to be obtained by living wisely. Stoicism held that one could find fulfilment through conformity to the logos (divine logic or reason). A new school of thought called Gnosticism was beginning to develop, which held that the material world was evil and only the spiritual world was good. We see awareness of these philosophies in the NT writings. The Apostle John uses the concept of the Logos (Word) in the prologue to his gospel. Paul addressed both Epicurean and Stoic philosophers in Acts 17:18. In the letters that he wrote to the churches, the issues he addressed include hedonism (1 Cor 6:12; 10:23) and extreme asceticism (1 Tim 4:3).

Other religions also flourished in the Mediterranean world alongside these philosophies. There were the ancient religions of Greece and Rome, evident when Barnabas and Paul were mistaken form Zeus and Hermes (Acts 14:12) and in the worship of Artemis in Ephesus (Acts 19:23-28). There were also newer “mystery religions”, like the cults of Dionysus and Mithras. These mystery religions were secret societies in which only an elite few were privy to secret knowledge and rituals that gave them access to spiritual power. By contrast, Paul repeatedly declares that the mystery of Christ is open to all (Eph 3:3-12).

Another popular religion in the region was the worship of Rome and the Roman emperors. Temples were erected to Julius Caesar, Augustus, Nero and Domitian. Such worship was a way to maintain the emperor’s favour, and those who refused to offer a pinch of incense at these shrines could be accused not only of a lack of patriotism but even of treason. This was the problem Christians faced when they asserted “Jesus is Lord” and refused to acknowledge Caesar as Lord.

In some respects, the world in which Christ lived and in which the NT was written is not unlike the world we live in today in South Asia.

A range of philosophies and religions still compete for our allegiance, and the options are not that different from what they were then. In political terms, our nations still think of national heroes, saviours who will reverse our political, economic and social fortunes. In India, oppressed classes like the Dalits have come to build their hopes around great personages such as Dr B. R. Ambedkar and Mahatma Gandhi and used their teachings to find their identity and place in history. Every country in the region has such a messianic figure of its own. The NT makes much greater sense to anyone who can see all such hopes, aspirations and struggles converge on one person, Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ, both prophetically, retrospectively and existentially.

Babu Immanuel Venkatarama

 

Continue Reading

SACRAMENTS

The word “sacrament” derives from the Latin word for a soldier’s oath on entering the army or for any solemn engagement or pledge of a religious nature. When the Scriptures were translated from Greek into Latin, sacramentum was used to translate the Greek word mysterion, which refers to a “symbol” or “something of mystical significance”. Soon the word “sacrament” was used only of Christian acts that were believed to have mysterious and sacred significance.

Over time, the word “sacrament” came to be attached to various things that were seen as channels of divine grace. The Roman Catholic Church identified seven sacraments: Baptism, Confirmation, the Eucharist, Marriage, Ordination, Penance and Anointing of the Sick (given just before death). Protestants, however, recognise only two sacraments, baptism and the Eucharist or the Lord’s Supper, both of which were instituted by Christ himself. Protestants also emphasise the importance of preaching the word whenever the sacraments are administered. Only in the light of God’s word do they find their

proper confirmatory and supporting role, pointing to Christ and confirming our faith in him. There are two sides to each sacrament. On the one hand, each is a visible representation of God’s grace; on the other, each involves an action on the part of the believer, who responds to divine grace by binding himself or herself to God in faith and love.

In baptism, the visible sign is water, and the believer’s action is accepting immersion in the water in a ritual that unites the one baptised with Christ and his people. In some churches, infants from Christian families are baptised, whereas other churches will baptise only confessing believers. In South Asia, baptism has become problematic for Dalits as this public declaration of faith in Christ can lead to their losing all the privileges associated with membership in a scheduled caste, without any other change in their economic circumstances. In situations like this, we must allow God the Holy Spirit to give the individual the conviction and urge to be baptised. It is unwise to push them towards baptism, especially now that anticonversion laws are already in place in many states.

In the Eucharist, the visible signs are the bread and wine and the believer’s action is eating the bread and drinking the wine. Whereas baptism is an individual matter, the Eucharist is a corporate sacrament, one that Christians celebrate together. Bread and wine are used because Jesus used them, for they were the basic food and drink of his day. However, in South Asia the use of wine is contentious, and many churches prefer to use grape juice. Some churches have even gone so far as to substitute indigenous foods like roti and tea for the bread and wine.

The key thing to remember is that baptism and the Eucharist are not magical ways to manipulate God but are outward symbols of an inward grace that is operating in our hearts and minds. Ultimately they connote a “mystery” that can best be expressed in signs and not by speech. Baptism with water shows the cleansing of sin and our dying and rising with Christ and publically proclaims that someone has become a follower of Christ (Rom 6:3-4). The bread and the wine in the Eucharist remind us of the costly grace of God. The wine symbolises the forgiveness of sins through Christ’s blood shed on the cross and the bread symbolises Christ’s broken body through which he nourishes and sustains us (Luke 22:17-20). God calls us to participate in these sacraments so that we can stand firm to the end.

They are also a witness to others about what we believe about Jesus Christ, and thus they have a strong missionary element.

Monodeep Daniel

Continue Reading

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE OLD TESTAMENT
AND THE NEW TESTAMENT

The Christian Bible consists of two major sections, the Old Testament and the New Testament. These two sets of writings are usually bound together in one book. Hence the question of the nature of the relationship between the two testaments is inescapable for every reader of the Bible. Scholars, too, have engaged in sustained studies, seeking to understand this profound yet complex relationship. Each of the NT writings has been examined to observe its specific use of the OT.

There are two important realities we need to bear in mind when dealing with the relationship between the OT and NT. The first is that Jesus, his followers and every author of the NT writings saw the Christian gospel as essentially rooted in the faith of God’s people, as found in the OT. God’s purpose to bless the whole earth began with the call of Abraham (Gen 12:1-3). This call then passed on to Abraham’s descendants as God formed them into a holy nation and entered into a covenant with them after their redemption from Egypt (Exod 19:3-6). Israel was intended to be God’s instrument of blessing to the world, but it failed in that task.

However, Israel’s task was ultimately fulfilled in the life, death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Heb 1:1-4). His role was anticipated by the OT prophets who foretold that God would ultimately introduce a renewed covenant in which his law would be written not on stone but on human hearts (Jer 31:31-34).

The first followers of Jesus recognised the fundamental continuity of God’s redemptive purposes, even though there was obvious discontinuity. This was bound to be the case, since the first covenant was between God and Israel whereas the second covenant is between the same God (now fully revealed in Christ) and a reconfigured people of God, consisting of both Jews and Gentiles. Thus there is unity and diversity, continuity and contrast.

Jesus knew, read and interpreted Scripture (Luke 2:46-47; 4:16- 21). In fact, he declared that the Scriptures testify of him (John 5:39) and that his life and mission would fulfil Scripture (Matt 5:17-20).

The disciples understood this more fully after Jesus’ resurrection, as their minds were opened by Jesus and the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:25-27, 44-49; John 16:13-15). Peter, Stephen and Paul all boldly proclaimed that Jesus had fulfilled God’s deliberate plan as revealed in the Scriptures (Acts 2:14-36; 3:18; 7:2-53; 13:16-48).

Paul, referring to the OT writings, says that “all Scripture is Godbreathed” or inspired and life-giving (2 Tim 3:16). Thus an understanding and appropriation of the OT is absolutely essential to a proper understanding of the NT writings. To give one simple yet significant example, when Jesus said, “I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener” (John 15:1), he was not just using a common plant and its branches to speak of his connection with his disciples.

Rather, as his Jewish hearers would have readily grasped, he was making a very sober and serious claim. He meant that from now on, God’s people (like the Israel of old) were being newly reconstituted in him – since Israel was seen as God’s vine or vineyard (Ps 80:8-16; Isa 5:1-7). His disciples were going to be the new people of God, with the Holy Spirit writing on their hearts (2 Cor 3; Gal 6:16; Phil 3:3). This Spirit-empowered church, founded on Christ, is now called to continue and fulfil the redemptive purpose of God (Matt 28:18-20; Acts 1:8). As believers in Christ Jesus, this is our calling, today (1 Pet 2:9).

The second foundational reality is that the writers of the NT employed the OT texts in a wide variety of ways. While they all held that the OT (both in the original Hebrew as well as in the Greek translation) was God’s life-giving word, they proceeded to draw upon this foundational revelation in distinctive and multiform ways. Some of them directly quoted OT texts, along with an introductory formula like “it is written” (see Matt 1:22-23; 2 Cor 8:15). One count identifies 224 examples of this type of quotation. Apart from these clear citations, countless NT texts paraphrase, summarise and allude to OT passages in often unique ways. This was bound to happen when we realise that the OT was “the Bible” for the early Christians, since the NT documents had not yet been assembled.

We discern this multiform usage in the NT writers. The four Gospel writers have varying ways to connect the story of Jesus with the biblical story of Israel. For example, Mark shows that the gospel of Jesus Christ is the fulfilment of Isaiah’s prophecies of salvation (1:2-3; Isa 40:3; Mal 3:1). Mark also alludes to Jewish messianic expectations, as in the voice that came from heaven at Jesus’ baptism and at his transfiguration (1:11; 9:7). These words echo or allude to texts such as Genesis 22:2, Exodus 4:22-23, Deuteronomy 18:15, Psalm 2:7 and Isaiah 42:1.

Matthew’s gospel uses the OT even more extensively yet differently. The author wants to show that Jesus fulfils not only the prophetic Scriptures but the legal requirements as well (Matt 3:15).

So he records Jesus discussing five scriptural topics in 5:21-48. Apparently, this gospel seeks to present Jesus as the new Moses, as when the resurrected Jesus stands before his disciples on the mountain and commissions them (28:16-20).

The letters of Paul also provide evidence of the rich and complex ways in which OT texts, analogies and metaphors are employed. Paul feels enabled by the Spirit to express God’s continuing and ultimate revelation in Christ and the gospel using OT categories. He quotes the OT more than a hundred times; yet there is no uniformity in his style.

Sometimes the citation is closer to the Hebrew text (as in Rom 1:17, citing Hab 2:4) and at other times it is closer to the Greek translation (as in Rom 2:24, citing Isa 52:5).

Further, there are countless allusions to OT texts in Paul. One scholar identified more than a hundred citations and allusions in Romans 9–11 alone. Again, this shows that the fundamental thinking of NT Christians was based on and was in continuity with the revelation of God in the OT. Paul’s letter to the Philippians is full of allusions to the OT, although it does not include a single explicit reference to the OT. For example, when Paul writes that “every knee should bow … and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord” (Phil 2:9-11) he is alluding to Isaiah 45:15-25 (especially verse 23), where YHWH, Israel’s Lord and Saviour, declares his exalted status over all gods and nations. His use of Scripture reveals Paul’s exalted conception of Christ.

Paul also provides several pointers as to how we ought to see the revelation in Jesus Christ as meeting the ultimate aspirations of the law, or the first covenant. In Galatians 3:24, he used the analogy of the law as a “guardian” or “caretaker” who served an important but interim purpose “until Christ came”.

The book of Hebrews cites OT texts more extensively than any other NT document. Inspired by the Spirit, the writer creatively uses the OT for pointed Christian exhortations. For example, he builds a high-priestly Christology in Hebrews 5–7. Even the book of Revelation, which does not explicitly mention the OT Scriptures, is saturated with OT imagery and ideas. The images of the new heaven, the new earth and the new Jerusalem blend ideas and images from Isaiah (65:17; 66:22) and Ezekiel (40–48).

The whole of the OT still remains the word of God for us, even if it is not still the word of God to us. This means that most of the dietary, legal and ritual laws in the OT, which were addressed to Israel living in Canaan, do not apply in the same way to modern believers living all over the world. These laws, however, reveal God’s concern for Israel’s welfare; present-day believers will also benefit by reflecting on the reason and intention of these directives.

The rich and varied reality that confronts us when we read the OT and NT serves to highlight this central truth: The God who revealed himself in the OT as the Creator of all things and as the God of patriarchs and the prophets is the same God who has revealed himself ultimately in Christ, in whom “all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form” (Col 2:9). The writers of the NT express in their own unique ways the common conviction that the core and characteristics of the Christian gospel are foreshadowed in the multi-layered narratives, laws, poetry and prophetic writings of the OT. The careful reader of the Bible is ushered into this wonderful interplay between the testaments.

Jacob Cherian

Continue Reading

INTRODUCTION TO THE LETTERS

 INTRODUCTION TO THE LETTERS

Twenty-one of the twenty-seven books that constitute the NT are in the form of letters, a name derived from the Latin word epistulae, which means “letters”.

In the first century AD, letters were a common and valued form of communication. Thus these letters from Paul, the apostles John and Peter, and James and Jude, the Lord’s brothers, were not casually discarded but were carefully preserved and shared with other churches (Col 4:16).

All the authors wrote with some awareness that their letters would be seen as backed by apostolic authority. They also all intended that what they had written would be read aloud in the community. This explains their somewhat official style. So does the fact that these letters did not come from the hand of the letter writer himself but were dictated to a secretary or a scribe, a practice that used to be common in South Asia. We see traces of this practice when Paul takes pen in hand to sign a letter himself (Gal 6:11), when Peter mentions his secretary by name (1 Pet 5:12) and when the secretary adds his own greeting to the letter (Rom 16:22).

There is great diversity among these letters. Some, like Philemon and 3 John, are almost as brief as modern postcards. Others, like Romans and Hebrews, are much longer. Some are addressed primarily to individuals such as Timothy and Titus, while others, such as Philippians and Romans, are written to churches, responding to pastoral needs in their particular contexts.

It is helpful to remember that all these letters were written to individuals or groups of people in particular circumstances. We can understand their message much better when we have a good grasp of the circumstances that prompted them and of the setting of the believers who received them.

The first thirteen letters in the NT were written by Paul, often along with co-senders. These letters were collected and circulated as a group long before the NT writings were finally put together. They are arranged in two sets – the first nine (Romans to 2 Thessalonians) are addressed to churches and the remaining four (1 Timothy to Philemon) are addressed to individuals. Within these sets, the letters are arranged in descending order of length. Scholars sometimes divide the letters into other subsets. For example, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians and Philemon are sometimes called the prison letters, for they were written while Paul was in prison. Similarly, the letters addressed to Timothy and Titus have been called the pastoral letters because they deal with issues related to pastoring a church.

Of the remaining eight letters, seven are identified by their author. The exception is Hebrews, for which we do not know the author. However, it was clearly written to believers with a strong knowledge of the Hebrew (Jewish) faith. The other seven letters (James to Jude) are often called the catholic (meaning universal) or general letters, because they do not appear to have been written to a specific church or individual (although this might be disputed for 2 and 3 John).

Not surprisingly, there are similarities between the letters. Many of them follow the standard format of first-century letters, beginning with the name of the writer, the addressees and a greeting. This is followed by thanksgiving and prayer for the recipients, after which the author gets down to the major message or body of the letter. The letters usually end with greetings and a closing benediction.

There are also similarities in the subject matter in that all focus on who Christ is, what he has done, and what this means for the way believers should live. However, there are also considerable differences between the letters, reflecting the different situations of those addressed. In Romans, for example, Paul writes to a church where there was tension between Jewish and Gentile believers and stresses that together they form one people of God, drawn together on the basis of the righteousness received through faith in Jesus Christ.

By contrast, in his letter to the Philippians, Paul writes to thank his gospel partners at Philippi for their support and to encourage them to press on to know Christ, rejoice in the midst of suffering and serve each other in humility and love. He holds up the example of Christ and of others such as Timothy and Epaphroditus, as well as offering himself as a role model for enduring trials. Peter, in turn, writes his first letter to suffering Christians, reminding them that they are called to suffer just as Christ suffered. He encourages them to live righteous lives, especially when under pressure, because they are filled with hope based on Christ’s resurrection. Jude writes to warn the recipients of his letter against false teachers and exhort them to stand firm in the faith. The letters to Philemon and 3 John simply commend someone to someone else.

When we read these letters, we need to remember that they were not originally divided into the chapters and verses we find in our Bibles today. Those were added much later to make it easier for us to refer to particular points. But the letters were not intended to be read in chapters but as entire letters. Thus the best way for us to understand the author’s intention and purpose is to read the whole letter, rather than picking and choosing a few verses. Knowing that the letter would have made sense in the cultural and historical situation of the original readers, our task is to reconstruct that original occasion to the best of our ability and then observe the flow of thought of the author.

Historically, the NT letters have influenced much of church doctrine and practice. But they are far more than just historical artefacts. Their underlying message is relevant to every age. We still hear God speaking to us through these ancient writings to God’s people.

Jacob Cherian

Continue Reading

INTRODUCTION TO THE GOSPELS

INTRODUCTION TO THE GOSPELS

The first four books in the NT are the gospels that tell of the life and ministry of Jesus. One contains a very clear statement of the writer’s purpose: “These are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31). The writers of the other three gospels probably had a similar purpose.

The gospels record what Jesus did and the teaching he gave during his public ministry. These stories were not written down immediately because Jesus’ disciples did not need to resort to writing to remember what he did. They were with him as he travelled about Israel, and they heard him teach, asked him questions, and saw him heal the sick and deliver others from evil spirits. Later they told others about the things they had seen and heard. The gospels are thus based ultimately on eyewitness testimony.

As the stories of Jesus and his teachings were repeated over and over, they gradually fell into formal patterns. For example, one of the most familiar forms in the gospels is the miracle story. These all follow a similar basic pattern: a problematic situation is described, Jesus is made aware of it, there is often some reference to faith, Jesus responds to the situation and solves the problem, and his actions have an effect on the bystanders. Many of the miracle stories involve either healing or exorcism, but there are also nature miracles like the feeding of crowds and the calming of the storm on the Sea of Galilee.

Another popular form of story is the pronouncement story. These involve a problem that is resolved by some appropriate words or pronouncement by Jesus. For example, when the Jewish authorities criticise Jesus for going to the home of Levi, a tax collector, for a meal, he defends himself with this statement: “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners” (Mark 2:17). Many other such pronouncements are preserved in the gospels.

However, the bulk of the teaching of Jesus recorded in the gospels is in the form of direct teaching given to crowds or, in the latter part of his ministry, to his disciples. This teaching is recorded in different forms. Of these, the most familiar is the parable. Parables range from very short, crisp statements of comparison to brief stories about one or more characters. Jesus uses these parables to engage his hearers by using routine, everyday situations and events to communicate or illustrate divine truth. For example, when he is criticised for his friendship with tax collectors and sinners, he tells the story of the shepherd who searched until he found his sheep that had gone astray.

His point is that God is like that shepherd and rejoices over every lost person who is found (Luke 15:3-7). At other times, Jesus used parables to teach about the kingdom of God (Mark 4:1-34) or about the future (Matt 25).

Jesus’ sayings often take the form of rules or instructions about the life of discipleship. These often appear in the gospels as collections around a theme like prayer, light or salt. There is good reason to believe that at a very early stage a collection of the parables, sayings and other teachings of Jesus existed, and that this collection is a source that two of the gospel writers, Matthew and Luke, drew on when they were writing their gospels. Scholars call this source Q (short for Quelle, the German word for “source”).

Although all four of the gospels present the life and ministry of Jesus and are written with an evangelistic purpose, the last of the gospels, John, is very different from the others. The first three all bear some resemblance to each other, not just in their overall presentation but also in their selection of material and even in their wording. For this reason, scholars refer to them as the Synoptic Gospels, a term which indicates that they ought to be read alongside each other.

Mark, the briefest of the Synoptic Gospels, was probably the first to be written. Apart from two blocks of teaching (chs 4 and 13), this gospel is largely narrative. It falls into two major sections. The first begins with Jesus’ baptism by John and the start of his public ministry and ends with him about to enter Jerusalem for the last time (10:52).

The second begins with his entry into Jerusalem and covers the passion and resurrection narratives (11:1-16:20).

Matthew and Luke largely follow Mark’s narrative from Jesus’ baptism (Matt 3:1; Luke 3:1) to his entry into Jerusalem for the last time (Matt 20:34; Luke 19:27). However, both of them introduce their gospels with collections of stories about the circumstances of Jesus’ birth (Matt 1–2; Luke 1–2). The birth stories in each gospel differ in terms of content and thrust. Both Matthew and Luke also include information about Jesus’ teaching, some of it common to all three gospels, some common to both of them, and some unique to each of them. Likewise, their stories of the events surrounding Christ’s death and resurrection cover common ground but also reflect their individual interests and emphases.

In the Synoptics we thus have three individual but similar accounts of the life and ministry of Jesus. Each of the three writers wants to bring out particular themes, sometimes to suit the particular audience for which he was writing, and so each collects, selects, arranges and shapes the material to emphasise these themes. Readers who recognise the nature of these accounts and try to appreciate the individual nuances of the different gospels will get the most out of them.

The fourth gospel, John, presents a noticeably different portrait of Jesus from that presented in the Synoptics. The author seems to assume that his readers will be familiar with some of the details of the life and ministry of Jesus mentioned in the other gospels. This is especially true of the account of John the Baptist and his disciples in John 1:19-51.

Instead of beginning with an account of Jesus’ birth or baptism, John begins his gospel with a prologue in which Jesus is presented as the divine Word coming to humanity (1:1-18). He is rejected by those who ought to have received him, but there is no other way to know God than the Word that has come to humans in Jesus (1:14, 18).

There are also some fundamental differences in perspective between John’s Gospel and the Synoptic Gospels. For example, in the Synoptics, up until six months before the end of Jesus’ life, people are still speculating about his true identity (Mark 6:14-15; 8:27-28). But in the first chapter of John’s Gospel, we hear Andrew testifying to his brother Peter, “We have found the Messiah”. Even when John tells us about the same events or reports the same teaching as the Synoptics, he presents it differently.

John does not include Jesus’ short parables and sayings about things like the kingdom of God. Instead he gives us long discourses in which Jesus speaks about himself and his mission. Yet John and the Synoptics do have some things in common. For example, in all the gospels, the same titles are ascribed to Jesus or used by Jesus to refer to himself. Like the authors of the Synoptic Gospels, John has a distinctive portrait of Jesus in mind, and it is up to the reader to appreciate the distinctive features of that portrait.

After the prologue (1:1-18), John’s Gospel divides into two sections. The first section (1:19-12:50) deals with Jesus’ public ministry up to the final rejection of his message in Jerusalem. It contains a series of signs or miracles that are either followed or preceded by a related discourse. Each sign and the explanatory discourse that accompanies it point to the identity of Jesus as the one who reveals the Father. Then in the second section of the gospel (13:1-20:31), Jesus completes the mission that he has been sent for and returns to the Father. The final chapter (21:1-25) is a sort of epilogue.

Although the gospels were not the first books in the NT to be written, it is appropriate that they are placed first. This is because their subject, the Lord Jesus, is the very heart and centre of the entire NT. In other words, the gospels lay the foundation for the NT, and the rest of the books build on them. It is also important to remember that these stories and traditions regarding Jesus were formulated and used in the early church long before they were put down in writing. Jesus of Nazareth was not a mythical figure from the distant past. He was someone who was known and loved by many in the church of that period.

Brian Wintle

Continue Reading

INTRODUCTION TO THE NEW TESTAMENT

When the risen Jesus was taken up into heaven (Acts 1:9), he left behind eleven apostles and a group of about a hundred and twenty believers. Their expectations were high. Jesus had promised that after he left he would send them the Holy Spirit from the Father (John 15:26).

When the Spirit descended on the apostles on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2), those present were convinced that this was not only a fulfilment of Jesus’ promise but also a fulfilment of the prophecy of Joel that the Spirit would be given to one and all (Joel 2:28-32). Filled with the Spirit, the disciples bore witness to their faith in Jesus and to his resurrection. More and more people came to believe that Jesus of Nazareth was the long-awaited Messiah, who had been wrongfully put to death by the Jewish and Roman authorities and whose authority had been vindicated by his resurrection. In defence of this position, the disciples pointed to texts in the Jewish Scriptures that referred, they believed, to a Messiah who would die vicariously for his people.

The believers constituted a small segment of Jewish society. But as they studied the Scriptures and proclaimed the implications of their belief for the temple and the Jewish law, they attracted opposition.

One of the early preachers who spelled out this message was Stephen, a Jewish believer from a Greek background. His preaching so enraged the Jews that they stoned him to death (Acts 7). Persecution followed, and the disciples began to scatter from the region of Jerusalem and Judea. As they travelled, they bore witness to their faith in Jesus as the Messiah. People from other communities – Samaritans, Gentiles who worshipped the Jewish God, and finally, Gentiles who had previously shown little interest in Judaism – began to join the community of believers.

One of those who spearheaded the persecution was a young and determined member of the Jewish Council named Saul, who hailed from the town of Tarsus in the province of Cilicia (now part of Turkey). He was dramatically confronted by the risen Jesus while pursuing the fleeing disciples. Not only did he become a disciple, he also became a pioneer missionary (Acts 9:1-30). His initial base was the town of Antioch in Syria, and from there he and his colleagues set off to preach the good news of salvation in West Asia and Eastern Europe, where he was known by his Roman name, Paul (Acts 13:1-3).

As people responded to his preaching and put their faith in Jesus, he organised them into local communities of believers, instructed them in the faith and its implications for everyday life, and then moved on.

However, he made a point of keeping in touch with each community, visiting them when he could and writing to give them further instruction, advice on practical issues and answers to their questions.

These pastoral letters are the earliest of the documents that were later collected and included in the NT canon, where they are arranged according to length. The first nine letters are addressed to communities in towns that Paul regarded as under his pastoral oversight; the remainder are addressed to individuals. We can normally deduce his reasons for writing from the letters themselves.

For example, the letter to the Romans was written towards the end of Paul’s missionary career, when he was planning to visit Rome on his way to Spain. As part of his preparation for the visit, Paul wrote to introduce himself and the message that he normally preached to Gentile audiences. But he also addressed the situation in Rome at the time, for it appears that the Christians there, whose Jewish and Gentile backgrounds were very different, were finding it difficult to maintain unity. Similarly, in his first letter to the church in the city of Corinth, he dealt with various problems in the church – some of which had been reported to him, and others that the Corinthians themselves had written to ask him about. By the time he wrote his second letter to the same church, however, relations between him and the church had deteriorated. Knowing this helps one to appreciate what Paul has to say about such matters as the hardships of ministry, Christian giving and the like.

The NT also contains letters written by Peter, John, James and Jude, and a letter addressed to Jewish Christians who were not living in Israel and were under pressure to return to Judaism. Reading these letters, we can deduce something about the context of their readers.

In the period immediately following Jesus’ resurrection and ascension, the disciples remembered his teaching and deeds and referred to them in their preaching and teaching. Thus Paul’s letters contain allusions to the words and deeds of Jesus. It is clear that the apostle saw himself as both recalling and building upon the Jesus tradition by drawing out its implications for everyday life. As long as the original eyewitnesses were alive and present in the communities around the Roman Empire, it may be safely assumed that any appeal to the tradition would have been subject to their scrutiny.

With the passing of the years, and then decades, two developments took place. First, the expectation that Jesus would soon return began to dim; secondly, the original apostles and disciples began to pass away. The church became aware of the need for th Jesus tradition to be put down in writing, and this need was met in the writing of the gospels. The gospels tell the Jesus story. All four of the gospels included in the NT deal with the public ministry of Jesus and what is called the Passion Narrative, that is, the narrative of Jesus’ final days in Jerusalem and his suffering and death, followed by the narrative of the empty tomb and the appearances of the risen Jesus to individuals and groups of disciples. The gospels have different emphases and were written for different groups of readers, but all share the same evangelistic purpose – that the readers might come to faith or confirm their faith in the messiahship of Jesus of Nazareth and have life in his name.

The Gospel according to Mark was probably written somewhere in the late sixties and focused on Jesus’ deeds. This was followed, possibly ten to twenty years later, by gospels according to Matthew and Luke that covered the same ground as Mark but included more of Jesus’ teaching. Finally, the Gospel according to John represents still another form of the Jesus tradition.

The evangelist Luke, a Gentile disciple, was one of Paul’s colleagues. From the prologue of his gospel we gather that he wrote it for the benefit of a person called Theophilus, who was probably a Roman officer of some rank. But having written the gospel, Luke proceeded to write a second volume, the Acts of the Apostles, in which he told of the ongoing spread of the faith across the Roman Empire.

The first century AD was a period of Jewish hostility and opposition to the new faith and of persecution by the Roman state that peaked under certain emperors, particularly Domitian in the sixties and Nero in the nineties. The last book of the NT canon, called Revelation or the Apocalypse, was probably written during the latter part of the emperorship of Domitian. The book has some unique features, but clearly belongs to a genre called apocalyptic writing.

Books in this genre are intended to comfort readers who were being persecuted for their faith. The message is contained in a series of visions of the future when the period of persecution has come to an end and those who have persevered are vindicated. The visions of parallel happenings in heaven and on earth are intended to underline the truth that God is sovereign and that he will vindicate those wh remain faithful in spite of persecution.

As the Christian faith spread across the Roman Empire, various interpretations of the person and work of Jesus arose and were reflected in writings of various kinds. Faced with this situation, the church in the second century recognised that heretical teaching could confuse believers, and thus it had to make a decision regarding what writings would be considered as presenting orthodox doctrine – especially in relation to Jesus the Messiah.

One of the criteria used was apostolicity, which means that the books must have been written by an apostle or someone closely associated with an apostle. A second criterion was the importance of the community to which the book or letter was addressed. A third criterion was the conformity of the letter or book to the accepted beliefs of the Christian communities.

These criteria were used by the church to determine which of the many works in circulation could be regarded as normative or canonical – that is, works that were truly God-breathed and Spirit inspired.

By the fourth century AD, twenty-seven books were selected and put together to constitute the New Testament as we have it today.

Brian Wintle

Continue Reading

How Did Jesus Use Apologetics?

How Did Jesus Use Apologetics?

Because Jesus made extraordinary claims about Himself, including His claim to be the Son of God, apologetics was an essential part of His ministry. He did not ask or expect people to simply offer blind faith based on His unique message alone. He, more than anyone else, understood that if His words were to have the desired force and effect on His hearers, He would need to offer compelling reasons and actions in their support.

From the Scriptures we recognize that God is a rational being (Isaiah 1:18), and humans who are made in His image are naturally inclined to look for reasons and evidence before making a decision. God has never called on anyone to make an unthoughtful and unreasoned decision about eternity. To be sure, there is a real difference between a leap of faith in the dark (existentialism), and a step of faith in the light (realism). Jesus encouraged the latter. Throughout His ministry, as we shall see, Jesus provided persuasive reasons and evidence to confirm His claims. Jesus is the greatest apologist who ever lived, providing a model for all disciples to follow. His apologetics included the use of reason, witnesses, miracles, prophecy, and His resurrection.

Jesus’s Use of Different Apologetic Approaches

Jesus’s Apologetic Use of Reason

Jesus was a master logician who presented irrefutable rational arguments that baffled His opponents. God is a rational being, and creatures created in His image are designed to use their senses and reason to discover and discern truth from error. We are created to know and live according to truth (John 8:32; 17:17). Reason is even operative before the gospel, for one must be able to think logically and coherently to understand the message.

Reason is also fundamental to communication. Although fallen in sin, people still possess the capacity to reason and discover truth (Romans 1:18- 20) and avoid contradictions (1 Timothy 6:20). Throughout His ministry, Jesus employed sound logic in His teachings, discourses, and actions.

Philosopher Dallas Willard said, “He [Jesus] constantly uses the power of logical insight to enable people to come to the truth about themselves and about God from the inside of their own heart and mind. Quite certainly it also played a role in his own growth in ‘wisdom.’”[1]

Although Jesus did not articulate the undeniable first principles of logic, He certainly understood them and used them. Jesus applied the Law of Identity (A is A). In Matthew 5:37, Jesus said, “Let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No.’” Jesus applied the Law of Noncontradiction (A is not non- A). This is seen when Jesus contrasted true teachers from false teachers in Matthew 7:15 and 24:24. Jesus applied the Law of the Excluded Middle (either A or non-A). In Matthew 12:30, Jesus said, “He who is not with me is against Me.” Jesus always employed the basic laws of reasoning throughout His discourses.

When the Pharisees confronted Jesus, He used many forms of reasoned arguments to answer their challenges. In Matthew 12:22-28, Jesus responded to the charge of demonic empowerment with a reductio ad absurdum argument—that is, showing that if their premise was true, it led to a contradictory or absurd conclusion. Jesus was challenged for healing on the Sabbath (Matthew 12:9-14). He responded with an a fortiori argument.

This is an argument from lesser to greater force, or what applies in a less important situation applies in a more important situation, often with greater implications.[2] If the people believed they should rescue a sheep on the Sabbath, how much more should Jesus rescue a man from sickness? In Matthew 22:15-22, the Pharisees attempted to corner Jesus with a seemingly inescapable dilemma regarding whether or not to pay taxes.

Facing two unacceptable options, Jesus skillfully avoided the horns of a dilemma. Presented with two unacceptable choices, He went to a third option. After asking about whose image and inscription appeared on the coin, Jesus insightfully replied, “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” (verse 21).

Jesus’s skill in presenting sound arguments is summed up in Matthew 22:46, which states, “No one was able to answer him a word, nor from that day on did anyone dare question him anymore.” Jesus proved to be the greatest thinker who used the laws of logic to present truth, demolish arguments, and expose error.

Jesus’s Apologetic Use of Witnesses

The Jewish law requires two or three witnesses to verify one’s claims (Deuteronomy 19:15). Knowing this, on several occasions, Jesus pointed to the testimony of witnesses to confirm His message. A prime example occurred in John 5 after Jesus healed the lame man at the Pool of Bethesda.

An interrogation by the Pharisees followed because Jesus had healed on the Sabbath, thus violating Jewish tradition. What transpired provides one of Jesus’s finest discourses defending His claim to be the Son of God. In this discussion, Jesus presented a convincing argument using the testimony of witnesses.

Like a defense lawyer, Jesus presented five witnesses who authenticated His actions. His first witness was John the Baptist, a recognized prophet of their time (John 5:33). The second witness was His miracles (verse 36). His third witness was God the Father (verse 37). His fourth witness was the Scriptures (verse 39). His final witness was Moses, the greatest prophet of Israel (verse 46). Here, Jesus exceeded the minimal requirement of two or three witnesses, and brought five very powerful witnesses to the stand.

Jesus used the testimony of witnesses again in John 8. After declaring He was the “light of the world” (verse 12), Jesus defended His claim by presenting four witnesses. The first was Jesus Himself (verse 14), then the testimony of the Father (verse 19), and finally the testimony of Abraham, the father of the nation (verse 56). His final witness is Jesus’s own sinless life (verses 41,46). As a masterful lawyer would do in any courtroom, Jesus provided expert witnesses to defend His claims.

Jesus’s Apologetic Use of Miracles

God confirmed His message and messengers with miracles, which are special acts of God that interrupt the normal course of events and confirm the Word of God through a messenger of God.3 Through His miracles, Jesus demonstrated authority over every realm of creation, authority exclusive to God alone. Norman Geisler states that Jesus’s power over the cosmos was seen by the fact that He manifested control over every category of the cosmos as listed by the famous Greek philosopher Aristotle in his Categories.[3]

Note Jesus’s power over…

• substance (what?)—turning water into wine

• quantity (how much?)—feeding of 5,000

• quality (what kind?)—blind man gains quality of sight

• relation (to what?)—raising Lazarus from relationship

• space (where?)—healing nobleman’s son from a distance

• time (when?)—healing an invalid of 38 years

• position (on what?)—walking on water, an unnatural position

• action (from what?)—His victorious death

• passion (on what?)—His triumphant resurrection

• state or habit (under what condition?)—catching a draught of fish

The Jews should have realized that Jesus possessed the authority of God. Several recognized this, including Nicodemus (John 3:2) and the disciples (John 2:11). Jesus often pointed to His miracles as evidence and expected the Jews to make the connection (Matthew 11:20-23; John 10:25,38). No other religious leader has demonstrated the kind of authority Jesus exhibited over creation.

Jesus’s Apologetic Use of Prophecy

Only God, who is eternal, can repeatedly predict future events with 100 percent accuracy. In Isaiah 46:9-11, God declared, I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like Me, declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things not yet done, saying, “My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure…I have spoken it; I will also bring it to pass; I have purposed it; I will also do it.”

Jesus has a unique prophetic legacy that no other religious leader can match. J. Barton Payne’s Encyclopedia of Biblical Prophecy records 127 prophecies regarding the life of Christ.[4]

These prophecies include:

• Prophecies regarding His lineage and birth

Descendant of Abraham (Genesis 22:18) Tribe of Judah (Genesis 49:10) Descendant of King David (Isaiah 11:1) Place of birth, Bethlehem (Micah 5:2)

• Prophecies regarding His ministry

Ministry preceded by a messenger (Isaiah 40:3, Malachi 3:1)

Ministry begins in Galilee (Isaiah 9:1)

Ministry of miracles (Isaiah 35:5-6)

• Prophecies regarding His death

Rejected by His own people (Isaiah 53:3)

Betrayed by a friend (Psalm 41:9)

Sold for 30 pieces of silver (Zechariah 11:12)

Hands and feet pierced (Psalm 22:16)

Crucified with thieves (Isaiah 53:12)

Garments parted and lots cast (Psalm 22:18)

Bones not broken (Psalm 34:20)

Buried in a rich man’s tomb (Isaiah 53:9)

Exact date of death predicted (Daniel 9)

Jesus pointed to the Old Testament prophecies of the Messiah that He fulfilled as evidence He was the long-awaited Messiah.

Not only did Jesus fulfill many prophecies, He made predictions of future events, with some being fulfilled during His lifetime. Moreover, Payne documents that Matthew recorded 58 predictions and Mark recorded 47. In Luke there are more than 40. In John, of the 45 predictions, Jesus made most of them. Some of Jesus’s prophecies include:

• The Word of God will abide forever (Matthew 5:18)

• The apostles will be persecuted (Matthew 10:17-23)

• His words will abide forever (Matthew 24:35; Mark 13:31)

• Jesus will die and rise three days later (Matthew 12:40)

• The kingdom of heaven will experience great growth (Matthew 13:31- 32)

• The church will never be destroyed (Matthew 16:18)

• Jerusalem will reject Jesus and become desolate (Matthew 23:37-38)

• Jerusalem temple will be destroyed (Matthew 24:2)

• Mary’s act of anointing Jesus will be remembered throughout the ages (Matthew 26:13)

• The Holy Spirit would come upon the disciples (John 15:15-26; 16:5-15)

• The disciples will do greater works than Jesus (John 14:12)

• John will live to an old age (John 21:18) Jesus stated, “Now I have told you before it comes, that when it does come to pass, you may believe” (John 15:29). Jesus not only fulfilled dozens of Old Testament prophecies, but also proclaimed His own prophecies regarding future events. This legacy of fulfilled prophecy is unrivaled and further upholds Christ’s claims of deity.

Jesus’s Apologetic Use of the Resurrection

The resurrection was the ultimate proof of Christ’s deity. On several occasions Jesus prophesied His own death and resurrection (Matthew 12:40; 17:23; Mark 14:58; John 2:19). God alone is the author and giver of life. Therefore, Jesus predicting and accomplishing His own resurrection from the dead conclusively confirmed His claim as the Son of God.

Jesus’s resurrection fulfilled Old Testament messianic prophecies.  Psalm 16:10 states, “You will not leave my soul in Sheol, nor will you allow your Holy One to see corruption.” The Messiah would not remain in the grave, nor would His body suffer the decay of death.

Isaiah 53:8-10 states, “He was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgressions of My people He was stricken. And they made His grave with the wicked—but with the rich at His death…When You make His soul an offering for sin, He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in His hand” (NKJV).

The phrase “cut off from the land of the living” means the Messiah would be killed. But the following phrase, “He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days,” indicates He would be resurrected to see His

descendants. The passage also states the death and resurrection of the Messiah will fulfill the requirements of the Old Testament law. Jesus the sinless Son of God was the only one who could meet God’s holy requirements; therefore, He is the only Savior for mankind.

Jesus’s resurrection affirms Jesus words, “I am the resurrection and the life” (John 11:25). He is the source of life. The Bible also states that God is the source of life. Only God has the ability to create and restore life. That Jesus raised Himself from the dead demonstrates that He has the authority of God.

The Most Effective Defender of the Faith

In the Gospels, we see clear examples of how Jesus used apologetics. He employed reason, evidence, the testimony of witnesses, miracles, prophecy, and His resurrection. It is important to recognize that Jesus did not present a formal apologetics system per se, but from what we gather from Scripture, His method was consistent with the classical and evidential apologetic approaches.

Jesus was not only the world’s greatest teacher, He was the most effective defender of the Faith who ever lived. Time and again He offered compelling reasons and evidence as He defended His claims to be the Son of God. His life and ministry serve as a model for every believer as we seek to do the work of an apologist in a lost and searching world.

---

[1] Dallas Willard, “Jesus the Logician,” Dallas Willard, http://www.dwillard.org/articles/individual/jesus-the-logician.

[2] Ralph P. Martin and Peter H. Davids, eds., Dictionary of the Later New Testament and Its Developments (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1997), 845.

[3] Norman Geisler and Frank Turek, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2004), 201-202.

[4] Norman Geisler, Baker Encyclopedia of Apologetics (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1999), 53.

Continue Reading