Ecumenism - Any Hope For 21st Century Pluralistic Culture?

The goal of ecumenism (objective organic unity of Christian denominations) has been highly elusive for the church. During the last half of the twentieth century many Christian denominations have made great effort to develop closer relationships and understandings. Mergers were realized among groups such as the Methodists, Presbyterians and Lutherans. Still, ecumenism remained an un-ending series of high hurdles to cross over (as was the case with plenary sessions of the Consultation on Church Union 1960). I believe ecumenism as we envision it to be will continue to be elusive in America, especially since the idea of America has been built upon pluralism and the freedom of religion. It is Christ’s wish that we come together (Jn. 17:21), though the path is difficult (not impossible).

The Seven Power Keys For Planning Change | Dr. Myles Munroe

Dr. Myles Munroe - Kingdom Faith - Successful Living Beyond The Tests_clip2

Dr. Myles Munroe - Kingdom Faith - Successful Living Beyond The Tests_clip1

American Church History: Dealing With Multi-cultures

One of the most unique challenges faced by Christians during the colonial years was the internal struggles within the movement itself. Interestingly enough, these struggles were very closely tied to pro/anti American Revolution sentiments. In the North East or what we can call New England territories, there continued to be struggles related to ties to the Church of England. Why would anyone wish to identify with England and its church with the push for liberation? Why sever ties with the people who provided means for a new life? After all, wouldn’t that be the least these new territories could do for the motherland?  Not quite. Aside from economic and political motivations related to the revolution, the North Eastern region became a melting pot of diverse religions and worldviews, pre-dominantly pro-freedom of religious liberties. In Lancaster county, Thomas Barton described the presence of “German Lutherans, Calvinists, Mennonites, New Born, Dunkers, Presbyterians, Seceders, New Lights, Covenanters, Mountain Men, Brownists, Independents, Papists, Quakers, Jews.”[1] Imagine a community in which such diverse religious worldviews are competing for space, influence and converts. 

Struggles Of Blacks & The Church In Early America

Consider if you will the history of the Christian church in the early stages of the development of the New World, specifically the settlement of Virginia. It was the 1700’s. England colonized this portion of America, importing its religion of which the Church of England was preeminent.  The legal structure for the official Church of England was set up in 1660, with parishes being set up and one doctrinal standard established as set by the bishops of England. If you were not properly ordained and commissioned by the Church of England you could very well lose your livelihood. Here’s how the Virginian officials put it: “If any other person pretending himself a minister shall, contrary to this Act, presume to teach or preach publicly or privately, the Governor & Council are hereby desired and impowered (sic) to suspend & silence the person so offending.”[1] Talk about keeping it together!

Cultural Intelligence Applied To Mission

The Great Commission mandate provides a clear directive to believers: “Go,  Make Disciples, Baptize them, and Teach them *Mat. 28:19-20). This seems like a simple enough task until one recognizes the universal reach of the command: “of all nations”. This gospel is to be preached to all nations (Mat. 24:14).  This mission to the nations calls for the application of cultural intelligence as communicators of God’s message will need to have “a core understanding of cultures, language patterns and non-verbal behaviors,”[1] unless the preference is to limit their cultural exchanges to a certain demographics. Many of the nations to which the gospel will be preached comprise people “whose tastes, behaviors, and assumptions are not only different but often in conflict with one another.”[2] That said, the message of the gospel may be foreign to many within these foreign nations. This means a clear grasp of intercultural communication that is catered to the audience. We are talking about creating an indigenous experience that is totally biblical, especially since the gospel is a universal message with universal appeal. The same approach can be used for local missions work.

God Be Praised by the Potters House Mass Choir

The Operation of Spiritual Gifts Within God's Church

The Equipping & Building Of The Church (Ephesians 4:12-16)

Unfortunately, in many churches, only the office of the pastor seemingly is in operation. Christ’s intent was that all of his saints who have been graced with a measure of his gift would operate in their gifting (or that which they have been graced with) “in order that everything in the church might be well arranged, or put into its proper place, that Christians may have every possible advantage for becoming complete in love, and knowledge and order.”[1]  The main idea here is that the church becomes mature when Christ’s gifts are functioning within the community of believers. Jesus proclaimed he would build his church (Matthew 16:18), and he saw fit to govern such and organism through these various offices.

“What Did Jesus Say About Homosexuality?”

The debate surrounding marriage is as old as Moses (Deut. 24). Homosexuality as well has had  historic implications since Old Testament times (Gen. 19; Lev. 18:22, 20:13). Michael Brown contributes to the debate with a biblical response to the homosexual agenda in light of the institution of marriage (Gen. 3:18-24; Mat. 19:8; Deut. 24) and the argument of silence that supposedly supports tolerance of homosexual relationships in light of Matthew 19:11-12. If this were the times of the apostle Paul, he would say that any claim that the Bible favors homosexuality is not only false doctrine, but the discipline of homosexual theology is biblically incompatible.

Here We Grow Again! Church Home In Lauderhill Florida.

I savor moments like these, when you know you are living in a dream.  The picture to the left is myself, praying in one of the church offices overlooking the parking lot, facing a multicultural community of Inverrary/Lauderhill. Moments after I penned the last paragraph of my message for Sunday, I moved to the kitchen counter, stood by the sink for a moment, feeling a bit overwhelmed but in a good way. In the stillness of the early morning I declared, “Thank you Jesus!” The dream has become a reality. Once, a dream, now we are living it; and it feels like  a nonstop movement toward an intended purpose. Wow! Who would think we'd be doing this a year ago? Everything starts as a dream; God's providence effects the reality. "And God saw that it was GOOD" (Gen. 1:10).

You Are Not Your Sexuality

Impersonation Of Famous Preachers

Why Baptize?

Perspective on Baptism

The following is a block quote that serves as an excellent apologetic for Believer’s Baptism:

“In the NT, baptism represents at least three and possibly four things. First, it signifies cleansing from sin and is thus “unto repentance.” Obviously the threat of judgment is behind the need for baptism, but the baptism itself is (symbolically) the means of escape from judgment. Those who are baptized acknowledge their guilt and seek to have it washed away. Second, baptism is a ritual dying and rising again, symbolizing the believer's participation in the death and resurrection of Christ. This is the point of Col 2:12. Third, it is a “sincere pledge/request to God” because in baptism one comes to God in genuine faith, seeking forgiveness, and desiring to walk in the light. Fourth, it may represent the effusion of the Holy Spirit upon the believer after the patterns of the descent of the Spirit at Jesus' baptism and the reception of the Spirit by Cornelius' household just prior to their baptism (Acts 10:44–48).”[1]

---

[1] Duane A. Garrett, “Meredith Kline on Suzerainty, Circumcision and Baptism,” Believer’s Baptism, Nashville, TN: B&H, 2006).

GoogleImage

Salvation During Old Testament Times

How was salvation obtained in the Old Testament? Was it through circumcision? Was it adherence to laws, rituals and ceremonies? How could they be righteous without the indwelling Holy Spirit? These are profound questions that have been the source of contention for decades. The Bible attests to several instances in which men of God were called righteous: Abraham (Gal. 3:6), Noah (Gen. 6:9), and Job (Job 1:1,8). How is it that folks could be righteous without the work of the Spirit? A study of the Bible reveals that indeed the Spirit of God has been working a plan since the beginning of time. There may not have been a blanket indwelling of the Spirit of God, but there were several accounts of men controlled by God’s influence (cf. Moses, Joseph, Saul, Daniel, Joshua, Abraham). Here's one instance you may find interesting. There was "an apostolic appointment as far back as the days of Moses: 

"Joshua son of Nun was full of the spirit of wisdom, because Moses had laid his hands on him" (Deut. 34:9). Was this a foreshadowing of New Testament "laying on of hands" for the gifts of the Spirit?

The point is, God has been working through his Spirit long before incarnation. 

Atonement Theories: The Person & Work of Christ

The Person & Work of Christ

Atonement is exactly described with the Hebrew word “kaphar,” meaning “to cover.”[1] Theologically speaking, the blood of Jesus Christ has covered the sins of mankind. By the will of God, “we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all” (Heb. 10:10b). That Jesus Christ lived on the earth, conducted ministry, was killed on a cross, arose from the dead, and went back into the heavens (Lk. 2:7; Mk.1; Jn. 18, 19:17-37, 20:1-9; Acts 1:9-11), is essential to the doctrine of humanity and of the atonement. Humans were created by God for his good pleasure, but the entrance of sin necessitated “a satisfaction.” This satisfaction could only be obtained by divine means, hence the doctrine of soteriology – salvation through Jesus Christ (Gal. 3:13-15; Jn. 3:17). If the doctrine of humanity is understood in light of “what needed to be done for, how it was done for and the ultimate destiny of humans,”[2] then the atonement describes Christ’s work through the incarnation in satisfying the demands of a holy, righteous and moral God for violations against his nature and for human liberation from sin.

Discovering Your Personal Leadership | Dr. Myles Munroe

God Gifts His Church

                        Spiritual Formation Enabled By Spiritual Gifts (Ephesians 4:11)

Now, at the heart of spiritual transformation into Christ-likeness is Holy Spirit guided living, described by Paul as “attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ” (Ephesians 4:13b). In no way could this “fullness” (Ephesians 4:9b) be achieved through human effort. It is God who must “fill” his church in order that they may be “full”. It is the Holy Spirit who does an “inside job” by “empowering a transformed people to live out “God honoring lives within the context of community and healthy relationships.”[1] Christ’ desire is to see his people become agents of change in the earth. In verses 11-12 Paul fleshes out the offices or functions through which Christ’s mission would be accomplished:

“He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers” (Eph. 4:11). 

These gifts/functions/office (five main functions) were given to the entire church for the efficacy of Christ’s kingdom government. If anything is to be accomplished in Christ’s church, it will be through divine enablement. That said, Paul further explains: “And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, varieties of tongues” (1 Corinthians 12:28). This was the work of God to spiritually empower men and women within and for the enabling of these gifts within his church. The first three gifts or offices that Paul numerated are sometimes called “higher offices” (apostles, prophets and evangelists). An apostle “was chosen and commissioned by Christ and were endowed through a special impartation of the Holy Spirit for the work of establishing the church.”[2] They played an authoritative role. “While they lived, they could provide teaching in person, but also committed their inspired revelation to writing, bringing into existence the New Testament.”[3]

Considerations Before Missions Engagement

Understanding Culture

It would be a difficult task to remove the cultural influence that shapes the worldview of a person. “No one can ever divorce himself from his culture.”[1] When considering strategies for fulfilling God’s call to take the Good News to the nations, it is essential to consider the cultural component. If any one person already has difficulty objectively looking into the impact culture has on his life, how much more the church as it makes in-roads into new territory and peoples. Lloyd Kwast suggests using the “man from Mars” method in seeking to understand the impact of and the values associated with cultural studies. The “man from Mars is able to visualize successive levels of understanding the real heart of a culture. His will be an objective view, looking from the outside-in.” on this alien culture.[2] One of the first observations about a people is their “behavior,” seen in their speech, language and non-verbal responses to stimuli (the message). An objective summation of behavior is that “culture functions as a patterned way of doing things.”[3] Perhaps a better way to describe it is “the super-glue which binds people together and gives them a sense of identity and continuity that is almost impenetrable.”[4] The communicator of the gospel can expect any number of setbacks from a group of people who will view his message a strange or even alien to who they are as a people. The gospel may at times be considered heresy, an attack on their cultural identity and a means of upsetting the apple cart.

Voices from Inside the Towers (9/11 Documentary)

Globalization & Missions: Getting The Message Out

Globalization in the twenty first century guarantees that neighborhoods Christians seek to communicate the gospel will be a blend of cultures. If the message of the gospel is to be effectively presented, fulfilling Christ’s mandate to go to the nations (Mat.24:14, 28:19; Lk. 24:47), then leadership must seek to have “some insight into how culture shapes the thoughts and behaviors of the people” within those communities.[1] The call to witness is not just for some far away country; globalization has brought the world next door. It will require greater effort; Livermore calls it “a disciplined effort to better understand cultural differences.”[2] What is valued in the American culture may be of a lesser value or even offensive to another culture. It would be wise to have at least a beginning understanding of the worldview of the target audience as “worldviews provide a system of beliefs reflected in values and behavior.”[3] While the Christian believes without a shadow of a doubt that there is only one God (Deut. 4:35,39; 6:4) and all else is false (and worthy of condemnation), there is a benefit to understanding the religion of those hearing the gospel. A good step in small-talk is finding common ground that leads to a more receptive audience.

It would not be uncommon for proclaimers of the gospel to have a cocooning mentality, yet this may very well be one of the core impediments of reaching outside the four walls of the church. Because the church is in the people business, “leaders must be both global and local in understanding and serving customers” (in this case, those to whom the gospel is proclaimed).[4] What works at home may not work in India or Africa. Although the gospel is a universal message, others may already have presuppositions about this gospel. For example, it may be seen as a “western religion” or “the white man’s religion.” History has shown that on numerous occasions, the western world has indeed imported its Christian worldview without consideration for indigenous peoples. That said, if the gospel is to be effectively proclaimed to the nations, the church ‘should be acutely aware that people have tastes, behaviors and assumptions that are not only different, but in conflict with one another.”[5] It is not enough to hit folks in the head with the Bible; the proclaimer of God’s word may wish to meet the listener at their point of need with an eye towards Christ’s kingdom (Mat. 6:33).

The gospel is in no way esoteric. It is universal in appeal, content and power to save. What makes the difference is the employment of fully functioning gifts of the Spirit under the empowerment of the Holy Spirit. The Father already promised empowerment (Mat.28:18,20), but he also expects the church to be organized for effectiveness (Acts 6:2-7). There will be challenges working with individuals and teams of people, especially culturally diverse teams. Without compromising orthodoxy, Livermore suggests making an effort to (1) understanding how a family system works, (2) understanding culture, language patterns and non-verbal behaviors, (3) “slowing down long enough to observe the hearer” while drawing on cultural intelligence to resolve issues, and (4) “looking internally at biases and assumptions and then making conscious decisions to address them.”[6] This is where intercultural communication truly becomes effective. Proclaimers of the gospel who work regularly with culturally diverse ministry partners will “reap rewards from acquiring the awareness, knowledge and skills of flexible intercultural communication. This will be needed to solve problems, manage conflicts and forge new visions at home and abroad.”[7] Bottom line is that the effective spread of the unchanging gospel to the nations (“diverse contexts and cultures”) will require both a learning/developing to function across diverse cultures (CQ) and “developing a creative mindset to see things from different angles without rigid pre-judgment.” [8]

---

[1]  David Livermore, Leading With Cultural Intelligence: The Real Secret To Success, (United States: AMACOM, 2015), 67.

[2]  Ibid., 67-8.

[3]  Lloyd E. Kwast, Understanding Culture, 399, accessed September 6, 2018, https://learn.liberty.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-24419510-dt-content-rid-297477156_1/courses/GLST650_B02_201840/GLST650_LUO_8WK_DEV_ImportedContent_20180129105511/GLST650_M2_Understanding_Culture_by_Lloyd_E._Kwast.pdf

[4] Livermore, Cultural Intelligence, 16.

[5] Ibid., 14.

[6]  Ibid., 29-30.

[7]  Stella Ting-Toomey and Leeva C. Chung, Understanding Intercultural Communication, (New York: Oxford Press, 2012), 6-7.

[8]  Ibid., 5.

GoogleImage.

Written by Kevin A. Hall.

The Multicultural Mission Field

It is unfortunate that the church is seen as organized religion, packaging the gospel as determined by its target groups. But then again, this is not a new phenomenon. When Jesus came on the scene he not only denounced the religious class as hypocrites (Mat.23:13), he appealed to Isaiah as an authoritative reference (Mat.15:7; Isa.29:13).  His plan to reach the nations beginning with his immediate circle would be a radical and incarnational approach that raised more than a few eyebrows. As master communicator, Jesus made adjustments to his teaching style opting to use parables to communicate truths to those who wished to listen and as a source of judgment for those who rejected his message (Mat.13:10-17). Even Jesus then, believed it was necessary to make adjustments to the method of delivery in order to be more effective and relevant. While he made adjustments, he did not compromise his message, delivering his message with noticeable authority (Mat.7:29; Mk. 1:22). In many cases, this is what is lacking in the present proclamation of the gospel; many come in his name, with many titles, but are lacking spiritual authority.

Should We Care About Our Approach To Mission?

God has commanded that his message of salvation be communicated to all cultures. However, there are barriers to effectively communicating that message. If ever there was a mandate for the masses, Jesus communicated that mandate in Luke 4:18-20. Bob Ekblad posits that communicating the Scriptures can result in “reconciliation, unity, joint mission and spiritual renewal.”[1] In order to communicate the Gospel, communicators must “provide safe spaces for people to share openly their problems and thoughts,”[2] present fears, needs and concerns. If the communicator is to be effective, he/she should: (1) be aware of their own cultural and theological assumptions; (2) identify the racial/ethnic, cultural and class assumptions of the audience; (3) be fully aware of pitfalls to hearing the Good News; (4) seek to develop a spirit of awareness and dependence on God’s spiritual gifts and (5) learn effective pedagogies and communication strategies.[3]

The Historical Jesus

Christ and his work are inseparable. This presupposition has fueled Christological debates for centuries and held as dogma by the early church. A shift occurred during the medieval period when “scholastic theology separated the doctrine of the person of Christ from the offices and work of Christ, making it more difficult for the average Christian to appreciate how this plays into their everyday living.”[1]  The quest of the historical Jesus was a means of making sense of all this.

Erickson considers the “Christology from above” approach as fideistic.[2]  Understandably so as Scripture went mostly unquestioned during the early years of church history. It makes three assumptions: (1) foundational to the Christian faith is the witness of Christ and his word proclaimed (the kerygma); (2) there is a preference for the “explicit theological interpretations of the apostle Paul and the Synoptic Gospels (especially John) and the witness of the prophets and apostles; (3) faith in “the Christ in the flesh” as foundational; “he or she will accept historical statements by being rationally persuaded.”[3]

Why God?

Ever fell into the trap of asking (or even complaining to) God about the returns on your  investment in His kingdom? One young man felt so good about his prospects that he was confident enough to say to Jesus “I’ve kept all the laws.” The disciples looking on saw a very disappointed young man walk away in response to Jesus’ answer. At this point, Peter quips “Well, we’ve left everything to follow you. What’s in it for us?” (Mat. 19:27; emphasis mine).

We just can’t help ourselves in not only comparing ourselves with others, but asking the same set of questions the original audience put to Jesus:[1]

ü  “What will I (we) get for our labor?  19:27

ü  “Why don’t I get more for my effort?  20:11

ü  “How can this be fair?”   20:12

ü  Since I (we) have sacrificed so much, will I (we) receive more than him/her?”  20:21-22

The Illogic of Grace: Dealing With My Neighbor

Kingdom values are totally reversed from the world. Our cultural values may contribute  harm and pain to others. How should we handle difficult situations? Sherwood Lingenfelter has an interesting perspective on how to deal with this:

"When we follow God's way we focus on loving one another and extending grace to our brothers and sisters in contexts where we have disagreements and conflicts with them. We try to implement the commands of the Lord to love one another, to deny ourselves, and to be servants. Our relationships are then guided not by logic, but by the illogic of love that flows from grace."[1]

---

[1]  Sherwood Lingenfelter, Leading Cross-Culturally, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008), 50.

Cultivating A Christian Worldview- Our Nine Year Old Girl

My nine-year-old (she tells me soon to be 10) does not instinctively gravitate towards anything “church/God”. I have to wonder what my mom would say about me when I was 9/10 years old. I have been observing her for a few months now, and notice that if given the opportunity, she will not: sing church songs, worship, read her Bible, pray, act friendly towards others. However, as I have observed over this summer, she will: watch as many hours of videos as she can, she knows all the (worldly) songs and dance moves, can repeat the coolest things to say, can identify all the kid celebrities, will play all day. C’mon, you say…give her a break! She’s only nine years old. True. Again, at my age, I cannot remember what I was like at her age. I am sure I was no saint, and I did much the same things as she did. At nine, I was in Primary school and in love with the prettiest girl in the school (Kim), thought we'd get married too…funny thing I am married to another  beautiful girl named Kim. I was on top of stuff, knew all the songs (it was the Michael Jackson era). I was very engaged in school and did a lot of stuff with friends and family. But church… can’t say. I lived with my grandmother who had a more subdued approach to "training in the Way." 

The Apostle Paul's Use Of Old Testament Scripture

 The Logic of Paul’s use of Deuteronomy 25:4 in 1 Corinthians 9:9-10

In the broader context of Deuteronomy 25, God was concerned with justice even for the most vulnerable. The apostle Paul in making the case that “servants of the gospel who sow spiritual things among people should benefit materially from those same people” analogically uses a Deuteronomic law for a stronger argument.[1] The first approach is in use of a lesser to greater argument (moving from a law about animals to an application of a principle related to humans). In defending the rights of apostles in first Corinthians (“Do we not have the right to our food and drink?” 9:4), Paul makes a comparison by pulling on a universal principle. “He applied an Old Testament law to the issue at hand, insisting that God was concerned about more than an oxen,”[2]  also an integral part of that agrarian society. Even though the Deuteronomic text on the surface deals with an oxen plowing/threshing grain, “the command is not for the oxen in Israel’s day, but it is for our sake.”[3] Another way to say it is that there was a deeper moral principle that undergirded the Deuteronomic law and Paul exegeted a fuller meaning in first Corinthians 9:10.[4]

The second approach is a proverbial use of the text. Commentators “suggest the Deuteronomic text was already understood proverbially” and not written only for the welfare of animals but as advocating for the rights of humans.[5]  “This is how Rabbis could argue that what is true of oxen is all the more true of men.”[6] Paul, then, accurately applied the Deuteronomic text to make a strong case as such:  if the oxen can eat of its labor, the same principle applies to the welfare of those working in ministry. This second approach is the most convincing as it was part of his intertextual approach commonly practiced. Evidence of this can be seen in his use of Habakkuk 2:4 in Romans 1:17, (“going far deeper than an explicit quotation.")[7]

---

[1]  G. K. Beale, Handbook On The New Testament Use Of The Old Testament: Exegesis And Interpretation, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2012), 67.

[2]  Richard L. Pratt, Holman New Testament Commentary: 1-2 Corinthians, ed., Max Anders, (B&H Publishing Group, 2000), 138, accessed August 23, 2018, https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.ezproxy.liberty.edu/lib/liberty/reader.action?docID=673831&query=1+corinthians

[3] Beale, Handbook, 68.

[4]  Pratt, Commentary, 138.

[5]  Beale, Handbook, 68.

[6]  Leon L. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol.7. InterVarsity Press (2014): 8, accessed August 23, 2018, https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.ezproxy.liberty.edu/lib/liberty/reader.action?docID=2030116&query=1+corinthians

[7]  Steven Moyise, Paul and Scripture: Studying The New Testament Use Of The Old Testament, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2010), 111-2.

Written by Kevin A. Hall

Problem Passages: New Testament Use of Psalms In The Book Of Hebrews

The ministry of the Psalms gives testimony to a God who is both immanent and personal, who reveals himself throughout biblical history. The Psalms is also a “universal statement about the majesty of Yahweh and the delegated authority of humanity.”[1] It contains some of the most profound sentiments humans have about themselves and God. “It functions to give people opportunity to articulate their uncertainties about their positions as human beings in the world, before drawing them into statements of faith.”[2] In contrast to the poetry of the Psalms, the author of the letter to the Hebrews will effectively utilize the quotations and imagery of the Psalms to “demonstrate the superiority of Christ to every other key Jewish figure and institution.”[3] The author of the book of Hebrews will apply a Christological hermeneutic that reveals how “the moonlight of the Old Testament is replaced by the sunlight of a new era in God’s dealings with men.”[4]

Interpreting The New Testament

Three Views on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament: Bock & Enns

It is easy to claim improper usage of Old Testament (O.T.) texts in the New Testament (N. T.) if there is not a seemingly logical flow. Bock debunks this idea with his “Single Meaning, Multiple Contexts and Referents” method. He makes very persuasive points, taking both an historical-exegetical and a theological-canonical approach to the reading of Scripture. The strength of his argument is found in the appeal to an “inherent futureness” found in the texts.[1] Bock agrees with Kaiser’s “Single Meaning, Unified Referents” adding that N.T authors authoritatively used O.T texts with “the presence of new factors in the progress of revelation within the movement of the history of salvation, factors not obvious at the time of the original production of the text.”[2]

How The New Testament Authors Used The Old Testament: Examples

New testament writers often utilized Old Testament texts to indicate a direct fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy. Because they had a Christotelic mindset, their use of certain seemingly unrelated Old Testament texts elicited claims of arbitrary and embellished use of the Scriptures. Both Matthew and John utilize Messianic typological interpretive methods in revealing Jesus to their audience.

  I.            Problem Passages: Zechariah 11:12-13 & Matthew 27:9-10

Zechariah was a priest and one of “the greatest post-exilic prophets.”[1] He had more to say about the Messiah than all other prophets except Isaiah and “his message included rebuke, exhortation and encouragement.”[2] The surrounding context of the pericope finds the Israelites as a vassal of the Medo-Persian empire (539-334 BC).[3]  God assigns Zechariah to convey a symbolic message to the nation in response to their rejection of him. He will use multiple metaphors to deliver the message. In chapter 11, verses 1-3, Zechariah describes the national apostasy using “picturesque language of trees (nations)wailing, fire (judgment) devouring, shepherds(kings/leaders) weeping and lions (kings) roaring.”[4]  In a magnificent display of power, Zechariah prophetically describes desolation from Lebanon in the north to Bashan to the South. “The figurative of shepherds and lions describe the leaders of Lebanon and Bashan lamenting the destruction of their pride and livelihood, which is the timber of the region.”[5]As part of his Messianic prophecy, the message he develops is that when the “Good Shepherd” is rejected, the people will be led like sheep to the slaughter by evil, insensitive, ungodly and wicked leaders (11:6-7). There will be rampage as all they have will come to ruins (v. 3). “Resistance is futile, so Lebanon should open her doors (like the gates of a fortified city) to the fire of God’s judgment awaiting her.”[6] Miller suggests that Jewish rabbis interpreted Lebanon as representative of temple and the devastation would be so complete that what the fire did not destroy would be cut down.”[7] The destruction Zechariah alludes to is the Abomination of Desolation realized in Jerusalem when the Roman armies descended in A.D. 70.