LIBERTY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF DIVINITY
Jesus’s View of the Old Testament
Submitted to Dr. James Sulfridge
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the completion of
DSMN 500
Discipleship Ministries
By
Anthony Bean
Definition
Jesus’s view of the Scriptures was similar to his contemporaries—accepting their
completely divine origin, reliability, and authority in our lives—but also markedly different—
seeing their judgment of ethnocentrism, their Christological nature, and their implications for
the Levitical purity laws.
Summary
We see in Jesus’ view of the Old Testament God’s word to the world, as evidenced by his
citation of a wide selection of texts, even if not always in ways with which his Jewish
contemporaries would have agreed. What we do not see in Christ’s teachings based on the
Bible of his people is anything that would point to a canon within a canon—viewing only certain
parts of the Bible as authoritative. To be sure, like other rabbis Jesus can recognize some books
as more central than others and distinguish between the lighter and the weightier parts of
Scripture (Matt. 23:23 par.). But all of the Bible remains inspired, and all God’s laws must be
obeyed. At the same time, none of it can be obeyed until we see how the arrival of the new
covenant has changed things.
Throughout church history, various Christians have minimized the value of the Old
Testament. Yet they profess to follow Jesus as their Lord. A study of Jesus’ view of these
Scriptures, therefore, proves crucial, as it should inform believers’ approach to the first three-
quarters of their Bible.
Similarities between Jesus and His Contemporaries
In many ways, Jesus’ view of the Scriptures of his people would have fallen exactly in line
with the attitudes of his fellow Jews. He seems to have adopted the identical body of
authoritative documents as the Judaism of his world. He quotes from all three major sections of
the Hebrew Bible (the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings) and from all three major kinds of
laws, as Christians would later define them (the moral, civil, and ceremonial). He alludes to still
more texts and treats them consistently as authoritative for both himself and his audience
(John 10:35). He sees God as the ultimate author of the Bible and views Scripture’s words as
God’s words.
Jesus and the Historicity of the Old Testament
Jesus appears to have viewed Old Testament narratives as historical. He frequently appeals
to the events in the lives of key Old Testament individuals to support his teaching or justify his
behavior. He can take it for granted that his listeners share his conviction that these things
really happened and that they were recorded to provide authoritative models of good and bad
behavior for God’s people in later eras. For example, he recalls those who persecuted God’s
prophets in past times (Matt. 5:12 par.). He cites Tyre, Sidon, and Sodom as paradigms of
ancient evil cities (11:21-24 par.). He accepts that Jonah remained alive in the great fish’s belly
and went on to preach to a repentant Nineveh, and he believes the Queen of Sheba actually
lived and visited Solomon (12:40-42 par.). He refers back to the days of Noah and then of Lot
and the catastrophic destruction that occurred around each of them (24:37-39 par.). He reflects
on the ministries of Elijah and Elisha (Luke 4:25-27) and appeals to the account of Moses
erecting a bronze snake in the wilderness (John 3:14). He believes that God provided manna for
the Israelites during that same period of wanderings (6:32, 49, 58). Finally, he assumes the
historical truth of a broad cross-section of Old Testament narratives when he makes the
sweeping pronouncement that his generation will experience all the judgment due “for all the
righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of
Zechariah son of Berekiah” (Matt. 23:35; cf. Luke 11:50-51).
Jesus and the Prophecies of the Old Testament
In other instances, Jesus takes the same approach his contemporaries would have by
viewing unfulfilled prophecy as an authoritative and true account of what must still occur in the
future. Thus, there must still be an “abomination that causes desolation standing where it does
not belong” (Mark 24:15)—the sacrilege of the Jerusalem temple (cf. Matt. 24:15; Luke 21:20)
that replicated the horrors of Daniel 9:27, 11:31 and 12:11. He recognizes that Hosea 10:8 must
still take place, when people will want to end their misery from this world’s tribulation by
having the mountains fall on them and kill them (Luke 23:30). He envisions cosmic upheavals
when he returns, using the imagery of Isaiah 13:10 and 34:4 to do so (Mark 13:14 par.). He also
anticipates a coming end-times banquet for all God’s people from all the world (Matt. 8:11-12
par.) based on Isaiah 25:6-8.
Differences between Jesus and His Contemporaries
Yet Jesus’ understanding of the Old Testament does not entirely overlap with that of his
Jewish contemporaries. Despite many similarities between his perspective and theirs, he often
quotes Scripture against key authorities or groups of authorities. Sometimes he argues that
they have missed the original meaning or purpose of a text through a tradition of distorting or
misinterpreting it. Sometimes he flat out challenges those he talks with by claiming that they
have ignored or even disobeyed the clear teaching of a certain text of Scripture. For instance, at
the end of Matthew’s longer version of the call of Levi/Matthew, Jesus adds the instruction to
“go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice’” (Matt. 9:13). Jesus can
presuppose that his religious opponents have the identical high respect for Scripture that he
has, acknowledging its truthfulness and authority. But in this context, Jesus’ application is still
more radical. The Hebrew Bible never suggested that the sacrificial system was to be
abandoned when it included statements like these (Hos. 6:6; cf. 1Sam. 15:22; Isa. 1:11). “X, not
Y” meant “X much more than Y.” Jesus, however, forgives sinners and accepts them as
followers (Mark 2:15b) without any indication that they need to offer animal sacrifices in the
temple. At this juncture, his behavior is most definitely not abiding by the standard
interpretation of biblically stipulated practices.
Jesus and the Judgment of Ethnocentrism in the Old Testament
Frequently, Jesus understands the Scriptures to be fulfilled in him or in the events with
which he is involved. Occasionally, these were direct predictions of things that have now
happened. Far more commonly, they represent typology — the recognition of patterns in
history as God reveals his characteristic, recurring ways with human beings, especially in saving
or judging them. Thus, Jesus quotes Micah typologically in Matthew 10:35-36 (and parallel) in
order to affirm that his disciples may face hostility and opposition in their own families, just as
in Micah’s day. Jesus’ typology, nevertheless, remains firmly grounded in historical events, so
his disciples would scarcely have found this kind of application of Scripture unusual. The same is
true of Jesus’ use of Isaiah 6:9-10 as a reason for speaking to his own generation in parables
(Mark 4:11-12 pars.), and likewise of his reapplication of Isaiah 29:13 to the hypocritical
worship of religious leaders in his day (Mark 7:6b-7). So, too, his use of “den of robbers” in
Mark 11:17b reapplies Jeremiah’s label for the context of corrupt leaders in his day (Jer. 7:11).
In this case, Jesus has just quoted Isaiah 56:7 about the temple becoming a house of prayer for
all nations (Mark 11:17a), a feature already implied by its containing a “Court of the Gentiles.”
But it will take on extra significance in the messianic age when the peoples of the world would
make pilgrimage to Jerusalem in unparalleled numbers to worship Israel’s God.
Jesus and the Christological Nature of the Old Testament
Often Jesus interprets Scripture Christologically, seeing both direct and typological
predictions pointing to himself as the newly arrived messianic King. Even when his use of
Scripture does not directly serve Christology, his sovereign authority over Scripture at least
implicitly raises the question of who he is, or at least of who he thinks he is. This approach
reaches its climax after his death and resurrection when he declares in Luke 24:44 that
“everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets, and
the Psalms.” Here, the Psalms stand for the Writings more generally, as Jesus refers to all three
major parts of the Hebrew canon—the one time in all of the New Testament where all three are
mentioned together. It is important to observe that Christ does not say that everything in all of
Scripture points to him, as some Christians have said periodically throughout church history.
Not every verse or passage from Genesis to Malachi teaches something about Christ. Instead,
Jesus is claiming that whatever in each part of Scripture that was intended to point to him is
indeed fulfilled. In fact, he has already maintained as much in Luke 24:47 where he refers to the
Hebrew Bible with its simpler twofold division into the Law and Prophets: “beginning with
Moses and the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning
himself.” But if that was the summary of his prolonged conversation with Cleopas and his
unnamed companion on the road to Emmaus, then he certainly found quite a few passages
throughout the Old Testament to expound.
Jesus and the Purity Laws of the Old Testament
At the same time, there are moments when Jesus seems to upend the fulfillment and
application of Levitical laws entirely. Perhaps most dramatically of all, Jesus established the
precedent for declaring all foods clean, which is an explicit break from the dietary laws of
Leviticus. In Mark 7:14-15 and parallel, he calls the crowd listening to him to realize that
“nothing outside you can defile you by going into you. Rather, it is what comes out of you that
defiles you.” Even if Jesus is speaking somewhat metaphorically (hence the reference to “this
parable” in v. 17), the implications are relatively clear. Why do the disciples need further
explanation? Presumably because they could not imagine that Jesus was doing anything as
sweeping and as radical as setting aside the kosher laws. Peter himself would have to have the
vision of unclean meat and the Lord three times telling him to eat it before he would be
convinced, and that may well have been another ten years or so later (Acts 10:9-16). But Mark,
writing as the early church tell us from Peter’s perspective, could look back another twenty or
more years after that and realize that Jesus was indeed cleansing all food (Mark 7:19b).
Jesus and the Fulfillment of the Old Testament
Perhaps the most important passage for understanding Jesus’ overall view of the Old
Testament is Matthew 5:17-20. It is crucial, therefore, to interpret this text correctly when
synthesizing Jesus’ similarities and differences from other Jews on this topic. He begins by
denying any form of the charge that he is abolishing any part of the Hebrew Scriptures (“the
Law or the Prophets”—v. 17a). He adds emphatically that not the smallest portion of the
Scriptures can disappear before this current world order passes away (v. 18), and that any of his
followers who ignores or removes even the least of the Bible’s commandments will be called
least in God’s reign (v. 19).
All of this, nevertheless, stops well short of demonstrating that Jesus thought that the
implementation of the Law remained unchanged by his coming. As we have just seen, he
pronounced the forgiveness of sins on individuals apart from their offering animal sacrifices in
the temple (Mark 2:5 pars.; note the reaction elicited in vv. 6-7 pars.), and he set the precedent
for understanding all foods to now be kosher. He announced the imminent arrival of an era in
which the temple in Jerusalem would no longer be uniquely holy (John 4:21-24). He challenged
Sabbath laws in ways that went beyond just charging the religious leaders of his day with
legalistic interpretations, but said that it was always appropriate to do good on the Sabbath
(Mark 3:4 par.). We should not be surprised to note, then, that after declaring he has not come
to abolish Torah, Christ does not state the expected opposite—that he has come to preserve it
unchanged. Rather, he speaks of fulfilling it (v. 17b), the same verb already used six times in
Matthew (plro; 1:22; 2:15, 17, 23; 3:15; 4:14) for the occurrence of an event to which
Scripture, either literally or typologically, had pointed forward. This meshes perfectly with the
temporal clause in verse 18, “until everything is accomplished.” Everything needed to atone
fully for the sins of humanity was accomplished through Christ’s cross-work.
This means that while the sacrificial laws of Leviticus remain part of inspired Scripture for
believers, they are not to be literally obeyed, even if an actual temple in Jerusalem were again
erected, but to remind us of Jesus’ once-for-all sacrifice. The time for separating Israel off from
the nations in a variety of ritual or ceremonial contexts has likewise passed; Jesus goes out of
his way to welcome “sinners” of many kinds, including gentiles, into fellowship with him apart
from Torah regulations (see, most dramatically, Matt. 8:5-13 par.). But moral law-keeping
should still separate believers’ behavior from those who behave immorally.
Who is able to pontificate so about God’s holy, perfect and immutable Law? Only a divine
messiah. For anyone else such claims would have been outrageously blasphemous. Here, then,
is the greatest difference between Jesus’ views on the Old Testament and those of the rest of
his contemporaries. Jesus confirms this by following Matthew 5:17-20 immediately by the so-
called “antitheses”—declarations about the differences between what his listeners understand
to be true about the Torah and what he is teaching. Some have limited these differences to
differences of interpretation, especially because the last antithesis doesn’t actually quote the
Law but only its misunderstanding (“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and
hate your enemy’ ” — v. 43). Moreover, Jesus’ prohibitions of anger, lust and divorce (vv. 22, 28
and 32) actually intensify the commandments with which Jesus compares them (murder,
adultery, and giving a wife a certificate of divorce). On the other hand, Jesus forbids oaths and
retaliation where the Old Testament actually commands the fulfillment of vows and “an eye for
an eye” (vv. 33-42). So here he is changing the requirements of the written Law itself. It is
better, therefore, not to try to generalize about all six antitheses except to say that he can
announce God’s authoritative intent for all the Law and every part of the Law in the age of the
fulfillment of his new covenant.
Conclusion
In sum, we see in Jesus’ view of the Old Testament God’s word to the world, as evidenced
by his citation of a wide selection of texts, even if not always in ways with which his Jewish
contemporaries would have agreed. What we do not see in Christ’s teachings based on the
Bible of his people is anything that would point to a canon within a canon — viewing only
certain parts of the Bible as authoritative. To be sure, like other rabbis Jesus can recognize
some books as more central than others and distinguish between the lighter and the weightier
parts of Scripture (Matt. 23:23 par.). But all of the Bible remains inspired, and all God’s laws
must be obeyed. At the same time, none of it can be obeyed until we see how the arrival of the
new covenant has changed things. To take just two examples that go beyond the gospels and
Jesus’ teaching we see no tithe for believers but sacrificial generosity that makes ten percent
too little for many (2Cor. 8:13-15). We see no gleaning, but we see enough care for the poor to
make us look for equivalent processes that help the poor be able to help themselves.
Crucial, too, is how Jesus treats “Scripture” as a singular, unified document. He does not
distinguish between the inerrant and the errant, between matters of faith and practice on the
one hand and matters of history or science on the other. We dare not make any Old Testament
passage teach on a topic it did not intend to address. But if we claim to follow Jesus, we should
adopt his view of the Scriptures—their completely divine origin, reliability, and authority in our
lives.
Notes
Beale, G. K. and D. A. Carson, eds. Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old
Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007.
France, R. T. Jesus and the Old Testament. Vancouver: Regent College, 1992.
Hays, Richard B. Reading Backwards: Figural Christology and the Fourfold Gospel
Witness. Waco: Baylor University Press, 2014.
Moyise, Steve. Jesus and Scripture: Studying the New Testament Use of the Old
Testament. London: SPCK; 2010; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2011.
Powery, Emerson B. Jesus Reads Scripture: The Function of the Use of Scripture in the
Synoptic Gospels. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2002.
Wenham, John. Christ and the Bible, 3rd Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2009.
