Finding Evidence for the Deity of Christ in the Old Testament is not a New Testament Exercise

Originally presented by Bill Schlegel, UCA conference, Goodlettsville, TN, October 2021. The latter portion of this text has been modified.

To hear this presentation on the One God Report Podcast, click here.

Neither Jesus nor any author of the New Testament appealed to the Old Testament in an effort to find evidence for the deity of Jesus Christ.

 

Finding evidence for the deity of Jesus Christ in the Old Testament is an activity which began in the centuries after the New Testament was written. Such efforts are foreign to the New Testament.

 

Based on Jesus’s own post-resurrection appeals to the Old Testament as described in Luke 24:25-27, and 24:44-47, and the apostolic sermons of Peter and Paul recorded in the Book of Acts (e.g., Acts 2:22-36, 3:18, 13:32-35, 17:2, 31) this presentation gives evidence that Jesus and the apostles never appealed to the Old Testament to demonstrate the deity of Christ, but rather to demonstrate the suffering, death, burial, resurrection and exaltation of the human Christ, Jesus of Nazareth.

 

Likewise, and all the more so, neither Jesus nor any New Testament author ever appealed to the Old Testament to show that God is a Trinity.[1]

 

I won’t document here the many efforts to find evidence for the deity Christ in the Old Testament. Later I will examine two such claims. In the age of the internet one can easily find books, articles, lectures, podcasts and sermons where an Old Testament passage is expounded to show the “deity of Christ”.

 

A few passages that seem to be among the favorites for those finding the deity of Christ in the Old Testament are: Gen. 1:26, Gen. 18 & 19, Psa. 110:1, Isa. 7:14, 9:6, 42:8, Jer. 23:6, Micah 5:2, Zec. 12:10.

 

In a more nuanced fashion, verses like the following also are put forth:

Gen. 1:1-3 (evidence for the plurality of God persons in the grammatical plural Elohim),

Gen. 48:15-16 (“God” and “the angel” with the singular verb “bless”),

Gen. 1:5 & 2:24 as evidence that “one” is more than “one”, cf. Deut. 6:4,

Isa. 42:8, 48:11 (“will not give my glory to another”), 48:16 (Lord Yahweh sent me and his spirit).

 

Allow me to recall a personal story as an example of how some “deity of Christ” believers seem to think that Jesus and the apostles appealed to the Old Testament to prove Jesus’ deity. In the audience participation portion at the end of a debate between Dr. Dale Tuggy and Dr. Michael Brown, titled, “Is the God of the Bible the Father Alone?”, I asked a question along this line:

“In the Book of Acts – actually backing up to the last chapter of Luke – when the Messiah Jesus appeared, resurrected from the dead, what did he go back into the Old Testament to show the apostles? He does it two times in Luke chapter 24. And then, what do the apostles, in the Book of Acts continually go back into the Old Testament to show? Did they appeal to the Old Testament to show the deity of Messiah, or something else?”

 

After what I would consider to be a correct answer given by Dr. Tuggy, Dr. Brown gave a different answer. Dr. Brown replied: “…when Jesus opens up the Scriptures to his servants - what do they then, right afterwards (sic)…They speak of the divine son, the one who was in the beginning, the pre-existent eternal one, the one who himself is God. Where did they get that from? Obviously from Jesus himself.”[2]

 

Is Dr. Brown correct? Do Jesus and the apostles go to the Old Testament, find there, and then speak of a “divine son, the one who was in the beginning, the pre-existent eternal one, the one who is himself God?”

 

On the Road to Emmaus

 

Let’s see what Jesus said to two disciples on the day of his resurrection, on the way to Emmaus:

 

Luke 24:25-27 RSV: “And he said to them, ‘O foolish men, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken!  ²⁶ Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?’  ²⁷ And beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.”

There is comprehensiveness in these verses. The word “all” occurs three times, one time in each of these three verses:

·         all (πᾶς, neuter plural) that the prophets have spoken (24:25) – all topics, matters, things

·         beginning with Moses and all the prophets (24:26)

·         in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself (24:27)

In Jesus’s interpretation of all things that the prophets have spoken, from Moses and all the prophets and in all the Scriptures, certainly we would expect Jesus to instruct concerning this most crucial topic - his deity. Was his deity among all the things that Jesus found in the Old Testament Scriptures?

Alas, not a word. As Jesus described all things concerning himself in the Hebrew Scriptures, he mentioned nothing about his deity or pre-incarnate existence. There is no record here of Jesus opening the Old Testament Scriptures and speaking about, to quote Dr. Brown, “the divine son…the pre-existent eternal one, the one who is himself God.”

 

What did Jesus find in the Old Testament concerning himself, the Messiah?

Instead, “all that the prophets have spoken” about “the things concerning himself” which Jesus interpreted from “all the Scriptures” are described:

1.      that the Christ[3] should suffer these things

2.      and enter into his glory.

When the resurrected-from-the-dead Jesus appealed to and interpreted the Scriptures for these two disciples on the road to Emmaus he found evidence for the suffering of Messiah and his subsequent entering into glory, characteristics that fit an entirely human person, not God. Jesus said not one word about his supposed pre-incarnate existence or deity. Out of all the Hebrew Scriptures that Jesus interpreted - the “deity of Christ” is not among the “all things” that Jesus mentioned here.

 

That night in Jerusalem, “all things written about me”[4]

 

We have in the Luke 24 not just one testimony of how Jesus interpreted all things written about the Christ in the Old Testament, but a second testimony, given later that evening after his resurrection, to the apostles in Jerusalem, minus Thomas:

 

Luke 24:44-47: “Then he said to them, ‘These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.’ ⁴⁵ Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, ⁴⁶ and said to them, ‘Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, ⁴⁷ and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem.’”

 

Jesus again appealed to the Torah of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms[5] to explain how “all things (πάντα, πᾶς, plural) written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.”

 

Is the deity of Christ among the “all things” written about Jesus in the Old Testament? If the deity of Messiah is to be found in the Hebrew Scriptures, this would have been one of the main places in the Bible where we would expect Jesus to open up Old Testament passages to show his apostles his deity. Perhaps the apostles had not understood his deity up until this point. But now, as he “opened their minds to understand the (the Old Testament) Scriptures”, he could make his deity clear.

 

Yet, as recorded earlier in Luke 24:26-27, Jesus did not declare the “deity of Christ” from “all things” written in Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms. Not a word about pre-incarnate existence or about being one member of a tri-personal God. No appeal to the Old Testament to pronounce, “Christ is God incarnate just like Moses, the Prophets and Psalms said I would be”. Nothing here about Jesus being the “divine son, the one who was in the beginning, the pre-existent eternal one, the one who is himself God.”

Instead, what were “all things written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms?” Jesus explained, “thus it is written”:

1.      that the Christ should suffer

2.      and on the third day rise from the dead[6]

3.      and that repentance and forgiveness of sin should be proclaimed in his name.[7]

As earlier that day on the road to Emmaus, Jesus appealed to the Old Testament to show the suffering, death, and resurrection of Christ, and the good news this meant for humankind.

 

If the deity of Christ was one of the “all things written about me” in the Old Testament, Jesus forgot to mention it here to his apostles as “he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures.” 

 

But the truth is, Jesus didn’t forget. The clearest, simplest and most obvious reason that Jesus did not appeal to the Old Testament for evidence of his deity is because the deity of Christ was not among “all things concerning himself” that were written in the Law, the Prophets and the Psalms.

 

“These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you”

 

Jesus told the apostles that what he was explaining from the Hebrew Scriptures that evening, he had already told them before he had been put to death. Jesus was not giving them a new message but was repeating what he said previously.

 

There is only one other time recorded in the Gospel of Luke where Jesus referred to all that is written in the prophets about himself:[8]

 

Luke 18:31-34 NAS: “And he took the twelve aside and said to them, ‘Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and all things which are written through the prophets about the Son of Man will be accomplished. ³² For he will be delivered to the Gentiles, and will be mocked and mistreated and spit upon, ³³ and after they have scourged him, they will kill him; and the third day he will rise again.’ ³⁴ And they understood none of these things, and this saying was hidden from them, and they did not comprehend the things that were said.”

 

This is undoubtedly one of the occasions Jesus was referring to when he said “these are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you”. In both cases, both here and after his resurrection, he referred to “all things which are written in/through the prophets” about himself.

 

What are the “all things which are written through the prophets about the Son of Man”?

1. delivered to Gentiles
2. mocked, mistreated, spit upon
3. scourged, put to death
4. third day he will rise from the dead
5. the Son of Man is God incarnate
6. the Christ pre-existed.

There are at least three other occasions specifically recorded that Jesus taught his apostles about his death and resurrection (Luke 9:22 // Matt. 16:21, Mark 8:31; Luke 9:44-45 // Matt. 17:22-23, Mark 9:30-32; Luke 17:25). There is no Gospel record anywhere of Jesus appealing to the Scriptures to declare to his apostles that he, the Messiah, was God incarnate.

 

Jesus’s appeal to the Old Testament Scriptures was the same both before and after his resurrection. The Messiah would suffer, be killed, and rise from the dead.

 

“They did not comprehend these things.” What was not understood?

 

What did the apostles not understand about Jesus’ appeal to the Old Testament Scriptures concerning the Christ? Was it his deity, or about his being put to death and being raised from the dead? Luke tells us what they did not understand: “And they understood none of these things, and this saying was hidden from them, and they did not comprehend the things that were said.” The apostles did not understand what Jesus had just said about his suffering, death and resurrection. There is no Scriptural discussion about the apostles not understanding the deity of Messiah.

 

In confirmation and agreement with other New Testament literature, what Jesus explained from the Old Testament Scriptures is what the Apostle Paul later called “a stumbling block for the Jews” – “Christ crucified” (1 Cor. 1:23, 2:2). The disciples did not understand and did not see in the Scriptures that God’s Messiah was to suffer and be put to death before entering his glory. The “deity of Christ” was not a stumbling block for Jews in the 1st century because it was not being proclaimed by Jesus or the apostles.

 

In summary, Jesus believed that the Scriptures spoke of the death and resurrection of the Messiah, not deity.

 

The Testimony of the Apostles: Peter’s Appeal to Psalm 16 and Psalm 110 in Acts 2: Deity or Death of Christ?

 

We turn to the witness of the apostles in the Book of Acts. In Peter’s Pentecost Sermon (Acts 2:22-36), he appealed to Psalm 16 and Psalm 110 to show that although the Christ would be killed, God would raise the Christ from the dead and exalt the Christ to His right hand. Peter did not appeal to these Scriptures to show that “Christ is God”.

 

Peter referred to Psalm 16 in Acts 2:25-28. Speaking to Yahweh, the Psalmist declared:

“…because You will not abandon my soul to Hades, nor allow Your holy one to undergo decay.  You have made known to me the ways of life; You will make me full of gladness with Your presence” (2:25-28).

 

Peter interpreted the meaning of Psalm 16 as relating to the resurrection of the Christ, not his deity. Acts 2:29-32: “Brethren, I may confidently say to you regarding the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day.  ³⁰ And so, because he was a prophet, and knew that God had sworn to him with an oath to seat one of his descendants upon his throne, ³¹ he looked ahead and spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that he was neither abandoned to Hades, nor did his flesh suffer decay. ³² This Jesus God raised up, to which we are all witnesses.”

 

Differentiating Jesus from God, Peter appealed to Psalm 16 as evidence that God would raise the Christ from the dead. Peter made no appeal to the Psalm for evidence of Christ’s deity.

 

Next, Peter appealed to Psalm 110, not as evidence for the deity of Christ, but as evidence that God has exalted the man Jesus, David’s descendant, to God’s right hand, and that God has made Jesus both Lord and Christ:

 

Acts 2:32-36 “This Jesus God raised up, to which we are all witnesses. ³³ Therefore having been exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the holy spirit, he has poured forth this which you both see and hear.  ³⁴ For it was not David who ascended into heaven, but he himself says: ‘The LORD said to my Lord, "Sit at My right hand, ³⁵ Until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.”’  ³⁶ "Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ-- this Jesus whom you crucified."

 

Unlike many modern Christian apologists who seem to think that Psalm 110:1 (quoted by Jesus in Matt. 22:42-45) has something to do with the deity of Christ, Peter appealed to Psalm 110:1 as evidence that Yahweh (יְהוָ֙ה, LORD) has made the man Jesus “Lord (אדֹן) and Christ”. David’s descendant, Jesus of Nazareth, is greater than David.[9]

 

We might pause here again and ask, was Dr. Brown correct? Did Peter “right afterwards…speak of the divine son, the one who was in the beginning, the pre-existent eternal one, the one who himself is God?”

No. Not a word even remotely close to what Dr. Brown claims. Instead, the apostle Peter right afterwards differentiated between God and Christ and appealed to Old Testament texts that prefigured and evidenced:

·         the suffering and death of Christ (not of God)

·         followed by the resurrection and exaltation of the Christ by God.

In the Book of Acts thousands of people who heard Peter’s words and later Paul’s words were saved without ever hearing about the “deity of Christ” or that God was a Trinity.

Peter preached again following the healing of a lame man, Acts 3:11-26

 

Not long after Pentecost, as recorded in the next chapter in the Book of Acts, chapter 3, when the apostles Peter and John were going up to the temple, they healed a lame man. In the excitement following the healing, Peter preached in the Porticoes of Solomon on the temple mount (Acts 3:11-26). Far from claiming that Jesus is God, Peter consistently differentiated between God and God’s Christ. Jesus the Christ was put to death, but God raised him up (3:14, 26). Jesus the Christ is the servant of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; God glorified Jesus (3:13, 26). Jesus is the prophet like Moses whom the Lord God would raise up (3:22). We wait for God to send Christ Jesus from heaven (3:19-21).

 

Peter said specifically that God, through the mouth of all the prophets, announced that the Christ should suffer.  Acts 3:18 “But the things which God announced beforehand by the mouth of all the prophets, that His Christ should suffer, He has thus fulfilled.”

 

God, according to his plan and foreknowledge, declared ahead of time through the prophets the suffering (and in context also the death) of Christ.[10] Not a word about Christ’s deity. The death of the Messiah was announced by the prophets, not the deity of Messiah.

 

That the deity of Christ was not the subject of the apostle Peter is evident over and over again in this passage and throughout the Book of Acts. Acts 4:1-2, “And as they were speaking to the people, the priests and the captain of the temple guard, and the Sadducees, came upon them, being greatly disturbed because they were teaching the people and proclaiming in Jesus the resurrection from the dead.”

 

Nothing recorded about the apostles proclaiming the deity of Jesus. No “divine son…the pre-existent eternal one, the one who himself is God.” And no opposition from the religious leaders: “You claim this man is God!” Imagine the hulabaloo the opposition would have generated if the apostles were claiming “Jesus is God”. And imagine the constant defense that the apostles would have made if that was their claim. Yet, not a word of opposition, and not a word of defense about the “deity of Christ”. This is because the claim was not being made by the apostles. The “deity of Christ” is a claim made in a later century outside of the land of Israel.

 

The Apostle Paul, finding the death or deity of Christ in the Old Testament Scriptures?

 

We turn to the apostle Paul. In his recorded sermons in the Book of Acts, and in his letters, did Paul ever turn to the Old Testament Scriptures to find and proclaim the deity of Christ?

 

Pisidian Antioch Synagogue, Acts 13, Paul’s First Journey, ca. AD 46-47

Paul’s first recorded sermon was given in a synagogue in Pisidian Antioch. The sermon is recorded with over 30 verses (13:16-47). Paul said that the Jerusalem leaders did not recognize Jesus (to be the promised Messiah) “nor understand the declarations of the prophets which are read every Sabbath, fulfilled these by condemning him and…having him killed” (13:27-28). The prophets had proclaimed Christ’s death, not his deity.

 

In the sermon Paul quoted from Psalm 2, Psalm 16 and Isaiah 55 as evidence that the Christ would die and that God, someone distinct from the Christ, would raise him from the dead.

 

Paul quoted from Habakkuk 1 as a warning against unbelief that God had raised the Christ from the dead. He quoted from Isaiah 49 as evidence that he, Paul himself was instrumental in bringing the good news of salvation to Gentiles as well as Jews.

 

In none of these five references to the Old Testament Scriptures (Psalms (2x), Isaiah (2x), Habakkuk) did Paul provide an interpretation declaring the deity of Christ. Simple reading comprehension of Paul’s sermon in Acts 13 shows that Paul did not appeal to Old Testament Scriptures to show that “Jesus is God”.

 

Thessalonica Synagogue, Paul’s Second Journey, ca. AD 50-53

Acts 17:1-3   Now when they had traveled through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a synagogue of the Jews. ² And according to Paul's custom, he went to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures, ³ explaining and giving evidence that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead, and saying, “This Jesus whom I am proclaiming to you is the Christ.”

 

Modern Christians seem to think that Paul “reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and giving evidence that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead was God.” But again, it is the death and resurrection - not the deity - of Christ that Paul found in the Scriptures. This is the same picture in all the apostles’ sermons and declarations in the Book of Acts. As one more example, we examine Paul’s personal testimony as recorded in Acts 26.

 

Paul before Herod Agrippa in Caesarea, ca. AD 60

 

Acts 26:22-23 NAS: “And so, having obtained help from God, I stand here to this day testifying both to small and great, stating nothing but what the Prophets and Moses said was going to take place; ²³ that the Christ was to suffer, and that by being the first of the resurrection from the dead he would proclaim light both to our people and to the Gentiles.”

 

After some 20 years of ministry, after writing the epistles 1^st and 2^nd Thessalonians, Galatians, 1^st and 2^nd Corinthians and Romans, Paul testified that he was declaring “nothing but what the Prophets and Moses said was going to take place; that the Christ was to suffer and that by being the first of the resurrection from the dead he would proclaim light both to our people and to the Gentiles.”

 

The deity of Christ is not ever something Paul said he found in the Old Testament Scriptures. Those who want to claim that Paul found the deity of Christ in the Old Testament Scriptures make Paul into a liar. Paul claimed to be preaching nothing but what the Prophets and Moses said would happen, that the Messiah would suffer and be the first to rise from the dead.

 

That Paul found in the Old Testament Scriptures the death and resurrection of Christ and never the deity of Christ is confirmed by his summarizing statement of the gospel message recorded in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4. Once again basing his proclamation on the Old Testament Scriptures, Paul writes: “Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, ² and by which you are being saved,³ For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, ⁴ and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.”

 

The gospel that Paul preached and by which his hearers were saved had nothing to do with believing in the deity of Christ. Rather, Paul preached of first importance what he had received himself (most likely from Jesus). The Gospel was that “according to the Scriptures” (2x) Christ died, was buried and was raised on the third day. To preach the “deity of Christ” is to preach a different Gospel than the Apostle Paul preached, something that is not according to the Scriptures.

 

1 Corinthians 10:4, 9; Hebrews 1:8, Jude 5; “Yahweh texts”

If we broaden our scope for a moment beyond Jesus’s and the apostles’ application of Old Testament passages recorded in the last chapter of Luke and the Book of Acts, there a few New Testament verses that have been put forth as evidence that the authors of the New Testament appealed to the Old Testament to show the deity of Christ.[11] However:

1.      That’s it? A couple verses in 1 Corinthians 10, one verse in Hebrews, one verse in Jude and a handful of other verses where a New Testament author quotes an Old Testament “Yahweh text” and applies it to Jesus or his ministry? If Paul wanted to say that the Old Testament Scriptures declare the deity of Christ, should we expect him to be so restrained and only drop a hint when he is speaking about entirely different subjects?  Would the author of Hebrews give us one verse claiming “Jesus is literally Almighty God” and then drop the topic, spending the rest of his book describing how the man Jesus has been made greater than angels, and is greater than Moses, Aaron and Joshua? 

2.      In each of these few references there are textual (1 Cor. 10:9, Jude 5), translation and interpretive questions (1 Cor. 10:4, Hebrews 1:8 and “Yahweh texts”). As to the so-called “Yahweh texts”, instead of just hinting that Jesus is literally Yahweh while some other topic is under discussion, are there more reasonable reasons why a New Testament author may apply an Old Testament passage about Yahweh to the life of Jesus? The Hebraic understanding of agency easily explains such passages. The Messiah was understood to come as Yahweh’s representative in the name of Yahweh (Psa. 118:26; Matt. 21:9, 23:39; John 5:42, 10:45). Jesus said his works were not his own, but that he did works “in my Father’s name” (John 10:25, cf. Acts 2:22). That is, Jesus did miracles according to the will, authority and power given to him by God, whom Jesus calls the Father. 

3.      I mentioned above that to assert that Paul wanted to claim the deity of Christ by quoting an  Old Testament passage contradicts Paul’s own testimony in Acts 26:22-23. In fact, saying that Paul found the deity of Christ in the Old Testament accuses Paul of being a liar. But Paul was no liar: 

·         Paul over and over again differentiates between God and Jesus. Take for example Romans 10:13 where Paul quotes a “Yahweh text”, Joel 2:32. It is clear in the context that Paul is not blurring the distinction between Yahweh and Jesus, or making Jesus Yahweh. Four verses earlier, in Romans 10:9, Paul stated that God raised Jesus from the dead. To Paul, in the Book of Romans, God is “the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Romans 15:6). 

·        The context of Romans 10 is God’s relations with Israel. If Paul wanted to say that Israel is in the wrong relationship with God because Israel failed to realize that the Messiah was literally Yahweh – why didn’t he say so?  Why these riddles. Why not at least a chapter in the Book of Romans to explain this revolutionary understanding of who God is? 

4.      Neither Paul, nor any other New Testament author makes the claim, “I’m applying this Old Testament passage to show that Jesus is Yahweh”. The Old Testament quotes are always being presented in a different context and for a different reason. By contrast, compare, Peter and Paul’s application to Jesus of Psalm 16. Peter and Paul gave the reason why they were quoting the passage (Acts 2:27, 13:35). They explain that the Old Testament passage predicts the Messiah would be raised from the dead. 

5.      Claiming that this handful of verses appeal to the Old Testament to show the deity of Christ creates a contradiction with Jesus in the Gospels and the apostles in the Book of Acts, who never made such an appeal to the Old Testament. Luke 24 and Acts are clear, explicit teaching that what the Old Testament prophesied about Messiah is that Messiah would suffer, die, be raised from the dead, and exalted to God’s right hand. 

6.      The efforts of modern scholars by more circuitous (dare I say “clever”) ways like the “Yahweh texts” to suggest that the apostles quoted the Old Testament as a way to declare the deity of Christ, is evidence that the New Testament authors do not appeal to the Old Testament for evidence of the deity of Christ. If the New Testament authors did make an appeal to the Old Testament to show the deity of Christ, we could simply open the Bible to explicit statements declaring “the Old Testament declared that Messiah is God in a human nature, indeed, one member of a tri-personal godhead, incarnate.” 

Walter Kaiser, The Messiah in the Old Testament[12] 

Further evidence that neither Jesus nor any other apostle appealed to the Old Testament in an effort to find the deity of Christ, are books like The Messiah in the Old Testament by Walter Kaiser. Dr. Kaiser was formerly President of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, and still serves there as Colman M. Mockler distinguished Professor of Old Testament. 

 

In this book Dr. Kaiser examines the Old Testament Scriptures concerning the Messianic expectation starting with Genesis and going through to the last prophet of the Old Testament canon, Malachi. In the book are chapters and sections titled: Messiah in the Pentateuch, Messiah in the Psalms, the Rejection of Messiah, the Betrayal of Messiah, the Death and Resurrection of Messiah, the Triumph of Messiah, Messiah as Teacher, Messiah as the Second David, Messiah as King, Messiah as Servant, Messiah as Anointed Conqueror.

 

But wait, in a book by an eminent evangelical Christian scholar called The Messiah in the Old Testament, there is not a chapter about “The Deity of Messiah”? This is not to say that Dr. Kaiser doesn’t throw an occasional bone to the deity of Christ claim when he looks at several Old Testament passages. He does. But it is always in a secondary fashion with verses that can and are easily understood in a different way.[13] And, pertinent for this study, with verses that no New Testament author appeals to in an effort to proclaim the deity of Christ.[14]

 

Finding the Deity of Christ in the Old Testament: An Activity of Later Centuries 

Now that we have seen that neither Jesus nor the apostles appealed to the Old Testament Scriptures to find the deity of Christ, I would like to give two examples which demonstrate that finding the deity of Christ in the Old Testament is an activity of later centuries. It is important to “know our sources”. Who are the first ones to expound an Old Testament passage to show the deity of Christ?

Justin Martyr on Genesis 18 and 19, Abraham’s three visitors and the Angel of Yahweh: a pre-incarnate appearance of Jesus?[15] 

Justin Martyr (c. AD 100-160, i.e., mid-2^nd century) is the first person on record to claim that appearances of God and the angel of the LORD (Yahweh) in the Old Testament were pre-incarnate appearances of Jesus. For instance, for Justin, Jesus was one of the three visitors, the angel/messenger of Yahweh, who visited Abraham at Mamre:

 

Moses, then, the blessed and faithful servant of God, declares that he who appeared to Abraham under the oak in Mamre is God, sent with the two angels in his company to judge Sodom for Another who remains ever in the super-celestial places, invisible to all men, holding personal intercourse with none, whom we believe to be Maker and Father of all things…

 

I shall attempt to persuade you, since you have understood the Scriptures, [of the truth] of what I say, that there is, and that there is said to be, another God and Lord subject to the Maker of all things; who is also called an Angel, because he announces to men whatsoever the Maker of all things— above whom there is no other God — wishes to announce to them.^[16]

 

Two observations on Justin Martyr’s belief:

1.      While no one in the Bible, neither Old or New Testaments, identifies the angel of the LORD as a pre-incarnate appearance of Jesus Christ, Justin does. The claim comes only from the AD mid-2^nd century, over one hundred years after Jesus lived on earth. 

2.      Justin’s Christology and identification of the “angel of Yahweh” is very different from current Trinitarian beliefs. To Justin, the pre-incarnate Jesus was another (ἕτερος, heteros) “God” who appeared as the “angel messenger  of the LORD”. This “another God” was not a co-equal member of a tri-personal God. Rather, Jesus the Son of Justin’s pre-incarnate appearances was another being who could be called “God and Lord”, but was a lesser “God” subject to and servant of the supreme God who was the Father, the Maker of all things. This second, other “God” had an origin, born out from the supreme God who was the Maker of all things.[17] 

Respected evangelical commentator F.F Bruce confirms that while no one in the New Testament claims that Jesus made pre-incarnate appearances to the patriarchs, this claim was confidently made by Justin:

 

…the Christian interpretation of the Old Testament in the New Testament is restrained and disciplined by contrast with what we find in the post-apostolic period. There is no reference to wrestling Jacob in the New Testament. But Justin Martyr (150 AD) in his dialogue with Trypho asserts confidently that the mysterious wrestler, whom the narrator describes as “a man”, and whom of Jacob speaks as of God, must be the one whom Christians acknowledge as God and man…The Christological exposition of such incidents is hardly attested, if at all, in the New Testament documents…[18] 

We agree with F.F. Bruce that:

1.      There is a vast difference between the New Testament and post-apostolic period interpretations of the Old Testament: Such interpretations are “hardly attested, if at all” in the New Testament.

2.      Justin Martyr is the first person on record who claims that Jesus made pre-incarnate appearances in the Old Testament as the “Angel of Yahweh”.

Dr. David Capes, co-author of The Divine Christ: Paul, the Lord Jesus, and the Scriptures of Israel says similarly: 

“No, I don’t think there is anything in Paul…that would suggest that Jesus is somehow present mysteriously, or as the angel of the LORD back in those particular places…What is the relationship of the angel of the LORD to God and to Jesus? I don’t think Paul ever really gets into that.”[19]

 

Declaring that Jesus made pre-incarnate appearances to Abraham at Mamre is not a New Testament exercise but is an activity beginning in the AD 2^nd century.

 

Tragically, the pre-incarnate appearance claim directly contradicts the Book of Hebrews which says that God has spoken to us through a son only in these last days, and that the next time Christ comes will be only the second time he has been on earth:

 

Hebrews 1:1-2, “In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets; but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things…”

 

It is only “in these last days that God has spoken by a son”. God did not speak by a son in former, Old Testament period times. And Hebrews 9:28, “so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.”

 

When Jesus Christ returns, it will be his second time he has come. Not his third, fourth, seventh, or tenth. Such statements like these in the Book of Hebrews eliminate the possibility that Jesus the Son of God was alive and appeared to Abraham at Mamre.

 

Isaiah 9:6

“For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.”

 

Unlike Trinitarian apologists for whom this verse is a favorite[20], no one in the New Testament appealed to this verse in an effort to prove the deity of Christ. Instead, it was Greek and Latin church fathers in later centuries who declared that Isaiah 9:6 had something to do with some kind of divinity of Jesus.

 

If we search in the writings of the church fathers in the centuries after Jesus[21], one of the first things we discover is that if they do make mention of Isaiah 9:6, the text is quite different from the translations we have in our English Old Testaments. This is because the early church fathers worked in the main from the Greek translation of the Old Testament, the LXX, and the text of Isaiah 9:6 is is quite different in the Greek translation.

 

LXX Isaiah 9:5 (Eng. 9:6):

“For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called the Messenger (or Angel) of Great Counsel[22]: for I will bring peace upon the princes, and health to him.”

 

In the Greek LXX of Isaiah 9:6 the child being born is not called “Almighty God” or “Everlasting Father” or even “Prince of Peace”. Instead, the child is called the “Messenger (or Angel) of Great Counsel”. Therefore, the early church fathers appeal to the verse to show that Jesus was the Great Messenger/Angel of God, because the Son revealed to mankind the plans or counsel of God. To the early church philosopher fathers, Jesus was the Angel Messenger of Great Council, the Announcer of God’s will. Jesus was by no means “co-equal” with God. He could be called god, but god with a small g. His existence was derived from and subordinate to the one true God, the Father, the Maker of All Things.

 

Back to our point. We see that finding the deity of Christ in the Old Testament, even if it is a subordinate kind of divinity, is not a New Testament exercise. The Greek and Latin church fathers were the first ones to appeal to Isaiah 9:6 to claim some kind of divinity for Jesus.

 

I won’t go into great detail here as to what Isaiah 9:6 does mean. Just a few comments:

 

“Mighty God” and “Everlasting Father” are “theophoric names”, “God carrying” names, given to human beings. Every name in Hebrew given to a human means something. With “God carrying or bearing” names, the name is given to a human being to declare a truth about who God is or what God’s relationship is to us. The names are not a declaration of the essence of the human person who has the name. Take for instance the name Jehu, the King of Israel that Elisha anointed, and who wiped out the worship of Baal from the Northern Kingdom. Jehu’s name means “He is Yahweh!”. No, Jehu was not Yahweh incarnate, but his name declared that Yahweh was God and that Yahweh was acting through the man Jehu to wipe out Baalism from Israel.

 

The name “Mighty God” can be understood and translated with the present tense form of be, “is”: “God is mighty”. “God is Mighty” El Gibbor, does not mean that the person bearing the name is a Mighty God, but that God is mighty. The God of Israel showed himself to be mighty in the days of the Prophet Isaiah and the Davidic King Hezekiah. In one night, the God of Israel decimated the mighty Assyrian empire’s army. Assyria was attacking Judah. But one morning the Judeans woke up and the mighty Assyrian army “were all dead bodies” (Isaiah 37:36). Indeed, Hezekiah’s God is a Mighty God.

 

This is why the child born was also called “Everlasting Father”. The name “Everlasting Father” alone shows the "deity-of-Christ" appeal to this verse is wrong. If you want to say that Jesus is a “Mighty God” from Isaiah 9:6, then Jesus is the Everlasting Father. But the truth is that the name, Everlasting Father, is given to a human being as a reminder that our God, the one true God, is Father to us. He cares for us and has our well being in mind, forever. By the way, I personally know a couple people named “Everlasting Father”.  None of them think they are God Almighty.  But their name declares a truth about God. Also by the way, I personally know about five Immanuels. None of them think they are God incarnate.

 

Lastly, these names in Isaiah 9:6 had application to a person born in the days of Isaiah the prophet, otherwise Isaiah the prophet was a liar. We must interpret the Scriptures in their historical grammatical context.  The tenses of the verbs in Isaiah 9:6 are in the Hebrew perfect tense, which is generally past tense. Instead of "will be born...will be given" (NAS, LSB), or even present tense "is born...is given" (KJV, RSV) the tenses are best understood in the past tense "has been born...has been given" (NET, NRS). That is, the prophet is referring to someone who had already been born in his days. Most likely these theophoric names have reference to King Hezekiah of the House of David. In contrast to faithless Ahab, the father of Hezekiah, Isaiah saw in the crown prince Hezekiah the faithfulness which would display the greatness of Judah's God. In Hezekiah’s days Yahweh proved Himself to be a Wonderful Counselor, a Mighty God, and an Everlasting Father.[23]

 

To sum up, Isaiah 9:6 was not used as a deity of Christ proof text by the biblical authors. The appeal to Isaiah 9:6 began in the centuries after the New Testament era.

 

These two famous Trinitarian, deity of Christ proof texts, Gen. 18-19 (angel of the LORD) and Isaiah 9:6, are put forth here as examples to illustrate that all efforts to find evidences for the deity of Christ in the Old Testament began only in centuries after the New Testament era. No New Testament author appealed to Gen. 1:26, Gen. 18 & 19, Psa. 110:1, Isa. 7:14, 9:6, 42:8, Jer. 23:6, Micah 5:2, Zec. 12:10 - or any other Old Testament text - in an effort to prove the deity of Christ. 

 

Review

1.      Neither Jesus nor any apostle in the Book of Acts appealed to the Old Testament in an effort to find evidence for the deity of Jesus Christ. Rather, Jesus and the apostles appealed to the Old Testament to show evidence for the suffering, death, and subsequent resurrection and exaltation of the Messiah. 

2.      On two occasions, Jesus, on the day after his resurrection, as recorded in Luke 24, explained to his disciples from the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms (Writings) how it was written that the Christ would suffer, be put to death, and be raised from the dead before entering his glory. All of these Old Testament prophetical descriptions given from God to his prophets are valid for an entirely human Christ, not for a God or God-man Christ. Jesus said nothing about how the Old Testament Scriptures proclaimed or hinted at his deity. 

3.      The teaching of Jesus from the Old Testament Scriptures that resurrection day was very thorough. Jesus told the apostles “all things which are written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms” (Luke 24:44). If Jesus is God, and the Old Testament Scriptures testified so, it is incredible that Jesus left out this seminal feature which eventually became the cornerstone belief of traditional Christianity. 

4.      We surveyed the declarations of Peter and Paul in the Book of Acts chapters 2, 3, 13, 17 and 26 and saw how these foundational apostles appealed to the Old Testament Scriptures in testifying about who the Christ is. The apostles in the Book of Acts never appealed to the Old Testament Scriptures to show the deity of Christ. Instead, the repeated evidence in the Book of Acts is that the apostles “reasoned…from the Scriptures, explaining and giving evidence that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead” (Acts 17:2-3). People were being saved in the Book of Acts without ever hearing that Jesus was God or that God was a Trinity.

To put it another way, the apostles appealed to the Old Testament to declare the death, not the deity of Messiah. Again, such Scriptures are suitable only for a human Christ, not for a God Christ or a god-man Christ. 

5.      Other New Testament writings do not conflict with Jesus in Luke 24 and the apostles in the Book of Acts. There is no appeal by any New Testament author to an Old Testament text with the aim of proving the deity of Christ. 

6.      We should not make the apostle Paul into a liar by claiming that he quoted Old Testament Scripture in order to prove that Jesus is Yahweh. Paul testified that he preached “nothing but what the prophets and Moses said would come to pass: that the Christ must suffer and that, by being the first to rise from the dead, he would proclaim light both to our people and to the Gentiles” (Acts 26:22-23). To claim that Paul quoted Old Testament Scriptures to prove the deity of Christ makes Paul a liar. 

7.      We looked at two typical Old Testament texts that Christians appeal to in an effort to find the deity of Christ, Genesis 18-19 (the angel of the LORD) and Isaiah 9:6. Claiming such texts are evidence for the deity of Christ began hundreds of years after the New Testament era. In the case of Genesis 18-19, Justin Martyr in the 2^nd century. The case of Isaiah 9:6 is even more complicated since the LXX Greek version of Isaiah 9:6 that the church fathers quoted is quite different, replacing the title “Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God” with “Angel of Great Counsel”. The church fathers of the 2^nd and 3^rd centuries believed Jesus to be a lesser god, subordinate to and derived from the Father, the Maker of all. 

8.      In the New Testament the controversy about Jesus was not about his “deity”, but about a Messiah who died and was raised to glory: “…that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory.” Controversy about Jesus’ deity is from later centuries, not from the 1^st century.

Challenges

Three related questions, yea verily, challenges may be asked of modern Christian lay persons and leaders alike.

 

Neither Jesus nor the authors of the New Testament appealed to the Old Testament in an effort to prove the deity of Christ. Why are you?

 

Neither Jesus nor any author of the New Testament appealed to the Old Testament in an effort to prove that God is triune. Why are you?

 

Do you know better than Jesus and the New Testament authors?

 

Like religious leaders in Jesus’s day, “Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition” (Matt. 15:6).

 

Selected Bibliography

 

Abernethy, Andrew T., and Gregory Goswell. God’s Messiah in the Old Testament: Expectations of a Coming King. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2020.

 

Bruce, F. F. The Canon of Scripture. IVP Academic, 2018.

 

Capes, David B. Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology. Baylor University Press, 2017.

 

Capes, David B., and Craig Evans. The Divine Christ: Paul, the Lord Jesus, and the Scriptures of Israel. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2018.

 

Intrater, Asher. Who Ate Lunch with Abraham? United States: Intermedia Publishing Group, Inc., 2011.

 

Williams, A. Lukyn. Justin Martyr: The Dialogue with Trypho. SPCK, 1930. http://archive.org/details/SPCKJustinMartyr.

 

Kaiser, Walter. Messiah in the Old Testament, The. Revised ed. edition. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Academic, 1995.

 

Rydelnik, Michael, and Edwin Blum, eds. The Moody Handbook of Messianic Prophecy: Studies and Expositions of the Messiah in the Old Testament. Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2019.

 

Smith, James E. What the Bible Teaches About the Promised Messiah. Nashville, Tenn: Thomas Nelson Inc, 1993.

 

Tuggy, Dale and Brown, Michael. Debate: Dr. Dale Tuggy vs. Dr. Michael Brown. 21^st Century Reformation, January 11, 2019, https://youtu.be/Oi300_FvFz0?t=9494.

Abernethy, Andrew T., and Gregory Goswell. God’s Messiah in the Old Testament: Expectations of a Coming King. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2020.

Capes, David B. Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology. Baylor University Press, 2017.

Capes, David B., and Craig Evans. The Divine Christ: Paul, the Lord Jesus, and the Scriptures of Israel. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2018.

“CHURCH FATHERS: Dialogue with Trypho, Chapters 55-68 (Justin Martyr).” Accessed October 4, 2021. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/01285.htm.

Intrater, Asher. Who Ate Lunch with Abraham? 41858th edition. United States: Intermedia Publishing Group, Inc., 2011.

Jr, Walter C. Kaiser. Messiah in the Old Testament, The. Revised ed. edition. Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan Academic, 1995.

Smith, James E. What the Bible Teaches About the Promised Messiah. Nashville, Tenn: Thomas Nelson Inc, 1993.

Vlach, Michael J. The Old in the New: Understanding How the New Testament Authors Quoted the Old Testament. The Woodlands, TX: Kress Biblical Resources, 2021.

Zondervan. Harper Study Bible: Revised Standard Version. Edited by Harold Lindsell. Revised edition. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1971.

 

---

[1] I’m not familiar with anyone who thinks the New Testament authors quoted the Old Testament to prove that God is a Trinity.

[2] “Debate: Dr. Dale Tuggy vs. Dr. Michael Brown”, January 11, 2019 in Concord, North Carolina. My question begins at 2:38:14. https://youtu.be/Oi300_FvFz0?t=9494. It appears that Dr. Brown’s mind skipped over Jesus’s application of OT passages in Luke 24 and the apostles in the Book of Acts, and went to the Gospel of John. I assume this from his statement about Jesus being “in the beginning” (John 1:1). But Dr. Brown’s interpretation of such passages in the Gospel of John are only inferences (cf. author’s studies on the Gospel of John here). Neither does the Gospel of John declare that Jesus is the “divine Son, the pre-existent eternal one, the one who himself is God”. The Gospel of John does not quote Old Testament passages as evidence of the deity of Messiah.

 [3] “Christ” (Hebrew: “Messiah”, משיח) is not a title for deity. Messiah/Christ means anointed – anointed by God for a special role. Kings (e.g., Saul, David, Solomon, Cyrus), priests and prophets were anointed. In the Bible, to be “Christ/Messiah” means a person is not God, since God anointed the person.  The word “Messiah/משיח/Christ” occurs 39 times in the Hebrew Scriptures. It never means “God” or “deity”. In the NT, “Christ” is always differentiated from God.

[4] “all things written”, cf. Psa. 40:7, that is, according to the foreknowledge and plan of God relayed in Holy Writ.

[5] Law of Moses, Prophets, Psalms – the three-part breakdown of the Hebrew Scriptures, meaning the entire OT. Cf., John 1:45, 5:39, 46.

[6] There are various suggestions as to which OT Scriptures Jesus and the apostles appealed to concerning the resurrection on the 3^rd day. For instance:

a.    As parallel and anti-type to 3^rd-day events of appearing in the OT (life, covenants, other events):

https://bibleproject.com/blog/why-did-jesus-rise-on-the-third-day/

https://ourrabbijesus.com/articles/resurrection-on-the-third-day/

Jesus drew attention to Jonah’s experience as a parallel and type of his own experience, Matt. 12:40.

b.    In connection with the Feast of First Fruits:

https://www.academia.edu/36385142/He_was_Raised_on_the_Third_Day_according_to_the_Scriptures_1_Corinthians_15_4_A_Typological_Interpretation_Based_on_The_Cultic_Calendar_In_Leviticus_23

c.     As relating to Jewish understanding of bodily corruption setting in after the 3^rd day: Poirier, John C. "Psalm 16:10 and the Resurrection of Jesus ‘on the Third Day’ (1 Corinthians 15:4)." Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters, Vol. 4, no. 2 (2014): 149-67.  http://www.jstor.org/stable/26371776

[7] The more universal results of Messiah’s mission “to all nations” are found in passages like Psa. 2:8, 22:27.

[8] Compare the similar “all that is written” in Luke 21:22 and in Acts 13:29.

[9] Jesus quoted Psalm 110:1 (Matt. 22:42-45) not as evidence of his pre-incarnate existence or deity, but as evidence that David’s son (descendant) was to be superior to David. Yahweh (יהוה the LORD) says solemnly to David’s adon (אדון, lord) to sit at Yahweh’s יהוה right hand. David’s greater son was to have supremacy over David. David’s son would be his lord/Lord. This should no way be a Trinitarian proof text for the deity of Messiah since it is obvious that Yahweh יהוה is God and David’s lord/Lord אדון is not Yahweh. Again, Peter and Paul referred to Psalm 110:1 to show that God has made the man Jesus of Nazareth “Lord and Christ”.

[10] Cf.  Acts 2:23: Jesus was “delivered up according to the plan and foreknowledge of God.”

[11] See, e.g., John Gills Exposition of the Bible, 1 Cor. 10:9.

Todd Scacewater on Jude 5, Yes, Jesus Saved and Destroyed the Israelites

Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology; and, Capes and Evans, The Divine Christ.

Capes suggests some seven times that Paul takes Old Testament texts which originally referred to Yahweh and applied them to Jesus https://youtu.be/EznUeCZ4Qcg. For instance, Romans 10:13 quotes Joel 2:14, “All who call upon the name of the Lord will be saved”. “Lord” in Joel 2:14 is Yahweh יהוה.  For a Biblical Unitarian analysis of the “Yahweh texts”, see Dr. Dustin Smith four-part podcast: Paul’s Use of Yahweh Texts for Jesus,  https://biblicalunitarianpodcast.podbean.com/e/182-paul-s-use-of-ot-yahweh-texts-for-jesus-part-1/

 [12] Kaiser, Walter Jr., Messiah in the Old Testament, The.

[13] Other “Messiah in the Old Testament” type books follow a similar pattern, e.g., Abernethy and Goswell, God’s Messiah in the Old Testament; Smith, What the Bible Teaches About the Promised Messiah; Vlach, The Old in the New. The “Deity of Messiah” is only inferred from less clear passages.

[14] Ironically, I’ve never heard a Trinitarian appeal to Exo. 17, Num. 20 or Num. 21 as evidence for the deity of Christ, the way some claim Paul is doing in 1 Cor. 10. For some reason these OT passages are not on the same list as Isaiah 9:6 and Micah 5:2, verses which Paul never appealed to.

[15] See e.g., Intrater, Who Ate Lunch with Abraham?

[16] “CHURCH FATHERS: Dialogue with Trypho, Chapters 55-68 (Justin Martyr).” Much of Justin’s identification of Jesus being “another, lesser” God and the Angel of the Lord can be found in paragraphs 55-68: https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/01285.htm

[17] Ibid, 61

[18]Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 328–29, emphasis mine. Hosea 12:4 says Jacob wrestled with a messenger/angel,מַלְאָךְ.

[19] YouTube interview: Dr. David Capes on how Paul interprets the Old Testament, the Divine Name, and Jesus as Lord. Relevant discussion begins at 1:10:37  https://youtu.be/EznUeCZ4Qcg?t=4238. Emphasis mine.

[20] E.g., Zondervan, Harper Study Bible, 1013. “This proclamation of the birth of the Messiah king undoubtedly refers to the Lord Jesus Christ as the God-Man”

[21] See, e.g., Treatise of Novation Concerning the Trinity, 8. Origen, Against Celsus, 53.

[22] μεγάλης βουλῆς ἄγγελος

[23] A friend well-studied in the church fathers, Andrew Davis, makes an interesting observation.  Davis suggested that Latin fathers like Augustine and Jerome who were familiar with the Hebrew text shied away from using Isaiah 9:6 in debates with Homoian (‘Arian’, “like the Father, but not in essence) opponents because: 1) the debate would have turned from Christology to textual criticism (LXX vs. Hebrew), and 2) the Homoians would have had no problem calling Jesus a “mighty God” (אֵל גִּבּוֹר) in contrast to the title for the Father, “Almighty God” (אֵל שַׁדַּי). The passage could have ended up being more of a proof text for the Arians.  (Email communication to the author, July 7, 2021).