This is an extract from Peter Adam, ‘“As it is written …” “This was to fulfil…”: The New Testament’s use of the Old Testament.’ Sign up to TGCA’s mailing list to be notified when the longer work becomes available.
We are sometimes unnerved by what looks like the erratic use of the Old Testament by the New Testament writers.
There are two notable examples in Matt 2:13-18
When they had gone, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream. ‘Get up,’ he said, ‘take the child and his mother and escape to Egypt. Stay there until I tell you, for Herod is going to search for the child to kill him.’
So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt, where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: ‘Out of Egypt I called my son.’
When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi. Then what was said through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled: ‘A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more.’ 
‘Out of Egypt I called my son’ (v. 15) is from Hosea 11:1, where it clearly refers to when God brought his people out of captivity in Egypt. The quotation—‘A voice is heard in Ramah …’ (v. 18)—is from Jeremiah 31:15 where it refers to the grief of the exile in Babylon (which will one day be overcome in the return from the exile).
Neither of these seems to be a prediction of Christ, so how can it be right for Matthew to pretend that they are?
Neither of these seems to be a prediction of Christ, so how can it be right for Matthew to pretend that they are?
This is a highly complex area of Biblical studies. All I am offering is a brief overview of how we might make sense of what is happening. I will give some Biblical examples of the points I am making, but this is not a comprehensive or complete account.
I think our difficulties arise because we have a narrow view of what prophecy is: that it is something that only occurs when the Old Testament writer makes a specific prediction which has no contemporary meaning and only refers to Christ. This makes it hard for us when the New Testament recycles parts of the Old in less obvious ways.
The theological basis for the New Testament’s use of the Old
Here, therefore, is the theological foundation for a wider view of ‘prophecy’:
- The God of the Old Testament is, of course, not just God the Father, but God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. This trinitarian reality is not revealed in the Old Testament, but the Trinity is the only God there is! The Father, Son and Spirit are rightly called LORD and God.
- In God’s educational plan for the human race, the Old Testament is like primary school and the New Testament like secondary school. The syllabus of the former leads to the syllabus of the latter: it is not complete in itself. Cumulative and gradual education means that things learnt in younger years gain deeper meanings in later years: this is our general experience of ourselves and of our lives. The Biblical revelation is gradual and cumulative, and events and people in the Old Testament may, with further New Testament revelation, be seen to have a greater significance than the people in the Old Testament and the Old Testament writers realised. In the words of St Augustine, ‘The New Testament lies hidden in the Old, and the Old becomes manifest in the New.’
- So in general terms, the Old Testament is the promise, and the New Testament is the fulfilment. Christ is promised in the Old, and revealed in the New. So we should not think that the two Testaments are unrelated, or that the Old Testament represents God’s Plan A, which failed, and was replaced by the New Testament, God’s Plan B. The whole Bible is a self-interpreting book, and we can understand neither Testament without the other. More than that, the two Testaments have the same theological content in different forms, and in different stages of revelation. Both are about God, and both are about Christ. ‘For no matter how many promises God has made, they are “Yes” in Christ’ (2 Corinthians 1:20).
- What is called ‘typology’ in Biblical studies develops the word ‘type’ in the New Testament to describe one of the functions of the Old Testament. Here are the New Testament references:
Adam, who is a pattern (‘type’) of the one to come (i.e. Christ) (Romans 5:14).
Now these things occurred as examples (‘types’) to keep us from setting our hearts on evil things as they did …These things happened to them as examples (‘types’) and were written down as warnings for us, on whom the culmination of the ages has come (1 Corinthians 10:6,11).
Typology looks for examples of this in the Bible. It recognises that Old Testament ‘types’ can only be discovered from the perspective of the New Testament, and expects an analogical historical situation and theological correspondence between the ‘type’ and the New Testament, its later expression (the ‘antitype’). Jesus is ‘the bread of life,’ more wonderful than the manna God provided in the wilderness. People who ate that manna still faced death. Those who eat the bread of life have eternal life, and Jesus’ flesh is that bread—which he will give for the life of the world (John 6:30-51). Another notable example is the description of the fall of the city of ‘Babylon’ in Revelation 18. In the Old Testament, God’s people were attacked and exiled by Babylon, so this image is used to describe the world opposed to God.
- There is the idea that Christ did what humanity and God’s people were meant to do, achieving the destiny that God intended for them:
- The damage done by Adam was repaired by Christ.
- Christ was the descendant promised to Abraham.
- Christ was the ‘other prophet’ like Moses.
- Christ’s glory was foreshadowed in the glory that covered the tabernacle and temple.
- Christ was the priest, high priest and sacrifice foreshadowed in the tabernacle and temple, in priest and sacrifice.
- Christ was the royal descendant of David.
- Christ’s kingdom was foreshadowed in the kingdom of David and his descendants.
These Old Testament people and realities were valid in themselves but also pointed forward to the coming Christ.
These Old Testament people and realities were valid in themselves but also pointed forward to the coming Christ. They were ‘visible signs of the Christ to come’.
- The image in Hebrews of ‘shadow’ and ‘reality’ is a useful key to understanding. ‘The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves’ (Hebrews 10:1, and see also Colossians 2:17). As Hebrews makes clear, priests and sacrifices pointed forward to Christ, and especially the Day of Atonement. Similarly, Paul in 1 Corinthians, writes that ‘Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed’ (5:7).
- There is also a continuity between the people of God in the Old Testament and the church, the people of God in the New Testament. Therefore, it makes perfect sense to apply God’s words to his people in the Old Testament to his people in the New Testament, and to expect common experiences in the lives of both. This is expressed both in terms of similarity and contrast, as in 1 Corinthians 10:1-11, Hebrews 3:7-4:11, Hebrews 10:26-31, and Hebrews 12:18-29.
- All this means that strict historical-grammatical exegesis is necessary, but also that it will be insufficient. In the words of Walter Moberly:
The challenge for Christian preachers of the OT is to combine historical respect for the distinctive biblical voices with a robust Christian understanding of God in Christ as the frame of reference within which the OT witness is now to be appropriated.
The Old Testament Scriptures need to be read in their own context; and in the context of the whole Old Testament; and also in the context of the New Testament, the later and superior revelation.
Old Testament Scriptures have to be read in their original context, and also recontextualised in the New Testament.
- The continuing usefulness of the Old Testament is evident in the letter to the Hebrews. It begins,
In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, [but] in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe (1:1-2).
Yet, despite this contrast between the Old Testament revelation and God’s revelation in his Son, the remainder of Hebrews uses mostly Old Testament material to explain the Son, while showing his superiority to Old Testament revelation. Christ is the eternal priest of the order of Melchizedek, the eternal high priest, who offered a once for all time sacrifice of himself, established the new covenant, and is now seated at the right hand of the Majesty on high.
- Old Testament images and language => New Testament reality.
- Old Testament promises => New Testament fulfilment in Christ.
- The New Testament itself makes it clear that some revelation of God was hidden in the Old Testament, but is now revealed in the New. It does this by using the word ‘mystery’, as in Romans 16:
Now to him who is able to establish you in accordance with my gospel, the message I proclaim about Jesus Christ, in keeping with the revelation of the mystery hidden for long ages past, but now revealed and made known through the prophetic writings by the command of the eternal God, so that all the Gentiles might come to the obedience that comes from faith— to the only wise God be glory forever through Jesus Christ! Amen (16:25-27).
The Old Testament prophets were aware of their lack of knowledge, and of their future audience.
It also teaches that the Old Testament prophets were aware of their lack of knowledge, and of their future audience.
Concerning this salvation, the prophets, who spoke of the grace that was to come to you, searched intently and with the greatest care, trying to find out the time and circumstances to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when he predicted the sufferings of the Messiah and the glories that would follow. It was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves but you, when they spoke of the things that have now been told you by those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven … (1 Peter 1:10-12).
We should not imagine that the Old Testament prophets knew more than they did.
- We find examples of Jesus’ contemporaries who welcomed him because they recognised that in him God’s promises to his people would be fulfilled, for example, Simeon and Anna in Luke 2:25-38. It was also the case that some features of the New Testament were not clearly revealed in the Old Testament.
- God’s people were expecting a human Messiah. There was no expectation of the incarnation of the Son of God, of the personhood of the Spirit, or of the Trinity.
- God’s people were expecting one ‘day of the Lord’ not two: it was not obvious that there would be two ‘comings’ of Christ, with a long period of time between them.
- Though the Old Testament taught that Gentiles would be part of the future of God’s people, they did not know that Gentiles would be ‘heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus’ (Ephesians 3:6, and see 3:2-6, and Titus 1:1-3). And while some recognised Christ as the Messiah, they were still slow to learn and slow to believe that and how he fulfilled the Old Testament promises. Jesus said,
‘How foolish you are, and how slow to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Did not the Messiah have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?’ And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself (Luke 24:25-27).
- So the words ‘fulfilled’ and ‘fulfillment’ can have a wide range of meanings. They can mean:
- The only fulfillment of a predictive prophecy.
- Another example of a common pattern of Old Testament revelation
- The filling out of a general pattern of Old Testament revelation in ways not expected by the Old Testament writers.
- The fulfilment in Christ of what God intended Adam to be, and his peoples to be.
- The fulfilment in Christ of the blessings and the curses of the Old Covenant.
- The fulfilment in Christ of the tabernacle, temple, priests and sacrifices.
- The achievement in Christ of what the Old Testament failed to achieve.
- A ‘fuller meaning’ and application of words which had their first meaning and application in a former context.
For the New Testament writers, the phrase ‘This was to fulfil …’ did not necessarily mean that this was the only fulfilment of these words.
According to Douglas Moo and Andrew Naselli, here are the three foundations of this approach.
- The whole Bible is the context for every part of the Bible.
- Typology is one key to the relationship between the Old and New Testaments.
- The ‘fuller meaning’ (Sensus Plenior) is the result.
They describe these three as the ‘why’, the ‘how’, and the ‘what’ of the New Testament reading of the Old Testament.
So when you are reading the New Testament, and find a quotation from or reference to the Old Testament, it is worth spending some time researching and meditating on how it is being used. If you find the connection difficult to understand, don’t panic! Find a resource which will help you. And do some reading of Biblical Theology at a popular or academic level. It will certainly enrich your Bible reading.
More popular sources
Adam, Peter, Hearing God’s Words: Biblical Spirituality, NSBT, Leicester, Apollos/Downers Grove IVP, 2004.
Adam, Peter, Written for Us: Receiving God’s Words in the Bible, Nottingham, IVP, 2008.
Clowney, Edmund P, The Unfolding Mystery: Discovering Christ in the Old Testament, Leicester, IVP, 1988.
Motyer, Alec, Look to the Rock: An Old Testament Background to our Understanding of Christ, Leicester, IVP, 1996.
Roberts, Vaughan, God’s Big Picture: Tracing the Storyline of the Bible, Downers Grove, IVP, 2002.
More academic sources
Baker, David L, Two Testaments, One Bible: A study of the theological relationship between the Old and New Testaments, Revised and Enlarged edition, Leicester, Apollos, 1991.
Beale, Greg, and DA Carson, eds., Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, Grand Rapids, Baker/Nottingham, Apollos, 2007.
Blomberg, Craig L, ‘Reflections on Jesus’ View of the Old Testament’, 66-701, in DA Carson, ed., The Enduring Authority of the Christian Scriptures, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 2016.
Ellis, Earle, The Old Testament in Early Christianity, Grand Rapids, Baker, 1991.
France, RT, Jesus and the Old Testament, London, Tyndale, 1971.
Goldsworthy, Graeme, Gospel-Centred Hermeneutics: Biblical-theological foundations and principles, Nottingham, Apollos, 2006.
Goldsworthy, Graeme, Christ-Centred Biblical Theology: Hermeneutical Foundations and Principles, Downers Grove IVP, 2012.
Goppelt, Leonhard, Typos: The Typological Interpretation of the Old Testament in the New, tr. H Mavig, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1928.
Greidanus, Sidney, Preaching Christ from the Old Testament: A Contemporary Hermeneutical Method, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1999.
Hafeman, SJ, and PR House, Central Themes in Biblical Theology, Nottingham, Apollos, 2007.
Moberly, Walter, ‘Preaching Christ from the Old Testament, 233-50, in ‘He Began With Moses …’ Preaching the Old Testament Today, eds., GJR Kent, PJ Kissling, LA Turner, Nottingham, IVP, 2020.
Moo, Douglas J and Andrew David Naselli, ‘The Problem of the New Testament’s Use of the Old Testament’, 702-746, in DA Carson, ed., The Enduring Authority of the Christian Scriptures, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 2016.
Wenham, John, Christ and the Bible, London, Tyndale Press, 1972.
 Bible quotations are from NIV11.
 See the technical resources listed at the end of this document.
 Augustine, Quæst in Heptateuch, ii, 73.
 For more on Christ as the theme of the whole Bible, see Sidney Greidanus, Preaching Christ from the Old Testament: A Contemporary Hermeneutical Method, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1999; Goldsworthy, Graeme, Christ-Centred Biblical Theology: Hermeneutical Foundations and Principles, Downers Grove IVP, 2012; and Peter Adam, Written for Us: Receiving God’s Words in the Bible, Nottingham, IVP, 2008, 175-212.
 Leonhard Goppelt, Typos: The Typological Interpretation of the Old Testament in the New, tr. H Mavig, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1928; and, RT France, Jesus and the Old Testament, London, Tyndale, 1971, 38-82.
 See Edmund P Clowney, The Unfolding Mystery: Discovering Christ in the Old Testament, Leicester, IVP, 1988, pp. 17-34.
 I outline Calvin’s rich version of these ideas in Peter Adam, Hearing God’s Words: Biblical Spirituality, NSBT, Leicester, Apollos/Downers Grove IVP, 2004, chapter 4, 119-38.
 See Adam, Written, 107-130.
 Walter Moberly, ‘Preaching Christ from the Old Testament’, 233-50, in ‘He Began With Moses …’ Preaching the Old Testament Today, eds., GJR Kent, PJ Kissling, LA Turner, Nottingham, IVP, 2020, 239-40.
 The word ‘but’ is not in the Greek text.
 See also a similar use in Matthew 13:11 (Mark 4:11, Luke 8:10), Romans 16:25, Ephesians 1:11, 3:3,4,8,6:19, Col 1:26,27, 2:2, 4:3, 1 Tim 3:9,16.
 Acts 1:9-11, 2 Peter 3.
 Douglas J Moo and Andrew David Naselli, ‘The Problem of the New Testament’s Use of the Old Testament’, 702-746, in DA Carson, ed., The Enduring Authority of the Christian Scriptures, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 2016, 736-37.