Jesus Is There: Discovering Jesus at Work in the Old Testament

The below is from the Conclusions of Chapter 5—“The Old Testament: Finding where Jesus Is Likely at Work” (page 114).

Conclusions

In the last chapter, we tested out three keys and three guidelines in terms of their ability to distinguish between the first and second persons of the Trinity in the New Testament, and we found that they were very effective in making that distinction. In the present chapter, we applied those keys and guidelines to the Old Testament to see if they would make the same distinction. We studied 25 passages and here is a summary of the conclusions which can reasonably be drawn:

• Key #1—Enduring names for God. A fundamental contention through this book is that the enduring names for God through the Bible are two: “God” and “Lord.” This key received strong support from our Old Testament studies since one or the other of these names or both were found in all 25 passages studied. Sometimes, “angel of the…” was added to “Lord,” but few other variations were observed. Exactly as in the New Testament, “God” was routinely associated with the first person of the Trinity and “Lord” was typically, but not always, associated with the second person of the Trinity.

• Key #2—Primary roles of the divine. Based on the New Testament, the primary roles for “God” and “Lord,” as summarized in table 4, were applied to the Old Testament passages. In one case (#18—Testing of Job), the role of the divine could not be clearly discerned. However, in the other 24 cases, the roles of “God” and “Lord” all agreed with the final judgment as to which member of the Trinity was involved. Overall, a remarkable consistency was found across the testaments between the primary roles demonstrated and membership in the Trinity.

• Key #3—Speech patterns of the divine. In 20 of 25 cases, the speech patterns of the first and second members of the Trinity in the Old Testament were in agreement with the conclusion as to which member of the Trinity was actually involved. However, in five cases, no speech was recorded for the member of the Trinity involved in the passage, and thus the key could not be applied. Also, the first member of the Trinity spoke on four especially important occasions (“landmark communications”), and in each case he spoke in the expected way, although longer than anticipated. The greater length is no doubt due to the importance of the occasions, but the longer narrations were not anticipated because there are no New Testament parallels. Overall, Key #3 was definitely of value, but not quite as consistently as Keys #1 & 2, primarily because the divine did not always speak.

• Guideline #1—“God” is used alone or with another name other than “Lord.” Using the rules for this guideline given in Table 4, this guideline held up except for two cases (Balaam and Jonah), where “God” instead of “Lord” had likely been inserted in the text by the writer due to the breaking of the covenant by these prophets. If one can accept this explanation, the guideline holds up perfectly.

• Guideline #2—“Lord” is used alone or with another name other than “God.” As outlined in Table 4, this guideline was concordant with the final conclusion in every case.

• Guideline #3—“God” and “Lord” used together in one way or another. The passages called for the use of this guideline only twice, but in each case the result was concordant with the final conclusion drawn as to which member of the Trinity was involved.

• Overall findings—First member of the Trinity. In seven of the 25 passages studied, it was the first person of the Trinity who was the divine person involved, and in an additional two cases, he was involved with the second person of the Trinity. Routinely, he was called “God.” He assumed the roles of being creator, founder, director, and administrator, and he was the one who set down all parameters and made the covenants. These roles were consistent across the testaments. In characteristic form, the first person came in and efficiently did what he needed to do. Consequently, his work was presented crisply and succinctly. For his work in the seven cases where he was the sole deity involved, it was remarkable that only about five chapters were taken up altogether to describe that work.

• Overall findings—Second member of the Trinity. In 16 of the 25 passages studied, it was the second person of the Trinity who was the divine person involved, and in two additional cases he was involved with the first person of the Trinity. Routinely, he was called “Lord.” A prominent feature here is the connections he made with people as he conveyed the will of God. At least some of these contacts were made personally and face-to-face. In general, the roles of the second person of the Trinity in the Old Testament were very similar to his roles in the New Testament. However, report of his work consumed a huge amount of space in the Old Testament (approximately 178 chapters).

• Contributions of the LXX. The LXX made major contributions to an understanding of three of the 25 passages. It promoted seeing similarities in the names, roles, and communication patterns of the first and second persons of the Trinity across the testaments.

          The studies reported in this chapter lead to the overriding conclusion that the second person of the Trinity is actively involved in numerous places in the Old Testament. His involvement with people bears striking similarities to his involvement with people in the New Testament, and he was a mediator between God and people repeatedly. Even his speech was similar to his speech in the New Testament as it was frequently conversational and with a prominence of questions. It was further found that “God” and “Lord” are indeed the enduring names for God through the Old Testament just as they are in the New Testament. The unity of scriptures is therefore clearly in evidence. The implications of all of these findings will be discussed in our final chapter.