David Murray - Leadership for Servants

What’s the Old Testament all about? Peter responds.

Jan 27, 2011 • By David Murray • 2 Comments

Yesterday we asked Jesus what the Old Testament was all about. His answer? “Me!”

Today we start asking the same question to those who knew Jesus best - the Apostles. Let’s start with Peter, and let’s break into the first chapter of his letter, where he’s talking about the message of the Old Testament prophets.

Peter taught that the Old Testament prophets made predictions, studied the predictions, and understood the predictions (1 Peter 1:10-12). Let’s look more closely at these three stages of prophetic experience.

First, the prophets made predictions. The “Spirit of Christ”, or the Holy Spirit, was in the Old Testament prophets (v. 11). In his commentary on 1 Peter, Wayne Grudem argues that the title “Spirit of Christ” “suggests that predicting the coming Messiah was the primary focus of his [the Holy Spirit’s] activity in the Old Testament prophets.” This unbreakable bond between all Scripture, Christ, and the Holy Spirit is described succinctly by the apostle John: “…the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy” (Rev. 19:10).

We should not, therefore, be surprised to read that, like the New Testament Apostles, the Old Testament prophets were focused on “salvation” (v. 10), and also “prophesied of the grace that should come” (v. 10). And indeed, not only did they preach salvation by grace, but they also preached the way this would be accomplished – by a suffering Messiah (v. 11).

So, through the prophets, the Spirit of Christ “testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow” (v. 11). The Spirit took the things of Christ and showed them to the prophets (John 16:15). Regarding the Scriptural location of these predictions, Grudem writes:

If we are to look for examples of this predicting activity, we may in fact look through the whole of the Old Testament, for the New Testament authors can sometimes speak of the whole of the Old Testament as the writings of ‘the prophets’ (see Lk. 24:27; also Acts 2:30 on David as a prophet). In this sense the predictions of the sufferings of the Messiah begin with the prediction of the ‘seed’ of the woman who would be bruised in the heel by the serpent (Gn. 3:15), and continue through much of the Old Testament writings…Yet all these verses are only a beginning, for they do not include the ‘acted-out prophecies’ seen in the historical events of the Old Testament, where in the lives of people like Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Joshua, David, Solomon, Jonah, and often the nation of Israel generally, God brought to pass events which foreshadowed a pattern of life that would be later followed by ‘one greater than Solomon,’ one who was David’s greater Son (Grudem, 1 Peter, 70).

Second, the prophets studied their predictions.It was not always immediately or entirely clear to the prophets what their predictions meant. Therefore, they “enquired and searched diligently” into the salvation they prophesied (v. 10). Specifically, they searched “what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glory that should follow” (v. 11). The Greek words used for “enquire” and “search” indicate an active, earnest, careful and diligent pursuit of the meaning of their own and of previous prophecies (e.g. Dan. 9:2). And, as Michaels notes, these are Christ-centered enquiries:

Even though the prophets’ ministry was long before the fact, Peter depicts them as pointing not to an undefined messianic figure but specifically to Jesus Christ. “Christ” is a name to Peter rather than a title, and he writes as if the prophets viewed matters in the same way (1 Peter, Word Biblical Commentary).

Some versions translate verse 11 in a way that suggests that the prophets did not know what person or what time they were talking about. For example, the ESV says the prophets were “inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories.” 

The NIV translates it closer to the KJV, saying the prophets were “trying to find out the time and circumstances to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow.”

This translation implies that the prophets did not puzzle so much over who the person was, but only over what time, and what manner (or circumstances) of time.

The latter translation, which maximizes rather than minimizes the prophets’ knowledge, is to be preferred. It is more consistent with the surrounding verses, which indicate the prophets knew a lot. From his study of this passage, Walter Kaiser draws out five truths that the prophets were certain of:  

1. The Messiah would come
2. The Messiah would suffer
3. The Messiah would be glorified (in kingly splendor)
4. The order of events was that the suffering came first, and then the glorious period followed
5. This message had been revealed to the prophets not only for their own day, but also for a future generation.

What then were the prophets all stirred up about in their searching and inquiring? It was the question of time…Therefore, 1 Peter 1:10-12 does not teach that these men were curious, yet often ignorant as to exact impact or meaning of what they wrote and predicted. Theirs was not a search for the meaning of what they wrote; it was an inquiry into the temporal [timing] aspects of the subject, which went beyond what they wrote (Kaiser, The Uses of the Old Testament in the New, 20).

Although the prophets did not have comprehensive and complete knowledge of Christ (who does?), they knew enough to answer the “Who?” question. Their major questions were about the “When?” and the “How?” 

Third, the prophets understood their predictions would be even better understood by future generations. It was revealed to them that, “not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven” (v. 11). They would have gradually grown in understanding of the Messiah they were looking for. But, Peter tells us that they especially came to understand that their predictions would be better understood by, and therefore would be more useful to, those who lived in Messiah’s day than to themselves.  They recognized that many of their prophecies would make sense to their readers only once they had happened. Greidanus highlights this: 

The power and grace of Christ’s redemption are present in the Old Testament long before he is born. At the same time, Old Testament believers look forward to the coming of Christ, when they will receive “far more light.” In the meantime, God gave many promises of the coming Mes­siah and raised up types that prefigured him (Greidanus, Preaching Christ from the Old Testament, 136).

This does not mean that the Old Testament presents only the broad, general characteristics of Christ’s person and work and that the New Testament fills in the details. While the New Testament is more detailed in some respects, the Old Testament is more detailed in other respects. For example, nowhere in the New Testament are we given such insight into the emotions and feelings of the Lord Jesus during his sufferings, as we are in the Messianic Psalms 22 and 69. Likewise, Isaiah 53 contains considerable detail.

So, Peter is not so much teaching a lack of detail, but rather a lack of full understanding. And, that lack was not due to a lack of spirituality or holiness, but simply because many of the predicted events could not be understood until they happened. Even Christ’s disciples had limited understanding of the person and work of Christ until after his resurrection.

Last, notice how Peter ties the prophets and the Apostles together. The same “things” that were predicted, studied, and, in a measure, understood by the prophets, “are now reported unto you by them that have preached the Gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven” (v. 11).

The prophets ministered the same “things” that the apostles “now reported.” The Old Testament “things” and the New Testament “reports” were identical in substance. The major difference, apart from the clothes the truths were dressed up in, is that, since Pentecost, the New Testament “reports” are accompanied by a greater measure of the “Holy Spirit sent down from heaven,” giving the preaching greater power, and so better enlightening the minds of the hearers (Luke 24:49; Acts 1:8; 2:33).

2 Responses to “What’s the Old Testament all about? Peter responds.”

  1. drake January 28, 2011 at 2:59 am #

    Have you read the rejection of the Tripartite distinction by DA Carson (Mystery and Fulfillment) and Tom Schreiner? If so what did you think of his view that the moral law does not oblige Christians, instead the “law” in the abstract is a witness to the righteousness of Christ? Sounds liike anabaptist nonsense to me but any thought or references for reading would be helpful.

  2. David Murray January 30, 2011 at 3:18 am #

    Drake: I’m a simple sort of guy. Sin is transgression of the law. Christ came to save me from my sin - it’s guilt and its power. Therefore Christ came to save me from the penalty of the law and from transgressing the law. I’m not interested in a Gospel or a Christ who can’t stop me from sinning against the law of my Father.

Leave a Reply:

Gravatar Image