EXEGETICAL PREACHING BLOG

The way New Testament authors quote the Old Testament often feels enigmatic, even confusing. But often these quotations serve not so much to prove the Old Testament author’s point, but to weave together themes in a given passage. In 1 Peter 2:6, for example, Peter uses Isaiah 28:16 to tie several threads of his argument in 2:1–10 together. He writes, “Behold, I lay in Zion a choice stone [lithon], a precious [eklekton entimon] cornerstone, and he who believes in Him will not be disappointed.” (1 Peter 2:6 NASB) In Isaiah 28, God pronounces judgment on Ephraim for disobedience and unbelief, continuing Isaiah’s frequent themes of judgment for those who trust in foreign countries and military strength but victory for those who trust in God alone.  Even as Isaiah’s prophecy exhorted God’s people to trust God alone through persecution and hardship, so Peter draws on his prophecy to implore believers in Jesus to trust in him alone.

There are two important observations from the first half of Peter’s quotation. First, the quotation expands Peter’s understanding of Jesus as a “living stone [lithon zōntes]” (2:4) to a “cornerstone [lithon akrogōniaion]” (2:6). While akrogōniaion appears nowhere in secular Greek literature, Peter’s emphasis on Jesus being the foundational stone as well as the possibility of someone stumbling over it (2:8) shows that he refers to a ground-level cornerstone.  Second, he changes the Septuagint’s embalōto tithēmi in order to indicate God “lay[ing] a stone.” Peter’s use of tithēmi both maintains the original context of laying a stone but expands the range to emphasize the word’s context within God’s election and choosing of Jesus (1:1–2; 2:4). It also allows Peter to frame 2:6–8 with Jesus, whom God “lay [tithēmi],” and unbelievers, whom God “destined [etethēsan]” to disobey the message.

The latter half of the quotation further explains the believers’ relationship to Jesus. Peter has already shown that believers are “living stones,” just like Jesus is the “living stone,” and are being built up into a holy priesthood to offer “spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ” (2:4–5). The second half of Isaiah 28:16 shows that those living stones—those to whom Peter is writing—are those who believe and that they “will never be put to shame [ou mē kataischynthē].”

Using different language, the idea of believers never being put to shame echoes God’s choosing and election of Jesus despite his rejection at the hands of humanity (2:4). The point is that those who believe in Jesus should trust God. Jesus was rejected by men, yet he was God’s chosen and elect cornerstone. In the same way, even though the believers to whom Peter writes may be put to shame by men, they will never be put to shame by God.

Ben Hussung

What strikes your mind when you think of the book of Hebrews? What is the book’s main point, its primary objective? Many would well answer something like “The divinity of Jesus” or “Jesus is greater than angels or Judaism or even Moses.” The author of Hebrews opens the letter with such a message when he strings together a beautiful set of pearls of praise that affirm the divinity of the Son. “Whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the world. And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of his power” (Heb 1:2–3a [NASB]). Short version: “Jesus is God.”

To stop here, though, would miss the point of where this is all going.

Consider the NASB’s rendering of verse 2. “In these last days [God] has spoken to us in His Son, whom he appointed heir of all thing, through whom also He made the world.” Staying true to the Greek, the NASB has rendered the various forms of the relative pronoun hoswith their English counterpart “who” (or “whom” in this case). The pronouns rightly draw the reader back to the word huiō or “Son” as the NASB takes it, and it is here that the high Christology at work here is clear.

This is not the whole argument, however. The word huiō is a dative, a form that basically functions like an adverb. This invites the reader to look farther back to search for what huiō modifies. To what then does the dative point?

Consider how the author opens the letter. “God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways” (Heb 1:1 [NASB]). Both this temporal clause and the main clause in verse 2 share the same verb—laleo (“to speak”). The author is saying that the act of speaking is nothing new. God has always done it, and he has done it today. The difference is in the means. God used to speak in many portions (polumerōs) and in many ways (polutropōs) in the prophets (en tois profētais). Now He has spoken through His Son (en hiuō).

The reason, therefore, that the author of Hebrews is at pains to provide all these lavish descriptions of the Son is because He is the final means by which God has spoken ep eschatou tōn hēmerōn (“in these last days”). High Christology has a purpose – to give full weight and crystal clarity to God’s full and final speech.

Jarrett Ford

Mark Lowery’s catchy modern Christmas carol “Mary, Did you Know?” has influenced a generation of readers of Christian scripture that Mary may have been naive about the angelic pronouncement she receives and its theological implications for Israel. This is unfortunate. Quite the contrary, Mary’s own statements present a fuller picture of the mother of our Lord than what fans of modern Christmas music might expect.

As Mary states in Luke 1:48, “For He has had regard for the humble state of His bondslave; For behold, from this time on all generations will count me blessed.” The phrase “humble estate” (tapeinōsin) also translated as “affliction, distress, and humility,” has deep covenantal connections. It doesn’t mean Mary is merely folksy and comes from humble origins.

In Israel’s Scriptures, it was God’s hearing of Israel’s affliction (tapeinōsin) that prompted him to deliver them from their oppression in Egypt (Deut 26:7; Neh 9:9). These connotations carry forward into the new-exodus imagery of the prophetic literature which describes the affliction of a Israel’s exile as the affliction of a virgin girl.

We’re familiar with the prophecy from Isaiah 7:14, “Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel. The virgin girl isn’t solely one person in Isaiah. The virgin is also a symbol in reference to the affliction of Jerusalem and Israel. Jerusalem is referred to as the Daughter of Zion in Isa 1:8; 10:30, 32; 16:1. In Isaiah 37:22 Jerusalem is called “The virgin daughter of Zion” (cf. Lam 2:13).

In Isaiah 52:1-3 we read:

“Awake, awake, Clothe yourself in your strength, O Zion; Clothe yourself in your beautiful garments, O Jerusalem, the holy city; For the uncircumcised and the unclean will no longer come into you. Shake yourself from the dust, rise up, O captive Jerusalem; Loose yourself from the chains around your neck, O captive daughter of Zion. For thus says the Lord, “You were sold for nothing and you will be redeemed without money.” (NASB)

The coming of Immanuel in Isaiah is about the redemption of his virgin daughter Israel.

In Luke, Mary is drawing upon the Scriptures of Israel when she considers her humble estate. She is the embodiment of the affliction of Israel. In Mary’s magnificat (Luke 1:46-56), she embodies the prophecy of Zech 2:10, “Sing and rejoice, O daughter of Zion, for behold, I come and I will dwell in your midst, declares the Lord.” Mary’s conception in Luke is not solely that a virgin gives birth, as miraculous as that is, but that Mary is the embodiment of God’s promises to Israel. Mary’s own understanding of her symbolic function in the promises to Israel is evident from the end of her hymn, “He has helped his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy, as he spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to his offspring forever.” (1:55).” It turns out that Mary did know and knew deeply what God was up to in the bringing of Jesus into the world.

Trey Moss

What does it mean when Peter describes Jesus as “a living stone”? Peter could simply be alluding to Jesus’s resurrection while also setting up his “spiritual house” metaphor of 2:5. Perhaps less obvious is that Peter’s use of Psalm 33 and the term “stone” point toward Jesus being not only the believer’s example for suffering but actually God himself.

Immediately preceding 1 Peter 2:4, Peter quotes Psalm 33:9, telling the believers to “long for the pure milk of the word...if you have tasted the kindness of the Lord” (2:2–3 NASB).  Just a few verses before Psalm 33:9, the psalmist writes, “I sought the Lord, and he heard me and delivered me from all my sojournings. Come [proselthate] to him and be enlightened, and your faces will never be put to shame” (Ps 33:5–6 LXX).  Just as Peter assumes that the believers have already “tasted the kindness of the Lord” (2:3), Peter also assumes that the believers have “come to him” (2:4), just as the psalmist writes.  In this allusion, Peter not only interprets Jesus as God himself, but he also equates coming to God and tasting him with the salvation that the believers have found in Jesus.

Peter continues to describe Jesus as “a living stone [lithon zōntes]” (2:4). “Living stone,” which is in apposition to the relative pronoun “hon” that begins the phrase, likely refers to Old Testament stone imagery (Ps 118:22–23; Isa 8:14–15; 28:16).  Peter goes on shortly to quote all three of these passages. While no Old Testament author uses lithos to describe God directly, it is not difficult to see a potential conceptual connection between God the Rock (Deut 32:4; 2 Sam 23:3; Isa 26:4; 30:29; Ps 1:3; 19:15; 62:3, 7) and the messianic cornerstone. This “stone” is also “living” [zōntes]. This is the third time Peter has used zaō as an adjectival participle, describing the “living hope [elpida zōsan]” (1:3) and “living word [logou zōntes]” (1:23). Just as in 1:3, the “living hope” comes “through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,” so here Jesus is the “living stone” because he has risen from the dead and is currently alive.

Peter’s description of Jesus as “a living stone,” then, not only sets up his comparison between Jesus and believers, giving them hope amidst suffering. It also gives key insight into who Jesus is. He is not only the rejected cornerstone but God himself—all the more reason for Peter’s readers to cling to him amidst their suffering.

Ben Hussung

It has become commonplace to talk about a “New Exodus” in Isaiah. The idea is that God’s future act of post-exilic redemption that Isaiah foresaw can be understood in light of the foremost act of redemption in Israel’s past, the exodus from Egypt. Often times though, a reader blazes through the meandering poetry of Isaiah without recognizing the warrant for such a view. If this “New Exodus” is indeed in Isaiah, one might rightly wonder where it is to be found.

The answer to this question requires a brief comment on the way poetry works. Unlike prose, which allows an author to build his literary world sentence by sentence, thought by thought, poets wrap their worlds in microscopic power, like an unfurled blossom, forcing the reader to take time and peel back the layers before the verse yields its fruits. This is the sort of shrouded existence Isaiah gives to the New Exodus. He hides it beneath the surface, leveraging the connotations of certain words and images to bring it into light. 

Consider chapter 11. The first half describes how God intends to whip his people into shape with Assyria. In their arrogance, the ancient superpower thought they were acting of their own accord and strength. But Isaiah knows better. Assyria is Yahweh’s own personal rod, being moved as he God moves his hand (Isa 10:4–11). Yahweh, via Assyria, will burn Israel to the ground, and so few people will remain that even a child will be able to count them (see 10:19b).

The few that do remain, however, Yahweh begins to console. “Therefore thus says the Lord GOD of hosts, ‘O My people who dwell in Zion, do not fear the Assyrian who strikes you with the rod and lifts up his staff against you, the way Egypt did’” (Isa 10:24 [NASB]; emphasis added). The Hebrew behind the italicized phrase is bederek misrayim, which literally means “in the way of Egypt.” The idea is something like “in the manner of Egypt,” which is why the NASB has helpfully smoothed it out as “the way Egypt did.” Assyria would oppress Israel as the Egypt that knew not Joseph.  Egypt (misrayim) and rod (mateh) combine to drudge up images associated with the Exodus, images that continue in verse 26. “The Lord of hosts will arouse a scourge against him like the slaughter of Midian at the rock of Oreb; and His staff will be over the sea and He will lift it up the way He did in Egypt” (Isa 10:26 [NASB]). The same phrase (i.e., bederak misrayim) stands behind “the way He did in Egypt” and reaches back to the Exodus as it did in verse 24. This time though, mateh combines with yam (or “sea”) to subtly compel the reader to picture Moses, staff raised and courage full before the roaring Red Sea.

For Israel, this is redemption incarnate, what they pictured when they thought of concepts like salvation or liberation. Rescue for them was not some theoretical abstraction. It was the exodus. By referring to Egypt and Moses’ staff, Isaiah pulled on a few connotative strings to communicate his point. He need not spell it all out for it to be there. Israel, having been oppressed by the Assyrian monster, would one day receive a redemption like the one they annually celebrated. There is coming a New Exodus.

Jarrett Ford

While in Athens, Paul preached about Jesus Christ to a curious audience (Acts 17:22-31). At the climactic point of his sermon, Paul asserted that God raised Jesus from the dead (17:31). This claim got a polarized reaction. As the NASB translates Acts 17:32, “Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some began to sneer, but others said, “We shall hear you again concerning this.” Beneath the English, Luke uses the tools of the Greek language to highlight these contrasting reactions to Paul’s message.

Luke uses two subtle Greek words, men and de, in his description of the responses. The NASB leaves the Greek men untranslated, because there is not an exact English equivalent. However, men is a significant word, because it is a connective which works with other words to correlate two clauses. In this case, men introduces one clause, “some began to sneer,” but also creates the expectation that a second related clause will follow. So, Luke creates the expectation that sneering was not the only response. Also, men is frequently used to correlate, along with de, adversative statements. Since Luke introduces a second clause using de, “but others said, ‘We shall hear you again concerning this,’” he intends for the two to be read together as contrasting statements.

Following Acts 17:32, Luke describes other responses to Paul’s preaching: “But some men joined him and believed, among whom also were Dionysius the Areopagite and a woman named Damaris and others with them” (Acts 17:34). By narrating these reactions, Luke further demonstrates that he wants readers to see the varied responses to Paul’s preaching.

So, Luke uses men and de to subtly highlight the polarized nature of the responses to Paul’s preaching. Instead of simply relating the apparent successes of Paul’s ministry, Luke emphasizes the contrasting reactions to the message of the gospel. And, in this retelling, there is an implicit lesson for Christians about evangelism. On the one hand, some will sneer at the gospel, but, on the other hand, others will ask for more, and still others will believe.

E. Coye Still IV

Galatians 3:10–14 serves a central role in Paul’s discussion of works of the Law and faith in Christ. In this passage, Paul provides an explanation for why “those who are of faith are blessed with Abraham, the believer” (3:9). Having described Christ’s redemption on the cross for those under the curse of the Law in 3:10–13, Paul then completes his explanation with two subordinate clauses.

The first subordinate clause expresses the purpose of Christ’s redemption while tying together themes from 3:1–9: “In order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles” (3:14a NASB). The clause begins with hina, which here expresses purpose. Christ’s redemption, then, is the key to understanding how this blessing has come to the Gentiles. While everyone stands under the curse of the Law because no one can follow the entire Law (3:10), Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the Law (3:13). Therefore, faith in Christ and his redemption, just like Abraham’s faith in God, brings the Gentiles the blessing of Abraham.

The second subordinate clause, beginning with the same conjuction hina, makes clearer what this blessing entails: “So that we would receive the promise of the Spirit through faith” (3:14b). It is unclear, however, whether this clause is coordinating with or subordinate to the first subordinate clause in 3:14a. The former option seems most reasonable for three reasons.

First, Paul has already made a significant connection between receiving the Spirit and the blessing of Abraham in 3:5­–9, where he compares the faith necessary for receiving the Spirit to the faith exercised by Abraham that led to his justification. The blessing of 3:9 both looks back to the Gentiles’ reception of the Spirit in 3:1–5 and forward to the reception of the Spirit in 3:14b.

Second, Paul likely alludes here to Septuagint Isaiah 44:3, which also parallels the Spirit and blessing: “I will put my Spirit (to pneuma) upon your seed (to sperma) and my blessing (tas eulogias) upon your children.” Paul uses both eulogiaand pneuma in 3:14 and moves to a discussion of Abraham’s “seed” (sperma) in 3:15–18. The theme of Abraham’s children also permeates the next section (Abraham’s “sons” [huioi] in 3:7).

Third, Paul stands on the foundation of the Old Testament. The prophets foresaw the coming of the Spirit in relation to Israel’s restoration (Isa 32:15–17; 44:1–5; 59:21; Ezek 11:14–21; 36:22– 27; 37:1–14). They also prophesied that God would write the Law on the people’s hearts so that they would fulfill the Law themselves (Jer 31:31–34; Ezek 36–37). Therefore, the dual purposes of the blessing of Abraham coming to the Gentiles in Christ Jesus and the promise of the Spirit coming to us through faith are actually the same thing. The blessing of Abraham is fulfilled among all Christians by the outpouring of the Spirit by faith in Christ Jesus.

Ben Hussung