Does the New Testament Quote the Old Testament Out of Context? by Craig Keener
See also Steve Hays interaction in the comments section of his blog HERE. Steve does a great job explaining how the New Testament authors legitimately quoted the Old Testament.
I also wrote the following comments in Steve's blog:
This might help or hurt. According to some Messianic Jews there are:
Four categories of quotations in the New Testment of the Old Testament. Using a common Jewish hermeneutical approach called Pardes/PaRDeS.
Arnold Fruchtenbaum argues [in his article How the New Testament Quotes the Old Testament] the following four ways.
*P*ardes
Literal Prophecy Plus Literal Fulfillment: Pshat
The first category is known as “literal prophecy plus literal fulfillment,” reflecting the rabbinic pshat, which refers to the simple meaning of the text. The example of this first category is found in Matthew 2:5 6.
pa*R*des
Literal Plus Typical: Remez
The second category of quotations can be labeled “literal plus typical.” In rabbinic theology it was known are remez or “hint.” An example of this category is found in Matthew 2:15.
par*D*es
Literal Plus Application: Drash
The third category is “literal plus application,” correlating with the rabbinic drash. The example of this category is Matthew 2:17 18.
parde*S*
Summation: Sod
The fourth category is “summation” or “summary.” The meaning of sod is “secret” or “mystery” or “something unknown.” The example of the fourth category is found in Matthew 2:23.
(cf. this article A Look at Messianic Prophecy: Four Ways the New Testament Authors Use the Hebrew Bible)
Typology And Simplistic Skepticism by Steve Hays
The Nature Of Biblical Prophecy Fulfillment by Jason Engwer
I would also recommend Michael L. Brown's five volume work Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus. Since I possess all five volumes, I can definitely say that Brown answers all the major objections to Jesus as the prophesied Messiah in the Old Testament. See also my related blog:
What Do You Think About The Messiah?
Isa. 7:14, Matt. 1:23 and the Virgin Birth
http://bibledifficultiesanswered.blogspot.com/2015/06/isa-714-matt-123-and-virgin-birth.html
More Links:
How the New Testament Quotes the Old Testament by Arnold Fruchtenbaum
Here is a link to Arnold Fruchtenbaum's 21 part lecture series on The Life of the Messiah (now titled "The Jewish Life of Christ")
Fruchtenbaum explains PaRDeS in audio lecture #3.
A Look at Messianic Prophecy: Four Ways the New Testament Authors Use the Hebrew Bible
Does the New Testament misquote the Old Testament?
by Robert Plummer
I asked ChatGPT:"Many anti-missionary Jewish folk object that the New Testament misquotes and/or misapplies the Old Testament. I say that Jewish the hermeneutical principle of PaRDeS explains away the alleged misquotations and misapplications. If PaRDeS didn't exist during the 1st century, were the elements of it in existence back then and could my point still be made that the proto-Pardes explains away the Jewish objections to how the NT quotes and applies the OT?"
ReplyDeleteChatGPT wrote back: You're raising an interesting and insightful point regarding the use of Old Testament (Tanakh) quotations in the New Testament and the hermeneutical method known as PaRDeS. Let’s break down your argument and address whether the proto-PaRDeS (or early forms of similar interpretive methods) could indeed explain away the alleged misquotations or misapplications of the Old Testament by the New Testament writers.
1. What is PaRDeS?
PaRDeS is an acronym for four Jewish interpretive approaches:
Peshat (the simple, straightforward meaning of the text)
Remez (hints or allusions, where the text points to deeper meanings)
Derash (interpretation through homiletic or moral teachings)
Sod (the secret, mystical meaning of the text, often associated with Kabbalah).
This method became formalized much later, but elements of it were likely in use well before it was fully developed. In fact, many scholars agree that the techniques that led to PaRDeS were already being used by Jewish rabbis and scholars in the first century, especially in the interpretive traditions that arose around the Hebrew Scriptures.
2. The New Testament and Old Testament Quotations
Many anti-missionary Jewish critics argue that the New Testament writers misquote or misapply Old Testament passages, particularly in their portrayal of Jesus as the fulfillment of Messianic prophecies. For example:
Matthew 2:15 cites Hosea 11:1 ("Out of Egypt I called my son") as a prophecy of Jesus' return from Egypt, though the original context of Hosea refers to the nation of Israel, not an individual.
Isaiah 7:14 (the "virgin" prophecy) is cited in Matthew 1:23 as referring to the birth of Jesus, though the term "almah" (young woman) in the Hebrew might not strictly mean "virgin" in the original context.
These types of quotations lead some to claim that the New Testament authors were either misapplying or twisting the Old Testament text to fit their theological agenda.
CONTINUED BELOW
3. Proto-PaRDeS and Jewish Interpretive Traditions in the 1st Century
DeleteWhile PaRDeS as a formalized system wasn’t fully developed by the first century, there were still existing Jewish interpretive methods that closely resemble the elements of PaRDeS, especially in the way texts were read through multiple layers of meaning.
Midrash: This was a prominent interpretive method used by Jewish rabbis in the first century. Midrash often involved searching for deeper meanings in the texts, sometimes seeing foreshadowings or symbolic meanings that went beyond the straightforward reading. In fact, the New Testament authors often engage in a form of Midrash when they apply Old Testament prophecies to Jesus, interpreting them in light of events that they believed fulfilled those prophecies.
Allegory and Typology: Both of these methods, which are akin to the Remez and Derash approaches of PaRDeS, were frequently used in Jewish thought, especially in the Hellenistic and Roman periods. In this sense, early Christian authors could have been drawing on these existing techniques to demonstrate how the events in Jesus' life were a continuation of God's redemptive plan, as symbolized in the Hebrew Scriptures.
4. Can the Proto-PaRDeS Explanation Address Objections?
Yes, I think you can still make a case that the principles behind PaRDeS (or its proto-forms) can help explain why the New Testament authors quote and apply the Old Testament in the way they do, without it necessarily being a misquotation or misapplication. Here’s why:
Jewish Interpretive Methods: The use of typology, allegory, and Midrash by New Testament writers reflects methods that were already part of Jewish thought in the first century. These methods were not intended to present a "literal" reading of the text but to explore deeper spiritual truths, historical continuities, and connections between events.
Prophetic Fulfillment: The New Testament authors frequently interpret Old Testament prophecies as types or foreshadowings that are fulfilled in Jesus. For instance, the reference to Hosea 11:1 in Matthew 2:15 isn’t a claim that Hosea’s prophecy was directly about Jesus, but rather that Jesus' life mirrors the experiences of Israel. This approach would align with a more flexible, typological reading of the text, which was common in first-century Jewish exegesis.
Messianic Interpretation: Many of the Messianic prophecies that Christians claim are fulfilled in Jesus were understood to have multiple layers of meaning in Jewish thought. The idea of a suffering servant (as in Isaiah 53) or a conquering king (as in Psalms or Daniel) was often held together in Jewish tradition. Early Christians believed Jesus fulfilled these roles in a way that had not been fully understood before, and they interpreted Old Testament passages with this fulfillment in mind.
Conclusion
Though the formal system of PaRDeS as we understand it today may not have been explicitly articulated in the first century, the interpretive principles that underlie PaRDeS—especially Peshat, Remez, Derash, and typological reading—were already present in Jewish hermeneutics at the time. The New Testament writers, drawing from Jewish interpretive traditions like Midrash and typology, can be understood as applying these principles in their use of Old Testament quotations and prophecies.
Thus, you can indeed make the argument that the proto-PaRDeS method of interpretation would provide a reasonable explanation for how the New Testament writers applied Old Testament scriptures to Jesus, even if these applications seem unconventional from a strictly literal or peshat-based perspective.