Is Jesus of Nazareth the Predicted Messiah?

A Historical-Evidential Approach to Specific Old Testament Messianic Prophecies and Their New Testament Fulfillments

Douglas D. Scott

• Publisher: Wipf and Stock
• Year: 2019
• Print ISBN:
  9781532658518
  9781532658525
• eBook ISBN:
  9781532658532
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Biblical Criticism & Interpretation

Christians in general--and preachers of prophecy in particular--attribute the fulfillment of hundreds of Old Testament messianic prophecies to Jesus of Nazareth. Often these claims arise in the uncritical environment of Christian churches or popular literature that is treating messianic prophecy. People with critical thinking abilities, and those endowed with a skeptical nature, often have key questions that remain unaddressed in such environments. These thinkers and skeptics are the people that will be most interested in this work. The primary question addressed is this: "Do critically acceptable historical-evidential reasons exist for believing that Jesus Christ is the direct fulfillment of some specific Old Testament messianic texts?" Approaching this question within a framework that eliminates any possibility of staged prophetic fulfillment, and those that may occur by mere chance or collusion, produces results that must be taken seriously. Even with these strict criteria, Jesus emerges as the only viable candidate to fulfill some of the prophecies included in this study. For other prophetic texts, the evidence is not as abundant or convincing. However, even these texts yield several minimal facts that directly impinge on New Testament claims about Jesus.

Part I

Introduction and Literature Review

Chapter 1

Introduction to the Study

Background and Preliminary Considerations

Is Jesus of Nazareth the ultimate anointed messianic king (משיח/Χριστός)1 who was to rule Israel from the throne of David as predicted by the Old Testament (OT) prophets?2 Since circa AD 30, a number of people proudly—some even defiantly—claimed that Jesus is this Messiah. In some cases, his followers made these claims despite persecution, threats, and even martyrdom by antagonists who were vehement in their opposition to the growing sect. According to biblical data, John the Baptist (JTB) was the first to provide public witness affirming that Jesus was the fulfillment of OT prophetic messianic predictions. He identified Jesus as the anointed one (Mark 1:10; John 1:32; Q 3:21–22).3

Jesus himself affirmed his status as Χριστός during interviews with the High Priest Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin by overtly stating, “I am, and you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven” (Mark 14:62b, English Standard Version).4 The implication is that by evoking the image of the transcendent “son of man,” appearing in Daniel 7:13–14, Jesus was claiming status as both the predicted Messiah and the judge of those present during this trial.5 Pontius Pilate also inquired about Jesus’ status when he asking, “‘Are you the King of the Jews?’ And Jesus answered him, ‘You have said so’” (Mark 15:2b). On the Day of Pentecost, Peter proclaimed Jesus as the fulfillment of OT promises (Acts 3:18–25), especially those related to messianic suffering.6 Later, at the house of Cornelius, Peter again referred to the prophets while describing Jesus as judge and redeemer (Acts 10:42–43). In 1 Peter 1:10–12, providing salvation as a distinctly messianic function is also attributed to Jesus; Peter contends this was foretold by the prophets. Stephen ties prophetic prediction to Jesus: Stephen specifically is reported as mentioning the coming of the Righteous One (Acts 7:52) which, in context, can only be referring to the crucifixion Jesus.

The work of the apostle Paul is of major importance for this study because of his repeated references to the OT prophets. Saul of Tarsus was one of the primary persecutors of believing Jews. His persecutions began shortly after the formation of the new Jewish sect (Christians) and its initial expansion into the regions surrounding Judea. His conversion experience profoundly changed both the direction of his life and his religious belief system (Gal 1:11–17; 1 Cor 15:8). The cornerstone of Paul’s arguments advocating Jesus as the Messiah are the words of the OT prophets; these figure prominently in several of his recorded speeches (Acts 13:27; 26:22ff; 28:23; Rom 1:2–3; 3:21; 1 Cor 15:3–4). When Paul became the persecuted rather than the persecutor, his interlocutors pressed him for answers as to the basis for his affirmation of Jesus as the predicted Messiah. Paul’s responses routinely included reasons based on fulfilled OT prophecy. The normative Jewish interpretations of the early first century would not unambiguously have delineated Jesus as the Messiah. Even so, Paul almost certainly expected any Jew with the requisite knowledge of the Tanakh to follow his arguments and reach the same conclusion.7

Several of the early Christian fathers add their voices to those of Peter and Paul by supplementing the biblical data concerning the vital role OT prophecy plays as an apologetic tool. They did this when demonstrating the truth of the Christian religion and its assertions about the messianic status of Jesus. Two examples will suffice to support this observation. The first extant apologetic documents of the church are those of Justin Martyr (Justin), in which prophecy is frequently appealed to as evidence for the truth of Christianity.8 Another influential writer, Origen, in his well-known work Against Celsus, employs OT prophecy to defend the Messiah being born of a virgin within the house of David. Interestingly, in this case, OT prophecy is used to argue in a way reminiscent of Paul’s letters because the Jew Celsus believes in predictive prophecy, but rejects Christianity:

And these arguments I employ as against a Jew who believes in prophecy. Let Celsus now tell me, or any of those who think with him, with what meaning the prophet utters either these statements about the future, or the others which are contained in the prophecies? Is it with any foresight of the future or not? If with a foresight of the future, then the prophets were divinely inspired; if with no foresight of the future, let him explain the meaning of one who speaks thus boldly regarding the future, and who is an object of admiration among the Jews because of his prophetic powers.9

The goal at this juncture of the dissertation is not to provide an exhaustive list of apologetic data but to bring attention to the early and wide-ranging use of fulfilled prophecy as a legitimate apologetic tool. It is ironic that many within Christendom—as well as agnostics and atheists—now dismiss a once valuable and often deployed apologetic evidence for Christianity. The proposed remedy for this condition is a revitalization of the study of messianic prophecy for apologetic purposes by applying contemporary historical-critical methods to these ancient oracles and drawing conclusions based on strict verification criteria. Criteria-verifying conditions include: (1) primary fulfillments, (2) critical dating, (3) the impossibility of staging fulfillments, (4) minimal facts,10 and (5) justifiable historical descriptions based on probabilities as indicated by adequate historical data.

Statement of the Problem

This study will seek to establish if critically acceptable historical-evidential reasons exist for believing that Jesus is the direct fulfillment of the specific OT messianic texts included in the study. This investigation envisions the existence of three possible outcomes for each prophecy examined: (1) Jesus directly fulfilled the prophecy and sufficient historical evidence establishes the claim as probable, (2) Jesus directly fulfilled the prophecy, but the available historical evidence is insufficient to establish the claim as probable, and (3) sufficient historical evidence exists to refute the claim that Jesus directly fulfilled the prophecy.

Significance of the Problem

The problem under investigation seeks to identify and to examine critically acceptable historical-evidential reasons for believing that Jesus is the direct fulfillment of the OT messianic texts. Questions about the status, nature, and person of Jesus have been the subject of many scholarly investigations. A significant lacuna exists in critical scholarly data, however. The lacuna lies in the treatment of the relationship ...

Table of contents

• Title Page
• Foreword by Leo Percer
• Acknowledgements
• Part I: Introduction and Literature Review
• Part II: Exegesis Analysis and Synthesis
• Part III: Conclusions
• Bibliography