God's Messiah in the Old Testament

Expectations of a Coming King

Andrew T. Abernethy, Gregory Goswell

• Publisher: Baker Academic
• Year: 2020
• Print ISBN:
  9780801099755
• eBook ISBN:
  9781493426867
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Biblical Criticism & Interpretation

Two respected Old Testament scholars offer a fresh, comprehensive treatment of the messiah theme throughout the entire Old Testament and examine its relevance for New Testament interpretation. Addressing a topic of perennial interest and foundational significance, this book explores what the Old Testament actually says about the Messiah, divine kingship, and the kingdom of God. It also offers a nuanced understanding of how New Testament authors make use of Old Testament messianic texts in explaining who Jesus is and what he came to do.

1

The Seed, the Star, and the Template in the Pentateuch

When my wife and I (Andrew) moved to Melbourne from the US, we expected that encounters with poisonous spiders and venomous snakes would be a daily, or at least weekly, occurrence. After all, every tourism book that we read before our move featured Australia as home to the deadliest spiders and snakes on the planet. As it turns out, after three years in Australia, we had not seen a single snake, and the only scary spiders we had seen were huntsmen (we dare you to do a Google search), which are harmless.

Many Christians have a similar mismatch in expectations when they read the Old Testament. During Jesus’s walk to Emmaus, he helps some struggling disciples see how Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms—all of the Old Testament—bear witness to him (Luke 24:27, 44). With this sort of New Testament passage in mind, some Christians find themselves perplexed by how few explicit references there are to a royal Messiah in the Pentateuch. In this chapter, we will consider how messianic expectations figure into the portion of Scripture Jesus began with in his exposition to the disciples on the road to Emmaus, the Pentateuch, “the law of Moses.” As is indicated in our introduction, we will limit our attention to passages containing royal messianic expectations while at the same time factoring in how such passages fit into the bigger picture of the Pentateuch.

Messianic Expectations in Genesis

The book of Genesis launches the story line of Scripture, so how do messianic expectations figure into the Bible’s opening book?

Creation

There is no need for a messianic agent in the opening two chapters of Genesis. After all, on both the cosmic scale (Gen. 1) and on a narrower scale in the garden (Gen. 2) there is harmony; there is no rupture in God’s ideal for his world.1 A triangulated ideal for God’s world emerges from these opening chapters where God the King creates humanity (his vice-regents) to govern creation as both humanity and the rest of creation experience God’s blessing.2 It is the rupture of this harmonious ideal through the fall that sets in motion a plot that will eventually include messianic expectations whereby God’s ideal in creation will be regained.

Genesis 3 and the Seed of Woman

Yes, when Adam and Eve ate from the forbidden fruit, they committed sin. There is, however, more wrong in Gen. 3 than Adam and Eve disobeying God. Through a clever play on a word from the final verse of chapter 2, chapter 3 opens by introducing a snake that is more crafty (ʿārûm) than all other animals (3:1) and threatens to undo the shameless, naked (ʿărûmmîm; 2:25) existence of Adam and Eve.3 This snake is “the mouthpiece for a Dark Power,”4 an evil force at work to rupture the God, human, and creation interrelationship.5 As evil’s wiles unfold, as humans partake in sinful actions, and as shame sets in, the harmonious ideal of Gen. 1–2 quickly unravels. Any solution to Gen. 3, then, must seek to remedy all facets of the problem presented there—the power of evil, sinful human action, and the consequences of sin, including alienation of humans from one another, from God, and from creation. Although the rest of Gen. 3 primarily details the negative outcomes of this event for the snake, the woman, and the man, in God’s words to the snake a glimmer of hope arises that has implications for understanding messianic expectations in Genesis and beyond.

Genesis 3:15, often referred to as the protoevangelium (first gospel), is a difficult passage to interpret. Debate swirls around two major questions: (1) Is the “offspring” of woman singular or collective? (2) Does the passage envisage the ultimate victory of the “offspring” of woman over the snake’s “offspring” or a perpetual struggle between them? A comparison of the NIV and ESV translations, along with their footnotes, exposes these issues. In Hebrew, zeraʿ can be either singular or collective. Also, the final two clauses use the same Hebrew verb (šûp), which the ESV translates with the same English word (“bruise”) and the NIV translates with different English words (“crush”; “strike”).

NIV	ESV
And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring [zeraʿ]a and hers [zeraʿ]; he will crush [šûp]b your head, and you will strike [šûp] his heel.	I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring [zeraʿ]a and her offspring [zeraʿ]; he shall bruise [šûp] your head, and you shall bruise [šûp] his heel.
a. Or seed. b. Or strike.	a. Hebrew seed; so throughout Genesis.

Instead of reviewing all the debates, we will present our understanding of this verse in four points and engage with differing views as needed.

First, Gen. 3:15 occurs within God’s curse of the snake. The curse opens with God decreeing that the snake will go about on its belly and eat dust (v. 14). As Walter Kaiser suggests, it is likely that this is a “figure of speech, vividly picturing those who had been vanquished.”6 The curse is directed against an evil agent itself, not snakes (contra the etiology view).7 Although verse 15 does include some negative implications for humanity (i.e., enmity), the fact that it is part of God’s curse spoken to the serpent should lead one to interpret verse 15 as a curse primarily for the agent of evil embodied in the serpent. The implications of this will become evident below.

Second, Gen. 3:15 decrees perpetual enmity between the snake’s zeraʿ (offspring) and woman’s zeraʿ. Whether zeraʿ is singular or collective is the crux of interpreting this verse. On one side, C. John Collins argues for interpreting zeraʿ as an individual on grammatical grounds due to the use of singular pronouns for zeraʿ.8 This leads to an interpretation where woman’s singular zeraʿ is understood as the Messiah who would reign in the future. The other side, however, which is the view we prefer, is to understand zeraʿ as collective, referring to humanity generally. Grammatically, this view is defensible, as singular pronouns can also occur with a collective understanding of zeraʿ.9 Also, since all the other curses and consequences in verses 14–19 are perpetual and long term, it seems odd to think of verse 15 as pronouncing an isolated occasion of enmity between an individual seed of woman and an individual seed of the snake at a later date. As one reads on into Gen. 4, the struggle between Cain and “sin” that is crouching at his door (v. 7) seems to illustrate what 3:15 has in mind: a battle for humans to obey God in spite of temptation. It seems most natural, then, to interpret Gen. 3:15 as referring more generally to the continual enmity between evil and the sons and daughters of Eve in general.

Third, Gen. 3:15 may be understood as conveying the expectation of victory over evil. The same verb, šûp, describes the actions by the offspring of woman and the offspring of the snake toward one another. This leads some to conclude that 3:15 speaks of a perpetual battle, without any sense of victory by either side. While that is a grammatically defensible interpretation, the body parts referred to in the conflict could have some bearing on this text. “Striking” a heel is a logical way for a snake to attack a human, but “striking” the head of a snake would be a mortal blow. Since this is part of a curse toward the snake, a negative outcome of death for the snake is not unexpected. So, what would victory over the snake entail? The snake is a symbol of an evil force that aims to lead humanity into sin, resulting in shame, death, and a fracture in relationship among humanity, God, and creation. Victory in Gen. 3:15, then, anticipates the victory of humanity over evil through obedience to God resulting in restored relationships with one another, God, and creation.10

Fourth, Gen. 3:15 should be understood in light of its role in introducing the Pentateuch. The expectation is that there will be perpetual enmity between humanity and evil with the hope that Eve’s offspring will ultimately be victorious over evil. As we will see in the rest of Genesis, what begins as a hope for Eve’s offspring in general becomes centered on Abraham’s offspring, Israel. Israel carries the hope of humanity to overcome evil. Whereas Adam and Eve face exile from the garden due to sin, Israel will be offspring who enter a new land, with God in their midst, in hope of overcoming evil through obedience to Torah and experiencing God’s blessing in the land, which will lead to blessing for all nations.11

So far, we have not addressed any specific messianic expectations; we have just been observing the hope that the sons and daughters of Eve will overcome evil. Across the rest of Genesis, we will see how kingship figures into God’s plans for Eve’s offspring.

The Collective Seed of Abraham and Kingship

If Gen. 1–3 sets the drama of Scripture into motion, the rest of Genesis depicts how one lineage within Eve’s offspring fits into God’s plans to bless his fractured world. In fact, as many observe, Genesis itself is a collation of genealogies, some of which incorporate extended narratives about God’s workings with particular individuals.12

Particularization—God’s election of a particular lineage among Eve’s offspring—becomes apparent from the very first “genealogy” (Gen. 2:4–4:26). While Cain’s lineage plunges deeper into sin, Gen. 4 introduces an alternative line among Eve’s offspring, that of Seth. By explaining the reasoning behind the name Seth (šēt)—God had given (šāt) offspring (zeraʿ) to Eve (4:25)—and by associating Seth’s lineage with calling upon the name of the LORD (v. 26), the narrative particularizes in the line of Seth the hope from 3:15 that the offspring (zeraʿ) of Eve will overcome evil. The hope of a righteous “offspring” continues with Noah, who is described as righteous and blameless (6:9). From Noah, primeval history particularizes upon Shem, one who is portrayed as upright in contrast to his brother Ham (9:18–27). As sin, death, and ruptures in God’s ideal develop, the particularization within the genealogies of th...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Endorsements
• Contents
• Preface
• Abbreviations
• Introduction
• 1. The Seed, the Star, and the Template in the Pentateuch
• 2. The Need for a King in Judges
• 3. The Book of Ruth and the House of David
• 4. The Heart of Kingship in 1-2 Samuel
• 5. Failure and the Royal Ideal in 1-2 Kings
• 6. Royal Messianic Expectations in Isaiah
• 7. The Death and Rebirth of Kingship in Jeremiah
• 8. The Prince Forecast in Ezekiel
• 9. Kingship for a United Nation in Hosea
• 10. David’s Booth in Amos
• 11. Davidic Rule in Micah
• 12. The Sprout, the Divine Shepherd, and the Messenger in Zechariah and Malachi
• 13. The Portrait of David in the Psalter
• 14. Where Is David in the Book of Daniel?
• 15. Kingship and the Temple in 1-2 Chronicles
• 16. Looking Forward to the New Testament
• Conclusion
• Bibliography
• Scripture and Ancient Writings Index
• Name Index
• Subject Index
• Back Cover