Copyright 2014 Richard James Lucas Jr. All Rights Reserved. The .

Appenzeller have each played some role in me finishing this dissertation, whether it wastaking on a heavier ministry role, serving as a dialogue partner, or even encouraging meto hurry up and get it done to be free to join them full time in this gospel work. Thanksare also due to Steve and Lisa Matteucci, who have been close family friends for adecade now. Their encouragement, prayers, and financial support of my ministry madecompleting this dissertation possible.A special thanks to my dissertation committee. It is a tremendous honor tohave Tom Schreiner serve as my supervisor. If he were not teaching at SouthernSeminary, I would not have even come in 2003 for my MDiv studies. I wanted him to bemy professor, but I never expected then that he would also become my pastor, doctoralsupervisor, and friend. I can never hope to live up to the example he has modeled in hisChristian conduct, family life, ministry effectiveness, or scholarly output, but he hasprovided an example worthy of attempted imitation.I also want to thank the other members of my committee, Russell Fuller andBill Cook. Both men exemplify the pastor-scholar, and are overflowing with ministrywisdom in every class they teach. I was pushed by both to work hard in my academicwork, but I was also admonished by both of them to shepherd faithfully the flock of God.It is this rare combination of scholarly giftedness wrapped in real ministry experienceamong the faculty that has made Southern Seminary such an ideal place to study for theaspiring pastor. While they did not serve on my committee, I would be remiss not to alsoexpress deep appreciation for the other members of the faculty who have shaped mythinking and my life indelibly. Of special note are Bruce Ware, Steve Wellum, PeterGentry, Stuart Scott, and Brian Vickers.Two other professors from my time in college deserve to be mentioned. Sincethis dissertation concerns the use of the OT in the NT, it is fitting to thank the two menwho first taught me Hebrew and Greek, Colin Smith and Rodney Decker respectively.But my reasons to thank them here expand far beyond their lingual instruction. Colinxv

Smith imparted in me, and so many of his students, an infectious love for the Bible. Hiscommand of its content never ceased to amaze, but even more impactful was his personalministry to his students. Besides the many hours in his office and home, we took severalfield trips with him, including two weeks in Europe. All of these occasions were filledwith numerous hours of teaching, talking and laughing. His influence on my life is hardto quantify.Rodney Decker graciously allowed a college junior to enroll in his seminarylevel beginning Greek class meeting at 6:35 AM two days a week. But in my two years ofGreek with him he taught me more than the language of the New Testament, butintroduced me to the world of New Testament scholarship. It was under his tutelage thatthe seeds of pursuing a PhD in NT studies were first planted. In addition to graciouslyopening his home to me and my wife on several occasions, he also invited me on severalfield trips, one to examine some Greek manuscripts and the other to accompany him to anordination counsel. These two examples demonstrate his passion for both scholarship andpastoral ministry a passion he has helped to pass on to me. And even though I chose toattend Southern Seminary for my MDiv studies, Dr. Decker has always been very kindand generous with his time to answer my email questions and continue to encourage mein my studies.The Lord saw fit to take Colin Smith home a few years ago at the age of 53,and Rod Decker passed away only a few months ago at the age of 61. I hope that mycompletion of this dissertation is but a small return on their investment in my life and areminder that their legacy continues in the ministry of their students.Since most of this writing was completed away from Southern’s campus, I washeavily dependent on the distance education and inter-library loan team at the BoyceCentennial Library. Whitney Motley and Ben Ruppert and their team were so helpful intracking down resources which were hard to find, mailing me scores of books, andscanning hundreds of pages. I will sorely miss having their regular assistance in futurexvi

research projects.Thanks to my Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ - following all the other namesmentioned above - “for there is no other name under heaven given among men by whichwe must be saved.” I can produce nothing apart from the undeserved, unmeasured graceof God. I pray that Jesus Christ would receive all the glory for any of my efforts in thisproject. May his name stand above all others!Richard LucasWilliston, VermontDecember 2014xvii

CHAPTER 1INTRODUCTIONStatement of the ProblemThe area of study which is collectively referred to as the New Testament Useof the Old Testament is vast1 and ever developing.2 While various attendant questionsnaturally arise from this area of study, one of particular importance concerns therelationship between the meaning of the OT passage in its original context, and itsmeaning as used by the NT writers.3 In 1978, Walt Kaiser announced a crisis in exegesis1Numerous helpful introductions could be referenced here, but besides the works cited below,though older, D. Moody Smith, “The Use of the Old Testament in the New,” in The Use of the OldTestament in the New and Other Essays: Studies in Honor of William Franklin Stinespring, ed. James M.Efird (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1972), 3-65, is still quite useful. For more recent introductoryarticles, see Craig A. Evans, “The Old Testament in the New,” in The Face of New Testament Studies: ASurvey of Recent Research, ed. Scot McKnight and Grant R. Osborne (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2004), 13045; Michael J. Vlach, “New Testament Use of the Old Testament: A Survey of Where the Debate CurrentlyStands” (paper presented at the annual meeting of the Evangelical Evangelical Theological Society, SanFrancisco, CA, November 17, 2011), 1-15; and Darrell L. Bock, “Scripture Citing Scripture: Use of the OldTestament in the New,” in Interpreting the New Testament Text: Introduction to the Art and Science ofExegesis, ed. Darrell L. Bock and Buist M. Fanning (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2006), 255-76. Thelatter is an updated version of Darrell L. Bock, “Use of the Old Testament in the New,” in Foundations forBiblical Interpretation, ed. David S. Dockery, Kenneth A. Mathews, and Robert B. Sloan (Nashville:Broadman & Holman, 1994), 97-114.2A brief survey of some modern approaches and their respective exponents, such asintertextual (Richard Hays and Timothy Berkley), narrative (Tom Wright, Ross Wagner, Sylvia Keesmaat,and Francis Watson), and rhetorical (Christopher Stanley and John Paul Heil) can be found in SteveMoyise, Paul and Scripture: Studying the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: BakerAcademic, 2010), 111-25.3Lunde proposes the metaphor of a gravitational center and five orbiting questions. Thegravitational center being “the relationship between the OT and the NT authors’ intended meanings.” Hisfive orbiting questions are (1) Is sensus plenior an appropriate way of explaining the NT use of the OT? (2)How is typology best understood? (3) Do the NT writers take into account the context of the passages theycite? (4) Does the NT writers’ use of Jewish exegetical methods explain the NT use of the OT? and (5) Arewe able to replicate the exegetical and hermeneutical approaches to the OT that we find in the writings ofthe NT? Jonathan Lunde, “An Introduction to Central Questions in the New Testament Use of the OldTestament,” in Three Views of the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, ed. Kenneth Berding andJonathan Lunde (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007), 7-41.1

over this very issue because of what he saw as a capitulation in biblical scholarship toallow a variance in meaning of individual texts in the OT and their appropriation in theNT.4 The scholarly debate has not subsided since then, as demonstrated in the exchangeof articles over this very issue between Peter Enns and Greg Beale.5With the publication of the Commentary on the New Testament Use of the OldTestament6 in 2007, a major step forward was taken in this field of study. Insights intoindividual passages which have been scattered across various articles, technicalcommentaries and monographs are all brought to bear on every quotation and allusion ofthe OT in the NT in a systematic fashion.7 And while the editors themselves indicate thata stated goal of their project was to demonstrate that the NT writers use the OT with theOT context in mind,8 the nature of the work demanded that discussions of even (socalled) hard texts be given limited attention.9Detractors from a contextually-oriented approach consistently appeal to thephenomena in the NT itself as justification for their understanding of apostolic4Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., “The Current Crisis in Exegesis and the Apostolic Use of Deuteronomy25:4 in 1 Corinthians 9:8-10,” JETS 21 (1978): 3-18.5Peter Enns, Inspiration and Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament(Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005), 113-65; G. K. Beale, “Did Jesus and the Apostles Preach the RightDoctrine from the Wrong Texts? Revisiting the Debate Seventeen Years Later in the Light of Peter Enns’Book, Inspiration and Incarnation,” Themelios 32, no. 1 (October 2006): 18-43; Peter Enns, “Response toProfessor Greg Beale,” Themelios 32, no. 3 (May 2007): 5-13; G. K. Beale, “A Surrejoinder to Peter Ennson the Use of the Old Testament in the New,” Themelios 32, no. 3 (May 2007): 14-25. Beale also publishedthese articles in a slightly revised form in his, The Erosion of Inerrancy in Evangelicalism: Responding toNew Challenges to Biblical Authority (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2008), 85-122.6G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson, eds., Commentary on the New Testament Use of the OldTestament (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007).7In speaking of this Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testatment, Beale laterwrites, “This is the first time in the history of biblical scholarship that this kind of material has beenbrought together in one volume.” G. K. Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology: The Unfolding of theOld Testament in the New (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic), 13.8This sentiment was made explicit in an interview with both Greg Beale and Don Carson byCollin Hansen, “Two Testaments, One Story,” Christianity Today 52 (February 2008) (web-only), accessedFebruary 8, 2008, 106-52.0.html.9Most discussions of these types of passages in commentaries also receive little attention.2

hermeneutics.10 Any overall approach to this issue has to be able to handle the data itselfand explain how the NT is using the OT with reference to its meaning.ThesisThis dissertation will contribute to the general field of the NT use of the OT byexploring the plausibility of a contextually oriented approach to three “hard cases.” Myworking thesis is that the NT authors demonstrate a respect for the OT context in theirexplicit quotations.11 They will often organically develop the meaning of the OT passagethey quote along biblical-theological lines, and intertwine their interpretation with thequotation, but not in a manner which disregards the original context nor the intendedmeaning of the OT author.12 Their quotations of the OT demonstrate a hermeneuticalorientation which is rooted in the original context of the passage cited. Organic integrityis maintained between the testaments as demonstrated by the way the authors of the NTappeal to the OT.This thesis is tested by an examination of three hard cases from Paul, eachfrom a different letter.13 The three passages are (1) Romans 11:26-27 (Isa 59:20-21 and10Greg Beale distilled eight such examples from Peter Enns in Beale, “Revisiting the Debate,”23, and ten from Richard Longenecker in G. K. Beale, “Did Jesus and His Followers Preach the RightDoctrine From the Wrong Texts? An Examination of the Presuppositions of the Apostles’ ExegeticalMethod,” Themelios 14, no. 3 (April 1989): 90.11A study of OT allusions would be worthwhile too, but usually it is the undisputed quotationsthat are at the center of discussion. For more on the role that allusions and “echoes” play in Paul’sutilization of the OT, see Richard B. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven, CT:Yale University Press, 1989), as well as the substantial interaction with Hays’s work found in Craig A.Evans and James A. Sanders, eds., Paul and the Scriptures of Israel, JSNTSup 83 (Sheffield: JSOT Press,1993), 42-96.12For the purposes of this dissertation, to speak of “respecting the original context” is simplyanother way of saying to “represent accurately the (or at least ‘an’) intended meaning of the OT author.”While not in vogue in some sectors of biblical scholarship, I agree with those who maintain that themeaning of a given text is grounded in the intentionality of the original author. For the development anddefense of this notion, see Kevin J. Vanhoozer, Is There a Meaning in This Text? The Bible, the Reader,and the Morality of Literary Knowledge (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998), 201-80.13The use of test cases is well established in this area of study. Both Doug Moo and MoisésSilva examine Paul’s use of Hab 2:4 as a test case for their general approach, because it represents in their3

27:9), (2) Ephesians 4:8 (Ps 68:18), and (3) 1 Corinthians 15:54-55 (Isa 25:8 and Hos13:14).14 These three texts are cited

EBC The Expositor's Bible Commentary, rev. ed. ECC Eerdmans Critical Commentary EKKNT Evangelisch-katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament EQ Evangelical Quarterly ETL Ephemerides theologicae Lovanienses ExpT Expository Times Field Origenis Hexaplorum quae supersunt sive veterum interpretum graecorum in totum