Old Testament Fulfillment in the Christmas Story – Classic

I have three guests in the studio today. First guest is Dr. David Lowery. David Lowery teaches New Testament at Dallas Theological Seminary. And second guest is Dr. Gordon Johnston, who teaches Old Testament here. And Dr. Darrell Bock, who's normally driving this podcast, but is one of our expert guests today.

Sometimes people will say, "Where's that come from? What prophet?" Or maybe they have a footnote in their Bible, and they say, "Okay, well, I'm gonna go there," and they want to figure out, "How does this relate to what Matthew is doing?" And then for pastors as well, as they're preparing their messages, what the significance is of these things that they can bring up.

So, we'll talk about Matthew 1. There's one passage in there, and then there's four passages in Matthew 2 that we'll discuss. So, let's just dive right in. We'll take a look at the first passage, and I'm gonna read these passages 'cause, as we've learned before, nothing beats looking at the text. Right?

"All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet" – and then we have verse 23, which is a quotation. It says, "'Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,' which means, 'God with us.'"

And Isaiah the prophet shows up and says, "Don't be afraid, because these two countries that are your two enemies, they're going to be wiped off the scene within the next generation or so." And he says, "As a sign for that, to confirm that you'll be safe, God's gonna give you a confirming sign." And typically, the word "sign" would be – this would be fulfilled before that.

So, the expectation would be that whatever the sign is going to be would be fulfilled before the end of the next generation. And he says, "The sign is going to be that an almah is pregnant and about to give birth, and she" – and actually, the Hebrew could be understand in terms of "you" and the Septuagint even translated that, "Well, you, young woman, will call His name Immanuel."

So, and then it says, "And after He's born, He's going to eat curds and honey so he knows to choose the good and not the evil. And before He knows good and evil, the two kings that you fear are gonna be wiped away, and then the king of Assyria is going to come up on the land." And that likely happened in 701 B.C. with Sennacherib. So, these events happened. Samaria gets destroyed in 722, Damascus 732, Sennacherib 701. So, we're talking about the eighth century.

In the context, we're probably talking about – Isaiah's probably addressing or at least referring to a woman – a young woman, an almah. In Hebrew, the word almah is a young woman. Betulah, a different word, was a technical term for virgin, and he doesn't use that.

So, there's a young woman. The Hebrew could be read easily that this young woman is already pregnant and about to give birth. And so, we'd expect that this would be fulfilled in the near view. In Isaiah chapter 8, there's a parallel passage that appears to be a parallel description of Isaiah's own son. So, in the near context, this is probably fulfilled historically.

Now there's a broader context in Isaiah 9 that there's a Davidic King to come who's going to be born. And it's remarkable that Matthew doesn't quote that passage but Isaiah 7. And it's interesting; this probably would not have been a text that would have been, in the first century, somebody would have been necessarily going to messianically. The Isaiah 7 was – it appears people understood this as being fulfilled in the eighth century. It was never really one of the inventories – on the inventory list for future messianic prophecies to be fulfilled.

So, I think the best way to understand this is that Matthew is seeing some kind of typological escalation that when this child was born in the eighth century, it was a sign that God was there to protect and provide and deliver His people, but then how much more, in the first century, with Jesus, the ultimate Son.

And David might want to talk about the parthenos. The Septuagint translated the Hebrew word almah – Hebrew almah – young woman. The Greek Septuagint translated parthenos, that at the time meant young woman, it could be used of a virgin, but technically meant young woman. But by the time you come to the first century, it starts being used more and more – a virgin.

David, let's think about how, in Matthew's context, he uses – why would Matthew go to this, and what would be significant for his audience?

A word of assurance, then, that the purposes of God are being accomplished, and despite the troubling times and the apparent difficulties associated with what we'll see as the life of Jesus, God's purposes are going to be accomplished. And He is with His people particularly – as Gordon said, escalation – in the person of Jesus; His presence is manifested.

So, it's both a word of assurance, a word of fulfillment, but a reminder that the purposes of God are going to be achieved, and Jesus is going to be the focal point of what God is going to do in terms of His presence with His people.

We have a woman who's announced to give birth to a sign child. Jesus is going to be a sign child, believe me. He means God with us. And so, we have this sign child that shows that the program of God is moving ahead.

But instead of this being about a young woman who either is pregnant or about to become pregnant, in the original setting, we now have someone who's a virgin, who gives birth. So, that's an escalation. And "God with us" is not merely the presence of God in our midst, although it's certainly that, but it is, if I can have some fun here, "GOD WITH US – THIS IS CNN." I mean there's an escalation here, and that escalation has pushed – is being pushed to the limit.

So, it's a pattern fulfillment, and then that sometimes bothers people that it's not a direct fulfillment – you know, a direct prediction looking hundreds of years down the line. But I tell people, "What's more amazing, that God predicts a single event down the road, or that there is a pattern that God is exercising across time at multiple places and in multiple spaces that shows a connection and a design to what it is that God is doing?"

So, I actually see typological prophetic fulfillment as a sign of God's hands being across history and not just in one event. And so, I think that helps to explain the kind of fulfillment that we're dealing with here. It's not a retreat from a view about what God is doing; it actually invests God with more involvement in history to see it this way.

So we get stuck in the first part of the passage. The point of the passage is coming really at the end and advances the story. And so, in that sense, some of this skepticism that we end up having to deal with – I'm not saying you shouldn't deal with it – having to deal with gets us off the track in terms of what's happening in the narrative.

Matthew chapter 2 says, "Now, after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, in the days of Herod the king, behold, wise men from the east came to Jerusalem, saying, 'Where is He who has been born King of the Jews? For we saw His star when it rose and have come to worship Him.'"

In the context of Micah 5, you've got Jerusalem is under siege by the Assyrians. Micah also announces that eventually Jerusalem's going to be taken into exile by the Babylonians. So, 701 B.C., 586 B.C.

But in the future, Jerusalem's going to be restored by a coming David, a new David, a greater David who's going to come out of the veritable roots where David came from, with Bethlehem – the book of Ruth takes us all the way back to Bethlehem, with Naomi and Ruth and Boaz, leading to David.

In the context, though, this ruler that's coming out, that Micah is anticipating, is that he's going to end up defeating the enemies of the people of God, and Isaiah describes it as if the next time Assyria tries to besiege us, we're gonna chase them back, and we're gonna besiege them, and the enemies of God are gonna be defeated.

And so, Micah is picturing Him in terms of this mighty ruler and military warrior who's gonna defeat the enemy because that was at the time.

When Matthew cites this, he's not got a military conqueror in mind, but rather the one that ultimately will defeat sin – the victory over sin which ultimately is the reason why there's trouble in the world.

And Matthew tags Micah 5 with not who will be the ruler, but as the shepherd. And he picks up on 2 Samuel 7, where he says, "David used to be a ruler" – or, sorry – "a shepherd. I took you out from the pasture as a shepherd, and I made you a shepherd over My people." So, he's picturing in terms of where David had these obscure beginnings and was a shepherd.

So, he's blending ruler with shepherd imagery and, if you will, almost suggesting that this Messiah Jesus is gonna have the shepherd role first before he comes in terms of the mighty conqueror. But it's got typological escalation as well, and you've got second exodus imagery with the Messiah. So, it's really remarkable, a profound passage.

So, Herod wants to know what's going on with regard to this possible king being born, asks for information about it, receives special revelation. But it's interesting, as Matthew presents this, the wise men rejoice at the news and go and worship, whereas Herod decides he needs to kill the child.

And it becomes, in some measure, an illustration of – for readers – of what should be expected with regard to the response, generally speaking, of the political and religious leaders with regard to this child.

Now, Herod's going to try and kill the child, as we shall see in another passage, but he's ultimately unsuccessful. However, Pilate, at the end, is successful in bringing about the death of Jesus. But in the passion narrative, Jesus basically says, "All these things must happen in accordance with what the Scriptures say."

So, we're seeing a pattern all the way through the gospel, in some respect, of what God said is fulfilled, is carried out, but it's in His time, in His plan, and for His purpose.

And so, there's the idea that these origins – you know, out of Judah – not just out of Judah, but out of Bethlehem, that's an important feature.

So, what the Scripture delivers to the wise men is more than what the stars are giving them. And the stars are giving them the sense that something of significance has happened. A king is probably being born somewhere, but where exactly? And this is the telegram that tells you exactly where to go – or at least the city to go to.

Bethlehem wasn't very big, so with – you would – the sign saying "Entering Bethlehem" and then the sign saying "Leaving Bethlehem" would be really close to one another.

But the irony is, in this case, He actually was born in Bethlehem, in literal fulfillment of it. But then there's more typological fulfillment of other parts, and He's not this conquering hero; He's more of the shepherd and the conqueror of sin and evil. So, there's all sorts of things happening here.

And, of course, the gospel's gonna answer, "Yes, He will." But it's based in the promise of God.

And so, the point of salvation is never just to tick a box, say, "My sins are forgiven, and one day I'm gonna be in heaven." No, it's about this ongoing relationship, this journey with God that I'm gonna be on, in which He's gonna be my protector, my leader, my guider, et cetera, and my enabler. And all that is wrapped up in the idea of being the shepherd who looks after the sheep.

It says, "Now when they had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and said, 'Rise! Take the child and His mother and flee to Egypt, and remain there until I tell you; for Herod is about to search for the child to destroy Him.'"

When you look at Hosea 11, when he talks about, "Out of Egypt I called My Son," it's not prophetic at all; it's looking historically back in terms of God's son being Israel coming out of Egypt when – as is His collective son, and he's describing Israel collectively as a son in the exodus.

And it goes on and says, "When Israel was a child, I loved him. Out of Egypt I called my son. The more they called, the more they went away from Me. They sacrificed to the Baals. Yet I was the one who taught Ephraim to walk."

So, it's clear in the context that the son here was Israel who was a disobedient son. He called Israel to be a covenant-keeping people; they weren't. And then He ends up going – down to verse 5, He says, "They're gonna go back to Egypt. They're gonna go back to Assyria. I'm gonna reverse the exodus." And then Hosea ends up predicting a second exodus, and eventually chapter 3 talks about a new David who's going to be part of that second exodus.

So, it's really clearly Matthew is doing some things in terms of he's seeing a pattern again, that at one point his people were in Egypt and God brought them out in the first exodus. The first exodus is gonna have to be reversed because His people violated this. But Hosea also has a second exodus imagery, and in chapter 3 he's got a Davidic figure there.

So, I think Matthew is looking at Hosea holistically and sees this whole thing, and he sees patterns in terms of the holy family being warned to go down to Egypt. And that's where he – where Matthew is quoting Him, that He's going down – He's sent Him down to Egypt so He can bring them back out. And when He brings them back out, it's not Israel collectively; it's the ideal Israel; it's the ultimate Israel – Jesus, who's now gonna inaugurate the second exodus as the second Davidic King. So, it's a remarkable passage.

So, Joseph responds again to the revelation that he's given. Jesus is in Egypt. He is the Son – preeminent Son, as Gordon said – and all of the passage fits the circumstance of Jesus being in Egypt for a short period of time and then being brought back into the land.

And so, what we see here is the preparation for the formation of a ministry that's going to deliver the people in this – with this eschatological expectation, which Hosea has tipped his hand to in a bigger sense. You know, sometimes what’s going on in these texts is we're citing a verse, but the verse is aware of the bigger story of what's going on from the place from which it is cited.

And what's interesting about this one, and what some people comment on is that the placement of this is actually pretty interesting because it's placed as Jesus is sent to Egypt, and then the extraction from Egypt, if you will, comes after the citation as opposed to the way many of the other citations work, where you get the layout of what's going on, and then you get the citation following it in a description of kind of a commentary.

So, this is almost anticipatory of what – where the narrative is gonna go because it's anticipatory of what the story of Jesus is from the standpoint of His birth. You know, this is the start of what is going to be a saga of deliverance on behalf of God's people.

"Then Herod, when he saw that he had been tricked by the wise men, became furious, and he sent and killed all the male children, in Bethlehem and in all that region, who were two years old or under, according to the time that he had ascertained from the wise men."

"Then was fulfilled what was spoken by the prophet Jeremiah" – and here's verse 18 in a quotation – "'A voice was heard in Ramah, weeping and loud lamentation, Rachel weeping for her children; she refused to be comforted, because they are no more.'"

So, Gordon, context in Jeremiah, what's going on here?

So, what's happening in Jeremiah 21 – or, sorry, 29 to 31 is that Jeremiah's dealing with the reality of the exile. Jerusalem is in exile 586 B.C. And he pictures Jerusalem, during the exile, as being this woman, this mother who's been abandoned, bereft of her children. And she's heartbroken. And in Jeremiah 31, he comes back and forth to this imagery of Jerusalem as a woman and says, "You're heartbroken now, but one day I'm gonna bring the children – your children back on the highway, and you're gonna be full of joy." But now there's this drama.

Now, the picture that Jeremiah has of Jerusalem during the exile is he says, "A voice is heard in Ramah" – that's an important tag as far as the city of Ramah. And "Rachel weeping for her children, refusing to be comforted" – he's referring back to Rachel. So, Ramah was an important town mentioned, and Rachel was the wife of Isaac.

And you remember Isaac had two wives, Rachel and Leah, and under the providence of God, Leah conceived first. She was less loved than Rachel was. And Rachel was heartbroken that she could never conceive.

Genesis 30, Genesis 31, she's not able to have children; she's heartbroken; she's crying; she wants to have children 'cause she can't. And then finally God opens her womb and gives her children. And the first child she has is Joseph, the beloved child.

As time goes on, then she conceives a second child, Benjamin, but she has such a terrible labor that she ends up dying in childbirth, and she's weeping not because she's lost her child, but because in her very last breath, she gives birth to a child that she had longed for. But Rachel then becomes this lamentable picture of a woman who is not able to have children, and then finally has them, but it's in the midst of tragedy.

There's another example of this, too, in which Hannah, in 1 Samuel, the wife of Elkanah, she was barren as well, and she's lamenting. And she prayed that God would give her a child. And finally, God gave her a child – Samuel – who was the kingmaker. Well, Hannah lived in Ramah. Okay?

And so, Hannah was from Ramah, Samuel was from Ramah, and so Samuel was the kingmaker. And Samuel anointed David at Ramah. And all of these events happened at Ramah. And eventually, as time went on, when Israel got into trouble, their kings went foul, they went into exile.

The Davidic dynasty – the throne got dismantled, the prophets – Isaiah and Jeremiah – talk about Ramah weeping because kingship has been taken away, and Rachel now is evoked because it's this picture of Jerusalem now as a woman who's been bereft of her children.

But the context has to do with loss of kingship, exile, and it's taking us back to these figures that the ancestors of Israel and Joseph and Benjamin, and then the place where kingship began. So, it sets up in so many wonderful ways as far as the kingship's now gonna be restored. And Rachel's grief will one day be turned to joy because a King's coming.

But in the meantime, Matthew's also saying they're parallels because just as Jerusalem suffered at the hands of this violent, wicked king in the sixth century, now you got an Israelite king that's gone rogue.

Sometimes I think we, as modern readers, lose context of what – the way in which texts were read. And therefore, it looks perhaps cavalier or innovative. And in fact, it's something that's well established in terms of how to look at history from within Jewish tradition.

But he's also, from Jeremiah – I wonder if he's evoking Jeremiah's also word of hope? Yes, bad times are coming to Israel, 'cause he's predicting the Babylonian captivity, which is coming soon, but he also includes the promise of the New Covenant in Jeremiah so that God again has not forgotten His people.

They will experience times of real trial and difficulty, and Matthew will narrate that as well, when he talks about Jesus' prediction about the destruction of Jerusalem, which comes later. That the people of Israel may be facing a time of real trial and suffering and lamentation, but there is a promise bound up in the work that this child is going to bring about.

And in Jeremiah 31, it starts off with, "Here's the suffering," but at the end, "There's the glory. Jerusalem will be restored, there will be the new covenant, and you're going to get the new David."

Let's take a look at the very last passage, now, and this is the return to Nazareth; they're coming back. Verse 19 through the end, we'll just key in on the last part here in verse 23.

But it starts out like this, verse 19, "But when Herod died, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt, saying, 'Rise, take the child and His mother, and go to the land of Israel, for those who sought the child's life are dead.' And he rose and took the child and His mother and went to the land of Israel."

"And when he heard that Archelaus was reigning over Judea in place of his father Herod, he was afraid to go there. And being warned in a dream, he withdrew to the district of Galilee, and he went and lived in a city called Nazareth so that what was spoken by the prophets might be fulfilled, that 'He would be called a Nazarene.'"

So, He would be called a Nazarene that what was spoken by the prophets – Gordon, what’s the reference here, these prophets?

It looks like it's an example in which Matthew is taking language out of several texts and combining them in some very creative ways, and seeing the providential hand of God. And I think at this table we've got probably five different views among the four of us as far as what's happening.

So, I'm a little more inclined to think it evokes this meekness, humility that characterizes Jesus contrary to expectations that a king would come out of Nazareth.

Just because it is such a hard one to identify exactly what's going on, and the appeal to the prophets – plural – I mean it could just be a way of saying, "In the Scripture." And it could just be as generic as that, and there is something specific in mind. But usually, when you get prophets in the plural, there's more than one text and more than one idea in play.

And so, this combination of things that we're talking about all have possibilities and no one knows. But I'm deeply suspicious that he was sending a signal. And it's a cultural script that Matthew and his readers get that we've lost or that we're fishing for in terms of thinking about this.

So, it's a little bit of a harder text. But it does land us – you know, when we come to the end here of a section in which we have had five appeals to the design of God as the birth of Jesus unfolds. And the whole point is to say, "Look, what is going on, as surprising and as wondrous as it is, is a part of the program and plan of God."

And it's the beginning of a story in which the program and plan of God is unfolding, and it evokes pictures of rule, pictures of victory, pictures of God's presence, pictures of the eschaton, pictures of the Messiah – I mean these two chapters are loaded.

What would you say, just as a – to encapsulate one main thing that a reader could take away from these passages we've looked at, a pastor could just make sure that he brings out the significance of during a Christmas message perhaps? What would that be?

But the fulfillments, if you will, are suggesting that the New Covenant fulfillments dwarf Old Covenant expectations, that Matthew's using Old Covenant texts, but the fulfillment is even greater. It's not just – it's not just that it matches; it's even greater and grander than anybody had in mind.

And that's why it was so surprising, because Jesus is pushing the boundaries and going above and beyond 'cause God's plan is even greater than any of us could imagine. I think Jesus even said the same thing. He says, "I'm trying to talk to you about earthly things, and you don't understand; how can I talk to you about heavenly things?"

And they're asking a question, "Whose wife will she be?"

And He says, "You don't understand the power of the resurrection. How can I even begin to describe it for you?"

And I think the author of Hebrews is doing the same thing. The fulfillments are so much greater and so much grander. So, the kind of things that Matthew's doing – I don't think – don't undermine what he's doing; it actually points to the fact that God's going above and beyond what anybody even had in mind.

Well, it's actually – to those who are believers, it's our story, too. And the promises that God has kept are an assurance that there are other promises that God will keep, and that this design extends beyond us and wraps around us and hugs us in His grace.

And that is, I think, another part of this story, that the incarnation drives to the cross, and to the ascension, and then eventually to the return, and to the vindication of God's people and the reestablishment of God's presence on the Earth. God is with us, and He is with us always.

Thank you, Darrell, for being with us. Thank you, Gordon, and thank you, David, for being with us.

And thank you so much for joining us on The Table podcast today. Please stay with us next week where we discuss issues of God and culture.