As we approach Christmas, many of us no doubt are reading the Christmas narratives in Matthew and Luke. Both are replete with quotations from and allusions to the OT. If you’ve taken any time to dig into those OT passages, some may have left you scratching your head, particularly those in Matthew 1–2.
Five times in his opening two chapters, Matthew writes something like, “All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet,” (1:22-23; 2:5-6, 15, 17-18, 23). Were we to look at each of the OT passages in view, we might expect to see straightforward predictions about the events depicted in Matthew 1–2. For example in Hosea 11:1 (quoted in Matt 2:15) we might expect to find something like, “I’m going to send a Savior, My Own Son, who will be in danger from an earthly king. However, when the king is dead, I will call My Son out of Egypt.” That’s not what we get though.
In only one (Micah 5:2 in Matthew 2:5-6) of Matthew’s five early quotations do we find something like a straightforward prediction. The others mostly seem to pertain to events related to the prophets’ own historical circumstances. They are conundrums…if we are expecting straightforward predictions.
However, consider this. Compared to other NT authors’ use of OT passages, Matthew’s handling of the Bible doesn’t seem unusual at all. Matthew is the norm.
And it can’t be that the NT authors are all incompetent. There are two reasons to say this. First, these authors’ writings are inspired by the Holy Spirit. That is, their recorded interpretations of the OT hold the Holy Spirit’s seal of approval. Second, these guys were using OT passages to prove their case about Jesus. If Matthew were to use the OT in ways that did not prove his point, he would give his readers the easiest excuse in the world to reject Jesus as the Messiah. Matthew must have been using the OT in ways his original readers expected and understood.
If we would understand what the NT authors are doing in their use of the OT, we must accept that straight prophetic prophecy isn’t the only tool in the biblical prophetic tool bag. Another invaluable tool is one we’ve talked about before: typology. Biblical typology is device where a “type”—a person, event, or thing in salvation history—anticipates, corresponds to, escalates toward, and resolves in its “antitype.”1 In other words, God sovereignly uses patterns (types) in salvation history to prefigure aspects of the person and work of the Lord Jesus and/or the church (anti-types). Typology allows us to make sense of a wide variety of NT uses of the OT.
Once again, consider Matthew’s quotation from Hosea 11. The best way to understand what Matthew intends is to understand the OT passage in its own context.
1 When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.
2 The more they were called, the more they went away; they kept sacrificing to the Baals and burning offerings to idols. (Hosea 11:1–2)
Hosea, a contemporary of Isaiah, was the last to prophesy to God’s people before Assyria conquered the northern kingdom. In chapter 11, he is God’s mouthpiece, recounting their history. Israel was God’s son, called out of Egypt—a clear reference to the exodus. Yet, the more He pursued them, the more they resisted in idolatry.
I won’t reproduce the entire chapter here, but the prophet goes on to predict their Assyrian exile (11:5-7). Rather than going to Egypt as they did in the days of Joseph, they will go to Assyria. Yet, he predicts they will not remain in exile:
“They shall come trembling like birds from Egypt,
and like doves from the land of Assyria,
and I will return them to their homes, declares the LORD.”
(Hosea 11:11).
Remember, that he said they would NOT go to Egypt, but here he writes that they will return from Egypt/from Assyria. This is a figurative return from Egypt. He’s saying that there will be a return from exile patterned after their exodus from Egypt. In other words, God is going to save them from slavery in Assyria, just as He did from slavery in Egypt.
Hosea has modeled typology. He has recognized an event in salvation history—the exodus—and reminded the Israelites of it. He has then indicated that this is a pattern that will be repeated by the Lord in the future after they are exiled.
Matthew has simply picked up on the pattern and recognized that the pattern continues in the life and work of Christ. Just as Jacob and his family went to Egypt to escape death in Genesis, so Jesus was taken to Egypt to escape death at the hands of Herod (Matt 2:13). Just as God brought “his son” out of Egypt (Hosea 11:1, 11), so God brought His Son Jesus out of Egypt (Matt 2:19-23).
The correspondences continue in Matthew’s ensuing narrative. Matthew doesn’t point out every iteration, but his linking Jesus’ life to Israel’s history via the Hosea 11:1 quotation indicates we should look for them.
Upon Israel’s exodus from Egypt, they crossed a body of water (Exo 14) and entered the wilderness for 40 years of testing (Num 14:20-38). After Jesus’ exit from Egypt, He is baptized in the Jordan (Matt 3) prior to entering the wilderness for 40 days of testing (Matt 4). Whereas Israel repeatedly failed in the wilderness, Jesus only succeeds in the wilderness. As He does, He quotes exclusively passages from Deuteronomy in contexts noting Israel’s failures in their wilderness testing. He has obeyed where they failed.
And therein the significance of the typological pattern comes into view. Jesus is the true and better Israel, fulfilling all righteousness and obeying on behalf of all who repent and trust in Him.
Matthew sees that Jesus “fulfills” Hosea 11:1 in a way much deeper and richer even than He might have fulfilled a direct predictive prophecy. The work of Christ is the culmination of a pattern of historical events sovereignly orchestrated by God from the beginning. Christ has come bringing a new exodus for all who are in Him, clothed by His righteousness.
This Sunday, Lord willing, we’re going to take a closer look at one of the other Old Testament passages quoted in Matthew 1—Isaiah 7-8. May the Lord bless us as we continue to revel in the coming of the King of the Ages.
1 I’ve modified this definition from Mitch Chase, 40 Questions About Typology and Allegory. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2020. p38.
Comments