LIBERTY UNIVERSITY

BOOK REVIEW

KNOWING JESUS THROUGH THE OLD TESTAMENT

BY CHRISTOPHER J.H. WRIGHT

SUBMITTED TO DR. STEVEN GUEST

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT

OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE COMPLETION OF OBST-591 B05,

BY

JASON LOCKE

LEESBURG, IN

SEPTEMBER 21, 2010

Introduction

Reverend Dr. Christopher J. H. Wright, the author of Knowing Jesus Through the Old

Testament, was born in Belfast, Ireland. He received his doctorate in Old Testament ethics from

Cambridge University. He taught in India for five years from 1983-1988 at Union Gospel

Seminary and then returned to All Nations Christian College in England to become its’ Principal

from 1993-2000. Dr. Wright is now the director of international ministries for the Langham

Partnership International (known in the United States as John Stott Ministries). He is an ordained

Anglican, and serves on the staff of All Souls Church, Langham Place, London, England.

In the book Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament, Wright takes the reader through

the Old Testament and shows how it speaks to the person and deity of Jesus Christ. Wright

develops the idea that Jesus was not only a Jew but that every aspect of his life was connected to

the Old Testament. It is not surprising that Wright would see the Biblical connections to the Old

Testament coming from an Anglican background and being an Old Testament scholar. The

Anglican background would have enforced the importance of seeing the Bible as a whole.

Wright’s doctorate in Old Testament ethics also comes out in his book, and gives him a

distinctive approach to the subject of Jesus and the Old Testament, especially in the area of the

last chapter dealing with values. This review of Wright’s work will look at several of his points

and show how this book gives a deeper understanding of Jesus and the impact of Israel’s history

upon his earthly ministry. It will also critique Wright’s statement “it was the Old Testament

which helped Jesus to understand Jesus” (108).

Wright’s main idea in the book is showing that a deep understanding of the Old

Testament leads to a deeper understanding of Jesus. His whole point of the book is to show that

Jesus knew, expanded upon, and fulfilled the Old Testament promises and covenant. In the

2
preface of the book Wright clearly states that the Old Testament was more than just a collection

of writings for Jesus, but it was his story, his songs, his life (ix). Wright in the first two chapters

of his book connects Jesus to both the Old Testament story and the Old Testament promise.

These first two chapters lay the foundation by showing that apart from the Old Testament one

cannot know Jesus. Wright spends time connecting Jesus to the story told in the Old Testament

by connecting Jesus to David and Abraham (5). Wright spends time outlining the story of the

Old Testament for his readers so that he later can show how Jesus is connected to it (9-28).

Wright spends time showing the reader that the promises of the Old Testament were and are

fulfilled in Jesus. He outlines for the reader several promises and then shows how this particular

promise finds the fulfillment in Jesus (61). Wright’s’ own particular view on fulfillment of

prophecy comes out in his dealings with the promises. In chapters 3-4 Wright points to the facts

that the Old Testament mission, identity, and values are found in Jesus. Wright explains the

expectations that Israel had for its Messiah and how Jesus did not fit that idea (138-140).

Another point that Wright makes in these chapters is that Jesus’ identity was formed in the Old

Testament. He spends a great deal of time explaining the different titles of Jesus and making

comparisons to the Old Testament. Wright also deals with how the Old Testament values are

completed or demonstrated through Jesus. Wright’s main theological point is that studying the

Old Testament is to get a clearer picture of Jesus and all that he came to do. This next section

will deal with the analysis of some key issues that Wright uses to make his case.

Analysis

Wright’s analysis of the story so far starts with the character of Abraham and makes the

point that in order to understand Abraham one must first understand the first eleven chapters of

Genesis. His point is that it is in these eleven chapters that the need of God to intervene and

3
make a people for himself is clearly seen (9). Abraham is the start of the answer that is posed on

behalf of the first eleven chapters of Genesis; namely, how God is going to get humans back

into right standing with Himself following the fall in Genesis 3. Wright makes the point that the

genealogy of Matthew is to take the Old Testament as story, from Abraham to David, from

David to Exile, and from Exile to Jesus (33). The essence of these verses is to show that Jesus

comes on the scene in the story of the Old Testament. Another point that Wright makes is that

Israel’s history was not to be seen as an end in and of itself but was for the benefit of all the

nations (36). Another great point that Wright makes is in his dealing with Matthew and the early

life predictions of Jesus. It is here that Wright makes the point that Matthew was not merely

trying to make up stories that seemed to fit Jesus’ predictions, but that he was indeed working

from actual events that now took on deeper meanings in light of Jesus’ life (58).

A great theological point that Wright makes is that Jesus as God’s son was to fulfill

where Israel had failed. God’s intention for Israel was that they would be a people that would

live as missionaries to the rest of the world. They were to be the “light” to the nations and be

God’s witnesses to who He was. Due to disobedience though they were unable to fulfill their

obligation, but Jesus through obedience was able to accomplish (132). Wright makes the

connection that the first son of God (Israel) failed in their duty but the second son (Jesus) was

able to accomplish all that God had intended Israel to do and be. He also makes great points in

his discussion of the difference between predictions and promise. A prediction does not require

anything out of the subject and Wright points out a prediction is about the subject (65). Promise,

on the other hand, requires commitment, response of acceptance, and ongoing levels of

fulfillment. Promise is made to someone and requires that person(s) involvement (64-72). Wright

4
goes into depth in this section to show that the main point is that God entered into a promise

relationship with Israel and ultimately fulfilled that promise through Jesus Christ.

Wright spends a great deal of time sifting through the identity of Jesus and comparing

that to the Old Testament. It is significant because how Jesus identified himself shows how he

related to his mission. Wright makes the point that after the baptism of Jesus He finally gets a

clear picture of who He was when God calls Him His Son (106). As mentioned earlier there is a

parallel here in that God called Israel His son. One must be careful here though because this is

one area where Wright seems to be promoting replacement theology. The idea that the church

has replaced Israel as God’s chosen people. The problem with this is that it opens the door for

God to reject the church in the future for another people, so one should be cautious.

In the chapter dealing with the mission of Jesus Wright spends time going through the

titles of Jesus and the expectations that Jews had for Jesus as Messiah. Wright summarizes that

for many Jews the exile had not ended and that the Jews were waiting for the day when their

savior would come and remove the oppression of the Romans from them (138). Dr. Anthony

Tomasino makes the observation that Jesus avoidance of using the title of Messiah was to avoid

being misunderstood1, a point that Wright makes as well when discussing the idea of Messiah

and why Jesus decided not to use the term to describe himself (145). Wright goes on to say that

the title most used by Christ was that of “Son of Man”. Wright makes the argument that by using

this title Jesus could define it according to the true way that the “Messiah” should be viewed not

according to the expectations of the time period (149).

In the final chapter Wright tackles Jesus and his Old Testament values. It is here that

Wright makes his case that through the obedience to the law of God Jesus will fulfill the promise

of the Old Testament and bring about the new covenant. It is here that Wright makes the
1
Anthony J. Tomasino, Judaism Before Jesus, (Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 2003), 302.
5
conclusion that Jesus has come into this world and given a choice to all people. His parables

make stark contrasts like: wheat or weeds, sheep or goats, wise or foolish, rock or sand, God or

mammon. Wright concludes that either you walk with Him or you walk away; there is no middle

ground (189). It is an echo of Deuteronomy 30:15, 19, where Moses has just given his final

speech and the Israelites are about to enter the land of Canaan and Moses wants them to be

obedient and live. Jesus is pleading the same case in his parables.

Two books about this subject came out about the same time; they are Jesus and Israel:

One Covenant or Two by David Holwerda, and Messiah in the Old Testament by Walter C.

Kaiser. Holwerdas’ book would come closest to relating to Wright’s work. Wright and Holwerda

both agreed that Jesus viewed himself as the inheritor of Israel’s sonship, and where Israel failed

Jesus succeeded.2 They also agree that every prophecy about the future restoration of Israel must

be literally fulfilled in the nation of Israel.3 Here is one part that still needs to be approached with

caution. It strikes of replacement theology to which this reviewer would have problems with as

mentioned earlier in this review. In Kaiser’s book his main point is that all the passages that are

messianic would have been for the readers of that day just as it is for readers today. In other

words there are no reinterpretations of events that are necessary because the readers and authors

of the Old Testament would have read these passages in light of a Messiah. This stands in sharp

contrast to Wright’s work. This reviewer would have to disagree with Kaiser since it is doubtful

that Genesis 3:15 would have been understood in this way by not only the readers but by the

writer as well.4

2
Frank Theilman, “Jesus B.C. Three new books look at Jesus through the Old Testament”, Christianity Today, 40
no 3 (March 1996), 61
3
Ibid.
4
Ibid.
6
 One statement that brought this reviewer pause was “…it was the Old Testament which

helped Jesus to understand Jesus.” (108). The statement indicates that Jesus had to read the Old

Testament in order to understand who He was supposed to be. This totally discounts His deity. If

Wright is suggesting that Jesus could not have known his mission and purpose aside from

reading the scriptures then Wright has missed the concept of Jesus as the Word of God. Jesus did

not have to read the Old Testament in order to see how to be the Messiah; He was there in the

Old Testament giving those words to the writers of the Old Testament. Now there is something

to say about trying to bring out the humanity of Christ. The problem is that total humanity or

total deity is not representative of Christ. He was both and there has to be a middle ground

between them.

There have been many reviews of this book and one that stood out to this reviewer came

from Paul Alexander

He states,

Wright is so solid with text and context that once he's done teaching us how to know

Jesus through the Old Testament, we're left identifying with him when he says

Jesus was not just an identikit figure pasted together from bits of the Old
Testament. He transcended and transformed the ancient models…so that for
His followers, what began as a shaft of recognition and understanding of Jesus
in light of their Scriptures, ended up as a deepening and surprising new
understanding of their Scriptures in light of Jesus. (p. 117, emph. orig.)

Alexander would agree with this reviewer that Wright brings the necessity for pastors to preach

richer sermons that show the connection between the Old Testament and the New Testament.5 It

is this audience in particular that this reviewer believes this book can serve the greatest purpose.

5
Paul Alexander, Book Review 9 Marks, http://www.9marks.org/books/book-review-knowing-jesus-through-old-
testament. Accessed September 21, 2010
7
Conclusion

In conclusion, Wright’s book offers the reader the opportunity to move from the “milk of

the word” to the meat. He shows how a greater understanding of the Old Testament will allow

one to see the life and mission of Jesus in a whole new way. This review has shown that Jesus

came to this earth steeped in a tradition and people. He was a Jew and not just a Jew but came to

fulfill the role that Israel was to perform. Through His obedience all the Old Testament was

fulfilled and made complete. Wright makes the points clear and draws the reader on an adventure

through the Old Testament. Even though there were areas that this reviewer had disagreements

with Wright, overall they were minor and agreements were more prevalent.

8
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alexander, Paul. 9 Marks. September-October 2008. http://www.9marks.org/books/book-review-

knowing-jesus-through-old-testament (accessed September 21, 2010).

Theilman, Frank. "Jesus B.C. Three New Books Look at Jesus through the Old Testament."
Christianity Today, 1996: 58-61.

Tomasino, Anthony. Judaism Before Jesus: The Events and Ideas that Shaped the New
Testament World. Downers Grove, IL: Inter Varsity Press, 2003.

Wright, Christopher J.H. Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament. Downers Grove, IL: Inter
Varsity Press, 1992.