Steve Moyise. The Later New Testament Writings and Scripture: The Old Testament in Acts, Hebrews, the Catholic Epistles and Revelation. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2012. x + 182 pages.
First, I want to thank
Trinity Graeser and Baker Academic for a review copy of this book.
This book is the third
installment of a series on the use of the OT in the NT. The first two books dealt with the Gospels
and the Pauline letters respectively.
The book is written in a popular, readable style accessible for
non-scholars (which is not to say that the book is not scholarly). Hence, one should not expect an exhaustive
treatment of the use of the OT in these NT books. As is common with many popular-level books,
notes are relegated to the back of the book and it contains a highly selective
bibliography mostly of very recent books.
The first chapter deals
with the book of Acts. According to
Moyise, there are forty explicit quotations of the OT in Acts, most of which
are contained in the speeches. Hence,
Moyise gives some consideration to the relationship between the speeches and
the narratives in Acts. The first part
of the chapter traces how Luke utilizes OT quotations to support a number of
themes:
1) Salvation
for Jews and Gentiles: Luke uses Scripture to reveal that God has always
intended to save Gentiles as well as Jews (12).
2)
Christ’s death, resurrection, and exaltation: Luke claims that Jesus’ death
occurred according to the Scriptures, but he does not employ specific texts to
elaborate on its meaning (15). David
prophetically spoke about Jesus’ resurrection and exaltation (17, 19)
3) Christological
titles and functions: Luke uses Scripture to identify Jesus as Lord and
Messiah, Servant, Son of God, a prophet like Moses, and Cornerstone (19–25).
4) Judgment:
Luke utilizes a number of Scriptures to demonstrate that judgment will come
upon those who have rejected Christ (25).
5) Historical
summary: Historical summaries may serve the purpose of showing fulfillment of
OT Scripture (30) or to demonstrate that the Israelites had a history of
resisting God’s plan (31–32).
The
latter half of the chapter surveys two major theories of the relationship of
Acts to OT Scripture. One view states
that Luke’s Christology is modeled on David and the Psalms. The other view believes that Isaiah is the
predominant influence on Luke’s Christology.
Moyise concludes that the Psalms were more important than Isaiah for
Luke, but that both were important influences (40–41).
Moyise next turns to the
usage of Scripture in 1 Peter. He
divides his analysis according to scriptural texts. First Peter quotes the Psalms only twice, but
uses them differently from Acts; they are not used to explicate the suffering,
death, and resurrection of Christ (44).
Isaiah is by far the most influential text for 1 Peter with six explicit
quotations and several allusions (45).
Isaiah 53 is the most important text for understanding Christ. The gospel message is described as the
imperishable word of God according to a passage from Isaiah 40, and the author
frequently applies scriptural passages that originally referred to Israel as
now applying to the Church (52). The
author also makes use of Proverbs and Leviticus. Moyise gives particular attention to 1 Peter
1:10–12 which speaks about the inspiration of prophecy. He believes that the references to “suffering
and glory” can refer to Christ’s death and resurrection/exaltation, but that
the glory to follow may also refer to the birth of the Church and the reality
of salvation (58). Moyise states that
Peter’s use of Scripture is “unreflective”; he assumes that OT Scripture
passages speak about Christ or the Church (60).
While for Acts, the Psalms were more important than Isaiah, it is the
reverse for 1 Peter. While analyzing the
author’s use of particular Scripture texts may be illuminating, I wonder
whether this is an artificial distinction.
Both the Psalms and Isaiah may be of equal importance to the author of 1
Peter, but it just so happens that Isaiah texts were more suitable for his
purposes in this particular letter than Psalm texts. It is hard to be dogmatic about such issues
for such a short letter as 1 Peter.
Chapter 3 looks at the
use of Scripture in Jude, 2 Peter, and James.
Jude and 2 Peter are unique among the writings of the NT in that they
not only draw upon OT writings, but also extensively upon extra-canonical
writings such as 1 Enoch and the Assumption of Moses (63). Second Peter seems to be largely dependent on
Jude as indicated by the fact that most of the OT material it draws upon is
also found in Jude (67). Moyise examines
James’ view of justification by works.
James uses the same OT text, Genesis 15:6, as Paul to argue for
justification by works. There have been
three approaches to the relationship of James with Paul: 1) James contradicts
Paul; 2) James can be harmonized with Paul; 3) James should be interpreted
in light of his own contexts and traditions (76–77), which seems to be Moyise’s
approach. For James, works “are not
simply the product of faith but a necessary constituent in order to
bring faith to completion” (78). James
is also heavily dependent on the Jewish wisdom tradition (Proverbs, Sirach,
Wisdom of Solomon). Much of this wisdom
tradition is accessed through Jesus’ own teachings. Moyise concludes that James does not offer a
Christological interpretation of Scripture, but it is a “Jesus-centered” one
(80).
Chapter 4 focuses on the
use of Scripture in Hebrews. Moyise
identifies 37 explicit quotations: 16 from the Psalms, 13 from the Pentateuch,
6 from the prophets, and 1 each from 2 Samuel and Proverbs (81). Moyise works his way sequentially through the
book of Hebrews, commenting on the OT quotations and allusions that appear in
each section. The opening prologue
affirms both the continuity of revelation but also a contrast between the
revelation spoken in the past and the revelation in the Son (81–82). The revelation in the Son is superior to
prior revelation because “it comes from a more intimate source” (82). In chapter 1 several quotations are used
elsewhere in the NT, but some are unique to Hebrews. The author perhaps is drawing upon earlier
traditions but also building upon them with his own insights into Scripture
(82–83). The prominent use of the Psalms
in Hebrews suggests that the author was drawn to the first-person speech so
frequently found in the Psalms and that the author likely viewed them as
“divine speech between Father and Son” (86).
Hebrews 2:6–8 quotes Ps 8:4–6 but differs from it in a couple of
ways. First, humanity was made lower “for
a little while,” rather than “a little lower.”
Second, humanity is made lower than angels, rather than God (87). Moyise presents both the anthropological and
christological interpretations of this passage, showing both their strengths
and weaknesses (88–89). Moyise believes
that these interpretations are not mutually exclusive as suggested by the
Scripture quotations in 2:12–13 which emphasizes Christ’s solidarity with
humanity (89). This contrast between
Moses and Jesus at the beginning of chapter 3 is facilitated by an allusion to Num
12:6–8, which describes Moses as a servant, while Jesus is the Son (90–91). In the quotation of Ps 95:7–11 that
immediately follows, the author of Hebrews interprets the “today” of the Psalm
as now and the “rest” as the eschatological Sabbath rest that is available to
his readers, rather than the rest of the promised land (91). Moyise next discusses Hebrews’ exposition of
Gen 14 in chapter 7 and concludes that it differs “from Paul’s Adam typology,
since the author’s main point is not that Christ supersedes or undoes the work
of Melchizedek but that he belongs to the same order” (93). In his discussion of the use of Ps 110 in
Hebrews, Moyise critiques Buchanan’s view that Hebrews is a midrash on Ps 110
since the author shows interest only in verses 1 and 4 and no other verses of
the psalm (94). The author quotes at
length from Jer 31:31–34 in Heb 8–10 to argue that the implementation of the
new covenant implies that the old covenant is obsolete. The forgiveness of sins promised in Jeremiah
is accomplished through the sacrificial death of Christ (96). The author also reinforces the transitory
nature of the old covenant with a quotation of Ps 40:6–8 in Heb 10:5–7, which
serves as a proof-text for the incarnation and demonstrates the futility of
sacrifices to take away sins (97–98). Moyise
then elaborates upon various allusions and quotations from Isaiah, Deuteronomy,
and Habakkuk in Heb 10:19–39 (99–102). Hebrews
11 draws up various OT stories, but gives greatest attention to Abraham and
Moses, whose stories are embellished by the author of Hebrews (104–105). Moyise opines that he “virtually turns
Abraham and Moses into Christians before Christ” (106). Finally, Moyise deals with miscellaneous OT
quotations in the final two chapters of Hebrews (106–109). Moyise concludes with three
observations. First, Hebrews shows both
continuity and difference with the OT revelation (109). Second, while the author of Hebrews draws
upon Christian tradition by quoting many of the same OT passages, he also goes
beyond it, “both extending the tradition and discovering texts of his own”
(110). Third, the author quotes chiefly
from the LXX, but sometimes he adapts the quotations. The author often interpreted the ambiguity of
first-person pronouns in OT quotations as “words spoken by God or
addressed to God as a divine exchange between God and Jesus” (110).
Chapter 5 deals with the
use of Scripture in Revelation.
Revelation does not quote the OT but it makes numerous allusions, which
have been estimated in the range of 250 to over 1,000 (111). While on some occasions certain Scriptures
stand out, in other instances the author weaves together allusions from various
OT passages (112). Moyise traces
Revelation’s use of the OT under five topical headings: God, Jesus and the
Spirit; dragon, beast and false prophet; judgments and disasters; witness and
struggle; and final salvation. Moyise
frequently demonstrates how John weaves together OT allusions throughout his
revelation. For example, in the opening Trinitarian
greeting, the description of God reflects Exod 3:14, the description of the Spirit
alludes to Zech 4, while the description of Christ draws upon Ps 89:27, 37
(112–114). Revelation 1:7 splices
together allusions to Dan 7:13 and Zech 12:10 (115). The inaugural vision of Christ in Rev 1:12–18
pulls together various allusions from Daniel, Ezekiel, and Isaiah (116–118). The vision of the heavenly throne in Rev 4–5 is
heavily indebted to Ezek 1 and Isa 6, but also incorporates various other allusions
(118–121). John frequently juxtaposes what
he sees with what he hears. Moyise
remarks, “John clearly intends what he sees and what he hears to
mutually interpret one another” (122). The judgments and disasters that pervade
Revelation are likely inspired by the ten plagues of Egypt in Exod 7–12, as
well as assorted passages from Isaiah and Joel, while the four horsemen evokes
Zech 1:7–11 and 6:1–8 (128–131). The
eschatological visions of salvation that conclude the book, not only draw upon
much biblical imagery, but also upon extra-biblical traditions (134). John’s vision of the heavenly Jerusalem is
heavily dependent upon Ezekiel (137–139).
In the conclusion, Moyise highlights two features of John’s use of the
OT. First, “John’s visions are either modeled
on sections of Scripture . . . or are composed in scriptural language”
(139–140). Second, John is selective in
his use of the OT and is not constrained either by its original wording or
meaning (140). Moyise explores three
different theories of composition: the rhetorical model, the scribal/exegetical
model, and the mystical model (140–142).
He concludes with an excursus on the letters of John and Scripture. The letters have no explicit quotations, but
do contain some echoes of OT passages (142–144).
In the conclusion
(chapter 6), Moyise concludes that the NT writers evince both tradition and
innovation. Certain texts of the OT (such
as Gen 15–22; Pss 2, 110, 118; Isa 6–8, 40–55) are used by various authors in
the NT. Innovation is accomplished by
drawing on traditional texts but using a different part of them, by drawing on
texts that share a common theme or wording with a traditional text, or by
drawing upon extra-biblical traditions to supply what is missing in OT stories
(145–149).
In conclusion, while I
cannot assert authoritatively the contribution that Moyise makes with all of the
books he discusses, I can say that he does not seem to advance the discussion
on Hebrews’ use of the OT very far.
There are numerous articles and monographs which explore Hebrews’ use of
the OT in much greater depth. What
Moyise’s book accomplishes, then, is to provide an overview to the use of the
OT in Acts and the latter books of the NT for non-specialists. The book may serve as introduction for
specialists, but they will certainly want to turn to other works for more
in-depth treatment.
