Christ in the Old Testament

In a previous blog entry, I mentioned the fact that the Old Testament gave us a great deal of information about who Christ was. Although the specific name of “Jesus Christ” is not mentioned in the Old Testament, it does still identify the Messiah with other specific names and titles. The Old Testament, then, is full of references to Christ (both Christ and Messiah mean “Anointed One”). And while it is certainly true that the vast majority of these connections would not be easily seen without the light of the New Testament shining on them, they nevertheless remain real connections that could be found from the Old Testament alone. So let us look at these references now.The first reference to the Messiah occurs when God curses the Serpent after the Fall of Adam. This is known as the protoevangelum. In Genesis 3:15, we read: “I will put enmity between you [the Serpent (i.e. Satan)] and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.”

This shows us a great deal about who the Messiah would be. The primary message is simple: The Messiah will crush Satan’s head, although He will receive a wound in exchange. The wound to the Messiah would be painful, but the wound to Satan would be devastating.

Secondly, we see here that the Messiah would have a human nature. The humanity of the Messiah is indicated by the fact that the enmity will be between Satan and “the woman” and between Satan’s offspring and “her offspring.” The Messiah would be human; yet interestingly enough, His humanity is established through the woman (Eve) and not through the man (Adam). It is the woman’s offspring who will do this, not the man’s.

Thus we see from this verse that the promised Messiah would have a human nature through Eve, and that He would crush Satan in a manner that will leave His heel bruised.

Immediately after the Fall, we have the story of Cain and Abel. When Abel was murdered, God told Cain: “What have you done? The voice of your brother’s blood is crying to me from the ground” (Genesis 4:10). Naturally, we know that blood does not have a literal voice; but God was stating here that blood does metaphorically communicate something, and thus the shedding of blood is a big deal. That is why He later commanded, “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image” (Genesis 9:6).

While there are other types and shadows that we could look at, that would require this blog entry to be book length! So to be brief, let us move forward to Abraham. Abraham was promised that he would be a great nation, although he was childless. More importantly is the promise that the Messiah would come through Abraham’s lineage. Yet it was not just Abraham here, but also Sarah, for Abraham’s son Ishmael was not the promised lineage. Instead, Isaac was. This shows us that it is once again the woman’s portion of the lineage that plays a key role, for Messiah would not just come from Abraham but Sarah too.

After Isaac’s birth, God told Abraham to sacrifice Isaac to him (see Genesis 22). This was said to test Abraham, but also to provide us a picture of the Messiah. Abraham obeyed God. He took Isaac and bound him upon the altar. Then, God stayed his hand from killing Isaac and provided a substitute–a ram that was caught in a thicket.

This story must have seemed extremely odd to the Jews, especially during the time that Moses enscripturated it. They knew that God would not command an immoral act such as the sacrifice of a child! In fact, if Abraham had carried it out, Abraham would have fallen under the order of Genesis 9:6 and would have forfeited his own life. The Jews also knew that the Messiah’s lineage would pass through Isaac, not Ishmael. So what was the underlying meaning to the story?

Isaac was put on the altar as a sacrifice, but God provided an alternate sacrifice. Instead of being killed on the altar, God substituted something else that satisfied the requirements of the sacrifice, thus demonstrating the validity of substitution.

When we put this idea of substitution with the fact that the Messiah was promised to crush the head of Satan and receive a wound in the process, we can see that Messiah would be that substitutionary sacrifice. That sacrifice would require blood, which we have seen “communicates” something to God.

This is even more clearly seen by the laws regarding the sacrificial system. We read in Leviticus 17:11, “For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it for you on the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life.” Atonement, therefore, comes not just through the shedding of blood, but the taking of life.

Animals were provided as substitutes for the Jews. The Jews would identify themselves with the animal by placing their hand on its head (“And he shall lay his hand on the head of the sin offering and kill the sin offering in the place of burnt offering” (Lev. 4:29)). The life of the animal would be substituted for the sinful Jew. The blood would then be put on the altar to communicate that substitution to God.

We can see then that the manner in which the Messiah would crush Satan’s head would be through the substitutionary atonement of His blood upon the people of God.

So thus far we see that the Messiah would be human (through the woman’s side), He would conquer Satan by being sacrificed. This sacrifice would require the shedding of blood and the taking of Messiah’s life. But His death would also be considered as a “bruised heel” and not a “bruised head” leaving open the possibility that His death is not the end.

When we move on to Isaiah’s promises regarding the Messiah, we learn even more. For instance, we learn: “Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. He shall eat curds and honey when he knows how to refuse evil and choose the good.” (Isaiah 7:14-15). Immanuel means “God with us.” Traditionally, this passage was viewed as having both an immediate fulfillment (probably in the son of Isaiah, Mahershalalhashbaz), and a duel Messianic interpretation, since the child is metaphorical of the remnant left in Judah in verse 15 (as seen from the term “curds and honey”, something that typically infants do not eat, but which people left behind in a ravaged country would). If this passage is Messianic, then we learn that the Messiah would come of a virgin. (Naturally, while the Hebrew word does not have to mean “virgin” but could mean a young woman of marriageable age, it most often was translated as “virgin” and indeed, even the LXX did just that.)

But even if the above were not Messianic, we learn a great deal more later on in Isaiah about the Messiah. For instance, we read:

Behold, my servant shall act wisely; he shall be high and lifted up, and shall be exalted. As many were astonished at you–his appearance was so marred, beyond human resemblance, and his form beyond that of the children of mankind–so shall he sprinkle many nations; kings shall shut their mouths because of him; for that which has not been told them they see, and that which they have not heard they understand (Isaiah 52:13-15).

Here we see a clear referenced to the Messiah as the “high and lifted up” and “exalted” servant. Yet this servant is also “so marred, beyond human resemblance…beyond that of…mankind.” An interesting concept for the Messiah to be both high and lifted up and marred.

But Isaiah continues:

Who has believed what they heard from us? And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed? For he grew up before him like a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground; he had no form or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him. He was despised and rejected by men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief; and as one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not.Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent, so he opened not his mouth. By oppression and judgment he was taken away; and as for his generation, who considered that he was cut out of the land of the living, stricken for the transgression of my people? And they made his grave with the wicked and with a rich man in his death, although he had done no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth.

Yet it was the will of the LORD to crush him; he has put him to grief; when his soul makes an offering for sin, he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days; the will of the LORD shall prosper in his hand. Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied; by his knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant, make many to be accounted righteous, and he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore I will divide him a portion with the many, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong, because he poured out his soul to death and was numbered with the transgressors; yet he bore the sin of many, and makes intercession for the transgressors. (Isaiah 53)

Here we see that this passage is explicitly speaking of the Messiah. The Messiah is going to provide the substitutionary atonement for his people, just as we have already seen foreshadowed. We see specifically that “he was wounded for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his stripes we are healed.” It is His sacrifice that saves us, and it saves us by His death. “When his soul makes an offering for sin, he shall see his offspring.”

Thus, we see the Messiah had a human nature, He would substitute Himself for His people, He would suffer and die and by His death He would actually save His people. This is all done according to “the will of the LORD.” And the end result is that “he bore the sin of many, and makes intercession for the transgressors.”

As if this was not enough, the Old Testament also states that the Messiah is divine. David, for instance, wrote of the Messiah: “The LORD said to me, ‘You are my Son; today I have begotten you” (Psalm 2:7). He then writes: “Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and you perish in the way, for his wrath is quickly kindled. Blessed are all those who take refuge in him” (Psalm 2:11-12). David here indicates that we are to take refuge in the Son. This could only occur if the Son was divine, for it is God who we are to take refuge in!

The sons of Korah state that the Messiah is God explicitly in Psalm 45:6-7: “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever. The scepter of your kingdom is a scepter of uprightness; you have loved righteousness and hated wickedness. Therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions.”

This is seen clearly when we look at who the subjects are in the above passages. We start with:

“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever.” Thus, the King on the throne is God. More importantly, the “you” in the sentences are referring to this King and this God. Thus, it is God’s scepter of uprightness. And it is God who is the “your/you” in the statement: “Therefore God, your God, has anointed you.” (In other words, “God, God’s God, has anointed God.”

We see this again in Psalm 110:1, where David states: “The LORD [YWHW] said to my Lord [adonai]: ‘Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.’” This Lord is shown to have divine rights by sitting at the right hand of God–something no angel is ever afforded! Angels must stand before God. They do not sit, and they do not sit at the seat of power.

Isaiah 9:6 states: “For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” Here, the son who is born (and thus, human) is called “Mighty God.” He is also born, and yet called “Everlasting Father.” “Everlasting” is something that God is–eternal.

This is also shown in Micah 5:2: “But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, who are too little to be among the clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel, who’s origin is from old, from ancient days.” Thus, the ruler from Bethlehem will “come forth” in Bethlehem, yet his origin is “from old, from ancient days.” In other words, the one who comes forth has an eternal aspect to him.

Thus we see from the Old Testament alone that:

1) the Messiah would be both divine and human (since the humanity of the Messiah is specifically linked to His coming from the woman, the divinity of the Messiah would logically be from the Father; thus, even if Isaiah 7:14 is not Messianic, one could still logically conceive of the virgin birth of the Messiah);

2) that He would be a substitutionary sacrifice for His people;

3) that His sacrifice would be sufficient to save His people;

4) that He is eternally the Son of God but that He will be manifest temporally (hence his “Everlasting”ness and his “origin…from old” in juxtaposition with his being “born” and his “com[ing] forth”).

Thus, we have a great deal of information about the Messiah without even needing to look at the New Testament! We can see that the New Testament functions not so much as new revelation, but instead as a lens that brings all of the Old Testament into focus. Indeed, it is for this reason that Christ said He came not to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it. The Law does nothing but point toward Christ!