Commenting on the use of Old Testament Yahweh texts to the person of Jesus (e.g, in the context of Jesus’ parousia), Larry Hurtado, interacting with N.T. Wright, wrote the following in a recent book (one which I highly recommend to those interested in Christology):
[I]n Hebrews 10:37 the appropriation of the promise of YHWH’s coming (from Isa 26:20) to encourage believers to await in patience its fulfilment in Jesus’ future appearance. In 2 Peter 3:10-13, the author deploys wording from Isaiah 65:17 and/or 66:22 in predicting the future coming of “the day of the Lord,” who in this context is Jesus. Mark 8:38 and 13:24-27 (and parallels) are additional instance. And Revelation 19:11-16 is replete with wording that seems to be adapted from various OT texts that reflect the return of YHWH theme used to depict the future appearance of Jesus as eschatological warrior . . . Every exegete recognizes the remarkable adaptation of phrasing from Isaiah 45:22-25 to predict a universal acclamation of Jesus as Kyrios in Philippians 2:9-11. The Isaiah passage appears in a larger context declaring YHWH’s uniqueness and predicting YHWH’s future judgment on the nations and the restoration of Israel (e.g., 45:14-17). The Philippians passage reflects a creative christological reading of Isaiah 45:22-24, however, in which the eschatological supremacy of YHWH is to be recognized in the universal acclamation that is to be given to Jesus. But note that in Philippians 2 Jesus is to receive this universal acclamation because it was with this intention (ινα, v. 10) that God "highly exalted him" and gave him “the name above every name” (which I take to be kyrios). To underscore the matter, the text depicts God as having given Jesus a new and exalted status and role (as Kyrios) in response to Jesus’ complete obedience (διο, v. 9); and consequently, on the basis of that exaltation, Jesus it to be acclaimed by all spheres of creation . . . [W]w are to see in Philippians 2:6-11 a christological appropriation of the OT theme of YHWH’s eschatological return and supremacy, this appropriation is again with reference to Jesus’ “post-Easter” status and a future universal acclamation as portrayed in verses 9-11. It is from God’s exaltation of Jesus onward that he is the Kyrios, the future universal acclamation of him described in wording from Isaiah 45:22-23. This is similar to what we have in the other clear NT instances noted earlier, where YHWH’s return is appropriated with reference to Jesus’ parousia. To underscore the relevant point (contra Wright), the Philippians passage does not show the theme of YHWH’s return used to describe the ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus. It certainly does not give evidence that the appropriation of the theme of YHWH’s return was the foundational christological conviction upon which the full gamut of christological claims then developed. (Larry Hurtado, “YHWH’s Return to Zion: A New Catalyst for Earliest High Christology” in Ancient Jewish Monotheism and Early Christian Jesus-Devotion [Baylor, Tex.: Baylor University Press, 2017], 75-95, here, pp.89, 91-92)
Such comments reminded me of what Blake Ostler wrote on Paul's use of the Old Testament in Philippians 2 vis-á-vis the worship and exaltation of Jesus in Pauline Christology.
