As we consider how the NT quotes the OT, we
must stress that an “ontological” identity between the persons mentioned in the
quotes is not at all obvious. In Hosea 11:1 the reference in both the Masoretic
text and the Septuagint is Israel. But in Matthew 2:15 the words are applied to
Jesus. Will anybody suggest that Jesus is ontologically identical to Israel? In
Jeremiah 31:15, Rachel, representing the ten-tribe kingdom, is portrayed as
weeping over her sons, yet Matthew 2:17, 18 applies the words to the murder of
the small children in Bethlehem after Jesus’ birth and those who wept over
them.
Then there is the identification of John the baptist
with the prophet Elijah. Malachi 4:5 prophecied that Elijah the prophet would
come before the great and fear-inspiring day of YHWH. Jesus quoted these words
in Matthew 17:12 and said that “Elijah had already come.” Verse 13 tells us
that the disciples perceived that he spoke about John the baptist. In Matthew
11:14 Jesus states the matter clearly, “He himself is Elijah who is destined to
come.” There can hardly be a more direct way to express ontological identity
than the say that John the baptist is
Elijah! But this is not what is meant, because John was neither the resurrected
nor the reincarnated Elijah. But John did the same work as Elijah, under
circumstances which were comparable to those of Elijah.
We could also quote the prophecy of Habakkuk
1:5, 6 referring to the Chaldeans, which was fulfilled not many years after the
prophecy was given. However, Paul quotes this prophecy in Acts 13:40, 41,
indicating that it would get a second fulfillment through a people playing the
same role as the Chaldeans, but who were not identical with them. Given the
background of the unique position of Jesus and how prophecies may be applied
without any ontological identity, let us look at some prophecies that
originally referred to YHWH but which are applied to Jesus in the NT.
The most interesting prophecy in our context
is Psalm 68. The one referred to in this Psalm is YHWH, a fact which is already
stressed in verse 1. The Psalm tells how God went forth before his people
(verse 7), women were telling the good news of victory (verse 11), the Almighty
One scattered the kings (verse 14), YHWH had come from Sinai into the holy
place (verse 17), and how he had ascended on high, had carried away captives
and had taken gifts in/among men (verse 18). We are also told how the enemies
had seen God’s processions into the holy place (verse 24), how the singers went
in front, then maidens with tambourines (verse 25), and how the congregated
throngs blessed God (verse 26).
How did YHWH do all these things? Not by
being personally present on earth, but through a proxy, namely, the king sitting
on his throne (1 Chr 29:23), in this case probably David. David conquered his
enemies, took captives and then led them in a triumphal procession up to the
holy place. But because David acted as the representative of YHWH, it could be
said that YHWH did all of this.
The Psalm is quoted in Ephesians 4:8-10 and
Paul applies the words about YHWH in the Psalm to Jesus. Does this mean that
there is an ontological identity between Jesus and YHWH? Not at all! In both
cases two individuals are affected.
In the past, David actually performed the acts but YHWH was given the honor. In
the first century CE Jesus actually performed the work but YHWH is again given
the honor. If Ephesians 4:8-10 is taken to mean there is an ontological
identity between Jesus and YHWH, the consequence is that there should be an
ontological identity between David and YHWH, also. This quote from Psalm 68
only tells us that Jesus acted as YHWH’s representative. This fact is stated
frequently in the NT (Joh 7:16, 17; 12:49, 50; Heb 1:1-3; 3:1).
This situation may be viewed as a pattern or precedence
for any other situation were words or actions are applied to YHWH in the OT,
and the same words and actions are applied to Jesus in the NT. This need mean
nothing more than a functional unity; it does not necessarily involve ontological
unity. Additional evidence supporting this reasoning is found in Genesis 18:13,
where it is said that YHWH visited Abraham as a visible person and spoke to
him, Evidently it was the angel of YHWH and not YHWH himself who personally
acted. We are told that that YHWH was present at Sinai, gave the law to Moses
and spoke with a loud voice to the people. But Paul says in Galatians 3:19 that
it was God’s angel who actually did all of this. (Rolf Furuli, The Role of Theology and Bias in Bible
Translation With a Special Look at the New World Translation of Jehovah’s
Witnesses [Huntington Beach, Calif.: Elihu Books, 1999], 195-97)
