BEMA Episode Link: 235: Jewish Roots — Tanakh and Religion
Episode Length: 43:20
Published Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2021 01:00:00 -0700
Session 6
About this episode:

Marty Solomon and Brent Billings venture further into the ideas from the book Understanding the Jewish Roots of Christianity, discussing chapters 2–3 on how the authors of the New Testament used Tanakh and whether Jesus intended to establish a new religion.

Discussion Video for BEMA 235

Understanding the Jewish Roots of Christianity by Gerald McDermott

Mark S. Gignilliat at Beeson Divinity School

Inspiration and Incarnation by Peter Enns

Matthew Thiessen at McMaster University

Matthew Thiessen on Twitter

Transcript for BEMA 235

Notes

*Note: The following notes are handwritten by me, Adam, and I reserve the right to be wrong.

BEMA 235: Jewish Roots - Tanakh and Religion

Title & Source Summary

Episode: BEMA 235: Jewish Roots - Tanakh and Religion Hosts: Marty Solomon and Brent Billings Focus: Chapters 2 and 3 of “Understanding the Jewish Roots of Christianity” - How New Testament authors used Tanakh and whether Jesus intended to establish a new religion

This episode explores the essential relationship between the Hebrew Scriptures (Tanakh/Old Testament) and the New Testament. Marty and Brent discuss two academic essays that demonstrate how the New Testament cannot exist independently from its connection to the Hebrew Scriptures, and examine whether Jesus came to start a new religion or to work within the Jewish framework. The conversation challenges common Christian assumptions about the separation between “Old” and “New” testaments, showing instead that they represent one continuous story.

Key Takeaways

• The New Testament has no independent existence apart from the Hebrew Scriptures - it is fundamentally inspired commentary on the Old Testament
• Early Christianity never operated apart from the Scriptures of Israel as authoritative texts
• Jesus’s teaching, parables, and ministry are all rooted in and inseparable from Hebrew Scriptures and Jewish theology
• The enhypostatic-anhypostatic relationship between Christ’s divine and human natures serves as an analogy for understanding the Old Testament-New Testament relationship
• Jesus did not come to reject Judaism or start a new religion, but rather affirmed the temple, Torah, festivals, and Sabbath while offering critique and deeper interpretation
• Jesus’s engagement with ritual purity laws demonstrates he affirmed the system while working to remove the sources of impurity (representing death) from people’s lives
• Jesus’s Sabbath controversies show him making legal Torah-centric arguments, not rejecting the Sabbath but arguing for proper prioritization of human need
• Historical Jesus scholarship has significant limitations - we cannot fully reconstruct Jesus’s exact intentions and plans behind the Gospel accounts

Main Concepts & Theories

The Inseparability of Old and New Testaments

Dr. Mark Gignilliat’s chapter emphasizes that “the New Testament leans on the Old Testament for its own theological sense-making, and perhaps more provocatively does not even exist apart from its relation to the Old Testament.” This is not merely an academic observation but a fundamental reality about how Scripture functions. The early church never operated apart from the Scriptures of Israel, and Jesus Christ, the apostles, and the earliest members of Christ’s church all recognized the Scriptures of Israel as “a constraining authority and privileged source of divine revelation.”

The chapter opens with a story about Jeremiah, someone with high-functioning autism who loved the Old Testament. When shown a chapel with ten painted panels depicting biblical scenes, with only one from the Old Testament, Jeremiah was “aghast.” This illustrates the historical Christian tendency, particularly since medieval theology, to marginalize the Hebrew Scriptures in favor of focusing almost exclusively on the New Testament.

The Enhypostatic-Anhypostatic Analogy

Dr. Gignilliat introduces sophisticated theological language from Christology (the study of Christ’s nature) and applies it to understanding Scripture. Drawing from the Council of Chalcedon’s teaching about the hypostatic union (Jesus being fully God and fully human simultaneously), he proposes:

Enhypostatic - The positive affirmation that Christ’s humanity genuinely exists in the full person of Christ. His humanity is genuine, real, and like ours, residing within the divine-human Logos who is Jesus Christ. This concept counters the tendency to view Jesus through “God goggles” where His humanity becomes diminished or less real.

Anhypostatic - The negative account or qualifier that while Christ’s humanity is real and subsistent, it has no independent status apart from its union with the divine nature of the Logos. Jesus’s humanity cannot be understood in isolation from His divinity.

Applied to Scripture, this means: “The New Testament is anhypostatic in its relation to the Old Testament. That is, the New Testament has no being apart from its relation to the Scriptures of Israel.” Just as Jesus’s humanity cannot exist independently from His divinity, the New Testament cannot exist independently from the Hebrew Scriptures.

This analogy comes from Peter Enns’s work “Inspiration and Incarnation,” which explores how the Chalcedonian logic applies both to Christ and to Scripture as being both human and divine in authorial source and origin.

Jesus’s Relationship to the Temple

Matthew Thiessen’s chapter addresses whether Jesus planned to start a new religion by examining His relationship to Jewish institutions. Regarding the temple:

Historical Protestant Perspective: Martin Luther argued that in the Book of Jonah, the plant represents Judaism and the worm that kills it represents Jesus - a shockingly anti-Semitic interpretation. More recent scholars like John Dominic Crossan argue that “Jesus saw himself as the functional opponent, alternative, and substitute to the Jewish temple.” N.T. Wright suggests Jesus attacked what had become standard symbols of Second Temple Jewish worldview, viewing them as “out of date” now that the Kingdom had come.

Jewish and Some Christian Scholars’ Perspective: Scholars like Joseph Klausner, David Flusser, Geza Vermes, Paula Fredriksen, Amy-Jill Levine, and E.P. Sanders stress the continuity between Jesus’s teachings and those of His fellow Jews, placing Jesus within Judaism rather than against it.

Evidence from the Gospels:

• Luke depicts young Jesus in the temple describing it as “his father’s house,” amazed by all who hear him speak
• Matthew’s Jesus teaches that the temple altar sanctifies what is offered on it because the sanctuary (naos) is where the Jewish God dwells
• Jesus assumes the value and validity of temple piety throughout His teaching
• The accusations that Jesus spoke against the temple were false charges - the prosecution couldn’t make them stick because Jesus had actually affirmed the temple enough that witnesses contradicted each other

The conclusion: Jesus was not rejecting the temple but rather critiquing how the temple system was being administered, while affirming the temple’s sacred role.

Jesus and Ritual Purity Laws

One of the most significant sections demonstrates Jesus’s relationship to Jewish purity laws:

The Nature of Ritual Impurity: Building on the work of Mary Douglas and Jacob Milgrom, ritual impurity in Judaism represents the forces of death. This is key - being ritually impure was not sinful or morally wrong; it simply represented contact with death and required purification before entering sacred space.

Jesus’s Ministry Pattern:

• He healed a man suffering from leprosy (ritually impure)
• He healed ten lepers (ritually impure)
• A woman with an issue of blood touched his garment (ritually impure)
• He touched corpses and raised the dead (contact with the dead causes ritual impurity)

Critical Insight: “At no point does Jesus tell them not to worry about being ritually impure. Not once does he deny the existence of impurity and not once does he break the law in relation to those various people. After all, touching or being touched by people who are ritually impure neither is a breach of the law nor is it sinful.”

What Jesus does is remove the sources of impurity - healing the disease, stopping the bleeding, raising the dead. Once these sources are removed, people can undergo the minor purification rites required and re-enter the temple precincts. As Thiessen notes: “These various stories demonstrate Jesus’s belief in the existence of ritual purity and his opposition to its causes almost as though he wants people to be free of ritual impurity so that they can visit the Jerusalem temple.”

Far from rejecting the purity system, Jesus affirms it while working to eliminate death’s power over people’s lives, enabling fuller participation in temple worship.

Jesus and the Sabbath

Jesus’s Sabbath controversies are often misunderstood as rejecting Sabbath observance. The analysis reveals:

What Jesus Actually Did:

• He made no money from healing on Sabbath
• He derived no benefit from those healed
• He didn’t even “break a sweat”
• In most cases, he simply touched people or spoke brief commands
• In healing the man with the withered hand, “Jesus literally does nothing” - he issues two brief commands

How Jesus Argued:

• “When confronted on these issues, Jesus always makes legal Torah-centric arguments to support his actions”
• He meets opponents on their own turf, arguing from Scripture and Torah
• He argues that human need takes precedence, citing precedents like David eating the showbread
• He assumes the sanctity of the Sabbath while arguing that human life is of even more value
• “In this, he’s hardly alone among fellow Jews of his time” - rabbinic tradition also prioritized saving life over Sabbath restrictions

This represents reinterpretation and proper application of Torah, not rejection of it.

The Historical Jesus Problem

Thiessen raises an important scholarly caveat: “Ultimately, I no longer find persuasive efforts to get behind the Gospels to a historical Jesus. The various criteria, while not entirely without merit, are simply too weak to yield results of much value.”

This is a significant academic check on the kind of historical reconstruction that BEMA often engages in. While we can learn much about the context, culture, and Jewish background of Jesus’s time, there are inherent limitations to reconstructing exactly what the historical Jesus said, did, or intended. We cannot interview Jesus to clarify historical nuances or verify our interpretations.

This doesn’t invalidate contextual study but reminds us to hold our reconstructions humbly, acknowledging the gaps we cannot fully fill.

Examples & Applications

The Chapel Windows Illustration

The opening story of Jeremiah and the chapel panels powerfully illustrates how Christian tradition has often marginalized the Old Testament. A chapel with ten biblical scenes but only one from the Old Testament visually represents the theological imbalance in much of Christian history - treating the Hebrew Scriptures as mere backstory rather than essential foundation.

This has practical implications for how Christians read their Bibles, preach sermons, and understand their faith. Many Christians focus almost exclusively on New Testament texts without recognizing that those texts are themselves commentary on and fulfillment of Hebrew Scripture.

Jesus’s Use of Isaiah in Luke 4

When Jesus reads from Isaiah 61 in the synagogue at Nazareth and declares “Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing,” He is not starting something new but claiming to be the fulfillment of Israel’s story. Understanding the full context of Isaiah 54-66 and the “Servant Discourse” reveals layers of meaning about Jesus’s identity and mission that connect Him to Israel’s prophetic tradition.

Interpreting Parables Through Isaiah

Jesus explicitly connects His parabolic teaching method to the prophet Isaiah (in Luke 8). Even the phrase “Who has ears, let him hear” is an allusion to Hebrew prophets calling God’s people to listen. This means Jesus’s parables cannot be properly understood apart from their rootedness in prophetic tradition.

The Acts 15 Jerusalem Council

When the early church gathered to discuss Gentile inclusion, they drew on Leviticus 17-19 and what some call the Noahic or Noahide laws. This demonstrates that even as the church expanded to include Gentiles, they continued to work within the framework of Torah and Hebrew Scripture, not abandoning it.

Modern Application to Bible Reading

For contemporary Christians, this means:

• Reading the Old Testament is not optional or merely historical background
• New Testament passages should be studied with their Old Testament references and allusions in view
• Jesus’s teachings make most sense when understood within their Jewish context
• The “Old” and “New” Testament distinction, while traditional, can obscure the fundamental unity of Scripture as one continuous story

Rethinking “Uncleanness”

Understanding that ritual impurity represented death rather than sin transforms how we read healing stories. When Jesus touched lepers or allowed the bleeding woman to touch Him, He wasn’t breaking purity laws or teaching that they didn’t matter. He was removing the power of death from people’s lives so they could fully participate in worship and community.

This has implications for how we understand holiness today - not as separation from “dirty” or “sinful” people, but as bringing life, healing, and restoration that enables fuller relationship with God.

Potential Areas for Further Exploration

The Book “Understanding the Jewish Roots of Christianity”

This episode covers only chapters 2 and 3 from a larger collection of essays. Other chapters explore different aspects of the Jewish-Christian relationship and would provide additional depth. The book is edited by Gerald McDermott and contains contributions from multiple scholars including Jen Rosner (whose interview was covered in episode 234).

Peter Enns’s “Inspiration and Incarnation”

This book develops the enhypostatic-anhypostatic analogy more fully, exploring how the Chalcedonian logic about Christ applies to understanding Scripture as both human and divine in origin. This could deepen understanding of how to read the Bible with both its divine inspiration and human authorship in view.

Dr. Mark Gignilliat’s Other Works

Dr. Gignilliat has written extensively on how Paul understood Isaiah in the context of 2 Corinthians, representing deep exploration of New Testament authors’ use of Hebrew Scripture. His work offers detailed analysis of specific intertextual connections.

Matthew Thiessen’s Research on Purity Laws

Thiessen’s primary research focus is how Christianity relates to early Judaism and how Jesus engages Jewish purity laws. His work builds on Mary Douglas and Jacob Milgrom’s anthropological and theological analysis of purity systems. Further study could explore:

• The distinction between moral impurity (from sin) and ritual impurity (from death)
• How the purity system functioned in Second Temple Judaism
• The relationship between purity, holiness, and access to God’s presence

Jewish Scholars on Jesus

The chapter mentions Joseph Klausner, David Flusser, Geza Vermes, Paula Fredriksen, and Amy-Jill Levine as Jewish scholars who stress continuity between Jesus and Judaism. Reading their work would provide important perspectives often missing from Christian scholarship, helping to place Jesus more firmly within His Jewish context.

E.P. Sanders and the “New Perspective on Paul”

Sanders’s work sought to place Jesus within Judaism rather than against it, and his scholarship on Paul contributed to what became known as the “New Perspective on Paul.” Exploring this scholarly movement could illuminate how our understanding of Jesus, Paul, and Judaism has evolved in recent decades.

The Reformation and Anti-Semitism

The episode mentions Martin Luther’s problematic anti-Semitic views, including his interpretation of Jonah where Jesus is the worm that kills the plant of Judaism. Exploring how Reformation theology contributed to Christian anti-Semitism and how to correct these tendencies would be valuable.

The Historical Jesus Quest

Thiessen’s caveat about the limitations of historical Jesus research raises questions about methodology in biblical scholarship. Exploring the “quest for the historical Jesus” - its various phases, criteria, methods, and critiques - would provide context for understanding both the possibilities and limitations of reconstructing Jesus’s life and teachings.

Rabbinic Perspectives on Sabbath

The chapter notes that Jesus’s arguments about human need taking precedence over Sabbath restrictions were consistent with rabbinic thinking of His time. Exploring Mishnaic and Talmudic discussions of Sabbath law would show the diversity of Jewish interpretation and where Jesus’s teaching fits within that spectrum.

Sacred Time and the Festivals

The chapter mentions Jesus’s relationship to Jewish festivals (moadim) and how He affirmed and participated in them, even injecting Himself into their meaning. Studying how Jesus engaged Passover, Sukkot (Tabernacles), Hanukkah (Festival of Lights), and other festivals would reveal additional layers of His teaching and identity claims.

Comprehension Questions

1. According to Dr. Mark Gignilliat, what is the relationship between the New Testament and the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament)? Use the concepts of enhypostatic and anhypostatic to explain your answer.

2. How does Matthew Thiessen’s analysis challenge the view (held by scholars like John Dominic Crossan) that Jesus saw Himself as “the functional opponent, alternative, and substitute to the Jewish temple”? What evidence from the Gospels supports Thiessen’s position?

3. What is the difference between ritual impurity and sin in Jewish thought? How does this distinction change our understanding of Jesus’s interactions with lepers, the woman with the issue of blood, and the dead?

4. When confronted about healing on the Sabbath, how did Jesus argue His position? What does this reveal about His relationship to Torah and Jewish law?

5. What scholarly caveat does Matthew Thiessen raise about efforts to reconstruct the “historical Jesus” behind the Gospel accounts? How might this caution affect how we approach biblical interpretation and historical reconstruction?

Summary

This episode powerfully demonstrates that the New Testament and Hebrew Scriptures form an inseparable unity, with the New Testament having “no being apart from its relation to the Old Testament.” Using sophisticated theological analogies from Christology, the discussion shows that just as Jesus’s humanity cannot exist independently from His divinity, the New Testament cannot exist independently from the Hebrew Scriptures.

The examination of whether Jesus planned to start a new religion reveals a clear answer: No. Jesus affirmed the temple, explaining that it houses God’s presence and sanctifies offerings. He engaged with ritual purity laws not by rejecting them but by removing the sources of impurity (representing death) from people’s lives, enabling them to participate more fully in temple worship. His Sabbath controversies show Him making legal Torah-based arguments while affirming Sabbath’s sanctity, placing Him squarely within Jewish interpretive tradition alongside other rabbis of His time.

The episode challenges common Christian assumptions about Jesus “replacing” or “rejecting” Judaism, instead revealing a Jesus who worked faithfully within Jewish faith and practice while offering prophetic critique and deeper interpretation. For modern readers, this means the Old Testament is not optional background material but essential foundation for understanding Jesus, the New Testament, and the Christian faith itself. The story of Scripture is one continuous narrative of God’s relationship with His people, not two separate stories divided by Jesus’s arrival.

Edit | Previous | Next