Understanding Scripture Part One
What is New Testament Priority, and How Does it Hinder Biblical Study?
Hi Friends,
Today’s article is the start of a new series I am calling, “Understanding Scripture”. My goal in this series is to tackle a number of issues related to biblical hermeneutics, the study of bible interpretation. Despite the seemingly intellectual focus of this article, I will actually be scaling back the technical terms as much as possible. How we read and study the Bible is important, not only for those who consider themselves teachers or academics, but also for the average person who opens their bible to seek God’s truths.
Are We Studying the Bible Wrong?
This may seem like an odd question. Many people would think that any reading of the Bible is good, and the truth is, for a lot of people I will gladly concede to that argument. My concern is when we cross the threshold from general reading and devotion into the realm of study. It is through bible study that we begin to form concrete ideas about the greater plans and purposes of God.
Without realizing it, many of us are shaped by our pastor, our denominational history, or even the teachers and influencers we glean from online. You may not know it, but your personal methods of processing and interpreting Scripture are quite possibly being shaped in important ways by people who have never taken the time to explain their methods.
New Testament Priority vs. Continuity
The majority of the people reading my articles are American Protestant Christians. Unless your pastor consistently teaches from a dispensational framework, much of what you hear from the pulpit is likely being shaped—whether explicitly or implicitly—by a Reformed or Covenantal approach to biblical interpretation. In simple terms, these approaches often differ in how they understand the relationship between Israel, the Church, and the promises God made throughout the Old Testament (OT).
To use a theological term, Reformed and Covenantal theology employs a method of biblical interpretation I am referring to in this article as New Testament Priority. Among the major Protestant theological traditions, Dispensationalism is the primary tradition that explicitly rejects this approach.
New Testament Priority (NTP) describes a method of biblical interpretation in which the New Testament (NT) is given interpretive priority when determining how OT promises and prophecies should ultimately be understood. This approach is normative within Reformed and Covenantal theology. Dispensationalism, by contrast, generally emphasizes maintaining the original historical-grammatical meaning of OT promises when interpreting their subsequent development in the NT. Some dispensationalists refer to their method as “Passage Priority“.
To make things clear, I am a Protestant, but I do not teach from a Reformed, Covenantal, or Dispensational approach to biblical interpretation. While I agree with Dispensationalists that the historical-grammatical meaning of OT promises must be taken seriously, my approach is different.
I believe the Bible should be read with canonical continuity in mind. The idea is simple: Scripture is one unified revelation. (To be fair and transparent to Reformed and Covenantal teachers, many would agree with my assessment of unified revelation.) Even so, how I apply this logic to biblical study is different. In my view, later revelation (often NT) can further develop what was revealed previously (typically OT), but it does not replace or reinterpret the original meaning and context. Going a step further, later revelation does not take priority or precedence unless the text itself explicitly instructs us to do so. I believe this approach will open much of the Bible to you in a new way.
I have addressed my issues with Dispensationalism in a previous article, so today we’ll focus entirely on what NTP does to Scripture, provide an alternative reading, and show how a different approach will help us to get more out of our personal Bible reading.
Let’s take a look at a few examples of NTP and examine how reading the passage with continuity in mind will help us understand things in a new light.
Jeremiah 31 & Hebrews 8
The New Covenant is a great place to start when examining what NTP does to our reading of this great promise.
“At the same time,” says the Lord, “I will be the God of all the families of Israel, and they shall be My people…
For thus says the Lord: “Sing with gladness for Jacob, and shout among the chief of the nations; Proclaim, give praise, and say, ‘O Lord, save Your people, The remnant of Israel!’
Hear the word of the Lord, O nations… the Lord has redeemed Jacob, and ransomed him from the hand of one stronger than he. Therefore they shall come and sing in the height of Zion…
“Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah— not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them, says the Lord. But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.”
-Selections from Jeremiah 31:1-34 NKJV
Now, let’s compare this to Hebrews 8:
Now this is the main point of the things we are saying: We have such a High Priest, who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens…
For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second. Because finding fault with them, He says: “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah— In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.”
-Selections from Hebrews 8:1-13 NKJV
Hebrews 8 does the work of showing us that Jesus is the High Priest of the New Covenant. Recognizing Jesus and everything that is fulfilled through Him is good and necessary. This is what the Bible intends us to understand.
Hebrews 8 also does the work of affirming the original context of the New Testament Promise. Even when we consider the first covenant as being made obsolete, the text confirms the New Covenant was made explicitly with Israel and Judah. But this is not the conclusion made by the reformed bible teacher. They would conclude that the church is the recipient of the New Covenant, not Israel and Judah. We must ask, “Why?”
Down the Rabbit Hole of NTP vs. Continuity
Reformed teaching isn’t reading Hebrews 8 as a standalone unit—it reads it as one piece within the prior theological framework (Covenant Theology) that has already decided, on the basis of other texts, that the church is the recipient of Israel’s promises. On the surface, the principle of looking at other texts is fantastic and good for biblical interpretation, but we must first see what this theological framework does with these texts. We’ll examine a few of these now.
Now when He came into the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people confronted Him as He was teaching, and said, “By what authority are You doing these things? And who gave You this authority?”
– Matthew 21:23 NKJV
Jesus is speaking to the chief priests and the elders of the people. He is speaking to those presently in authority. Then, Jesus calls them to hear the parable of the wicked vinedressers. The parable highlights a landowner who leased his land to vinedressers, putting them in charge of the vineyard he planted on His land. Throughout the season, the vinedressers committed abuse against the landowner’s servants, including killing and stoning.
He asks the priests and elders:
“Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those vinedressers?”
They said to Him, “He will destroy those wicked men miserably, and lease his vineyard to other vinedressers who will render to him the fruits in their seasons.”
Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures:
‘The stone which the builders rejected
Has become the chief cornerstone.
This was the Lord’s doing,
And it is marvelous in our eyes’?
“Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it. And whoever falls on this stone will be broken; but on whomever it falls, it will grind him to powder.”
Now when the chief priests and Pharisees heard His parables, they perceived that He was speaking of them. But when they sought to lay hands on Him, they feared the multitudes, because they took Him for a prophet.
– Matthew 21:40-46 NKJV
Reformed theology concludes that, by Jesus speaking to the chief priests and Pharisees, He was by virtue speaking to all Israel. But this is not what the text itself recognizes. The text recognizes that the chief priests and Pharisees perceived that Jesus was speaking to them. The text also recognizes that the multitudes, (the faithful of Israel who had come to the temple to celebrate Passover), had already recognized Jesus as a prophet.
The reformed perspective sees “the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it” as God’s promises being taken away from Israel and Judah. They view the New Covenant as being given to a spiritual nation now referred to as the Church. Is this what the text is actually teaching?
An Alternative to NTP
Here’s my alternative: The text appears to recognize that Israel’s authority would be taken from the leaders of Jesus’ generation. His judgment is on the leaders and their current system of government. In taking the kingdom of God away from these wicked leaders, Jesus is recognizing that Israel itself is the Kingdom of God. Why? Because He’s invoking the promises of Old Testament prophets while preaching in the land, city, and temple they prophesied about. Who then, is the nation that will bear the fruits of this kingdom?
Let’s consider both Old and New Testament examples to dig deeper.
I will bring forth descendants from Jacob, and from Judah an heir of My mountains;
My elect shall inherit it, and My servants shall dwell there.
– Isaiah 65:9 NKJV
I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not! For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew…
Even so then, at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace. And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace…
And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: “The Deliverer will come out of Zion, and He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob; For this is My covenant with them, when I take away their sins.”
-Selections from Romans 11:1, 5-6, 26-27 NKJV
When we examine what continuity looks like between the OT and NT, we can identify that the heir of Judah and the Deliverer from Zion is Jesus. There is no question about that. The NT provides the added revelation concerning Jesus, but it does not reinterpret the OT.
Continuity argues that Israel and Judah are the recipients of the New Covenant. They are not being erased or superseded by a new people called the Church. The removal of their wicked leaders is an aspect of God’s grace and plan to save them.
When we read the bible through the interpretive lens of Reformed theology, NTP becomes a license to reinterpret the plan of God. We’ll examine another passage from Matthew to give an example.
Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”
Jesus answered and said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”
– Matthew 16:16-19 NKJV
In this passage, Jesus reveals that He will build His church. Centuries later, after having been advised by the Reformed tradition as well as the Catholic tradition which preceded it, our view of church can get twisted up in the errors of NTP.
First of all, Peter declares that Jesus is “the Christ”. This title has immediate OT meaning. Christ, or Messiah, is the King from the Davidic Dynasty who is anointed and destined to rule over Israel.
Furthermore, is our definition of church here. For a Jew like Peter, when Jesus uses the term “My Church”, Peter is not envisioning a new institution. He is envisioning Christ as King over Israel. The word for church in the Greek is ekklesia. This is the same word that the Greek version of the Old Testament uses to describe the congregation/assembly of Israel.
Not only this, but Jesus is using a rabbinical idea, binding and loosing, to describe the function of His ekklesia. Binding and loosing is the ability to determine, according to OT Law and Prophets, that which is lawful and good. This is exactly what the apostles did in Acts 15 when they determined how Gentile (non-Jewish) believers should be instructed in the faith.
NTP would have us believe that Jesus is reinterpreting the function of Christ and the nature of the ekklesia, what we call “church” today.
Continuity understands that Jesus is actively fulfilling previous promises while revealing new insights into the existing, ongoing, and eternal plan of God. Even Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, understood that Jesus did not reinterpret the OT. Concerning the Gentile inclusion into the Gospel, Paul says this:
Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh—who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands— that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.
Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone…
-Ephesians 2:11-13, 19-20 NKJV
Paul effectively teaches that the ekklesia is the “Commonwealth of Israel” in that he declares the Gentiles have been “brought near” to the commonwealth by the blood of Christ. Those who emphasize Reformed theology might say, “exactly!” But their meaning is that the church instituted by Jesus in Matthew 16 is the new Israel, and is therefore the commonwealth spoken of by Paul.
But again, this assumes New Testament Priority. It demands that we read the whole NT through this interpretive lens. Every promise is reinterpreted through Christ. What you end up with is a convoluted and confusing Gospel. One where God’s former promises, many which are depicted as everlasting oaths and eternal promises, are now reduced to types and metaphors.
NTP requires us to examine everything through the perspective that the immediate context of an OT passage is incomplete or sometimes unknowable without NT interpretation. I believe this demeans and diminishes the witness of the prophets who pointed us to Christ in the first place. Often under NTP, you end up with an OT that never really means what it says or says what it means.
When you go to a text assuming that the NT is intending to reinterpret the OT, this conditions your brain to seek out or debate the meaning of the NT passage. It creates confusion around something that could easily be understood by taking the OT in its own context and allow the NT to naturally reveal further details within the OT context.
When we read NT authors such as Paul, continuity assumes that he actually understands the immediate context of the multitude of OT passages he references. He is a Jewish believer teaching Gentiles about a Jewish Messiah. Paul does not shy away from correcting doctrine or behavior in his letters, so we can be at least somewhat confident that if a reinterpretation were needed the text itself would explain it.
When looking at Paul’s words in Ephesians, he is affirming that the Gentile can in fact be included in Israel’s promises and invited to be co-heirs with Israel in the promise of Christ. Continuity understands that Paul is not diminishing or reinterpreting Israel’s prophetic hope. Rather, it realizes the effect of Israel’s hope and salvation, which is to guide the nations to God’s blessings.
Paul is not teaching Gentiles about the characteristics of a new institution called church. He is teaching that Israel is the church, and that Gentiles have been accepted into its community. He describes the enmity between Jew and Gentile as being abolished, so that He can make one new man from the two.
To make this point clearer, let’s look again at the passage:
Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone…
– Ephesians 2:19-20 NKJV
The key here is understanding the terms apostles, prophets, and Christ. Apostle was actually a generic and secular term in Jesus’ day. He was using a common, almost archaic word to describe the role of His disciples. By calling twelve Jewish men to be the ambassadors of Christ (remember our definition of Christ from earlier), Jesus was commissioning these men to be witnesses of His Davidic authority. This is clear when we consider how the apostles treat this information throughout the book of Acts.
In Acts 2, Peter notes that David
“knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne”.
-Acts 2:30 NKJV
Similarly, in Acts 13, Paul recounts God’s choice of David and says,
“From this man’s seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus“.
-Acts 13:22-33 NKJV
The apostles declared Jesus’ destined rule according to the promises made to David. When the passage in Ephesians refers to the prophets, this is referring to the testimony of the OT prophets who spoke concerning Christ. These promises not only included salvation, but they also included specific promises related to the land, borders, and everlasting covenants granted to the Israelites.
Paul does not redefine these terms for the Ephesians. Later in chapter 4 of the same letter, Paul even recounts the ministry of apostles and prophets (among other gifts), and does not need to elaborate on their identity. When he elaborates, he does so to explain the intended effect of these gifts as they function within the body of Christ.
By contrast, NTP imports a theological perspective that is not native to the text, one that would be entirely unfamiliar to the hearer of Jesus’ or the apostles’ message. This in and of itself does not mean that a theological perspective is wrong outright, but it does mean that we need to do extra work to determine its true merit.
Where the merit of NTP falls apart, at least in my estimation, is that it demands we reconfigure the context of the Bible itself. It is one thing if a theological system imports modern ideas and reasoning upon text when it has already weighed its original context. Despite my personal issues with Dispensationalism, this is one thing that proponents of this system do well.
Isaiah 66 and The Age to Come
To make my point clearer, I believe an examination of Isaiah 66 will be helpful.
“Rejoice with Jerusalem, and be glad with her, all you who love her; Rejoice for joy with her, all you who mourn for her”…
For thus says the Lord: “Behold, I will extend peace to her like a river, and the glory of the Gentiles like a flowing stream…
“For I know their works and their thoughts. It shall be that I will gather all nations and tongues; and they shall come and see My glory…
“Then they shall bring all your brethren for an offering to the Lord out of all nations, on horses and in chariots and in litters, on mules and on camels, to My holy mountain Jerusalem,” says the Lord, “as the children of Israel bring an offering in a clean vessel into the house of the Lord. And I will also take some of them for priests and Levites,” says the Lord.
“For as the new heavens and the new earth which I will make shall remain before Me,” says the Lord, “So shall your descendants and your name remain. And it shall come to pass that from one New Moon to another, and from one Sabbath to another, all flesh shall come to worship before Me,” says the Lord.
– Selections from Isaiah 66:10,12,18,20-24 NKJV
Now, let’s go back just a little and read a few verses from Isaiah 65.
“For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth; And the former shall not be remembered or come to mind. But be glad and rejoice forever in what I create; For behold, I create Jerusalem as a rejoicing, and her people a joy. I will rejoice in Jerusalem, and joy in My people; The voice of weeping shall no longer be heard in her, nor the voice of crying.”
– Isaiah 65:17-19 NKJV
These passages are describing the new heavens and a new earth. Notice how central Jerusalem, the children of Israel, even the presence of priests and Levites is to the prophet’s description of the new creation. Here, we have the passage of time, New Moons and Sabbaths, animals, objects— numerous aspects that hold continuity with the current created order.
Many theological views argue for complete annihilation of the present heavens and earth, then recreation. The prophet Isaiah’s depiction of the new heavens and new earth appear to depict more of a renewed perspective. Because the actual word for new in OT Hebrew can mean either new or renewed, we must let context decide how we understand the passage.
חָדָשׁ (ḥādāš) — new, fresh, renewed
חָדָשָׁה (ḥădāšâ) — feminine form, “new/renewed”
Isaiah 65:17: šāmayim ḥădāšîm — “new heavens”
Isaiah 66:22: šāmayim hădāšîm — “new heavens”
While a few NTP proponents believe in a renewed creation belief, and fewer yet maintain a belief in the future hope of Israel, it is due to a lack of consistent biblical interpretation within their theological processes. In most cases, the presence of NTP will create a rift between understanding an OT prophecy such as Isaiah 65-66 in its native context, and what they assume the text must mean in light of NT development. The result is often an over-spiritualized or reimagined view of life after the resurrection.
I believe when we take the text at face value, we see the prominence of Jewish covenantal culture. NTP would instruct us that Levites are no longer necessary, but the prophet Isaiah declares that God will restore Levites in the new creation. Some Christians would go so far as to say that the presence of anything Levitical in the age to come is sacrilegious. Yet, if we take Isaiah at his word, it actually appears that Jesus will be active in establishing at least some aspect of their function and purpose once again.
The focus of this article is not to discuss the reestablishment of a Levitical priesthood— that’s another long-form article all on its own! My intent in highlighting this is to show that there are many things promised by the prophets that we have either ignored or turned into metaphors. What created the assumption that prophecy, especially end-times prophecy, is mostly metaphor? In my estimation, NTP plays a significant role.
These very prophets provided the biblical narrative which Paul identifies as being foundational to the formation of the body of Christ. NTP creates a distance between us and the very promises upon which that foundation rests. Some people might scoff at an article like this and maybe argue that we simply need to “focus on Jesus”. Why are we still debating issues like this?
To me, the real question is: “Why are we tolerating a method of Bible interpretation that redefines the function of one of our essential foundations?”
More to Come
I will deal with these topics in more depth as I progress throughout this series. My aim today is to highlight that NTP is an error. I believe if we read the Bible with true canonical continuity in mind, we will see the whole story as one unfolding plan and purpose of God. In doing so, we can re-wire our minds to see the centrality of God’s covenants, His covenant people Israel, and how we all fit into the greater narrative of God’s redemptive purposes through Christ alone.
Blessings to you through Christ Jesus our LORD. Amen.
-J.S. Marek
J.S. Marek 