The First Apostles

In the New Testament, the apostles referred to Old Testament scriptures without changing the original meaning of them. Matthew referred to Jesus fulfilling Old Testament prophecy without spiritualising the passages. In Is 7:14, Isaiah refers to the virgin birth of the Messiah.

While Isaiah 7 made reference to Isaiah’s time, the Holy Spirit inserted a prophecy that referred only to Christ. Some say the prophecy was first fulfilled in Isaiah’s time by a woman who was a virgin when Isaiah prophesied and later married and had a child. In that case the birth would not have been an unusual sign.

The Hebrew word used in Is 7:14 translated “virgin” always means “virgin” and never just a young woman. The prophecy was not to king Ahaz in Isaiah’s time, but to “the House of David”. Calvin, Gill, Henry, Clarke and scholars from every era claim that Is 7:14 was purely messianic.

This calls into question a principle of interpretation called “double fulfilment”. This principle claims that one verse can be fulfilled two, or even more, times. This brings into question the whole process of hermeneutics. If we can interpret a text in some way, unknown to the author or unauthorised by the Holy Spirit in the original context, then we can apply almost any imagination to almost any passage.

Getting back to Is 7:14, if the prophecy about the virgin birth was fulfilled in Isaiah’s day, then what authentic basis does Matthew have for applying it again to Jesus? The Jews would easily have denied its application to Jesus as an afterthought. Jesus would have been seen as a normal man with a messianic complex, looking for some backing in the religious writings of the day.

The Jews of Jesus’ time did know that verses like Is 7:14 had a singular messianic purpose, but later denied this when they refused to accept Jesus. The point is that a verse in Isaiah could not mean to Matthew afterward what it did not mean when Isaiah wrote it. Isaiah did not have a full understanding when he wrote about Christ, but he did know that the Holy Spirit was referring to Christ when he wrote and not to his own time.

To whom it was revealed, that not to themselves, but to us they did minister the things, which are now reported to you by them that have preached the gospel to you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into. (1 Pet 1:12).

Claiming that Old Testament prophecies have a double meaning weakens their power in referring to Jesus Christ. Accepting the principle of double fulfilment means that we interpret scripture subjectively rather than by its original intention. We know Is 7:14 was speaking about Christ, because the Holy Spirit said so in Is 9:6-7 and all the way through the book of Isaiah. We can only interpret a text the way the Holy Spirit intended us to in the original context of the passage.

Peter said, when referring to certain aspects of the Psalms, that they were fulfilled by Christ alone and not also by David. Peter specifically denied a double reference in order that the Jews could not escape the conclusion that the text spoke of Christ alone and was fulfilled by Jesus of Nazareth. Peter specifically denied a double reference to prophecy. Peter said that:

1. David knew he was not speaking of himself.

2. That the texts were not fulfilled by David in his own time.

3. That David knew he was speaking of Christ, who was to come.

Men and brethren, let me freely speak to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried and his sepulchre is with us to this day. Therefore being a prophet and 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.

He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that His soul was not left in hell, neither His flesh did see corruption. This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. (Acts 2:29-32).

In this passage we see Peter’s hermeneutics. The Jews who listened to Peter would have surely mocked at any loose exegesis, or double fulfilment. The church of Christ is not built on such flimsy hermeneutics. Peter said that the prophets knew that some sections of their work were speaking of Christ and not of their own time.

So how do we read the Bible? We do not read it “devotionally”, which is bringing personal or private meanings to the text. We read it contextually or exegetically. Do we apply the text to our lives in a devotional way? Yes absolutely! Devotional means loving God and living His way by His Spirit.

But application is the second step. Interpretation is the first step. Passages in the Bible must be interpreted exegetically. Meaning must always be what comes out of the passage, never what we bring into the passage through preconceived ideas or subjective persuasions. This is just common sense. A text means what it says, not something else.

Once we admit to a principle of double reference we apply it in all manner of cases, whenever it suits our purposes. We call it looking for the spiritual or deeper meaning of a text, which is not intended by the original draft. Spiritualisation of texts is a major weakness of devotional and some Pentecostal approaches to study and preaching.