Quiz - NT Use of the OT

Single Meaning, Multiple Contexts and Referents view. Not surprising to me because the O.T. is so full of prophesies fulfilled through Jesus Christ and N.T. events. Nevertheless it is clear from the context of many of these prophesies that the scrivner (not the author) had no idea his writing would be used to portray such events, e.g., Genesis 14:18. Not all O.T. prophesies fit into this mold however. Some are direct and to the point, e.g., Isaiah 7:14.

 

The problem with this quiz, (and many like it), is that it is so nebulous. Take the first question:

When the NT authors utilized the OT, which of the following was true?

• The interpretive methods that they used were essentially the same as those used by careful interpreters today.
• The interpretive methods that they used were essentially the same as those used by Jewish interpreters of the ancient world, but they used them in ways that did not alter the OT authors' meanings.
• The interpretive methods that they used were the same as those used by Jewish interpreters of the ancient world, and like those ancient Jewish interpreters they sometimes used them in ways that altered the OT authors' meanings.

I would answer the first one, but who wouldn't? Would anyone really claim that the NT authors were not careful interpreters of the OT? The problem is that people who see all kinds of multiple meanings believe themselves to be careful interpreters. Those who see only a single meaning believe themselves to be careful interpreters. So both answer yes, but mean entirely different things by it (which is the whole problem to begin with). Until I know what the author means by "careful interpreters" I can't answer that question.

Virtually every question has similar problems.

 

I also match up with Enns and am also not surprised.

 

I turn out like Dr. Bob and Zenas. On a few of the questions, I was torn between 2 answers.

You seem to be most closely aligned with the Single Meaning, Multiple Contexts and Referents view, a view defended by Darrell L. Bock in the book “Three Views on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament” (edited by Kenneth Berding and Jonathan Lunde, Nov. 2008). This view affirms the singular nature of the meanings intended by the OT and NT authors when OT texts are cited in the NT. In spite of this essential unity in meaning, however, the words of the OT authors frequently take on new dimensions of significance and are found to apply appropriately to new referents and new situations as God’s purposes unfold in the larger canonical context. Often, these referents were not in the minds of the OT authors when they penned their texts.

 

You seem to be most closely aligned with the Single Meaning, Unified Referents view, a view defended by Walter C. Kaiser Jr. in the book “Three Views on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament” (edited by Kenneth Berding and Jonathan Lunde, Nov. 2008). This view denies any distinction between what the OT author intends by his words and what the NT author intends (therefore a “single meaning”). In addition to any prior reference, the OT writer is to be understood as ultimately having the same people or events in mind when he writes his text as the NT author does when he refers that text to Jesus and the community defined by him.
this was my result,
Gwyneth