Jesus Teaches the Old Testament: The Importance of Jewish Roots Studies, Part 1

What is the big deal about Jewish Roots? How can we better understand Jesus by examining the debates of His day? Why should we care if He derived some of His teaching from Old Testament passages?

The answer is simple: context. Jewish Roots studies can contribute toward increasing the Biblical context; when we increase context, we increase understanding.

As a conservative evangelical, I hold the Scriptures in high regard. My reverence for the Scriptures means I seek to interpret them fairly, using a method described by the term, “Historical-Grammatical.” Norman Geisler comments in The Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics:

This means the correct interpretation is the one which discovers the meaning of the text in its grammatical forms and in the historical, cultural context in which the text is expressed.¹



If the reader agrees that historical and cultural contexts are helpful when it comes to interpreting Scripture accurately, we have answered the question as to why the Jewish Roots of Scripture matter; they contribute to the historical and cultural context of the New Testament.

Christians have historically embraced unflattering attitudes about Jewish Roots studies because of an anti-Semitic frame of mind dominating the Christian church for centuries. We should remember that even the Protestant movement blossomed in the soil of an anti-Semitic culture.

In modern times, some interpreters place little value upon Jewish Roots studies because they may over-emphasize a doctrine referred to as the Perspicuity of Scripture; you may know it by its simpler name: the Clarity of Scripture. Misused, this doctrine can minimize the importance of the cultural context of the Scriptures in general, not just Jewish Roots studies. Sometimes the doctrine of the Clarity of Scripture is invoked selectively and inconsistently.

I do believe the Scriptures are adequately clear when it comes to the major teachings of the Bible, but I also believe our understanding can be sharpened and honed beyond the merely adequate, and that increasing context — be it cultural or otherwise — can add insight toward interpreting a text more fully. I also believe the Jewish culture — more than other cultures (like Greek or Roman) — is particularly helpful, since this is the context of both testaments.

This is not to say that no Christians were interested in the Jewish Roots of our faith until after World War II. John Lightfoot’s work, “A Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica” was published in 1658! The four-volume set includes his comments through 1 Corinthians. Due to his untimely death, the set was never completed.

Another commentator worth noting is John Gill (1697-1711). Like Lightfoot, Gill freely quotes or includes notes from the Talmud and other Jewish sources within his commentaries. Although few referred to Jewish Roots materials quite as frequently as these two, the latter 19^th century saw a significant increase in Jewish Roots interest.

Others discovered an important concept we now refer to as “midrash” (a Jewish-style elaboration upon Scripture), though they did not use the term. By pouring over both testaments. Jonathan Edwards, for example, came upon a New Testament midrash developed from an Old Testament passage. In his book, The Religious Affections, Edwards ties the use of the Hebrew word “shibboleth” in Judges 12:5-6 to the teachings of Jesus.

In Judges 12, the word “shibboleth” was used to distinguish a regional accent during an instance of war. Northern Israelite impostors were sorted from their southern counterparts by the ability — or inability — to properly pronounce the word “shibboleth,” a word referring to the fruit (grain) of a crop.

Edwards writes,

As it is the ear of the fruit which distinguishes the wheat from the tares, so this is the true Shibboleth, that he who stands as judge at the passages of Jordan, makes use of to distinguish those that should be slain at the passages. For the Hebrew word Shibboleth signifies an ear of corn. And perhaps the more full pronunciation of Jephthah’s friends, Shibboleth, may represent a full ear with fruit in it, typifying the fruits of the friends of Christ…²



Since the word “shibboleth” means “fruit,” this connects us to Christ’s teaching that, “Thus, by their fruit [karpos, perhaps translated from the Hebrew shibboleth] you will recognize them.” To make this connection, one must accept that Jesus is taking an Old Testament teaching and applying it in a different way for His disciples.

When it comes to Biblical hermeneutics (the science of interpretation), the prime benefit of Jewish Roots studies is first and foremost (in my view) helping us to recognize midrash (or possible midrash) when we see it.³

While Jewish Roots studies help us discover midrashim, they offer a second benefit for the student of the New Testament: setting the broader context. When we discover what the major debates of the day were within the Judaism of the era (and perhaps the diversity of opinions about those debates), this can cue us in to what exactly Jesus (or Paul, etc.) is addressing in certain instances. This is not to say that the Roman or Greek cultures are not part of the context of the New Testament; they are. My viewpoint is that the Old Testament and the Jewish story line are the most important contexts. The division, however, is not a neat one: Greek and Roman culture wielded a significant influence upon first century Jewish culture!

Jewish Roots studies are important. In the next installment, I will (very briefly) summarize how Jewish Roots studies have risen to a greater prominence in portions of the evangelical world.