Gospel Of John Research Paper

The Old Testament gives the appearance of existing as a varied series of histories, laws, poems, and genealogies. However, we know that the major theme of scripture is the eternal plan of God for humanity through Jesus Christ. As such, it is reasonable to believe every word of that document speaks to the work and the person of the Son of God. The Church has long known that Jesus was the final revelation of God's efforts on earth (Hebrews 1:1). Yet, the depth of the scripture's expression concerning the Lord has always caught the Disciples of Christ, both past, and current, by surprise (Luke 24:24-27). Most Christians, at first blush, agree the whole Bible is about the Lord. Yet, if one were to ask how this or that verse contributes toward

God has established in our present economy that the entirety of the Spirit's message is about Jesus Christ. That truth should lead us to acknowledge the Old Testament as being fully about the Lord. After all, the Holy Spirit moved through the authors of God's writings and the Spirit's conversation always concern Jesus (Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:20; John 14:26, 15:26, & 16:13, 14). Jesus speaks on this point while on the road to Emmaus. The resurrected King met with two of His disciples and, beginning with Moses and working through the prophets, interpreted to them all the scriptures of things concerning Himself. He was amazed they lacked the belief and understanding of the scriptures spoken of (Luke 24:24-27). How do we avoid a similar response from the Lord? We will consider three proofs in this essay. First: The primary, if not the entire, instruction in Jesus' personal knowledge of His work came from the Old Testament. Second: The Apostles recognized the history of Israel as being explicit about the Messiah. Finally: The law itself is an expression of the person and character of Jesus. If the New Testament writers understood these things, then we can as

Not only did the Lord use these words in His self-identity, but the Apostles used them in their recognition of Him as Messiah. Matthew seemed to be the most intimately connected with this phenomenon, but the other Gospel writers were also aware of Israel's foretelling of Jesus' life (John 19:24, 28; Luke 21:22; Mark 14:49). What made Matthew's recognition so astonishing was even those historical events which spoke of occurrences which had no obvious sign of being about the Messiah were interpreted as otherwise. Matthew 2:15 is a fulfillment of Hosea 2:15, 11:1. In Hosea, the prophet speaks of the deliverance of Israel from Egypt's enslavement. We have no indication of a Messianic promise. Yet, for the apostle, the history of Israel represented the Messiah's life. Israel's history becomes a shadow and type of the Messiah. In about one hundred places in the New Testament, the writer connected an event of Israel's history with Jesus. Virtually every facet of the Lord's life, ministry, purpose, person, and consequences are shown to be the completion of Old Testament writings. This interpretive understanding was known to the Pharisees as well. When Herod asked the scribes where the Messiah was to be born (Matthew 2:4), they responded with a quote from 2 Samuel 5:2 about the coronation of King David that the later prophet Micah amplified into a Messianic prophecy (Micah