Indirect and Subtle Allusions to the Hebrew Bible in the New Testament (Part 3)
Unexpected and Creative Uses
This post is a continuation of a previous post discussing the subtle and indirect uses of the Hebrew Bible in the New Testament. Click here to read the previous post.
While the instances where New Testament authors directly quote from or cite the Hebrew Scriptures are abundantly evident, a deeper examination reveals a collection of subtler allusions and echoes woven throughout these texts. These more indirect uses, while often overlooked, offer significant insight into the interpretive lenses through which early Christian writers engaged the Hebrew Bible.
One avenue for understanding these nuanced intertextual links lies in tracing how specific words, phrases, or themes from the Hebrew Bible find unique representation within the New Testament texts. Literary critics and exegetes have meticulously analyzed potential cases where New Testament passages seem to evoke distinct scriptural patterns, perhaps through purposeful rhetorical use or unconscious cultural conditioning. Did the New Testament authors deliberately harness recognizable language and imagery to reinforce their theological perspectives? Or did the pervasive influence of the Hebrew Bible naturally manifest in their writings, reflecting a thought world profoundly shaped by these texts?
As these intertextual relationships are analyzed and interpreted, intriguing questions can and should emerge. How might the exegetical approaches of New Testament figures align with, or diverge from, traditional readings found across ancient Jewish and Christian communities? Might the very existence of these indirect literary links challenge assumptions about rigid interpretive boundaries? Such questions open further exploring of the developmental trajectories of scriptural interpretation over centuries of lived tradition.
The relevance of these inquiries extends well beyond academic analyses, however. For communities of faith seeking understanding of scripture and tradition, recognizing the intricate interplay between Hebrew Bible and New Testament offers intrigue. By examining how the earliest Christian writers engaged the sacred texts of Israel, new dimensions of literary wisdom may emerge to illumine contemporary exegetical and theological reflection.
In the interpretive landscape surrounding these literary relationships lie opportunities for an ever-deepening engagement with scripture and tradition. Whether illuminating the historical circumstances that pushed textual development or unearthing new means of interacting with the text on a more personal level, continued examination promises to yield interesting discoveries.
One who argues with his Creator is in grave danger, one who is like a mere shard among the other shards on the ground! The clay should not say to the potter, “What in the world are you doing? Your work lacks skill!” (Isaiah 45:9)
You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who has ever resisted his will?” But who indeed are you—a mere human being—to talk back to God? Does what is molded say to the molder, “Why have you made me like this?” (Romans 9:19-20)1
The emphasis shared between Isaiah 45:9 and Romans 9:18-20 lies in the ways the Isaiah and Paul employ the metaphor of the potter and clay to illustrate the relationship between God and humanity. In the Isaianic passage, this imagery is invoked within the context of addressing the rebellious nation of Israel, who are defiantly challenging God's chosen means of redemption and deliverance.2 The confrontational language of the clay questioning and contending with the potter serves as a scathing satirical representation of Israel's audacious rebellion, accusations, and resistance against YHWH's sovereign will and wise purposes. Paul draws upon this same metaphorical language from Isaiah, appropriating it to grapple with the perplexing and divisive issue of his perceptions of Israel's rejection of God's redemptive plan. Just as Isaiah employed the potter/clay imagery to rebuke Israel's stubborn defiance, Paul uses it as a illustration of resistance to the culmination of God's promises and covenants.
Significantly, in the original Isaianic passages, the clay is depicted not as a passive, inanimate object, but rather as actively challenging and questioning the decisions and methods of the potter. This detail suggests a deliberate acknowledgment of humanity's capacity for resistance and rebellion against the divine will, even in the face of God's sovereign prerogative. The apostle Paul's parallel usage of this metaphor in Romans 9 carries similar implications, inviting a nuanced understanding of the divine-human relationship that recognizes the complex interplay between God's overarching purposes and human moral agency.
While these passages both affirm God's supreme authority and wisdom, they simultaneously seem to wrestle with the perplexing reality of human resistance and defiance. The clay's audacious questioning of the potter's methods and decisions serves as a potent reminder that the biblical narrative does not present humanity as merely passive objects, devoid of any capacity for agency. Instead, these metaphorical depictions invite a deeper exploration of the intricate tensions and mysteries inherent in the relationship between the divine and human wills.
Rather than offering simplistic or dogmatic resolutions, the parallel usage of the potter/clay metaphor in Isaiah 45 and Romans 9 should prompts more thoughtful theological reflection and grappling with the complexities of this age-old question. Paul's questions and potential answers are not new and his use of Isaiah represents a conscious effort, not to merely provide pure theological dogma, but rather to contextualize his own experience with Israel's history. These passages may even ask readers to hold in dynamic tension the biblical affirmations of the divine and human wills, acknowledging the limitations of human understanding while also recognizing the reality of human resistance and rebellion within the grand narrative of divine redemption.
How blessed is the one whom you instruct, O Lord, the one whom you teach from your law in order to protect him from times of trouble, until the wicked are destroyed. Certainly, the Lord does not forsake his people; he does not abandon the nation that belongs to him. (Psalm 94:12-14)
So I ask, God has not rejected his people, has he? Absolutely not! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin. God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew! (Romans 11:1-2)3
Paul's impassioned rhetorical question in Romans 11:1 - “God has not rejected his people, has he?” - cuts to the core of a complex issue in the early Christian movement. Did much of the Jewish community’s rejection of Jesus signal their permanent severance from God's covenant purposes? From his perspective, Paul resolutely denies this notion, rooting his repudiation in key scriptural allusions regarding God’s unfailing commitment to the people He has claimed as His own inheritance.
Among the biblical witness Paul incorporates into his rebuttal is Psalm 94, a prayer voicing both lament over oppressors and trust in YHWH's righteousness to ultimately vindicate His people.4 The psalmist's confession that “the Lord will not forsake his inheritance” serves as a ray of hope amidst the darkness of injustice. When cited against the backdrop of his own experiences, these words take on heightened significance as Paul seeks to assuage complaints or fears of God abandoning His covenant people.
Throughout this rhetoric, the psalmist's affirmations concerning God’s unfailing covenantal commitment provide a stabilizing refrain. Though the path is clouded and fraught, Psalm 94 offers the assurance that Israel’s apparent disagreement can never negate God’s fidelity to His people or nullify His purposes. Paul casts the Jewish nation’s response to the Christ-event not as their irrevocable dissolution, but as an anguishing birth-pang heralding life from the dead for the entire world (Romans 11:15). The moorings of hope in Psalm 94 provide the literary and theological backdrop for this vision.
An inheritance gained easily in the beginning will not be blessed in the end. Do not say, “I will pay back evil!” Wait for the Lord, so that he may vindicate you. The Lord abhors differing weights, and dishonest scales are wicked. (Proverbs 20:21-23)
Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep. Live in harmony with one another; do not be haughty but associate with the lowly. Do not be conceited. Do not repay anyone evil for evil; consider what is good before all people. If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all people. (Romans 12:15-18)5
The call to resist retaliation and instead entrust justice to God reverberates equally in both Proverbs 20 and Romans 12. In the Proverbs passage, the sage imparts prudential wisdom urging restraint from vengeful reprisals - “Do not say, ‘I will pay back evil!’”. This ethic of non-retaliation is coupled with an admonition against dishonest dealings, suggesting an ethos of patient integrity before God who abhors all that is corrupt or unjust. Paul's instructions in Romans bear striking resonance, commanding believers to “not repay anyone evil for evil” while exhorting pursuit of peaceable conduct towards all.
The parallel extends beyond mere ethical injunctions against vengeance. Both texts intimate a profound theological rationale anchoring this ethic of non-retaliation - a vision of the Lord as the supreme arbiter and vindicator.6 Proverbs 20:22 urges deference to divine justice with the words “Wait for the LORD, so that he may vindicate you.” Paul's exhortation is likely shaped by this very scriptural premise - if God alone judges rightly and impartially, then human attempts at personal retribution are fundamentally incompatible with trusting His sovereign justice. The ethic flows from the theological reality.
For the Roman believers, this counterintuitive path of non-retaliation would have a countercultural meaning. Drawing on proverbial wisdom's invocation of divine vindicating justice, Paul posits a way of embodying faithfulness amidst oppression and injustice - a way rooted not in pragmatic calculation but transformative allegiance to the One who “judges rightly”.
This is what the Lord, your Protector, says, the one who formed you in the womb: “I am the Lord, who made everything, who alone stretched out the sky, who fashioned the earth all by myself, who frustrates the omens of the empty talkers and humiliates the omen readers, who overturns the counsel of the wise men and makes their advice seem foolish, who fulfills the oracles of his prophetic servants and brings to pass the announcements of his messengers … (Isaiah 44:24-26)
Where is the wise man? Where is the expert in the Mosaic law? Where is the debater of this age? Has God not made the wisdom of the world foolish? (1 Corinthians 1:20)7
Isaiah 44 resounds with the affirmations of YHWH’s sovereignty over all created reality and human wisdom. Paul's rhetorical questions in 1 Corinthians 1:20 appear to consciously echo this very Isaianic text, suggesting an intriguing exegetical move on the apostle's part.8
The humiliation of worldly wisdom reinforces the revelatory power enacted through Judah's constitutional offices. Paul's Christological hermeneutic, however, repurposes this motif in stunning fashion. Now it is the death of the Messiah on a cross that emerges as the definitive “folly” by which God “has made foolish the wisdom of the world”. The Crucified Messiah becomes the apex of divine self-disclosure, decisively eclipsing human philosophies.
Yet this turn does not undermine Paul's deployment of Isaiah’s rhetoric from its historical context. Just as YHWH pledges to Jerusalem and Judah's towns “You will be rebuilt, I will raise up your ruins”, so the apostle discerns in the crucifixition the inauguration of a new creation project - a divinely-reconstructed humanity being birthed from the ruins through participation in Jesus' death and resurrection. The apparent “folly” of the cross unveils the paradoxical wisdom by which God overthrows corruptible wisdom to raise an imperishable dwelling.
This Isaianic subversion and recalibration continues into 1 Corinthians 1:27 as Paul rejoices in how the Lord has chosen the “foolish, weak, lowly and despised” things of the world to shame its power and wisdom. The prophet's polemic against arrogant counselors morphs into an announcement of God's new mode of cosmic reconstruction - through the self-emptying of Christ and the formation of a tertiary community rooted in the cross.
“‘This day will become a memorial for you, and you will celebrate it as a festival to the Lord—you will celebrate it perpetually as a lasting ordinance. For seven days you must eat bread made without yeast. Surely on the first day you must put away yeast from your houses because anyone who eats bread made with yeast from the first day to the seventh day will be cut off from Israel. (Exodus 12:14-15)
When you gather together in the name of our Lord Jesus, and I am with you in spirit, along with the power of our Lord Jesus, hand this man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord. Your boasting is not good. Don’t you know that a little yeast affects the whole batch of dough? Clean out the old yeast so that you may be a new batch of dough—you are, in fact, without yeast. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. So then, let us celebrate the festival, not with the old yeast, the yeast of vice and evil, but with the bread without yeast, the bread of sincerity and truth. (1 Corinthians 5:4-8)9
Paul's injunction to the Corinthian church to clean out the old yeast echoes the Passover instructions found in Exodus 12.10 The apostle's language of purging leaven/yeast and becoming a “new batch” of unleavened dough unmistakably evokes the exodus narrative's command to remove all leaven for the festival's seven-day duration. Paul's deployment of this biblical metaphor takes on distinct theological dimensions as he maps it onto the communal realities confronting the Corinthian believers.
For the exodus event, the prohibition against leaven was a signal of Israel's new identity as a redeemed people set apart. Removing this cultic impurity enabled their celebration of YHWH's liberating act instituting the covenant community. Paul's appropriation of this symbolism suggests his understanding of the Corinthian church's existence as a new exodus - one brought about through Christ. The call to purge sin's “leaven” is not mere ethical exhortation, but a summons to embrace their inclusion into the divine community.
Pay attention, Israel, and be careful to do this so that it may go well with you and that you may increase greatly in number—as the Lord, the God of your ancestors, said to you, you will have a land flowing with milk and honey. Hear, O Israel: The Lord is our God, the Lord is one! You must love the Lord your God with your whole mind, your whole being, and all your strength. (Deuteronomy 6:3-5)
With regard then to eating food sacrificed to idols, we know that “an idol in this world is nothing,” and that “there is no God but one.” If after all there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many gods and many lords), yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we live, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we live. (1 Corinthians 8:4-6)11
The affirmation of Israel's monotheistic confession in the Shema finds creative resonance in Paul's instructions to the Corinthians concerning food offered to idols.12 The apostle’s citation does not merely rehearse this creedal declaration - it refracts it through the surprising prism of a declaration of Jesus’ lordship to forge a distinct theological articulation. This hermeneutical move bears profound implications for how the early Christian movement understood its theological foundations.
For the Shema, the proclamation “The LORD is one” stands as the centering axiom of Israel's covenant identity, with wholehearted love serving as the orienting summons of blessed national existence. Paul’s rhetorical assertion “there is no God but one” appears to directly cite this very creedal formula.
This filial reframing then leads Paul to his Christological move - identifying Jesus as the “one Lord, through whom are all things and through whom we live”. The Shema now seems to extends to incorporate Jesus. The “one God” confessed in the Shema is now beheld as Father, with the “one Lord” Jesus Christ possessing a unique filial identity in relation to this paternal source.
The New Testament writers engage the Hebrew Bible in multifaceted and nuanced ways, often employing subtle allusions and echoes rather than direct quotations. These indirect interactions with the scriptures of Israel suggest the authors were significantly in-tune in these traditions, with the texts providing the conceptual backgrounds for how they interpreted their contemporary experiences.
By revisiting motifs, images, and language from the Hebrew Bible, the New Testament texts recontextualize and reapply these elements in surprising new contexts. At times, New Testament authors invoke the voice and perspective of the Hebrew scriptures to reinforce particular ethical instructions or doctrinal teachings.
Staples, Jason A. Vessels of Wrath and God’s Pathos: Potter/Clay Imagery in Rom 9:20–23 (pp. 1-22) Harvard Theological Review, 2022
Gibb, Ian Paul and the Psalms: Paul's Hermeneutic and Worldview (pp. 176-177) University of Glasgow, 2017
Zerbe, Gordon M. “Economic Justice and Nonretaliation in the Dead Sea Scrolls: Implications for New Testament Interpretation” in Charlesworth, James H. (ed.) The Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls: The Second Princeton Symposium on Judaism and Christian Origins (pp. 319-355) Baylor University Press, 2006
Heil, John Paul The Rhetorical Role of Scripture in 1 Corinthians (p. 32) Society of Biblical Literature, 2005
Villeneuve, André Anthropic Temple and Nuptial Symbolism in First Corinthians (pp. 155-171) Letter & Spirit, Vol. 10: Christ Our Passover: Theological Exegesis of St. Paul, 2015
Rainbow, Paul A. Monotheism and Christology in I Corinthians 8.4-6 (p. 173) The Queen's College, 1987