Sidney Greidanus is a retired preaching professor from Calvin Seminary. Greidanus’ Preaching Christ from the Old Testament: A Contemporary Hermeneutical Method is an argument for Christocentric preaching and a history of how Christ has been preached from the OT. It is also an explanation of a biblical method for preaching Christ from the OT. Greidanus describes Christocentric preaching as “preaching sermons which authentically integrate the message of the text with the climax of God’s revelation in the person, work, and/or teaching of Jesus Christ as revealed in the New Testament.”[1] This integration is done using his seven ways to Christ. Previously I explained his first three ways. Below is an explanation of his fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh ways to interpret Christ from the Old Testament.

Greidanus’ fourth way is the way of analogy. Analogy is transferring meaning from a source subject to a target subject. This way links the goal of the original author’s message to the goal or goals of one or more of Jesus’ messages. Analogies can be found when connecting what God does, teaches, and demands of Israel in the OT to the church in the NT.[2] As an example, “God guided and protected Israel through the cloud (Exodus 13:21–22), so God guides and protects his church through Christ ‘to the end of the age’ (Matthew 28:20).”[3]

Greidanus’ fifth way is the way of longitudinal themes, an approach that traces biblical themes from the OT into the NT. The biblical theology process is closely linked to the way of longitudinal themes.[4] It develops a theme through the history of redemption, to make applications for the contemporary church. One example Greidanus provides is the theme of the presence of God with his people that he traces from Jacob at Bethel in Genesis 28:10–22 to Jesus as Immanuel in Matthew 1:23.[5]

Greidanus’ sixth way is the way of NT references. This way is found when NT authors cite OT passages to support their own specific message. However, this message is not wholly distinct from the OT message. These messages can provide a bridge to Christ. An example cited by Greidanus is the reference in Mark 15:34 to Psalm 22:1. If a preacher is expounding Psalm 22, he will need to reference Mark 15:34. But the preacher can also bridge the messages and thus make Christocentric applications.

Greidanus’ seventh is the way of contrast. This final approach highlights distinctions between the OT and the NT. The emphasis is on how Jesus, not any human, changes a message. Greidanus changes a message by highlighting the problems in the OT, which then find their solution in Christ.[6] In one example, Greidanus highlights the difference in the closeness of the individual to the glory of God in Ezekiel 1:28 and John 1:14. Ezekiel is two-steps removed from the glory of God, but by contrast, God himself dwells as a human with his people in the NT.

Greidanus’ ways to Christ are useful tools to train church leaders to interpret Christ from the OT minor prophets. Greidanus’ concern is not to stick to “precise perimeters of a particular way”[7] but rather to be confident that any sermon from the OT has preached Christ. Every preacher of the prophets should share this same goal when using Greidanus’ ways.

*This material was originally published in chapter three of “The Gospel According to Micah: A Christocentric Commentary.” HERE

Sidney Greidanus is a retired preaching professor from Calvin Seminary. Greidanus’ Preaching Christ from the Old Testament: A Contemporary Hermeneutical Method is an argument for Christocentric preaching and a history of how Christ has been preached from the OT. It is also an explanation of a biblical method for preaching Christ from the OT. Greidanus describes Christocentric preaching as “preaching sermons which authentically integrate the message of the text with the climax of God’s revelation in the person, work, and/or teaching of Jesus Christ as revealed in the New Testament.”[1] This integration is done using his seven ways to Christ. Below is an explanation of his first three ways to interpret Christ from the Old Testament.

First, he explains the way of redemptive-historical progression: “Redemptive history, or kingdom history, is the bedrock which supports all the other ways that lead to Christ in the New Testament. Today redemptive history is called the ‘metanarrative,’ or ‘The Story.’”[2] As opposed to creation, fall, redemption, and consummation, he describes the metanarrative of scripture as creation, redemption in OT times, redemption though Jesus Christ, and new creation.[3] Like all biblical theology proponents, he emphasizes a “unified history.”[4] The first way is seeing “every Old Testament text and its addressees in the context of God’s dynamic history, which progresses steadily and reaches its climax in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ and ultimately in the new creation.”[5] The story of David and Goliath is used to explain that every OT narrative can be understood as a personal story, a national history, but also as redemptive history.[6]He goes on to describe that the account of David and Goliath is “more than Israel’s king defeating the enemy; the essence is that the Lord himself defeats the enemy of his people.”[7] Utilizing this first way of redemptive-historical progression and applying it to David and Goliath, he writes, “Thus the battle between David and Goliath is more than a personal scrap; it is more than Israel’s king defeating a powerful enemy; it is a small chapter in the battle between the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent—a battle which reaches its climax in Jesus’ victory over Satan, first with his death and resurrection, and finally at his Second Coming when Satan will be thrown ‘into the lake of fire and sulfur’” (Revelation 20:10).[8]

Second is the way of promise-fulfillment, which is when the OT is interpreted in light of Christ’s fulfillment. Greidanus gives two rules for this method: “First, take into account that God usually fills up his promises progressively—in installments, as it were … Second, in interpreting the text, move from the promise of the Old Testament to the fulfillment in Christ and back again to the Old Testament text.”[9] As an example, he cites the promise of Isaiah 61:1–4 and how it finds fulfillment in the return of the remnant in 583 BC, then its greater fulfillment in Jesus’ first coming as dawn of Jubilee, and finally its ultimate fulfillment in the Day of Judgment.[10] The way of promise-fulfillment is about how a text “was fulfilled, is being fulfilled and will be fulfilled.”[11]

Third is the way of typology. Types are most often people, but can also be institutions and events, which serve as prerepresentations or prefigures of Christ. Of course, the links show Christ to be the perfect escalation and extreme type. Greidanus admits that the original audience would not have recognized most OT types as predictive, but only later does the church recognize the typology.[12] He also warns against the error of typologizing, which is when every detail of the type is interpreted as a type. An example of typologizing is viewing blue, purple, and red in the tabernacle as types pointing to Christ’s heavenliness, kingship, and death.[13] Six rules are provided to protect against typologizing: proceed with using literary-historical interpretation, look for types in the central message not details, determine symbolic meaning, note points of contrast, carry forward the meaning of the symbol, and do more than just draw a typological line to Christ in order to preach Christ.[14] Moses, Joshua, the exodus event, and the institution of the tabernacle are all examples of typology.

Greidanus’ ways to Christ are useful tools to train church leaders to interpret Christ from the OT minor prophets. Greidanus’ concern is not to stick to “precise perimeters of a particular way”[15] but rather to be confident that any sermon from the OT has preached Christ. Every preacher of the prophets should share this same goal when using Greidanus’ ways.

*This material was originally published in chapter three of “The Gospel According to Micah: A Christocentric Commentary.”  HERE

Pastors, read homiletical commentaries. Well, you might respond with the question, “what is a homiletical commentary?” Brother, I’m glad you asked!

There are numerous types of commentaries on the Bible. Exegetical commentaries delve deep into the original languages. Theological commentaries delve deep into how the particular book fits within the larger theology of the Bible. Homiletical commentaries are how a particular pastor not only explains but applies the text. As a pastor, my approach is to use all three types in my sermon preparation.

The need for exegetical commentaries is very obvious to most pastors. Pastors who have not attended seminary might not know Greek and Hebrew. Seminary trained pastors most likely have a working knowledge of the biblical languages. However, even a seminary trained pastor does not have expertise to the degree of the professors writing exegetical commentaries. Therefore, all preachers should do the diligent work of engaging a robust exegetical treatment of the passage they are preaching.

I recommend the Baker Exegetical Commentary series, the Zondervan Exegetical Commentary series, Eerdman’s New International Greek Commentary series, as well as the Word Biblical Commentary series. All four series provide in-depth scholarship that the vast majority of pastors are unable to develop on their own. As a pastor I view these scholars and their books as a gift to the church. They enable me to wrestle with the text to degrees otherwise unattainable for me even though I have a working knowledge of the languages.

The need for theological commentaries is probably obvious to most pastors. Most pastors (seminary trained or not) have a deeper knowledge of theology than the biblical languages. However, there is still a need for pastors to humbly learn from those who have greater expertise. Further, these commentaries tend to make observations and connections that we might miss. At the very least, these works stir the thinking of a busy pastor.

I recommend B&H’s New American Commentary series, IVP’s Tyndale Commentary Series, Eerdman’s classic New International Commentaries on the Old and New Testaments, as well as P&R’s Reformed Expository Commentary series. I have a conviction that you ought to purchase the author not the series. However, by in large, these series are written by scholars and pastors from a sound evangelical perspective. Further, these authors always provide helpful knowledge about the text that I would not have had otherwise.

The need for homiletical commentaries might not be as apparent for most pastors. These commentaries are typically the reworking of a pastor’s sermons on a book of the Bible. These books have a more pastoral tone than exegetical or theological commentaries. They are demonstrations of not only how to explain a text but also apply a text. They are helpful to bridge a pastor from thinking about what the text means to how it can help his congregation.

I recommend Crossway’s Preaching the Word series, Ligonier Ministries’ Expositional Commentary series, and The Bible Exposition Commentary series. My recent book The Gospel According to Micah: A Christocentric Commentary is in the vein of a homiletical commentary. These commentaries are a particular blessing because they link the exegetical work of understanding to the pastoral work of application. They drive the preacher to intentionally think through how his passage ministers to his church.

Finally, I advocate the need for a pastor to read widely a diversity of commentaries. Certainly, a pastor should study sound evangelical works. However, pastors should not be afraid to venture outside the camp. Further, more academically minded brothers should diversify their study to include homiletical works. Likewise, brothers focused more on practical concerns should do the work of studying their text at a more academic level. In the end, I urge pastors to include homiletical works in their rhythms because it will ensure their preaching moves from the theoretical realm to the practical realm. Your church will thank you for this type of pastoral care.

How does Jesus relate to justice? Two extremes should be avoided when answering this question. One extreme argues that Jesus has nothing to do with justice. Another extreme answer is that Jesus is primarily about justice.

Of course, the terms should be defined. What is justice? Today the term “social justice” is thrown around. Technically, social justice is about the unfair distribution of wealth or opportunity or privilege in a society. Did Jesus care about the fair distribution of wealth? Was he a revolutionary who came to bring about a classless society? Does he have anything to say regarding topics like white privilege?

Again, one extreme would argue that if this is the meaning of justice then Jesus has nothing to do with justice. However, again, another extreme would argue that Jesus was primarily concerned with bringing about a more just society.

Preachers have long turned to the prophets in order to speak to justice. For example, the great civil rights preacher Martin Luther King Jr. regularly turned to the prophets for images in his sermons. He quoted Amos 5:24 in his “I Have a Dream” speech when he said he would not be satisfied until “justice rolls down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream.” In the same speech he referenced Isaiah 40:4-5 when he spoke of a dream where “every valley shall be exalted, and every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight; and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together.” In his “Letter From a Birmingham Jail” he wrote, “I am in Birmingham because injustice is here. Just as the eighth-century prophets left their little villages and carried their ‘thus saith the Lord’ far beyond the boundaries of their hometowns.” Further, the night before he died, he preached at Memphis’ Masonic Temple and said, “But I’m not concerned about that now. I just want to do God’s will. And he’s allowed me to go to the mountain, and I’ve looked over. And I have seen the Promised Land.”

It is natural and right for Christians to go to those images and to the prophets when advocating for justice. After all, the prophets did more forthtelling than foretelling. Their voices still ring in the face of contemporary injustices. Following the example of Martin Luther King Jr., preachers should use their voices to advocate for a more just society. But it matters how we use those passages. Sound hermeneutical principles and biblical theology still apply when preaching the prophets. Contemporary preachers must demonstrate how they get from a verse like Amos 5:24 to tax policy.

For example, Micah 6:8 reads, “He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?” The social justice warriors love the “do justice” part of this verse. They are right that this verse has something to say regarding tort reform and length of jail sentences. However, do social justice warriors have the same love for the “love kindness” and “walk humbly with your God” parts? Further, what does it mean to “walk humbly with your God?” Even further still, how does walking humbly with God relate to doing justice? Sound hermeneutical principles and biblical theology help answer those questions.

You see, the way Jesus relates to justice is through a Christocentric interpretation and application of the prophets. When Jesus was given the chance to interpret “all the Prophets” (Luke 24:27) he interpreted them according to himself and his works. Luke 24:27 says he interpreted the prophets “concerning himself.” He did not interpret the prophets disconnected from himself and his gospel works.

Likewise, when contemporary preachers try to jump from Micah 6:8 to marginal tax rates, they must first connect Micah 6:8 to Jesus and the gospel. For example, what does it mean to “walk humbly with your God?” Romans 6:4 says, “We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised form the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.” A preacher cannot go straight from Micah 6:8 to tax codes without first addressing our new life in Christ. The interpretation and application are more profound than just voting a certain way. Faithful preaching on justice must include clarity on how someone is born again through faith in Christ and then how they live new lives united to Christ.

Does Jesus have something to say about injustices? Yes, but it is more profound than a political rant to vote a particular issue. Jesus’ ethics are connected to his person and works. He wants us to work for justice, but according to our new life in him. Further, true humility toward God recognizes that he is the only one to really bring about perfect lasting justice. Eternal justice will not ultimately come until he returns. However, the call is to work for it here while we are here. But, when preaching the prophets, never forget that something glorious happened after the prophets that gives new illumination to the prophets. Jesus does speak to injustice, but his sermon is more beautiful radical and profound than any politician’s speech.