Did the Apostles just invent Jesus as the Messiah by using Old Testament prophecies?


The challenge that is often posed by skeptics to the faithful is whether the Apostles simply read the Old Testament into the Passion narrative in the wake of the crucifixion of Jesus. It is a fair challenge, one that I’ve wrestled with myself. It’s easy to think that if you needed to make a specific narrative to fit what happened to your leader who was supposed to be the Messiah to go look for answers in Scripture.

My answer would be rather simple and most of it has to rely on the assent to the available evidence. St. Paul writes, “but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, 24 but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men. (1 Cor. 1:23 RSV).

There are two particular Old Testament prophecies that are used by Christians to claim that Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah. The Key Old Testament texts within the Passion Narrative are Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22. Pope Benedict XVI writes, “A great many Old Testament allusions are woven into the Passion narrative. Two of them are of fundamental significance, because they span, as it were, the whole of the Passion event and shed light upon it theologically: Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53. (Pope Benedict XVI, Jesus of Nazareth Vol. 2, p.204.)”

There have been Messiah figures before and after Jesus; however, when they died or were executed their disciples disbanded for the next figure to appear. The Messiah was supposed to restore the glory of the Kingdom of Israel and Jesus’ death was a mockery—a stumbling block for the Jews, as St. Paul expresses here. Furthermore, The pagans would see that a God who dies is no God at all, it would be folly to them.”

So, these particular passages that have been put into the Gospel accounts in reference to the Passion have to be read in hindsight of the glorification of Christ, Jesus. If Christ remains in his tomb then these passages would really be meaningless, so the issue becomes a secondary issue in dialogue with skeptics. The primary issue as always been the Resurrection. Jesus says, An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign; but no sign shall be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. 40 For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, so will the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. (Mt 12:38–40 RSV).

The ultimate sign to the truth of the Gospel is and always has been the resurrection without it Jesus would be another failed Messiah figure. St. Paul explains this further in his First Letter to the Corinthians:

13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised;14 If Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. 15 We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified of God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised. 17 If Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. ( 1 Cor. 15:13–17 RSV).

5 thoughts on “Did the Apostles just invent Jesus as the Messiah by using Old Testament prophecies?

  1. Nicholas

    The more I have reflected on things, the more I realise we have been left to faith and faith alone. Apologetics makes the case that it is more reasonable to believe the Gospel than not believe it. but no one (human) can create certainty in us. It makes more sense to believe in the Resurrection than to deny it, but in this life we have the capacity for doubt.

    As Paul says, without the truth of the Resurrection, we are the most wretched of all men, living on a false hope. Part of the the Reformation tradition is emphasising the need to internalise the Gospel – not that this is lacking in other traditions. Evangelicalism was about reviving that premise after Protestantism had become cultural, just as Catholicism and Orthodoxy had before it.

    When we return to the narratives and the idea of a temptation to “read Isaiah 53 into the events”, on sober reflection, we realise that just won’t wash. The Disciples died for their faith – that should tell us something. And if they wanted to invent the Gospel, they probably would have chosen to read Yom Kippur into the event, not Passover. But the Yom Kippur connection came much later, with the Epistle to the Hebrews, and it still seems quite weak there (which incidentally has many of us to conclude that Yom Kippur will be fulfilled in the Second Advent, which is probably the prophetic emphasis for that feast).

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I certainly reject fideism. But with that being said, I think that most, if not all, decisions are not made with logical certainty, but rather as St. John Henry Newman proposed an assent to certitude.

      Recently, for example, in a Catechism class, I asked a young girl how she knew her mother was her mother. And every reason she gave me I gave a skeptical rejection. I had her finally conclude that she couldn’t be 100% certain based on the facts, but rather took the Kierkegaard leap of faith based on the evidence she’s been given.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Nicholas

        A lot of our religious experiences can be discounted. Certain experiences of God that I have had could be explained as wish fulfilment and others as coincidence or me wanting to see more than was really there. Nevertheless, I believe that a number of those are genuine and can accept that others may not be or just aren’t easily defined.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. I’ve listened to some dialogues between Trent Horn and Skeptics and what is interesting is that many skeptics seem to demand a personal religious experience to be able to believe. One that they would discount if it occurred to someone else. Odd.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. Nicholas

        Very odd. Some people just won’t accept anything that’s offered to them, of course. But in other cases, Sometimes I find myself wondering if the debate context just makes things worse. I remember when I took an interest in Christianity again, it was because someone reached out to me and his “aura”, for want of a better word, exuded kindness. That was attractive in a context in which I was vulnerable and unhappy.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s