Douglas S. Huffman. <i>Understanding the New Testament Use of the Old Testament: Forms, Features, Framings, and Functions</i>

The author states that this brief book is to serve as a guide to those who want to enter the study of the use of the OT in the NT. As well as an introduction to this field, Huffman seeks to contribute to the topic through the use of taxonomies: four forms of citations and four different allusion classifications. The book presents “a rigorous taxonomy of ten overlapping function categories” (p. xii). These “more rigorous taxonomies of the forms and functions of the New Testament use of the Old Testament are the book’s primary contribution to this particular theological discipline” (p. xii). The author approaches these taxonomies as “continuous and overlapping categories” rather than giving firm boundaries. Huffman sets out to examine some of the basic elements in the study of the NT’s use of the OT and touch on many of the issues in this subject. There are six chapters, three appendixes, and a glossary. The glossary is important due to the variability of terminology on this subject, such as “echo” and “allusion.”Chapter 1 introduces the study of the NT’s use of the OT. Throughout the book, there are tables and sidebars, such as table 1.1, “Methodological Issues for Studying the New Testament Use of the Old Testament.” Huffman describes and compares the theological presuppositions of the NT writers as laid out by Darrell Bock and G. K. Beale. Next, the chapter discusses perspectives of interpreters of the NT use of the OT. Often, discussions on method focus on citations, but Huffman observes that there is far more to the NT use of the OT than citations. He also suggests that sometimes his own approach is eclectic. Next, Huffman discusses the specific procedures used by some to analyze a specific OT text in the NT. The author lists the steps he recommends for analyzing a given NT use of the OT.Chapter 2 considers the classification of forms for the use of the OT in the NT. The form of a passage is the “means by which a NT writer refers to an OT text (p. 25). Huffman stresses the ambiguous terms for the NT’s use of the OT. Huffman suggests that refinement is needed in the definition of terms. He proposes using a taxonomy that shows the overlapping relationships of the forms. This will make scholarly interaction easier. The author critiques, for example, making conclusions about Luke’s use of Scripture based only on explicit quotations. He presents a taxonomy that is multilevel, rather than linear. It contains eight items, four under the category of citations: introduced quotations, unintroduced quotations, introduced paraphrases, and unintroduced paraphrases. The four in the category of allusions and recollections include: Scripture summaries, historical reminiscences; specific allusions, and thematic echoes. Unlike some scholars, Huffman sees allusions and echoes as separate forms of referencing Scripture. The forms are each described and the author offers examples of OT references that are easy to assign to one sector of the diagram, as well as identifying types of references that cannot easily be classified, for example, composite citations. This makes the counting of OT references difficult, to say the least. Identification of OT references in the NT is complicated. Huffman states that, “here we can make the oxymoronic observation that, when scholars all agree that a particular reference to the OT is not to be classified as a citation, they are more prone to disagreement about what kind of no-citation form classification best applies to that particular instance” (p. 42). This chapter’s contribution to the discussion is “the visual charting of form classification of NT authors’ use of the OT on a two-dimensional continuum that clarifies the potential overlap between classifications” (p. 43). In using this approach, scholars may see that their different classifications are not all that different.“Features for Form Identification in the New Testament Use of the Old Testament” is the subject of chapter 3. The existence of a taxonomy of forms shows the need for criteria to distinguish between various forms. Disagreements often arise from ambiguous definitions of criteria for identifying a citation. Huffman seeks to offer a clarification of terms in order to improve scholarly conversations about the NT use of the OT. Huffman describes his criteria for identifying an OT citation including the vocabulary of introductory formula, such as γράϕω. Sometimes, as in Acts 7:5, what could be a quotation has been transformed into a specific allusion. This is done by changing word order, grammatical changes, and pronominal shifts. There are many examples of unintroduced quotations and paraphrases in the Pauline corpus. These can be identified by parallel wording, interpretive glosses, and syntactical tension. Huffman then moves to recollections, that is, introductions with no citations. These include OT people or events. The chapter includes a list of apparent citations that are difficult to find in the OT, for example, John 7:38. The chapter offers criteria for identifying direct allusions and thematic echoes, such as those by Thompson, Hays, and MacDonald.Chapter 4 concerns “Framing Classifications for the New Testament Use of the Old Testament.” Framing is distinct from forms, although there is some overlap. Framing is the “means by which a NT writer presents the OT passage and not merely the characteristics of the OT reference (i.e., the form) or his motives for appealing to that particular OT passage (i.e., the function)” (p. 73). Framing is the setting in which the author places the OT reference. While scholars debate whether some Jewish exegetical practice caused a NT writer to use an OT passage out of context, Huffman defers and shows how framing provides a way forward. He asserts first that he stands with those who see the NT writers as being “entirely faithful to the original OT contexts in the use of the Scriptures” (p. 76). To flesh out his basis for this assertion, the author offers two points.First, while the NT authors utilized Jewish appropriation techniques, they had very different hermeneutical axioms because of the Holy Spirit and the model of Jesus. This led the NT writers to different, even opposing, conclusions. Unlike rabbinical materials, the NT writers used the same methods for reading the OT that the OT itself evinces. Second, in considering early Jewish interpretational methods, these could be applied in both proper and improper ways. In the hands of faithful interpreters, Jewish exegetical methods “were utilized for faithful expression of the true theology of the Scriptures.” Their expositional and application methods are what we would call, “doing theology.”Huffman offers a taxonomy of fifteen framing methods the NT authors employed when using the OT. The first of these, midrashic exegetical framing, is of special note because midrash as practiced by the rabbis was not practiced until about AD 200, a point made strongly by Richard Hays. Nevertheless, Huffman points to places in the OT where something like midrash appears. He lists rules for interpretation set forth by various rabbis. He then argues that Hillel’s thirteen rules for interpretation may be seen being applied at points in the NT authors’ treatment of the OT. The author emphasizes that NT authors did not take passages out of their original context. Recognizing these practices as framings, rather than merely exegetical practices, enables us to see the NT writers practicing “faithfulness to the intentions of the original OT authors, even in places where such faithfulness has been previously questioned” (p. 100). This is an important topic for understanding how the NT uses the OT, and Huffman does a good job of defending his view.Chapter 5 considers “Function Classifications for the New Testament Use of the Old Testament.” Function is how an NT author uses the OT passage in his argument. This is perhaps, Huffman states, the most complicated taxonomy because it mixes forms, framing, and function. 2 Tim 3:14–17 shows that the OT is applicable in multiple ways to the Christian life. “Function” in this case is the “discourse purpose for which the NT writer is using the OT text.” This is the role the OT text plays in the NT writer’s literary presentation or argument. The author assumes that the NT writers had specific reasons for using the OT in their texts, and the functions help in identifying these reasons. Table 5.1 shows the taxonomies of others for function. This is one of the book’s strengths. Huffman has his own view and method, but he engages fairly with other views. Using John Goldingay’s taxonomy as a foundation, Huffman proposes a taxonomy of the functions played by OT texts in the NT. He identifies ten specific classifications in clusters, but he presents them in a way that shows overlaps. In describing each function, Huffman spends significant time on the meaning of promise/prophecy/pattern-fulfillment. He asserts that a single meaning can have multiple referents, a single promise can have a pattern of multiple applications. It is these descriptions of functions that are most likely to spur debate. It would have been helpful for Huffman to deal in some depth with thematic echoes. Intertextual echoes have become a significant area of research, not least because of the work of Hays.Chapter 6 concerns “The New Testament Use of the Old Testament in Luke and Acts.” Huffman provides a brief investigation into how Luke used Scripture, how it relates to theological themes, and from these suggests some programmatic themes in Luke’s work. Luke–Acts uses all eight forms. After briefly describing the theological themes others find in Luke–Acts, Huffman offers no functions for individual texts, but he considers Luke’s larger goals “at the larger discourse level for using Scripture.” He identifies Luke’s five programmatic motives for his use of Scripture. Luke’s allusions to Scripture are as important as his citations. Luke considers Scripture authoritative. Luke’s position on the Law is that it is fulfilled in Jesus, and faith is needed to keep it. Luke’s use of Scripture aims to bring people to believe in Jesus and to bring them to testify about Jesus.This volume will be helpful to both those well-versed in this topic and those who are new to the questions that the NT use of the OT raises. The many tables and figures are helpful for summarizing and comparing otherwise complex procedures or principles, such as figure 2.1, which shows the relations of the eight types of forms. While an appendix is often not all that significant, readers will benefit from reading at least Appendix A, “Apparent Citations Introduced in the New Testament but Difficult to Locate in the Old Testament.” Huffman has succeeded in introducing readers to the NT use of the OT and offered a helpful way to study this issue.