Imo, this misrepresents the work and its value. The NT use of the OT as it is explored in this useful volume cannot be reduced to "the OT is about Jesus".
I agree with your point. But Jesus did sort of hint he was the Chosen One. I forget if that was OT, 2nd Temple or Enoch.
And you expect better of FL marketing Francis ? [:O]
Agree it is a little to cute. I can see people giving hi-fives when the idea was floated. [8-)]
Marketers being reductionistic with their slogans? Who would have thought !!!However, I can't see that line being "the major hook" that gets people to buy this tome. It is a deeply academic book that you rightly point out is far, far broader than "the hook" conveyed in the slogan. It is not a book I would recommend if you are looking for some light bedtime reading. I doubt also that most people would just buy simply because it popped up in an ad feed.
I suspect there may be some people who click buy to this kind of ad simply because of the authors listed. Even if that was the case, they would be getting for themselves something of solid worth content-wise that a casual glance will show clearly goes beyond the slogan.
Personally, The inconsistent Capitalisation In the Slogan headline Probably Bothers Me more.
Edited for clarity
It would have been more accurate to say, “Jesus and His followers knew the Old Testament...Do you?”
DAL
It would have been more accurate to say, “Jesus and His followers knew the Old Testament
I rather doubt it as there was nothing known as the "Old Testament" and the scriptures - Torah was set but History and Writings had no set canon. We know to little of their background to make more than an educated guess as to what they learned in yeshiva and synagogue ... we have some evidence of what they did know but that is rather sparse.
I rather doubt it as there was nothing known as the "Old Testament" and the scriptures
At the risk of digressing in theological discussion... there is such a concept as the graphai in the NT which intersects substantially with what we call the OT or Hebrew Scriptures. I agree that the canon was probably not fixed yet although it seems that Torah, psalms, and "prophets" (whether that terms was meant as broad as in the Jewish canon or narrow as in the Christian canon) were included. In any case, point taken, though on this one, can't see how one could communicate the reference to these writings simply and as conveniently as the conventional "Old Testament" in a marketing slogan.
... we have some evidence of what they did know but that is rather sparse.
Definitely true. Jesus' use (Deu, Isa, Psa largely) matches the DSS pattern. But the DSS'ers (Qumran?, Essenes?, etc) were quite happy to completely over-write the Torah, and everyone headed off for a tour of Heaven (Assumptions, Enoch, etc).
When the Jesus followers arrived, it's also not clear what they recognized as valid prophesy. Paul avoided Joel like the plague, while Peter appeared to embrace it. The synoptics really liked the late prophets. And the Apocalypse writer was a big Ezekiel guy.
