In Luke 24.13-35 we have the story of the two disciples on their way to Emmaus after the crucifixion of Christ. Christ appears in their midst but they do not recognize him. On their journey Christ rebukes their attitude about his death showing from the Scriptures that this was the way things had to happen. The disciples did not recognize him until he had a meal with them as he broke the bread before vanishing from their midst. While there is much to be said about the resurrection in this passage what I want to focus on is this presupposition that the resurrection of Christ created a new paradigm for reading the Old Testament.
This is not only a Lukan idea. In John 20.1-9 at the tomb the Beloved Disciple and Peter see that he is no longer there and the Beloved believes but the narrator emphasizes that “they did not understand the Scripture, that he must raise from the dead” (v. 9). It is implied that at this juncture the Beloved believed in the person of Christ but he didn’t know exactly what had transpired.
Likewise, before giving a detailed exposition on the resurrection, the Apostle Paul asserts that the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ are “according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor 15.3-4). We now have three early strands of the church who presented a resurrection hermeneutic for the Old Testament.
My question is this: How do you see this functioning? Is it the “meta-narrative” of the Old Testament that they have in mind? Are there particular sections of the Old Testament that are more explicit?