Introduction
John S. Feinberg’s essay Salvation in the Old Testament confronts a surprisingly neglected topic: What did “salvation” mean for Old Testament believers, and was it fundamentally different from the New Testament way? Many biblical and theological studies gloss over how the Old Testament handles individual, spiritual redemption, focusing instead on corporate deliverance or national restoration. Feinberg insists that understanding “salvation” in its Old Testament setting is essential—not merely for theological completeness, but to see the unity of God’s plan of redemption across both Testaments.
He concentrates on three core questions:
- Method of salvation — Is there one method across all biblical history, or multiple?
- Implementation — How did salvation function in Old Testament times? What was revealed and what was required?
- Sacrificial system — What role did sacrifices play in the Old Testament soteriological economy, especially in light of Jesus’ later sacrifice?
These areas help clarify what Old Testament authors taught about spiritual salvation, what Old Testament believers could and did understand, and how the promises foreshadowed Christ.
1. One Method or Many?
Feinberg begins by challenging the notion that there were multiple ways of salvation—one for Old Testament saints, another for New Testament Christians. He observes that some critics assume dispensationalists (those who hold to different dispensations in God’s redemptive plan) must affirm different methods of salvation. But he argues that no consistent dispensationalism (or scriptural theology) requires such multiplicity.
Instead, Feinberg affirms that Scripture throughout presents one method of salvation operative across all ages: by faith, in the context of what was revealed, responding to God’s promise. Old Testament believers were saved by looking forward in faith to God’s provision, even when they did not yet know the full revelation that New Testament believers enjoy.
He quotes theological voices from church tradition, such as Hodge and Payne, who insist on the continuity of God’s plan—“the same promise of deliverance,” “the same Redeemer,” “the same condition required for participation in blessings.” The primary difference is not method, but how much of the content of revelation had been disclosed at various times.
2. Implementation of Salvation in Old Testament Times
Having argued for a unified method, Feinberg turns to how salvation was implemented under Old Testament revelation. Several things differ in how believers experienced, expressed, and understood salvation compared to the New Testament:
- Revealed content of faith: Old Testament believers did not always know Christ by name or fully understand His atoning work. Their faith responded to promises—such as those given to Abraham or prophecies—that pointed toward God’s deliverance and mercy. Feinberg argues that what was believed varied according to what God had revealed at that time.
- Role of the Law: The Mosaic system, including ceremonial, civil, and moral law, structured not just obedience but also a framework for understanding sin, covenant, holiness, and worship. However, Feinberg emphasizes that obedience was not the way of justification—faith was. The law served to illuminate sin, drive people to dependence on God, and reveal the character of God’s covenant.
- Relationship to the Law and Obedience: While Old Testament believers were required to obey, their standing with God wasn’t secured by perfect obedience. Faith in God’s promise mattered more than flawless law-keeping. Though obedience, ritual, sacrifice, and rite had real place, they were expressions of faith rather than earning salvation.
- Spiritual realities that foreshadowed fuller revelation: Feinberg argues that Old Testament believers enjoyed many spiritual comforts: forgiveness, fellowship, hope. These spiritual blessings were real, even when they did not yet have the full disclosure of Christ’s work or the indwelling Spirit in the New Testament sense.
3. Sacrifices and the Atonement System
A central portion of Feinberg’s essay is devoted to the sacrificial system—how it functioned, what it signified, and its limitations.
- Function of sacrifices: The Old Testament sacrifices served multiple roles: as offerings of worship, as remembrance, as expressions of reliance on God, and as means for forgiveness and ritual cleansing. However, sacrifices never earned salvation by themselves. They were part of God’s revealed means for dealing with sin under that covenant, always pointing forward.
- Efficacy and limits: Feinberg stresses that Old Testament sacrifices did have efficacy—God did forgive, reconciled people brought offerings with faith, and restored fellowship. But they were not, and could not be, full atonements in the sense that Christ’s sacrifice is. Hebrews is cited (especially Hebrews 10:4) to show that animal sacrifices could not ultimately take away sin, highlighting their provisional and typological nature.
- Typology and foreshadowing: The sacrificial system is deeply typological. It prefigures, in shadow-form, the ultimate sacrifice of Christ. Those who brought offerings did so in faith that God would accomplish what was promised, even though they did not see the fullness of that fulfillment.
4. Distinctions in the Old Testament Context
Feinberg points out several distinctions that help us understand how things were different (not contradictory) between Old Testament and New Testament experiences of salvation:
- Spirit’s operation: In Old Testament times, the Holy Spirit was involved selectively—coming upon certain persons for specific tasks, empowering prophets, craftsmen, kings. The indwelling, ongoing Spirit ministry that becomes normative in the New Testament (post-Pentecost) is different in kind.
- Union with Christ: Old Testament saints did not explicitly know of union with Christ in the way New Testament believers do. Feinberg suggests that union with Christ is an essential aspect of salvation, but that Old Testament believers had this union in an anticipatory or foreknown way, even if not fully articulated to them.
- Law relationship: The ceremonial and civil laws applied under the Mosaic covenant, which New Testament believers are no longer under. Moral law remains binding, but the way believers relate to law changes—Old Testament saints obeyed law with faith, whereas New Testament believers obey out of response to Christ’s work and under Spirit’s enabling.
- Revelation progression: As history progressed, God revealed more—prophecies, the incarnation, the sacrificial death of Christ, the resurrection, full disclosure of what was promised. The content of faith increased, though the basis of faith remained the same. Thus Old Testament believers could be “in faith” even when not all was revealed.
5. The Ground and Basis of Salvation
Feinberg works to clarify the basis (or ground) of salvation in both Testaments. He argues that what God requires is trust—faith in the promises, in God’s character, in mercy, in atoning work (as it was revealed). Justification (or being right with God) is granted by faith, not by works, even in Old Testament times.
He distinguishes between:
- Ground: what makes forgiveness and justification possible (God’s mercy, promise, typological foreshadowing).
- Requirement: what God calls for—faith (which includes repentance, trust, obedience) in whatever revelation He has given.
- Ultimate content: the full meaning of salvation which becomes clear in Christ, including forgiveness, cleansing, new life, resurrection, etc.
6. Continuity, Unity, and Theological Implications
Feinberg emphasizes that the theological implication of this study is the unity of God’s redemptive plan:
- God has always worked by grace, always required faith, always offered deliverance to those who responded in trust—even though this trust looked somewhat different before Christ’s historical work.
- The Old Testament is not inferior or separate, but foundational. New Testament teaching (apostles, Jesus, epistles) build on it, clarify it, fulfill it.
- Theology (especially soteriology) must preserve that continuity: believing that Old Testament believers were saved in Christ’s merit (from the divine perspective), even if in history they looked forward.
7. Summary: What Salvation in the Old Testament Means in Practice
Putting the pieces together, Feinberg’s view suggests that an Old Testament believer could:
- Respond in faith to God’s revelation (promises, covenant, law, sacrifice)
- Enjoy forgiveness, cleansing, fellowship, hope
- Live in obedience to what was revealed (not as a way of earning salvation, but as faithful response)
- Live expectantly, with hope for future fulfillment (in messianic promises)
Meanwhile, Christ’s coming and His atoning work bring fullness—clarification, more revelation, greater access, indwelling Spirit, resurrection, etc.—but do not change the foundational principle of salvation by faith in what God has promised.
Conclusion
Feinberg’s Salvation in the Old Testament helps Christians see that salvation was always God’s work of grace, accessed by faith in God’s promises, even under earlier revelation. The differences between Old and New Testament are about degree of revelation, scope of experience (Spirit, union, resurrection), not about method or basis.
For your website or teaching materials, this means you can confidently show that Old Testament saints were genuine believers, saved in God’s sight, even if they awaited fuller revelation. It also underscores that Christ did not start a second, distinct method of salvation—but fulfilled what God had always intended.