New Testament fulfillment, as indicated by the term πληρόω, has received considerable attention. It is often assumed that when the biblical authors used the term πληρόω, they intended to indicate the fulfillment of predictive prophecy or messianic-predictive fulfillment (e.g., Guthrie, Longenecker, Menken, Konradt, Hays, among many others). This assumption about predictive prophecy and fulfillment is nothing new; it is found in nearly all Greek lexicons and dictionaries (e.g., BDAG, TDNT, Brill Dictionary of Ancient Greek, Liddell-Scott-Jones, Concise New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology and Exegesis, Lust-Eynikel-Hauspie, Muraoka, Conybeare-Stock, Louw-Nida). Ironically, the evidence used to validate a predictive reading of πληρόω is often the use of this term in the very same passages in question.
This study aims to provide comparative and statistical evidence that πληρόω has a broad semantic range and ought not be equated with prophetic fulfillment, as suggested by Dyer, Kennedy, Kirk, and others. To accomplish this goal, this analysis is generally modeled after Maarten J. J. Menken’s “Messianic Interpretation of Greek Old Testament Passages in Matthew’s Fulfillment Quotations,” where Menken attempts to categorize Matthew’s formula-citations based on how probable it is that the OT itself allows for a messianic reading. Going beyond Matthew’s formula-citations, however, this study considers and categorizes every use of πληρόω in reference to prior communication in the NT. The goal is to consider the claims made by the NT authors on their own terms and establish a tentative taxonomy of uses.
Ultimately, the data is considered as to when the NT authors cite plausible messianic-predictive passages versus when they cite passages where a messianic-predictive reading is implausible. If, as we shall see, plausible messianic-predictive passages are in the minority, perhaps we should conclude that messianic-predictive fulfillment is neither demanded nor inherent in the term πληρόω itself, even as such a focus may be warranted by context.
Thesis: This study proposes a tentative taxonomy of the NT uses of πληρόω in reference to prior communication. It concludes by suggesting that although πληρόω allows for previous prediction, it does not demand it.