Christ in the Old Testament

Well good evening everyone we are back and this is class 7 of the survey of the Old Testament Now if you would open up your Bibles, we don't always begin with a Bible reading but tonight we're going to begin with our Bibles open to Luke chapter 24 and The subject of tonight's lecture is Christ in the Old Testament and I will say this since we began the survey of the Old Testament this has been the one lesson that I have looked forward to the most if You go back through the last six weeks.

We have gone through each one of the books of the Old Testament we have done a quick survey of each book who wrote it who it was written to about when was it written and So on but tonight we're going to be looking at the Old Testament with a different lens Tonight we're going to be looking at the Old Testament through the lens of The New Testament and so we're going to begin by reading Luke chapter 24 verses 13 to 27 this is the Account on the road to Emmaus after the resurrection of Jesus that very day Two of them were going to a village named Emmaus About seven miles from Jerusalem and they were talking with each other about all these things that had happened And while they were talking and discussing together Jesus himself drew near and went with them but their eyes were kept from recognizing him and He said to them.

What is this? Conversation that you are holding with each other as you walk and they stood still looking sad Then one of them named Cleopas answered are you the only visitor to Jerusalem who does not know the things that have happened here in these days and he said to them what things and they said to him concerning Jesus of Nazareth a man who was a prophet mighty indeed and word before God and all the people and How our chief priests and rulers delivered him up to be condemned to death and crucified him But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel Yes, and beside all this it is now the third day since these things happened Moreover some women of our company amazed us they were at the tomb early in the morning and when they did not find his body they came back saying that they Had even seen a vision of angels who said that he was alive Some of those who were with us went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said But him they did not see and he said to them Oh foolish ones and Slow of heart to believe all the prophets have spoken was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory and beginning with Moses and all the prophets He interpreted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning Himself May God add his blessing to the reading of his word in this narrative Jesus comes alongside two of his disciples and In the midst of the conversation when they were kept from seeing who he was he makes a statement that reverberates down through the ages He says that it was necessary that he should suffer It shouldn't it was necessary that these things should happen and then it says why it was necessary Because these things had been foretold in the Old Testament Scriptures it was necessary that he should suffer and beginning with Moses and all the prophets He interpreted to them and all the scriptures the things concerning himself now Why does it focus on Moses because Moses takes us back to the earliest part of the Old Testament it Shows us that the words of Jesus Christ the words about Jesus Christ find their way not only in the later prophets Which we know they're there we talked about those but the words about Jesus Christ take us all the way back to the very beginning of the Bible and the goal of this lecture is to demonstrate the cohesion in God's Word by examining the prefigured person and work of Christ found in the Old Testament Scriptures, so that's the goal for tonight and As I was saying to some of you before the class started This is one of my favorite subjects to teach about and this is one of my favorite subjects to study And I am really nervous that an hour and a half is not even going to give me an opportunity To really do justice to the subject But as you've probably seen in the last several weeks when I get going I can go pretty quick But if I talk quick you have to listen quick so stay with me tonight.

We have a lot of ground to cover It is obvious that the Bible uses various methods in the Old Testament to point us to important truths in the New Testament some have said that the Old Testament is the Word of God concealed and The New Testament is the Word of God revealed I believe it was Augustine who said that it was concealed in the Old Testament Revealed in the New some have said the Old Testament is the Word of God Unfolded and the New Testament is the Word of God unfolded While the Old Testament has value in and of itself to express truth about God and his people Israel the fulfillment of that meaning Is found not in the Old Testament, but in the New Some have claimed that that's not the case in Fact some Christians will tell you that it's wrong to read the New Testament back into the Old Testament I've even heard some go as far as saying that almost none of the Old Testament is really about Jesus When it is taken in its historic context Even passages which are often always pointed to Jesus like Isaiah 53 have been questioned by some as saying no, these aren't really about Jesus and certainly One of the things that we want to be careful to do is we don't want to read into the Bible something that is not there But it is true That we have to be fair But at the same time we have to understand that the New Testament tells us that Christ is in the Old Testament So it isn't as if we're just coming up with this on our own It's not as if this was just some idea that someone had a few hundred years ago well, hey we can find Christ in the Old Testament if we just go look hard enough and Uncover a few rocks or look through a few things.

It's Jesus himself who said beginning with Moses He showed them that he was talked about in the Old Testament It should always be remembered that the ultimate author of Scripture is the Holy Spirit of God and therefore when we talk about the intent of the author We can talk about the intent of Moses and his audience we can talk about the intent of Isaiah and his audience and we can Talk about the intent of David or any of the other Old Testament writers But the ultimate author the ultimate superior author of the Bible is the Holy Spirit And therefore we have to not only consider the intention of David or the intention of Moses or the intention of Isaiah We also also have to consider the intention of the Holy Spirit of God Because he is superintending the writing for a grander purpose Than is often recognized in a cursory reading of the text Now I want to pull out my board Because can't work without my board.

I Want to compare two Old Testament hermeneutical methods with you that I think are important for you to know and I did give you a handout For this so as you came in you should have been given a handout There are two schools of thought when it comes to interpreting Jesus in the Old Testament The first is referred to as Christo tell it Christo.

Tell it The second is referred to as Christo centric Christo tell it and Christo centric now in your handout, you'll notice that it says what is the difference between Christo centric and Christo tell it hermeneutic.

I'm not going to read this whole sheet to you I had miss Pat make copies and miss Pat.

Thank you.

She's always the one who does that for us So everyone remember to thank her This handout is for you to take and read it goes along with tonight's lesson But I'm not going to take the time to read it to you because I know that you're able to read on your own But basically what I'm going to do is give you a very quick overview of what the distinction is between Christo tell it hermeneutic and Christo centric hermeneutic Christo tell it comes from the Greek word telos.

Well, obviously the word Christ Christ is in both of them So you understand Christ is there but the word tell us Tell us means purpose or goal Purpose or goal I understand Now centric means centered or focused upon so I don't even think I need to write that.

I think you know that so the distinction is Between those who would say yes the The Messiah is the goal of the Old Testament But he's not the focus He's the end But he's not on every page That's the Christa tell it view you understand That's the view that would say when we read Isaiah 53.

It's not really about Jesus.

It's about Israel Yes, Jesus is the ultimate goal of the Old Testament.

He's the ultimate purpose of the Old Testament, but he's not The focus of every page he's not the focus of every passage I Will tell you just so you know and that there is no bones about it.

I come from the school of Christo centric not Christo tell it Because I believe that not only is Christ the goal of the Old Testament, I believe that he is spoken about Specifically in the Old Testament and it is as I believe Spurgeon said you cannot cut the Bible anywhere where it does not bleed the blood of Christ and So I would say that the entire Bible has its center in Christ.

Not just its goal Now there are those who would argue against that there are those who would and I've had conversations where people tell me I'm flat-out wrong.

I I'm willing to have a debate a conversation about it if you feel like I'm wrong But I'm gonna I'm gonna make my case for a moment as to why I believe in Christo centricity the imponents of the Christo centric view Say that we should not see Jesus as the focus of the Old Testament because this would cause us to miss the original authorial intent of the passages But as I already stated if the Holy Spirit is the author Ultimately, I want to know his authorial intent More than I concern myself about Moses or Isaiah or David or anyone else? I believe Christo centric interpretation is in line with the New Testament Because when I read the Apostle Paul, it says that he went about preaching Jesus and the Bible he was using was the Old Testament Remember what he says I knew nothing among you except what? Christ and him crucified remember what he said all Scripture is given by inspiration of God and it's profitable for teaching for correction for rebuke And for training in righteousness when he said that he was talking about the Old Testament, but yet it was enough The Old Testament was sufficient to teach about Christ Therefore I do not think that the Old Testament simply looks forward to the goal of the Messiah I believe that the Messiah can be exegeted from the Old Testament Properly exegeted he told Timothy in 2nd Timothy 3 and Chapter 4 2 he said preach the word The word was the Old Testament for the early church It was the only Bible they had and yet they were a Christian Church on the road to Emmaus Jesus models that expositional approach of the Old Testament that Christological approach rather when it says beginning with Moses He interpreted them to them and all the scriptures the things concerning himself Jesus's key statement was this Everything listen to this from Luke chapter 24 verse 44 Everything written about me and the law of Moses and the prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled Everything written about me and Moses and the Psalms and the prophets must be fulfilled Jesus is telling us he's there It's not just looking forward to him.

He's there.

It's about him I want to quote Graham's goal Graham Goldsworthy and this is from the book gospel centered hermeneutics and he says this The hermeneutical question about the whole Bible correlates with this question.

What do you think of? Christ the hermeneutical center of the Bible is therefore Jesus in his being and in his saving acts the Jesus of the gospel We can say that while not all scripture is the gospel all scripture is related to the gospel That is its center.

The Bible makes a very radical idea inescapable Not only is the gospel the interpretive norm for the whole Bible but there is an important sense in which Jesus Christ is the mediator of the meaning of everything that exists in other words The gospel is the hermeneutical norm for the whole of reality Everything is to be interpreted through Christ People say you can't interpret the Bible through the lens of Jesus.

I say I can't interpret it any other way If I'm going to put on an interpretive pair of glasses That's going to help me understand the Bible.

Jesus is those glasses So I make no shame and I stand upon the truth that I believe in Christo centricity Do I believe these people are heretics? No, but I do believe they're getting it wrong And I'll tell you often who falls into this camp if you remember a few weeks ago.

I talked about dispensational and covenant theology Dispensationalism and this is a this is a relatively recent argument that has been really hard-hitting Because they make the argument that they're interpreting everything literally and They say a Christotelic view is the literal view and a Christo centric view is the figurative view Well one I would disagree with that, but also I would say this the reason why they're so bent on Holding to such a crass and it is often a crass literalism is because they have to fit their eschatological presuppositions into the text and Therefore they demand that you use this hermeneutic.

So again, I Think this is the right way.

I Realize and I have friends who would tell me this is the right way if you disagree with me I'm not going to call you a heretic, but I won't agree with you just so you know All right.

So tonight we're going to using the Christo centric method using Christ as the Center of the whole Bible the focus of the whole Bible We are going to look at three ways that we can see Christ Clearly in the Old Testament the first and you can write these down as three three Three three headings for tonight's lesson First we're going to look at the pre incarnate appearances of Christ the pre incarnate Appearances, I'll write that out for you.

So the pre incarnate Appearances of Christ then we are going to look at the prophetic Utterances About Christ the prophetic utterances about Christ and then we are going to look at the types and shadows of Christ the types and shadows So that's our threefold lesson for tonight the pre incarnate appearances the prophetic utterances and the types and shadows You guys ready? All right, so we will look first at the pre incarnate appearances The Bible is very clear that Jesus Christ pre existed Bethlehem John chapter 1 verse 1 says in the beginning was the Word the Word was with God and the Word was God He was with God in the beginning So we don't have to doubt Whether or not Jesus Christ pre existed Bethlehem In fact, even the Jehovah's Witnesses who deny that Jesus is fully divine at least will admit that he pre existed Bethlehem Because you just can't get around it.

The Bible doesn't allow for any other option Jesus clearly pre existed Bethlehem he said in John 8 58 truly truly I say to you before Abraham was I am Not only did he use the divine name to describe himself I am but he also said before Abraham was indicating some 2,000 years before he existed So we have Jesus's confession that he existed before his birth in Bethlehem.

It's also clear That no one has seen God the Father This one is a little more difficult, but it is true.

John 1 18 tells us no one has ever seen God You remember that passage John 1 18 no one has ever seen God, but that isn't where it stops It says no one has ever seen God the only God who is at the Father's side.

He has made him known And that interesting it says no one has ever seen God The only God who is at the Father's side.

He has made him known Makes it sound like there are two gods But yet if you understand the doctrine of the Trinity, you'll know that there is one God but that one God that Being or essence of God is shared by three persons and when Jesus talks about God He's referring to the Father when Jesus uses the term father He's referring to God and those are interchangeable language and therefore when we see in the New Testament No one has ever seen God, but God has made him known We know we're talking about God the Father has not been seen but God the Son has been seen and therefore we can go through the Old Testament and we can see those places where God is seen and We can know that that is an example of someone seeing a pre-incarnate Jesus Christ How many of you have ever heard the term theophany? Okay, a theophany is a reference to an appearance of God in physical form The burning bush was a reference to God in physical form the shakunah glory cloud of God was an example of the Of what we would call a theophany right the The theophanies are throughout the Old Testament But we also use the term Christophany and Christophany I think often is the better term to use for instance in Genesis chapter 18 when it says the Lord came and visited Abram under the oak trees at Mamre and it says he had two people with him which we know were Angels and those angels were the ones that would go to Sodom and and there would rain down fire and brimstone on Sodom and you know what? The Bible says it says the Lord was there and the Lord was laying raining down fire from heaven And that an interesting reality that we see the Lord in heaven and the Lord standing next to Abram But who is the Lord standing next to Abram? Can it not be and should it not be seen as the Lord Jesus Christ? I believe it should this is why I Believe Jesus is able to confidently say Abraham long to see my day because he knew who I was One of the clearest examples of this is in Isaiah chapter 6 the Bible says in Isaiah 6 that Isaiah went to the temple and he saw the Lord seated on his throne and the train of his robe filled the temple and the Seraphim were surrounding him saying holy holy holy is the Lord God Almighty and the whole earth is filled with his glory you see if John chapter 118 says no one has ever seen God and You go back and read Isaiah 6 and it says Isaiah saw the Lord seated upon his throne either the Bible is Contradicting itself or we find a place where the Trinity must be true You see the Trinity is not optional The Trinity is not some Johnny-come-lately theological idea This is why it is the very first Ecumenical Council of the church that was held in 83 25 Was not about the subject of eschatology and whether or not you were an amillennialist or a premillennialist It was not about the subject of whether or not you should speak in tongues It wasn't about the subject of whether or not you should have women pastors the first eschatological or excuse me the first ecumenical council was on the subject of who is Jesus The question and it wasn't as if the church didn't know but a heretic had arisen within the church Arius who came and said Jesus is not fully divine and he was Not only excommunicated as a heretic but he was universally denounced by the bishops of Nicaea Because the universal understanding of Christ was not only that he was man, but that he was God man That he was fully divine So kind of got off track there a little bit.

Let us go back There are other passages Where the Lord appears and we can assume that it is Jesus I've already mentioned Genesis 18 the Lord appeared to him at the Oaks of Mamre Genesis 19 the Lord raided down Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah And there's another Passage that some believe is a pre-incarnate Jesus and I take a little issue with this but the the person Melchizedek Some people believe Melchizedek is a pre-incarnate Visitation of Jesus.

I don't hold that view But I don't think it's a it's not a hill to die on for me if you believe if Melchizedek is a Pre-incarnate Jesus, that's fine The reason a lot of people believe that is because in the book of Hebrews it says he did not have a mother or father Therefore he would have been a supernatural being and therefore they say he's supernatural However in the book of Hebrews when it references Melchizedek not having a mother and father It doesn't mean he didn't have a mother and father what it means is he didn't have a lineage by which he would be a priest his priesthood was granted by God not through a Family line and so you have to understand what the writer of Hebrews is saying however, if you particularly take the path if you take the position that Melchizedek is a pre-existent Visitation Jesus that's fine.

I think it's possible.

It's just not where I'm at personally But again, I could be wrong.

It's one of those times where when I preach it and I will Probably two years from now because I've been in Genesis for almost a year and I'm still in chapter 2 but When I finally do get to Genesis 18 I'll explain both sides of the argument and explain why I hold to the position that I do But there are several places throughout the Old Testament.

There is also There are several references in the Old Testament and I don't want to spend a lot of time on this and this can create some Confusion so I'm going to make it very clear There are some references in the Old Testament to a figure known as the angel of the Lord not an angel, but the angel of the Lord and you remember what the word angel simply means messenger and oftentimes the angel the Lord Exercises a certain type of divine authority whereby many people have equated that with a pre-incarnate visitation of Christ Could it be? possibly I think it's likely actually in some of the passages that it's likely Christ, but that again is That's just something for you to consider when you come across the angel of the Lord.

Look at that person Look at the the what the narrative says about that person when you're reading What authority is he exercising is he coming in in the place of Yahweh as his messenger or is he speaking as Yahweh? That's the that's the key And when he speaks as Yahweh that think of the burning bush he spoke as God This is why we say it wasn't an angel, but it was God speaking in the burning bush Take your shoes from upon your feet for the land upon which you stand is holy ground The Lord your God is visiting you in this spot So those are Examples of what we would call Theophanies and Christophanies and I tend to believe that there are many more Christophanies than there are Theophanies I I would say just about all of them would be Christ Any questions about the pre-incarnate appearances before we move to the prophetic utterances? Good, I must be doing fantastic job if nobody has any questions All right under prophetic utterances.

I have given you a handout If you would please take that handout out That's not redundant What is a prophetic utterance a prophetic utterance is when a prophecy is made about something that will happen and a Messianic prophecy is when a prophecy is made specifically about the coming of Jesus the Messiah in This you have 44 on this page.

It's a front and back page that I gave you there are 44 Messianic prophecies Some of them are very specific and I will readily admit some of them are less specific some might even say they're vague I don't like to use the word vague But some of them are not as specific as the others for instance the very first one on the list is Messiah would be born of a woman You say well that that doesn't really narrow it down since everybody's born of a woman, but You might say that's not much of a prophecy but it if you understand Genesis 3 15 that it's referencing as the first time there's a promise of a child who would crush the head of the serpent and That child would be born of woman and you know that in Galatians One of the points that is made about Jesus that he would be he was born of woman born under the law That he would redeem those who are under the law You remember that in Galatians so you understand the connection there is not just that he's born of a woman.

Everybody's born of a woman but he is Specifically the promise to the first woman Eve that she would ultimately in her line have a child Who would give the devil his due? so there's more to it than just born of a woman and Also when you think about this idea born of a woman Jesus has the unique qualification of being born of only a woman Because there is no father earthly father the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary and there was a divine conception and a Virgin birth and so that is so like I said if you see it It looks a little vague might be more to it if you look a little further, but there are 44 on here Some of the ones I think are really very important are ones like number two that he would be born in Bethlehem Because the New Testament goes through a lot of trouble to tell us how he was born in Bethlehem Because he was not from Bethlehem is his his family's his family line was from Bethlehem because they were of the house of David But he had to go back there because of the decree of Caesar Therefore there was this entire this entire world event that had to come about to bring him back to this place The third one he was born of a virgin Very important theological significance there not only that it was a miracle that he was born of a virgin, but that he was born without the I I'm gonna say this because I believe it.

He was born without the taint of original sin The original sin taint which comes from our father Adam.

I do not believe Jesus was born with that same taint Because Jesus is without sin and Therefore the virgin birth I believe contributed to that and somebody says well Does that mean that you believe that the sin is passed on through the father? I think it's possible because I think it's a conjecture But every everybody else has got a daddy and everybody else has got a sin nature Jesus did not have an earthly father, and he didn't have a sin nature therefore.

There's a there's a Conclusion that can be drawn.

It's not a necessary.

It's an inference I'm inferring based on everybody else has a sin nature everybody else has a father Jesus doesn't have an earthly father Jesus doesn't have a sin nature therefore They sin nature many theologians have seen the sin nature as being passed through the father make sense So there are many more on here.

He'd come from the line of Abraham Isaac Jacob from the tribe of Judah He'd be on David's throne They're all here, and I want you to I want to encourage you to take this now if you have the books if you have Rose book of charts maps and timelines I Couldn't photocopy this for you because there's like six pages But starting on page 129.

There's a hundred messianic prophecies So I gave you 44 because I knew not everybody had this book, but if you have this book you've got 100 minus 44 you got 56 more 66 more 66 more okay, sorry really bad at math So you have you've got more if you have this book.

I'm gonna edit that part out If you have If you have the Zondervan Old Testament charts, which I recommended that you get you didn't have to get it You didn't have to get anything extra, but if you did page 107 gives Messiah in the Old Testament as high priest king of Israel And how he is represented by certain other individuals such as the patriarchs Cyrus Eliab and then general references to him being the king of Israel this one's a little more specific It doesn't have as many references, but it's more specific references, so if you have this you can look that up as well It's page 107 Now before we move away from the prophetic utterances.

I want to make a note About something that happened to me several years ago Because I would say the greatest prophetic utterance regarding Jesus Christ is Isaiah 53 In fact find your find your way there if you would And I want to tell a story about this several years ago a Woman came to my office after a sermon Very nice lady But she I could tell she was confused she was having difficulty with what was said you know and she just wanted some answers and So I invited her to come sit in my office, and she came and sat down in my office, and we began to talk and She said I just don't know I Just don't know if I can believe the Bible's true.

I Was thankful for her honesty a lot of people have trouble Believing what the Bible says and won't be honest about it at least she was honest so I Consoled her in that I said, you know I I understand the Bible the Bible makes big claims and Takes big faith because the Bible makes big statements about where we came from What life's all about? Where we're going? the most important things in life are in the Bible and Our eternity is staked on whether or not the Bible is true So it should we this is not a small small question and so I Could have I could have went several directions whether I could have talked about what's your standard for good and bad do you believe God? Exists I could have taken several different Apologetic approaches But for whatever reason that day I I had Just overwhelmed idea.

I said you know what I want to do.

I want to read something to you And I want you to tell me who this is about He was despised and rejected of men a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief and As one from whom men hid their eyes He was despised and we esteemed him not Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows Yet we esteemed him stricken smitten by God and afflicted But he was wounded for our transgressions He was crushed for our iniquities Upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace and with his stripes.

We are healed All we like sheep have gone astray We have turned everyone to his own way and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all He was oppressed and he was afflicted yet He opened not his mouth like a lamb that has led to the slaughter and like a sheep that is before its shears is silence So he opened not his mouth By oppression and judgment he was taken away and as for his generation who considered that he was cut off from the land of the living stricken for the transgression of my people and they made his grave with the wicked and with a rich man in his death, although he had done no violence and There was no deceit in his mouth Yet it was the will of the Lord to crush him.

He has put him to grief When his soul makes an offering for guilt, he shall see his offspring He shall prolong his days the will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand Out of the anguish of his soul.

He shall be satisfied By his knowledge shall the righteous one my servant make many to be accounted righteous and he shall bear their iniquities I said ma'am Who is this about And she said oh that's about Jesus I Said this was written 700 years Before Jesus was ever born Old Testament prophecy is one of the clearest testimonies to the divinity of the source of Scripture It tells us things that will happen and they did happen hundreds of years before they ever came to be and Isaiah 53 is one of those passages that is simply to me without controversy This is about Jesus even people who don't know and don't believe they hear those words.

That's Jesus and It is So prophetic utterances, that is the second thing now the third thing and the thing that we're going to spend more time than we have on the first two probably the rest of tonight is types and shadows types and shadows Certainly we see Jesus Present in the Old Testament and pre-incarnate pre-incarnate appearances.

Certainly we see Jesus spoken of in prophecy But the place we see Jesus the most is in types and shadows Typology and yes, that is a word.

I didn't make it up Typology is a field of study in Scripture Which studies Old Testament texts which prefigure something that happened in the New Testament a type Will have a corresponding anti-type I Want to go ahead and apologize for my daughter's artwork And I'm going to erase this quickly Yes.

Yes.

She's the artist So we have the word type type and anti type a type is something that represents an Anti-type that represents something else and the anti-type is that which is represented in the book of Hebrews the word is shadow We're going to get to that more in a moment types and shadows but it is often seen in Using the the construction the linguistic construction of as and so as And so a s and s o Give you an example first Corinthians 15 22 as In Adam all die so in Christ all are made alive Matthew 24 37 as The days of Noah were so shall be the days of the coming of the Son of Man as And so John 3 14 as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness So shall the Son of Man be lifted up as and so Matthew 12 40 as Jonah was three days and three nights in the whales belly So shall the Son of Man be three nights and three days in the belly of the earth as and so So that's the linguistic construction that we see in the use of types and antitypes It's this way and it represents this as it is with this So it is with this and it is important that we make a distinction Between a type and a shadow or a symbol Shadows symbols you'll hear me use you might hear me use various language shadows symbols and illustrations are all One category and types are another category.

You say well, how do you distinguish between the two? types are mentioned in the Bible Shadows and illustrations aren't always mentioned Give you an example the Bible says Adam was a type of Christ as In Adam all die so in Christ all will be made alive Adam.

Jesus is called the second Adam He's called the last Adam right? So Adam is very clearly a type of Christ The Ark however is never called a type of Christ however, the Ark is clearly an illustration or a shadow of Christ because the Ark represents what you go into to Avoid the wrath of God Those who are in the Ark are safe those who are outside of the Ark are not Those who are in Christ are safe from the wrath of God those who are outside Will receive the wrath of God you see the Ark is never mentioned in the New Testament as being a type of Christ But it is certainly an illustration of Christ or a shadow So we we make the distinction.

I'll read to you a quote About this because we should be able to make this distinction this quote explains it we should point out the difference between an illustration and a type a type is always identified as such in the New Testament a Bible student finding correlations between an Old Testament story in the life of Christ is simply finding illustrations not types In other words typology is determined by Scripture the Holy Spirit inspired the use of types Illustrations and analogies are the result of study For example many people find parallels between Joseph and Jesus Joseph was beloved by his father.

He was rejected by his brothers.

He was a Savior to his people Right.

There's many correlations between the life of Joseph and Jesus but he's never called the type therefore he would be what an Illustration or a shadow The humiliation and subsequent glorification of Joseph seemed to correspond to the death and resurrection of Christ However, the New Testament never uses Joseph as a model of Christ.

Therefore Joseph story is properly called a Illustration but not a type So I'm being very I'm just trying to be specific with language, right when you study typology Typology is the New Testament tells us what the types are behold the Lamb of God John calls Jesus the Lamb of God So what's he telling us the lamb in the Old Testament? The sacrificial lamb was was Jesus.

That's a type.

We don't have to wonder It's there that's the difference between types and shadows or illustrations So let's look at some types in the Old Testament types specific types.

I'll give you a few The first one I've already mentioned is Adam 1st Corinthians 1545 tells us that Adam was a type of Christ Jacob's stairwell or Jacob's ladder, you know that story where the Bible says Jacob saw a stairwell to heaven and Angels were going up and down on that stairwell or that ladder remember Did you know that that ladder is a type of Christ? because in John chapter 1 when Jesus met Nathanael he said that you will see angels ascending and descending on the Son of Man He was referencing specifically The angels that ascended and descended on the stairwell or the ladder of Jacob Why why did that? represent Jesus Because Jesus is the way to heaven Jesus is the bridge that man who's separated from God has been given a ladder a stairwell away Jesus said I'm the way the truth and the life so perfect type and the Bible explains it the Passover lamb is a type of Christ John Excuse me, first Corinthians 5 7 says Christ is our Paschal lamb.

He is our Passover first Corinthians 5 7 manna is a type of Christ This is in John 6 32 Jesus talks about the manna coming down from heaven.

He says I am the bread come down from heaven the brazen serpent Remember the bronze serpent what did Jesus say about the bronze serpent as The serpent was lifted up by Moses.

So shall the Son of Man as and so right? So shall the Son of Man be lifted up The high priest was a type of Christ Hebrews chapter 4 verse 14 Jesus is our high priest now, but the Old Testament high priest represented Christ.

He was a type of Christ the veil Was a type of Christ's flesh Hebrews 10 19 and 20 References that that the veil and remember what the veil was The veil protected the holy place and the veil it says was a type of Christ's flesh now this what this next one is Because I didn't want to go through every single one.

I just put it as one thing the whole sacrificial system is a type of Christ And just Hebrews 9 19 26 if you read Hebrews 9 Well, if you read Hebrews 8 9 10, it takes you through it all how Jesus is the fulfillment of that sacrificial system But every every part of the every part of the the ceremony represented in some way the work of Christ and in fact one of the great and interesting studies that you can do and it's in this book I believe is studying the tabernacle and How the tabernacle represented the work of Christ? Let's see Yeah, it's page 90 Well, no this maybe it does Yeah here keys to the tabernacle and it tells you what each part was and it tells you Ultimately how that part was fulfilled in the work of Christ and how that points forward to the work of Christ It's page 92 and 93 in the Rose Book of Charts, so again These are types Jonah was a type of Christ.

We've already said that Jesus said in Matthew 12 40 So those are all types there are more but those were the ones that I have listed for us Now I want to look at shadows or illustrations of Christ I've already mentioned my favorite the ark as I said, I'm preaching through Genesis.

I really look forward to preaching Genesis 6 through Genesis 9 The story of the flood It's such an amazing and horrifying narrative and I say it's horrifying because the the flood was nothing like we see Painted on many nursery walls in many churches where you see a boat where you got to Giraffe head sticking out a couple of elephants head sticking out and and Noah's standing there just looking like everything's fine The Bible says the earth essentially Just collapsed into a water watery pit the the waters came from above and below and the only thing that survived Was the ark? That the waters just destroyed the earth.

Nothing was the same afterward and I look forward to preaching it because it's such a picture of the wrath of God the God Expresses his wrath it is terrible people look at God like a combination of Santa Claus and And you know a grandfather figure God is the God is the king of the universe and while he is all-loving and we should never ever Discount his love for any reason We have to understand that God is just and holy and So the ark is an illustration of the saving work of God in the midst of his wrath Noah wouldn't have been saved if God had not called him to build that ark It was God's grace that saved Noah Another illustration from the Old Testament is the ram that was caught in the thicket You remember when Isaiah was I'm sorry when Isaac was being brought up Mount Moriah by his father It's another Horrifying event much more personal than the ark God says take your son your only son the son whom you love Everything why do you have to say it that way? Take the one you care most for take the one I gave you as a gift and And sacrifice him To me As a kid I used to think about how bad that was for Isaac as a father I think about how bad it was for the father.

You know you as you grow your connection to the character sort of changes But if you remember when they get to the mountain and they lay out the altar and they prepare to make the sacrifice God provides a ram Who becomes the substitute for Isaac Jesus is the substitute for sinners on the cross The ram is a picture of Christ the scapegoat Remember the scapegoat What was the role of the scapegoat? They had two goats that they would use for Sacrificing one was killed and its blood was poured on the mercy seat the other They would pray the sins over and they would send it off into the wilderness to do what to carry the sins away To bear the iniquity of the people.

What does Jesus do he bears our iniquity? Not only does he suffer for it as the first goat that died But he also bears it he carries our sins away So he is typified in the scapegoat and there are so many others I again Moses is a type of Christ.

He's a he's a savior figure.

He's you know, there's so many things Boaz certainly a type of Christ with his kinsmen Redeemer with Ruth taking her as his own a husband to her David Few weeks ago brother Mike Collier preached a message here I was out one Sunday and brother Mike preached on David and he showed Dave this had the whole story of David Goliath.

Everybody wants to put themselves in the place of David, you know I want to be hero, you know, it's all about me, but David is not about us David is about Christ in that in that in that narrative you have the people of God that are threatened by a a Massive danger this nine-foot tall Goliath who is mocking them in his hatred and David comes and like Christ stands in the place of his people and He slays the giant the Bible says Christ killed death on the cross.

Oh Death, where is your sting? Oh death? Where is your victory? Christ is Or rather David is a picture of Christ And this is why I tell people you you can't tell me you can't see Jesus in the Old Testament These are clear pictures of Christ though.

Not all types There are certainly as many shadows and illustrations of Christ as there are types.

I Preach I start in the text and I run to the cross.

I Start in the text and I run to the cross because it's all about Christ.

I just got it in Wherever I start from I have one goal and show them how this relates to the work of Christ now I want to you I want to as we begin to Move away from types and symbols.

I want to I want to show you one other thing.

I Want to show you how this idea of types and shadows is a biblical concept Not only in that we see it being used in the Bible, but we also see the language used in the Bible The Greek word Tupac is used Tupac is the word that we translate the word type and So the words Tupac is used and it is used in Romans chapter 5 verse 14 Listen to this Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses even over those who sinning was not like the transgression of Adam who was a type of the one Who was to come? Notice the language the ESV translates it directly Adam was a type of the one who was to come We also have the word Skiya Skiya now writing it in Greek doesn't help you.

So I'll write it in English Skiya And this one is T-u-p-o-s The word Skiya is the where we get the word shadow Colossians 2 in fact, I want you to look at this one go to Colossians 2 with me If you watch coffee with a Calvinist and if you don't for shame But if you do watch my podcast coffee with a Calvinist Tomorrow's episode is on Colossians 2 and I talked a little bit more about this text But I want to show you something because this is important The word Skiya is used here, but I want you to see how it's used verse 16 and 17 It says therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink or With regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath These are a shadow of the things to come but the substance belongs to Christ The word shadow there is the word Skiya and it relates to those things That were meant to point to Christ Either directly or Indirectly if you were here to hear me preach on the Sabbath You've heard me talk about how the Sabbath points to Jesus The Sabbath was about rest and the people of God receiving their rest Jesus Christ said come to me all ye who are weak and heavy laden and I will give you what? rest the Sabbath Prefigured the rest that we have in Christ not a once-a-week resting from our labors But a complete resting from our works and a trusting in him whose works are fully complete so Colossians 2 17 uses the word Skiya or the word shadow in Reference to those things that have their substance in Christ We also see this word in Hebrews 8 5 It says they serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things and in Hebrews 10 1 it says for since the law was but a shadow of the good things to come Instead of the true form of these realities remember look shadows are things that were the Old Testament They weren't the real things they were pointing to the real things.

You know what the book of Hebrews tells us The book of Hebrews tells us the blood of bulls and goats cannot take away sin You know what that would that sounds almost like a contradiction To the Old Testament because how many times in the Old Testament are the people of Israel? Commanded to go and make a sin offering How many times are they told to go and pray their sins over the goat and send the goat away? They had an annual day of atonement yom kippur that was meant to take away sins And then along comes the writer of Hebrews and says the blood of bulls and goats cannot take away sin It sounds as if he's contradicting the Old Testament, but he's not Because what he is saying is the blood of bulls and goats Pointed to something greater one of my professors used to say all of those Old Testament sacrifices were like a credit card Because if you've ever used credit card the one thing you know is it's not real money But it does pay the bill at the time but one day the bill the true bill is going to come due and it's going to have to be truly paid and Therefore the Old Testament sacrifices they did what they were supposed to do at the time But they were not the true sacrifice because the blood and bulls and goats cannot take away sin It's the blood of Christ that takes away sin.

And so all of that blood of those animals was simply a shadow It was credit Toward the final payment that would be made by Christ when he went to the cross and finished the work of Redemption There's another word Hoopoe day gum.

I said it wrong hoopoe dagma, and I'm not even going to try to Basically, it's the Greek word for copy the word for copy.

We see this in Hebrews 9 23 Thus it was necessary for the copies of heavenly things to be purified with these rights But the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these it's comparing the Old Testament to the real true heavenly temple And it's saying these are just copies Not not the genuine.

These are the heavenly the heavenlies has the real and the earthly has the copies Another word that we see is parable now you often think of a parable as Something Jesus when Jesus would tell a story that we'd call that a parable But the word parable is also used in another way for something that symbolized something else Hebrews 9 9 says that the the things of the Old Testament were parables of this present age or or symbols We also see the word and teat upon which is the word for anti type Hebrews 9 24 for Christ has entered not into holy places made with hands which are copies of the true things But into heaven itself now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.

It says there that uses the word and teat upon for the idea of Something that is a pattern or a figure First Peter 321 says that baptism is To be understood similarly to the flood of Noah you say well, how does that how does that connect? But listen what he says he says baptism corresponds to Noah's flood Not as a removal of the dirt from the body But as an appeal to God for a good conscience to the resurrection of Jesus Christ the idea that we die with Christ in baptism Remember what the Bible says you've been buried with Christ and the waters of baptism raised to new life This is why I believe the importance of actually going under the water You know my friends in the Presbyterian Church.

They you know, they little dabble do you you know that? They sprinkle and that and they you know, not not not to be offensive But they they believe the crown of the head is the only part that has to be baptized But as a Not a true Baptist because I'm not affiliated with the Baptists at all, but I believe I'm in the historical line of Baptist thinking I believe that going under the water has an important Symbolic reference the symbolism is death Buried with him Raised to new life and We see that language in first Peter All right now We're gonna end early.

I can't believe it.

But unless you guys have a lot of questions, which would be great But okay, great Okay, let me go back and let's actually just look at Hebrews 924 real quick Okay now in Hebrews 924 it says for Christ has entered not into Holy places made with hands which are copies of the true things But into heaven itself now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf now I mentioned earlier the use of the word copies.

That's a translation of an antitapas So so that's where the idea is something that represents something else It's a it's a it's it's it's it's almost the same as shadow and type and all that But it's just I'm just showing you the different ways.

The Greek uses uses antitapas parabola Hupo-degma Skia and Tupac all the represent things that were in the Old Testament that represented things in the New Testament So when this says the Old Testament things were copies of heavenly things, that's just the translation of the word antitapas So that's what I it isn't necessarily different than the others I'm just showing you the different way the language is used to make sense Well now this is on this this is referring to type and antitype That's more of an English expression because we talk about the type is David the antitype is Jesus The type is the lamb the antitype is is Christ.

So that that isn't necessarily the same as this.

Yeah That's that's not how this is being used.

So I'm sorry for the confusion.

I I didn't think about the how we tie that together I'm sorry All right So the the different language that the language that's used in the Greek is Tupac which means type Skia which means shadow Hupo-degma and antitype on both mean copy Or parable which means a figure so all of those are just our pair up the Greek word is parable a but it just means a figure of something and Ultimately the point to be made in all of that is simply to say this isn't something that we're coming up with out of whole Cloth the New Testament tells us these things are there.

It tells us that the copies are there It tells us that these things are there.

We're not leaving yet.

Don't get don't start packing up.

I Said I was almost done But I do have one more page because But I wanted to take any questions before I go the last the last thing I have for you tonight is a warning against Extremism and I'll explain that in a moment.

But before we get to the warning against extremism Let me ask does anybody have any questions so far Does it make sense? Ross you mentioned last night We talked before you left about having not heard the use of the term shadowed before does it make sense now? That's fine ask no Not not right now.

Okay.

No, I want I want to help you guys That's my job and I know in this room.

It doesn't feel the same as in the old Sunday school room You know when we were down in the Sunday school room We were much closer together and you guys I think felt more like you could interact and here it feels more like I'm preaching And maybe you feel like you don't want to interrupt me.

I want you to interact with me.

I build in time For that that's why we're probably going to end early because I want I want you to ask questions That's I mean we if it were just me talking we do it by video.

I Want to hear your thoughts and if you have questions or concerns I want to hear what they are so that I can help if I can help And Okay.

All right, and I didn't mean to call you out there.

I was just saying, you know, anybody him All right.

Last thing is a warning against extremism This is this is actually a quote.

It's a lengthy quote, but it's by Wayne Jackson On in his writing a study on biblical types and he says this One must be very cautious in his study of Bible types There are some dangerous extremes to be avoided on the one hand as Indicated earlier some deny the use of biblical types altogether Obviously, this is a radical view contrary to the teaching of the Bible itself others, excuse me others though Feel that the use of types in the scripture is quite limited Accordingly one can only identify a type when the New Testament specifically does This is an extreme position if one followed a similar line of reasoning he might assert that there are no prophecies in the Old Testament save those which are specifically quoted in the New Testament and as I said, I make a distinction between types and shadows and illustrations and that's how I make that distinction if it's a type it's Actually stated in the New Testament if it's not I call it a shadow or an illustration But he goes on to say still another extreme is the notion that virtually every little detail of the Old Testament Was a typical excuse me every little detail the Old Testament system was a typical was typical of some New Testament circumstance thus even the cords and pegs of the tabernacle were seen by some commentators as representing significant anti type New Testament truths and He's saying that's an extreme and I agree with him Here's an example of an extreme that I've heard you guys remember The story of the Passover when the Passover lamb was sacrificed and the blood of the lamb was painted on the doorposts of the homes of the Jewish people in Egypt Okay So is that a picture of Jesus? Absolutely 1st Corinthians tells us Jesus is our Passover lamb and I can carry that illustration out and talk about the fact that the blood of Jesus is applied to our heart and that's how The wrath of God is able to pass over us.

I mean, there's such a there's such a great illustration there wonderful illustration But years ago, I heard somebody say and I think I even may have used this illustration very young in my ministry That if you think about painting on a door, it makes the shape of a cross.

Well, no, it doesn't It makes us seven and a backward seven But Somebody said it made the shape of a cross and I thought that was great, you know So again, I'm I'm not can I'm not exempt from being an error You know, I've been doing this for a long time and started when I was 24 preaching full-time so I made a lot of mistakes in the past But I remember somebody after the message came up to me and they said that wouldn't make the shape of a cross and I said Yeah, I think you're right But that's the kind of stuff that Wayne Jackson in his in his writings.

He's saying we need to be careful for instance, I've heard people say well if you take all of the all of the People of Israel that were in The book of Numbers and how they put out the different tribes That if you were to get in an airplane and go above it, it would make the shape of a cross Because there were a certain number of tribes that went north or cut certain double that went south a certain number that went east certain number that went west and if you looked at it from the if you looked at it from a hot-air balloon or from an airplane it Would make the shape of a cross whether or not that's true.

It's certainly not provable and it's certainly not something you should preach That's the point that Wayne Jackson is making Is Jesus on every page of the Old Testament? I would say this I would say the whole Old Testament is about Jesus I believe the whole Old Testament is centered on Christ I believe we should read the Old Testament through the glasses of the New Testament because we have what's called progressive revelation Which means we have progressed in our knowledge of God through the New Testament Therefore we can look at the old revelation and understand that progress But the one thing that we should not do is we should not read into the text Like the whole cross on the doorframe It's just not one.

It's not necessary and Two it's not exactly true So we have to be careful.

He goes on to say this.

He says the truth is to be found between the extremes There are several interpretive principles that one should keep in mind as he begins to study this subject and one of them is easy You know It's a type if it's mentioned in the Old Testament and it's repeated in the New Testament So and as the so and as principle, you know, it's a type if that's the language that's used You know, it's an illustration if it's something that you can look at you can say here's God's saving his people and this way And this certainly typifies the salvation of Jesus Christ David Noah These are Savior figures even Samson is a as as foolish as Samson was He was a Christ figure in the salvation of his people so my final question for tonight is Is can you think of Any pre-incarnate appearances prophecies or types and symbols that I have not mentioned that you would like to bring up and ask about? Or do you just want to end early? Okay All right, Brian Okay What? Now that's a good question Brian the question For the who's or who's ever hearing this on the recording because sometimes I can't hear you guys is the question of Daniel chapter 3 with Hananiah Mishael and Azariah Being thrown in the fiery furnace Now, why did I say that? Because that's their real names.

Yeah, Hananiah Shadrach Meshach and Abednego is their Babylonian names.

So I like to take them by their real name.

No, I'm just easy But no Shadrach Meshach and Abednego Thrown in the fiery furnace and the Bible says when Nebuchadnezzar looked inside he saw four people and One looked like and this is where that this is where it's difficult because the King James Bible says one who looked like the Son of God and Therefore every good King James preacher who's ever preached that text has said that's Jesus Because it says he was the Son of God But if you read your ESV or New American Standard Bible or any other text, that's more of a modern translation It usually translates it.

It looks like a son of the gods which would be another way of using the word for angel, um, I Like to think that it was Jesus But I can't prove it from the text There's a song my mother loves to sing southern gospel and it's called he's still in the fire and it talks about when you're going through the fires of life Jesus is in the fire with you and I like the song and I like the sentiment And I would say that there is just as much of a chance that it's a pre-incarnate Visitation of Christ as it was an angel.

So there's no reason not to believe it But based on language alone, you can't prove it There's no proof.

Yeah, I Again, some people take the King James is the ultimate translation And if you take that position, then you might could try to make the argument.

Well, the King James translators were somehow Inspired to come up with the translation the Son of God But if you think about who Nebuchadnezzar was that language would not be suitable to him But the language a son of the gods Would have it would have made more sense and a cows and a chowdhury in Which was his religion would have made more sense in that Language, so do I think it was Jesus? I like to think so, but I don't know Very good question Anybody else Yeah, I think it was Jesus in the garden with Adam and Eve But the thing about that though is My only evidence for that is John 1 18 Because it says no one has ever seen God and when it says no one that's a universal negative You know like if I said no one can ride a bicycle and then I walk outside and I see somebody changing They're right by I know I was wrong because one person proves a universal negative wrong if you use the universal negative so When when this is no one has seen God the son has Shown him or has Has exegete him that's actually the word exegete I was the Greek for exegete is in John 1 18 the son exegetes the father and So it makes me think that Adam and Eve's interaction with God in the garden was with Christ but again there is nothing that would say that Adam and Eve could not have seen the father in the garden because they were not yet tainted by sin and so kind of comes down to an issue of how do we understand John 1 18 and my issues the universal negative in John 1 18, but I'm not I could be misunderstanding that text and I'm clearly Ready to say I could be wrong, but I do think it was Christ that walked in the garden with Adam and Eve So that makes sense, yeah another one we got five more minutes go ahead Moses was a man His hinder parts, yeah, that's King James says hinder parts You know That would be the that would be one where I would say I would probably lean toward theophany Because of the specific reference you can't look at me I'll let you see the only part of me that you can my hinder parts my backside.

Whatever you want translate that but it's the only time where the whole idea of not seeing him because this is why I make a distinction between that and Isaiah 6 right because in Isaiah 6 I See the Lord seated on his throne.

There's there's there's nothing about hinder parts or anything, right? so that to me is a Christophany because and by the way, you can prove Isaiah 6 is a Christophany because in John 12 It says Jesus was the one Isaiah saw it says Isaiah saw his glory and the the his in that passage The pronoun his references back to Christ It's a specific reference when when Isaiah saw Jesus and Isaiah or when Isaiah saw the Lord and Isaiah 6 it was Jesus and John 12 proves that But on the mountain with Moses, I think that's a theophany.

I think because of the point you can't look The point is made and so like I said, I don't think there's no theophanies, but I think theophanies I think More so we have Christophanies But there are some some theophanies the burning bush Sort of a I think the burning bush is more of an example of the expression of God's power He's there but you're not seeing the the true his is you're not seeing him fully You know, you're seeing a burning bush, you know, and so some people think the burning bush is Jesus Huh? It's Yahweh and Jesus is Yahweh, you know, but there's a I hope that was helpful I think I think I think I think obviously the Moses on the mountain very unique situation And what happened when he came down? Face was glowing.

Yeah All right.

Anything else You guys enjoy tonight Well good Let me read this last paragraph and then I'm gonna ask miss Daisy to speak because she has a prayer request and then we're going to pray The first century Christians did not have a New Testament They had the scriptures which Paul said were God breathed and profitable for teaching for reproof for correction and for training in righteousness That the man of God may be equipped for every good work and the first century Christians were able to preach Jesus from the Old Testament, we should be confident to be able to do the same All right, and that ends our lesson on Christ in the Old Testament next week we're going to look at the intertestamental period which is the time between Malachi and Matthew 400 years of history in an hour and a half.

So be ready for a lot next week All right, miss Daisy share with us and we'll pray Okay, please.

Oh Well praise the Lord That's wonderful, well praise the Lord I'm very happy about that Well good good Well, let's pray father in heaven We are so thankful to get to come and to talk about your word and to talk about your son What a blessing that is and I thank you that you have been gracious Lord to us to bring us here tonight and especially gracious to Daisy as you have shown her Lord that she does not have Anything wrong with her lungs that she has to be worried about and I know that's a great Weight off of her and I pray that you'll continue to bless her and strengthen her to minister to others and continue to grow in Your word.

Thank you again for this night.