What does the Old Testament have to do with Jesus Christ?

[Carbon]

What does the Old Testament have to do with Jesus Christ? - Everything.

The first five books of the Old Testament were written centuries before the birth of Jesus. Yet they intricately involve him.

Vern S. Polythress says, "Christ himself is the key that unlocks the riches of the Old Testament. In his book, "The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses." Dr. Poythress opens the door to our understanding of the law of Moses and its relationship to the gospel.

The Bible is a single, unified story of God's redemptive plan, centered entirely on Jesus Christ. Jesus is the key to all of Scripture. He explicitly stated he came not to abolish the Law or the Prophets, but to fulfill them (Matthew 5:17). All the promises of God find their "Yes" in Christ (2 Corinthians 1:20). Reading the OT through the "lens of Christ" is essential to proper interpretation.

The OT contains "types" or "shadows" (persons, events, and institutions like the temple, sacrifices, and priesthood) that foreshadow the greater "antitype" or reality found in Christ. For example, the Passover lamb was a type of Christ, the ultimate sacrifice, and the physical land promise is transformed into the global reality of the new earth inheritance for all believers.

So, the Old Testament must be interpreted by the New Testament; the NT is the fulfillment. Not the other way around.
Dispensationalists believe differently. They believe the New Testament adds new information but does not reinterpret or override the original meaning of the Old Testament. This approach emphasizes a literal fulfillment of Old Testament promises to national Israel, viewing the church as a distinct entity that emerged after the Old Testament era. I believe this is an error.

I believe it will be interesting to go through some of these types and shadows and their fulfillment.

I will be using some parts of Dr. Vern S. Poythress's book.

All who are interested, whether you agree or not, are welcome to join in. Share your beliefs, support them with scripture. Most of all, may all the glory go to God alone.

 

[Carbon]

The whole Old Testament finds its focus in Jesus Christ, His death, and His resurrection.

The apostle Paul says the same thing in different words: For all the promises of God find their Yes in him. That is why it is through him that we utter our Amen to God for his glory. 2 Cor 1:20.

"These things [ in the Old Testament] happened to them as examples and were written down as warnings for us, on whom the fulfillment of the ages has come."
Now these things happened to them as an example, but they were written down for our instruction, on whom the end of the ages has come. 1 Cor 10:11.

Jesus said, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished" Matthew 5:17-18.

 

[Carbon]

A great heritage awaits us in the Old Testament. But how do we unlock it? Christ Himself is the key that unlocks the riches of the Old Testament.

May God open our eyes and hearts so we may see how.

 

[Carbon]

Christ is the all-glorious Lord, the only Son of the Father, who from all eternity beholds the Father face to face, who is with God, and who is God: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. John 1:1.

Every word of the Old Testament is the word of God Himself:
16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. 2 Tim 3. And God is the Trinitarian God - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Thus all of the Old Testament is Christ's word to us, as well as God the Father's word to us.

 

[Carbon]

The Tabernacle as a symbol of the Messaiah

The Tabernacle of Moses prefiguring God's presence through Christ.

The OT Tabernacle is full of meaning because it is a symbol of the Messiah and his salvation. The book of Hebrews gives much instruction concerning the Tabernacle.

Hebrews 9:7–14​

7 but into the second only the high priest goes, and he but once a year, and not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the unintentional sins of the people. 8 By this the Holy Spirit indicates that the way into the holy places is not yet opened as long as the first section is still standing 9 (which is symbolic for the present age). 4 According to this arrangement, gifts and sacrifices are offered that cannot perfect the conscience of the worshiper, 10 but deal only with food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until the time of reformation.

Redemption Through the Blood of Christ

11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, 5 then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) 12 he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. 13 For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify 6 for the purification of the flesh, 14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our 7 conscience from dead works to serve the living God.

The earthly tabernacle was a copy or a shadow of the true dwelling place of God in heaven. 5 who serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things, just as Moses was warned by God when he was about to erect the tabernacle; for, “See,” He says, “that you make all things according to the pattern which was shown you on the mountain.” Heb 8:5.

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. Heb 9:24.

 

[Eleanor]

What does the Old Testament have to do with Jesus Christ? - Everything.

The first five books of the Old Testament were written centuries before the birth of Jesus. Yet they intricately involve him.
Vern S. Polythress says, "Christ himself is the key that unlocks the riches of the Old Testament. In his book, "The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses." Dr. Poythress opens the door to our understanding of the law of Moses and its relationship to the gospel.
The Bible is a single, unified story of God's redemptive plan, centered entirely on Jesus Christ. Jesus is the key to all of Scripture. He explicitly stated he came not to abolish the Law or the Prophets, but to fulfill them (Matthew 5:17). All the promises of God find their "Yes" in Christ (2 Corinthians 1:20). Reading the OT through the "lens of Christ" is essential to proper interpretation.

The OT contains "types" or "shadows" (persons, events, and institutions like the temple, sacrifices, and priesthood) that foreshadow the greater "antitype" or reality found in Christ. For example, the Passover lamb was a type of Christ, the ultimate sacrifice, and the physical land promise is transformed into the global reality of the new earth inheritance for all believers.
So, the Old Testament must be interpreted by the New Testament; the NT is the fulfillment. Not the other way around.
Dispensationalists believe differently. They believe the New Testament adds new information but does not reinterpret or override the original meaning of the Old Testament.

The apostolic teaching (1 Th 4:16-17) of Christ (Lk 10:16) is authoritative.
Prophecy is given in riddles, not clearly (Nu 12:6-8) and is subject to more than one interpretation.

This approach emphasizes a literal fulfillment of Old Testament promises to national Israel, viewing the church as a distinct entity that emerged after the Old Testament era. I believe this is an error.
I believe it will be interesting to go through some of these types and shadows and their fulfillment.
I will be using some parts of Dr. Vern S. Poythress's book.
All who are interested, whether you agree or not, are welcome to join in. Share your beliefs, support them with scripture. Most of all, may all the glory go to God alone.

 

[Carbon]

It's amazing that the Israelites had genuine communion with God when they responded to what He was saying in the Tabernacle. They trusted in the Messiah, without knowing all the details of how fulfillment would finally come.
And so they were saved, and they received forgiveness, even before the Messiah came. The animal sacrifices in themselves did not bring forgiveness (Hebrews 10:1-4), but Christ did as he met with them through the symbolism of the sacrifices.
1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect. 2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins. 3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year. 4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

 

[Eleanor]

It's amazing that the Israelites had genuine communion with God when they responded to what He was saying in the Tabernacle. They trusted in the Messiah, without knowing all the details of how fulfillment would finally come.
And so they were saved, and they received forgiveness, even before the Messiah came. The animal sacrifices in themselves did not bring forgiveness (Hebrews 10:1-4), but Christ did as he met with them through the symbolism of the sacrifices.

Actually, sin was not remitted at the sacrifices, it was covered (Ro 4:7, Heb 10:4) until they were remitted by Christ's atonement (Ro 3:25).

1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect. 2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins. 3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year. 4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

 

[Carbon]

Actually, sin was not remitted at the sacrifices, it was covered (Ro 4:7, Heb 10:4) until they were remitted by Christ's atonement (Ro 3:25).

You're not saying that the OT saints were not forgiven, are you?

 

[Eleanor]

You're not saying that the OT saints were not forgiven, are you?

They were forgiven, their sin was covered (Ro 4:7, Heb 10:4), but not remitted, until the atonement of Jesus, for the blood of bulls and goats cannot remit sin.

 

[Carbon]

They were forgiven, their sin was covered (Ro 4:7, Heb 10:4), but not remitted, until the atonement of Jesus, for the blood of bulls and goats cannot remit sin.

Oh, okay, got ya. Amen!

 

[Arial]

What does the Old Testament have to do with Jesus Christ? - Everything.

The first five books of the Old Testament were written centuries before the birth of Jesus. Yet they intricately involve him.

Vern S. Polythress says, "Christ himself is the key that unlocks the riches of the Old Testament. In his book, "The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses." Dr. Poythress opens the door to our understanding of the law of Moses and its relationship to the gospel.

The Bible is a single, unified story of God's redemptive plan, centered entirely on Jesus Christ. Jesus is the key to all of Scripture. He explicitly stated he came not to abolish the Law or the Prophets, but to fulfill them (Matthew 5:17). All the promises of God find their "Yes" in Christ (2 Corinthians 1:20). Reading the OT through the "lens of Christ" is essential to proper interpretation.

The OT contains "types" or "shadows" (persons, events, and institutions like the temple, sacrifices, and priesthood) that foreshadow the greater "antitype" or reality found in Christ. For example, the Passover lamb was a type of Christ, the ultimate sacrifice, and the physical land promise is transformed into the global reality of the new earth inheritance for all believers.

So, the Old Testament must be interpreted by the New Testament; the NT is the fulfillment. Not the other way around.
Dispensationalists believe differently. They believe the New Testament adds new information but does not reinterpret or override the original meaning of the Old Testament. This approach emphasizes a literal fulfillment of Old Testament promises to national Israel, viewing the church as a distinct entity that emerged after the Old Testament era. I believe this is an error.

I believe it will be interesting to go through some of these types and shadows and their fulfillment.

I will be using some parts of Dr. Vern S. Poythress's book.

All who are interested, whether you agree or not, are welcome to join in. Share your beliefs, support them with scripture. Most of all, may all the glory go to God alone.

I agree. It is his story. Here is the prelude to the beginning of the action in the unfolding story of redemption through Christ. Gen 3:15 The seed of the woman will crush your head, and you will bruise his heel. Everything that follows is the historical account of that coming to pass. Until we begin to read the OT with that in mind, and our focus firmly set on him, we will fail to rightly understand the value of the OT and make all sorts of doctrinal mistakes along the way.

 

[Soyeong]

What does the Old Testament have to do with Jesus Christ? - Everything.

The first five books of the Old Testament were written centuries before the birth of Jesus. Yet they intricately involve him.

Vern S. Polythress says, "Christ himself is the key that unlocks the riches of the Old Testament. In his book, "The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses." Dr. Poythress opens the door to our understanding of the law of Moses and its relationship to the gospel.

The Bible is a single, unified story of God's redemptive plan, centered entirely on Jesus Christ. Jesus is the key to all of Scripture. He explicitly stated he came not to abolish the Law or the Prophets, but to fulfill them (Matthew 5:17). All the promises of God find their "Yes" in Christ (2 Corinthians 1:20). Reading the OT through the "lens of Christ" is essential to proper interpretation.

The OT contains "types" or "shadows" (persons, events, and institutions like the temple, sacrifices, and priesthood) that foreshadow the greater "antitype" or reality found in Christ. For example, the Passover lamb was a type of Christ, the ultimate sacrifice, and the physical land promise is transformed into the global reality of the new earth inheritance for all believers.

So, the Old Testament must be interpreted by the New Testament; the NT is the fulfillment. Not the other way around.
Dispensationalists believe differently. They believe the New Testament adds new information but does not reinterpret or override the original meaning of the Old Testament. This approach emphasizes a literal fulfillment of Old Testament promises to national Israel, viewing the church as a distinct entity that emerged after the Old Testament era. I believe this is an error.

I believe it will be interesting to go through some of these types and shadows and their fulfillment.

I will be using some parts of Dr. Vern S. Poythress's book.

All who are interested, whether you agree or not, are welcome to join in. Share your beliefs, support them with scripture. Most of all, may all the glory go to God alone.

Jesus frequently quoted or alluded to the OT so much that I don’t think that there was another person whose teachings were more thoroughly rooted in the OT. While the OT contains important foreshadows that testify about Christ and the NT should be interpreted in light of this, it can also be easy for someone to misunderstand how the NT uses the OT if they are not thoroughly rooted in the OT, so the NT should not be misinterpreted as overriding the OT. While the Bible has a deeper meaning, it can be easy for someone to go off the deep end of they don’t always remain rooted in the plain meaning. The NT recognizing that something in the OT is a foreshadow or a symbol that points towards Christ is not diminishing its literal importance but rather it is emphasizing the importance of living in a way that points towards Christ rather than a way that points away from him. For example, in 1 Corinthians 5:6-8, Paul recognized how Passover foreshadows Christ by drawing the connection of him being our Passover lamb, however, instead of concluding that we no longer need to literally observe Passover now that he has come, he concluded by saying that we should therefore continue to observe Passover. If the Israelites had understood that the Tabernacle was just a symbol for Christ so they did not need to literally build it, then they would have been missing the point.

 

[Carbon]

Jesus frequently quoted or alluded to the OT so much that I don’t think that there was another person whose teachings were more thoroughly rooted in the OT. While the OT contains important foreshadows that testify about Christ and the NT should be interpreted in light of this,

The NT should be interpreted in light of this? See, you hve it all backwards, the OT should be interpreted by the NT. Not the other way around.

it can also be easy for someone to misunderstand how the NT uses the OT if they are not thoroughly rooted in the OT, so the NT should not be misinterpreted as overriding the OT.

Well in a sense, the NT does override the OT. The OT is fulfilled in Christ, and in this sense it overrides the OT.

While the Bible has a deeper meaning, it can be easy for someone to go off the deep end of they don’t always remain rooted in the plain meaning.

Yes, and, I believe you are demonstrating that.

The NT recognizing that something in the OT is a foreshadow or a symbol that points towards Christ is not diminishing its literal importance but rather it is emphasizing the importance of living in a way that points towards Christ rather than a way that points away from him.

Lets look at yoiur "for example."

For example, in 1 Corinthians 5:6-8, Paul recognized how Passover foreshadows Christ by drawing the connection of him being our Passover lamb, however, instead of concluding that we no longer need to literally observe Passover now that he has come, he concluded by saying that we should therefore continue to observe Passover.

I think you might re-read 1 Cor 5.

If the Israelites had understood that the Tabernacle was just a symbol for Christ so they did not need to literally build it, then they would have been missing the point.

They seen and understood the tabernacle as God dwelling with them. So, I'm not sure how you would think I meant something other?

 

[Soyeong]

The NT should be interpreted in light of this? See, you hve it all backwards, the OT should be interpreted by the NT. Not the other way around.

Well in a sense, the NT does override the OT. The OT is fulfilled in Christ, and in this sense it overrides the OT.

Jesus and the Apostles quoted or alluded to the OT thousands of times in order to support what they were saying, so it doesn’t work to consider them to be more authoritative than what they considered consider to be an authoritative source, but rather the NT is commentary on the OT. For example, in Acts 17:11, the Bereans were praised because they diligently tested everything that Paul said against OT Scripture to see if what he said was true, not the other way around. It can be easy to misunderstand the NT if our understanding of it is not tested against the OT to see if it is true. Jesus quoted thee times from Deuteronomy in order to defeat the temptations of Satan, which included saying that man shall not live by bread alone but by every word that comes from the mouth of God, so someone is flying off the rails if they interpret the NT as overriding anything that has come from the mouth of God. Jesus fulfilled the OT not by overriding the least part of it but by teaching us to correctly obey it as it was originally intended.

Yes, and, I believe you are demonstrating that.

By all means please make that case for it.

Lets look at yoiur "for example."


I think you might re-read 1 Cor 5

Tell me to reread it is not looking at my example.

They seen and understood the tabernacle as God dwelling with them. So, I'm not sure how you would think I meant something other?

I was just using it as an example of how someone could go off the deep end if they did not remain rooted in the plain meaning.

 

[Arial]

Jesus and the Apostles quoted or alluded to the OT thousands of times in order to support what they were saying, so it doesn’t work to consider them to be more authoritative than what they considered consider to be an authoritative source, but rather the NT is commentary on the OT

Saying that the NT interprets the OT is not saying that it is more authoritative than the OT. That is a bit of a straw man. There were things in the OT that could not be fully understood until it was revealed through the NT. The OT presented shadows of who was to come and what he would do; it prophesied of his coming; but none of this, and not even the purpose of the Old Covenant and its law, could be understood until Jesus came and finished his earthly work of redemption. Jesus was the fulfillment of the OC, bringing in the NC.

For example, in Acts 17:11, the Bereans were praised because they diligently tested everything that Paul said against OT Scripture to see if what he said was true, not the other way around.

Absolutely they checked their scriptures to see if what Paul was say9ng was true and they found that it was. That gives the NT equal authority. Both are the word of God equally. The OT and the NT are not separate. The NC promise to Abraham of "his faith was counted as righteousness" existed within the Old Covenant of Law. The New Covenant is unfolding through the Old Covenant. The NT never overrides the OT. It explains those things that were not yet revealed in the OT but are now revealed in the life, death, resurrection. and ascension of Christ who was promised in the OT.

 

[Soyeong]

Saying that the NT interprets the OT is not saying that it is more authoritative than the OT. That is a bit of a straw man. There were things in the OT that could not be fully understood until it was revealed through the NT. The OT presented shadows of who was to come and what he would do; it prophesied of his coming; but none of this, and not even the purpose of the Old Covenant and its law, could be understood until Jesus came and finished his earthly work of redemption. Jesus was the fulfillment of the OC, bringing in the NC.

Absolutely they checked their scriptures to see if what Paul was say9ng was true and they found that it was. That gives the NT equal authority. Both are the word of God equally. The OT and the NT are not separate. The NC promise to Abraham of "his faith was counted as righteousness" existed within the Old Covenant of Law. The New Covenant is unfolding through the Old Covenant. The NT never overrides the OT. It explains those things that were not yet revealed in the OT but are now revealed in the life, death, resurrection. and ascension of Christ who was promised in the OT.

The NT explaining the OT means that it is commentary on it. The NT has the same authority as the OT insofar as it is not interpreted as saying things that the Bereans would have rejected, as many Christians commonly do. For example, in Deuteronomy 13, the way that God instructed to determine that someone is a false prophet who is not speaking for Him is if they speak obeying His law, so it is either incorrect to interpret the authors of the NT as doing that or they were false prophets, but either way followers of Christ should be followers of his example of obedience to God’s law. If Paul had been saying things that the Bereans would have rejected because of failing the Deuteronomy 13 test, then priority should be given to the OT, but because Paul passed that test, then we can be confident that those interpretations of Paul are incorrect.

 

[Arial]

The NT explaining the OT means that it is commentary on it. The NT has the same authority as the OT insofar as it is not interpreted as saying things that the Bereans would have rejected, as many Christians commonly do. For example, in Deuteronomy 13, the way that God instructed to determine that someone is a false prophet who is not speaking for Him is if they speak obeying His law, so it is either incorrect to interpret the authors of the NT as doing that or they were false prophets, but either way followers of Christ should be followers of his example of obedience to God’s law. If Paul had been saying things that the Bereans would have rejected because of failing the Deuteronomy 13 test, then priority should be given to the OT, but because Paul passed that test, then we can be confident that those interpretations of Paul are incorrect.

We can be confident of what Paul says because he was a Christ appointed apostle. He doesn't contradict anything in the OT and no one is saying that he does as far as I know. It is interpretations by people that may not be what Paul meant.

 

[Soyeong]

We can be confident of what Paul says because he was a Christ appointed apostle. He doesn't contradict anything in the OT and no one is saying that he does as far as I know. It is interpretations by people that may not be what Paul meant.

While I agree that we can be confident in what Paul said, we should not be confident in common interpretations of Paul that make him out to be a false prophet. For example, Paul is commonly interpreted as contradicting what God spoke in Deuteronomy 14 in regard to refraining from eating unclean animals.

 

[Eleanor]

While I agree that we can be confident in what Paul said, we should not be confident in common interpretations of Paul that make him out to be a false prophet. For example, Paul is commonly interpreted as contradicting what God spoke in Deuteronomy 14 in regard to refraining from eating unclean animals.

The apostolic teaching (Ro 14:14) of Christ (Lk 10:16) is pretty clear to me.

"As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself.
But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean."

Obedience to our consience comes first.
Our conscience should also be correctly informed, as was Paul's.