Typology

For Your Edification (4.30.12)

/ davidsschrock

For Your Edification is a weekly set of resources on the subjects of Bible, Theology, Ministry, and Family Life.  Let me know what you think or if you have other resources that growing Christians should be aware.  

BIBLE

The Case for Adam and Eve. In case you haven’t noticed, the historicity of Adam is once again under attack.  Groups like BioLogos and books like The Evolution of Adam (both of which are led or authored by Peter Enns) have recalled the question of Adam’s historical reality. Since evolution is still a topic promoted in schools and assumed in the media, this is an important discussion.  Thankfully, scholars like C. John Collins have given compelling evidence–biblical and otherwise–to help us see how Adam’s historicity is possible and why it matters.  In this interview, Professor Collins answers some important questions.  See also his recent book, Did Adam and Eve Really Exist?

The Whole Bible For Our Whole Lives. Our Presbyterian brother, Stephen Um interviews Richard Lints, asking him to discuss how biblical theology helps us read the Bible.  For me, reading Lints book,  The Fabric of Theology, was revolutionary.  He introduced me to the idea of reading each passage of Scripture in light of the textual, epochal, and canonical horizons.  In other words, he gave me terminology (which he got from Edmund Clowney) to describe how each text fits into the larger network of texts, chapters, books, and testaments known as the Bible. Every week, when I preach, I am looking to see the “micro-context” (trees) and the “macro-context” (the forest).  Why? Because men like Richard Lints showed me how to read the Bible as one unified story.  I encourage you to listen in on their six minute conversation.

THEOLOGY

The Old Testament and Providence. Kevin DeYoung provides a helpful overview of God’s purposeful providence in the history of Old Testament Israel.  It is a lengthy read, but one that is filled with strong biblical insights.

Jonathan Edwards of Typology. Douglas Wilson (pastor, theologian, author, and all-around literati) and Joe Rigney (Bethlehem College and Seminary) sit down to discuss Jonathan Edwards.  In this video they discuss his spiritual and sometimes speculative view of the two books of God–Scripture and Nature.

Take a look.

FAMILY, LIFE, & MINISTRY

Know Your Evangelicals. Joe Carter has begun to give short bios on evangelicals that every gospel-loving Christian should know.  In the first week, he has highlighted prison minister Charles Colson, cultural warrior Francis Schaeffer, and slave emancipator William Wilberforce.  Another, short book that provides similar information is Warren Wiersbe’s 50 People Every Christian Should Know: Learning from Spiritual Giants of the Faith.

Speaking the Gospel in an Age of Intolerance.  Ron Brown, assistant football coach at Nebraska, has come under fire for his opposition to a recent ammendment to a local ordinance in Omaha, Nebraska.  As the city seeks to add a clause protecting homosexuals, Brown stood up and spoke against it.  He has received great criticism for his stance and may face censure by his employer.  His public witness is bold, but his rationale is what makes the story so important.  As a bondslave to Christ, he wants to be found faithful to his master, and more than seeing homosexuals become heterosexual; he wants unbelievers to trust in Christ. He states,

It is not all about seeing homosexuals become hetereosexuals. This is not the message of the gospel. The gospel is about all types of sinners (like me) who are unbelievers becoming believers. The gospel of Jesus Christ is not discriminatory, it is all inclusive: we are all sinners. I am pretty consistent in talking to all types of people about Christ. This is the thing that encourages me in this whole thing: the gospel of Christ is being presented. God will forgive people. He will give a clean-slate to all who turn from sin and trust in Jesus.

May we all be so bold.

Babylon: A Typology

/ davidsschrock

Babylon functions as a negative type in the biblical storyline, one that is important to notice and understand as you read through Scripture.

In Genesis 11, the secular spirit of Babylon is introduced; it continues through the Old Testament, as the nation-state of Babylon arises and opposes God’s people; and finally in the New Testament, Babylon’s reach extends beyond the Fertile Crescent to engulf Rome and all those nations who oppose the City of God.  According to Revelation 18, the Babylonian harlot seduces men and women to drink her intoxicating liquor.  The final result is destruction of Babylon, but today that great spiritual city continues to proliferate.

In his book, The Progress of Redemption, Willem Van Gemeren gives a helpful synopsis of the negative type of Babylon.

“Babel/Babylon becomes in the Bible a symbol of self-restraint, imperialistic secularism: control without accountability to the Creator.  The spirit of secularism can coexist with religions and deities, but not with the absolutism of the Creator-God.  Humanism and secularism are bound to run counter to theism.  Isaiah saw this spirit in the imperial ambitions of Assyria and Babylon (10:7-11; 14:4-6; 47:5-7, 10).  John the apostle symbolically speaks of the Roman Empire and all kingdoms to follow as Babylon the Great. Babylon, the seducer of nations, kings, and merchants will fall (Rev. 18)” (Van Gemeren, The Progress of Redemption, 90).

Thankfully, Christ has defeated every work of the devil (1 John 3:8), and has successfully delivered the death blow to the serpent and his city.  Yet, until Christ returns the spirit of Babel will plague society, inviting human ingenuity and progress to appear more powerful and appealing than the wisdom of a crucified Jew.  Yet, God’s wisdom will prove true in the end.

Trust that Christ is preparing his city, and on that final day, he will return to sweep aside Babylon and establish the New Jerusalem.  Which city are you looking forward to?

May we turn away from Babel and all it offers, and turn towards the city whose architect and builder is God.

Soli Deo Gloria, dss

 

Introducing Bezalel: A Temple-Building Son of Judah

/ davidsschrock / 2 Comments

Introducing Bezalel

One of the main characters in Exodus is a man whose name only appears three other times in the whole Bible, and then only in genealogies in Chronicles and Ezra.  His name is Bezalel and he plays an enormous role in the construction of the tabernacle. Exodus 31:1–5 introduces him saying,

The LORD said to Moses, “See, I have called by name Bezalel the son of Uri, son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah, and I have filled him with the Spirit of God, with ability and intelligence, with knowledge and all craftsmanship,  to devise artistic designs, to work in gold, silver, and bronze, in cutting stones for setting, and in carving wood, to work in every craft.

Though Moses is given the vision of the tabernacle (Exod 25:40), and the people are called to furnish the materials (25:1–8; 35:4–9), it is the Spirit-endowed skill possessed by Bezalel that made it possible for the tabernacle to be constructed.  This is re-emphasized in Exodus 35:30-35, but it is Exodus 38:22 that I want to highlight.  There Moses records that “Bezalel the son of Uri, son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah, made all that the LORD commanded Moses.”

Now it is obvious why Bezalel is mentioned in Exodus.  He is the chief foreman on the tabernacle project.  He is given skill and the wisdom of the Spirit to accomplish the task.  However, the more amazing point is this: Why is it important that Bezalel’s family lineage be mentioned?  Of course, it is nice to know a little background on the guy, but is that it?  I think there is something more going on… what you might call prophetic typology.

Type, Ectype, and Archetype

Can you think of anyone else from the tribe of Judah, who obeyed God’s law to build a tabernacle?  How about David and his son Solomon.  In the history of Israel, it is recorded that God gave David a vision of the temple, and that David passed on this architectural plan to Solomon (1 Chron 28:11-19).  Moreover, like Bezalel, YHWH gave Solomon unsurpassed wisdom in order to construct the tabernacle (1 Kings 3:10ff).  Thus, in a very real way, Solomon with his Spirit-endowed wisdom was a greater Bezalel.  Bezalel was the type; Solomon the ectype, or to say it another way, a greater installment of the temple-builder par excellence who was still to come.

In the New Testament, we find that the temple-building typology of Bezalel and Solomon is picked up in Jesus Christ.  Jesus who is a son of David, and a son of Judah (Matt 1:1-17) is the one who perfectly obeys the law of Moses (Matt 5:17).  Moreover, as Matthew describes “something greater than Solomon is here” (12:42b).  Then in Matthew 16:18, Jesus himself says that he is building a church, one that will never be destroyed by death, sin, or Satan.  He alludes to the “rock” which conjures up pictures of the temple mount, and he says that he is going to found his temple/church on Peter and the other apostles. (See G. K. Beale on how Matthew 16:18 relates to the temple mount, The Temple and the Church’s Mission: A Biblical Theology of the Dwelling Place of God, 187–88).

Thus, in his death, Jesus becomes the cornerstone of a new temple.  Indeed, Paul uses temple imagery to describe what Jesus is doing by the Spirit.  He writes in Ephesians 2:19–22,

So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit.

The confirmation of the Bezalel-Solomon-Jesus typological structure finds further support in Hebrews, where the author compares and contrasts Moses and Jesus (Heb 3), and says that our Christ is not simply a servant in the house, he is “the builder of the house” (v. 3).  Accordingly, he deserves greater glory—more glory that Moses (and by extension Bezalel) who constructed a tent in the desert; more glory than Solomon who constructed a superlative temple in Jerusalem.  These typological dwellings were splendid in their own time and place, but compared to what Christ is doing in his church, they are dull and decrepit.

The Gospel of Temple Building Son of Judah

What a vision!  In Bezalel and later in Solomon, the Spirit of God is preparing the way for Christ to come.  The typology is not just a retrospective analogy between Jesus and Bezalel.  Rather, set in history, God has set aside Bezalel as a son of Judah, to become a temple-builder, so that when Christ comes into the world, we would see an entire history of Spirit-filled men from Judah building a dwelling place for God with his people.

Once again, we see in Exodus the way Christ is foreshadowed.  He is the substance from which Bezalel is the historical shadow.  It is a glorious reminder that all Scripture points us to Jesus, and that on every page of God’s inspired text, we see glimpses of our savior reflected in the saints who are shaped by the Spirit of Christ.

Soli Deo Gloria, ds

Who Is Jesus?

/ davidsschrock

Who is Jesus?

In his commentary, Exodus: Saved For God’s Glory, Philip Graham Ryken gives an excellent answer to this essential question.  Notice how he uses the typology of Exodus with its people, language, events, and descriptions to explain who Christ is.

Jesus is the Moses of our salvation, the mediator who goes for us before God.  Jesus is the Lamb of our Passover, the sacrifice for our sins.  Jesus is our way out of Egypt, the deliverer who baptizes us in the sea of his grace.  Jesus is our bread in the wilderness, the provider who gives us what we need for daily life.  Jesus is our voice form the mountain, declaring his law for our lives. Jesus is the altar of our burning, through whom we offer praise up to God.  Jesus is the light of our lampstand, the source of our life and light.  Jesus is the basin of our cleansing, the sanctifier of our souls.  Jesus is our great High Priest, who prays for us at the altar of incense.  And Jesus is the blood on the mercy seat, the atonement that reconciles us to God.  The great God of the exodus has saved us in Jesus Christ.

This is our Christ  He is understood not in the romantic views of our own making, but rather he is known through the revelation of God’s word.  Moreover, he is known from the descriptions of the Old Testament.  This means that failure to know the Old Testament necessitates an inability to know who Jesus the Christ is.

May we continue to press into the text of the Bible–Old and New Testaments–to see him!

Soli Deo Gloria, dss

What Does the Tabernacle Symbolize?

/ davidsschrock

Justin Taylor has a helpful post on the meaning of the tabernacle on his blog today.  As we have seen in our study of Exodus, the tabernacle is filled with imagery that helps us better understand our own relationship with God.

Here is the ESV Study Bible note that he begins with on Exodus 25:1-31:17:

First, the tabernacle is seen as a tented palace for Israel’s divine king. He is enthroned on the ark of the covenant in the innermost Holy of Holies (the Most Holy Place). His royalty is symbolized by the purple of the curtains and his divinity by the blue. The closer items are to the Holy of Holies, the more valuable are the metals (bronze→silver→gold) of which they are made.

The other symbolic dimension is Eden. The tabernacle, like the garden of Eden, is where God dwells, and various details of the tabernacle suggest it is a mini-Eden. These parallels include the east-facing entrance guarded by cherubim, the gold, the tree of life (lampstand), and the tree of knowledge (the law). Thus God’s dwelling in the tabernacle was a step toward the restoration of paradise, which is to be completed in the new heaven and earth (Revelation 21-22).

The explanation continues here with a full-color picture of the tabernacle.

For further reflections on the tabernacle see:

The Tabernacle as Typological Model

The Tabernacle as Holy Abode

The Tabernacle as God’s Meeting Place

The Tabernacle as a Royal Victory Palace

Soli Deo Gloria, dss

Sermon Notes: The Priest’s Particular Work (OT)

/ davidsschrock

In typological fashion, the names of Israel engraved on the breastpiece & ephod show how the priest represents God’s people before YHWH.  In other words, in Exodus 28 we learn that the priestly duty was to represent Israel before God in the holy of holies (cf Heb 5:1).  Specifically, verses 12 and 29 say that Israel was to remember them as they were kept on Aaron’s heart as he entered the holy of holies.  In this way, he made atonement for Israel.  Notice, in the OT, he didn’t make atonement for Egypt, Assyria, or Babylon.  He only represented those who were redeemed from Egypt, who passed through the sea, who were in covenant with God at Sinai.  It tells us that the priestly service was for those who are in covenant with God.  In fact, the Exodus 28 is a very strong typological argument for definite atonement.  Let’s consider.

To start, the priestly garments are made “for glory and for beauty” (28:2), but they are not simply for aesthetics; they are highly symbolic and even instructive for discerning what the priest did behind the veil.[1]  As Carol Meyers puts it, “priestly office and priestly garb are inextricably related.”[2]  G.K. Beale has developed the connection between the priestly garments, the temple and the universe,[3] but there is also good reason to examine the relationship between the priest and the covenant people.

In this regard, the priestly attire ‘visualizes’ the particular nature of the atonement.[4]  It does so in this way: From head to foot, the priest is to wear the holy attire designed and decorated to teach Israel and later generations what the priest is doing as he enters into the holy of holies.[5]  Of greatest interest (and illumination) are the “shoulder pieces” and the “breastpiece of judgment.”   Concerning the former, YHWH instructs,

And they shall make the ephod of gold, of blue and purple and scarlet yarns, and of fine twined linen, skillfully worked. It shall have two shoulder pieces attached to its two edges, so that it may be joined together… You shall take two onyx stones, and engrave on them the names of the sons of Israel, six of their names on the one stone, and the names of the remaining six on the other stone, in the order of their birth. As a jeweler engraves signets, so shall you engrave the two stones with the names of the sons of Israel… And you shall set the two stones on the shoulder pieces of the ephod, as stones of remembrance for the sons of Israel. And Aaron shall bear their names before the LORD on his two shoulders for remembrance (Exod 28:6-12; cf. 39:2-7).

The purpose of the shoulder pieces is far more than ancient Near Eastern fashion or utilitarian function.  The names of the twelve tribes were “deeply and permanently cut into the onyx,”[6] signifying the priest’s intimate connection with the people of Israel. As the priest of the covenant, he mediated for the people of the covenant.  Of this “corporate solidarity” that the priest shared with Israel, it was a necessary function of his office to be in communicative relation with those whom he represents. In other words, the priest does not mediate for an unspecified group or number, the “stones of remembrance” were designated to represent “the sons of Israel”—one stone for each tribe.  So that, when the priest entered the tabernacle, and later the temple he did so with Israel on his heart and mind.[7]

In the same way, the high priest’s breastpiece of judgment functioned as a symbol of the high priest’s covenantal representation.[8]  Moses records,

You shall make a breastpiece of judgment, in skilled work… It shall be square and doubled, a span its length and a span its breadth. You shall set in it four rows of stones. A row of sardius, topaz, and carbuncle shall be the first row; and the second row an emerald, a sapphire, and a diamond; and the third row a jacinth, an agate, and an amethyst; and the fourth row a beryl, an onyx, and a jasper. They shall be set in gold filigree. There shall be twelve stones with their names according to the names of the sons of Israel. They shall be like signets, each engraved with its name, for the twelve tribes… So Aaron shall bear the names of the sons of Israel in the breastpiece of judgment on his heart, when he goes into the Holy Place, to bring them to regular remembrance before the LORD (Exod 28:15-30; cf. 39:8-21).

Like the shoulder pieces, the breastpiece is designed to bring the sons of Israel into “regular remembrance before the Lord” (v. 29).  Again, as a priest chosen from his brothers for his brothers and their families, he does not generally atone, intercede, or minister.  Rather, God has appointed the high priest to make atonement for God’s particular people, people who knew they had a priest.  Rightly, D.K. Stuart says, “the high priest symbolized Israel” and “that whatever he did, he did as the people’s representative, and his actions would have the same essential effect that they would have if all of them, one by one, had done the same thing.”[9]  This, by itself doesn’t prove definite atonement, but it does show the exact representation of his priestly office.  It is not general, but particular.[10]

In fact, this notion of personal relationship between priest and people has been forcefully argued by Hugh Martin as evidence against indefinite atonement. Unpacking Hebrews 5:1, which develops the Levitical priesthood, Martin argues that the law of the office of the priest “rests on personal relation,” and this relation is not abstract.  Rather, the priest represents “individual men, particular persons.”[11]  Moving from textual observation to dogmatic assertion, he concludes,

If the atonement of Christ falls under the category of His Priesthood, it is impossible it can be impersonal, indefinite, unlimited; for the priesthood is not.  In order to its very constitution, it pre-requires personal relation; and the same must be true of the Atonement, unless the Atonement transpires outside the limits and actings and conditions of the priesthood…The pre-requisite of personal relation to particular persons is so indispensable in all real priesthood whatsoever.  It is true of “every” priest that is taken from among men [Heb 5:1].  Any “general reference” contradictory to this, or in addition to this—except simply community nature, secured by his being taken from among men—violates the very first principles of the office.[12]

While the priestly garments do not give conclusive evidence for Christ’s particular work on the cross; they are very suggestive.  Moreover, the fact that Christ, as the antitype of Israel’s high priest, wears the golden plate on his head declaring ‘Holy to the Lord’ and the names of his covenant people on his chest; there is great reason to see in his attire the inseparable union of Christ and his elect from every nation.

What do you think? Would love to hear how you think Christ’s priestly garments typify the person and work of Jesus Christ.

Soli Deo Gloria, dss

[1]They also connote a strong sense of authority.  See Douglas Stuart, Exodus, New American Commentary (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman, 2006), 604.

[2]Carol Meyers, Exodus, New Cambridge Bible Commentary (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 240.

[3]G.K. Beale, The Temple and the Church’s Mission, 39-45.

[4]For instance, speaking of the priest in his vestments, Alec Motyer writes, “he is the visual display of the Lord’s ‘judgment,’ his opinion regarding his people” (J. A. Motyer, The Message of Exodus, The Bible Speaks Today, ed. J.A. Motyer [Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005], 279.

[6]Stuart, Exodus, 609.  Stuart’s offhand comment about the engraving does not in itself signify anything about the definite nature of the atonement, but it does add to the mounting evidence that the priestly work was for a people whom he would not forget (cf. Isa 49:16).

[7]“This feature [the names engraved on the priestly attire] has commemorative symbolic value, bringing all Israel into the tabernacle with Aaron as he carries out the rituals thought to help secure the well-being of the people or adjudicate their conflicts” (Meyers, Exodus, 241).

[8]“The breastpiece was not merely a patch on his ephod but a square frontal vest, a very prominent, central, expansive, symbolic display of the covenant relation of God to his people” (Stuart, Exodus, 610).

[9]Stuart, Exodus, 611.

[10]On this point, it should be noted that the priests served the covenant people only, and they stood against those who were outside the people of God (David Williams, The Office of Christ and Its Expression in the Church, 13-14).

[11]All these quotes are taken from Hugh Martin’s discussion of the nature of Christ’s priestly office in The Atonement, 58.  Martin ties this particular relationship to the definite nature of the atonement.  Speaking of the Levitical priests, he says, “The priests of Levi were chosen for, or in lieu of, the first-born [Num 3]; and they were ordained for [Lev 8-9], or in room and on behalf of men, even for the Israel of God collectively and individually.  They acted for individuals; and besides such action, they had no priestly action whatsoever, no official duty to discharge.  The introduction of a ‘general reference’ into the theory of their office is an absurdity” (The Atonement, 65).

[12]The Atonement, 63-65.

Sermon Notes: The Tabernacle as a Holy Abode

/ davidsschrock / 3 Comments

Yesterday, we considered how the tabernacle served as a typological model meant to instruct Israel and us about God’s world, God’s plans for salvation, and what it means for the Creator to dwell with his redeemed creation.  Today, we will look at the way  God’s house is a holy abode.

In Exodus 25:8, Moses records God’s statement, “Let them make me a sanctuary…”  The word here means holy place.  Everything about the house of God is intended to stress his holiness.  From the arrangement of the curtains to the selection of the building materials, everything about the tabernacle shows how closer proximity to the holy of holies demands increased purity and holiness.

Holy of Holies, Holy Place, and Courtyard

The first thing that shows the holiness of God is the floor plan of the tabernacle, along with the series of curtains that separated Israel from God.  Exodus 26 explains these dimensions. So that looking down on the tabernacle, you can see a courtyard 150 feet long, 75 feet wide.  This courtyard was surrounded by a fence (7.5 feet high).  The gate was on the East (like the garden of Eden), and upon entering the courtyard, the Levites would be confronted with a massive bronze altar (7.5 ft wide, 4.5 feet high) and a bronze basin for washings.  Describing this holy space, T.D. Alexander writes,

Separated from the rest of the Israelite encampment, the courtyard was set apart as a holy area; only the tabernacle, in which God dwelt, was considered to be more sacred… Just as Moses set a boundary around Mount Sinai to prevent the people from coming into the divine presence (19:12-13, 21-24), so the courtyard fence prevented them from approaching God inadvertently… Without the courtyard buffer zone, it would have been impossible for [Israel] to dwell in safety close to the Lord (T.D. Alexander, From Paradise to Promised Land, 197).

So at the first-level, God’s holiness is seen in the separation between the priests and the people.  Next we come to the tabernacle, itself. At the end of the courtyard was the house of God.  In it were two sections—the holy place and the most holy place.  Again these correspond to the pattern on the mountain, and the pattern of access typified in Exodus 24.  When Moses met with Israel, the people remained in the camp, the priests came half-way up the mountain, and Moses alone entered the cloud (24:1-2).  

The Screen and the Veil

Next, we see how the screen and the veil add to the idea that God’s presence is separate from man.  Exodus 26:31-37 reports,

 Then you shall erect the tabernacle according to the plan for it that you were shown on the mountain. “And you shall make a veil of blue and purple and scarlet yarns and fine twined linen. It shall be made with cherubim skillfully worked into it. And you shall hang it on four pillars of acacia overlaid with gold, with hooks of gold, on four bases of silver. And you shall hang the veil from the clasps, and bring the ark of the testimony in there within the veil. And the veil shall separate for you the Holy Place from the Most Holy. You shall put the mercy seat on the ark of the testimony in the Most Holy Place. And you shall set the table outside the veil, and the lampstand on the south side of the tabernacle opposite the table, and you shall put the table on the north side. You shall make a screen for the entrance of the tent, of blue and purple and scarlet yarns and fine twined linen, embroidered with needlework. And you shall make for the screen 5 pillars of acacia, and overlay them with gold. Their hooks shall be of gold, you shall cast 5 bases of bronze for them.

When we unpack this passage, the holiness of God’s dwelling space is stressed by the screen that separates the courtyard from the Holy place in verse 36, as well as, the veil that separates the holy of holies from the holy place.  On the veil that protects the most holy place, there are cherubim—angelic beings who live to praise God around his throne.  These are not on the screen.  The difference between the veil and the screen is one more evidence, that approach to God’s throne room should not be taken lightly.

Gold, Silver, and Bronze

Likewise, as you move towards God’s dwelling place, the value of the materials changes.  Notice, the fence at the outside has silver hooks (on top) and brass bases; the screen has gold hooks and brass bases, and the veil has gold hooks and silver bases.  It is also worth nothing that because of these bases, the curtains of the  tabernacle don’t really touch the ground—again this stresses the holiness of God’s dwelling place, and by extension, the holiness of God. 

What might we learn from all this?

It is worth asking at this point, what are the implications of this holy space.  Let me suggest two things.

First, God dwells in unapproachable holiness, and we as covenant-breaking sinners  do not have natural access to him.  Truthfully, I wish someone would have told this to me when I was 17.  Wrongly, I had the impression that because God was a loving father, he was pleased with me and happy for me to come to him.  The tabernacle says otherwise.  God is pleased with absolute holiness.  This doesn’t change in the New Testament, either.  Jesus says that we must be perfect (Matt 5:48); Hebrews declares, without holiness, no one will see the Lord (12:14).

God’s unapproachable holiness has points of access.  At the same time that God’s dwelling place shouts “Holy, Holy, Holy!” It also promises gracious access.  Notice that in the fence there is gate.  In the screen there is an opening.  And in veil there is a way to enter.  What does this teach us about God?  Simply this: We cannot come to him on our own terms or in our own names, but through priestly mediation and a system of sacrifice, God has made a way to come behind the veil.

More specifically, from the people of Israel, there is a chosen people—the Levites—who can enter the courtyard.  In the courtyard, there is an altar to make burnt offerings, sin offerings, and peace offerings; as well as, a basin for cleansing.  These make possible access into the holy place.

Moreover, there is Exodus 28-29 a designated high priest  who will go before the LORD once a year in order to make atonement for Israel (Leviticus 16).  In all this, God reveals that he does not relax his holy standards, but neither does he leave his people to perish under the weight of his law.  He is terrifyingly pure but also unfathomably tender.

Bringing this forward, the tabernacle prepares the way for Jesus Christ, our superior access.  He is the the way, the gate, the door to the Father.  Jesus who is as pure and holy as the inner chamber of the tabernacle comes outside of the courtyard, into the polluted world, and makes clean not only the Levites.  He comes and makes clean people from every tongue, tribe, language, and nation, such that Revelation 5:9-10, “Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation, and you have made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and they shall reign on the earth.”

Praise God for his perfect provision of a way into his inner chamber.  May his tabernacle–in shadow and substance–teach us afresh of God’s sublime holiness and boundless grace.

Soli Deo Gloria, dss

Sermon Notes: The Tabernacle as a Typological Model

/ davidsschrock / 6 Comments

When we think about the tabernacle, the first thing to realize is that it is more than meets the eye.  In other words, the tabernacle is built to show off theological, cosmological, and Christological truths–just to name a few.  Today, lets consider a couple of these things. 

1. A Portable Mountain of God

First up, the tabernacle’s three sections—the courtyard where the people would bring sacrifices, the holy place (the first section in the tabernacle) where the priests would work, and the holy of holies where the high priest would enter once a year on the Day of Atonement, all correspond to the pattern that Moses saw on the mountain.  A few verses prove this:

25:8-9.  And let them make me a sanctuary, that I may dwell in their midst.  Exactly as I show you concerning the pattern of the tabernacle, and of all its furniture, so you shall make it.

25:40.  And see that you make them [Mercy Seat, Table, Golden Lampstand] after the pattern for them, which is being shown you on the mountain.

 26:30. Then you shall erect the tabernacle according to the plan for it that you were shown on the mountain. (cf. The Bronze Altar, 27:8)

 God gives Moses a vision and instruction of this tabernacle, so that Israel can see beyond it to the throne room of God—remember, most of the people never went inside, so this information has a curb appeal because of the mysterious of God’s tent.

2. The Cosmos

Second, in general and in detial, the tabernacle which is God’s earthly dwelling place with Israel is simultaneously constructed in a way that represents all creation.  Gregory Beale has proven this thesis in his book, The Temple and the Church’s Mission: A Biblical Theology of the Dwelling Place of God.  More succinctly, T. D. Alexander has followed Beale with his more popular treatment, From Eden to New Jerusalem: An Introduction to Biblical Theology. For our consideration, let me mention a couple verses. 

Ps 78:69.  He built his sanctuary like the high heavens, like the earth, which he has founded forever.  Clearly, this proves in a single verse the connection between the tabernacle and the construction of the universe. However, you will also find in Scripture those places where Scripture describes the reverse–the universe is God’s macrocosmic temple.

Psalm 104:1-6.  Bless the LORD, O my soul! O LORD my God, you are very great! You are clothed with splendor and majesty, covering yourself with light as with a garment, stretching out the heavens like a tent. He lays the beams of his chambers on the waters; he makes the clouds his chariot; he rides on the wings of the wind; he makes his messengers winds, his ministers a flaming fire. He set the earth on its foundations, so that it should never be moved. You covered it with the deep as with a garment; the waters stood above the mountains.

 The significance of this microcosmic-macrocosmic temple is simply that what God does in Israel has cosmic significance.  God’s goal is much larger than a singular sanctuary in the Middle East; it prepares the way for Christ and the garden-temple that is revealed in Revelation 21-22.

3. Eden

Not only is Moses given a vision of God’s mountain throne and the cosmos which he upholds, what we learn in the construction of this tabernacle is the way it points back to Eden.  Notice a couple of connections.

  1. Gold in the tabernacle goes back to the gold that existed in Eden (Gen 2:11-12; Exodus 25:7, 11, 17, 31; cf. 1 Kings 6:30)
  2. The Menorah points back to tree of life (Gen 2:9; 3:22; Exod 25:31-35); the bread of God’s presence corresponds to the food provided by God in the garden (Gen 2:17).
  3. Angels embroidered on the Veil reflects the angel who dwelt outside Eden (Gen 3:24).
  4. That God would dwell and even walk in the midst of Israel is Eden-like (Gen 3:8; 26:12).

Significance

Now the question arises: Why does this matter?  Let me suggest two reasons.

Typology.  Each of its elements is meant to represent something else—it is like a giant object lesson for Israel and for us.  In fact, verse 40, which is quoted in Hebrews 8:5, actually uses the word “type” (typon, LXX). Thus, to understand the furniture of Exodus 25 and the tabernacle itself (26), courtyard (27), we must appreciate its symbolism and typology. (We will explore this more in the days ahead.

Telos.  Since the purpose of the tabernacle is typological, it is also eschatological.  It does point back to Eden, but even more it points ahead to a permanent rest in the land.  This is prefigured in Israel’s entrance into Canaan, but even more it foreshadows the work of Christ and the dwelling he promises in the age to come.

Thus, if you know the Bible well, you know Rev 21:22 says that in the end there will be no temple in the city, but that doesn’t deny an eternal cosmic temple.  What is a temple, but the dwelling place of God.  And what Revelation teaches is that at the end of the age the God who dwells in heaven, will again dwell with man on earth; and not just in one box-shaped tabernacle.  All creation will be his dwelling place.  The glory of God will cover the earth.

Revelation 21:16 makes this so clear in the light of Exodus 25-40.  John records that the city of God that comes down from heaven is 12,000 stadia (1380 miles) in length, width, and height.  It is a perfect cube–just like the holy of holies.

So to understand Revelation 21, we must read it with Exodus 26, and what we see is that at the end of the age, the whole earth will be as holy as the holy of holies.  So the goal of God is not a 15x15x15 golden box in Israel.  His goal is a perfect, purified world where he dwells with his redeemed.  This is what Exodus teaches us.

It beckons for a temple not made with human hands, even as it is given to Moses for the construction with human hands.  Exodus points beyond itself and leads us to see that Jesus is the builder of this better tabernacle, and if we care at all about what God has done in Christ and/or is doing, we must see look carefully at the details of the tabernacle.

May God give us eyes to see his design in this ancient tabernacle and hearts that long for the temple that is to come!

Soli Deo Gloria, dss

Eyes To See Him

/ davidsschrock

Starting this week, a bunch of friends from Southern Seminary started a new Twitter account, and I hope it will be one worth ‘following.’

EyesToSeeHim is a Twitter venture designed to help others read the Bible better.  In particular, it is designed to help see the glory of Christ in every page of the Bible, 140 characters at a time.

Each of the guys who contribute to this “hermeneutical ministry” have a commitment to reading the Bible with Christ in view–some call this “Christocentric,” others call it “Christotelic.”  Either way, the aim is read Scripture with ‘Eyes To See Him.’

We read the Bible this way because this is how Jesus taught us to read the Scriptures (John 5:39; Luke 24:27).  It is the way that the Apostles read the Bible (Acts 28:23; Col 2:17).  And it is the way that most of us were assisted to the read the Bible while we studied at Southern Seminary.  I think it is fair to say that each of us did not arrive at this method of interpretation on our own–we were  helped immensely by our professors and teachers who themselves were taught.

In truth, none of us read the Bible well by ourselves.  The Spirit leads us into all truth (1 John 2:27), but he does so through the means of gifted teachers (Eph 4:11-16).  Left to our own devices we will put ourselves into the story of the Bible in the wrong places, and will be tempted to “moralize” the Scripture instead of believing the gospel message of the Bible and then responding with obedient faith.  Too many pulpits and Christian bookstores fail to put Christ in his proper place, as the telos of the Bible, and thus my hope is that we might help others read the Bible better, so that the gospel of Jesus Christ might grip the hearts of more and more Christians.  This is not an esoteric reading of the Bible, but one that reads each page in light of the full revelation of Jesus Christ (Heb. 1:1-3).

I hope you will benefit from this Twitter ministry and that it will help you read the Bible better.  Here are some of the contributors. I love these guys and am thankful for their ministry of the word. I would encourage you to keep up with them at their respective Twitter accounts, blogs, and/or ministries as they model Christ-centered ministry that renounces moralism and exalts the Messiah.

Phillip Bethancourt is a doctoral student at Southern Seminary working on the theme of warrior in Scripture.  He also works at the seminary and preaches regularly.

Jedidiah Coppenger is doctoral student at Southeastern Seminary who is working on a dissertation in area of gender studies and the church.  He also works for LifeWay and helps lead Baptist21.

Chip Dean is the hyper-active young pastor at Capshaw Baptist Church (near Huntsville, AL).  His youth ministry is a model for anyone wanting to bring biblical and systematic theology to local church ministry at the student level.

Sam Emadi is a Masters student at Southern Seminary and the youth pastor at Calvary Baptist Church (Seymour, IN).

Grant Gaines is a doctoral student at Southern Seminary who is researching local church ecclesiology.  He pastors Brushey Fork Baptist Church (Canaan, IN).

Trent Hunter is a graduate of Southern Seminary (M. Div.) who now works as a pastoral assistant to Ryan Kelly at the Desert Springs Church (Albuquerque, NM).

Robbie Sagers is a doctoral student at Southern Seminary researching the area of the Church and the Kingdom of Christ.  He is special assistant to Russell Moore at SBTS.

Justin Sampler is a graduate of Southern Seminary and a gifted preacher.  If you know of a good church in need of a good pastor, Justin is your guy.

Luke Stamps is a doctoral student at Southern Seminary researching the person of Christ.

The most important thing about each of these guys is their love for Christ, His Word, and their families–their wives and children, as well as, the family of God gathered in their local churches.   I have benefitted immensely from their insights into the Scriptures and their friendships and I hope others will too.

Soli Deo Gloria, dss

Typology in Exodus and in Exegesis

/ davidsschrock / 2 Comments

Gareth Crossley, in his accessible and Christ-centered book on the Old  Testament, The Old Testament: Explained and Applied, provides a sampling of just some of the typological features of Exodus.  With a few adjustments, I find that his list helps us discern the way that the OT prepares the way for Jesus Christ’s greater exodus (Luke 9:31) and provides a good model for a Christian reading of the Old Testament.  Here they are (p. 91):

  • Israel’s bondage in Egypt (1:11-14) is a symbol of the sinner’s slavery to sin (Rom 6:17-18).
  • The Passover Lamb (12:5, 7, 13) is a type of Christ and his precious blood (John 1:29; 1 Pet 1:19; 1 Cor 5:7; Rev 5:6). Not one of his bones shall be broken (Exod 12:46; cf. Num 9:12; Ps 34:20; John 19:30).
  • The pillar of cloud and fire (Exod 14:19; cf. 12:21-22) is a type of Christ’s presence with his people (John 14:18; Matt 28:20).
  • The song of Moses (15:1-19) is a type of songs of spiritual victory (Rev 15:3-4).
  • The mixed multitude (12:38) symbolizes the regenerate and unregenerate in the visible church (Matt 13:24-30, 36-43).
  • The waters of Marah and Elim (15:23-27) are a type of bitter-sweet experiences in the Christian life (1 Pet 1:6).
  • The manna  (16:4) is a type of Christ, the bread of life (John 6:31-35).
  • Water from the rock (Exod 17:6) is a type of Christ, who provides living water (1 Cor 10:4; John 4:10; 7:37-39).

Like I said, Crossley’s list is generally helpful.  He confines his typology to items picked up by New Testament authors, and therefore guards his typology from allegory.  Likewise, his reading of Exodus demonstrates what Paul does in 1 Corinthians 10, explaining that “all these things happened to them [ancient Israel] as examples, and they were written for our instruction, on whom the ends of the ages have come” (1 Cor 10:11).  Yet, Crossley also demonstrates the weakness of typology, namely questionable connections and the inevitable reading in our own personal views.

I would demur with making the church an antitype of the ‘mixed multitude.’  Why not the multi-colored human race, instead?  Would it not be better to say that the mixed multitude who joined the Israelites in the Exodus typify the nations streaming to Israel (Isaiah 2:2-3) and later Jesus Christ as the Lamb of God who has taken away the sins of the world (John 1:29).  Revelation 7:9-17 unites three Exodus themes: the Victorious Lamb, the mixed multitude, now the heavenly multitude from all nations, and a victory song liken unto Exodus 15.  Surely, this is a better typological reading– at least, I think so.  Plus the fact that Matthew 13 defines the ‘mixed multitude’ as the world, not the church.  All that to say, theological differences do effect our inter-textual reading.  Reading as a Baptist, I find this type-antitype difficult to follow. 

One other item, it is worth considering whether or not the waters of Marah and Elim are types of the Christian life, or something else.  I suppose in one sense they are typological, but perhaps it is better to simply call them analogical, or simply commonplace for all believers during all ages.  You have to wonder if this commonplace experience carries the escalation that is usually present in typological structures found within the Bible.  As it relates to Jesus Christ, the hunger and thirst in the wilderness do correspond to his experience in the desert, and to his followers, ‘elect exiles’ as Peter calls them, but still I pause to consider if this is ‘typology proper’ or just a common experience that all God’s people experience.  Would love to hear your thoughts. 

Overall, Crossley exemplifies an edifying approach to the Old Testament, one that exalts our Savior and sees all things in his light.  May we all, with the Spirit’s help, endeavor to do the same.

Soli Deo Gloria, dss