Christ on every page of the OT.

[civilwarbuff]

Oh boy, let's see...

#12:

#16:

#22:

#24: (this one directly conflicts with Proverbs 25:2!)

#32: (again, ignoring Proverbs 25:2)

So basic summary of what he said in the above:

"The reformers are right. We should stop allegorizing the Bible and take it literally, God never hides stuff in the texts, He never has stuff meaning more than one thing at once, and there are no "deeper meanings"."

Then that means... Christ was never mentioned in the Books of Moses which directly conflicts with John 5:46 where Jesus specifically says that Moses wrote of Him.

Well, ok. Tell me what verse in Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, or Deuteronomy that literally speaks of Christ, or even "a messiah"?

You won't find one AFAIK. The only way you find Jesus in the Torah, is to actually look for... yes... multiple meanings behind some of the verses (or use ELS in the original Hebrew, but I won't go into that here).

Or the Cross diagram in Numbers 2. etc. Which @Hoghead1 says not to do.

It is precisely this layer approach that I have trouble with. I am skeptical about it because it seems to completely contradict and the stated content of the passage. What it does is turn the passage into a kind of Rorschach card so that you can read in anything you want. How, for example, dos one go from the mere surface layer to the deep, hidden, inner secret meaning? What makes you think that your interpretation is correct? I mean, I could easily go to anyone of the above posts and read in a hidden meaning completely different from yours. That's why the Reformation cracked down on the allegorical approach and recognize the Bible speaks directly to us, that what the passage states right up front is what the author means.

Thank you for proving my question.....

 

[Xalith]

Thank you for proving my question.....

Explain, please?

 

[civilwarbuff]

Explain, please?

Post 37 & 39.....all you could do was give a "summary"

 

[Xalith]

Post 37 & 39.....all you could do was give a "summary"

Simple logic based upon the meat of what he said. He said that he "completely disagrees" with this approach, he has said multiple times that he agrees with the Reformers and what they viewed, and made multiple statements that "God does not hide things in texts".

What else do you think I should be deriving from that, exactly? You seem to be insinuating that I'm twisting his words into something he didn't mean, but I went back over what I C&P'd, and the stuff I didn't copy, and I don't see anything else, anywhere.

The "summary" I posted was just some common sense logic linking the several quoted blocks I gave together to paint the picture of his beliefs (not making fun of them, mind you) which appear to contradict Scripture Itself.

No, he didn't directly say that "Christ never appeared in the Torah", but yet whether or not he realizes it, he's implying that by what he did say, by manner of extension. If we do what he instructs us to do (take everything in the Bible 100% literal and do not look for hidden meanings or anything else), then we are in conflict with John 5:46 where Jesus says Moses wrote of Him.

So... how do you propose we reconcile that, then?

Am I wrong in evaluating @Hoghead1 's beliefs/instructions, or is he wrong in refusing to accept the possibility that Scripture can have more than one meaning in any given passage?

 

[Dan61861]

Xalith, I would agree with you. The shadows of Christ fill the pages of the Old Testament.

In Christ
Daniel

 

[Jaxxi]

So I've watched a number of Dr. Chuck Missler's sermons, and one of the things he loves saying over and over again is the Title of this thread: Christ is on every page of the OT.

He's also fond of saying that if there's something you don't understand, that you should praise God because you're about to discover something new, and that you should try putting Christ in the center of it and the answer is usually revealed.

Ever since he's said that, every time I read from the Old Testament, in the back of my mind, I ask myself...

"Where is Christ in this?"

On each story I read of the Old Testament... and you know what? I've yet to run into a single story of the OT that did not have something to do with Christ in some way, some shape, some form, or some manner. And even if there were a chapter that didn't, the next chapter (which is usually a continuation), will.

Starting with Genesis 1:1 all the way to the prophets, you will find either an allusion to Christ, a prediction of Christ, a type of Christ, or some detail having to do with Christ. Either that, or you'll find endtimes prophecy (the prophets were littered with these).

If you come to a story or part that you can't find Christ... oh, He's there... you're probably not looking at right, or it might be buried rather deeply (such as David's genealogy being buried in the Hebrew Text in Genesis 38).

So my challenge to you... if you find a section of the OT where you cannot see Christ at all, post it here and I bet there's some way we can link it to Christ.

Why wouldn't He be? If He was there for the creation then He would be there for the Divine message. What I'd like to know is why is God calling Ezekial Son of Man when Jesus is the Son of Man?

 

[Soyeong]

@Hoghead1

1 Corinthians 5:7 Get rid of the old yeast, so that you may be a new unleavened batch--as you really are. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed.

When Paul refers to Christ as our Passover lamb, is he not saying that Passover teaches us something about him?