Parallels of the old and new Testaments.

[theseed]

most bottom? isn't that the one that the one that says:

By most bottom, I mean the last one under the OP (main branch in threaded mode)


http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?goto=lastpost&t=85929

 

[JVAC]

Yeah, I have a problem with that one

 

[Preachers12]

Brethren in Christ, God give you Peace.

I did not read the whole thread - forgive me, but time is short.

I think that this is an outstanding topic. It is also one which is so broad and large as to be able to spawn numerous threads dedicated to sole instances.

Did anyone explore or reflect upon the incredible parallels between the Exodus (physical salvation) and the Gospels (spiritual salvation)? I have been reflecting on these recently, though I have not fully grasped (and perhaps never will) the full extent of it. What I have seen though has been most profound!! Almost overwhelming.

As a reflection, think back through the birth of Moses all the way through his "ministry" and unto the coming of the chosen people into the promised land. Then overlay that with the life of Christ. The parallels seem to go far beyond mere coincidence.

May God shed His light upon us and increase our faith. May He impart in us not only a true understanding of His Word, but the grace to live it.

God Bless,
P12

 

[danceforjoy]

Brethren in Christ, God give you Peace.

I did not read the whole thread - forgive me, but time is short.

I think that this is an outstanding topic. It is also one which is so broad and large as to be able to spawn numerous threads dedicated to sole instances.

Did anyone explore or reflect upon the incredible parallels between the Exodus (physical salvation) and the Gospels (spiritual salvation)? I have been reflecting on these recently, though I have not fully grasped (and perhaps never will) the full extent of it. What I have seen though has been most profound!! Almost overwhelming.

As a reflection, think back through the birth of Moses all the way through his "ministry" and unto the coming of the chosen people into the promised land. Then overlay that with the life of Christ. The parallels seem to go far beyond mere coincidence.

May God shed His light upon us and increase our faith. May He impart in us not only a true understanding of His Word, but the grace to live it.

God Bless,
P12

I just finished reading John 6 how Jesus performed the miracle of feeding the 5 000 males and how it is compared to God feeding the Manna from heaven.
At the end, the unbelieving Jews asked Jesus for a sign when He just showed them much the same thing. Lastly, Jesus wanted to get rid of those who only came for the loaves and fishes by saying that He himself is the Manna.
Preachers 12
I read in the last book of the Bible of that great city where also our Lord was crucified which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt. (11:8).
We now have Leaders in our churches that teach us how to be good Sodomites! What does it mean to be crucified with Christ? If He died for our sins, then we are also asked to die to sin and self daily!
Circumcision only cuts part of the heart, but under the new testament covenant we are given a brand new heart where love for God reigns supreme and not the idols of Egypt and the sins of Sodom.
If Baptism is only symbolic, the dying to sin is real. (Rom 6) But the question remains, what is sin?

 

[Phoebe]

bump

 

[Crazy Liz]

I read the first and last pages, so I know I've missed a lot. Like Danceforjoy, I like the parallel stories. A favorite pair of mine is that of Tamar the widow in Genesis 38 and that of the woman caught in adultery in John 8.

When studying these stories, I found it interesting that among all the commentaries I checked, every one written by a woman observed that these were parallel stories, but I did not find any commentary written by a man that noted the parallels between them.

 

[Yitzchak]

The first thing that comes to mind when I read the opening post is the verse where it says your circumcision is become uncircumcision and also where it talks about circumcision of the heart. Just as circumcision was no gaurentee of salvation , even so with baptism. Also recall the passage where it speaks of Abraham being justified apart form circumcision.

So bottomline. It is not baptism which saves just as it wasn't circumcision which saved. Baptism serves the same purpose as circumcision in the sense that it identifies me with the people of God. It is a sign of the convenant indeed.

 

[theseed]

The first thing that comes to mind when I read the opening post is the verse where it says your circumcision is become uncircumcision and also where it talks about circumcision of the heart. Just as circumcision was no gaurentee of salvation , even so with baptism. Also recall the passage where it speaks of Abraham being justified apart form circumcision.

So bottomline. It is not baptism which saves just as it wasn't circumcision which saved. Baptism serves the same purpose as circumcision in the sense that it identifies me with the people of God. It is a sign of the convenant indeed.

So Lotar, since you think that baptism is paralell to cirmumcision, it is only a symbol, and calling it a sacrment would not mean anything would it? Since they are paralell, then there is no Spiritual regeneration?

 

[Lotar]

So Lotar, since you think that baptism is paralell to cirmumcision, it is only a symbol, and calling it a sacrment would not mean anything would it? Since they are paralell, then there is no Spiritual regeneration?

Christ had not yet died and risen again, they were still under the old covenant. Yet even then, if one was not circumcised he was to be cut off from his people and was cut off from the covenant.

 

[theseed]

Christ had not yet died and risen again, they were still under the old covenant. Yet even then, if one was not circumcised he was to be cut off from his people and was cut off from the covenant.

There is only one covenant, the "new" convenant is really a "renewed" convenant. Just as Abraham was saved by faith, so are we. Our faith is accredited to us as rightousness. So there is not cleansing power in baptism.

 

[Lotar]

Oh dear, oh dear. You really just want to get me, don't you?

Come now, think a little on your statement. A half truth makes for one whopping heresy, and there have been more than our fair share of those flying about lately.

 

[theseed]

Oh dear, oh dear. You really just want to get me, don't you?

Come now, think a little on your statement. A half truth makes for one whopping heresy, and there have been more than our fair share of those flying about lately.

Name calling does not validate your position.

 

[Lotar]

With that there was no need for me to validate my position.

 

[Yitzchak]

Oh dear, oh dear. You really just want to get me, don't you?

Come now, think a little on your statement. A half truth makes for one whopping heresy, and there have been more than our fair share of those flying about lately.

Granted that a half truth makes for a whopping heresy. But which is truth and which heresy? Obviously there was value to circumcision but yet Abraham was justified apart from circumcision according to his faith. There is also value to baptism and yet the same potential exists to be justified apart from baptism according to our faith even as the thief on the cross was justified apart from baptism. Yet it is also true that to be uncircumcised was to be cut off from God's people. How is this reconciled?? Are we talking exceptions or are we talking precedent?

 

[aanjt]

Think about this, we don't have infants participate in the Lord's Supper.

My son took the Holy Eucharist the day he was baptized (which was 2 days shy of being 2 months old). He could not eat the body, but I had mine "dipped" into the blood and I placed it in his mouth so he could receive the blood of Christ. In the EC, if one receives either part of the body or blood, one has received it all. Some people are allergic to flour and some people cannot have any amount of alcohol, so this is important.

The purpose of the Lord's Supper is to remember what he did and how he did, and proclaim it that way, which infants can not due, this excludes them.

The Holy Eucharist is more than a recollection of a memory. In the EC and RCC we take remembrance of what it means literally. To make present. We believe that Christ is present in the bread and wine and the bread and wine, at the point of consecration is the body and blood of Christ (I think Lutherans believe in the Real Presence as well). The Passover dinner (Seder), the entire family participates, including infants and children so you point is moot. Christ was having the Passover when he was with his disciples. But, I already know that the Baptists view of the Holy Eucharist differs greatly than the EC and RCC.

Yours in Christ,
Jen

 

[aanjt]

It must be God's Grace, and, therefore, it is not up to our believing in the Sacrament as much as it is the God choosing us to give to us the Sacrament of His Grace. In the Sacrament we are not choosing God, He is choosing us. Wether we are a unbeliever or a believer God still gives us His Grace. The Sacrament to be valid, therefore, depends solely on God and not on man!

My faith is by God's grace through His sacraments. I don't see an either/or here.

Yours in Christ,
Jen

 

[JVAC]

Aanjt, I am not sure what you are getting at.

What I was stressing was the fact that, the Sacraments are only dependent on the Grace of God and not no the person or people involved.

Maybe you can elaborate a little more, for my sake.

-James

 

[aanjt]

Aanjt, I am not sure what you are getting at.

What I was stressing was the fact that, the Sacraments are only dependent on the Grace of God and not no the person or people involved.

Maybe you can elaborate a little more, for my sake.

-James

What you said appeared to be an either/or. Either it is by God's grace or it is through the Sacraments. Maybe I read it wrong?

Yours in Christ,
Jen

 

[JVAC]

What you said appeared to be an either/or. Either it is by God's grace or it is through the Sacraments. Maybe I read it wrong?

Yours in Christ,
Jen

Ok, I see.

What I was saying was it is not up to our faith in the sacrament. It is soely up to God's word that is intermingled with the physical symbol. The Sacraments are therefore made up of Grace [God's Word] and vessel [physical symbol]. One must recieve the vessel then one can recieve the Grace that is endemic to the vessel. It is real substance and real grace.

Now I was just saying that whether we believe it or not, the grace is still there. If we recieve the vessel then we recieve the grace. In order to recieve the Word one must recieve the vessel, for they cannot be seperated. That is a Sacrament, physical symbol comingled with the Word of God; vessel and grace.

-James

 

[theseed]

JVAC,
How is the Word of God intermingeled with the bread or water? And where in the Scriptures do we find that the Word of God is intermingled with the bread or the water to impart grace?