Symbols of Christ in the Wilderness

Among the abundance of redemptive types that God gave Israel throughout the exodus experience, wilderness pilgrimage and the conquest of Canaan, I find none so fascinating as the Gospel-symbols that God gave them in the wilderness. In addition to the Tabernacle, the sacrificial system and the priesthood, the Lord intervened at specific points in time to bring about supernatural provision for their physical needs. These provisions were ultimately given as typological pictures of the coming Christ and the redemptive provisions that would come through His saving work. We know this because our Lord Jesus told Nicodemus that the bronze serpent on the pole was a picture of His being lifted up on the cross (John 3:14-15). He also taught the Jews who followed Him that He was the anti-type of the manna that their forefathers ate in the wilderness (John 6:41, 48, 51). The apostle Paul explicitly taught the Corinthian church that the rock in the wilderness–from which the waters came–”was Christ” (1 Cor. 10:3). We can add the account of the bitter water healed by the tree thrown into it (Ex. 15:22-27) to the account of the rock, the bronze serpent and the manna. Nevertheless, the question remains: How are we to understand these types without inappropriately spiritualizing or allegorizing them? A few considerations of each one will help guide us in a process of biblical-theological interpretation.

The Serpent on the Pole

 

The most explicitly cross-centered wilderness type in the Scriptures (see John 3:14-15) was the serpent on the pole (Numbers 21:4-9). Like all the other miraculous redemptive typical provisions, the serpent on the pole was given in response to Israel’s sinful complaining and in the face of the judgment they deserved. There are a series of parallels that can be drawn between the Israelites being bitten by the serpents and then given a means of healing through the serpent on the pole, and the theological truth of the redemption we have through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Consider the following:   Continue at Nicholas T. Batzig

IMAGE

No Sex Please, I'm British

In light of my recent post on Ed Young's risible `sexperiment', a friend asked me this week about the current trend among some pastors for referring to sexual matters in graphic detail in books and sermons.  Having been rightly rebuked by my wife once for using the phrase `pole dancer' when preaching on 1 Corinthians 1 to a congregation containing children, I am now very circumspect when such matters arise.  Here are my further thoughts on yet another of the many trends in modern neo-Reformed circles with which I have little patience.

It is true: those who jump quickly to allegorise the Song of Songs bypass entirely the obvious fact that it is an erotic love poem.  Nevertheless, it seems to me significant that the Bible reserves raw and explicit sexual references for passages like Ezk. 23:20.  Yes, the Bible contains crudity but it never uses such language to describe a properly functioning marriage.   Those who speak explicitly in their sermons about sex acts may be reflecting the fact that the Bible does refer to such things; but the form they use may actually be reflecting rather the pathologies of the wider culture.  They are certainly not paying any respect to the form which scripture uses to speak of such things.  There is a beauty to the Song of Songs which is connected to its poetic form.  Telling the world it refers to this or that specific sex act misses the point on so many different levels and is an interesting and eloquent response which perhaps tells us much about the reader and little about the text; it reminds me of being in a gallery and seeing priapistic teenage boys sniggering at the naked breast of a woman in a painting by a Renaissance master.    Keep Reading >>>

4 Interpretive Guidelines for Understanding Jesus’ Parables

1. Don’t treat parables like allegory.

An allegory is most often completely filled with symbolic meaning. Every detail means something that can be traced to the overriding principle that is being illuminated. Parables usually have one basic, central meaning. Trying to oversymbolize them can have the effect of tearing them apart. A person doesn’t understand the beauty of a flower by disassembling it. Like a blossom, a parable is best understood by seeing it in its simple and profound entirety.

2. The Rule of Three.

Like all good storytelling, parables usually follow the Rule of Three. Do you remember the stories you heard as a child—such as “The Three Little Pigs” and “The Three Bears”? Both of these stories are filled with more “threes”: three wolves, three beds, three bowls of porridge. Jesus did this often in the telling of the parables. And is it any wonder that many parables deliver three important truths or that most sermons rest on three important points?   Keep Reading >>>

IMAGE

THE ALLEGORIES OF SARAH AND HAGAR