Published: September 11, 2025 | Speaker: Chuck Hartman | Series: Biblical Theology 2 - Exodus, Exile, and Eschatology - Part 4 | Scripture: Exodus 19
Transcript
View Full Transcript →
9:04
No, that that's that was switched because I didn't switch it. Okay, we picking up now. All right, so that is that is the
9:15
question. Uh, is there something in the Old Testament about being born again? Because if we put the logic together, Jesus would say yes. Because what would
9:26
Nicodemus supposedly know? He would know the Old Testament. He would know the Hebrew Bible. So, this is this is biblical theology. It's just like ma uh
9:37
Luke 24. You know, how is it that Jesus was able to teach from Moses and the prophets all of scripture about himself? And he says to him, "Oh, oh, you you you
9:48
foolish and slow to understand and to believe all that the scripture has said to believe all that the scripture did not the son of man have to suffer
10:01
suffer." They're like, "Uh, I guess." So, I mean, I did think that until you started laughing. Um, yeah, they they're
10:12
now they their responses were were were not our hearts wonderfully warmed. I I wonder how Nicodemus felt during this interview. You know, I just what was
10:22
going on inside of him? Um, but Jesus didn't give him what he was looking for in terms of systematic answers to his questions. He basically said, "You ought to know this stuff. You you say you've
10:35
been studying it all your life." That's what a Pharisee did was study the Torah from sun up to sun down. And yet you don't understand these things. Now what
10:45
that says to us is that the root of understanding these things must be in the Old Testament. Does that make sense? I mean, we're
10:57
basically relying on the answer key instead of learning the material when we focus only on the New Testament. we might as well just go to the back of the
11:07
book and read the answers, but we don't even understand what the questions are. So, we really can't understand the qu I mean, you just say 32. You have no idea what that's the answer
11:21
for. So, this is another verse, and we're going to be looking at these over time, but these this is another one of those New Testament verses that says it's in there. It's it's all there. Now, is
11:31
there a verse in the Old Testament that uses the phrase born again? Not that I know of.
11:42
I don't I don't I can't think of any verse that uses the same phrase that Jesus uses here in verse three. You must be born again or you must be born from
11:54
above. So that means that the concept must be in the Old Testament, but it must be there in a a veiled implicit form. And I
12:06
think it is. In fact, I think it's it's there a whole lot more than we realize. The reason we don't see it is because we're not looking for it. We really have been taught that there are certain
12:17
Christian doctrines that don't show up until the New Testament. But really, that's unacceptable. That's untenable especially to the New Testament writers
12:28
who like Paul frequently say according to the scriptures according to the scriptures so that the scripture might be fulfilled according to Isaiah. According to David you know they're they're constantly saying this is
12:39
according to the scripture and yet we persist in thinking that it all starts clean slate with John the Baptist but no it it can't. Okay. So,
12:53
I know that those two verses in John 3, that that's not necessarily the heart of the passage, the heart of the meaning of that passage, but I think it's the heart of what we're doing with the Old
13:03
Testament and especially with Israel because the idea of new birth, as we saw last week, is is really the fundamental
13:14
principle of Exodus is new birth. So the the the other question that goes with this one is to now turn to um Acts
13:25
chapter 2. And I'm not going to um yeah, I I'll go ahead and and read
13:41
represents um the scale falling from the disciples eyes. Now keep in mind that in John 21 or is it 20 where Jesus breathes upon them and
13:54
he says receive the Holy Spirit. Now that is after the resurrection but before the ascension. Now in the interim Jesus is with them
14:06
roughly 40 days and then before he ascends they ask Jesus is now the time that you're going to set up your kingdom. In other words, they still don't get it. All right?
14:19
So, something more needs to happen. Now, Jesus has already said what needed to happen in the upper room discourse. He said, "Many things I have yet to
14:31
teach you, but you are not able. But if I go, I will send the spirit of truth, and he will guide you into all truth." Well, that's Pentecost,
14:45
right? So, prior to that day, they're asking Jesus, "Is is now the time? We're gonna you're going to set up the kingdom now? I mean, it's been like 40 days since you rose from the dead. Come on. Can we get this moving? We have a deadline." And he
14:58
says, "It's not for you to know that. But you will you will receive power. You will receive ability." Literally, the word you will receive ability to be my
15:08
witnesses both in Judea and Samaria and to the other most parts of the earth. So right there, like he did with Nicodemus, he redirects their thinking. And you're
15:19
not supposed to be looking for this dividic kingdom that's going to conquer the Romans. No, you're going to be looking to being my witnesses from Jerusalem outward. But you need to stay
15:30
here until that power comes. In John, John 14:15 16 is where he gives the promise of the Holy Spirit.
15:41
Pentecost of course is when that promise is fulfilled. is fulfilled. So the question that is a correlary to Nicodemus. So we we look up here.
15:59
So we look at Nicodemus who's a teacher of Israel and did not understand these things. And then we can look at
16:16
a group of men who hung pretty close to Jesus for roughly three years and still didn't understand much. And yet, so we we have a we have a dichotomy here. We have a conundrum. We
16:26
have the expectation that this should be understood contrasted with the reality that it isn't. What needs to happen?
16:42
We have we have this conundrum. We have on the one hand the expectation that these things should be understood. On the other hand, we have the reality that they're not. Nicodemus did not know what Jesus was
16:54
talking about. talking about. Even after the resurrection, the disciples did not know what was going on. Is that a fair statement? Generally, from what we're told, Nicodemus did not
17:05
go home enlightened. Oh, I get it now. I'm going to go straight to my neighbors, you got to be born again. You know, he doesn't know. He goes home bewildered, hopefully to search the
17:15
scriptures, but he he doesn't know yet. The disciples have now witnessed Jesus resurrected for roughly 40 days and they
17:26
still have the typical second temple expectation of a conflict, a defeat of the Romans and a return of the Davidic king to the throne in Jerusalem. That's their
17:37
thinking. Okay? That's not Jesus's thinking, but that's their thinking. So, we have the fact that they they they ought to understand. I mean, he says that I've been with you so long,
17:48
Philillip, and and you don't you don't understand. If you see me, you've seen the father. You know, there's just so many examples that that they just did not understand. not understand. So, you have the expectation that
17:59
understanding should be there with the reality that it isn't. What makes the difference? The outpouring and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. That's what makes the
18:11
difference in Pentecost. So that when we get to Acts chapter 2 and that does happen and the disciples are
18:22
speaking in tongues um and um and those who hear him say they they're drunk with new wine. Um and Peter stands up and says they're
18:35
not drunk. It's it's only nine o'clock in the morning. Hopefully that's a logical statement. Um he says these men these men are not
18:45
drunk as you suppose. It's only the third hour of the day. But this is what was spoken of through the prophet Joel.
18:56
Did Peter know that the day before? I mean did Peter prepare this sermon like I do? You know that week ahead? Did he have notes?
19:08
if if you would have asked Peter. Now, it was the day before basically, I don't know exactly what day, but it was around that time that they were casting lots to choose a a 12th disciple, right? Matias.
19:21
Now, you never hear a word about him again. So, I don't know whether what they did was right or wrong. Okay, there's always a debate about how who's the 12th. A lot of people think Paul is
19:33
the 12th apostle. Um he does refer to himself as one untimely born. So I don't
19:44
let let another take his place in a way very much like writers. Yes. But the method by which they did is not commented on anywhere else. And
20:01
by lot. Yeah. What did I say? No. Yeah. Yeah. They they cast lots as to who would be I mean they they they stipulated that he had to be a man who had been with them from the beginning
20:12
from the baptism of John. You know, okay, that's all very reasonable, but they were not commanded to do that. And then all I'm saying is what they were doing what they were doing uh before
20:23
seems it to me it has a flavor of busy work, keeping keeping ourselves occupied, but we really don't know what we're doing. Okay. And we we've the
20:33
church has never been of one voice as to who the 12th who the replacement for Judas the Scariot really was. As far as an apostle chosen by God,
20:47
that's Paul there. I mean, he makes that clear. He did not receive his he did not receive it as Matias did through the ministration of the other apostles, not
21:00
Paul. He was just like the others. He was chosen directly. Uh I that's not that's a side issue. It only I'm only trying to point out that it appears that
21:10
what Peter said after the outpouring of the Holy Spirit was due to the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. That he did not prepare that sermon for the day when it would happen. You know, if they
21:21
ask me, I got it already here. No, he didn't. But he could say, "This is that which was prophesied. This is that. Okay. And that little phrase is is
21:33
really incredibly important
21:47
because it it cannot be limited just to Joel chapter 2. It's it's really the the shorthand of what all the New Testament writers have to say. This is that
22:00
What we've done is we've changed it to this is like that or this is sort of that or we might even say this is the beginning of that but
22:10
they don't say anything like that. They say this is that. Okay. Now that makes a direct connection between what Jesus has done and what was
22:21
promised that he would do. So when he said on the cross it is finished he meant it is finished. He really did not mean that it is the start of the finish. He wasn't Winston Churchill
22:33
talking about the end of the beginning or the beginning of the end. No, it is finished and this is that. So these little phrases like the like what Jesus says to Nicodemus, do you not understand
22:44
these things show us that and I this is a this is a complete hypothetical but I think it's a valid one and that is
22:57
if a person has the Holy Spirit and only the Old Testament, they can probably figure out what God is
23:08
doing. And that's what we're trying to do in a sense. We are very fortunate that we also have the New Testament. We have the inspired explanation of the fulfillment of the promises. But even having that,
23:20
if we didn't have the Holy Spirit, we would be no further along than we were before. We would at least we would be no further along than a pre-advent
23:33
Jew. Okay? a faithful, believing Jew would know as much as we did if we had the whole of scripture and not the Holy
23:46
Spirit. So, I guess I say that because I want to make sure that nobody misunderstands what we're doing as an an attempt of human reason to figure out how to read
23:56
the Bible. the Bible. I think an unbeliever or person who is unregenerate can figure out literarily how to read the Bible. And I think there have been some writers who have done
24:07
just that. They have figured out what the Bible is in terms of its genre, in terms of its if it's of its unity, uh in terms of its development. They can see
24:18
the plot developing. Sometimes I've found that some authors, articles or even books whose whose actual faith is quite questionable,
24:32
it seems that they sometimes understand the Bible better than many Christians who have been raised and immersed in a
24:42
in a wrong hermeneutic. It's not that we don't have the ability to understand the Bible. we have the Holy Spirit, Holy Spirit, but it's that we have been taught that
24:53
the Bible is broken up into these different time periods. Okay, that's one way of doing it. Or we've been taught that the Bible's all about this string of covenants,
25:05
of covenants, neither of which holds water when you read the scripture. Is that that fair comment?
25:36
That that I think that
25:49
Yeah. Yes. And that confession of Peter's puts him on the same level as Peter. He said these words.
26:02
No, I Yeah. Right. Did he I I think he knew what he was saying because the words he was using
26:13
were deeply rooted in the scriptures, son of God. Okay. But so you are the holy one or you know you are the
26:23
promised one that those those concepts. So he knew what he was saying. Did he understand what he was saying? I don't think so. I don't think he understood what he was saying. So he was he was
26:34
speaking I think maybe as many of the prophets spoke and that is they they were they were saying more than they knew. Okay. But what they said they
26:47
knew. That's what we do sometimes. Yeah. We we do we do that but not in the sense of of um not ha yet having the Holy Spirit. That's the That's the key is that what
26:58
Peter said was really no different than when Simeon picked up the child and said, "Now let thy servant depart in peace." Okay. Um but what Peter says
27:09
when he stands up and says, "Men, listen. These people, these men are not drunk. This is that when the when these men these disciples begin to say this is
27:20
that they they are now they are now operating both from their own intellectual heritage in the scripture but now by the power and the
27:32
illumination of the Holy Spirit. And there's no other way than that way. The Holy Spirit does not simply come over
27:42
us, take over our intellect as as many sadly in the charismatic movement think that you need to divest yourself of all
27:52
intellectual consciousness and just let the Holy Spirit take over. That's what speaking in tongues is within that movement. It's a divevestature of your
28:03
own rational faculties. That's not biblical. But then to say that we can reason our way by looking at the literary genre and the flow without the Holy Spirit that's
28:16
mere academic that's that's not uh enlightenment that is not insight and it's certainly not knowledge. So that you know you have the extremes where you
28:26
think all I need is the Holy Spirit. I've told this story before um but I do remember and I as I get older I think no that couldn't have happened. I mean some things. Do you ever do that?
28:37
The older people. You ever think that that couldn't have happened every day? Well, that's because it didn't happen. A no, you set yourself up for that one. Um,
28:49
but it was, you know, because the word and numa, the Greek, the Hebrew and the Greek translated spirit, also mean breath or wind. This fellow in order to
29:02
know what to read each morning, he would put his Bible outside and let open it up and let the wind blow the pages. I tried that once. We were living in
29:13
Oklahoma. My Bible ended up in Arkansas. Like, oh, I'm going to read the concordance. But I I I distinctly remember hearing
29:24
that. I don't think I dreamed it. The older I get, the more I wonder that's totally invalid. You you can see even in the writings and and the and the interchange between Moses and and
29:35
Jeremiah uh you can with God and Abraham you know reasoning with God you can see that these these men moved these holy men moved by the spirit of God were
29:46
still participants in the process. Habac Habach saying wait a minute God those people the calaldanss are are more wicked people than the ones I wanted you
29:56
to punish. What are you doing?
30:24
Well, I I think that's quite possible that that a lot of people mean it that way. I do know however of people that I have met who didn't mean it that way and who denigrated actual study and and any type
30:36
of any type of systematic approach to reading the Bible. I did I mean that's this particular person was like that. They did not believe in any particular
30:46
approach to reading. It's an extreme. It I'll grant Yes, that's an extreme.
31:05
Yes. And and they don't deny that they still have their own work to do that they're to study. Children. Yes. But they and I think you would
31:15
agree. I think most people do realize that when Paul says to Timothy, "Study to show yourself approved," he's not saying either, "do it all on your own rational power," or, "No, just just let
31:28
the wind open your Bible and read whatever's there." I am talking about the extremes. Um, and that's really just to illustrate the point that you you do need both. We we need to be able to
31:42
reason and understand the scripture with our intellect, but we cannot rely on our intellect in order to do so. And I was just trying to, you know, use the example of Nicodemus and of course Peter
31:53
who did not understand and then all of a sudden he did. Now, did he understand everything at that point? No, he didn't. Nor did nor did Paul. Okay? I and I don't know that they do even now. Um
32:04
there's a lot to understand. But what this is pointing to then is that there must be clues. Now, now what that means
32:17
is that what is revealed in the New Testament must be concealed in the Old. Now the phrase that that that um
32:35
is credited to Augustine and its English version help helpfully rhymes. But the idea of what is latent
32:49
becoming patent, what is concealed becoming revealed. becoming revealed. Now what that puts into our hands and put into the disciples hands and again
33:00
we have to remember that 2 Timothy 3:16 was referring to what we call the Old Testament that the that the writers of the New
33:12
Testament were writing the New Testament as the church was growing. So the scriptures that they devoted themselves to were the scriptures of the Old Testament.
33:24
So they evidently believe because they didn't seem to be in an old fired up hurry to write a New Testament. That is not what they did. They didn't they didn't sit down all together and say, "Let's write a New Testament and then
33:36
realize, well, we really can't do this until Paul shows up. We we got to get that seminary graduate to show up." Um, they didn't do that. They they preached, they evangelized,
33:49
they dispersed and the scriptures came together during that century with the last ones late in the century written by the apostle John. His gospel may not
34:01
have been written until sometime in the AD90s. So they they really, you know, Jesus didn't say you shall you need to tar in Jerusalem until you write the New Testament and then you can go off and
34:12
and preach. So the Old Testament is is where it is. So what ends up happening
34:28
during No, I don't think they took notes. No, notes. No, I I don't think they did. I think everything was probably on their iPad and uh No, I don't think they I don't think they took notes. I mean certainly
34:38
they they listened and we read uh even John when when Jesus says tear down this temple and in three days I will build it up again. He says after Jesus had been
34:50
risen they remembered what he said. Okay. So they did they certainly did in a sense listen to what he was saying. And I don't want to come across as
35:01
sounding like the disciples were were a bunch of ignorant boobs. I mean to some some extent they were but then so were we. We wouldn't have done any better. Um
35:12
their hearts I think except for one of them their hearts were in the right place as well as it could have been. You know they desired to see the glory of Yahweh and his return. Um so in that
35:25
sense they were they they they understood as much as maybe it could be understood given who they were in the time in which they lived. their expectations were normal for that time.
35:36
So, it wasn't that that Jesus's appearance itself was a surprise to them. It's who he was and what he taught and what he did that kind of surprised everybody. The disciples, John the
35:47
Baptist, the Pharisees, the scribes, they they just didn't get it. Even the even the woman at the well, the Samaritan woman, you know, I perceive that you are a prophet. Uh so there's a lot of confusion. Um and then but now
35:59
what this is pointing to and and this is going to tie in to the concept of incarnation and and that is merely being close to the truth is not
36:20
Merely being of the people of Israel and even being faithful and and even studying Torah is not enough. Even walking with Jesus for three plus years is not enough.
36:33
Everything that we're seeing is typological. It's pointing toward Jesus, but it's also pointing toward us in the sense that it's saying God is saying,
36:45
"I'm doing all these things. Do you see that it's not enough?" Does that make sense? You must be born again.
36:58
something that is incomprehensible to the natural mind. In fact, Paul says in 2 Corinthians 2, the natural mind can't even begin to understand it
37:08
because it is spiritually appraised. That's kind of what I'm talking about is that you can you can talk about these things. You can study these things. You can look up the references and even in a in a natural mental way understand the
37:20
connection of the prophecy to the fulfillment. But that's not enough. That is not enough. The shikina can live in the temple or the tabernacle and guide you through the
37:31
wilderness and lead the way across the water. That is not enough. Getting as close as possible is not you don't approach God asmmptotically.
37:43
That that's I guess what I'm saying. You don't just keep getting closer. There's no way that works. You're either in or you're out. And that's the work of the Holy Spirit.
37:54
When when we're when we're looking at all this, this word incarnation is not only pointing to the capital I advent of of the son of God born in the flesh.
38:06
It's also talking about regeneration. Incarnation is not we are not gods and we are not eternal God become flesh. That's not
38:16
what I'm saying. But what the scripture does say is that God dwells in us. That's incarnation That's incarnation in fleshment. Does that make sense? Does
38:28
that sound weird? Maybe a little Hough. Tough. But do do you agree that God dwells in a believer?
38:39
So he dwells in human form. Me not in the same manner where the fullness of deity dwells in Jesus in
38:49
bodily form. You can't say that of any body. Okay. But we are the body of Christ and he is our head. So all the metaphors are those are those are
39:00
metaphors. But is is regeneration a metaphor? Is it just a figure of speech?
39:22
I I think so. I think those words, those phrases, it is not I but Christ. I I no longer live but Christ lives in me. In the life I live in the flesh, I live in faith in the son of God. I think those
39:32
are incarnational phrases. We we understand that all the in the types of incarnation that are often not even seen
39:44
even seen and as I mentioned last week it is God dwelling in the midst of his people in the type but in the fulfillment it's God dwelling in his people
40:00
of course but spirit does not seem to be. Oh, certainly.
40:15
But it was a spirit. I mean, he was filled. Jesus was filled with the spirit without measure.
40:26
Yes. That's where I disagree. The incarnation has to refer to Jesus. And our incarnation can never be apart from Jesus.
40:37
But God is no longer dwelling merely in the midst of his people. He is dwelling in his people. That is what Jesus said. We will come and live in you.
40:51
Well, I'm glad. But don't throw it out just because it's hard to wrap your brain around.
41:02
I want to call it that because I want to try to show you what it is God has been doing from Genesis 1 on.
41:15
people. He wants to dwell in a people. The fullness of his glory is to dwell in a people. a people. That's why Moses said when when he was
41:25
told, "Hey, there there are people prophesying in the camp. Should I shut them up?" And and Moses says, "Would that all God's people had the Holy
41:35
Spirit?" Now, yes, it is the Holy Spirit, but the Holy Spirit is God. Do you not know that you are the temple of the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit dwells in you? I know that they don't use the word
41:46
incarnational incarnation, but that's incarnation. It's I'm trying to say teach that this is incarnational language. First of all, it points to the
41:56
incarnation. That's what I meant by nothing was enough. God dwelling in the tabernacle was not enough. We talked about that in Leviticus. You constantly
42:07
had to keep redoing and then even then once a year you had to go clean it out before you could do it again. So the idea was, yeah, he's dwelling as close to his people
42:19
as at any time since before the fall in the garden when he was dwelling in the tabernacle and then again in the temple.
42:31
That was God dwelling in the midst of his people. My point is that was never enough. The writer of Hebrews makes that, I think, crystal clear that all
42:41
these good things and it was far better for Israel that God dwelt in their midst than for the rest of the nations that God was merely ignoring as Paul puts it in Acts 14. Okay? It's far better for
42:53
them. But their problem was, as exampled by Eli's sons, you know, let's take the their problem was they thought it was
43:04
enough. They thought that having God in the Holy of Holies and one man goes in once that's enough. And yet all of it was saying this is not enough. This is not it. This is only approaching me as
43:18
your sins have not been dealt with. They have not been removed and therefore you cannot come into my presence. Now we can boldly go before the throne of grace. Why? Because of Jesus Christ. But
43:30
because we are also sons and daughters. We are indwell. We are the temples of the Holy Spirit. That is incarnational language. Now, I know this is this is
43:42
new. Um it it really isn't new. In fact, it's actually quite old in terms of the church understanding this concept. It is
43:52
actually, and I hate to say this, it's one of the key pervert, well, I can say it this One of the key perversions of the Roman Catholic Institution is
44:03
that it claims as an institution to be the incarnation of Christ. That's that's the they have an incarnational theo ecclesiology that the
44:13
Roman Catholic Church is the incarnation of Christ on earth. That's not what I'm saying. I'm talking about, you know, most of the time I talk about the corporate church, the corporate church.
44:23
I'm talking about believers. Now individual believers are the temple of the Holy Spirit because God now dwells not merely in our midst
44:35
but in us. Yes, it's by the Holy Spirit and it's absolutely because of the finished work of Jesus Christ. But that's what everything was pointing to. So if Nicodemus should have understood
44:46
you must be born again, then there must have been something in the Old Testament that would have taught him that.
45:01
Even if Jesus it is a theological term.
45:19
Yeah. All of the teaching that was guided toward in no way defiling the tabernacle and how even at a distance, remember in Leviticus, how at a distance things
45:30
would defile the tabernacle and the day of atonement was was an annual cleaning day basically cleansing the tabernacle and everything. That is that is
45:43
typological of how we are to be in the body in in our bodies being and that's what Paul teaches the Corinthians in his first letter you know that's what he keeps saying you know you cannot join Christ
45:54
with a harlot so your body is now and I know this sounds really um like it's going too far like we're a bunch of little little Christs
46:06
but actually Christian means Christ one we're not Christ. We're not eternal God. We're not. As I said, the fullness of deity does not dwell in us in bodily form, but the Holy Spirit does. And
46:19
Jesus said, "My father and I will come to you. We will dwell in you." With the Holy Spirit dwelling in us, the Godhead is present in us. We have the mind of
46:32
Christ, Paul says. Okay? We have the spirit that searches the deep things of God dwelling in us. So, I know it sounds odd, but I really
46:43
think it lies very much at the heart of what regeneration means. It doesn't just mean that when I die, I'm going to go to heaven. It means a whole lot more than that. And I know I've emphasized the the
46:55
the importance of the body of Christ, the church, but let me, you know, go back that that pendulum a little bit and and just acknowledge that the church is
47:06
not, and I've said this before, the church is not in a sense independent of of its members. It's more than the sum of its parts. It's the body of Christ, but it's
47:18
certainly not less than that. I mean it's it can't be a holy uh bride without individual believers who are indwelt by the Holy Spirit who are
47:30
walking keeping in step with the spirit. So I think the idea of incarnation is in a biblical theological point of view I want to try to establish that that's
47:40
what we're seeing in the Old Testament. Why God created in the first place? What was his desire? And that's why I said that Jesus was not made in the image of
47:52
Adam. Adam was first made in the image of Christ. of Christ. That was the plan from the beginning from before the beginning. Okay? Christ
48:02
is the incarnation. So in a sense we can say chronologically say chronologically that as we look at the Exodus and we look at Israel's exile and we look at the hope of an eventual return certainly
48:16
chronologically all this is pointing forward but in a sense it's also always pointing backward to what God had ordained from before the
48:27
foundation of the world. So that that leads to this phrase here that I I want to point out because this is what I'm doing. It's called a it's reciprocal hermeneutics.
48:39
reciprocal hermeneutics. We tend to look at the relationship between the Old Testament and the New Testament in several different ways in church history. And and this is somewhat of a
48:50
review, but there's there's this view
49:03
that the Old Testament carried us just so far. But then it stopped and there was about 400 years when the revelation of God was not coming to Israel and then John the Baptist came preaching and then
49:13
Jesus came. And so we had the Old Testament and now we have the New Testament. Practically, this is a majority view. In in American Christianity, this is the
49:25
practical majority view. Very few would actually admit it, but if you go to a church and you just kind of pay attention to how often the Old Testament
49:36
is mentioned, you will realize or or you you know, you go to the the um uh Christian bookstore and just notice how many New Testament and Psalms there are
49:46
for sale. Okay. So, um, practically this is the majority view. Okay. Then there's the other view. This is more covenantal. I don't even know how to draw this.
50:06
I don't know. I really don't. It's It's the continuity view.
50:19
I don't know. I don't know. It's like that. That's a That's almost a ZT. Um Um the point being is that hardcore covenantalism makes you wonder what was
50:29
the point of Golgtha? What what was the point of the cross? Um, that's, you know, that's where I I part
50:39
with the whole idea of a covenantal hermeneutic. Not not to mention the fact that the nuts and bolts don't work to begin with. The covenants are not linear by any means and they're not equivalent
50:51
by any means. Okay. So, but that there's that view. I I don't know if I it's it's really just basically a a hyper
51:06
And you'll spend a lot of time in the Old Testament in this view. And and if you if you counted up commentaries on the Old Testament from the Reformation on through the 19th century, the vast
51:19
majority of them are written by reformed authors, covenantalists. authors, covenantalists. Now, the dispensationalists are going to get into it in the 20th century, but
51:30
more in a forward-looking prophetic view, more in an esqueological view. So the I prior to that the Old Testament had pretty much fallen out of vogue
51:40
completely. Not in the early church, not the fathers, but then in the mid the uh medieval church uh for about a thousand years it it pretty much fell out. So then you have of course that view where
51:52
you have
52:03
the view that the Old Testament story has been broken. it has been paused and another story is playing out in the in the intermission. Okay, now the intermission is approaching the
52:13
intermission of the ten commandments or Benhur, you know, it's getting pretty long. Um, but and there's no music playing. So, but this idea that the Old Testament and New Testament are really
52:24
hermetically sealed. I'm going to propose that what what I'm trying to do and I'm not the only one that does this, but it's more like this.
52:44
In the U Bible as literature class at Milton, we were one last week, last Friday, we're talking about a a proposed Bible reading plan. And and I would not propose that uh that a person would begin their reading in
52:56
the Old Testament. I think they should begin in the New Testament. I think they should very quickly get back into Genesis been the penetuk. I think they have to get back to the pentatuk. They have to get back to
53:07
Genesis and they have to get back to the other four books. Um otherwise what they're reading is for example in the go in the gospels is not going to have any
53:17
historical context and there's a danger that it just becomes a disembodied story. There's there's no there's no heritage. There's no fulfillment. And so when the gospel writers constantly say
53:29
as the scripture foretold, you you have to eventually learn what that scripture was actually foretelling. But it's not a matter of the New Testament simply shining light on the Old Testament.
53:40
That's another popular view or that we go back to the Old Testament to mine for proof texts to prove that Jesus is Jew is the Messiah, the Jewish Messiah. It's
53:52
the the fact that they work o on each other that as the New Testament sheds light on the Old Testament, the Old Testament
54:04
reciprocates and sheds light on the New Testament. It it actually illuminates what we're reading in the New Testament, not just the other way around
54:14
because it it deepens the the text. The text of the New Testament
54:27
is the fulfillment. It is the witness of the fulfillment. the fulfillment. The text of the Old Testament is the promise which is fulfilled. So our understanding of the fulfillment deepens as our understanding of the
54:38
promise that is fulfilled deepens. When we read that all the promises of God or yes and amen in Christ, that phrase becomes deeper the deeper we dig into
54:50
the promises themselves. All the promises. So this is reciprocal hermeneutic. Okay, we and I think this is definitely why we need the Holy Spirit. But that it's it's
55:02
it's looking at so we're going to be looking at the life of Israel in this particular course. Um we're going to be starting with I'm going to start uh where I believe Israel was born and that
55:16
is the Exodus. I do not believe that Israel was born in Genesis 12 with the call of Abram. I do not believe that Genesis was born even in Genesis 49 when
55:27
Jacob gives the the the prophecies of his 12 sons. I don't think Israel was a nation in any sense of the word during
55:38
its 400 years in Egypt. Was certainly a people, but it was a slave nation. And that's an oxymoron. Okay. And we're going to look next week,
55:49
Lord willing, we're going to look at Isaiah. Well, actually Um, let's turn there. Um, uh, I want to make sure I don't get ahead of myself.
56:10
Isaiah 43. Let's let's spend some time there. that that's where we um and I mentioned before that Isaiah is somewhat of a template um for what I'm
56:20
going to be doing. So, we're going to be spending a fair amount of time in both Exodus and in um Isaiah. But to summarize what I was just saying,
56:31
where I'm going to start is with the 10 plagues. So, we're going to we're going to start with the Exodus and we're going to start where the Exodus itself begins and that
56:43
is the 10 plagues. And and I hope to show that everything we read in Exodus and and you know other passages but primarily Exodus not only
56:56
forms the the literary uh framework of the rest of scripture including the New Testament.
57:13
It is full of the deeper purposes of God with regard to his whole creation. That that's just a little order. That's what I'm I'm trying to bring out that
57:25
that when we read about, you know, I've mentioned what the writer of Hebrews says about the Levitical system as a parable. Uh I I personally believe that that the whole life of Israel is itself
57:37
a a microcosm. Maybe not a parable. I don't I don't want to ever indicate that these things did not actually happen in history. They did, but they can happen
57:48
and still be parabolic. They can happen and still be typological. Uh ma in a matter of fact, a biblical type
58:01
must be historically valid. You you don't have biblical types that were not also real historical events.
58:11
That that's that's a hand in hand. Um and we'll talk about that next week. But looking at Isaiah 43, I want to try to explain why I'm starting where I'm starting. And I want to try to explain how
58:23
throughout this the idea of exile, exodus, exile, exodus just keeps repeating itself. repeating itself. Starting with the original exile, which
58:34
was actually Adam being sent out of the garden. That is the original exile. And the original I don't know what you would call the original Exodus. In a
58:46
sense, it's Noah and the ark, which is itself a picture of Israel passing through the Red Sea,
58:57
which is then tied together by Peter and linked to baptism. Okay? And that's one of those passages in the New Testament that's kind of hard to understand. I hope to shed some light
59:08
on it. Um, but all these things are connected. And I'm I'm maintaining this evening that the purpose of God in all of these
59:19
things has always been one and constant and that is to dwell in a people
59:36
doing that ultimately in his eternal son and then through him in the church. So that's the incarnation part. Okay? It's the It's the behind the scenes. What is Why is God doing this? Because I don't
59:48
know why he willed to do this, but he willed to dwell in a people. And that's what he accomplished through his son Jesus Christ. But he he symbolized it.