Randy Green's Blog - Posts Tagged "the-law"
What's the difference?
Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, (Jesus) explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures [Luke 24:27].
"All the Scriptures" teach about Jesus in some capacity, whether about His Person or about His ministry. This is infinitely so when it comes to the various offerings in the Law of Moses. For our purposes today we will limit our discussion to the sin offering and the guilt offering.
The question at hand, then, is what's the difference between sin and guilt? Since these were two different offerings, a difference must needs exist to mandate two different offerings. In seeking an answer, we mustn't forget Jesus' words quoted at the start of this post. These two offerings, as well as all the offerings, were picture stories to teach aspects of Jesus' Person and/or ministry.
Over the centuries many varying attempts have been made to define this difference. For instance, some folks thought the sin offering was directed toward God, while the guilt offering was directed toward man. But a cursory reading of Scripture reveals that some of the sins which required the guilt offering had to do solely with God. Man had no part in the matter.
Several other theories also exist. This issue is a deep one, requiring much thought and prayer for an answer. I believe I have the correct understanding, and I share it in detail in my book on Leviticus. A full vetting of the various theories, as well as a presentation of my explanation, requires considerable space.
This post is not the place to copy a large portion of my book! To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Leviticus: Volume 3 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. For more info please visit these sites to purchase my books:
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B005PJ761C
https://sites.google.com/site/heavenl...Leviticus: Volume 3 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly ShoesLeviticus
"All the Scriptures" teach about Jesus in some capacity, whether about His Person or about His ministry. This is infinitely so when it comes to the various offerings in the Law of Moses. For our purposes today we will limit our discussion to the sin offering and the guilt offering.
The question at hand, then, is what's the difference between sin and guilt? Since these were two different offerings, a difference must needs exist to mandate two different offerings. In seeking an answer, we mustn't forget Jesus' words quoted at the start of this post. These two offerings, as well as all the offerings, were picture stories to teach aspects of Jesus' Person and/or ministry.
Over the centuries many varying attempts have been made to define this difference. For instance, some folks thought the sin offering was directed toward God, while the guilt offering was directed toward man. But a cursory reading of Scripture reveals that some of the sins which required the guilt offering had to do solely with God. Man had no part in the matter.
Several other theories also exist. This issue is a deep one, requiring much thought and prayer for an answer. I believe I have the correct understanding, and I share it in detail in my book on Leviticus. A full vetting of the various theories, as well as a presentation of my explanation, requires considerable space.
This post is not the place to copy a large portion of my book! To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Leviticus: Volume 3 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. For more info please visit these sites to purchase my books:
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B005PJ761C
https://sites.google.com/site/heavenl...Leviticus: Volume 3 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly ShoesLeviticus
Paul the Circumcised
If anyone else has a mind to put confidence in the flesh, I far more: circumcised the eighth day, of the nation of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the Law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to the righteousness which is in the Law, found blameless. But whatever things were gain to me, those things I have counted as loss for the sake of Christ [Philippians 3:4-7].
If Christians were polled on who they considered the Numero Uno man of all time, the answer would invariably be, "Jesus!" Probably most often their second choice would be, "The Apostle Paul!" Yes, Paul impacted the Church more than any other man, Jesus excepted. He planted more churches than anyone else, and he was used by the Holy Spirit to write New Testament Scripture to a greater extent than anyone else was. Paul was indeed a giant among Christians.
We began this post with a the quote from Philippians. In those verses Paul presented the Christians of Philippi with his job résumé. His credentials as a Hebrew, who were the people of God back in the day, were quite impressive. Paul was a giant among the Hebrews as well.
The sign of the covenant for the Hebrews was circumcision. It is not surprising to read, then, that the first credential Paul presented in his list was circumcision. Paul stated that he was circumcised the eighth day. The Law of Moses required circumcision to be done on the eighth day (cf., Leviticus 12:3). You see, Paul obeyed the Law meticulously, as a good Hebrew was expected to do.
Notwithstanding all this—or rather because of it—once he was born again, Paul was just as gung-ho for the Gospel as he was for the Law earlier in his life. Hence his words to the Philippian Christians, But whatever things were gain to me, those things I have counted as loss for the sake of Christ.
We Christians can learn a good deal from Brother Paul. Once the light of the Gospel of Jesus Christ invades the darkness of our lives, we too count as loss all the vain conceits for which we have a predilection to boast. We do an about face (i.e., repent). We cease from playing the trumpet and clashing the cymbals, while singing our own praises. We replace it with singing Jesus' praises.
So how am I doing in this department? Am I proud of what I've accomplished? Do I look in the mirror and tell myself I've reached the big time now? Or do I see the Lord Jesus and recognize my own unworthiness? He alone is worthy, Christ the Lord!
We cannot attain to such a desirable haven apart from daily quiet time alone with Jesus, dear friends. I think I'll enter my prayer closet now, bow low, open my Bible, and allow my Savior to speak His Word directly to my heart. Would anyone like to join me?
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Leviticus: Volume 3 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. For more info please visit these sites to purchase my books:
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B005PJ761C
https://sites.google.com/site/heavenl...
If Christians were polled on who they considered the Numero Uno man of all time, the answer would invariably be, "Jesus!" Probably most often their second choice would be, "The Apostle Paul!" Yes, Paul impacted the Church more than any other man, Jesus excepted. He planted more churches than anyone else, and he was used by the Holy Spirit to write New Testament Scripture to a greater extent than anyone else was. Paul was indeed a giant among Christians.
We began this post with a the quote from Philippians. In those verses Paul presented the Christians of Philippi with his job résumé. His credentials as a Hebrew, who were the people of God back in the day, were quite impressive. Paul was a giant among the Hebrews as well.
The sign of the covenant for the Hebrews was circumcision. It is not surprising to read, then, that the first credential Paul presented in his list was circumcision. Paul stated that he was circumcised the eighth day. The Law of Moses required circumcision to be done on the eighth day (cf., Leviticus 12:3). You see, Paul obeyed the Law meticulously, as a good Hebrew was expected to do.
Notwithstanding all this—or rather because of it—once he was born again, Paul was just as gung-ho for the Gospel as he was for the Law earlier in his life. Hence his words to the Philippian Christians, But whatever things were gain to me, those things I have counted as loss for the sake of Christ.
We Christians can learn a good deal from Brother Paul. Once the light of the Gospel of Jesus Christ invades the darkness of our lives, we too count as loss all the vain conceits for which we have a predilection to boast. We do an about face (i.e., repent). We cease from playing the trumpet and clashing the cymbals, while singing our own praises. We replace it with singing Jesus' praises.
So how am I doing in this department? Am I proud of what I've accomplished? Do I look in the mirror and tell myself I've reached the big time now? Or do I see the Lord Jesus and recognize my own unworthiness? He alone is worthy, Christ the Lord!
We cannot attain to such a desirable haven apart from daily quiet time alone with Jesus, dear friends. I think I'll enter my prayer closet now, bow low, open my Bible, and allow my Savior to speak His Word directly to my heart. Would anyone like to join me?
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Leviticus: Volume 3 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. For more info please visit these sites to purchase my books:
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B005PJ761C
https://sites.google.com/site/heavenl...
Betwixt and Between, Part 1
What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith; but Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as though it were by works [Romans 9:30-32].
In those verses a clear dichotomy exists, and this contrast is the point to the entire quotation. On the one hand there is the righteousness which is by faith, on the other a law of righteousness. In each case righteousness is the result. The cause is what varies between the two.
The phrase a law of righteousness is better understood when the order of the words corresponds to the phrase the righteousness which is by faith. After all, Paul is teaching the difference between the two "righteousnesses", if you will permit me to coin a word.
So let's change the order of the words for the phrase a law of righteousness, so that it does correspond to what it is being contrasted with. Voilà! we come up with the righteousness which is by law. For each phrase righteousness is the result, while it is achieved by means of either "law" or "faith".
I wanted to note this contrast because by doing so we can see the purpose of the Law of Moses, dear friends. The Law was given by the Lord to the Israelites to teach them that they could not be perfect. But being perfect is the condition necessary for entrance into heaven. God is perfect and He cannot tolerate anything less. If He did then heaven would become hell pronto!
The problem wasn't with the Law. The problem was with man because man is a sinner and sinners are the opposite of perfect. Trouble is, because man is a sinner his thinking and judgment is all out of whack. Ergo, instead of looking in the mirror and seeing a sinner, he looks in the mirror and sees a saint.
This predicament leaves man betwixt and between. He is torn between Law and grace, and the sinner cannot swallow his pride enough to accept the pure Gospel without adulterating it by adding in the Law. By that means a sinner can feel that he is not perfect and needs the Gospel, but he is not really so bad after all and can do good on his own.
We will continue our flow of thought in our next post tomorrow. For tonight let’s hie off to our prayer closet and ruminate a bit on what we have just studied.
In those verses a clear dichotomy exists, and this contrast is the point to the entire quotation. On the one hand there is the righteousness which is by faith, on the other a law of righteousness. In each case righteousness is the result. The cause is what varies between the two.
The phrase a law of righteousness is better understood when the order of the words corresponds to the phrase the righteousness which is by faith. After all, Paul is teaching the difference between the two "righteousnesses", if you will permit me to coin a word.
So let's change the order of the words for the phrase a law of righteousness, so that it does correspond to what it is being contrasted with. Voilà! we come up with the righteousness which is by law. For each phrase righteousness is the result, while it is achieved by means of either "law" or "faith".
I wanted to note this contrast because by doing so we can see the purpose of the Law of Moses, dear friends. The Law was given by the Lord to the Israelites to teach them that they could not be perfect. But being perfect is the condition necessary for entrance into heaven. God is perfect and He cannot tolerate anything less. If He did then heaven would become hell pronto!
The problem wasn't with the Law. The problem was with man because man is a sinner and sinners are the opposite of perfect. Trouble is, because man is a sinner his thinking and judgment is all out of whack. Ergo, instead of looking in the mirror and seeing a sinner, he looks in the mirror and sees a saint.
This predicament leaves man betwixt and between. He is torn between Law and grace, and the sinner cannot swallow his pride enough to accept the pure Gospel without adulterating it by adding in the Law. By that means a sinner can feel that he is not perfect and needs the Gospel, but he is not really so bad after all and can do good on his own.
We will continue our flow of thought in our next post tomorrow. For tonight let’s hie off to our prayer closet and ruminate a bit on what we have just studied.
Betwixt and Between, Part 2
What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith; but Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as though it were by works [Romans 9:30-32].
Those words take us back to yesterday’s post. Let’s continue now with what we began then. Man thinks he is good enough to obey the Law. So God gave the Law to His chosen people back in the day to allow them all the chances they wanted at keeping it. Guess what? Nary a soul succeeded. The purpose of the Law was achieved: it showed man that he could not possibly live with God on the basis of his own merits.
This taught man that, if he was to live with God, he needed a Savior—One Who could pay the penalty for his sins and also replace the sinner living inside him with a new life of righteousness. On the one hand the penalty for sins needed to be paid, and that penalty is death. On the other hand a new life was needed, one which did not want to disobey the Word of God and also had the power to obey it.
So it is, you see, that it is a good thing we Christians are not under law but under grace (cf., Rom.6:14). The Law did NOT merely consist of a set of do's and don'ts to be followed. The Law consisted of an indivisible set of regulations forming one single LAW, and every last regulation must perforce be obeyed perfectly at all times 24/7, or else the offender was not perfect and so was unable to live with God.
Also, the Law was NOT merely a question of morality. As we learned by the opening quotation of this post, the Law was a means for attaining righteousness. In other words to put ourselves under the Law is to attempt to be perfect, in order to earn our own way to heaven. To be under the Law is not merely to obey the Ten Commandments to the best of our ability. It is to attempt to get ourselves to heaven by our own obedience—in which case either we obey it perfectly always or else we pack the swim suits because the destination will be very hot!
Dear friends, don't listen to well-meaning folks who quote the Law and insist we are responsible to obey it. We are NOT under law: we ARE under grace. The Apostle Paul's words with which we began this post are meant to teach us this very point. Those Israelites who rejected Jesus as Israel's Messiah did so because they wanted the Law, not grace. Ergo, God had the Gospel go to the Gentiles to give them the opportunity to receive Jesus as their Savior.
Which of us in our right minds wants to reject the Gospel and return to the Law? Not me! I will arise and go to Jesus. He will embrace me in His arms. Care to join me?
Those words take us back to yesterday’s post. Let’s continue now with what we began then. Man thinks he is good enough to obey the Law. So God gave the Law to His chosen people back in the day to allow them all the chances they wanted at keeping it. Guess what? Nary a soul succeeded. The purpose of the Law was achieved: it showed man that he could not possibly live with God on the basis of his own merits.
This taught man that, if he was to live with God, he needed a Savior—One Who could pay the penalty for his sins and also replace the sinner living inside him with a new life of righteousness. On the one hand the penalty for sins needed to be paid, and that penalty is death. On the other hand a new life was needed, one which did not want to disobey the Word of God and also had the power to obey it.
So it is, you see, that it is a good thing we Christians are not under law but under grace (cf., Rom.6:14). The Law did NOT merely consist of a set of do's and don'ts to be followed. The Law consisted of an indivisible set of regulations forming one single LAW, and every last regulation must perforce be obeyed perfectly at all times 24/7, or else the offender was not perfect and so was unable to live with God.
Also, the Law was NOT merely a question of morality. As we learned by the opening quotation of this post, the Law was a means for attaining righteousness. In other words to put ourselves under the Law is to attempt to be perfect, in order to earn our own way to heaven. To be under the Law is not merely to obey the Ten Commandments to the best of our ability. It is to attempt to get ourselves to heaven by our own obedience—in which case either we obey it perfectly always or else we pack the swim suits because the destination will be very hot!
Dear friends, don't listen to well-meaning folks who quote the Law and insist we are responsible to obey it. We are NOT under law: we ARE under grace. The Apostle Paul's words with which we began this post are meant to teach us this very point. Those Israelites who rejected Jesus as Israel's Messiah did so because they wanted the Law, not grace. Ergo, God had the Gospel go to the Gentiles to give them the opportunity to receive Jesus as their Savior.
Which of us in our right minds wants to reject the Gospel and return to the Law? Not me! I will arise and go to Jesus. He will embrace me in His arms. Care to join me?
Deuteronomy: Volume 5 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes
The first nine verses of Deuteronomy 21 detail a procedure to be used, when murder was committed but the murderer was unknown. Imagine watching one of the CSI TV series or Bones. A corpse is discovered in some secluded location. There are no witnesses to the crime and the corpse isn’t talking either. What to do?
Well, on TV the scientific nerds and squints commence to gathering materials from the landscape around the corpse, and from the corpse too. Then they retreat to the laboratory and see what they can find out from their collection of materials. Finally, as more and more evidence is examined and new revelations come to light, a light bulb comes on over the head of one of the actors and he or she exclaims, “I know who did it!”
Well guess what? It doesn’t usually work like that in reality! It didn’t usually work like that in Old Testament Israel either. So much for Plan A. That left the Lord with Plan B, which He shared with the Israelites in Deuteronomy 21:1-9. Let’s spend our time today studying this plan. You may read the full account in Deuteronomy Book III.
Deuteronomy 5:3 might be a wee bit befuddling to some folks. At Mt. Sinai the older generation of Israelites received the Law. On the plains of Moab in our present text the younger generation of Israelites were about to receive the Law. How then did Moses assert that the Lord didn’t make His covenant with their fathers, but with them?
Hmm. I am reminded of Winston Churchill’s 1939 description of Soviet Russia. He referred to them as “a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma”! They were a tough nut to crack. But not to lose heart, dear heart. Let us wade through the confusion and decipher the cipher.
Moses and all the Old Testament saints had an Oriental mindset. They didn’t fraternize with Aristotle much. Their way of reasoning and concomitant mode of expression did not jive with the Occidental mode, and vice versa too!
Moses was not claiming the Lord at Sinai did not make a covenant with the older generation. He stated that the Lord’s covenant was not SOLELY with the older generation. His covenant was with Israel, with all Israelites throughout ALL generations.
So did the Lord give the Law to the generation of Israelites who were at Mt. Sinai? No, He did not. Did He give the Law to all Israelites of all generations? Yes, that is precisely what He did. It is in this context we are to interpret Moses’ words in verse 3, brothers and sisters. You may read the full account in Deuteronomy Book I.
Well, on TV the scientific nerds and squints commence to gathering materials from the landscape around the corpse, and from the corpse too. Then they retreat to the laboratory and see what they can find out from their collection of materials. Finally, as more and more evidence is examined and new revelations come to light, a light bulb comes on over the head of one of the actors and he or she exclaims, “I know who did it!”
Well guess what? It doesn’t usually work like that in reality! It didn’t usually work like that in Old Testament Israel either. So much for Plan A. That left the Lord with Plan B, which He shared with the Israelites in Deuteronomy 21:1-9. Let’s spend our time today studying this plan. You may read the full account in Deuteronomy Book III.
Deuteronomy 5:3 might be a wee bit befuddling to some folks. At Mt. Sinai the older generation of Israelites received the Law. On the plains of Moab in our present text the younger generation of Israelites were about to receive the Law. How then did Moses assert that the Lord didn’t make His covenant with their fathers, but with them?
Hmm. I am reminded of Winston Churchill’s 1939 description of Soviet Russia. He referred to them as “a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma”! They were a tough nut to crack. But not to lose heart, dear heart. Let us wade through the confusion and decipher the cipher.
Moses and all the Old Testament saints had an Oriental mindset. They didn’t fraternize with Aristotle much. Their way of reasoning and concomitant mode of expression did not jive with the Occidental mode, and vice versa too!
Moses was not claiming the Lord at Sinai did not make a covenant with the older generation. He stated that the Lord’s covenant was not SOLELY with the older generation. His covenant was with Israel, with all Israelites throughout ALL generations.
So did the Lord give the Law to the generation of Israelites who were at Mt. Sinai? No, He did not. Did He give the Law to all Israelites of all generations? Yes, that is precisely what He did. It is in this context we are to interpret Moses’ words in verse 3, brothers and sisters. You may read the full account in Deuteronomy Book I.
Deuteronomy: Volume 5 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes
Did you know that my book on Deuteronomy includes the entire Book of Deuteronomy? That is correct. Because of space considerations, it was divided into four books. Books I-IV are available from Amazon CreateSpace Amazon Kindle. Get your copies today! My Heavenly Citizens series offers full-length analysis of entire books of the Bible. It not only teaches the Bible, but it also role models for the reader how to study the Bible. It not only provides the reader with a fish to eat, but it teaches the reader how to fish for himself.
Of Nerds & Squints & Other Assorted Characters
What do CSIs and Squints have to do with Deuteronomy 21? Hmm... That's a toughie. If you want to know the answer, purchase your copy of Deuteronomy: Book III, Volume 5 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. It's very interesting.
Sundays Are Great!
Greetings! one and all.
I am pumped today because it's Sunday! Under the Law of Moses the Sabbath was the day of rest, and the Sabbath was and always is the seventh day of the week, aka Saturday. More specifically, the Sabbath began at sundown on Friday and concluded at sundown on Saturday.
Then along came the prophet like Moses (Deut.18:15), viz., Messiah Jesus, and fulfilled the Law of Moses. He followed this up with dying on the cross as mankind's sin offering, then was put in a tomb, rose out of death on the third day, and ascended into heaven. He is there now serving as our great High Priest, while sending the Holy Spirit to indwell us and conform us into His image. Having fulfilled the Law, Jesus instituted a New Covenant, aka the Church. The Church is the spiritual family of God, with the fulfillment of the Law and death to sin and resurrection to new life being its makeup.
The day Jesus rose out of death was the first day of the week, aka Sunday. Hence the Church's day of rest is Sunday, the Resurrection Day, not the Sabbath. The New Testament notes that the disciples met together on the first day of the week, and refers to this day as the Lord's Day (Rev.1:10). I am pumped for Sunday because it is the Resurrection Day. I can't wait to be promoted to eternity to be with the Lord, which is far better (Phil.1:23). Sundays remind me of this imminent happening.
I am pumped today because it's Sunday! Under the Law of Moses the Sabbath was the day of rest, and the Sabbath was and always is the seventh day of the week, aka Saturday. More specifically, the Sabbath began at sundown on Friday and concluded at sundown on Saturday.
Then along came the prophet like Moses (Deut.18:15), viz., Messiah Jesus, and fulfilled the Law of Moses. He followed this up with dying on the cross as mankind's sin offering, then was put in a tomb, rose out of death on the third day, and ascended into heaven. He is there now serving as our great High Priest, while sending the Holy Spirit to indwell us and conform us into His image. Having fulfilled the Law, Jesus instituted a New Covenant, aka the Church. The Church is the spiritual family of God, with the fulfillment of the Law and death to sin and resurrection to new life being its makeup.
The day Jesus rose out of death was the first day of the week, aka Sunday. Hence the Church's day of rest is Sunday, the Resurrection Day, not the Sabbath. The New Testament notes that the disciples met together on the first day of the week, and refers to this day as the Lord's Day (Rev.1:10). I am pumped for Sunday because it is the Resurrection Day. I can't wait to be promoted to eternity to be with the Lord, which is far better (Phil.1:23). Sundays remind me of this imminent happening.
Words, Phrases, Sentences, and More
What's in a name anyway? Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me. Suchlike banalities are common enough, are they not? Trouble is, they promote a mentality which equates with such bromides.
Words are indeed crucial in the Lord's economy, dear friends. By His Word the Lord created the heavens and the earth. Man is like the grass which grows on the rocks. Having no root it pops up in the morning and shrivels up in the evening.
Not so with the Word of God however! The grass withers and the flower fades, but the Word of our God shall stand forever (Isaiah 40:8). God is not a man that He should lie or change His mind...EVER!
Because of this character in God, He cannot relate to us unless we to are people of our word. We must ALWAYS honor our oaths, never speaking only to be nice while having no intention of following through with what we say.
Words are indeed crucial in the Lord's economy, dear friends. By His Word the Lord created the heavens and the earth. Man is like the grass which grows on the rocks. Having no root it pops up in the morning and shrivels up in the evening.
Not so with the Word of God however! The grass withers and the flower fades, but the Word of our God shall stand forever (Isaiah 40:8). God is not a man that He should lie or change His mind...EVER!
Because of this character in God, He cannot relate to us unless we to are people of our word. We must ALWAYS honor our oaths, never speaking only to be nice while having no intention of following through with what we say.
Water for Three, Please!
There are a lot of occasions in Scripture involving "three days". The typology involved is theologically astute! The axis of all history is the cross and resurrection of Jesus Christ. He died and was in a tomb for three days.
Realize that Jesus is the axis of all Scripture. Beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, (Jesus) explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures [Luke 24:27]. Jesus takes center stage in ALL THE SCRIPTURES, from Genesis through Revelation.
This being the case, and considering that His death and resurrection (a three day event) forms the center of Jesus' ministry, is it too much of a stretch to consider that "three days" in Scripture should be given consideration as typifying in some fashion Jesus' death and resurrection?
Consider the Book of Joshua. In Joshua 1:11 Joshua announced that the Israelites would cross the Jordan in three days. In chapter 2 he sent two spies to survey Jericho before Israel attacked the city. The spies were gone for three days. In chapter 3 the Israelites crossed the Jordan after three days.
At the Red Sea the Israelites were baptized into Moses (1 Cor.10:2). Christian baptism typifies the Christian's death and resurrection in Christ (Rom.6:4). Christ accomplished this on our behalf in three days.
When the older generation of Israelites left Egypt under the Lord's auspices, they irrevocably left that life of worldliness to be the people of the Lord. In Christian terminology this is known as dying to self and rising to new life in Christ Jesus. Once they crossed the Red Sea and its waters returned, they were cut off from the life they had in Egypt. They in effect died to Egypt, the world power of the day and symbol of the world. Hence they were "baptized into Moses" at the Red Sea.
The same applied to the younger generation of Israelites some forty years later at the Jordan River. Once they crossed the Jordan to the west bank and the Jordan's waters returned, they were cut off from the life of wilderness wanderings in order to receive their spiritual inheritance—for a spiritual inheritance it was, even though it was also a physical inheritance. They in effect were "baptized" into Joshua at the Jordan River.
The name Joshua means "salvation of YHWH". In English the name is Jesus. Moses brought the Israelites out of the world (Egypt), and Moses represented the Law. But Moses failed to bring the Israelites into the Lord's inheritance, into the new life of resting in Him because the Law cannot achieve that. It took Joshua (aka Jesus) to do that.
So we see that Moses (the Law, the Old Covenant) and Joshua (Jesus, grace, the New Covenant) are symbolized by the Israelites' exodus from Egypt, their wilderness wanderings, and their new life in the Promised Land. But the Promised Land does NOT typify heaven. It typifies victorious Christian living which can only be the result of God's grace. The wilderness wanderings, contrariwise, typify defeated Christians who walk in the flesh. This results from living in one's own strength and power, which the Law typifies.
Realize that Jesus is the axis of all Scripture. Beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, (Jesus) explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures [Luke 24:27]. Jesus takes center stage in ALL THE SCRIPTURES, from Genesis through Revelation.
This being the case, and considering that His death and resurrection (a three day event) forms the center of Jesus' ministry, is it too much of a stretch to consider that "three days" in Scripture should be given consideration as typifying in some fashion Jesus' death and resurrection?
Consider the Book of Joshua. In Joshua 1:11 Joshua announced that the Israelites would cross the Jordan in three days. In chapter 2 he sent two spies to survey Jericho before Israel attacked the city. The spies were gone for three days. In chapter 3 the Israelites crossed the Jordan after three days.
At the Red Sea the Israelites were baptized into Moses (1 Cor.10:2). Christian baptism typifies the Christian's death and resurrection in Christ (Rom.6:4). Christ accomplished this on our behalf in three days.
When the older generation of Israelites left Egypt under the Lord's auspices, they irrevocably left that life of worldliness to be the people of the Lord. In Christian terminology this is known as dying to self and rising to new life in Christ Jesus. Once they crossed the Red Sea and its waters returned, they were cut off from the life they had in Egypt. They in effect died to Egypt, the world power of the day and symbol of the world. Hence they were "baptized into Moses" at the Red Sea.
The same applied to the younger generation of Israelites some forty years later at the Jordan River. Once they crossed the Jordan to the west bank and the Jordan's waters returned, they were cut off from the life of wilderness wanderings in order to receive their spiritual inheritance—for a spiritual inheritance it was, even though it was also a physical inheritance. They in effect were "baptized" into Joshua at the Jordan River.
The name Joshua means "salvation of YHWH". In English the name is Jesus. Moses brought the Israelites out of the world (Egypt), and Moses represented the Law. But Moses failed to bring the Israelites into the Lord's inheritance, into the new life of resting in Him because the Law cannot achieve that. It took Joshua (aka Jesus) to do that.
So we see that Moses (the Law, the Old Covenant) and Joshua (Jesus, grace, the New Covenant) are symbolized by the Israelites' exodus from Egypt, their wilderness wanderings, and their new life in the Promised Land. But the Promised Land does NOT typify heaven. It typifies victorious Christian living which can only be the result of God's grace. The wilderness wanderings, contrariwise, typify defeated Christians who walk in the flesh. This results from living in one's own strength and power, which the Law typifies.
