PDA

View Full Version : Understanding Types and Shadows



Beck
02-23-2012, 04:08 PM
I would like to heard your thoughts on how 'Types' and 'Shadows' are used in the Old Testament to forecast the AntiType. The question came to me does the 'type / shadow' always have to be real in an physical sence?

One reason I ask is that lets us consider Adam is an type of Christ Jesus. Paul even used the terms 'the first Adam' and the 'second Adam' to the Corinthains. Now if we say that all 'types and shadows' have to be real in an physical sence then I must disagree. Considering Adam which is said to be the first man, but in the way that the story of creation is written Adam is the beginning of Israel, not humanity.

So then can we always claim that every type and shadow is real? I would see the same type for Manna from heaven in the wilderness. Unless someone can provide some other evidence that I've over looked.

Bob May
02-23-2012, 06:32 PM
I would like to heard your thoughts on how 'Types' and 'Shadows' are used in the Old Testament to forecast the AntiType. The question came to me does the 'type / shadow' always have to be real in an physical sence?

One reason I ask is that lets us consider Adam is an type of Christ Jesus. Paul even used the terms 'the first Adam' and the 'second Adam' to the Corinthains. Now if we say that all 'types and shadows' have to be real in an physical sence then I must disagree. Considering Adam which is said to be the first man, but in the way that the story of creation is written Adam is the beginning of Israel, not humanity.

So then can we always claim that every type and shadow is real? I would see the same type for Manna from heaven in the wilderness. Unless someone can provide some other evidence that I've over looked.
Hi Beck,
I think you mean "Physical" rather than real. And I would agree. The type does not have to have physically existed as related in story form in order for the Truth that the story is designed to convey, be conveyed. Aesop's Fables are a good example. He used stories of talking animals in order to illustrate a deeper meaning or "moral" of those stories. We are not expected to think, while reading those stories, that the animals really spoke. At least not after we reach adulthood. Adam can also mean Mankind instead of just an individual's name. That is a legitimate definition of the word. So the real would be the moral of the stories of Aesop, not the talking animals that seemed real when we were children. Sometimes the types and anti-ypes in the bible illutrate similarities. Sometimes contrasts. The stories of the Patriarchs and sons of Jacob illustrate their perceptions of reality and their perception of relationship with God. It is the same for us beecause we are walking the same paths as they are portrayed as having walked. Whether or not they did, what is important is to look inside ourselves. The same stories ar being played out inside of us as we change our perception or point of view as our ideas of our relationship with God changes. so in my estimation it is more important to understand the spiritual truths concerning the OT than whether or not they actually happened in a physical sense. The patterns are more important than the story. Moses was told, "See that you build it ( the tabernacle) after the pattern showed thee on the mount." The more we look at the bible as applying to us, the higher the perspective or the closer to how it was meant to be read. My opinion. Bob

Beck
02-24-2012, 01:45 PM
Hi Beck,
I think you mean "Physical" rather than real. And I would agree. The type does not have to have physically existed as related in story form in order for the Truth that the story is designed to convey, be conveyed. Aesop's Fables are a good example. He used stories of talking animals in order to illustrate a deeper meaning or "moral" of those stories. We are not expected to think, while reading those stories, that the animals really spoke. At least not after we reach adulthood. Adam can also mean Mankind instead of just an individual's name. That is a legitimate definition of the word. So the real would be the moral of the stories of Aesop, not the talking animals that seemed real when we were children. Sometimes the types and anti-ypes in the bible illutrate similarities. Sometimes contrasts. The stories of the Patriarchs and sons of Jacob illustrate their perceptions of reality and their perception of relationship with God. It is the same for us beecause we are walking the same paths as they are portrayed as having walked. Whether or not they did, what is important is to look inside ourselves. The same stories ar being played out inside of us as we change our perception or point of view as our ideas of our relationship with God changes. so in my estimation it is more important to understand the spiritual truths concerning the OT than whether or not they actually happened in a physical sense. The patterns are more important than the story. Moses was told, "See that you build it ( the tabernacle) after the pattern showed thee on the mount." The more we look at the bible as applying to us, the higher the perspective or the closer to how it was meant to be read. My opinion. Bob

Hi Bob,

You explained it very well, I couldn't agree more.

Gil
02-24-2012, 03:47 PM
Howdy Beck,
Just a little off the wall thought.


Allegories , Metaphors , Types, Shadows within scripture were all pointing to Messiah/Christ.
Paul said that what was natural/physical was first and then that which is spiritual.
Darkness would become Light
Death would become Life
Lies would become Truth
Man would see the upside coming down
The outside moving in
The fallen Man would be raised up

Man seen things from an environmental point of view.
Externally with natural eyes, but may see internally with spiritual eyes.
That which is seen physically, exterior to ourselves is through our
mental capability.
That which is seen Spiritually, interior to our own selves is through our
mental capability.
We begin to see the unseen even in those things which are seen.

What was kept in secret within the Old Testament was revealed within the New Testament.

Paul moved the Gospel of Jesus Christ right into his Christology. The BOC.
He said all was made full and complete within the BOC.
Messiah to the Jew and Christ to all flesh at the end which was then at hand.
AD70.
The BOC was to be the end of an age and a new beginning for Mankind.
A new creation, new heavens and earth etc.
The BOC was the beginning of new function and purpose not only here upon this planet,
but for a continuation of Life within another realm that was lost through the first fallen Adam.

The reality of GOD as the creator and his first begotten Son Jesus Christ are not lost through the modern
mindset of the scientific community.

They to are searching for the same answers as ANE and all ancient cultures of the past.

Psychology, Psychiatry , Physics , Mathematics , Astronomy , Quantum Mechanics , Meta Physics ,
Genetics , micro organic Biology , Chemistry , Etc., all have one thing in common.
All looking for answers deeper and deeper within. Into the world of the unseen, spiritual workings of the Creator.
Even in Astronomy, man is looking into the past and may indeed come face to face with his future.
Maybe one should move forward in the progression of thought, ideas and concepts and take the old and new testaments as stepping stones into the future.
Does that mean that GOD does not exist. No, he is seen to be the creator of all things even now.
What about his Son Jesus Christ. Did he resurrect from the dead. Sure he did.
Can we enter unto life eternal as Paul, through the presence of the Spirit of Christ said we could. Yes.

Gil :pop2: