Goliath and the Antichrist.....?

[hapimom98]

I've been going to a bible study at my church for the last couple of weeks. It's been an awesome study called "Faith Lessons on the Promised Land". I highly recommend it.

Anyway, tonight it was mentioned that it's a possibility that Goliath could've been a "foreshadowing" of the Antichrist......

I hadn't heard of that before and it made my ears perk up. Anyone know anymore about this and could shed any light? I find it rather intriguing, to say the least.

:wave

[frisian1970]

:noidea

:confused

[Hootmon]

Interesting... Goliath = “splendour” From the root (possibly) of 'gâlâh'... to uncover, remove...as in the removal of clothing aka nakedness...

In all his splendour...

David does end up killing Goliath by sinking a stone into his forehead...

[frisian1970]

Lost me, Hootmon.

Anywhoo...I think Dr.Dino claims that Goliath is still alive, much like T-rex's.

[LaMontre]

Lost me, Hootmon.

Anywhoo...I think Dr.Dino claims that Goliath is still alive, much like T-rex's.

Interesting non sequitur Fris.....

At any rate;

1Sa 17:8 And he stood and cried unto the armies of Israel, and said unto them, Why are ye come out to set your battle in array? am not I a Philistine, and ye servants to Saul? choose you a man for you, and let him come down to me.
1Sa 17:9 If he be able to fight with me, and to kill me, then will we be your servants: but if I prevail against him, and kill him, then shall ye be our servants, and serve us.
1Sa 17:10 And the Philistine said, I defy the armies of Israel this day; give me a man, that we may fight together.

I would say that could very well forshadow armageddon?

[frisian1970]

Interesting non sequitur Fris.....

At any rate;

1Sa 17:8 And he stood and cried unto the armies of Israel, and said unto them, Why are ye come out to set your battle in array? am not I a Philistine, and ye servants to Saul? choose you a man for you, and let him come down to me.
1Sa 17:9 If he be able to fight with me, and to kill me, then will we be your servants: but if I prevail against him, and kill him, then shall ye be our servants, and serve us.
1Sa 17:10 And the Philistine said, I defy the armies of Israel this day; give me a man, that we may fight together.

I would say that could very well forshadow armageddon?
Does anything NOT foreshadow something? I mean, can't one just pick and choose nearly anything? What of scripture proclaims foreshadowing throughout? And what is mere theological fancy?

[Bone_Mender]

Interesting non sequitur Fris.....

At any rate;

1Sa 17:8 And he stood and cried unto the armies of Israel, and said unto them, Why are ye come out to set your battle in array? am not I a Philistine, and ye servants to Saul? choose you a man for you, and let him come down to me.
1Sa 17:9 If he be able to fight with me, and to kill me, then will we be your servants: but if I prevail against him, and kill him, then shall ye be our servants, and serve us.
1Sa 17:10 And the Philistine said, I defy the armies of Israel this day; give me a man, that we may fight together.

I would say that could very well forshadow armageddon?

Agreed, but it could also be foreshadowing the birth of Christ and His crucifixion. We see countless times where Christ was tempted during His ministry....almost like a battle. Goliath mocking the troops as Satan mocks Christ....satan calling out to send him someone worthy to fight, then Christ steps forth onto the scene. Then the challenge is made...if I beat you, these humans are my prisoners, if you beat me, then my demons will be your prisoners. We already know the outcome of that battle. I find it interested where it mentions demons in chains in the bible...almost as if they are prisoners. Dunno...just random thoughts I guess..it's still early for me :lol

Peace,
Bone

[Gary]

Does anything NOT foreshadow something? I mean, can't one just pick and choose nearly anything? What of scripture proclaims foreshadowing throughout? And what is mere theological fancy?

Agreed. I think many people over analyze and see things that just aren't there. The Bible says what it says and trying to "read between the lines" prormotes things like Bible Codes and other such nonsense.

As an old teacher of mine once said: "sometimes a moose is just a moose".

[hapimom98]

Ok, so now we got that over with.....

Is there anyone that CAN shed some light on this?? :confused I am very curious to know.

If you guys want to go debate about foreshadowing and and symbolism in the bible, you can take it over to apologetics, however, I would appreciate getting some feedback on my original question rather than hearing about your intellectualizing/analytical/theoretical musings.:wacko

Thank you. :):


(btw, thanks for those who sincerely attempted to answer my question, Bone, LaMontre, Hootman.... :wave )

[mamacags]

My son thinks it is so cool that there are real giants in the bible. He keeps asking if there are giants alive today.

[Gary]

Ok, so now we got that over with.....

Is there anyone that CAN shed some light on this?? :confused I am very curious to know.

If you guys want to go debate about foreshadowing and and symbolism in the bible, you can take it over to apologetics, however, I would appreciate getting some feedback on my original question rather than hearing about your intellectualizing/analytical/theoretical musings.:wacko

Thank you. :):


(btw, thanks for those who sincerely attempted to answer my question, Bone, LaMontre, Hootman.... :wave )

Well, I don't appreciate being dissed for trying to answer a question...

If I need to be more blunt, very well...

NO!!!! Goliath was a MAN, who threathened the nation of Israel. David killed him through the power of God. It is a historical record and part of David's rise to the King of Israel. It is not symbolic. Symbolism in the Bible is almost always portrayed through anecdotes or parables, not historical accounts. I think naming Goliath as a "foreshadow" of the Anti-Christ is nonsense.

That better?

[hapimom98]

Well, I don't appreciate being dissed for trying to answer a question...

If I need to be more blunt, very well...

NO!!!! Goliath was a MAN, who threathened the nation of Israel. David killed him through the power of God. It is a historical record and part of David's rise to the King of Israel. It is not symbolic. Symbolism in the Bible is almost always portrayed through anecdotes or parables, not historical accounts. I think naming Goliath as a "foreshadow" of the Anti-Christ is nonsense.

That better?

Thank you for your input, Gary.....that is one possibility. :wave

[MrJim]

Well, I don't appreciate being dissed for trying to answer a question...

If I need to be more blunt, very well...

NO!!!! Goliath was a MAN, who threathened the nation of Israel. David killed him through the power of God. It is a historical record and part of David's rise to the King of Israel. It is not symbolic. Symbolism in the Bible is almost always portrayed through anecdotes or parables, not historical accounts. I think naming Goliath as a "foreshadow" of the Anti-Christ is nonsense.

That better?

What about this scripture:

1Cr 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

Doesn't this verse mean that things that happened in the past were examples for us, as a warning? Or am I missing the point of this verse?

[LaMontre]

Does anything NOT foreshadow something? I mean, can't one just pick and choose nearly anything? What of scripture proclaims foreshadowing throughout? And what is mere theological fancy?

Interesting question....when I was first saved, the Lord was revealing the Trinity to me all over the place....

I wish I had wrote those things down.....surely they were not direct references to the Trinity, but it was definitly something God wanted me to understand about Himself.

So maybe "symbolism" can be seen in personal revelation, but thats just not something you would publically teach as a doctrine....I think this scritpural interpretation belongs in that catagory? Nothing wrong with sharing it, I just could not (or would not) be dogmatic about it.

[LaMontre]

Agreed, but it could also be foreshadowing the birth of Christ and His crucifixion. We see countless times where Christ was tempted during His ministry....almost like a battle. Goliath mocking the troops as Satan mocks Christ....satan calling out to send him someone worthy to fight, then Christ steps forth onto the scene. Then the challenge is made...if I beat you, these humans are my prisoners, if you beat me, then my demons will be your prisoners. We already know the outcome of that battle. I find it interested where it mentions demons in chains in the bible...almost as if they are prisoners. Dunno...just random thoughts I guess..it's still early for me :lol

Peace,
Bone

Not at all, that too is quite plausible and probably more "proper".

[LaMontre]

What about this scripture:

1Cr 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

Doesn't this verse mean that things that happened in the past were examples for us, as a warning? Or am I missing the point of this verse?

Good call!:thumb

2Co 3:6 - Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

[Gary]

What about this scripture:

1Cr 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

Doesn't this verse mean that things that happened in the past were examples for us, as a warning? Or am I missing the point of this verse?

Examples - yes.
To learn from and teach - yes
To Correct - yes


As a "premonition" or "Forecast" - No. Unless it is stated that it is "prophecy"

Scripture is quite clear as to what is prophecy, what is a parable, what is/was tradition and what is history. False prophecies occur fairly commonly when someone claims a "special revelation" from scripture, that was written as a historical record, or for some other purpose.

Daniel, Ezekiel, Elijah et al were quite clear when they prophecied upcoming events. A historical account is not a prophecy or "foreshadowing."

[hapimom98]

:sigh

[bubba jones]

Hapimom...I'm glad you started this thread because I think it's an interesting one...

[bubba jones]

I'm hope this thread gets more replies regarding the original topic...:):

[Timothy]

Interesting question....when I was first saved, the Lord was revealing the Trinity to me all over the place....

I wish I had wrote those things down.....surely they were not direct references to the Trinity, but it was definitly something God wanted me to understand about Himself...

You should see about finding a book called "The Trinity in the Universe" by Nathan R. Wood. I have not read it in years, but it goes through all of the aspects with a three-fold basis...

[Timothy]

The one aspect in scripture that I find interesting is:

GIANT = BAD

Scripture consistently indicates that giants are always evil. And giants are always destroyed. The pre-flood giants were wiped out by the flood, and the post-flood giants were all wiped out by violence.

[frisian1970]

My son thinks it is so cool that there are real giants in the bible. He keeps asking if there are giants alive today.
Have you played the Hovind collection for him? He may even have some at his Dinoland.

[frisian1970]

Interesting question....when I was first saved, the Lord was revealing the Trinity to me all over the place....

I wish I had wrote those things down.....surely they were not direct references to the Trinity, but it was definitly something God wanted me to understand about Himself.

So maybe "symbolism" can be seen in personal revelation, but thats just not something you would publically teach as a doctrine....I think this scritpural interpretation belongs in that catagory? Nothing wrong with sharing it, I just could not (or would not) be dogmatic about it.
That sounds, sound.

:D:

[Gary]

:sigh

Not quite sure why you started this thread. Did you only want replies that agreed with or supported this theory?? :confused

Are you looking for a book or something that can expand on your Bible study??

[bubba jones]

:):

[frisian1970]

http://religion-cults.com/antichrist/types.htm

http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/words/1/1130600636-7242.html


Multiple sites refer to Goliath's name meaning soothsayer. The Strong's concordance, at least, doesn't say so. It says the root of his name could be seen to mean an uncovering. But it states COULD be a root. It isn't definitive.

[hapimom98]

http://religion-cults.com/antichrist/types.htm

http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/words/1/1130600636-7242.html


Multiple sites refer to Goliath's name meaning soothsayer. The Strong's concordance, at least, doesn't say so. It says the root of his name could be seen to mean an uncovering. But it states COULD be a root. It isn't definitive.

Thanks for the links, Fris....I will check into them. :wave

[Hootmon]

It says the root of his name could be seen to mean an uncovering. But it states COULD be a root. It isn't definitive.One implies the other.

'uncovering' as in 'revelation'.

[Joel]

hapimom98 :):,

IMHO, yes. Goliath, or, Golyat (Gimel, Lamed, Yod, Tau) as the Hebrew renders it.. and the surrounding circumstance of the situation outlined in 1st Samuel 17 present a clear microcosm 'picture' of the days-to-come, if sifted into..

Before tackling the components presented in First Samuel 17, it would be beneficial IMO to take a step back and look a little bit at the immediate back drop, i.e. chapter 16 of the same book.



But, even before this (:Madgrin), I wanted to leave a 'few' comments in regards to the subject of type and shadow, as questions have been raised to the subject at general, and it's my ever-lasting inkling of a hope (as I can do nothing through myself, but by His spirit alone) to shed some light, and thereby revelation, to the area called into question.

It's understandable that some have reservations to this arena of study, as people have quite repeatedly abused the skill of interpreting through type and shadow many times over, dating very far back, even to the 'early church fathers'. Even today, you can quite literally 'twist', and 'turn' the meaning of one thing in the Bible into anything you might devise or desire (much less the subjective nature this particular type of study presents).

It is very easy to use our own preconceived notions and bias' and make, or rather, filter the word of God through our own preset credence of faith - instead of letting the word of God mold our beliefs, we can often be guilty of molding the word of God according to our already existing system and state of beliefs in all its particulars.

Now I will not try or even pretend to exhaust all forms of Scriptural Interpretation, or the art of interpretation with all its modes and definitions... for that is a broader subject than I ever intended my reply to cope with.. but a framework does need to be set on how we approach and view this revelation through papyrus and ink.

Firstly, and personally, I am probably what might be termed a 'literalist' in how I view the scriptures at large. I take the word of God literally and this therefore, and without apology, shapes my worldview of Scripture from the onset. What God said, God meant. Literally. And this is how I believe God intended it, for God is not a God of confusion, but of order (1 Corinthians 14:33.) Easy enough.

More than this though, you must needs be a possessor of some human common sense as well.. where hyperbole, parabolic language, and poetic, colorful imagery (often used in Psalm form for example), and mysterious symbols (popular in books of a prophetic nature) can come into play strewn throughout the Scriptures.. we let these modes of communication retain their rightful properties, and, unless the context demands otherwise (as just now shown), literal is still key.

We should recognize that God uses such crafts and devices of human language throughout the various human agents He inspires, over the course of some fifteen-hundred plus odd years. :):

Each agent retains their own personal style and personality, yet through each instrument, God's unchanging and eternal message is conveyed... through this we see God is a God of personality, and He celebrates the diversities we all bring to the table, for He created each of us how we are... for even nature at large, God's own creation, it is as diverse if not more-so than all the rest of us.

Some of my personal no-no's are spiritualizing away (dismissing) the true, surface-value meaning of the text into some pseudo-creampuff 'where's my decoder ring?' vagueness (i.e. see full-blown preterism ;):).

We've all heard it before, but it is of importance - let the Bible interpret the Bible. Scripture interprets scripture. Scriptural symbol interprets scriptural symbol 2 Timothy 2:15[/COLOR]), and be as Bereans, who searched the scriptures daily (Acts 17:10-12), showing our diligence, and thereby hunger for God and His word.

And even more than these, including a fair understanding of the languages [communication] the Word was originally conveyed in (Hebrew, Aramaic, Koine Greek), helps us in the present better understand, and therefore divide, the word of God.

True revelation, though, still always comes from God's own Holy Spirit... for it is He who guides all of us into Truth, and comforts us in that Truth [John 16:13].. - for it is by that truth that we are set free into liberty [John 8:32].

We can still receive, and most often do, attain revelation from God's own illumination (in degrees of prayer and worship for example, or alone time reading His word), whether or not we have a scholar's degree or some study aid, though beneficial to some degree, not a necessary requirement in coming to a good understanding, provided being under right and fair teaching and fellowship (with God and with man).

It is my personal striving to always, always maintain a good and solid, "sound" view of scripture, a proper hermeneutic, and never ever 'butcher' or 'badger' the Scriptures into [mine own image], but 'dig', and 'glean', and see the treasures lying beneath the surface of the black and red ink on that white paper, while maintaining the integrity of the surface meaning and value.

[For I am convinced there is a richness yea, even a depth, a breadth, a width, and a height to God's word, and the more I learn of God's nature as revealed plainly in His word, the more I see what a rich and diverse, wise and eternal God He is Himself!

A oft-referenced Hebraic system of interpretation which is a personal favorite of mine is called PaRDeS. I would recommend reading the link.. more on this study can be found detailed here. (http://www.nazarene.net/Hermeneutics/Pardes.html)

The 'gist', the nutshell explanation of the link is that there is the literal, surface meaning of the text, and the text can not, and should not ever lose this meaning from the interpreter.. but it concedes there are deeper spiritual truths behind the surface meaning {which never contradict or say something contrary to the plainly revealed counsel and word of God, by the way - and we must remember this in our own studies}... and this is where the role of type and shadow come into effect]

It is something I always wrestle with when I work upon, or especially, share my studies... as sharing the teachings found of Scripture is a great privilege, but yet also a greater responsibility (think Peter Parker's uncle) to properly undertake.

Even now, I may indeed hold to some stance or position on one of the many type and shadows, where it is 'how I want to see it', and I've plainly seen this in others as well, and it is this road I prayerfully always wish to avoid. I aim for the balanced chord, neither to the left or the right, but the straight and narrow.

And on this note it is true to the extent that while we have no Apostles penning Scripture (the canon of scripture is completed), that we cannot be and should not be absolutely dogmatic about our own interpretation of Scripture of the varied type and shadow as being divinely inspired... we can present our argument from Scripture, and see if it lines up with what is already plainly revealed in Scripture, and make judgment thereupon. And while I may even hold a sensible conviction over an interpretation of this type or that shadow, I always know it is yet still in that area where you cannot fully be dogmatic about such, and must always be open and willing to hear or see correction or direction about this or that.

Important principles, again, for such study is to remember proper interpretation methods, 'sensible' guidelines, some very briefly outlined up above already (but not nearly exhaustive in the least), along with the fact whatever is studied and gleaned should not, and must not ever contradict or say something contrary to the revealed will of God.

If you are doing such, you can be assured your revelation is not coming from God, but from your own flesh (or possibly other sources).

In fact, it should most usually, yea, even always 'speak' something which confirms the already plainly revealed word and will of God from a straight-forward reading.

If you aren't doing such, and 'coming up with' [construing] symbols interpreting them to say the Cubs will win the pennant in 2008, for example, you can be assured you are far out in 'left field', and should veer back towards the biblical pendulum.

Another important principle in the area of type and shadow must be the fact that all interpretations should most probably be Christocentric in essence and nature. The scriptures in plain reading speak this 'in the volume of the book it is written of Me' (Psalms 40:7, Hebrews 10:7), confirmed in the account of the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:25-27) '... And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself', and (Luke 24:31-32) 'Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the Scriptures?'

(Their spiritual insight was 'opened', so the Scriptures were 'opened' to them, i.e. revelation), and even yet more... (Luke 24:44) 'And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.', (Luke 24:45-46) 'Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the Scriptures, And said unto them, Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer, and rise from the dead on the third day'

Now in relation to 'the law of Moses', 'the prophets', and 'the psalms' it is understood to be the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Old Testament), the prophetic books including the historical books written by prophetic men (i.e. Joshua, Joel, Kings, Chronicles), and the Psalms contain 'every other writing' (Lamentations, Proverbs, Psalms, etc).

From the whole of the Canon of the Old Covenant Christ used every part to show where and how it pointed to fulfillment in Himself.

It is my personal belief Christ not only used clear, plain writ prophecy (Isaiah 53, Psalm 22, and so on) but he had to use some form of expounding the type and shadow so that their understanding might be 'opened'. As I have seen prophecy which speaks of a suffering servant, but am yet to find any explicit plainly writ reference to the messiah rising from the dead after three days.

Rather, Christ Himself even used a 'type and shadow', which, also happened to be a historical event, to hammer this point home to His disciples while He lived, so that they too might have their 'understanding opened' about His up and coming mission.

(Matthew 12:40) For even as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the sea monster, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth

What Christ is doing here is clearly setting up a historical event that occurred to Jonah, as Christ seems to verify it actually happened by His wording.. and turning it around to make it appear as a parallel at the least, and more probably a shadow of what had to be accomplished in His own life.

This is where the disciples' understanding begins to be opened, and scripture begins to burst with revelation, IMHO.

More than this..

(Matthew 2:14-15) And having risen, he took the Child and His mother by night and withdrew to Egypt, And remained there until Herod's death. This was to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet, [I]Out of Egypt have I called My Son

Now we could rail against the writer of the gospel of Matthew himself, for he's using a reference here, (Hosea 11:1) When Israel was a child, then I loved him and called my son out of Egypt ... and fashioning it to be a prediction of Christ, a shadow of sorts, giving from a historical event, which clearly was referring to Israel, yet the gospel writer saw in it a 'type' of the Christ, too.

Again...

(1 Peter 3:20-21) Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ

Now the word in Greek for what is translated 'the like figure' is
G499
ἀντίτυπον
antitupon

Thayer Definition:


1) a thing formed after some pattern
2) a thing resembling another, its counterpart
2a) something in the Messianic times which answers to the type, as baptism corresponds to the deluge (1Pe_3:21)Part of Speech: adjective
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: neuter of a compound of G473 and G5179
Citing in TDNT: 8:246, 1193

Notice, it is anti tupon. Or rather what we know to be called, anti-type.
So the verse just read can be rendered 'the antitype to which baptism now also saves us'.

Here we have Peter using, once more for clarity's sake, another historical event (the deluge of Noah) and saying it, of all things, is a type of our baptism in water. The ark and the flood is the type (which predicts), therefore the baptism is the anti-type (where fulfillment is found).

Was Peter, divinely inspired of the Holy Spirit, or just operating under mere guesswork and theological fancy? Was Peter overanalyzing a historical record and twisting it into something it was not?

Of course not. And while there is yet the danger of people who do such things (and I am all for a proper and right interpretation), we mustn't, IMHO, throw the baby out with the bathwater (or flood waters in this case.) :B:


i.e. We recognize there are errors and excesses, and we should stray from such, yet also, we can be assured there is more than enough precedent set in Scripture for showing the area of study known as types, shadows, and figures are not without merit, the only thing being, we cannot be dogmatic, but can share our findings and form a discerning judgment as to how it lines up with the plainly revealed word of God.

[Joel]

While we're on the subject, I thought it beneficial to dig up every reference to 'shadows' as I can find from the writings of Paul. Perhaps I missed some, but here we go..

(Colossians 2:16-17) Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a holy day (annually), or of the new moon (monthly), or of the sabbath days (weekly): Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

If you look into the Greek, Paul is actually using a contrast here. The word for shadow, skia, and the word for body, soma, are meant to amplify Paul's point.

That is, that which is without substance, a mere shadow, an outline, finds its fulfillment in that which does have substance, that which 'gives off the shadow', the body apparently.

And that body is Christ.

So Paul is actually saying that all these things..
the meat,
the drink,
the holy days,
the new moons,
the sabbaths,all of these things are to find their fulfillment in Christ Himself. They were all 'shadows', something predictive, anticipative of something yet to come.

It goes back to the theme of 'in the volume of the Book it is written of Me', i.e. we should remain Christocentric in our application of type and shadow. That is to say, it all centers around Christ as its chief subject.

This is how the Amplified Bible reads...

(Colossians 2:16-17) Therefore let no one sit in judgment on you in matters of food and drink, or with regard to a feast day or a New Moon or a Sabbath. Such [things] are only the shadow of things that are to come, and they have only a symbolic value. But the reality (the substance, the solid fact of what is foreshadowed, the body of it) belongs to Christ.

(Hebrews 8:5) service [merely] as a pattern and as a foreshadowing of [what has its true existence and reality in] the heavenly sanctuary. For when Moses was about to erect the tabernacle, he was warned by God, saying, See to it that you make it all [exactly] according to the copy (the model) which was shown to you on the mountain.

(Hebrews 9:9) Seeing that that first [outer portion of the] tabernacle was a parable (a visible symbol or type or picture of the present age). In it gifts and sacrifices are offered, and yet are incapable of perfecting the conscience or of cleansing and renewing the inner man of the worshiper.

(Hebrews 10:1) FOR SINCE the Law has merely a rude outline (foreshadowing) of the good things to come--instead of fully expressing those things--it can never by offering the same sacrifices continually year after year make perfect those who approach .

The author of Hebrews explains the Law, with its call for High Priestly duties, and various offerings made under the provision of the Law, and all these services, including the Tabernacle itself - form a copy, a shadow, an outline, a pattern, a model, a blueprint for what is yet to come and be manifest (and what was already in existence, namely the Heavenly sanctuary).

And that we know, that Christ was manifested in the flesh and dwelt (tabernacled) amongst us... now is come the Light into the world, whereby the shadows and types find their source of being and purpose and fulfillment (John 8:12, 12:46).

A couple more examples include (Romans 5:14) Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

The word for 'figure' is tupos. Or rather, 'type'.
G5179
τύπος
tupos

Thayer Definition:
1) the mark of a stroke or blow, print
2) a figure formed by a blow or impression
2a) of a figure or image
2b) of the image of the gods
3) form
3a) the teaching which embodies the sum and substance of religion and represents it to the mind, manner of writing, the contents and form of a letter
4) an example
4a) in the technical sense, the pattern in conformity to which a thing must be made
4b) in an ethical sense, a dissuasive example, a pattern of warning
4b1) of ruinous events which serve as admonitions or warnings to others
4c) an example to be imitated
4c1) of men worthy of imitation
4d) in a doctrinal sense
4d1) [B]of a type, i.e. a person or thing prefiguring a future (Messianic) person or thing
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from G5180
Citing in TDNT: 8:246, 1193


The Amplified translation reads..

'Yet death held sway from Adam to Moses [the Lawgiver], even over those who did not themselves transgress [a positive command] as Adam did. Adam was a type (prefigure) of the One Who was to come '

Thus we receive the title for Christ, 'the last Adam' (1 Corinthians 15:45)

Furthermore,

(Hebrews 11:17-19) By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son, Of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy seed be called: Accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure.

The language here, 'only begotten son' (even though he fathered Ishmael as well), and receiving a son from the dead, in essence (in figure - [I]parable, type, shadow), is purposed to remind us of God's only begotten son (John 3:16), who likewise was 'received from the dead', and as Isaac, 'on the third day'..

(Genesis 22:4) Then on the third day Abraham lifted up his eyes, and saw the place (that is, the sacrificial altar Isaac was to be laid upon and subsequently raised up from in a short sequence) afar off.

Indeed, it is with rarity that I've seen anyone contend that the binding of Isaac was not a loud and clear type or shadow of that which had to be accomplished through Christ and His Heavenly Father two thousand years later. And all this, it was still a historical event.

Even more-so, If He deemed it good and fit to give us the record of His changing Abram and Sarai's names into Abraham and Sarah (juxtaposing an additional Hebraic letter Hey into the construction of said names) [Genesis 17:5, 15], then I deem it good and fit-worthy to study out the why's and wherefores, not only of this, but of further accounts as well per (Deuteronomy 29:29) The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children forever, and (Proverbs 25:2) It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honor of kings is to search out a matter.

For God does nothing without a purpose and meaning (Isaiah 55:11), and no account is given us that is devoid of instruction or learning (2 Timothy 3:16), so I deem it good and worthwhile to discover and 'dig into' what God's possible purpose might have been in doing this, or recording that, etcetera (and this does not exclude any other forms of study, but merely includes typology among practical life application studies and so on)

Two concluding examples, of that which pertains to Christ, as all of Scripture is God-breathed, and points to Christ. Naturally I suppose, as He is called the LOGOS (the WORD), then fitting the word of God should testify to the WORD, the One who is greater than the Temple (Matthew 12:6), one greater than Jonah (Matthew 12:41), and even yet one greater than Solomon in all his wisdom (Matthew 12:42), who were all in their respective rights a 'taste' of what was to come... (Christ)

(John 3:12, 14) If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things? And [I]as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up

What is this account spoken of?

(Numbers 21:9) And Moses made a serpent of bronze and put it on a pole, and if a serpent had bitten any man, when he looked to the serpent of bronze [attentively, expectantly, with a steady and absorbing gaze], he lived.

Christ is making a comparison between a serpent, and Himself, being, the son of God.

How is this?

(2 Corinthians 5:21) gives us a further clue. 'For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.'

This is how Christ was justified in comparing a brazen serpent to Himself, in that, he became sin for us, likewise, the serpent, a long standing emblem of that enemy, Satan, who beguiled and deceived our forefather Adam, and mother, Eve, in the garden to bring sin into this world (as well as the component of brass, being connected in language throughout the Old Testament as symbolic of sin, judgment, hardness, etc). And likewise, we must all look 'with eyes of faith', expecting, towards the cross, the pole our Lord and Saviour was lifted up upon, to receive our healing.

This is what might be termed a type, if you may, of Christ's redemptive work. Maybe a mere parallel, but, the instruction given by God to construct a brass serpent, of all things, for the children of Israel to look upon (with eyes of faith), expecting to be healed... seems to be an intentional pattern and shadow laid down for us, something which anticipated a future, greater fulfillment (For even Christ Himself saw there was a connection there worthy of mention in this famous discourse)... for how odd these instructions must have seemed to Moses at the time.

And lastly, (1 Corinthians 10:3-4) And all [of them] ate the same spiritual (supernaturally given) food, And they all drank the same spiritual (supernaturally given) drink. For they drank from a spiritual Rock which followed them [produced by the sole power of God Himself without natural instrumentality], and the Rock was Christ.

In this Paul is describing Israel's journeys out of Egypt, through the wilderness. John Darby's Synopsis on this portion is as follows...

The apostle then gives the Corinthians the ways of God with Israel in the wilderness, as instruction with regard to His ways with us, declaring that the things which happened to them were types or figures which serve as patterns for us: an important principle, and one which ought to be clearly apprehended, in order to profit by it. It is not Israel who is the figure, but that which happened to Israel — the ways of God with Israel. The things themselves happened to Israel; they were written for our instruction who find ourselves at the close of God's dispensations. That which shall follow will be the judgment of God, when these examples will no longer serve for the life of faith.
Paul is comparing a rock in the wilderness giving forth water to the sustenance of the camp of Israel (Exodus 17:6), and fixates it on Christ - in whom the volume of the book is written.

A clue to this representation connection may be found in John 4:10, and John 7:38, in Jesus' own words... 'He that believeth on me, as the Scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.'

God Himself is also to be remembered as the First and the Last (Isaiah 41:4). The Alpha and the Omega (Revelation 1:11), the Beginning and the Ending (Revelation 22:13), the author and finisher (Hebrews 12:2), the A unto the Z, the Alef through the Tau.

Naturally, the word of God, from Genesis 1:1 unto Revelation 22:21 speaks of Him - The WORD - the entire composition of the aleph-bet (alphabet), being the first and last, He is the sum of everything in-between, so to speak.

And thus we have, typology, shadows, figures, patterns, sketches, outlines... all pointing to, and finding their substance and source in - Him.

Colors, numbers, metals, persons, stones, weights, currencies, foods, drinks, letters, names, places, circumstances, laws, holidays, ceremonial instruments of tabernacle service - JESUS and His redemptive blueprint.

In conclusion to my 'few' comments, we should not be surprised if that which is of old (type) should repeat itself in a new, greater fashion (anti-type).

God Himself affirms ...

(Isaiah 46:10) Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:

He sets forth in motion, from the beginning, that which is to come in the latter days.

Indeed, He has set forth nature itself into a cyclical pattern, showing us these redemptive truths and principles beforehand, to testify to the Glory of God, and reveal to our natural senses spiritual realities.
One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh
The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose
The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits.
All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full; unto the place from whence the rivers come, thither they return again.The moral of the story?
The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.
(Ecclesiastes 1:4-7, 9)

"Those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them."---George Santayana


More on Goliath to follow… :):

[hapimom98]

You are my hero, Joel! :cheer

That is a lot to absorb, I have read through it once, but look forward to reading through it a few more times. Thank you for taking the time and thought to answer.....patiently waiting on Goliath......:wave