BIBLE INSIGHT

But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
(2 Pet. 3:18)

Volume 5, Number 6, February 10, 2002

Should We Still Study the Old Testament? By David McClister (Reprinted from Biblical Insights)

One of the biggest questions that faced the early church was the relationship between Christianity and Judaism. The matter came to a head in Acts 15, and the apostles taught that the Law of Moses had not been binding since the death of Jesus. The old covenant contained the promise of its own demise (Heb 8:7-13) and Paul said that the old law had been nailed to the cross (Col 2:14).

If the old covenant is no longer in force and its law replaced, then why should we still study and preach from the Old Testament? Does its cancellation warrant virtually ignoring it or relegating it to the status of a curious relic of the past? Should we still study the Old Testament?

Certainly! By all means! Why? Allow me to suggest a few important reasons:

1. The Old Testament gives us confidence in God's power and faithfulness.
The New Testament often urges us to rely, in faith, on God's power. How is such trust vindicated? Answer: from the stories of the Old Testament. The God who devastated Egypt with plagues, who led his people through the Red Sea, who fought their wars and defeated their enemies and who brought them out of captivity is the same God of the new covenant. Our confidence in God's power to save and bless is rooted in the acts of God recorded in the Old Testament, acts by which he has proven his power to accomplish good for his people. The New Testament also urges us to rely on God's promise word. How is such trust vindicated? The answer again is: from the stories of the Old Testament. The Old Testament is a veritable history of God making promises and keeping them faithfully and thus demonstrates that God is trustworthy (1 Cor 1:9; 2 Thess 3:3).

2. The Old Testament serves as a warning to us.
The history of Israel in the Old Testament is, for the most part, a history of failure and stands as a stark warning to spiritual Israel not to follow in those same steps of faithlessness and disobedience. Consider 1 Corinthians 10, where Paul exhorted the church in Corinth not to become idolaters after the example of the Israelites in the wilderness (the author of Hebrews makes a similar appeal in Heb 3, 4). Stephen used the history of the Old Testament as the basis of his rebuke to Jews of his day (Acts 7), and Jesus himself used the stories of the Old Testament as warnings to His hearers (Matt 23:34-36; 10:15; 12:38-42).

3. The Old Testament is about Jesus.
The old covenant was a promise waiting to be fulfilled, a story waiting for its ending. It's conclusion came in Jesus (2 Cor 1:20; Matt 5:17-18), the one to whom the law and the prophets had pointed (Rom 3:21-22). Adam, the high priesthood, the sacrificial system, the prophets, the kingship, wisdom and many other such things were types of the Messiah. Furthermore, Jesus was the object of many specific predictions, which the New Testament authors were careful to note (see especially Matthew's gospel). Jesus himself taught his followers to read the Old Testament in light of him (John 5:39, 45; Luke 24:27), and the early Christians used the Old Testament to preach Jesus (see Acts 2:22-36; 8:26-35; 13:26-40). To put it simply, it is not possible to understand the gospels correctly, or to have the right picture of Jesus, without first having read the Old Testament.

4. The Old Testament is the blueprint and prescription for the new covenant.
The old covenant contained many features that were types of spiritual things in the new covenant. The priesthood, the temple, circumcision, sacrifices, the exodus and Passover, washings - all of these things have spiritual counterparts in the new covenant. The outward features of the old system were shadows of the spiritual realities in the new covenant. In order to understand what it means to say that the church is God's temple (1 Pet 2:5; Eph 2:21; I Cor 3:16) or that Christians are God's priests (1 Pet 2:5, 9), we must go to the Old Testament to learn the fundamental nature of these institutions. Furthermore, the Old Testament records prophecies about the messianic age in which God described the kind of people he wants us to be (see Hos 2:14-10 for an example). The New Testament was written, among other things, for the purpose of teaching us how to live so as to be that people.

While we realize that we no longer live by the old law, we must also realize that we still need the Old Testament. "Whatever was written in earlier times was written for our instruction, so that through perseverance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope" (Rom 15:4).


Armageddon by Dale Smelser (From the "Wildercroft Announcements" http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/6330/)

I received the following: "Are you familiar with the theory/belief, that the battle of Armageddon will be fought at Mt. Megiddo? I have been unable to obtain much information on the place, Mt. Megiddo. I would appreciate information or insight you may have."

Answer: Actually, Megiddo was the name of an ancient fortress city in a plain between the Mt. Carmel Range of mountains along the western edge of Palestine and the hills southwest of the Sea of Galilee. The expression "Armageddon," or "Har Mageddon," literally means "hill of Megiddo." The hill of Megiddo would be one of the hills along that valley or plain of Megiddo, also known as Esdraelon, or Jezreel in the Old Testament.

The battle of Armageddon is over. Revelation pictured Rome in dramatic symbols depicting its different aspects. The Beast out of the sea (Imperial Rome), the Beast out of the land (the religious paganism of Rome), and the great harlot (the immorality and debauchery of Rome). The dragon (Satan) used Rome to try to destroy the kingdom of Christ, his church. Though Rome killed Christians, the gospel finally triumphed over Imperial Rome. The spiritual conflict between Rome and Christ is pictured as climaxing in a great battle at Har Mageddon.

By the use of the name Armageddon, one with a knowledge of the scriptures would think of a decisive battle by that symbolism. That area was known for its decisive battles. Gideon defeated the Midianites there. Deborah defeated Sisera there. Egypt won a great victory there, killing king Josiah. In fact, during World War I, from studying these battles in the Bible, General Allenby planned an attack on the Turks through that plain, surprising and defeating them. So if you wanted to picture a decisive conflict, what better symbolism than Har Mageddon, or one at the hill of Megiddo?

The battle was no more literal than there was a literal beast with 7 heads, or with literal frogs coming out of its mouth (Rev. 16:13-14), or a literal great harlot sitting atop the beast (Rev. 17:3). The climax of the spiritual conflict was spoken of as taking place at Armageddon (Rev. 16:16). I said earlier the battle is past, not future. Rome after all did succumb. The gospel did stand. The battle is described in Revelation 19:11-21.

Now look at the first 3 verses of Revelation. John was being shown a vision of "things shortly to come to pass." The time for them was "at hand." Thus the book was about things that were about to transpire in the persecution of Christians in that day. But they were assured of victory. After that victory, the kingdom of Christ was validated in the world and Christ would extend his reign for "a thousand years" (a long indefinite continuum). After that period the end would come and the judgment would take place, and the universe would pass away (Rev. 20:10-12). So up until that victory and the defeat of the beast (Rome), the book was dealing by its own testimony, with "things shortly to come to pass" in that age. That includes everything in the book up to the 1,000 years in Revelation 20. Everything in the book before that chapter was "shortly to come to pass" when John wrote.

Revelation is not about The U.S., China, the European common market, or any other nation today. There are principles in the book about what eventually will happen to any nation that persecutes God's people as Rome did, but the actual things it discussed were "shortly to come to pass." People have played irresponsible theological games with the book of Revelation, ignoring what it says about itself. Nearly every generation tries to find the fulfillment of the book in its own age, or what they think is about to happen to them. That is foolish and wrong.


The Blessings Of "No" (Author unknown)

I asked God to take away my pride. God said "no".
It is not for me to take away, but for you to give it up.

I asked God to make my handicapped child whole. God said "no".
Her spirit is whole, her body is only temporary.

I asked God to grant me patience. God said "no".
Patience is a by-product of tribulations; it isn't granted, it is earned.

I asked God to give me happiness. God said "no'.
I give you blessings, happiness is up to you.

I asked God to spare me pain. God said "no".
Suffering draws you apart from worldly cares and brings you closer to me.

I asked God to make my spirit grow. God said "no".
You must grow on your own, but I will prune you to make you fruitful.

I asked God for all the things that I might enjoy life. God said "no".
I gave you life so that you may enjoy all the things.

I ask God to help me love others, as much as he loves me.
God said...ahhhh, finally you have the idea!

QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
BIBLE INSIGHT is published for the members of, and visitors to, the Church of Christ at Beverly Shores, Leesburg, Florida, USA.
Carey Dillinger is the editor. He can be reached at the church address or via e-mail: dillinc@yahoo.com


Back To: Volume 5 Index

Back To: Bible inSite Home Page