Featured The New and True Exodus....In Jesus....Central Gospel Truth

Hello to you, Iconoclast (and everyone else)! I apologize for jumping in without a greeting.

In reading more of the thread, it looks like you are "just" demonstrating that the OT exodus/deliverance begun under Moses and continued under Joshua, is a huge type of our own journey conducted by Jesus (Y'shua). With this I agree--it is prophetic as well as didactic. This is not a new teaching, but central to the NT. And it should be unsurprising to Christians, as fulfilled prophecy is a uniquely Christian hallmark. It might be called "New Testament Theology of the Old Testament." Something like what Martin said--"...[W]e should seek to find Christ everywhere in the Bible."

 

OT themes are found through the whole of Scripture, as the Bible books are a thematic unity.
For this reason I'm mystified about a professing Bible believer rejecting the Exodus motif being found in the NT.

 

It goes ZOOOOOM! Right over their heads! And these are not just 'any ol' professing Bible believers, these guys are supposedly 'teachers of Israel'.

 

It's just astounding, isn't it? All these rainbow screeds in this thread, and apparently no clue about New Exodus scholarship:

Andreas Kostenberger The Story of the Incarnation (Crossway, 2015):

"The notion that Jesus leads a “new exodus” appears in all four New Testament Gospels and the book of Acts. Representative works on this topic include Rikki E. Watts, Isaiah's New Exodus in Mark, Biblical Studies Library (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001); and David W. Pao, Acts and the Isaianic New Exodus, Biblical Studies Library (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002)."

 

It seems to me that you're the one muddying the waters here on this thread. Did you even bother to look at the link Icon provided in post #4? You know, the article from "Preaching Source", "a text-driven resource of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary". Your 'Rikki Watts' did not write that.

The New and Greater Exodus: The Exodus Pattern in the New Testament | Preaching Source

 

I did, did you notice as I did, that it was a 1977, pre Conservative Resurgence article written by Fred Fisher? Of Golden Gate Seminary?

The Conservative Resurgence: Reflections of a Foot Soldier

"First of all, the liberalism was real and widespread, especially in our seminaries....Dr. Fred Fisher of Golden Gate Seminary wrote...that the Bible is not the revelation of God but contains the revelation."

A brief history of the Southern Baptist Convention

"Books have been published denying the Bible’s inerrancy, the historicity of the creation account....One major controversy was over Ralph Elliott’s 1961 book The Message of Genesis. The work fully embraced the Graf-Wellhausen hypothesis and often offered interpretations directly opposed to the clear meaning of the text. In 1970 Broadman published Fred Fisher’s book Is The Bible a Human Book? which is clearly written from a neo-orthodox perspective."

Has Our Theology Changed: Southern Baptist Thought Since 1845?

"Fisher's next book, The Purpose of God and the Christian Life applied the thesis of Christianity Is Personal to the Christian doctrine of God's purpose of salvation....Pledging to interpret the doctrine solely on the basis of New Testament study, Fisher hoped to offer a balanced critique of both Calvinism and Arminianism, while at the same time offering a more biblically sound alternative."

 

If it's so bad and so wrong why does SBTS still carry it?

 

I'll be concise, which means this may not sound as conciliatory as I'd like for it to.
1. Bringing in a "bugaboo" such as replacement theology could be called either a red herring or an attempt at guilt by association.
2. Bringing up personalities who held similar views in order to reject the Exodus motif reminds me of the genetic fallacy or, again, guilt by association.
What saith the Scriptures?

God called:
Light out of darkness
Dry land out of water
Abraham out of Ur
Israel out of Egypt
His children out of the power of darkness into the kingdom of His Son
His children out of darkness into light
And will call His people out of Babylon
And will call His people unto Himself to be with Him forever.

The Scriptures are filled with the Exodus motif. What Biblical reason is there for rejecting it? Jesus came to fulfill the Scriptures, in promises, prophecies, and in figures. We should expect recurring themes to be found, as God's Word is a coherent unity.

 

I liked your post but disagree with this. He's already called His people out of mystery Babylon, i.e., Apostate Judaism.

 

This post is not meant to be critical, or in any manner dispute what Icon has presented.

It is to bring two small opinions of rather minor importance.



Is the term "new and true exodus" supposed to be something of latest discovery?

This thread is not highly instructive and certainly well presented.

However, the instruction of this thread is not "new" and some title of "New and True Exodus" is not really new and has always been true. So, I'm a bit confused about the term "new and true" being used. Again, that is not in any manner meant to disparage or demean the presentation, but I read trying to find something new, only to read agreement with pretty much all presented as having already taught in the past.

The most extreme conservative or liberal teachers usually teach (in some manner at least) the exodus lead by Moses was a type of the journey and experience of many people, not just believers, the church, the Christ, but is used by many even outside the faith. The civil rights era was typically presented as such an exodus.

Here is a bit of words about typology as used in the Scriptures that all must be cautioned and aware.

All typology is nothing but a picture of what is real, and care must be taken in combining presentations of typology inappropriately.

For example: A series of crime scene photos may not represent the same crime or, if they do, may not represent the same aspects of the same crime. The OT typology may represent various aspects of either the same or a completely different reality.

Not all exodus events are types. Not all types in the OT Israeli exodus are of the same reality. Some may be applicable to the Christ, some may be applicable to the believer, and some to the unsaved, and some to the worship and some...

What is and must be guarded, in a thread of this magnitude, is application to prophetic statements of the future. As typology is only a picture, and not a movie, it is important to keep the background in focus as well as the central figure.

For example: Here might be a comparison of picture and movie presentation of typology. Christ stated that the sign of Jonah was a type. The picture was three nights in the belly of the fish. Basically, that was all that the type was to portray. The movie version would be to include all that lead up to the event, and take into account what happened during and immediately following the fishy experience. That is not using typology appropriately. Typology is not a movie, it is not an allegory. One must be careful in assembling the typology together and not put a picture in a wrong grouping.

The exodus contains typology, but the exodus was not a typology movie.
Too often, in "exodus" typology, movie version presentation is attempted. The journey itself becomes the story rather than the true focus of the typology.

The world does this movie presentation version by using the exodus as a journey from one estate to another (again the civil rights concern of the 60's).

The journey of the believer may echo that of the Exodus, but the exodus was not the believer. We may be presented in a type, but the experience and circumstance of our journey is one who is endowed with the Holy Spirit. We are a better then Moses, for we do not visit a burning bush, climb a mountain, sit in the doorway of inquiry... to visit with God, but may humbly and boldly enter into His conversations with others to plead for our cause.

Therefore, I present a caution that in my opinion is often overlooked, and in the exuberance of attempting to put the "new" into what is "old" and separate what is "true" from what is alloy can be forgotten.

Just my opinion in which I am unanimous with myself.

 

The very reason I believe, by faith, has the meaning of, because of Christ, the faith to come.

As is spoken of in Gal 3:23-25. The faith which brought the righteousness of God, which could be imputed unto us and by which we could be born into the kingdom of God.

The faith by which we could receive the promise of the Spirit V 14.

By faith, they were kept under the law.
Through, the faith, that has come we can Exodus sin, into the kingdom of God.

JMHO

 

....rollingonfloorguffawing!!!....

 

"New Exodus Theology" is nothing really new, but a revival of that which the typical Jews were expecting of the Messiah:

The king that would release them from the burden of the oppressors,
The return of the glory days of the strength of David and the wonders of Solomon,
The construction of a vast new Temple complex consistent with that portrayed in the prophets,
The physical change of the land that it be released from the curse and blossom with great harvests,
The new presentation of the temple rituals that would bringing homage and tribute to the Messiah.​

In all these matters (and more) resided the thinking of the typical Jews, and one reason the disciples were baffled at Christ's statements of His death.

Such promises are still held by the Orthodox Jews and those who long for the Messiah repeated point to the same OT promises they consider will become a reality. Such promises are also inclusive in the premillennialism thinking, unlike all other perspectives.

When the King of King does return in full glory, they shall morn, and then also rejoice. For the promises made thousands of years ago in our perspective are often diminished with time, but from that of Heaven only enhanced by the anticipation.

What is also true is that the typical teaching ministry of the church has been so sensational oriented, has been so shallow, has been so fruitless, that the typical assembly participant thinks that the theology is "new."

But as the wisdom of Ecclesiastes, "There is nothing new under the sun..."