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.
Excellent insight!
