Gooding, David: 4 - Contending for the Faith

We were considering the concept of fulfillment, particularly in those New Testament scriptures where the New Testament asserts that certain events in the Old Testament that were not in themselves prophecies or predictions were subsequently fulfilled in the life and ministry of our blessed Lord. We found the basic concept to be this, that in those Old Testament events, there were at work certain basic principles that were subsequently expressed at the infinitely higher level of the life and ministry of our Lord. And we asked ourselves, but what is the point of all this? Why do we Gentiles in our day and generation need to know about the Old Testament Passover, for instance? Why is it not enough to tell us that we have been redeemed with the blood of Christ and leave it there and not, uh, in- uh, make us learn all this ancient, uh, history about the Passover in Egypt? And one of the answers to that is this, that in giving us these early examples of the principles of redemption, God provides us with thought models with which to analyze the death of our Lord on our behalf, uh, on the cross. The use of thought models, of course, is widespread amongst pioneer scientists. Physicists examining the insides of an atom are obliged to use mathematics, and they construct for themselves models to think with. They would be the first to tell you that these models of theirs are not to be taken as representing some actual structure within the atom. They are math- models, uh, constructed from experiments by dint of mathematics, but the scientist will use them as a model to think with and to analyze his investigation. More than once it has happened that a mathematical physicist has drawn up a model of the insides of the atom and has predicted on the, uh, uh, and has found on the basis of his model and its symmetries that if the symmetry is correct, there ought to be a particle in such and such a position because it is called for in the model. He has then given it over to the scientist to work the old cyclotrons, and they have pushed innocent atoms into this and bombarded them with this, that, and the other, and lo and behold, yes, they have found a particle in exactly that same position where the model predicted it would be. And nobody laughs at them for constructing models and saying, that's typology. Constructing thought models is an exceedingly important thing as a tool for analysis. And God, in his wisdom in these Old Testament stories, has given us thought models, models to think with, models with which to analyze the great significance of our Lord's death upon the cross. Well, I ask you, gentlemen, what would be the use to you if God merely informed you that Christ died for your sins and left it there? What would you make out of the statement? Died for my sins? How did he die for my sins? Was it my ungodly sins put him to death or something? Or was it he died in protest against my sins? Or... in what sense did he die? It would, I humbly submit, been useless of God just to inform us that Jesus died for our sins. So when Paul states the gospel message, he says it is this in its beginning stage, not merely that Christ died for our sins, but that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures. And as you see from our Lord's conversation with the two disciples on the road to Emmaus, those scriptures according to which our blessed Lord died would have included such things as the scripture relating to Passover. Passover becomes a very useful and powerful analytical tool, a thought model that will help us to analyze one of the elements in the death of Christ when he died for our sin. We shall see it later in a discussion of another biblical book in another connection, perhaps later this evening. But it, uh, gives us the idea that in Israel, in Egypt, Israel stood under the wrath of God. If ever they were to be delivered from Egypt, it was not first and foremost a matter of destroying the power of Pharaoh. It was first and foremost a matter of delivering Israel from the wrath of God. That was what Passover was for. And when they who went by the cross mocked our blessed Lord Jesus and said he saved others himself, he cannot save, they were uttering a complete misconception. You might as well have blamed a Passover lamb for dying and not saving itself. How else could a Passover lamb deliver i- i- i- the Israelite if it didn't die. But that by the side, I quote it as one out of many, many, many thought models that God has constructed for us by means of these Old Testament stories, events, and people. For my own part, I tend to call things like the Passover prototypes, not types. And I have given you an example of what I mean in citing the two kinds of aeroplane, the first early primitive model and the super jet, and have argued that the early model is a prototype of the more modern sophisticated thing. Not a type of it, a prototype, an early example, because herein were expressed the certain basic principles of aerodynamics, aeronautics. These are expressed with more sophistication at the higher level of the jumbo jet. You may well ask, but why do you use the term prototype? Why can't you content yourself with using normal terminology like any normal sane man does, uh, you know, um, a- and call these things types? Well, because in my understanding, types are very different things from prototypes. Let me pass on, therefore, for a moment to talk about types. Uh, and here I have a difficulty, because the Bible does not use the word type in the sense that it is used in common Christian parlance. For instance, I suppose all of us would agree tonight here that the tabernacle was meant to be a type, and in the sense that we all normally mean it, I agree, all right, the tabernacle was a type. Actually, the New Testament never calls it a type. In the New Testament language, the type in c- in concerning the tabernacle was the model or architect's plans that God showed to Moses in the mountain. That was the type. And God commanded Moses to construct the the tabernacle after the type he was shown in the mountain, after the model set of plans he was shown in the mountain. The term the New Testament uses for the tabernacle is not type, but antitype. You'll say the type was the model shown Moses in the mount, the tabernacle being made in correspondence with that is called the antitype. But if you will call it a type, I have no objection, gentlemen, and I shall join you in calling it a type. Just let me add that the word type in Greek that is used in the New Testament is used in a number of different senses. For instance, in one Corinthians chapter ten, a list is given us of the Israel, of Israel's misbehavior in the wilderness and how God had to chastise them. And the apostle adds, now these things are types. These instances of bad behavior in the wilderness are types. Well, he obviously doesn't mean they were prophetic types, prophesying that we should behave in the very same way, and when we do behave in the same way, we should able to sit back and say, look at that type fulfilled, ha, marvelous. Well, of course not. They are not types for us to follow or to conform to. They are examples for us to avoid, in fact. And the better you can break the type in the modern sense, the better. Indeed, the word shouldn't be translated types, it should be translated examples. But as I say, the word type in the New Testament, that is the Greek word tupos, is used in different senses, even within the New Testament. It's not a technical term. Its meaning varies according to the usage and author intends in any one place. If you will insist, however, in normal parlance to call a thing a type, I shall say that the tabernacle is a type. Why do I say that, and what would I mean by it? Well, as I understand scripture, the tabernacle was designed by God himself from first to last, in all its parts, such as are given to us to know, as a way of conveying spiritual truth. And since it was designed by God from first to last, it doesn't break down anywhere, gentlemen, like types are re- are reputedly said to do. It was planned by God from start to finish. That's a very different thing from, say, the story of Joseph, or the story of Abraham and Isaac upon Mount Moriah. They weren't designed by God from start to finish. They involved men making their own decisions in their lives and doing this and doing that and doing the other. In their lives, you will find a lot of things that are not meant to be types, things to be avoided. Things, for instance, in which they were very different from the Son of God, and therefore, in that sense, cannot be in any sense said to be types of him. And yet, and yet, and yet, of course, in their lives, you will see at certain junctures principles being expressed and enacted at their lowly level that were subsequently to be enacted at the highest level in the life and ministry of our Lord Jesus. I should call those historical events prototypes, therefore, rather than types. To come back to the tabernacle as a type, I shall not need you to remind you how the New Testament confirms this. It says the tabernacle had a double function. Read the Epistle to the Hebrews, chapter eight, will declare to you that the tabernacle was made as a copy of things in the heavens, designed of God by its symbolism to bring the great realities of the eternal world down within the mental and imaginative grasp of Israelites while they were on in the desert, in symbols that they could begin to understand and that would give them some concept of the great eternal realities. It was a copy of things in the heavens. For instance, if you went inside the holy place of the tabernacle, standing on the left hand side was the lampstand. The lampstand was a very interesting object. It wasn't a seven-branched lampstand, as some people will tell you. It was a six-branched lampstand. It had a base, it had a central shaft, and it had six branches coming out of the central shaft. It was made, in fact, to look like a tree. The spread of its base was like the spread of this tree trunk that you see here on my right, that is used as a support for the lintel of this fireplace. And you'll see the base of the trunk of the tree coming out where the roots went out from the base of the trunk into the ground. The tabernacle was made with a base to remind you of the roots and the trunk of a tree. Its central stem was the tree, its central shaft was the tree trunk. The six, uh, branches were the branches of the tree. The tree was a stylized almond tree. It had in its branches, as in its central shaft, it had, uh, buds, it had, uh, bumps, you know, uh, that were represented the buds of an almond tree. Knobs, the Bible calls them. And then it had, uh, almond flowers and blossoms. And then shapes like an almond. All three stages of life all at once in this tree. Of course, you don't find a tree like that in nature. I wish you would, wouldn't you? We who only know human life ourselves, uh, I've often wished I had all stages of it at once. I look at the little children and see their boundless energy, and they haven't, uh, not blessed with a lot of sense yet. And as I see them using their energy on this, that, and the other nonsense, I say to myself, la, uh, you'll see. When I had their energy, I hadn't got any sense, and now I've got some sense, I haven't got the energy. And then I look at the, uh, the handsome young gentlemen of twenty two, twenty three, and twenty four, such as sit before me, and I say, look at how handsome they were. But I wasn't handsome, I was handsome too once, you wouldn't believe that. Well, tolerably, you'll see. But in those days, I hadn't got maturity. Let's hope now I have a little maturity, but as you see, I'm no longer handsome. What would you give to have all stages of life at once? Is there a world where all stages of life coexist? In the ancient tabernacle, by having one piece of furniture that represented a tree with all stages of life, God was bringing down an eternal reality in symbolic fashion so that people could understand it and begin to get a concept of heaven. That tree of, uh, tree in, uh, the tabernacle, with all its stages of life, was, of course, a symbolic representation of him who is the tree of life. To him that overcomes will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the paradise of God. That tree, however, was also the bearer of the light in the holy place, for on the end of its six branches and upon the top of its central shaft were seven lamps put. And so in Israel, you had that interesting phenomenon that the lampstand was, in it was life, and yet that life was the light. And the symbol wasn't accidental, gentlemen. For of our blessed Lord, it is said in John's Gospel chapter one, in the context of creation, all things were made by him, and without him was not anything made that was. And should you pause to ask, and pray tell me, where did he get the life from? This universe teems with life, doesn't it? Kangaroo life and butterfly life and caterpillar life and human life. Where did the word of God get all that life from to make all these different kinds of life? And the answer is he didn't get it from anywhere. The very next verse tells us, in him was life. He's a source of life. And then John adds, not only in him was life, but that life was the light of men. And tempting as it is, I mustn't yield to temptation. It's not a Christian thing to do. I mustn't go on to expound that and what John is saying, but merely point out the fact. The remarkable, uh, matching between that ancient symbolic tree of life, which was the lampstand, and our blessed Lord. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. That's not an accident. It was designed from the very start by God to be a symbolic representation of the great eternal reality. In that, uh, tabernacle, and I can't resist pointing that out too, there was, of course, the lampstand, if that be the building. There was the lampstand this side, and here there was the table. Yeah. And if I'm anywhere near the truth in saying that this lampstand was a symbolic tree of life, it was also the bearer of the light, and that it reminds us of our blessed Lord, in whom was life, the source of life. When you step across the other side, you come to a table, it had twelve loaves, twelve loaves of bread on it. And bread, gentlemen, is not a source of life, is it? You didn't get your physical life by eating bread and butter. Surely you didn't. You got your physical life from your parents. They in turn got it from God, of course, eventually. Bread and butter isn't the source of life. But having got physical life, you need bread, don't you? Because while bread isn't a source of life, it's a means of life, yes? And if you're going to be, uh, uh, get life and stay alive, you'll need both. You need a source of life, and you need the means of life. With superb accuracy, God designs the symbolism of his house, that you will see the two vessels that stand opposite one another in the holy place represent, one, the source of life, and two, the means of life. There's a rightness in that, isn't there? Because you've got to have birth. It is true in physical life, you don't get life by eating bread. You have to receive life from its source, but once you've got it, you do need to eat bread. It is true in spiritual realm, gentlemen. You will need first to come to Christ as the source of life and receive the gift of life forthwith and immediately. But having received the gift of life from Christ, the source of life, you will now need Christ as the means of life. Of course you will. As you have often preached it, regardless of the tabernacle, from St. John's Gospels, chapter five and six. For When you are in chapter five, you underline and preach and thump the desk at that point, don't you, gentlemen? And you say, listen to what the Lord is saying. As the Father has life in himself, he is source of life, so hath he given the to to the Son to have life in himself. A magnificent thing. Christ, the source of life. The day is coming when the dead that are in the grave shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and they shall come forth. Source of life. Ah, but John five, as you have pointed out to many a congregation, is followed by John six. Well, most people agree. A- a- and, and, and, and John six presents our blessed Lord Jesus not as a source of life, of course not, but as the means of life. He's the bread of life that came down from heaven. Well, of course he is. And the thing is exact, you need no one to prove it to you, because logically that is so. In life, you've got to have source and means. In physical life, I mean, and so in spiritual life, and so in the symbolism of this tabernacle designed by God to slide rule accuracy. If you want to call this a type, you have my permission. It's an antitype, really, but there you are, never mind. And it was a copy of things in the heavens, and many another accuracy it has of that order. But then the Epistle to the Hebrews, in subsequent chapters, points out that the tabernacle had another function. It was not only a copy of things in the heavens, so alerting the Israelite in those far off days to the tree of life which is in the paradise of God. But it was also, says the Epistle to the Hebrews, a shadow of things to come, of the good things to come. That is, it was a shadow once more designed by God, a shadow in advance of those good things that would come into our world with the birth and incarnation of our blessed Lord Jesus, his life, his death, his resurrection, and ascension to God's right hand. Shadows of the good things to come. Now here, gentlemen, by definition, the ancient Israel would have not, would not have seen that they were shadows of good things to come, would they? Well, a few very spiritually minded people might have seen it, but for the most part, no, they would have been content to use the tabernacle as a copy of things in the heavens, telling them of the present realities of, of heaven. It was only when the blessed Lord Jesus actually came, and you could look at the details of his life, death, and resurrection, and ascension, and looking back upon the past, you would have seen, hello! Those Old Testament tabernacle things were obviously shadows of the good things to come. And what marvelous and accurate shadows they were. Last week I was, uh, pointing out to to some learned men at another place the accuracy of the very elementary things in this tabernacle. Let me just mention that again for the sake of those who were not here. When you came into the tabernacle court, here's the building up here, here is the court all the way round. The first big piece of furniture was altar here, and the second was laver here. You'll see. At this altar there was cleansing by blood, and here there was cleansing by water. And you can't ponder that very many seconds, but what you'll observe that in Christianity too, there is offered us cleansing by blood and cleansing by water, yes? One John one verse seven, the blood of Jesus Christ cleanses us from all sin. Ephesians chapter five, Christ loved the church and gave himself for her that he might cleanse her by the washing of water. That is no accident, gentlemen. But as I say, the mere observation of this, of course, can immediately act for us as a thought model, can't it? Why do we Christians need both kinds of cleansing? If you want a little private exercise that will make you scratch your head, put the question to, in all innocence, of course, and with gentlemanly politeness, to your Christian friends, you see, and say, I was thinking the other day, you know, in the tabernacle there are two vessels for cleansing, not just one. One is, uh, cleansing by blood, and the other exists for cleansing by water. And you say, I've just been observing that in the New Testament we read of cleansing by blood and cleansing by water. Uh, why do we need two types of cleansing? Ask it, gentlemen, and see what answers you get or what non-answers you. Why? Because people know the answers, but they've never thought of it. And they haven't been in the habit of analyzing their Christian faith to, in too greater detail. Why do we need two kinds of cleansing? So here is this ancient thing designed by God to be a shadow of coming good things. And it points to our Lord's death at Calvary, of course, where he shed his blood that we might be forgiven. Blood of bulls and ge- uh, uh, uh, uh, and animals cleanses to the sanctifying of the flesh. How much more shall the blood of Christ cleanse your conscience? The blood of Christ is not some detergent, gentlemen. Nor, nor is it, uh, uh, magic, like some people seem to think, the kind of magic where when the devil smells blood, he runs off in fright. That's primitive magic, gentlemen. The blood of Christ is a legal concept. Our sinning devours our conscience with guilt, because our conscience witnesses we've broken the law, and our conscience cannot be satisfied until the demands of the law have been carried out. The blood of Christ cleanses our conscience because the blood is the token of his death, which death paid the penalty of the law, and thus sets us free from guilt. And the water? Pray, what is that? Cleansing by water. That the New Testament talks of it is plain. Hebrews chapter ten, which is describing how we may enter the very holiest of all of God's presence. It says, let us draw near in true heart in full assurance of faith, our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, that is by the blood of Christ, and our bodies bathed all over with pure water. So what is this bathing in pure water? To help us, just let's do a historical, uh, uh, uh, uh, experiment just for the moment. Historically, the great altar represents our Lord's death at Calvary. Yes, this is the cross. As John the Baptist would have said, behold the Lamb of God, which takes away the sin of the world. But John also said, when asked, are you the Christ, said, no, of course I'm not. I baptize you in water. There comes one after me, mightier than I. He shall baptize you with, or in the Holy Spirit. And if Calvary was where our Lord shed his blood, Pentecost was the occasion when he baptized his people in the Holy Spirit as he poured out the Holy Spirit. Us fulfilling John's statement. Behold the Lamb of God, which takes away the sin of the world by his blood at Calvary. This is he that baptizes not in water, but in the Holy Spirit. The counterpart then to water, Holy Spirit. And this historically was Pentecost. You will hear Paul talking in these terms in Titus chapter three. We ourselves were foolish, disobedient, hateful, hating one another, living in malice and envy. A right rotten lot of characters we were, tight as old boys, says Paul. And how did we get saved? Well, he doesn't say that after the mercy of God our Savior appeared, not by works done in righteous which, righteousness which we did ourselves, but according, uh, by the blood of Christ he saved us. For Paul isn't thinking of guilt. He's thinking of all those knots and twists and perversions in our characters. Hateful, hating one another, full of envy and malice and spite. The blood of Christ doesn't cleanse that, gentlemen. Blood of Christ cleanses guilt. We'll need something else to deal with these twists and gnarled knots and tangled characters that we have. Saved us, says Paul, by the washing of regeneration. That's how it happened. The new birth, if you like, the new life brought about by the Holy Spirit of God, by the washing of regeneration and the constant renewal thereafter of the Holy Spirit. So this l- l- lay altar here, this laver here, historically they stand for Calvary and then Pentecost. In our experience, the blood of Christ applied to us, and then the gracious, uh, Holy Spirit poured out upon us. If you come in through them, you will pass the lampstand and the table, which are on your right and left, but on the immediate road into the presence of God, you will come here, just before the veil, to the incense altar, at which the priest stood to offer incense at the time of prayer, and from its usage in Old Testament times of prayer and intercession becomes, of course, a shadow of our Lord's intercession for us. He ever lives to make intercession. Behold, gentlemen, the accuracy of it historically. This is Calvary, this is Pentecost after his ascension, and this is his present ministry, of course. Little question, gentlemen, just as an aside. How did our Moses know to get it right? I've often pondered that. Hm. It would have made very little practical difference, would it, if he had taken the laver and put it over here, or, or put the laver first and the older second. It would have made no practical difference. It would have ruined what you call the type. How did poor Ron Moses know how to get it the right way round? Well, you have your answer, and it's perfectly true. You'll see. Which reminds me of the function. One of the functions of tabernacle, of type in your sense of the word, as a shadow of the good things to come. It is useless, sen- gentlemen, and a little bit foolish to say, oh, it can't have meant that because no Jew at the time would have seen it meant that, but that's a silly observation, really, gentlemen, excuse my frank wordage. No Jew at the time was expected to see it anyway. He knew this thing as a copy of heavenly things. It was only after the Savior came that now he was asked to look back and see how the Old Testament was a shadow of the coming good things. And you say, what's the use of that? Well, as we've already suggested, as a thought model, but also for its evidential value, for purposes of identification. Here you are, for instance, let me take a rough analogy, it isn't absolutely hundred percent. Let me take a rough analogy. Here you are on a business trip, uh, to Paris or somewhere, to some Italian city or city in Belgium or something, and after the day's business is over, you wander out of the hotel at night, in the cool of the evening, down the street to look at the great buildings in the center of the city. You say to yourself, what is that big building there? Looks very ornate. What is it? Is it the Parliament building, perhaps? Or is it one of the local museums? Or... could it be the law courts? Or... could it be the general post office, as in Madrid? Or the local railway station? Or in some European cities, the post office and the railway station are the most magnificent buildings in sight. Which will it be? And there's nobody around to tell you, so how will you do to identify the building? There it stands. So you get out your traveler's guide, and you turn up, uh, center of the town. There are pictures of buildings. You look down them, and you look at the thing, and oh, here's the one. Oh, yes, it's the, it's the, it's the, uh, General Post Office here. Yes, okay. Marvelous. Uh, do you see what you're doing? Somebody took a picture of that. You had it in your book. The picture in your book wasn't the building. You point to it and say, oh, that's the post office. It ain't the post office, gentlemen. It's some ink on a page. They are taken by camera and the light and shadow and transferred to a page. But it's jolly useful when you come to identifying this building. Or you see the picture taken in advance of your arrival. And by comparing the reality with the picture, you know what the reality is. How would you know Jesus Christ is the Son of God, gentlemen? Come, come, how would you know it? You say ten thousand and one ways, yes, and this way amongst them, surely. You can compare our blessed Lord with the ancient pictures, and they match. That's not an accident, of course. Pray don't be ashamed to use this tabernacle for the purpose for which it was given, a shadow of good things to come. It will not only act as a thought model by which you may analyze profound New Testament doctrine, it will have the effect on your congregation when they see the point of buttress- buttressing their faith, one in the person of Christ, they say, yes, Jesus Christ is the fulfillment of those God-given Old Testament pictures. And it will have a converse effect. It will say, yes, and how could Moses have known that? How could any Jew at the time have known it? Well, then how does it come to be such an accurate picture? And you'll say, instinctively you'll say, well, of course, this thing was inspired by God. Our job as teachers, gentlemen, is not merely to impart information, but in the imparting and expounding of God's word, to cause people to see and sense that this is the inspired word of the living God. So develop faith in God's word. And this is a means to that very end. So yes, this is a type, in the full sense of the word type, if you must use the term, that is something designed by God from start to finish in all its parts. First as a shadow of the good things to come, and then as, uh, sorry, uh, uh, first as a copy of things in the heavens that brought these great spiritual lessons down to Israel as they were in the desert. But second, what they never would have seen at the time, as a shadow of the coming good things, which they only realized when the good things eventually came. So then we have thought of, uh, fulfillment, and we have thought of what I call prototype, or and, uh, now we must eventually go on to other categories. But I'm being signaled that our time is up, and therefore at this point I cease.