Category: Uncategorized

Jesus Christ; the seed of the serpent

This publication was written by a Christadelphian from a Christadelphian viewpoint. It does not reflect the views of the Christadelphian movement nor any groups therein.

Index:

1. Introduction
2. Conflict
3. Atonement
4. Snakes
5. Christ represented by a serpent
6. Doctrine
7. Jesus struggle against the serpent
8. Jesus portrayed with sin-nature (types/allegories of the destruction of sin-nature)
9. The conception of Jesus
10. The two-fold origin of Christ (son of man/son of God)
11. Division
12. The outworking of Jesus having the characteristics of 2 natures
13. Types & allegories
14. The outworking of the wounds of Genesis 3:15 in Jesus
15. Spirit & flesh
16. Christ the temple
17. Moses
18. Dual types
19. Incidental observations
20. Possible objections
21. Practical/personal applications
22. Concluding comments

contact: simonandanthea@ntlworld.com

Please do not reproduce this material without permission.

Jesus Christ; the seed of the serpent

Introduction

This theme interested me for some while. So when invited to talk on a subject  of my choice at the Sewstern Study Camp in 2006 I used the opportunity to put  some material down on paper.  This is an attempt at a more coherent and comprehensive study. The concept put forward here will seem radical but I’m convinced is properly founded in scripture. That is; the two seeds prophesied in Genesis 3 v 15 both have fulfilment in the person of Jesus Christ. He was prophesied to be both the seed of the woman and also the seed of the serpent. The two promised seed coincide in Jesus; the son of God and the son of man.

“And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel”. Genesis 3 v 15 (Authorised version)

 “and enmity I put between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; he doth bruise thee – the head, and thou dost bruise him – the heel”. (Young’s literal translation).

On a simple level, the prophecy does seem to call for a literal person as being seed of the serpent.

“And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel”. (NIV)

In suggesting Jesus to be the seed of the serpent doesn’t mean the term is used exclusively of him and somehow excludes its application to others. On the contrary, it appears that anyone who displays sin-nature can be likened to the seed of the serpent and therefore among it’s figurative descendants. The analogy is applied in varying instances to various individuals or groups in scripture.  Israel’s leaders are of course likened in this way by Jesus;

“Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it” (John 8 v 44).

Similarly, anyone benefiting from the work of Messiah will have a victory imputed to them similar to what Jesus achieved in the destruction of sin-nature in himself;

“the God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet”. Rom 16 v 20

This is normally thought to refer to Judaizers within the ecclesia but there’s no support for this, certainly not in this context. A better application would apply to a personal victory in relation to one’s self, rather than the external enemy in the form of Judaizers.

I am not ‘well-read’, but I’m not aware that anyone else, Christadelphian or otherwise, has put forward the interpretation that Jesus is the seed of the serpent.  Any unfamiliar interpretation will arouse skepticism especially something which goes to the core of such fundamental truths. I have given credit where I have knowingly drawn on the work of others but, if I appear to plagarize the ideas of anyone, then it is coincidental.

The concept is obviously not based on any individual passage but by cross-referencing scripture with scripture and bringing together verses apparently not brought together before. There’s considerable emphasis on typology and allegory which isn’t ‘everyone’s cup of tea’ although undoubtedly a device used by God.  Many of the interpretations put forward will not be to the taste of the majority but I hope this material will be given a fair hearing and will encourage further consideration.

Just to be clear, this exposition should not be taken in any way to denigrate the life and work of Jesus Christ, but to reinforce the magnitude of what he achieved in carrying out the will of his Father.

Conflict

Since the fall of mankind in Eden, the earth has been subject to the curse. One of the symptoms of this is conflict.  The tectonic plates of the earth are in constant conflict. The animal and plant kingdoms are all in a constant struggle for survival and dominance. This order is in itself a sign.

“The creation waits in eager expectation for the sons of God to be revealed. For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God.

We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time”.  Rom 8 v 19-22

The proliferation of earthquakes is a sign of the end of this age and indicative of a world increasingly at variance to God’s ways.

The origin of conflict in the natural world is traced back to the curse in Eden and, moreover, points to the ultimate struggle – the conflict between the spiritual and the natural; which conflict is played out in human kind.

“For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want”. Galatians 5 v 17

The scriptures, in one sense, are an account of how this conflict has been, and is being, played out God’s purpose and looks to the future when that conflict will be resolved – as intended from the outset.  One of the battlefields of this conflict – in fact the key battlefield –  is in the person of Jesus Christ.

It also follows, as Jesus said, his teaching would also trigger conflict so a similar experience would be played out among his followers.

“Do you think I came to bring peace on earth?  No, I tell you, but division. From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law”.  Luke 12 v 51-53

Clearly, not all conflict in history or in the world at large can be characterized as being between the natural against the spiritual – far from it.  People and societies the world over experience conflict and it’s generally the case that  such conflict is motivated by human instinct and little different from the animal kingdom.  For example, none of the factions at war in Northern Ireland during the 20th century represented the spiritual side; even though, ironically, each purported to be carrying out their own particular struggle in the name of Jesus Christ.

Atonement

It’s often said by Bible scholars  that atonement literally means “at one-ment”.  It describes reconciliation between a person and God. This has been achieved (at least initially) through the sacrificial work of Jesus in achieving peace, “Shalom”, for himself and then for others.  Again, as often said, not the cessation of war but a oneness of mind and purpose as the Hebrew word infers i.e. true fellowship.

“For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near.  For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit.”

Ephesians 2 v 14-18

The “one new man” may in fact be a reference to Jesus himself – having resolved an internal conflict whereby his human sin-nature has been quashed, leaving only a spiritual man that God raised.  The curtain of the temple was torn in two at the moment of his death, denoting this division.

This study considers the reasons and implications of this work.

Snakes

There are reckoned to be more than 3,500 species of snake.  Each an example of intricate design. They are widely feared, particularly by the female section of the human race which in itself a little remarkable.

Eve was tempted by a serpent which, it is reasonable to assume, was a snake -or something akin to a snake.  It is not known what particular species was involved nor whether any of its literal ancestors are around today.  We are not told whether it was venomous, but it’s hard to imagine that it was capable of physical harm in a creation which was “very good”.

However, at some stage that was to change and, if the serpent had not previously been venomous, it presumably was made so as a result of the curse.

Because sin and its consequence, death, came about through belief in the lie of the serpent, so the snake has become a symbol of sin in the Bible. It is also phallic in shape and has a voracious appetite – able to consume prey a lot large than its own body size.  Not coincidences.

As if to reinforce the connection with sin, the most deadly substance occurring in the natural world with, one exception, is snake venom. (Apparently there is a South American tree frog which is more poisonous although I’d be surprised if it had snake-like aggression and it doesn’t bite). The snakes which beset the camp of Israel in the wilderness had the ability to kill by their bite.  Eve’s tempter may not have been venomous but its words were poisonous.

In the natural world, about 200 to 400 species of snake are venomous. Snake venom is such a complicated substance that it cannot be replicated in the laboratory. It would be interesting to hear how evolutionists explain that. One article published on the internet (source unknown) discusses its complexity and says;

“Snake venom is a cocktail of hundreds or thousands of different proteins and enzymes. “Snake venom, the most complex of all poisons is a mixture of enzymatic and non-enzymatic compounds as well as other non-toxic proteins including carbohydrates and metals. There are over 20 different enzymes including….. phospholipases A2, B, C, D hydrolases, phosphatases (acid as well as alkaline), proteases, esterases, acetylcholinesterase, transaminase, hyaluronidase, phosphodiesterase, nucleotidase and ATPase and nucleosidases (DNA & RNA).

Another conundrum for evolutionists is to consider the mechanics of how venom causes harm.  There are various types which are categorised depending upon the effect upon the victim. This involves anything from generalised swelling up to direct interference with the nervous system and paralysis of vital muscles. This is instantly fatal in the case of Cardio Toxins, such as in the case of the Black Mamba, which act directly on the heart.

The more one reads into the subject the more intricate it is and the precise way each type of venom targets minute processes within the physiology of its prey.  Logically, these can only be the product of design by an intellect which has intimate knowledge of the physiology of mammals in order to incisively intercept vital processes. To any objective mind this declares a Designer.  However, that by the way.

More to the point, it would be difficult to find a more potent symbol of sin, and  the effects of sin, than snakes.  As snake venom will stop your heart beating so, in the process of time, will sin and sin nature.

Christ represented by a serpent!  The greatest Paradox

How ironic therefore that Jesus was represented by a snake!

“Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life”.  

John 3 v 14

Jesus referred to the enacted parable by Moses during the wilderness journey which he applied to himself.

“Then the LORD sent venomous snakes among them; they bit the people and many Israelites died.   The people came to Moses and said, “We sinned when we spoke against the LORD and against you. Pray that the LORD will take the snakes away from us.”So Moses prayed for the people.  The LORD said to Moses, “Make a snake and put it up on a pole; anyone who is bitten can look at it and live.”   So Moses made a bronze snake and put it up on a pole. Then when anyone was bitten by a snake and looked at the bronze snake, he lived”. Num 21 v 5

 This was not just a snake, but a bronze snake- bronze also being a well-known symbol of sin. Surely, there is no other symbol of sin more potent than this in the Bible.

Here then is a paradox – “a seemingly absurd or self-contradictory statement or proposition that may in fact be true. Or a person or thing that combines contradictory features or qualities”. (Oxford dictionary).

And what an incredible paradox!  –  that Jesus, the only perfect man who never committed any sin, should be represented by the most potent symbol of sin.

How can this be? Why does God represent His sinless son like this?

Instinctively, we may know the answer but familiarity can mean we overlook the full implications. Although partly of Divine origin, having God as his Father, Jesus was also partly of human origin.  He had characteristics from his Father but he also inherited sin-nature from his mother “of the seed of David after the flesh” being descended from Adam through Mary.  “As in Adam all die” (I Cor 15 v 22) and Jesus most certainly was “in Adam” due to his birth via his human mother. In the context of the brazen serpent, his human sin-nature is put under the microscope and magnified seemingly out of all proportion – almost a caricature.

The traditional Christadelphian view of the brazen serpent tends to limit the parallel as being indicative of the act of Jesus being lifted up. However, this is selective reading and inadequate.  Admittedly, Jesus seems to emphasise the act of lifting up (“as the snake in the desert was lifted up so the son of man must be lifted up”) but to limit the parallel to that, and that alone, is unsustainable.

The brazen serpent was elevated to be visible to those who needed saving from their plight. Jesus was also elevated to be visible. He was lifted up so that those of his day could witness his public humiliation – but they weren’t saved by seeing him.  Emphasis is made of his work of “drawing to him” by his being lifted up but this cannot be literal.  It is those who figuratively look up to the sacrifice of Jesus and are drawn to him in faith who are offered salvation.  “If I be lifted up I will draw all men unto me” (John 12:32).  The focus on the lifting up cannot mean the parallel stops there.  Why would God instruct Moses to make a serpent of bronze with such pressing urgency with people dying in the camp?  Moses had to go to a lot of time and trouble to make it – no easy feat in the wilderness, either to find the materials or fashion them.  The remedy to the bite of the fiery serpents was specific and purposeful.  So with the anti-typical serpent.  Although the lifting up of Jesus was significant – more so is the fact that he was made sin for us (“God made him who had no sin to be sin for us” 2 Cor 5 v 21) and thereby what was accomplished in his death.

It’s clear the brazen serpent represented sin and it’s unavoidable that it represented the work of Jesus on the cross.  If God wasn’t intending this He could have used an entirely different symbol.  Why weren’t the people invited to look to Aaron’s rod and be saved?;  or a stone?; or a lion?; or a lamb?; or a fish? or any other of the many symbols used to represent Jesus?

Much is made of the fact that Jesus was the long promised seed of the woman, a saviour. Yet it is exactly by this means that he inherited the requisite sin-nature over which he was to win victory. Jesus enjoyed an unparalleled intimacy and oneness with His father in the days of his mortal life but there was another side of the coin in the separation that existed between human nature and the Divine. This is seen in the enacted parable of the brazen serpent.

On a practical level, this illustrates how God views sin-nature. Even His own son (in whom He was “well pleased”) was estranged from Him even to this degree.  Evidently, there could be no compromise on this issue and hence the seemingly extreme measures needed to remedy the situation through the sacrificial work of Jesus.

What follows is a consideration of some aspects and interpretations which flow from this realisation which, not surprisingly, is a recurring theme from Genesis through to Revelation.

Doctrine

Why?

Why was Jesus born with sin-nature?

For good reason.  Essential in fact.  It was necessary for him to have sin- nature in order to be able to destroy it.

“For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil”.

I John 3 v 8

To destroy the devil, human sin-nature (or ‘sin in the flesh’), it had to be within him. It permeated his being, his DNA. Thereby he felt it’s effects, but also was able to resist its promptings and eventually took it to the grave.

“Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil”.

Hebrews 2 v 14

In contrast to the way Jesus was born, Adam was made from the dust of the ground. This is an important distinction. God could have created His son in the same way; directly from the dust and, thereby, make His son ‘very good’ like the first Adam.  However, clearly that would not have fulfilled the necessary intention for Jesus to inherit sin-nature from his mother.

Jesus took sin-nature into the grave and was victorious.  To play devil’s advocate (no pun intended), one could say that all humans take sin-nature into the grave so what did Jesus achieve?  The distinction of course is that no other person has been able to avoid allowing it to have mastery over their thoughts, speech and actions. Jesus was the one and only exception.

If sin leads to death it might be asked; why did Jesus die?  It is sometimes quoted that ‘death could not hold him’ but he inherited the death penalty from Adam the same as everyone else. It was not wrong that Jesus should experience death.  Though he hadn’t become liable for the penalty for sin by anything he’d actively done, the fact remained he inherited a nature that was automatically liable to death, transferred from the moment of conception. A new born baby that dies within minutes of birth has had no opportunity to actively commit any sin. Yet that baby, whilst it could be argued is sinless, is born with Adam’s sin-nature.  “As in Adam all die”.  Yet in Jesus’ case, because he underwent temptation and yet resisted, God was willing and pleased to resurrect him.  Unquestionably God was entitled to do so.  “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy”.  This is an illustration of salvation by grace rather than works.

The inherent and internal nature of sin is a vital doctrine as is the remedy through God’s purpose in Jesus. By way of analogy, the “Alien” science-fiction series of films illustrates this idea. The plot revolves around the conflict between humans and a race of highly aggressive creatures which use other organisms as hosts to gestate their young, including humans. The third film of the series culminates in the heroine, Ripley, discovering she has an alien embryo developing inside her (which happens to be a queen and the potential progenitor of the Alien race). Rather than allowing it to hatch from her body and live, Ripley commits suicide by throwing herself into a furnace taking the alien with her. In sacrificing her own life she destroyed the enemy within. The film emphasises her self-sacrifice for the sake of others, a theme unintentionally borrowed from the bible. The parallels with Jesus’ work are obvious. In effect, this is the victory he achieved. Although he had sin-nature, he was never mastered by it and he destroyed that nature by taking it to the grave.

“Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death-that is, the devil”.  Heb 2 v 14

What victory could there have been by his life and in his death if, as promulgated by Trinitarians, Jesus was perfect from birth having only God as his sole parent and devoid of human sin-nature? The Trinitarian view totally negates this principle and his work. In contrast Jesus felt the effects of his humanity first hand.  “God  cannot  be tempted with evil” writes James (1 v 13)  and yet Jesus most certainly was. The scriptures deliberately portray how Jesus was tempted, notably in the wilderness and parallel the temptation of Man in Eden (which will be looked at in more detail later).  Indeed, in those passages Jesus himself is, by implication, termed “the devil” (being the origin of his own temptations).

Again, the mainstream churches have distorted this by wrongly teaching that sin is (to a large extent) external – allegedly from an outside agency (the devil or satan) and not from within. The scriptures, however, show that sin is generated from within the human mind. This was the case with Jesus although this is described metaphorically as being from without.

The sin-nature of Jesus shows he couldn’t be co-equal or co-eternal with God. This is not of academic interest. It is fundamental to understanding the atonement and thereby a prerequisite to qualifying for God’s grace, as John writes.

“This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God,

but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world”.

1 John 4 v 2

 “I say this because many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist”. 2 John 1:7 

 If nothing else, this study seeks to reinforce this principle and God’s message of salvation in Jesus Christ is wholly at odds with the doctrine of the Trinity.

Jesus struggle against the serpent

As already said, the snakes in the wilderness caused death and sin-nature is represented by a venomous snake. It’s notable that the symbology of a constricting snake is also used.  Jesus’ suffering and death involved a struggle  likened to being in the grip of an entwining snake. David’s messianic writings use this symbology in his song of praise for God’s deliverance from his enemies (namely, Saul, which is not without significance, which we’ll come to later).  The symbology of an entwining snake occurs twice – once in the second book of Samuel and also in Psalm 18; the repetition in itself inviting particular attention.

“The waves of death swirled about me;
the torrents of destruction overwhelmed me.
The cords of the grave coiled around me;
the snares of death confronted me.”
2 Samuel 22 v 5
& Psalm 18 v 5

There are allusions here to Jonah of course but ultimately to Jesus. References to his  suffering and death become more obvious as one reads on in the chapter.  The idea of constriction causing death, spiritual death, is also an idea which appears in Jesus parable of the sower where the weeds choked the seedling.

The point to note, though, is that the conflict between Jesus and a constricting snake was not a literal battle with something external, but an internal struggle. Again, this reinforces the association between Jesus and the serpent symbol.

Jesus portrayed with sin-nature

(TYPES/ALLEGORIES of the destruction of sin-nature)

A common misconception is that because Jesus was ‘perfect’ (as in one sense he was) he can only be represented in scripture by ‘good’ people. Conversely, it is instinctive to shy away from drawing parallels with anyone in scripture who is deliberately portrayed as an example of wickedness or sin.  However, this isn’t scriptural as should be obvious from the example of the  brazen serpent symbol.  A great deal of proper scriptural enquiry and interpretation has been fettered by preconceived ideas when considering many biblical incidents and characters.

There are many examples of individuals who typify the destruction of sin in the flesh and, to that extent, portray the work of Jesus in destroying sin-nature and taking it to the grave.

This next section sets out some notable examples.

NOTE:

The remainder of this chapter can be heavy going and would probably be better for reference purposes rather than to be read.

Nadab and Abihu (Leviticus 10)

The priests Nadab and Abihu are notorious for their presumptuous and disrespectful attitude.  They abused their privilege when approaching the presence of God and were instantly destroyed for offering unauthorised fire and their corpses were removed outside the camp. “Outside the camp” is a recurring theme and Hebrews provides the link to Jesus;

“And so Jesus also suffered outside the city gate to make the people holy through his own blood. Let us, then, go to him outside the camp, bearing the disgrace he bore.” (Heb 13 v 12+13)

It was Jesus’ sin-nature in the days of his flesh which barred him from being fit to stand in the literal presence of God. It was not until after his sin-nature had been destroyed that he was qualified to be elevated to heaven to sit at the right hand of God in his role as a priest and mediator.

As said, the expression “outside the camp” is a notable and recurring theme. Each occurrence gives a connection with Jesus’ work.  In the parable of the tenants, the unfaithful vinedressers killed the son and threw his body outside the vineyard.

The Sabbath Breaker put to death (Numbers 15)

“While the Israelites were in the desert, a man was found gathering wood on the Sabbath day. Those who found him gathering wood brought him to Moses and Aaron and the whole assembly, and they kept him in custody, because it was not clear what should be done to him. Then the LORD said to Moses, “The man must die. The whole assembly must stone him outside the camp.”  So the assembly took him outside the camp and stoned him to death, as the LORD commanded Moses”.
Numbers 15 v 32-36

The manner in which these events are recorded include various pointers to this being an enacted parable. The key again is that his death was to be outside the camp giving a direct link to the death of Jesus.  With that point of reference other elements can then be paralleled;

“In the desert”

A period of trial –  for Israel and so for Jesus. The experiences of Jesus and Israel are often paralleled (given that they were both to carry The Name of God) and Jesus’ 40 days of temptation in the wilderness invites us to make the comparison.

 “A man”

“Behold the Man!” (announced Pilate). Emphasis on the fact that it was a man who had to die on behalf of (by inference) the whole community. Christ’s human nature is emphasised time and time again. “For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the  likeness  of sinful  man  to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man”. Rom 8 v 3

“Sabbath day”

Christ was accused of breaking the Sabbath to which he said “My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I, too, am working.” John 5v 17

“Gathering”

The work of Jesus was to “gather together in one”.

“Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all, Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not. And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation;  And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad.” John 11 v 50-52

“Wood”

Isaac carried the wood intended for the sacrifice of himself; similarly Christ carried the ‘tree’ on which he was crucified.

“In custody”

Although not directly recorded, Christ was held in custody for the night before his crucifixion.

“Not clear”

God’s purpose, whilst always discernable from the OT, was not made clear until the appearance of His son. God’s character and the promise of resurrection was not made clear until revealed in Christ.

“That which was from the beginning, which  we   have  heard, which  we   have   seen  with our eyes, which  we   have  looked at and our hands  have  touched-this we  proclaim concerning the Word of life.  The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us”.
I John 1 v 1+2

“The man must die”

God’s pronouncement on the Sabbath breaker appears harsh.  However, the event actually reveals God’s love and mercy if understood properly.

“It pleased the Lord to bruise him” (Isaiah 53) but only to bring salvation despite the pain it caused the Father.

“The whole assembly”

Responsibility for the death of Jesus is on the whole house of Israel; “his blood be on us and on our children” Matt 27 v 25. (Incidentally, so will be the benefits but that’s another subject).

“Stone him”

Stoning was the punishment prescribed under the Law. Jesus didn’t directly suffer this method of execution, (although, significantly, a stone was to be rolled over his grave) he did bear the curse of the Law;  “Having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross”.  Col 2 v 14

“Outside the camp”

At the risk of repetition;

“And so Jesus also suffered outside the city gate to make the people holy through his own blood.   Let us, then, go to him outside the camp, bearing the disgrace he bore”. Heb 13 v 12+13

Conclusion.  The seemingly harsh treatment of this individual was actually pointing to the future work of Jesus and, thereby, God’s love.  It’s common to hear it said that there’s a simple message to be derived; disobedience brings punishment i.e., ‘the man collecting sticks knew he shouldn’t and got what was coming to him’. Some will feel that applying a deeper significance is to dilute and distort that lesson.  But to limit its meaning to be stark lesson in strict compliance to rules satisfactory. It would be difficult to reconcile this episode with what is revealed of God’s character elsewhere.

 “The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance”.

2 Pet 3 v 9

 There was no necessity to make this man an example by a violent death simply to frighten the majority into submission. It simply doesn’t fit.  If God is so eager to mete out punishment why are others (whose crimes are ‘worse’) treated less severely?  Cain was sent into exile for murder rather than forfeiting life for life. That would have set an example to all mankind. We don’t know whether the man stoned for gathering sticks was deliberately and belligerently challenging the authority of God.  How God chose to deal with him was His prerogative. But the scriptures point to a different agenda. The man had to die, not to frighten us into obedience (albeit a characteristic of the Law), but  so that God’s mercy would ultimately be revealed in Jesus. His own son was condemned which, whilst it seems harsh, thereby God’s abounding mercy has been revealed.  “A curse turned into a blessing”, another theme in scripture.

Seen in this light it could be that the man condemned for gathering sticks will be in the kingdom for his part in declaring God’s righteousness. We ought therefore to be cautious before condemning people like him – “with what measure ye measure, so shall it be measured to you”.

Blasphemer stoned

As you may have guessed, similar ideas occur here.

“Now the son of an Israelite mother and an Egyptian father went out among the Israelites, and a fight broke out in the camp between him and an Israelite.  The son of the Israelite woman blasphemed the name with a curse; so they brought him to Moses. (His mother’s name was Shelomith, the daughter of Dibri the Danite.) They put him in custody until the will of the Lord should be made clear to them. Then the Lord said to Moses: “Take the blasphemer outside the camp. All those who heard him are to lay their hands on his head, and the entire assembly is to stone him””. Leviticus 24 v 10

Again there are allegorical details which point us to Jesus, as follows.

“The son”

“Unto us a child is born, to us a son is given” Isaiah  9 v 6

 Israelite mother – Jesus son of Mary, a Jew.

Egyptian father –  A non-Jewish father. Therefore of mixed origin, as was Jesus – son of man and son of God  (a topic which will be discussed later).

Notice the villain was described in terms of the ‘son of the mother’ as opposed to the father.  This seems to hint at the link to Jesus’ sin-nature from his mother’s side.

“Fight broke out”

Conflict between the natural and the spiritual; Jesus was in conflict within himself; eg  in Gethsemane he was in an “agony” (indicating conflict). “Thy will not my will”.  (Again a topic which will be explored later).

“Blasphemed”

The mixture of God’s characteristics with human sin-nature was, in a sense, a blasphemy of God’s holiness. In addition, and/or in the alternative, Christ was also accused of blasphemy by the Scribes & Pharisees.

“Name” 

The name of God is inextricably linked to the work of Jesus;

“I will  declare  your  name  to my brothers;  in the congregation I will praise you.  You who fear the LORD, praise him!”. Psa 22 v 22 +23

“Curse”

Christ bore the curse of sin and the curse of the law.

“Christ hath redeemed us from the  curse  of the law, being  made a   curse  for us:”. Gal 3 v 13

Shelomith  – meaning “peaceable”.

“For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath  broken  down the middle  wall  of partition between us”. Eph 2 v 14

Put in “custody”

This links with the experiences of Jesus, held in custody for the night before his crucifixion.

“Until the will of the Lord”.

The outworking of the Lord’s will in Jesus.  “Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer”. Isa 53 v 10

…”should be made clear“.

“Because God wanted to make the unchanging nature of his purpose very  clear”.   Heb 6 v 17

Also; “God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son”. Heb 1 v 1

“Outside the camp“;

“Let us, then, go to him  outside   the   camp, bearing  the  disgrace he bore.  For here we do not have an enduring city, but we are looking for  the city that is to come”. Heb 13 v13

“those that heard“;

If this is an allegory of salvation then we could apply; “he who has ears to hear, let him hear” (Matt 11 v 15).

“Lay their hands on his head”

The condemned was made to mimic a sacrifice under the law, as Jesus was typified by the sacrifices under the Law.

 “Entire assembly”

^“O my soul, come not thou into their secret; unto their assembly, mine honour, be not thou united: for in their anger they slew a man, and in their selfwill they digged down a wall”. Genesis 49 v 6

“stone him”

As mentioned, stoning was the method of execution under the law. Whilst Jesus did not die from stoning, he died bearing the curse of the law. Also, his mortal body was buried beneath a stone (similar to some other examples of sin-nature which were buried under a heap of stones).

 Conclusion;  Again, one may be tempted to draw lessons about personal behaviour, but the real issue is the prophetic message of the work of Jesus.

War on Midian (Numbers 31)

This is a detailed episode which requires a lot more time than I admit to having spent.  Suffice it to say, the theme is the destruction of sin in the flesh.  Various factors are at play but the main point being that God’s vengeance was carried out through Moses. Moreover Phinehas was to bring about “atonement” and this was to be a “memorial” – unmistakable echoes of Christ’s victory.

This was the last battle fought by Moses before his death and is described as  the “Lord’s vengeance”. Each tribe was represented in the battle, just as Jesus represented all Israel in his battle against sin.  Moses & Phinehas fought the five kings of Midian (5 synonymous with the law and its curse)  accompanied by trumpets (signifying resurrection).

Balaam was also killed, whose “curse was turned into a blessing” (Nehemiah 13 v 2 ) also synonymous with the work of Jesus.

The Midianite towns were burned – signifying judgment by fire at the last day.

The spoils and captives were brought to Moses and Eleazar outside the camp by the Jordan across from Jericho.

Gold plunder was brought into the Tent of Meeting as a memorial for the Israelites before the LORD. Similarly, an immortalized Jesus entered the presence of God and his victory is a memorial to his followers.

Also notable is that the sun stood still that day which also appears symbolic; the sun representing Jesus the ‘sun of righteousness’, “which is like a bridegroom coming forth from his pavilion, like a champion rejoicing to run his course” (Psa 19 v 5). But the sun’s progress was temporarily stopped, perhaps denoting Christ’s death.

Victory at Gibeon

After Joshua led the people into Canaan, they encountered the Gibeonites who, by deception, procured a treaty with Israel. This prompted the other Canaanite kings of the region to attack the Gibeonites.  Gibeon then appealed to Joshua and the ensuing battle against the confederacy of the 5 Amorite kings is full of significance. Again, it points to the battle against the curse of sin-nature and the victory won by Jesus for Israel and those joined to Israel by a treaty of peace.

This is not a full exposition, but here are some of the more significant features of the episode;

Gibeonites

Gentiles bound to Israel through an oath. This can be equated to Gentiles who make a treaty of peace by their association with Israel, dependent on the work of Christ. To achieve this, the Gibeonites disguised themselves with skins – just as the Gentiles are invited to “put on Christ”.

v1 “Were living near them”

“But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been  brought   near through the blood of Christ”. Eph 2 v 13

v2 “Royal City”

“And hath made us  kings  and  priests  unto God and his Father”.
Rev 1 v 6

 v2 “Good fighters“ 

“Fight the good fight of faith”.  I Tim 6 v 12

 v3  “Five kings confederate”

The five kings can be equated with the five books of the Law which, in essence, proved to be a curse.  “Christ redeemed us from the  curse  of the law”. Gal 3 v 13.

v4 “because it (Gibeon) has made peace with Joshua and the Israelites“ 

Gentiles associated with Israel by an oath “For he is our peace, who hath made both one”.  Eph 2 v 14

v 5  “Attacked”

Conflict between the natural and spiritual.

v 10 “Great victory”

“But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord  Jesus  Christ”. 1Cor 15 v 57

v 13 “Sun stood still”

Christ, the “sun of righteousness”, was temporarily stopped in his tracks for 3 days.

v 14 “no day like it when the Lord hearkened to the voice of a man” Of Jesus “who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that  was  able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared”. Heb 5 v 7-10

v 15 kings imprisoned in a cave with stones rolled over mouth

The curse entombed. Similarities with Christ’s tomb with a stone rolled over the entrance.

v18 Guard of the cave

Roman guard at Christ’s tomb.

v24 Put feet on their necks

A link to the head wound of Genesis 3 v 15.  Jesus dealt and received that wound (to be explored later).

v25 “This is what the LORD will do to all the enemies you are going to fight”

The promise of a future similar victory for God’s people after the same pattern.

v26 hanged on trees 

“Cursed is anyone who hangs on a tree” as was Jesus.

Conclusion.  The destruction of the enemy of Israel and also benefitting those Gentiles related to Israel  was through various factors all of which can be said to link to the manner in which Jesus achieved victory over sin and death.

Achan

 Achan is a notable example of the outworking of sin. His sin impacted on the whole camp of Israel.  An immediate parallel is therefore to be drawn with Adam.  Adam was never publicly ‘destroyed’ to atone for that sin – that work was carried out by the “second Adam”, a title of Jesus.  But Achan’s very public destruction points to the way that Christ’s sin-nature was also destroyed in a very public manner.  Other points of comparison are:

 Three-fold temptation – a correlation can be made with the lust of the eyes/lust of the flesh/pride of life (although I’ve not been able to pin down the exact parallels).

• Israel were defeated on their first attack of Ai because of a common enemy, namely sin in the camp; all Israel under the condemnation introduced by the first Adam.
• Achan was taken by lot – similar to the way the scapegoat was selected for sacrifice as also was Jonah – both pointing to Jesus.
• Achan was killed for the redemption of the whole community of Israel; as was Jesus.
• Buried under a pile of stones; a stone was rolled over the entrance of Christ’s tomb.

Achan was responsible for his own sin and the judgement was just.  But surely it would be unsurprising for him to receive mercy at the resurrection. If Achan was facing eternal death for his crime, it’s a little curious that he should be required to publicly confess his sin before being stoned to death. Surely his confession paves the way for future redemption.

 Abimelech (Judges 8)

Events in the life of Abimelech have echoes of other events in scripture.  Most notable was his death by a head wound. Other points of interest are;

• He had 70 brothers, 70 being the number associated with the Gentiles. Christ is a brother to those who have been baptized into the seed of Abraham.
• Unlike his brothers, Abimelech had distinct parentage; the offspring of an Israelite father and a concubine from Shechem. Therefore, of part Jewish lineage but combined with a non-Jewish parent – similarities to Christ’s parentage (we will return to this point).
• Hired reckless adventurers with 70 pieces of silver – possible echoes to Judas’ treachery.
• Murdered his 70 brothers – gentiles dead in Christ (?).
• Presumed to take the throne and crowned king – Christ tempted to take the throne.
• Likened to a thorn bush (Judges 9 v 14) – connection to the thorns of the curse (which Jesus literally suffered in the form of a crown of thorns).
• Destroyed Shechem and sprinkled it with salt – link to the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in AD70.
• Besieged a strong tower – hints of (a) the spiritual besieged by the enemy, as Christ was surrounded by dogs (Psalm 22) and (b) the Lord is a strong tower; “For you have been my refuge, a strong tower against the foe” (Psa 61v3).
• Abimelech killed by a head wound when a millstone was dropped onto his head – link to the head wound to the seed of the serpent – Gen 3 v 15.

King Saul

Saul was the embodiment of the nation of Israel and typified them, particularly in his stubborn disobedience in refusing to accept God’s choice of king and resulting alienation from God.  Eventually, he became driven mad and ended his life with his head taken and his body displayed as a trophy on the wall.  There are various parallels between him and Jesus which is to be expected as, to some extent, Israel and Jesus are linked given they both carry the Name of God.  Some mixed metaphors but some further points of comparison are:

• Saul was head and shoulders taller than all others, a man of the flesh; a notable head – Jesus, was also to be made the embodiment of sin-nature.
• Saul antagonistic towards God’s choice of the spiritual man, David, who he persecuted – Israel’s attitude to Christ.
• Saul permitted Agag (root word for ‘Gog’), the enemy of Israel, to live – Israel to be defeated by Gog.
• Saul destroyed the priests of the Lord – Christ abolished the Levitical priesthood by his work.
• Saul suffered God-inflicted madness, like Israel (Deut 28) – Jesus’ mother and brothers thought he had lost his mind.  Also, Christ accused of having a devil by the people.
• Saul prevented Israel from tasting the sweetness of honey (God’s salvation, depicted by the ‘honey from the rock’ (Deut 32 v 13 + Psa  81 v 16). In contrast, Christ was the means whereby salvation was brought forth.
• Saul killed and his body hung on a wall, the flesh placarded – Jesus hung on a cross.
• Saul’s head put in the temple of Dagon; a head wound (Gen 3 v 15) – Jesus dealt a head wound to sin.

Absalom

Absalom was a much-loved son whose human pride and ambition poisoned his love for his father. Although he was thoroughly different from Jesus in this respect, nevertheless his life and demise has many parallels with Christ’s temptations and death. For example, of Absalom:

No blemish in him from head to toe;

Christ the Passover lamb with no blemish (i.e. no sin).

heir to the throne

As was Jesus, son of David, in the royal line.

 Pride

Human ambition was his flaw (the pride of life) and he actively sought to advance himself to the throne before time. Christ resisted a similar temptation – “all kingdoms of the world I will give to you if you bow down to me”.

Rode on an ass/mule

As did Solomon and Christ.

Killed while hanging on a tree

As Christ also died on a tree.

 Head wound

Hanging by his head – a link to a head wound.  Psalm 3 is a Psalm of David when he fled from Absalom and he writes (v 7) “Strike all my enemies on the jaw; break the teeth of the wicked”.

Pierced

Absalom’s side was pierced – as was that of Jesus with a spear.

3 javelins

Three; a number associated with the temptations common to man as experienced by Jesus and/or 3 days in the tomb (and the number associated with resurrection).

Heart

Pierced through the heart – Christ died of a broken heart, eg  “Scorn has broken my heart” (Psa 69 v 20).

Buried under a heap of rocks

Similarities with Achan/Oreb/Zeeb – Christ buried with a stone rolled over the mouth of the tomb.

Mourning of his father.

“Absalom Absalom my son my son, would to God I had died for thee Absalom my son” – points to the grief of God for His son.

Conclusion

Though physically ‘perfect’, this son was rebellious to his father due to the pride of life and grasped for ruler ship (similar to our first parents) when it wasn’t his to take; in contrast to Christ who “did not consider equality with God something to be grasped” (Phil 2 v 6). Also, Absalom’s hatred of his father contrasts with the love Jesus had for his father. Yet, the love of David at his son’s demise speaks eloquently of God’s pain at the suffering and death of His son.

Uzziah King of Judah (2 Chron 26)

King Uzziah reigned in Judah at a time of prosperity for the southern kingdom. There are parallels with the future reign of Christ; eg the surrounding nations brought him tribute.  It’s recorded of Uzziah that “he did that which was right in the eyes of the Lord”. But his life was flawed with a notable error.  He also presumed to take the role of priest. Here is a pointer towards the ultimate role of Jesus to be a king-priest ‘after the order of Melchizedek’, but something not appropriate for Uzziah, the ante- typical Christ, to grasp for.  As Adam had grasped for the fruit (prompted by the pride of life), so did Uzziah grasp for something which was not his to seek. As a result, God struck him with leprosy. This curse links to that put on Adam; the consequences of which Jesus bore.

Some further points of parallel between Uzziah and Jesus are:

Uzziah was in David’s line and reigned on his throne in Jerusalem – Jesus the greater son of David was born to be king in Jerusalem.

“He did that which was right in the eyes of the Lord”
“This is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased”.

“Nations brought Uzziah tribute”

Nations will come up to honor Christ in Jerusalem.

“Dug many cisterns”

“but whoever drinks the  water  I give him will never  thirst. Indeed, the  water  I give him will become in him a spring of  water  welling up to eternal life.” John 4 v14

“Much livestock”

“I am the  good shepherd. The good  shepherd  lays down his life for the sheep”.   John 10 v 11

 “Man of soil”

Although describing Uzziah’s interest in horticulture, taken literally he was made from soil, as was Christ.  The first Adam was put in the garden of Eden to tend it. The 2^nd Adam was mistaken for a gardener at his resurrection and will tend the paradise of God.

“A well trained army ready to go out by divisions”

“Fight   the   good   fight  of  the  faith. Take hold of  the  eternal life to which you were called when you made your  good  confession in  the presence of many witnesses”.  1 Tim 6 v 12

“Uzziah provided: shields, spears, helmets, coats of armour, bows and sling stones”

Provision has been made by Christ for his followers to be equipped to resist the world and sin-nature within.

“Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the  breastplate  of righteousness in place, and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace.  In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one.  Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.” Eph 6 v 14-17

“His fame spread far and wide”

As it did for David and Solomon, also typical of the future reign of Christ.

“Pride”

Uzziah grasped honour which was not his to have.

“But after Uzziah became powerful, his pride led to his downfall. He was unfaithful to the LORD his God, and entered the temple of the LORD to burn incense on the altar of incense”. 2 Chronicles 26:16 

A similar temptation to that experienced by Jesus. In the wilderness he thought to himself ‘all this can be mine if I just take it’.

“Because the LORD had afflicted him”

Links to Isaiah 53 – “yet we considered him stricken by God,
smitten by him, and afflicted”.

“Leprosy” = sin

Points to Jesus’ sin nature.  “He is able to deal gently with those who are ignorant and are going astray, since he himself is subject to weakness. This is why he has to offer sacrifices for his own sins, as well as for the sins of the people”. Heb 5 v 2

Leprosy broke out in his “forehead”

A link to the seed of the serpent whose head of sin was to receive a fatal blow.  Links to Goliath, a man of sin, who was dealt a fatal head wound when struck between the eyes.

“Leprous, and excluded from the temple of the LORD” 

Jesus was, in a sense, the meeting place between God and man (see later notes), and yet was not fit for purpose due to his sin-nature and was broken and removed to an unclean place.

“Lived in a separate house”

An outcast as a result of sin-nature and its effects.
Links to the suffering servant prophecy where Messiah is described in the language of the leper.  “He hid as it were his face from us”.  Isa 53

“Buried away from the kings”

Of the Messiah “He made his grave with the wicked” Isa 53.

Conclusion:  Uzziah, a king in David’s line, is held up as an example of sin in the form of the pride of life – but also typifies aspects of Christ’s work both in his future reign but also his experiences and suffering for sin-nature.

King Azariah

“Azariah son of Amaziah king of Judah began to reign.  He was sixteen years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem fifty-two years. His mother’s name was Jecoliah; she was from Jerusalem.  He did what was right in the eyes of the LORD, just as his father Amaziah had done. The high places, however, were not removed; the people continued to offer sacrifices and burn incense there.

The LORD afflicted the king with leprosy until the day he died, and he lived in a separate house. Jotham the king’s son had charge of the palace and governed the people of the land”.  Kings 15 v 2-5

A king of Judah, a descendent of David, who did what was right and yet was afflicted by the Lord with leprosy – echoes of Isaiah 53.

Nebuchadnezzar

There is a lot more to Nebuchadnezzar the King of Babylon than meets the eye.  As depicted in his dream in Daniel 2, he was the head of the kingdoms of men and thereby the embodiment of sinful pride. He seems to be a personification of sin in the flesh, notably the pride of life;  “Is not this great  Babylon, that I have built for the house of the kingdom by the might of my power, and for the honor of my majesty?”  Dan 4 v 30.  And yet, God had a purpose with him and Nebuchadnezzar was given special revelation of God’s purpose.

Despite all his flaws, God describes him as “my servant” on three occasions.

“I will summon all the peoples of the north and my servant  Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, declares the LORD”.  Jeremiah 25 v 9  (see also Jeremiah 27 v 6 &  43 v 10).

This was in the context that his military exploits would fulfill God’s will on the political stage – not that he was obeying any directives from God and was ignorant of his role in God’s plan in punishing Israel.  Nevertheless, he and his army were rewarded with the wealth of Egypt (hints of the Exodus).  The term “my servant” is of course a title used of Christ himself;  “See,  my   servant  will act wisely;  he will be raised and lifted up and highly exalted”.  Isaiah 52 v 13

Nebuchadnezzar prided himself as the ruler of the Kingdoms of men which have perpetually been in conflict with the Kingdom of God (in prospect). Similarly, among Jesus’ temptations was the desire to take all kingdoms of the world for himself. The pride of life prompted him to exalt himself as ruler rather than await the appropriate time in God’s plan.

Curiously, God says on more than one occasion that he made Nebuchadnezzar to have dominion over the animals which reinforces a link with Adam and events in Eden. More of Nebuchadnezzar later.

Haman

Haman was the arch enemy of the Jews in the time of Esther; a book which has God’s fingerprint stamped all over it – in the allegories of the saving work of Jesus – even if direct mention of God is absent from the book. Elements which relate to the work of Messiah and  the destruction of sin in the flesh are:

• Haman, the Agagite – apparently the same root word as Gog (the future enemy of Israel).
• Haman was the enemy of Israel – the true enemy is sin. Sin-nature within rather than the physical enemy without.
• Hanged from a gallows – Christ hung on a tree.
• The day of destruction chosen by lot – links to Achan/the scapegoat/Jonah (each pointing to Jesus).
• A national victory whereby a curse was turned into a blessing – Christ provided a remedy to the curse of Eden to turn it into a blessing.
• Many Gentiles aligned themselves to Israel as a result of the ensuing victory. The Gentiles have been brought near to God through the victory of Christ.

The Tabernacle

A recurring theme in the tabernacle are items of furniture constructed of wood but overlaid with gold.  Examples are the Table of Shewbread, the Incense Altar and the Ark. Each were made from acacia wood although overlaid with gold. In other words, base, earthy and organic material overlaid with a pure covering which cannot be tarnished.

Gold represents tried faith and/or the purity associated with  immortality. The could point to the promise of immortality, reserved for those who are fit to be in the presence of God. This is a pattern seen in Jesus, ‘the firstborn of them that sleep’. “Meanwhile we groan, longing to be clothed with our heavenly dwelling”  2 Corinthians 5:2

The furniture of the tabernacle points to the work of Christ, and the materials indicate he was  subject to a similar pattern – originally of base human origin but clothed with immortality after his resurrection.

The Conception of Jesus

This subject requires due reverence, but it is helpful and informative to think about Christ’s conception always, of course, within the bounds of what the Scriptures say.

We have considered some of the consequences of Jesus having a human mother.  At the risk of over emphasising the point, these verses chime in with the importance of his parentage.

“When the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons”. Gal 4 v 4

“who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal to God, but did empty himself, the form of a servant having taken, in the likeness of men having been made, and in fashion having been made as a man, he humbled himself, having become obedient unto death – death even of a cross”

Phil 2 v 6-8 (Young’s Literal)

The mainstream churches mistakenly read passages like this to mean Jesus  had the choice as to the nature of his birth, but obviously he didn’t.  He did not exist before his conception except as the Logos (‘thought’, ‘intention’ or ‘purpose’ of God). He had no choice in the manner of his conception or birth.

His conception was miraculous and we should be careful not to speculate.  Nevertheless, it is not unreasonable to assume that the effect of God’s power, the Holy Spirit, overshadowing Mary was that the child conceived in her womb was the combination of genetic material from two parents; hers and that from God. God is a spirit, and not flesh, but in some manner He decreed that physical characteristics should be passed in this process.

A little bit of basic science. In the natural world, as designed by the Creator, there are 2 basic types of reproduction: (1) sexual reproduction (eg mammals/insects/plants/trees) and (2) asexual reproduction (eg amoeba/ hydra).

The distinction between the two forms is the number of parents; one or two.

In the case of Jesus’ conception, there were 2 parents. By definition, therefore, this was sexual reproduction, not asexual. The terminology sounds clumsy although, of course, there were no sexual relations. Nevertheless by definition the foetus was the product of sexual reproduction. Evidently this was deliberate and necessary.

Contrast the formation of Jesus with that of Adam. The latter was made from the dust and had one ‘parent’. He was therefore produced asexually.  The genealogy of Luke 3 records him as having been the “son of God” so this in itself was not a barrier to God producing the Messiah by this means. Obviously, God could have done the same with Jesus if He so wished. But no, the characteristics of God were deliberately mixed with human nature.

Note. This does not in any way infer that Jesus had a nature that is different from ours nor from that of the first Adam after the fall. Anyone who might want to infer from this that Jesus in some way had “clean flesh” or similar is misconstruing the point. If anything, what this study does is to emphasise the sin-nature that Jesus was born with and came to destroy at his death.

If saying that Jesus was the product of sexual reproduction appals you, then just pause for a moment before rejecting the point. It was mainstream Christendom that finds the subject of sex to be so abhorrent that they shied away to such an extreme and invented the false doctrine of the trinity.  They started with the premise that sex = sin and therefore have invented the idea of the “immaculate conception” and thereby avoid any suggestion of sexual reproduction.  The conception of Jesus was not “sex” but it was, by scientific definition, sexual reproduction and this is a necessary principle on which to understand the atoning work he carried out.

The natural world is largely based on sexual reproduction. Much of the animal kingdom therefore carries the hallmark of God’s purpose in Jesus. God’s creative work in Eden involves considerable  emphasis on sexual reproduction and has been played out by the natural creation ever since.

The Two-fold Origin of Christ (‘Son of Man’/’Son of God’)

The fact that Christ had ‘dual characteristics’ (although one sin-nature) inherited from two parents is emphasized by the fact that there are two distinct genealogies recorded of his ancestry; in Matthew and Luke respectively.  There has been speculation about the genealogies but there is no getting away from the fact there are two.  Without intending to be dogmatic, the genealogies seem to be as follows: 

1. Luke’s ancestry; the family line of Mary traced back to Adam.

2. Matthew’s ancestry; the royal line thought to be that of Joseph who would have been in line to be king of Israel if the monarchy had not already been removed. Yet, genetically, Joseph had nothing to do with the conception of Jesus. He may have been his ‘legal’ father, but God was the actual father.

(Luke)                                                                                   (Matthew)

Adam                                  God                                          Abraham  

          I                                         I                                                       I

     Mary                                     I                                     Joseph (legal father)

          I                                      I

                      J  e  s  u  s

 (son of man ) (son of God) (seed of woman & seed of serpent)                                     

• Matthew’s genealogy contains 66 generations (numerically denoting sin).
• Luke’s genealogy contains 77 generations (numerically denoting perfection).

This twofold origin is highlighted in various places in the scriptural record but is easily overlooked due to familiarity.

“He shall be great and shall be called the son of the Highest and the Lord God will give unto him the throne of his father David”. Luke 1:32

These words of Gabriel are so familiar it’s easy to overlook it contains an apparent contradiction; that is this child would have two different fathers.

This not isolated and below are others.  Many struggled in Jesus’ day to reconcile the seemingly contradictory references to two different fathers (and still do today).

“Nathanael  answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.  Jesus answered and said unto him, Because I said unto thee, I saw thee under the fig tree, believest thou? thou shalt see greater things than these.  And he saith unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Hereafter ye shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man”.  John 1 v  49-51

“he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?   And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.  He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?  And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.  And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven”.

Matt 16 v 13-17

“Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.   For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;   And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man”.

John 5 v 25-27

Christ’s trial

“Then the high priest stood up and said to Jesus, “Are you not going to answer? What is this testimony that these men are bringing against you?” But Jesus remained silent. The high priest said to him, “I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God.” “Yes, it is as you say,” Jesus replied. “But I say to all of you: In the future you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.”   Matthew 26 v 62-64

Nicodemus struggled with the same anomaly. He famously visited Jesus by night and the record hints at some verbal jousting between them. That’s not to say it was antagonistic but you can sense Nicodemus’ difficulty in grasping what Jesus was saying about his origin.  Frankly, Jesus’ testimony was contradictory –  unless of course understood in the context that he was son of God and son of man. 

1. “Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a member of the Jewish ruling council. He came to Jesus at night and said, “Rabbi, we know you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs you are doing if God were not with him.” In reply Jesus declared…………

13  No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven – the Son of Man. Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.  “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.  For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.  Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son”.  John 3

 Jesus repeatedly alludes to this ‘anomaly’ of his parentage.

“While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, “What do you think about the Christ? Whose son is he?”  “The son of David,” they replied.  He said to them, “How is it then that David, speaking by the Spirit, calls him ‘Lord’? For he says,  “The Lord said to my Lord:  “Sit at my right hand until I put your enemies under your feet.” ‘If then David calls him ‘Lord,’ how can he be his son?”   Matthew 22 v 41-45

Jesus was demonstrating that the greater son of David was superior, in spite of being a descendant which would normally imply inferiority. The reason David addresses his ancestor as his superior is because the Messiah was to be of a superior parentage. Whilst a descendant of David, he also would have Yahweh as his Father.

The title “son of man” is used in a number of places in the OT such as when God addresses Ezekiel.  Jesus prefers to use this title in reference to himself rather than assuming to call himself “son of God”.

Put   not   your   trust in princes, nor in the son of man, (the title Christ continually applied to himself) in whom there is no help.   His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.

Psa 146 v3+4

…but, in contrast, do put your trust in the son of God who was raised to life!

“I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life”. I John 5 v 13

Jesus didn’t presume to call himself ‘son of God’ nor exalt himself, unlike the first Adam who grasped after Godlikeness.  The 2^nd Adam’s attitude is contrasted with that of the 1^st Adam:

“Who…  did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,    but made himself nothing,  taking the very nature of a servant,  being made in human likeness.  And being found in appearance as a man,  he humbled himself and became obedient to death – even death on a cross!” Philippians 2 v 6-8

Division

 Division is a process which separates and separation is a principle implicit for those who aspire after holiness.  “Without holiness, no one will see the Lord”.

The process of division and separation is an underlying principle in many scriptural events and examples. Eg Noah.

It has been commented on the offerings under the Law of Moses (John Martin) always involved a division between a positive and negative aspect.  This is very instructive on this principle.

Jesus spoke of his mission as being not one of peace but of division.

“Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword” (Matt 10 v 34).  He then went on to describe the division his teaching would bring within families.

This process of division was played out in Jesus himself. At his death, the culmination of that process, the curtain of the temple (his body) was torn in 2. Jesus sets the precedent for division which is to be played out among (and within) his followers.

“For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.” Hebrews 4v12

This process was applied to Jesus and then is applied to his followers.

The outworking of Jesus having characteristics of 2 natures

The scriptures show that there are 3 types of temptation which lead to sin.

“For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world”.   I John 2 v 16

These words parallel with events in Genesis.

“And when the woman saw that the tree was  good  for  food, and that it was pleasant  to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat”. Gen 3v6

Immediately after his baptism and receiving the power of the holy spirit, Jesus went into the wilderness for a period of testing.  Each test was in relation to the holy spirit power which he had just been entrusted with. Would he use it for his own purposes to gratify self, or would he use it exclusively to promote his Father’s will? On each occasion, when prompted by his own inclinations to use that power for self, he denied his own instincts; even to the point of near death from starvation so determined was he not to use the spirit to make food.  Thus, a principle was established which characterized all his future miracles and none of them were for selfish gain.  (One exception might be said to be the miracle of the fish caught with the coin in its mouth used to pay tax – but even that was a sign to demonstrate the principle of self sacrifice by the fish in providing the atoning payment for sin).

Christ’s temptations in the wilderness are paralleled with those in Eden. The experiences of Christ, the 2^nd Adam, are paralleled with the 1^st Adam (although the reaction to these tests was opposite).

“Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the desert to be tempted by the devil. After fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry.  The tempter came to him and said, “If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread.”  (lust of the flesh) Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.'”  Then the devil took him to the holy city and had him stand on the highest point of the temple.  “If you are the Son of God,” he said, “throw yourself down. For it is written:  “‘He will command his angels concerning you, and they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.'”  (pride of life) Jesus answered him, “It is also written: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.'”  Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendour.   “All this I will give you,” he said, “if you will bow down and worship me.” (lust of the eyes)  Jesus said to him, “Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.'”   Then the devil left him, and angels came and attended him”.

Matt 4 v 1-11

Mark’s record emphasizes the link with events in Eden by making the point that Jesus was “with the wild animals”.

To summarise his temptations:

• Stones to bread (lust of the flesh)
• Saw all kingdoms (lust of the eyes)
• To throw himself down (the pride of life)

The personification of sin in the flesh in this episode (ie Jesus described as talking to the devil) confuses many. Sin comes from within, not without.  Jesus’ own sin-nature was prompting him to gratify his own wishes; contrary to the will of his Father. The personification of sin-nature in this manner is a curious way of depicting the situation, yet perhaps more easily comprehended and more easily reconciled when it is understood that this man, of all men, was typical of sin-nature.  Put bluntly, Jesus is termed “the devil” on several occasions in the Matthew and Luke accounts.  One could say, it was not Jesus but his sin-nature which is described as the ‘devil’ but this seems an artificial distinction since the sin-nature resided in him and influenced his thoughts. As Jesus had the characteristics of  two natures in conflict within him, this ties in with the temptations being recorded as if there is a discussion between two individuals, when in fact he was addressing himself.  This idea will be explored further.

An underlying theme of the temptations was the desire not to die; to not submit to the will of the Father and, in essence, was a similar temptation to Eden; “thou shalt not surely die”.

Gethsemane

A similar pattern occurs at this other significant moment of temptation; in the Garden of Gethsemane just prior to facing torture and death.

Then Jesus went with his disciples to a place called Gethsemane, and he said to them, “Sit here while I go over there and pray.”  He took Peter and the two sons of Zebedee along with him, and he began to be sorrowful and troubled.  Then he said to them, “My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death. Stay here and keep watch with me.”  Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, “My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will.”  Then he returned to his disciples and found them sleeping. “Could you men not keep watch with me for one hour?” he asked Peter.  “Watch and pray so that you will not fall into temptation. The spirit is willing, but the body is weak.”  He went away a second time and prayed, “My Father, if it is not possible for this cup to be taken away unless I drink it, may your will be done.”  When he came back, he again found them sleeping, because their eyes were heavy.  So he left them and went away once more and prayed the third time, saying the same thing. Matt 26 v 36 – 44

It’s no coincidence that 3 times he asked that the cup be taken away – as if emphasizing the threefold nature of sin.  The point which comes out is that his will was different from that of his Father.

“And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground”.  Luke 22 v 44

As expounded very movingly by Brother John Martin (his series “The hour is come”) the original word for “agony” is the Greek “agonia” meaning; a struggle, conflict or contest between two combatants (imagine for example Jacob wrestling with the angel). There were two wills at work; there was Jesus’ will and there was God’s will. They were different – not the same.  Jesus had prayed earlier that his disciples may be “one, just as we are one” but that oneness of mind and purpose was being severely tested (and little wonder).

Of course, it was a struggle he won and defeat his sin-nature in submission to the will of his Father. How apt that the words were wrung out of him “the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak”.

We should remember it was a lifelong struggle over his own sin-nature – a contest that had begun, one assumes, at birth, continued through childhood and manhood and was reaching its climax.

“For we have not an high priest which  cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin”.  Hebrews 4 v15

It is widely recognized that these principles are fundamental to the purpose of God in Christ, but just how far these issues pervade the scriptures is not always appreciated.

Made sin and a curse

“God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God”. 2 Cor 5 v 21

“Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree.”” Galatians 3 v 13

Types & allegories – some general comments

This is where the subject gets really interesting. Much of what follows will reinforce the principle of the sin-nature of God’s son and it’s destruction through his death.

In our respect for the son of God, we tend to shy away from the thought of Jesus as sin personified – a brazen serpent. Yet this is key, the KEY, given by Jesus himself to an amazing theme to unlock the meaning behind many incidents in scripture, all put there for our learning.

Personally, I feel it can be a misguided exercise to sometimes try to draw practical lessons from some scriptural events when the real agenda is the underlying battle between flesh and spirit.  For example, the events of Judges 20 are rather puzzling taken at face value.  The Benjamites had behaved wickedly in the matter of the Levite and his concubine and the nation of Israel gathered an army together to destroy wickedness out of Israel.  Repeatedly, that army consulted God as to whether they should go against the Benjamites in battle and the response from God was that they should. On the first two occasions, for no apparent reason, they were defeated by the Benjamites. And yet, on the third attempt, again after consultation with God, their attack was successful.  At best this is a puzzling episode if taken at face value. However, when set side by side with the battle that Jesus had in Gethsemane, in consultation with God, the significance comes into focus.

Of course, historical events in the Bible must be taken at face value but there’s often underlying teaching in them and in the manner in which they’re recorded. An obvious example, and one which doesn’t rely on personal interpretation, is Jonah’s 3 days spent in the belly of the fish which, as Jesus says, represents his time in the tomb. But, care is needed when dealing with types.  Jonah prayed from the belly of the fish and his prayer is full of prophetic Messianic meaning. Jesus, however, did not pray from the tomb because he was dead.  Thus there are limits within which types must be understood, particularly when it comes to first principle doctrines.

It’s important to bear in mind that any underlying teaching we may glean from types should never contradict the plain teaching and principles of the scriptures.

A few more points about types:

Whilst it is true types are quite capable of being inferred where they don’t exist or stretched beyond the meaning intended, they are nevertheless integral to God’s word. They give insight into His intentions and character often when it is seemingly absent or even contradictory.  Their usefulness should therefore not be underestimated, even if some people struggle to see or understand them.  Everything necessary for salvation is in the plain text of the Bible but it is not healthy to put up barriers to further enquiry.

“It is the glory of God to conceal a matter; to search out a matter is the glory of kings”  Prov 25  v 2

Some additional words of caution to bear in mind when considering types:

Paul’s writings – difficult to understand!

“He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction”. II Pet 3 v 16

Distorting the scriptures therefore can lead to destruction.

In this study the term “type of Christ” will sometimes be used in a context which might be unexpected. Any reader who doesn’t feel comfortable with this should substitute the term with “sin in the flesh”.

As I said, one of the great themes of the scriptures, if not the greatest, is the conflict between spiritual perfection and sin-nature; the spiritual versus the natural and vice versa.  That conflict came into existence with the sin of Adam.  That same conflict has been raging throughout the history of God’s purpose with mankind and had a culmination in the person of His son. The characteristics of both natures pervaded him and their conflict during the days of his mortality are graphically portrayed.

Genesis 3 v 15

This is the focal point of this study.

“And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.”  Gen 3 v 15

It has always been widely recognized that this verse is fundamentally important; being the promise of the saviour to arise out of the seed of the woman, Jesus.  What is not often appreciated is that Jesus was also to fulfill the other half of the equation in that he can also be identified as the prophesied seed of the serpent.  The two promises coincide in him.  Inevitably, therefore, this ancient enmity was to have its outworking in his person and hence the conflict within him leading up to his ultimate victory.

 In Sunday School a basic less is that a head wound is fatal, whereas an injury to the foot is temporary.  It has been observed (Brother Harry Whittaker) that, in essence, what is described here is the treading/stamping on the head of a serpent by a person who, at the same time, receives a bite on the foot.  That however is of course only a simplistic analogy of what is really described but it serves to illustrate the effect of the two wounds.

What is easily missed is that the recipient of the blow to the head and the wound to the foot are one and the same; Jesus Christ.  He delivered the fatal wound to sin in the flesh (himself) but in the process received a wound to his heel.

Jesus Christ is the seed of the woman AND the seed of the serpent. The promise of 2 seeds in Genesis 3 v 15 coincide in him.

We readily accept that Jesus was the seed of woman who would suffer a temporary wound in the heel – temporary in the sense that, whilst he died (entailing an injury to the heel from a nail driven into a tree), the effects were not permanent since he was raised to life and immortality.

“For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.  I may tell all my bones: they look and stare upon me.  They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture”.  Psa 22 v 16-18

“Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted.  But he was pierced for our transgressions”. Isa 53 v 4

 But there is another side to the equation. Note something else about the suffering servant prophecy of Isaiah 53.

“But he was wounded for our transgressions; he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed”. Isaiah 53 v 5

“Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin”.  Isaiah 53 v 10

 This key prophecy says of Messiah that:

 He would be pierced (wounded in the heel)

• He would be bruised (a wound to the head).

A possible objection; the Hebrew word for ‘bruise’ in the Isaiah passage is different from the word used for ‘bruise’ in Genesis.  The Hebrew word in Genesis 3 v 15 is “shoof” which doesn’t appear in Isaiah 53.

However, “shoof” is applied to Job who is equally a type of the sufferings of Christ.

“For he breaketh (shoof) me with a tempest, and multiplieth my wounds without cause.   He will not suffer me to take my breath, but filleth me with bitterness”. Job 9 v17

The NIV translates this as “crush” which conveys the idea more clearly.

There is one other occurrence of the word ‘Shoof’ in Psalms which can also be regarded as Messianic.

“If I say, Surely the darkness shall cover (shoof) me; even the night shall be light  about me”. Psa 139:11

It is repugnant to think of Jesus as the seed of the serpent as that line is always associated with the wicked and those alienated from God – such as the Scribes & Pharisees, described as a “brood of vipers”. But there is considerable scriptural support for this view of Genesis 3 v 15.

Scapegoat

Having referred to the Suffering Servant prophecy of Isaiah 52/53, it’s no coincidence we should be led to consider the sacrifice of the scapegoat which is also heavily alluded to in that passage.

The offering of the scapegoat was crucial in the national calendar of Israel being part of the ceremony to be enacted on the Day of Atonement.

The scapegoat was a sacrifice which had 2 distinct parts.  Two goats started the day alive & kicking but only one would see the day out.

Lots were drawn for the goats (notable links to Jonah and Achan) That determined which was to die and which would be released into the wild carrying the sins of the people.  Therefore it was distinctive in being a living sacrifice. The links to Jesus are well known;

“He laid on him the sin of us all.  We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on  him  the iniquity of us all”.  Isa 53 v 6

 “Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted”.  Isa 53 v 4

“Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors.  For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors”. Isa 53v12

The offering involved two goats – one lived and one died.  Jesus, the antitypical offering, fulfilled the two aspects. His spiritual side was raised to life, his sin-nature died and remained in the grave.

Paul, speaks of the future in these terms, and yet this has a relevance to Jesus;

“So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body”.  I Cor 15 v 42

Leprosy

Also in the context of the Suffering Servant prophecy of Isaiah, it’s significant that its language (as pointed out by Brother Harry Whittaker) contains many allusions to the leper (eg  “And as one hiding the face from us,” Isa 53 v3 YLT).  Leprosy is symbolic of sin in the flesh. The language of Isaiah 53 of a leper reinforces the principle of Christ’s sin-nature. The Psalms are also littered with allusions to a sickness also pointing forward to Messiah’s mortal condition, eg :

“For my loins are filled with a loathsome disease and there is no soundness in my flesh”. Psa 38 v 7

The offering for leprosy

Leviticus 14 contains the law concerning leprosy in a house. This law pointed forward to sin in the house of Israel as a nation (thanks to brother Ian Giles for his exposition). It also pointed to Jesus – whose flesh was broken outside the camp. The offering to purify a formerly contaminated house involved two doves. One was killed and its blood shed – the other released.  Echoes of the scapegoat.

In a sense, just as with the scapegoat(s), Jesus was both sacrifices; the bird that was to die as well as that which was to live and be released.

As Jesus stood on trial, with the prospect of laying down his life for the cleansing of the house of Israel, his feelings were prophetically recorded in Psalm 55, alluding to the sacrifice in Leviticus:

“I said, “Oh, that I had the wings of a dove!  I would fly away and be at rest – I would flee far away.” Psa 55 v 6

The fate of the living bird was something to yearn for, in preference to that which had to die.

It is accepted that both the natural and spiritual elements of Jesus’ character went into the grave, but one set of characteristics was to be raised to immortality. But that didn’t stop him longing for escape from his predicament.

It has been speculated why Joseph and Mary offered two doves at the circumcision of Jesus but it was very fitting that, of all the sacrifices prescribed, he should be linked to the ritual involving two birds.

Butler & Baker

This example is a graphic depiction of the two characteristics seen in Jesus. Events associated with the dreams interpreted by Joseph in prison in Egypt are usually just regarded as his ‘get out of jail free’ card.  But there is more to it than that. Genesis 40 (v 6-22) records the respective dreams of the butler and baker on the same night.  Their initial interpretation is obvious, as explained by Joseph, but there appears to be strong hint at a secondary meaning:

• The Baker dreamed of 3 baskets of bread eaten by the birds. After 3 days he was hanged on a tree and the birds ate his flesh.

         The baker/bread = BODY = death. 

• The Butler dreamed of 3 branches sprouting grapes which he crushed to make wine. After 3 days he was redeemed from a symbolic death and raised to a position at the right hand of the supreme authority.

    The butler/wine = SPIRIT = life.

In type, this is a picture of the two aspects of Christ’s work depicted through the symbols of the body & blood; flesh & spirit; death & life.  Figuratively at the point they had their dreams, the butler and baker were already dead, denoted by being in prison. Their fate came after 3 days denoting the day of Jesus’ resurrection.  For the baker, who denotes the sin-nature it was death  by hanging on a tree. For the butler, denoting the spiritual characteristics, there was salvation.

Linking the baker/butler with Jesus in this way does not exclude the fact that Joseph in prison is also a type of Christ seen on a different level. He also was symbolically resurrected from prison to stand in the presence of the ruler.

Bread & Wine

The correlation between bread with flesh and wine with blood is something the followers of Christ reinforce by following the pattern of the last supper.  Its purpose is to “show the Lord’s death until he come” but in taking the bread and wine   it may not be realised that here also is allusion to the portrayal of the 2 aspects of Christ’s character.

As with the butler & baker and their respective fates, so the symbols of bread and wine correlate to the two sides of Jesus; son of man (sin-nature) and son of God (spirit nature).  The characteristics inherited from his mother were crushed whereas those inherited from God were preserved.

Although not fitting the type exactly, both grapes and grain are crushed in the process of producing bread and wine.

It has been contended that unleavened bread should be used in this ceremony since that is what would have been used at the Passover meal. It is also argued that yeast represents sin and this doesn’t sit comfortably with the fact that Christ was sinless. However, to insist on unleavened bread for this purpose overlooks the principle that he was of our nature and had sin’s flesh.

Whilst you can make bread without yeast, you cannot make wine without it.  It is therefore fitting to commemorate the death and resurrection of God’s son by taking emblems made with yeast.

The outworking the wounds of Genesis 3:15 in Jesus

Head wound

If Jesus was also the seed of the serpent then you would expect to find inferences to this in scripture. Here are some examples.

Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath lifted up his heel against me.   Psa 41 v 9

(the original Hebrew word for lifting up of heel apparently implies stamping with the foot).

“I am not referring to all of you; I know those I have chosen. But this is to fulfil the scripture: `He who shares my bread has lifted up his heel  against me.” John 13 v 18

“I was a derision to all my people; and their song all the day.  He hath filled me with bitterness, he hath made me drunken with wormwood.  He hath also broken my teeth with gravel stones, (broken teeth denoting damage to the head) he hath covered me with ashes.  And thou hast removed my soul far off from peace: I forgat prosperity.  And I said, My strength and my hope is perished from the LORD:  Remembering mine affliction and my misery, the wormwood and the gall.  My soul hath them still in remembrance, and is humbled in me”.   Lamentations 3 v 14-20

Saul on the road to Damascus

“Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.” Acts 9 v 4

The usual interpretation is to say this is an allusion to an animal goad. But that’s not an analogy found anywhere else in scripture. The word “to kick” means to stamp.  Saul evidently saw himself as attempting to stamp out sin yet Jesus showed him he was fighting the wrong enemy.

Again in the context of a bruise (to the head), there are interesting references in Daniel. The dream of Nebuchadnezzar contains this detail:

“And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things: and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise”. Dan 2 v 40

It was the power of Rome which the Jewish leaders invoked to kill their adversary and a desperate Pilate tried to wash his hands of the crime.

Daniel’s dream of the four beasts (which mirrors the chronology of kingdoms in Neb’s image) contains further references to Rome which again have reference to Rome’s role in the death of Christ; the crushing of the seed of the serpent.

“There before me was a fourth beast – terrifying and frightening and very powerful. It had large iron teeth; it crushed and devoured its victims and trampled underfoot whatsoever was left”. Dan 7 v 7

“Then I wanted to know the true meaning of the fourth beast, which was different from all the others and most terrifying, with its iron teeth and bronze claws – the beast that crushed and devoured its victims and trampled underfoot whatever was left”.  Dan 7 v 19

“The fourth beast is a fourth kingdom that will  appear on earth. It will be different from all the other kingdoms and will devour the whole earth, trampling it down and crushing it”.  Dan 7v23

Three times this is mentioned which is in itself is significant (the threefold nature of temptation).

The connections back to Genesis 3 v 15 and the head wound to the seed of the serpent are persuasive. It was Jesus who experienced this fulfillment at the hands of the Romans.

The physical signs of a head wound suffered by Jesus are less obvious but it’s fitting that:

(a) in the garden of Gethsemane he “sweated as it were great drops of blood”;

(b) as a result of the beating he received, including being punched in the face and hit around the head with rods, we’re told “his visage was so marred more than any man” (Isaiah 52 v 14);

(c) he had his beard pulled out (Isaiah 50 v 6);

(d) he had a crown of thorns rammed onto his head (a link to the curse of Eden which he was bearing); and

(e) he may have been partially blinded by this treatment. (A discussion of the reasons for this suggestion do not appear here).

Golgotha

 It is often speculated that Golgotha, the place of a skull, was so-called because that is where the head of Goliath was buried after David had brought the trophy to Jerusalem.  That would fit nicely. How much more fitting that the seed of the serpent, Jesus the son of man, was to suffer a fatal head wound at the place of a skull.  His skull (unlike the skulls of many others who were types of sin in the flesh) remained intact because not a bone of him was broken. But, nevertheless, sin was broken within his flesh.

Jesus – the light of the world

The word of God “is a lamp unto my feet” wrote David (Psalm 119). Light was obtained in Biblical times by burning olive oil is also symbolic of the word of God. Both symbols speak of the work of Jesus, the light of the world:

Olive oil is extracted by the crushing of the olive fruit which could be said to be parallel with the head wound which Jesus suffered in his work to provide light:

“While I am in the world, I am the light of the world.” John 9 v 5

Receiving the wound to the heel

The other side of the Gen 3v15 equation is familiar in that Jesus, the seed of the woman, suffered a wound to the heel.  The nails driven through his feet at his crucifixion are an obvious fulfillment to this. Archaeological evidence shows it was Roman practice to drive a nail through the heel.  Jesus recovered from this wound when God raised him from the dead.

Jesus has always been seen as the seed of the woman who would receive a wound to the heel.

“Dogs have surrounded me;  a band of evil men has encircled me,  they have  pierced  my hands and my  feet”. Psa 22 v 16

It is noteworthy, the serpent could not receive a wound to the heel as its punishment was to be deprived of any feet and therefore destined to crawl in the dust.

Head and feet

If Jesus fulfilled both aspects of Genesis 3v15 then, in effect, he simultaneously received two wounds; to head and feet.

Prior to his suffering, he was to be anointed for his burial twice – once on the head, the other on his feet.  Little wonder Jesus commended those women so highly for their love and faith. They had more insight into his work than many of his disciples.

In the tomb at the time of Christ’s resurrection, John’s gospel says there was an angel where his head had been and another where his feet had been.

Head and feet (Nebuchadnezzar part 2)

Nebuchadnezzar and his empire was depicted in the dream interpreted by Daniel (chap 2) as the head of gold.  The lover of Song of Solomon (Christ) is described as having a head of gold (Song  5 v 11).  There’s something paradoxical in a head of gold representing the extremes of both good and bad.

This same image in the dream received a wound in the feet when struck by the rock cut without hands.  Jesus suffered a wound in the feet as the seed of the woman.

What is less obvious (although a little tenuous perhaps) is that the head of Nebuchadnezzar’s image was also to receive a wound when crushed to powder by the rock cut without hands (albeit along with the rest of the statue).

That rock represents Christ at his second coming. Possibly, therefore, another example of Christ being the smiter as well as being the smitten (in both the feet and head).  The symbol denotes the end of the age, but there are possible allusions to Christ’s work.

Nebuchadnezzar was depicted as the head of Gold, elevated over the earth, it is fitting that when God humbled Nebuchadnezzar, He referred to him as Lucifer, the shining one;

“How art thou fallen from heaven, O  Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!  For thou hast said in thine heart I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:  I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.  Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit”. Isaiah 14 v 12-15

Jesus seems to pick up on this symbology when hearing the disciples’ reports of how effective their preaching had been.  He seems to view it as a battle between the natural and the spiritual and applies it to the conflict being played out in himself:

“And he said unto them, I beheld  Satan  as lightning  fall  from heaven.  Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you”. Luke 10 v 18+19

It could be objected in what way was Jesus ‘in heaven’?  Heaven is something he aspired to, knowing that upon completion of his work he would be at the right hand of God. He says elsewhere “and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?” (John 6 v 62). He had never literally been in heaven, but only as the Logos of God.

Being the logos (ie the  thought, intention or purpose) present with God from the beginning,  he didn’t regard his sin-cursed nature to be fit to be in the presence of God. This description of falling from heaven is linked to the idea of the disciples also treading on sin and dealing it a head wound – only possible though the destruction of sin-nature in himself.

Nebuchadnezzar’s madness

Nebuchadnezzar, like Adam and Jesus, was given dominion over the animal kingdom.

Another episode in his life was when God humbled him with the onset of 7 years madness. He became like an animal for 7 times – possibly a symbolic death (similar to Job’s sufferings).

One of the curses placed on Israel for disobedience was madness.  (Deut 28)

Likewise, Jesus was accused of madness.

Neb’s humiliation has similarities to that suffered by Jesus. Neb was cured by God and came to recognize Him as the one true God whereupon he proclaimed this to the world. Similarly, Christ’s resurrection is the greatest testament to God’s power and glory.

Joseph wounded in the head and heel

Joseph is a strong type of Christ. We are told in Psalms received two distinct wounds during his prison sentence, typical of Christ’s sentence to the grave.

They bruised his feet with shackles, his neck was put in irons,  till what he foretold came to pass, till the word of the LORD proved him true. The king sent and released him,  the ruler of peoples set him free. Psa 105 v 18-20

Delivering the wound to the head

The destruction of sin-nature required the seed of the serpent to suffer a head wound (which we have linked to Jesus) but it was also Jesus who was to deliver that fatal blow.  Various passages seem to chime in with this concept.

“You will  tread upon the lion and the cobra;  you will trample the great lion and the serpent.  “Because he loves me,” says the LORD, “I will rescue him;  I will protect him, for he acknowledges my name. He will call upon me, and I will answer him”. Psa 91 v 13-15

The lion and serpent are both symbols used of Jesus and perhaps this is an allusion to both aspects of his character being destroyed in his sacrificial work.

Similar language is used of those who would preach the gospel after the resurrection of Jesus.

“Behold, I give unto you power to  tread  on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy”. Luke 10 v 19

That  work of Jesus would benefit Israel whose redemption is described in similar terms:

“You will again have compassion on us;  you will  tread our sins underfoot  and hurl all our iniquities into the depths of the sea”.  Micah 7 v 19

Micah 7 is interesting. It contains repeated allusions to the work of Messiah in terms of the destruction of sin in the context of Genesis 3 v 15. It also follows a  progression through God’s purpose; how that work is imputed as righteousness for Messiah, how it then accomplishes the destruction of the enemy and finally is imputed to God’s people. See below;

“Because I have sinned against him, I will bear the LORD’s wrath, until he pleads my case and establishes my right. He will bring me out into the light; I will see his righteousness. Then my enemy will see it and will be covered with shame, she who said to me, Where is the LORD your God? My eyes will see her downfall; even now she will be trampled underfoot like mire in the streets. ..

Nations will see and be ashamed, deprived of all their power. They will lay their hands on their mouths and their ears will become deaf.

They will lick dust like a snake, like creatures that crawl on the ground. They will come trembling out of their dens; they will turn in fear to the LORD our God and will be afraid of you.

Who is a God like you, who pardons sin and forgives the transgression of the remnant of his inheritance? You do not stay angry for ever but delight  to show mercy.

You will again have compassion on us; you will tread our sins underfoot and hurl all our iniquities into the depths of the sea.

You will be true to Jacob, and show mercy to Abraham, as you pledged on oath to our fathers in days long ago”.  Micah 7 v 9+10 and 16-20

The destruction of the ungodly (i.e. those that identified with sin) is often spoken about in terms of their being crushed in the winepress of God’s fury; an allusion to the practice of a vineyard owner treading his harvest of grapes to extract juice. The allusions to blood and sacrifice are unavoidable.

At his second coming, Jesus will be the means by which God judges the earth:

“I have trodden the winepress alone; and of the people there was none with me: for I will  tread  them in mine anger, and trample them in my fury; and their blood shall be sprinkled upon my garments, and I will stain all my raiment.   For the day of vengeance is in mine heart, and the year of my redeemed is come”. Isa 63 v 3+4

“`The LORD will roar from on high;  he will thunder from his holy dwelling  and roar mightily against his land.  He will shout like those who tread the grapes, shout against all who live on the earth”. Jer 23 v 30

Coming out of his mouth is a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. “He will rule them with an iron scepter.” He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty. Revelation 19:15

Jesus is perfectly qualified to mete out this justice, not least since it was a pattern played out in himself in the crushing of his own sin-nature.

Spirit & Flesh

There are many verses contrasting spirit and flesh. Although opposites, yet inextricably linked in the person of Jesus (in the days of his flesh). The same conflict should be taking place in the followers of Jesus.

“It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life”.  John 6 v 63

“For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.  For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, (a possible allusion to Jesus being led by the spirit into the wilderness) they are the sons of God”.  Rom 8 v 13+14

 “For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want”. Galatians 5 v 17

Christ the temple

Another Biblical theme is the recurring idea of a place of fellowship between God and man.  The first example was Eden, followed by the tabernacle which was later replaced by the temple in Jerusalem (notably Solomon’s, Ezra’s, Herod’s as well as the future temple as detailed by Ezekiel).

Christ talks about the temple of his body.

“Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.”  The Jews replied, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?”   But the temple he had spoken of was his body”.  John 2 v 19-21

Jesus’ words are difficult to grasp until it is understood that his body was, in a sense, a meeting place between God and man. He had the characteristics of both, inherited respectively from his two parents. He seems therefore to have been painfully conscious that the temple of his body was corrupted by sin-nature and therefore not fit as a place for God to dwell.  Like the leprous house spoken of in Leviticus 14, it was only fit to be torn down and removed to an unclean place outside the city. That is exactly the experience of Jesus.  Just as, acting in the role of priest, he had inspected the temple courts in Jerusalem and found them polluted, he turned his scrutiny on himself and found the temple of his body tainted with human nature (i.e. spiritual leprosy).  Consequently, he broke his body outside the city. As part of this perhaps he physically broke his own heart (“Reproach hath broken my heart;” Psa 69 v 20 and elsewhere). In effect he broke and tore down his own body. It’s difficult to understand how it might have been physically possible to literally break his own heart (in two?) so perhaps (and it’s purely speculation) Jesus used the Holy Spirit for this purpose. Never did he use it for his own ends but only in advancing the purpose of the Father, which this would have been.

Only some years later was the literal temple torn down in AD 70 and removed to an unclean place as a judgment against the house of Israel for their corruption.

An incidental observation concerns events at the time of Jehu (2 Kings 10) when the temple of Baal was filled with his worshippers and then destroyed. In a sense, this represents what occurred in the case of Jesus who took on the sins of the world when he destroyed the temple of his body.

Moses

There always had to be some interesting connections between Moses and Christ, “the prophet like unto Moses”. For example, there are parallels to be made between the plagues performed on Egypt  through Moses and the work of Christ.

God revealed Himself to Moses at the burning bush with His memorial name; “I am who I am” or “I will be who I will be” which we understand to mean God manifest in a multitude.

But Moses wanted reassurance that God had appeared as deliverer and he was then given signs to confirm this.

“Moses answered, “What if they do not believe me or listen to me and say, `The LORD did not appear to you’?”  Then the LORD said to him, “What is that in your hand?”  “A staff,” he replied.  The LORD said, “Throw it on the ground.”  Moses threw it on the ground and it became a snake, and he ran from it.  Then the LORD said to him, “Reach out your hand and take it by the tail.” So Moses reached out and took hold of the snake and it turned back into a staff in his hand.  “This,” said the LORD, “is so that they may believe that the LORD, the God of their fathers – the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob – has appeared to you.” Exodus 4 v 1-5

Points to note:

• The rod = a symbol of Christ (eg the rod which later budded)
• Christ “made sin for us ….”
• Recovered/resurrected
• This sign was that “they may believe”

Christ was (a) “made sin for us” and (b) was cured as the sign that God has “appeared” to us (‘Immanuel’, God with us).

(I will return to the symbol of the rod shortly).

Moses was then given a second sign, which basically reinforces the same idea as the first.

“Then the LORD said, “Put your hand inside your cloak.” So Moses put his hand into his cloak, and when he took it out, it was leprous, like snow. “Now put it back into your cloak,” he said. So Moses put his hand back into his cloak, and when he took it out, it was restored, like the rest of his flesh. Then the LORD said, “If they do not believe you or pay attention to the first miraculous sign, they may believe the second”. Exodus 4 v 6-8

• Moses’ made leprous = representing the symptoms of sin-nature.
• Arm      = Jesus the “arm of the Lord”.
• Cured   = Jesus cured of sin nature and its symptoms.

Again this was confirmation of God’s visitation to His people also being a sign of His future purpose in Jesus. The meaning of both signs is one and the same; that God had appeared to deliver His people, ultimately in the person of His son, made sin but to be cured.  This links with the suffering servant passage of Isaiah.

“Who hath believed our report and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed” Isaiah 53 v 1

The symbology is repeated in Psalm 74

Why do you hold back your hand, your right hand? Take it from the folds of your garment and destroy them! Psalm 74:11

There are many examples which reinforce that Jesus needed healing from sin-nature such as Job, Hezekiah and Uzziah amongst others.  Psalm 38 prophetically alludes to Jesus:

“For mine iniquities are gone over mine head: as an heavy burden they are too heavy for me.   My wounds stink and are corrupt because of my foolishness.  I am troubled; I am bowed down greatly; I go mourning all the day long.  For my loins are filled with a loathsome disease and there is no soundness in my flesh”.  Psa 38 v 4-7

 Moses (who can be equated with the Law and, thereby, righteousness by works) didn’t enter the Promised Land, just as Christ’s sin-nature was left in the grave and did not pass to immortality. Joshua, however, (who represents the immortalized Jesus) did.

Returning to Moses and the snake/rod symbology.

The allegory seems to be taken a stage further when Moses later presents himself before Pharaoh:

“When Pharaoh shall speak unto you, saying, Shew a miracle for you: then thou shalt say unto Aaron, Take thy rod, and cast it before Pharaoh, and it shall become a serpent. And Moses and Aaron went in unto Pharaoh, and they did so as the LORD had commanded: and Aaron cast down his rod before Pharaoh, and before his servants, and it became a serpent.   Then Pharaoh also called the wise men and the sorcerers: now the magicians of Egypt, they also did in like manner with their enchantments.   For they cast down every man his rod, and they became serpents: but Aaron’s rod swallowed up their rods.”  Ex 7 v 9-12 

• The rod made a serpent = Jesus “made sin for us”.
• Swallowed up the other serpents. Victory imputed to others.

The sign of God’s visitation (‘Immanuel’) was in the rod changed to a snake which had dominion over the other snakes and then was rejuvenated. Reminiscent of the language of Corinthians:

“So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory”.  I Cor 15 v 54

In  short – the sign that God would/will save His people from Egypt is that death will be swallowed up in victory.

Dual Types

types which prefigure both the natural and the spiritual sides of Jesus simultaneously

By “dual types” I mean examples where both aspects of Christ’s character are exhibited simultaneously.  Examples of this have already been given; such as the scapegoat (an offering in two parts) or the dreams interpreted by Joseph (of the butler & baker).  In both, Christ’s sin-nature (which was killed) as well as his spiritual or Godly side (which was preserved) are displayed at the same time, albeit in separate individuals.

Here are some other types/allegories which I suggest show a similar idea.

Job & Elihu

Job is an example of the suffering servant, smitten for no particular wrongdoing on his part.  Elihu’s revelation and mediator ship is revealed latterly (a message likened to new wine ready to burst from wine skins).

David and Goliath (1 Sam 17)

It’s familiar to liken David, the killer of Goliath, to Christ as the victor over sin.  I won’t explore the parallels as it’s a study in itself; suffice it to say that both David and Jesus were “men after God’s own heart”.

Goliath also is a well-known type, but representing sin in the flesh. Probably not exhaustive, but here are some allegorical details:

• Goliath; meaning ‘champion’. “Oh sting where is thy victory”
• Height of 6 cubits and a span. 6 = the number of sin/man (An overwhelming and intimidating enemy)
• Bronze helmet = head of sin
• Armour of bronze/javelin of bronze/bronze greaves = sin nature
• Coat of scales = serpent
• Iron point = symbol of strength also used of Rome
• 600 shekels = six, the number of man
• Uncircumcised = Of the world
• 40 days challenged Israel = Israel’s and Christ’s temptations in the wilderness.
• Israel dismayed/terrified – “the terrors  of  death  are fallen upon me” Psa 55
• Cursed David = the curse in Eden (and the law was a curse)
• Stone struck on the forehead and head cut off = head wound
• Head brought to Jerusalem = The place of Christ’s victory on the cross (Golgotha place of a skull?)
• Goliath’s death resulted in freedom for Israel = “The spirit of the Lord is upon me…. to preach deliverance to the captives”. Luke 4 v 18

The sum of the two, however, is perhaps more significant than consideration of them separately.  The conflict was undoubtedly a clash between the natural and the spiritual.  The natural was dealt a fatal head wound by the spiritual and  points to the victory of Jesus and the conflict which took place in his flesh.

• David, the man after God’s own heart, who destroyed sin in the flesh = Jesus son of God.
• Goliath, the man representing sin in the flesh, killed with a head wound = Jesus son of man.

There doesn’t seem to be any consensus as to whether any of David’s Psalms specifically refer to his victory over Goliath. However, there are many references to dominion with the use of feet – little wonder since the greater son of David was to crush sin-nature under his feet (although also being fatally crushed in the process).

“I crushed them so that they could not rise; they fell beneath my feet.  You armed me with strength for battle; you made my adversaries bow at my  feet”. Psalm 18 v 38-39

The victory over Goliath and sin-nature is extrapolated to become the victory and dominion of Messiah over the entire creation.

“You made him ruler over the works of your hands;  you put everything  under his feet”. Psalm 8 v 6

The theme continues to the time of Christ’s judgment of the earth at his second advent.  The nations are described in terms of being a sacrifice to God:

“I have trodden the winepress alone; and of the people there was none with me: for I will tread them in mine anger, and trample them in my fury; and their blood shall be sprinkled upon my garments, and I will stain all my raiment.  For the day of vengeance is in mine heart, and the year of my redeemed is come  ….  I trampled the nations in my anger;  in my wrath I made them drunk  and poured their blood on the ground.” Isaiah 63 v 3,4+6

“And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the  winepress  of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God”.  Rev 19 v 15

The progression of thought in these passages can be summarized as:

• Goliath/Jesus (son of man) denoting sin in the flesh killed by a head wound and trodden under foot by the work of David/Jesus (son of God) giving victory.
• The nations, denoting sin in the flesh, to be crushed under foot by Jesus son of God at his return to assert a further victory.

Bathsheba’s first baby/David

Despite David’s adultery and murder, he was told that God had forgiven his sin. He was shortly to contemplate how that could be possible because (as brother John Martin points out) there was no sacrifice under the law which could atone for what he had done.  He then experienced what it was like to watch an ‘innocent’ son die;  just as God was to do in the case of his own ‘innocent’ son. Thereby, the means for the forgiveness of David’s sin was made possible.

David’s baby was sick for 7 days and eventually died.  During that time, David lay prostrate and wouldn’t eat.  He allied himself to the child and during this period it could be said he symbolically died.

Similarly, those who hope to benefit from Christ’s death are invited to ally themselves with the death of Christ in baptism and thereafter to be dead to sin.

At the point of the death of the child, David got up, washed and ate; a symbolic resurrection. The two events can be seen in unison; the child’s death was accompanied by the resurrection of David.  In type, this can be equated to the two natures/characteristics of Jesus; one was raised to life; the other remained in the grave.

Joshua/Achan/King of Ai

In Achan can be seen the life of Adam but also pointing to the remedy for sin through the Second Adam.

The previous examples combine the characteristics of two individuals to depict the work of Jesus in type.

This next example is a sequence of events where the characteristics and events involving 3 individuals portray the destruction of sin-nature and prefigure Jesus.

Assuming a familiarity with the events, the following is a summary of relevant points:

Joshua

Joshua (the Hebrew form of ‘Jesus’)

3000 troops.  Three – associated with the temptations of Jesus and/or the number of resurrection.

Ai, “East of Bethel” meaning ‘house of God’. Emphasizing the conflict in relation to an inheritance in the Lord.

As a Canaanite stronghold, Ai was an obstacle to the promised inheritance of land.

Initial defeat resulting from sin in the camp.

Achan of the tribe of Judah – as was Jesus.

Sin was present in 3 forms (lust of the flesh, lust of eyes, pride of life). Jesus tempted in all points as we are.

Demoralised, Joshua fell on his face before the ark until evening.  Parallel with  Christ prostrate in Gethsemane.

Achan

Achan taken by lot; hints of Jonah and the Scapegoat.

Achan commanded to repent; “Give glory to the Lord God of Israel” (what was the point of repentance if his final end was then?) – Jesus; “I have glorified thy name”.

Achan stoned by all Israel – “his blood be on us and on our children”.

His sons and daughters also destroyed – we are buried with Christ.

The Lord turned from his fierce anger.

Joshua held out his javelin – arm of the Lord revealed in Christ; the javelin a device for piercing (Christ’s side pierced by a spear).

Sin eradicated from the camp and eventual victory at Ai – the destruction of sin-nature achieved by Jesus.

Burned city causing a plume of smoke – hints of the fate of future Babylon the Great.

12,000 fell that day – natural Israel?

King of Ai

King of Ai, hanged on tree – Christ hung on a tree.

King of Ai thrown at city gate – Christ crucified outside the city.

King of Ai buried under a pile of stones – Christ’s tomb blocked with a stone.

The Israelites plundered Ai – echoes of the Exodus, ie liberty from enslavement of sin.

Ai made a permanent heap of ruins – a desolation like Babylon/Babylon the Great).

Conclusion/summary

• Achan and the king of Ai represent Christ’s sin-nature (son of man).
• Joshua represents Christ’s spiritual characteristics and eventually subduing the world (son of God).

Phinehas – Moab seduces Israel (Numb 25)

There are powerful principles at work here but this is a more difficult allegory to comprehend.  It involves Christ and his bride having their sin-nature destroyed together, by an outside agency who also represents Christ.

It’s easy to miss that this episode was in fact two separate incidents which are easily confused into one. It begins with the Israelites quickly straying from God’s ways by the influence of foreigners. It records that the Israelites joined the religious practices of the Moabites (descended from Lot) which led them into sexual immorality. This brought quick and decisive action by Moses, as instructed by God.

However, the passage continues by describing an incident involving a Midianiite (as opposed to a Moabite) committing fornication with an Israelite. The Midianties were not strangers to Israel. Jethro was a Midianite who had been the one to suggest that Moses delegate judgment of the camp to 70 elders. Moses was married to one of his daughters.

However, when an Israelite was seen entering a tent to have sex with a Midianite woman, swift justice was executed by a zealous Israelite, Phinehas.   Phinehas is of interest, being the one to strike the blow to destroy sin in the camp, there seems also to be significance in the pair who received the fatal blow. It was an Israelite, Zimri, and his gentile partner, Cozbi. Their death together seems to be the more significant in that, by the death of the man, along with the woman, “atonement was made”. These words jump out from the page and, with that bench mark, other details take on meaning which reinforces an enacted parable.

Broadly, the type seems to be as follows:

• Phinehas; the spiritual aspect of Christ’s character dealt a fatal blow to sin in the camp.
• Zimri, the Israelite killed with a spear: the sin-nature of Jesus who died with a pierced side (on behalf of his bride – echoes of the first Adam whose side was pierced to bring forth his bride).
• Cozbi, the gentile ‘bride’ who died with (and after) her partner (ie dead in Christ).

Other details which point to the spiritual significance of this incident are:

The events occurred “before the eyes”;  Jesus at his crucifixion:

“O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth,  before  whose  eyes  Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?” Galatians 3 v 1

Phinehas, son of Aaron. Priestly office: Christ – a priest after the order of Melchizedek;

Drove the spear: to confirm he was dead on the cross, a solider pierced Christ’s side with a spear (Adam’s side was pierced in the formation of his partner).

Through both: an Israelite with a gentile bride. Christ and his bride both died to sin (Christ first then his bride, sharing in his burial; “we are therefore buried with him” Rom 6 v 4).

Plague stopped: the law of sin and death defeated.  The salvation of the nation depicted through this event.

24,000 died of plague: a sacrifice covering the sins of both natural and spiritual Israel (ie 12 + 12).

 He (Phinehas) and his descendants: a promise of benefit to his natural descendants.  Christ’s spiritual family also promised to benefit from his atoning work. “He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities”. Isa 53 v 11

Zealous: “zeal for thine house hath eaten me up” (Psa 69 v 9).

Atonement:  “And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement”. Rom 5 v11.

Zimri son of Salu (Simeonite). A Jew.

Cozbi daughter of Zur (tribal chief of Midianite family).  A gentile.

I read somewhere that in the Hebrew “Cozbi” is of a similar root to the word “cazav” (or, phonetically, “kazav”), which means to “lie, deceive, lying, deception“. If so, this would link back to the original lie of the serpent, “thou shalt not surely die” – but the remedy through association with the antitypical man.

This allegory was a victory performed outside the law, as also was Christ’s atoning work.

Incidental observations

Solomon

Criticism of Solomon seems to come rather too instinctively. It’s easy to condemn him as he clearly strayed from God’s principles. However, Jesus regarded Solomon worthy to be cited as an example (“Even Solomon in all his glory”) and he wasn’t ignorant of the King’s failings.

Solomon’s kingdom was the ‘Kingdom of God’ in the past. His kingdom is described as “God’s Kingdom” and he sat on “the throne of the Lord” (I Chron 29v23). It was a prototype of the Kingdom of God of the millennium.  Parallels between Solomon and Christ are therefore entirely appropriate. Clearly, Solomon’s kingdom had its flaws (notably his many foreign wives and concubines) and therefore could be styled the ‘natural’ kingdom which anticipated the spiritual kingdom to come.  Some other parallels are:

The king of the natural order had multitudes of wives and concubines –  the king of the future spiritual order will have a multitudinous bride.

One partner in particular seems special, his marriage to Pharaoh’s daughter (1 Kings 3 v 1). A union typical of Christ’s multitudinous gentile bride called out of Egypt.

Solomon built the physical house of God, the temple. Christ has laid the foundation of the spiritual temple the building of which his followers are the constituent parts and is to be completed through his work.

Solomon was given wisdom by God exceeding that of any man. Christ is the personification of the wisdom of God (“Wisdom  calls aloud in the street,  she raises her voice in the public squares” Prov 1 v 20).

Solomon’s wisdom was given him to enable him to ‘discern between good and evil’ (1 Kings 3 v 9) – Jesus, the wisdom of God personified, overcame the curse which was associated with good & evil.

The revenue in gold for a year in Solomon’s kingdom was 666 talents (2 Chron 9 v 13). This hints that Solomon’s reign was  tainted with sin- nature. Christ, also in the line of David, although similarly tainted with sin- nature, will declare a purity of reign previously unwitnessed on earth.

When God promised David a seed to sit on his throne it was accompanied by this statement; “I will be his father, and he will be my son. When he does wrong, I will punish him with the rod of men, with floggings inflicted by men”.  (2 Sam 7 v 14)  At no time is it ever recorded that this was fulfilled in Solomon, although it was literally fulfilled in Jesus (as he bore the punishments due to foolish Israel).

Stoning

Under the law, the method of destroying ‘sinners’ from the nation was by stoning.  This seems barbaric and even the most hardened Bible student can’t help cringing slightly to think of the outworking of this law. There is a theme, however, where sin and the destruction of sin is done by stoning and/or burial under stones. There are many examples. Ultimately, Jesus, a man of sin-nature, was buried behind a large stone. The act of stoning, therefore, as carried out many times in the history of Israel, was always pointing forward to the sacrifice of Christ:  the destruction of sin in the flesh.  Hence, for this rite to be regarded as  barbaric is really only due to ignorance, since its true intention is the proclamation of God’s righteousness through Christ and, in turn, His favour towards Israel and mankind.

The symbology then mutates. Whereas Jesus was the object of destruction  before his resurrection, after he then becomes the tool by which God will destroy sin. He will send Jesus back to the earth as the stone depicted in Neb’s image to smash sin and grind the nations of the world to powder. An example of the  transition of the work of Jesus pre and post resurrection; the former with sin-nature, the latter without sin-nature.

Is Christ divided?

Paul, in an appeal for unity, cites Jesus as the model:

“I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought. My brothers, some from Chloe’s household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. What I mean is this: One of you says, “I follow Paul”; another, “I follow Apollos”; another, “I follow Cephas”; still another, “I follow Christ.” Is Christ divided? I Cor 1 v 10-13.

Yet, the model is quoted as a question, not a statement of fact.  Whilst the simple teaching of this passage remains valid, could it be that one is invited to consider the example of Jesus at a deeper level. That is, in the days of his mortality, Christ’s characteristics were divided in the manner discussed.

It was only after the victory over sin-nature was achieved and he was rewarded with immortality that he was no longer divided.  By analogy, this side of the Kingdom, it is inevitable, though regrettable, that the body of believers will be divided.  Analogous to Judah and Israel perhaps.

Possible Objection(s)

There are no doubt many objections to this study.  One in particular might be that, if unbelieving Israel are likened to the seed of the serpent, then how can the symbol be applied to two separate entities (i.e. Jesus and Israel)?  This actually presents no difficulty (and in fact reinforces the point) when it is recognized that Christ and Israel are often interchangeable or paralleled (eg “out of Egypt have I called my son”).  The explanation seems to be that both Israel and Christ carry the Name of God and therefore parallels are inevitable.

Practical/personal applications

External conflict

 We are called to live at peace in our personal relationships; marriages, families, ecclesias and generally. It follows we should avoid conflict as much as possible and appropriate.  But to avoid conflict at all costs is not the example shown by Jesus. There were many occasions where his humility and meekness were outweighed by the imperative of standing up for God’s principles.  In such situations he even sought conflict head on eg cleansing the temple for which purpose he made a whip.  Another occasion was when Peter challenged his impending death (“this shall not be unto thee”) and thereby received the rebuke: “Get thee behind me Satan”.  Peter’s temptation was, in essence, the temptation of the serpent (“you shall not die”) and Jesus’ response indicates he saw it in that light.

Moses is another example of a man who was humble towards self and his own ambitions, but uncompromising and zealous to stand up for God’s ways.

Care is needed however. There is a tendency sometimes for people to use ‘standing up for the Truth’ as a cloak for being zealous over issues which are, in reality, their own personal preferences or objectives.  It’s not uncommon for people to fight to preserve human tradition on the basis, probably misguided, that they are fighting for God’s principles when really they are pursuing their own personal preferences.

Internal conflict

If Jesus was represented by a bronze snake, then how much more prominent is sin-nature in us?  The serpent nature seeks gratification and our natural instinct is to feed it.

The attitude of ‘the world’ (in the West anyhow) is to have what you want when you want and not deny yourself.  There’s a false logic that, if we satisfy such cravings, they will go away. But it’s counter intuitive. Rather, it’s more often the case that feeding an instinct will fuel that desire whereas we are commanded to “resist the devil and he will flee from you”. As a compulsive collector from my youth, I speak from experience. No matter what one adds to your collection, there is always the desire for the next.

Food is an everyday example. Feed the appetite and it will be satisfied for a short time but it will return, probably sooner and more strongly than you would hope.  The appetite for food is often a battle between the flesh and mind. In Bible times, fasting seems to have been a normal aspect of life, presumably to exercise oneself in the battle to deny gratification of the flesh. That sounds puritanical in this day and age but it’s an exercise which is probably far more profitable than is generally appreciated.  Jesus had a life-long battle against the flesh. That contest didn’t wait until the start of his mission of preaching.  Surely, contending with the flesh and his dominion of it encompassed the physical desire for food. When he said “my meat is to do the will of the Father” it was no hollow boast. He was well practised in resisting physical promptings, all part of his preparation to destroy his flesh on the cross.

Sexual desire is another personal battleground. Gratify a sexual appetite and it’s likely to grow – a good reason why it is reserved for marriage.

For men, women are the prime example of something that appeals to all aspects of sin nature; the lust of eyes, lust of the flesh and pride of life.  A potent cocktail.  When David saw Bathsheba, he desired her and he had the power to influence her against her own will (which probably flattered David’s pride).

In our world, if we feed the natural, we are likely to find acceptance and even respect.  Deprive the natural and feed the spiritual mind and it’s unlikely to meet with approval.

But we do have a spiritual side – or the potential for one. It’s the spiritual side we’re encouraged to feed from the scriptures and thereby develop the mind of Christ.   Naturally, we don’t have an appetite for spiritual things.  But the less we actively feed the spiritual person, the weaker it will become and, insidiously, it is replaced by the natural mind.

“Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows

The one who  sows  to please his sinful nature, from that nature (from the flesh) will reap destruction; the one who  sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life”. Gal 6 v 7+ 8

“Those who live according to the sinful nature have their minds set on what that nature desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires.  The mind of sinful man is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace; the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so”.

Paul (Romans 8  v 5-8)

To feed the spiritual person within doesn’t come naturally.  But the more we do, the more we should grow spiritually; the stronger we can become and so should our appetite for spiritual food.

Paul spoke of the conflict which existed in him.

“I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do – this I keep on doing. …..What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death?  Thanks be to God – through Jesus Christ our Lord!”

However, no amount of suppressing the natural and feeding the spiritual can make us righteous. That can only be through God’s gift of grace.

Like the Israelites in the wilderness, we have been bitten by sin.  We may not have realized it, we didn’t feel the teeth, but we inherited a bite which can be traced back to Adam – sin & death.  The venom is at work in us. We don’t suffer  haemorrhaging or asphyxiation from our nerves shutting down, but the relentless process will one day terminate our life functions: “In dying thou shalt die”.

But Christ’s victory can be imputed to us:

“Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life”.
John 3 v 14

Concluding comments

Recognition that Jesus may also have been the seed of the serpent is not crucial to salvation. Jesus’ own exposition of the brazen serpent was given privately to one of Israel’s leaders (though put on record for succeeding generations), rather than being preached on the mountainsides of Galilee.  If this theory is correct, and he was the seed of the serpent, then it emphasizes the magnitude of Jesus’ victory in accomplishing the will of The Father. It also gives new and deeper insight into many other incidents in scripture; all reinforcing God’s principles and shedding further light on His character and grace.

Paul wrote to Timothy that he should be “rightly dividing the word of Truth” (2 Timothy 2:15).   This is almost an invitation to explore how the word, the logos of God, can be spiritually discerned involving a division or distinction.  Clearly, there is a right way to divide the word and a wrong way.

Because this concept of his dual role may appear to contradict previous accepted scriptural interpretation doesn’t necessarily negate them.  The scriptures are intended to be read and understood on a number of different levels (first principle doctrines excepted) and it should come as no surprise to find deeper layers of meaning in the word of God.  Undoubtedly there are many other layers of meaning yet to be unearthed.

I am conscious this study will not be welcomed by some. I haven’t set out to be provocative but nevertheless decided to go into print. Although, for the most part, we should not actively seek conflict, it is an inevitable experience under the curse – as Jesus himself portrayed. Thanks be to God that gives the victory in Jesus Christ our Lord.

Simon Boyd
Brockley
London

 

SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

What follows are additional notes which explore further suggestions for the application of these concepts.  The idea that both the spiritual character and sin-nature are depicted simultaneously in one person or even in pairs of people opens up many avenues of enquiry and exposition.  These are not fully explored and many simply set out as suggestions for further enquiry. If the main study was not to your taste, then it’s not recommended that you read on – as these examples are rather more subtle, discreet and possibly even tenuous.

Snakes – more observations;  as symbols of sin nature

Snakes are designed to kill their prey by one of two methods; constricting and poisoning.

1. a) Constrictors; Crush their prey (a possible link to parable of the sower, where the seed which fell among weeds was strangled).
2. b) Venom; involving the piercing of flesh to inject venom from a bite (links to “the sting of death”).

Also, the way snakes are able to swallow prey which is many times bigger  than their mouths is also eloquent of the flesh. It is grotesque to watch footage of a snake unhinge its jaws and slowly devour a larger victim.  This is the appetite of the sin-nature inherited from Adam.

More suggestions of types/allegories of sin in the flesh

(with parallels to the work of Jesus)

Oreb & Zeeb

Oreb & Zeeb, the enemies of Israel, suffered head wounds.

²⁵ They also captured two of the Midianite leaders, Oreb and Zeeb. They killed Oreb at the rock of Oreb, and Zeeb at the winepress of Zeeb. They pursued the Midianites and brought the heads of Oreb and Zeeb to Gideon, who was by the Jordan.  Judges 7 v 25

A company eating in the presence of God

Nadab and Abihu were to be notable for their later rebellion had, ironically, been privileged to eat in the presence of God.

Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and the seventy elders of Israel went up  and saw the God of Israel. Under his feet was something like a pavement made of sapphire, clear as the sky itself.   ¹¹ But God did not raise his hand against these leaders of the Israelites; they saw God, and they ate and drank. Ex 24 v9-11

Moses + Aaron = Spiritual
Nadab+ Abihu =  Natural
(i.e. between them, these 4 show the two aspects of Christ’s mortal character).
70 elders =gentiles brought into fellowship.

The way of a snake on a rock (Prov 30)

• “There are three things that are too amazing for me,  four that I do not understand: (all depictions of Jesus). 
• the way of an eagle in the sky,  (a picture of immortality – seen initially in Jesus).
• the way of a snake on a rock,  (sin nature contrasted against the rock of salvation= a dual type of Jesus?)
• the way of a ship on the high seas,  (Possibly Christ’s authority over the sea of nations)
• and the way of a man with a maiden.  (Christ’s marriage to his multitudinous bride).

          Prov 30 v 18+19

666

6 is the number of man, Adam being created on the 6th Day. 666 is the number of man in Revelation (13v18), the final message of the 2nd Adam.  Greek letters each also have a numerical value.  The name “Jesus” rendered in the Greek plus the Greek symbol for the serpent has a combined numerical value of 666 (Harry Whittaker, “Revelation” page 175).

 Rahab – Egypt sin pierced Isa 51 v 9+37

Isaiah 51:9 (New International Version)

⁹ Awake, awake! Clothe yourself with strength, O arm of the LORD;
awake, as in days gone by, as in generations of old. Was it not you who cut Rahab to pieces, who pierced that monster through?……

¹¹ The ransomed of the LORD will return.
They will enter Zion with singing;
everlasting joy will crown their heads.
Gladness and joy will overtake them,
and sorrow and sighing will flee away.

The arm of the Lord is Jesus whose work was to defeat sin (in himself). The piercing of this monster seems to link to the salvation of Christ’s victory. Verse 11 can be linked to events on the Road back from Emmaus which was the celebration of that victory.

Christ trampled under foot

How much more severely do you think a man deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God under foot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified him, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace? Heb 10 v 29

Jesus inflicted a head wound on himself and sin nature, but that blow was to be struck once and not to be repeated.  Possible parallels with when Moses struck the rock in the wilderness for a 2^nd time.

The tree of knowledge of good & evil

It’s been suggested, with good scriptural logic, that the tree of knowledge of good & evil was a vine.  This is based on a comparison of the events from Noah’s life with events in Eden where there are strong parallels (source- Brother Ian Giles).

For Jesus to be the true vine reinforces the fact he bore/inherited the knowledge of good & evil from Adam but was able to rectify that crime.

Those who hate me without reason outnumber the hairs of my head;

many are my enemies without cause, those who seek to destroy me.

I am forced to restore what I did not steal. Psa 69 v 4

Alpha & Omega

Jesus declares himself in Revelation as the Alpha & Omega- the first and the last.  Possibly the two aspects are significant, the natural followed by the spiritual.

As Alpha & Omega means the first to last perhaps a similar idea can be equated to Absalom who, from head to toe, was without blemish. Possibly also a similar idea to “from Dan to Beersheba” (the land of Israel parallels with Jesus, both being places where God has chosen to manifest his name).

Judges

Judges. The book of judges is full of types of sin in the flesh and many (all?) of these can be linked to the work of Christ who destroyed sin in himself- from the head wound of Sisera to the dagger which Eglon engulfed so dramatically.

NOTABLE PAIRINGS or ‘dual types’

As explored earlier, there are instances where two people can simultaneously and in parallel be typical of the work of Jesus.  Two individuals considered side by side can represent two different aspects of the work of Jesus.  The butler and the baker who’s fate was interpreted by Joseph are a good example or the two goats on the day of atonement.  David & Goliath has similarly been cited as an example; one man representing the aspect of Christ’s nature which received the head wound to sin nature and the man the means by which that blow was struck. The natural was destroyed and the spiritual was preserved. When portrayed or compared side by side they covey a powerful contrast between the two – the spiritual and the natural – each aspect depicting the ‘dual’ role/work of Jesus .

The more one explores these concepts, the more examples one comes across. In fact, at the risk of stretching types too far, it could be said that anywhere the scriptures contrast the natural with the spiritual is, perhaps, a portrayal of the conflict and victory achieved in Christ’s flesh.  This is a bit of a work in progress and far from anything near a comprehensive survey but these are some of the areas I feel would be worth exploring in this context.

Adam/Christ

Jesus is described as “the second Adam” so there is nothing tenuous about this comparison.

If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.   So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit.  The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual.  The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven.  As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the man from heaven, so also are those who are of heaven.   I Cor 15 v 45-48

Adam, the sinful man of the flesh died. Jesus, the spiritual man, was made immortal.

“As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive”

Twofold affliction of Job

Job’s affliction came in two stages; firstly against his possessions and children, secondly against himself physically.

Christ’s sufferings could also be said to have two aspects; his offering was on behalf of himself and also his spiritual offspring.

(“Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the  people”. Heb 7 v 27)

Cain/Abel

A possible role reversal?

Abel- although the spiritual man and acceptable to God, he died.

Caan- the natural man, lived on and was cursed (like Israel).

Abraham/Isaac

Abraham; the man of faith who lived.

Isaac; the son who figuratively died.

Isaac/Ishmael

Hagar v Sarah

Sinai v Jerusalem

Each of these pairings are portrayed side by side by Paul in Galatians where he argues that the law (the system of righteousness by works) is inferior and replaced by the superior dispensation of righteousness by grace.

From this it follows that the law and the arm o flesh is to be equated with the sin-nature side of man as opposed to the spiritual, righteousness by grace.

Jacob/Esau

in the womb of Rachel.

Two nations in conflict- the natural against the spiritual. Ironically, it was Jacob who was grasping the heel of Esau. The first born came to serve the younger  (as in the first Adam and 2nd Adam).

Jacob wrestling angel

When Jacob was locked into a wrestling match with an angel which continued through the night it could be equated to Christ locked in battle with himself when he fought in Gethsemane to submit his own will to that of his Father. Being in an agony (Gr. “agonia”  – a physical contest between two combatants), he “sweated as it were great drops of blood”.

Aaron (Moses) Hur

against Amalekites

Moses/Joshua

Moses died-Joshua lived to cross into the promised land.

Moses led God’s people towards the promised land, but associated with the curse of the Law (and tainted with disobedience in striking the rock a second time), was not permitted enter the promised land. His body (like many less worthy Israelites with him) were excluded from the promised land. Joshua (the OT form of Jesus), on the other hand, the faithful spy, did cross Jordan to the promised land.

The rock which provided water

Jesus was typified by the rock in the wilderness which was smitten to supply living water.

“for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that  rock was Christ”.  I Cor 10 v 4

It is well known God’s instruction was that the rock should have been smitten only once.  Of course God knew that Moses would disobey and, even by that means, perhaps a type is fulfilled.  The rock was smitten twice. Both characteristics/natures of Christ were in effect taken to the grave and, in a sense, each side of his nature was smitten, the natural and the spiritual.  “Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken,  smitten  of God, and afflicted”. Isa 53 v 4

Pillar of fire

The pillar of fire/cloud was what led the Israelites in their wilderness journey.

That pillar had two aspects,  darkness and light. Darkness to the Egyptians and light to the Israelites.  There are parallels between that pillar and the word of God, Jesus the word made flesh, which is a guide on our wilderness journey.

Quails/Manna.
Quails in the evening = Flesh; Manna/bread = resurrection in morning.

(a pattern reinforced in Psalm 105.

⁴⁰The people asked, and he brought quails, and satisfied them with the bread of heaven. (as if to emphasise the salvation resulting from that contrast…) ⁴¹He opened the rock, and the waters gushed out; they ran in the dry places like a river.

Two edged sword.

Hebrews; diving of soul etc/

Jesus has a 2 edged sword from his mouth (rev).

Aaron + Miriam

A challenge against the authority vested in Moses, effectively a challenge against God.  i.e. the flesh challenging the spirit.

Miriam made leprous- healed and then banished outside the camp for 7 days.

Aaron intervened for Miriam.

 Moses & Aaron – Joshua & Caleb (Numb 30)

Moses + Aaron excluded from promised land.

Joshua/Caleb who went ahead brought a good report and permitted into the promised land.

God and Joshua to cross Jordan into promised land. Deut 31 v 3

Moses + Joshua = death/life of Christ. Deut 31 v 14

Levite and concubine (Judges 19)

The concubine was wayward and had deserted her new life in preference for her former life.

The pair were on a journey.

The woman was abused all night.

She fell down at the door – analogous to the flesh not being fit to enter (the presence of God).

She died.

He lived.

Her body was cut into 12 and her flesh was shared throughout all Israel to publicise these events.

Eglon+ Ehud

The overweight king Eglon is descriptive of a king of the flesh.  He suffered a wound, albeit by a piercing (to his side?). Ehud made his escape and lived to lead Israel in conquest of their enemies.

Jail and Sisera

The death of Sisera has unmistakable allusions back to Gen 3:15 and the head wound dealt to the enemy of Israel.   God’s victory was won through a woman f non-Jewish parentage.

Samson’s lion/Christ.

Death of adversary/flesh – sweetness of salvation through Christ.

Ark/Dagon

Dagon fell down before ark and suffered a head wound.

Jepthah

Jepthah was of dual parentage, that is to say one of his parents was of Israelite stock, the other was deemed not to be. Notably, he went on to make a sacrifice of an ‘innocent’ child.  Judges 11 v 1

Saul/David

Saul ended with his head cut off and his body hung on a wall. David lived to be king in Jerusalem.

Conflict in Israel between House of Saul/David 2 Sam 3 v 6

Saul/Jonathan

Decided/divided by lot  (1 Sam 14 v 42).  Hints of the scape goat.  Death was pronounced against Jonathan (by the unspiritual side of the equation- just as Jesus’ spiritual characteristics were condemned to death by his natural side).

Jonathan + David

“Knit as one”.  Yet, one lived one died.

Uriah the Hittite/David

Ironically, the non-Jew (Uriah a man of integrity) is typical of the spiritual man whereas David (who of all people should have known better) was the natural in this context.

Abner and Joab

Each faction in this conflict was represented by 12 fighters (2 Sam 2 v 12). Links to Israel, natural and spiritual are unavoidable.

Uzzah/Ahio

These men were guiding the cart on which the ark was (mistakenly) carried. One before one after it seems. Uzzah reached out and was struck down. I Chron 13 v 9). Possible parallels with ‘grasping’ after Godliness.  Momentarily, the progress of God’s glory (the ark) to Jerusalem was interrupted, as it could be said it was when Christ (also God’s glory) was struck down.

Uzzah/David

Another parallel arising from the same incident.  “Innocent” Uzzah was struck down as a result of David’s sin in the manner in which the ark was conveyed- on a cart not carried by the Levites as it should have been. David, however, lived.

David/Solomon

David laid up materials for the temple (but was not accepted as the builder)

Solomon built the meeting place with God.

Solomon/Jesus

A notable pairing; Solomon (natural) Jesus (spiritual).

Solomon could be said to represent the human aspects of Jesus.

He is paralleled with, and contrasted against, the one ‘greater than Solomon’ who displayed the spiritual aspects of character.

Solomon/baby

Solomon’s adjudication over the quarrelling prostitutes is famous for the wisdom displayed.  Is it possible there is a deeper level of wisdom revealed here?

There were two conflicting claims on the baby (possibly likened to two conflicting natures in the son born to Mary) and Solomon’s pronouncement as that the baby should be divided. There are hints of sacrifice here, although of course the baby wasn’t actually killed – but then nor was Isaac even though the knife was raised.

The fact that the baby was born to a prostitute seems incongruous, but then Jesus was born into the stock of Israel who at many times in their history have been likened by God to a prostitute.

Hence, Solomon (a type of Christ) was the ‘slayer’ of the child born (also a type of Christ) and therefore possibly a dual type.

Asahel and Abner

These two prominent men of valour (representing the camps of Saul and David respectively) were locked in a conflict as one pursued the other.  The outcome of their conflict was that he man from the camp of David died from a wound struck by a javelin (similar to Christ being pierced by a spear).  This type, if correct, would hold good only so far as Abner was obviously an unspiritual man and it is he that survived the conflict to live on.

Saul/Jonathan

Both Saul and Jonathan, the natural man and the spiritual man, both suffered the same fate nailed to wall at Bethshan.

Hushai/Absalom

Dramatically, after David had fled the city, Hushai and Absalom entered Jerusalem simultaneously (2 Sam 15 v 22).  This was the arena of conflict between two opposing views in place which bears the name of God (as does Jesus).  The spiritual was to prevail.

Adonijah & Solomon

Both these sons of David were contenders for the throne in Jerusalem.  Adonijah, motivated by human pride, presumed to take the throne.  He ultimately was killed and the spiritual son, Solomon was given the throne (he didn’t take it).

Solomon/Rehoboam

Rehoboam’s mother was an Ammonite so he was of mixed parentage.  His ascendancy to the throne triggered a conflict between the ways of Solomon his father or a possible new regime of Rehoboam. The people demanded an answer as to whether Rehoboam would lighten the burden placed on them by his father Solomon and the answer to that choice came after 3 days.  The upshot of that watershed was that Israel have been in rebellion against the house of David to this day” (2 Chron 10 v 19)

Israel & Judah

Continual conflict between Judah and Israel, notably between their respective kings.  Ezekiel looks to when they will be reunited, two sticks united in one under one king. (Ezekiel 37 v18).

Ahab and Jehoshaphat

Ahab and Jehoshaphat went into battle together. 1 Kings  22 v 28+29

The two kings allied and described as being one.  Only Christ will unite Israel.  Both wanted to hear the word of God, one receptive, one rebellious.  Both went together into battle but Ahab was killed and his blood was licked by the dogs according to the word of the Lord (i.e. the gentiles benefit from the blood shed in the destruction of sin in the flesh).

Ahaziah and Joram

Ahaziah and Joram challenged by Jehu (2 kings 9 v 21).

One died with an arrow through his heart, the other lived.  As if the emphasise the destruction of sin nature in this episode, Jezebel (the epitome of sin in the flesh) was trodden under foot by horse (crushed) and the dogs licked her blood- just as the gentiles commemorate the destruction of sin in the flesh by taking wine in memory of his blood.

The two bulls on Carmel.

When Elijah challenged the prophets of Baal on Carmel (1 Kings 18) there were two bulls laid out as sacrifices to God. One was associated with false religion, the other with acceptable worship.  The two aspects can be equated with the two aspects of Christ’s character/nature. One was acceptable, the other, the human and fleshly side, was not accepted.

Elijah/Elisha

This pair were inseparable, and only parted when Elijah was “taken to heaven”.  Likewise, Jesus 2 seemingly inseparable characteristics were divided when one was taken to heaven, the other not.

2 Kings 5 Gehazi took leprosy from Namaan (scape goat).

Two babies in the siege of Samaria

During the siege of Samaria and the famine conditions, the King despaired that relief could not be obtained from the threshing floor or wine press (bread & wine).  In desperation, the inhabitants were driven to eating their offspring.  There were 2 infants that faced such a fate, but only one was killed and eaten, the other lived. (2 Kings 6 v 28).

Jeremiah 24 v 1 good figs/bad figs

Haman/Mordecai

Esther/Mordecai

Two choirs at the time of Nehemiah on the walls of Jerusalem.

Nehemiah/Ezra (wall and temple)?

Moses/Elijah Moses/Elijah two aspects of Gods/Christ’s Character.

Two aspects highlighted; judgment and mercy.  Moses sought to invoke mercy, whereas Elijah wanted to invoke judgment on Israel (no coincidence that Moses and Elijah appear together (Transfiguration/Revelation).

Ezekiel’s sign

Ezekiel was commanded to lie on his side to bear the sins of Israel and then Judah respectively;, One man – two sides.

Dan 2 v 46  Daniel/Nebuchadnezzar.

Rom 1 v 3 Seed of David/Son of God

John Baptist/Jesus

In John 3, John the Baptist describes Jesus as coming from above whereas himself he describes as being from below.  The two were one in purpose in preaching the gospel but John, the earthly, was to defer to Jesus, the spiritual.

“He must increase, but I must decrease.” John 3v30

This indicates competition/conflict between the two (albeit  always in harmony). Nevertheless, in this context, John represents the law (righteousness by works) and Jesus grace (righteousness by faith).  These two aspects can be likened to the natural verses the spiritual and which were at war in the mortal flesh of Jesus. It was the spiritual which eventually won that contest.  Graphically, John suffered the head wound.  Little wonder Jesus was deeply affected when he heard this news- it prefigured the head wound he would deal to sin nature.

Mark 3  v 25 Christ’s spoke about a divided Kingdom (Beelzebub).

¹⁷ Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them: Any kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and a house divided against itself will fall. Luke 11

 Pilate mixed sacrifices with blood/tower of Siloam.

• Sacrifices mixed with blood can be assumed to have been a massacre by Roman soldiers using swords or similar weapons. This can be equated to piercing.
• Crushed by the tower of Siloam can be equated to the other side of the coin, the crushing (of the head).

Why would both sides of the equation (previously applied to Jesus) also be applied to Israel?

The experiences of Jesus and Israel are often paralleled.

Thus, on a deeper level,  perhaps this episode can be read as Israel being paralleled with the experiences of the son of man who also experienced both piercing and the crushing of sin nature (i.e. a head wound).

Paul v Peter (Jews / gentiles)

This is another example of the conflict between the natural (the Law) again the spiritual (righteousness by grace).  In this incident recorded in ….. Peter unwittingly takes a retrogrades step towards abiding by law and distancing himself from the gentiles.   Paul is quick to challenge his hypocrisy in this head-on public showdown.

Gal

Timothy (dual parentage)

Timothy’s parents were a Jewish mother and a Greek father (Acts 16 v 1).

Eph 2 v 15 who made the two one.

Priest/king

1 Pet 3 v 18

Rom 1 v 3

Sun/Moon

Jesus, the “sun of righteousness”.

The moon, with its cycle and no inherent light of its own, can be likened to woman (who have their own 28 day cycle) the multitudinous bride of Christ also has no inherent light of her own, reflects the glory of Christ, her counterpart.  (the link between woman and the moon is also made in Joseph’s dream of the sun, moon and stars).

Blue/Red

Blue speaks of the commands of God + Red (sin) = purple, Kingship.

Israel/Christ

Marriage-man/woman

Lot/Abram

Land (where God’s name was) wasn’t able to support them both.

Conflict between their respective servants. Natural v spiritual.

Gen 13

I Cor  2 v 14 The triumphal procession-death to some-life to others

Good Samaritan; paid two coins for the man he saved.

goodness/severity of God

Spiritual persecuted by natural (Gal 3+4)

Foxes/birds

Foxes holes-birds nests -son of man nowhere to lay his head.

Where we read of the “head” of “the son of man” one can’t help looking for something more in the same context. Indeed, foxes live in the earth (earthy) birds live up off the ground (spiritual).

Souls “beheaded”. Revel 20 v 4  Alludes to the head wound victory won for/in the redeemed.

flesh & blood

“Divided”

The gospel of John makes the point that those who listened to Jesus were divided.

John 7 v 43 “and the people were divided because of Jesus”.

This chimes in with “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.”. Matt 10v34

Perhaps it is not insignificant  that the effect of his teaching was division, given that he himself was divided in his loyalties.

But Jesus was always resolute in who he served, despite being tested . “No man can serve two masters…..” (by which he was also possibly exhorting himself).

Loaves/fish

Fish are a common symbol of Jesus in Christian tradition. Whether or not that is properly founded is debatable but there is basis for this in one of Jesus’ miracles. When he instructed Peter to throw in a line and catch a fish, it duly provided the tax for them both.  In type, the fish that gave its life to pay the price points to Jesus who has given his life as a ransom for his followers.

Thus, if fish are used as a symbol of God’s son, then is it significant that there were two fish used in the feeding of the multitude?

5 loaves=  5 being linked to the curse of the law.
2 fish=two characteristics in the son of man/God

Sheep & Goats

Sheep and goats are placed side by side to contrast that which is acceptable with that which will be rejected.  Although not appearing in the same context Jesus is the lamb of God and also the Scape goat.

fresh water/salt water from same spring?

Luke 7v43

Trees/fruit;
Bad tree/bad fruit- figs/thorns- grapes/briers (allusions to Eden and the curse).
Heart; good/evil

Mountains

are formed out of conflict in the earth’s crust.  One plate is dominant and rises, the other pushed beneath.  This conflict carried out in the person of Jesus Christ declares God’s righteousness.

 ⁶ Your righteousness is like the mighty mountains,
your justice like the great deep.
O LORD, you preserve both man and beast. Psalm 36:6

Human physiology

The  brain;

From the physiological point of view, the human brain is divided into two lobes.
One side is normally dominant – whether left  or right, producing a dominance on one side of the body.
Whilst, naturally, both sides of the human mind are fleshly in their thinking, the fact it is partitioned does coincide nicely with the fact that THE promised man would have two sides to his character.

The mind of Christ was to develop the spiritual side at the expense of the natural side.

The heart;

As above, the human heart is divided into two halves and a similar pattern may be at work here. If so this would give particular relevance to those messianic Psalms which speak of singleness of heart.

Teach me your way, O LORD, and I will walk in your truth; give me an undivided heart, that I may fear your name.  Psalm 86:11  (also Psa 36v 11)

It’s not without significance that this is a state prophesied/promised for Israel;

¹⁹ I will give them an undivided heart and put a new spirit in them; I will remove from them their heart of stone and give them a heart of flesh. Ezekiel 11:19 

Heaven & earth

Heaven & earth are called to be witnesses of God’s righteousness in  Isaiah 1.  Self evidently one is spiritual which contrasts with the other which is natural.  God’s righteousness was ultimately declared in the person of Jesus, who bore both characteristics.

Israel, head & foot

In Isaiah 1 Israel are likened to a body. In verse 6 God says of Israel that their head is injured and that from the top of their head to the sole of the foot there is no soundness in them. Jesus also had a body which was symbolic of Israel and his head and feet are particularly significant.

*****

James

Occurrences in James where the spiritual and natural are contrasted- each possibly with an application to Jesus in the days of his flesh.

Tongue (3 v 9) Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing.

Spring (3 v 11) “Can both fresh water and salt water flow from the same spring?”

Fruit tree(3 v 12) My brothers, can a fig tree bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs?

Desires that battle within you.(4 v1)

There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the one who is able to save and destroy. But you—who are you to judge your neighbor?.(4v12)

James;

the tongue is full of deadly poison.
Jesus had a tongue
And yet, in contrast to the serpent, he “did no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth”.

“Hear oh Israel, the Lord our God is one”. Deut 6 v 4 Emphasis on the one-ness of God and cited by Jesus as the greatest command. What ironic and obvious folly therefore for Christendom to propound the trinity.

Hear o Israel the Lord is one- as distinct from the Messiah in the days of his flesh.

Manna- bred worms!

Temple filled with prophets and burned.

Obadiah/Ahab (50 prophets x 2 in caves)

• rightly dividing the word of God.
• Two edged sword, dividing …
• Jesus was a sacrifice that was so examined.
• Because he ultimately triumphed as a sacrifice, he is qualified to wield the 2 edged sword of judgement.
• the nations will be a sacrifice to God at the return of Jesus.

The removal of the legs of the serpent gives rise to the almost crude connection with the male sexual organs.  Yet, such a connection is not as superstitious or puritanical as at first may be thought.   Just as the serpent ejaculated poison it’s seed (plural) can equally be viewed as poisonous.   The link between the poisonous seed (and distinct from with the righteous seed) is seen in the bizarre example of the stinkhorn toadstool which is designed to look like a phallus and in its latter stages of life exudes a stinking fluid from its top.

serpent/donkey

Balaam resisted from his course 3 times!

Crushed foot

went on to bless Israel.

spit;

uncleanness under the law (hygiene) but also a connection to the serpent!

Jesus made clay from spit to cure blind Israel!

Welcome! Please see my article on Jesus Christ; the seed of the serpent.

Simon Boyd
Christadelphian