A cautionary tale. A how-not-to. There are multiple ways to say it, but some of the best lessons we learn are from a bad example. Dale explores one from the Old Testament today…
Dale Pollard
Saul had a bright future that by all accounts was full of opportunity. When we first read of him he’s portrayed as a likable underdog who doesn’t seem to see his own potential, proven in his own words (1 Sam. 9.17-21). He was a nobody from a small tribe, but tall and kingly in appearance and his success would depend on who he listened to— not unlike us today.
God anoints him as king and like every anointed king that we read of in the Old Testament, he influenced the nation’s relationship with God. In hindsight, we’re able to see God’s wisdom. God wanted judges. A judge spoke on behalf of God while carrying out His will for a time and then left. A king would always be more susceptible to various forms of corruption that come with the vast amount of power given to him. No matter how the rulers would live their lives, good or bad, we can learn much.
Sadly, Saul is one of those kings who taught us how not to live. Here’s a list of the many spiritual dangers we should avoid— brought to you by Saul.
Saul’s Seven Deadly Sins
I SAMUEL
The sin of lacking patience – 13.8
The sin of excuse-making – 13.11, 12; 15:15, 20, 24
The sin of half-hearted service – 15.1-26
The sin of glorifying self – 15.12
The sin of fearing men rather than God – 15.15, 24
The sin of desiring forgiveness from man rather than God – 15.25
The sin of jealousy – 18.6-9
There are many other mistakes and shortcomings that accumulated in Saul’s physical and spiritual demise, but we can be strengthened by them (Rom. 15.4).
There are multiple Greek words used in the New Testament to talk about the process of explaining and interpreting God’s Word.
Mark 4:34 tells us Jesus was “explaining” His parables and other teachings to the disciples. This word means to loose or set free, to clarify and interpret.
Luke 24:27 is the first of six occurrences of a word translated “explained,” “translated,” and “interpreted” to speak of Jesus explaining to the disciples on the road to Emmaus how the Old Testament Scripture concerned Himself. The word refers to formal, extensive explanation of what is difficult to understand.
A trio of passages in Acts (11:4; 18:26; 28:23) refer to a word meaning to “expose” (a fourth use in Acts is used by Stephen to speak of Moses’ parents setting him outside, 7:21) or explain, manifest, declare, and expound. The latter three are all used in reference to a man taking God’s Word and explaining it to others.
2 Peter 1:20 is the passage telling us that “no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation….” This word (“interpretation”) means to release or unravel, the act or process of explaining even what is difficult or complex.
We live in a world where even the religious decry any attempt to give an absolute meaning or interpretation of a verse or paragraph of the Bible. While great care and careful study should accompany any effort to understand what Scripture is saying, the passages above (and a great many others) prove that God intended for His Word to be interpreted. Yet, it is suggested that there was a right way for them to be understood. Definitive, binding conclusions could be drawn. All people could (and must) conform to the commands, teachings, and principles of those passages.
Truly, everyone who thoughtfully studies it interprets the Bible. Our challenge is to faithfully, honestly, and truly understand each passage in its context and ultimately harmonize it with the whole of Scripture. The Bible repeatedly speaks of Jesus and others taking the Old Testament, making interpretations and sharing them as authoritative truths to be obeyed.
Paul uses another word, unique to him, to tell Timothy to “handle accurately the word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15). Other Scriptures speak of this “word of truth” as being intrinsically tied to bringing about our salvation (Eph. 1:13; Jas. 1:18). The word translated “handle accurately” means “to cut in a straight line; ἵνα ὀρθοτομῇ τὰς ὁδούς σου so that he gives you the right direction, so that he teaches you correctly, so that he gives you the right teaching” (Lust, Eynikel, and Hauspie, LEX LXX Lex., np). Leave it to a tentmaker to use such an analogy.
The New Testament is filled with passages teaching us about salvation, church organization, worship, gender roles, sexuality, morality, and much, much more. If these and other Scriptures can be cut straight, can’t they be cut crooked (cf. 2 Pet. 3:16)? If parables had a right interpretation, couldn’t they have wrong ones? If the Old Testament can be used to explain truth about Jesus, couldn’t they also be used to teach error about Him? The work of Peter, Aquila and Priscilla, and Paul in Acts, explaining to others, is implicitly endorsed as sound and proper. Doesn’t that mean that one could fail in such efforts by improper handling of Scripture? If holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit, the intention was for their words to be taken, processed, and utilized in a way that produced God’s pleasure and approval.
In a relativistic age, where knowledge, truth, and morality is said to not be absolute, authoritative, and binding, such passages are ignored or denied. Yet, there they stand, resolutely declaring that Scripture must be properly interpreted. The task for you and me is to humbly, prayerfully, and diligently read, meditate upon, study, then obey from the heart all that God commands in His Word. Is it important? Jesus thought so, asserting, “He who rejects Me and does not receive My sayings, has one who judges him; the word I spoke is what will judge him at the last day” (John 12:48; cf. John 14:26; 16:13). May “our interpretation” harmonize with the meaning He clearly intends and instructs through His inspired writers! Nothing else will suffice!
New Testament writers quote frequently from the Old Testament. Especially Paul was even fond of quoting secular poets. It is interesting to see Jesus, The Word, quoting His Word.
Dale Pollard
I don’t remember creating a collection of “good quotes” but that was the header of a file on my computer I didn’t recognize. I opened it up to find exactly three quotes; all of which were made by my dad. I wasn’t surprised that they lived up to the rather boring but factual file name.
Dad on the discipline he received growing up:
“Mom used nothing bigger than a flip flop, dad used a rod of correction that was floppy.”
On the key ingredient to sacrifice:
“When we love God more than anything else, what will we not give Him?”
On the first reference of love in the Bible (Gen. 22.2):
“The first time love is mentioned in the Bible it’s not a love of country, it’s not the love of a spouse, but it’s of a father’s love— towards his son.”
Perfect Quotes
Jesus quotes from the Book of Psalms more than any other part of the Old Testament. It’s interesting to think that Jesus wasn’t really quoting, He was just repeating Himself. A quote is defined as (and I quote), “..a group of words from a text or speech with an indication that one is not the original author or speaker.”
Everything Jesus says is worth quoting but anything Jesus says twice deserves our special attention.
David says, about 1,000 years earlier, the same thing Paul says. They had the same source, of course–the Holy Spirit breathed out the words through them both. In Psalm 4:4, David wrote, “Be angry, and do not sin. Meditate within your heart on your bed, and be still. Selah.” Paul wrote, “Be angry, and do not sin. Do not let the sun go down on your wrath, nor give place to the devil” (Eph. 4:26-27). A Bible with good footnotes and referencing will show you that Paul is quoting David, applying the scripture to the purpose of his own writing. So, each wrote for a different purpose, David to demonstrate who is the blessed man and Paul to show who is the new man. David’s writing is of the poetic genre. Paul’s writing is epistolary. Each wrote under a different covenant, meaning their priesthood, worship, and religious constituency were all different. Yet, for all the contrasts that can be made, there are three distinct similarities in these passages beyond the phrase that it is the same.
These writers show us that anger is a timeless issue. When Israel was autonomous or under the thumb of a world power, they were subject to feelings of anger. When Moses was the lawgiver and when Christ was, the issue confronted them. Time, geography, status, or race have nothing to do with a passion that can be stirred to anger. Wherever man wrestles himself and has to contend with others, it is an issue.
These writers show us that anger can be sinful. Though each covenant had different laws to respond to sinful anger, the very existence of such rules and commands shows man’s aptitude to let his anger get away from him. The ramifications of not reigning in self’s response to anger are ultimately the same, whenever and wherever one lives.
These writers show us how to avoid sinful anger. The meat of both passages is a divine strategy to stave off the inclination to sin in our anger. David’s suggests two things–meditation and stillness. Spend some time internally sifting through the issues that would provoke you. Don’t simply stew on it. Rationally think out the matter. Then, be still. Be careful about what course of action you take. Don’t be rash and hasty. Paul suggests resolution and self-mastery. He counsels against “stewing on it,” too. Don’t let anger fester like a sore. Regroup then confront the problem, and remember that this is not the same as being confrontational. You are confronting self more than the cause of the anger. Then, keep self protected from submitting to the devil. That may seem like a dramatic way to say it, but Paul is saying that you are giving yourself over to devilishness when you allow your anger to cross the line into sinfulness. What a hard pill to swallow, yet how helpful to understand that before we foolishly react.
God is looking out for us, seeking to save us from our worst enemy in anger–ourselves!
David is known as the man after God’s heart, but he is also a flawed human capable of terrible things. This truth might seem contradictory initially, raising questions about whether one must strictly follow religious doctrine or if God’s grace is enough. Even though David lived under a different covenant, God’s nature remains the same today. So, while the requirements for salvation have changed, nine out of ten commandments from the Old Testament are still considered necessary in the New Testament. David may have broken several commands during his lifetime, but we acknowledge that he was privileged to be the ancestor of the lineage that would result in the birth of Christ. As a result, despite being flawed, God thought he was worthy of using him to spread His love and mercy in this world.
Let’s examine David under a microscope to resolve this apparent contradiction. Lest you accuse me of being picky, remember that the Law of Moses required strict adherence. Therefore, consider a list of David’s sins.
David broke the Seventh Commandment against adultery by sleeping with Bathsheba, a married woman (Exodus 20.14; Deuteronomy 5.18).
David went on to violate the Sixth Commandment by ordering the murder of Uriah, Bathsheba’s husband (Exodus 20.13; Deuteronomy 5.17).
David violated the Ninth Commandment by lying and deceiving in both sins (Exodus 20.16; Deuteronomy 5.20). David also broke this commandment when he misled Ahimelech in 1 Samuel 21.
David violated God’s Law prohibiting a leader from having more than one wife (Deuteronomy 17.17), as well as God’s purpose for marriage as expounded upon by Jesus in Matthew 19.
David broke the Law by partaking in the showbread, which God only intended for the priests (1 Samuel 21.3ff; Leviticus 24.5–9). In all fairness, Jesus did use this incident to stress the need for mercy over legalism in Matthew 12.4.
In one of his last notable acts as king, David numbered the people in a manner inconsistent with God’s regulations regarding such, bringing a plague upon his people (2 Samuel 24.1–9; Exodus 30.11–16).
What actions did David take that were considered righteous or admirable? As previously stated, David earned the moniker “the man after God’s own heart” (1 Samuel 13.14; Acts 13.22). So he must have done something, making the sins we’ve mentioned seem minor in comparison—at least, that is what we would expect. Consider a list of David’s accolades.
As a young shepherd, David showed his faith and courage by defeating Goliath with a sling and a stone, demonstrating his trust in God (1 Samuel 17.45–50).
David spared Saul’s life twice, showing respect for God’s anointed king (1 Samuel 24, 26).
David repented after committing adultery with Bathsheba and having her husband Uriah killed (2 Samuel 12:13, Psalm 51). David was a penitent man, as the psalms he wrote show. Nearly half a dozen psalms have a penitential tone.
The book of Psalms, cited at least ten times in the New Testament, shows the depth of David’s faith. A couple of those psalms were messianic, serving as prophecy (see Psalm 22). Thus, David’s heartfelt praise, lament, and trust encourage believers today.
David laid the groundwork for building a new home for God’s Ark and provided a place for God’s shekinah to dwell. The Ark of the Covenant had been in Shiloh for the first 300 years of Israel’s national life. But the debacle of the battle near Aphek led to its loss to the Philistines for seven months. When the Ark returned on a cart led by two cows set loose by the Philistines, it came to Beth-shemesh. And the Ark did not have a permanent home until David brought it to Jerusalem.
I do not want to convey the impression that faith is a transactional exchange. David did not become the man after God’s own heart because his good deeds outweighed the bad. It was David’s heart that truly distinguished him. What truly characterized him was his genuine love and devotion to God and his willingness to repent and seek forgiveness when he sinned. David based his faith on a deep, personal relationship with God rather than earning favor through deeds. And David was aware that God’s mercy could bridge the gap.
Reflecting on the life of David, we see a vivid portrait of human complexity painted against the backdrop of divine grace. David’s story is not merely one of failure or success but a testament to the transformative power of repentance and the unfathomable depths of God’s mercy. Despite his significant shortcomings, David’s heart—a heart willing to acknowledge wrongdoing and turn back to God—set him apart. His legacy, therefore, isn’t defined by his failures but by his profound relationship with God. It highlights a path of redemption and faithfulness accessible to all. This narrative encourages us to approach God with a contrite spirit and to live with the assurance that grace, not our imperfect attempts at righteousness, is the foundation of our relationship with the Divine. In all its complexity, David’s life reminds us that no one is beyond the reach of God’s love and forgiveness. It’s a message of hope and reassurance for every believer.
Interestingly, Moses begins the book of Deuteronomy by giving the date, location, audience, and reason for writing. He gathered all Israel in the portion of the wilderness in the land of Moab, on the first day of the 11th month of the 40th year of their wandering. He writes that with his first address to the people he did so to “expound this law” (5). In order to give a detailed explanation of the law, he chooses to review exactly how they came to be in their current predicament.
A Rejected Mission (6-25). Moses starts his review at Mt. Sinai, where God told them to go and take possession of Canaan (6-8). To mobilize and care for a people so numerous–at the suggestion of his father-in-law (Ex. 18)–wise and experienced men were delegated to judge any grievances and issues among the people (9-18). When they arrived at Kadesh-Barnea in the hill country of the Amorites (19-20), they glimpsed their promised land (21). Moses admonished them, “Do not fear or be dismayed” (21b). The people devised the plan of sending spies into Canaan to bring back produce and a report of what they found in the land, which Moses approved (22-25). What he did not approve was their evaluation.
A Rebellious Men (26-33). Moses says that despite acknowledging that the land was good, they were rebellious and unwilling (26). They grumbled (27). The spies spread fear into the hearts of the people (28). They were shocked and afraid (29). They did not trust God, despite His faithful leadership and protection (30-33). An objective as ancient as Abraham, the very target they aimed at upon their exodus from Egypt, was now shunned. They let emotions overshadow their God-given purpose. For this, God calls them an “evil generation” (35).
A Recompensing Maker (34-46). Moses tells us how God felt about their distrust and disobedience. Not only was He angry with the nation (34), He would be angry for Moses during the wandering (37; Num. 20:12; Deut. 3:26; 4:21). God took an oath against them, a sobering image to consider (34). That generation was forbidden from entering Canaan (35,40), with the exception of Caleb who “followed the Lord fully” (36) and Joshua who would succeed Moses (38). Their children, whom they used as an excuse for disobedience, would grow up and go do what they lacked the faith to accomplish (39). Hearing this, the people suddenly mustered their courage and attempted to take the land. But God had withdrawn His help, and the people were chased as if by bees and “crushed…from Seir to Hormah” (41-44). Again, they were being rebellious and presumptuous (43). They wept to the Lord, but He would not listen to a people who had stubbornly rejected His Word (45). They were consigned to circle around Mount Seir for the duration of their wandering (2:1ff).
This new generation needed to know exactly why there were in the wilderness. They needed to know the way to leave the wilderness and to take the promised land. They needed to be more intimately acquainted with the God who had preserved them these 40 years, to trust Him as He led them in the conquest to come. They needed to come face to face with the faults of their fathers, to avoid repeating the deadly cycle. To go forward, it is often helpful to remember the past. We do not have to be enslaved by it, but we must be educated by it. Therefore, the wilderness experience will be retold by Bible writers throughout the Old Testament and even reviewed in the various genres of New Testament literature: the gospels (John 3:14; 6:32), history (Acts 7:44), and the epistles (1 Cor. 10:5; Heb. 3:8,17). In fact, Paul said God wants us to learn from this generation how not to live (1 Cor. 10:11). Moses is trying to do that with the next generation, to get them to see where their fathers had fallen short.
In Matthew 27 we find the start of what appears to be a mixture of supernatural and natural phenomena.
Clearly, Matthew, Mark, and Luke (the inspired authors of the synoptic gospels) make an airtight case for the diety of Jesus. Additionally, three extra biblical historians validate their accounts as well: Thallus, Africanus (the name of Janelle’s and my future first born— I hope), and Phlegon.
The Darkness
“From noon until three in the afternoon darkness came over the land.” Matt. 27.45
Phlegon records in the 2nd Century AD,
“…in the time of Tiberius Caesar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from the sixth hour to the ninth—manifestly that one of which we speak. But what has an eclipse in common with an earthquake, the rending of rocks, and the resurrection of the dead, and so great a perturbation throughout the universe? Surely no such event as this is recorded for a long period. But it was a darkness induced by God, because the Lord happened then to suffer.”
Not that we need Phlegon to confirm what God told us three times, but it’s interesting!
The Earthquake That Freed The Dead
Beginning in v.51ff, an earthquake splits the veil in the temple. The veil wasn’t a thin piece of fabric either— it’s thickness was equivalent to a man’s hand.
Next, the earthquake (used directly or providentially by God) cracks the circular stones open and the dead walk the earth. There’s some discussion over the identity of these “Saints” or “Holy ones” but it’s likely that they are followers of God who died in the past. Whether they were faithful servants that we read about in the Old Testament or followers of Jesus who were killed for their loyalty isn’t made clear in the text. My personal opinion on the matter is that they are Old Testament followers of God as this would indicate to “many” that a new Covenant or Testament is being fulfilled. These risen ancient followers would effectively convince those following the Jewish religion that Jesus is now who they should look to, and not Moses or Elijah (see the Transfiguration, Matt.17).
The Timeline Of Events
View One Of Chronology:
“The dead rise with Christ.”
Matthew captures the magnitude of Jesus’ death on the cross by describing the abnormal events surrounding his death in chapter 27. It’s important that the reader keep in mind the goal of the letter, and that’s Jesus. The tombs splitting open, then, likely occurred during the death of Jesus. After three days, the dead would then emerge along with Jesus and appear to many.
Matthew records what literally takes place, then, as well as alludes to the Day of His return. On that Day, all of the dead in Christ will rise.
View Two Of Chronology:
“The dead rose first before Jesus.”
The Bible is saturated in types and apocalyptic language. The New Testament brings a new light and depth to the things of the past. For instance, the flood account directs our minds to the second destruction of earth. The crossing of the Red Sea alludes to baptism. The blueprint of the tabernacle is symbolic of church and the entrance to her.
With that in mind, 1 Thessalonians 4.16 says,
“For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an Archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first.”
This seems to indicate an order of resurrection. Those who followed God in life— rise first. This would fit beautifully with Matthew’s record of events in Matthew 27.
View Three of Chronology:
“The dead rise at the death of Christ, but enter Jerusalem three days later with Jesus.”
The NIV suggests that the dead were resurrected when Jesus died and then went into Jerusalem after Jesus’ resurrection. A number of theologians and Christians agree with this view.
Many others say that since Christ is the firstfruits of the dead (1 Cor. 15.22), then the resurrection did not occur until He was raised. This view takes the phrase “after Jesus’ resurrection” and then fits them with “…were raised to life and came out of the tombs.” This is possible in the Greek and is also hinted at in the KJV and the NASB. The tombs broke open at Christ’s death due to the earthquake, but the bodies were not raised till Christ was raised— which is the view I currently hold.
A special thanks to Brittany Dyer for posing some interesting questions. She’s a committed student of the Bible and an excellent example to the Tompkinsville church of Christ family.
“Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom” (2 Cor. 3:17).
Without the proper understanding of the context, this verse can be taken to mean many different things. With a little bit of digging we can know what Paul is saying. In reference to the Jews who read the Old Law, Paul says that they had a veil over their hearts (15). What veil is he referring to? The Jews failed to see the Messiah in the Old Law. They had preconceived ideas about what He would look like, talk like, and His mission. They dreamed up a Messiah that was completely different from the One prophesied about.
These Jews read the Old Law with a veil over their eyes. They failed to see the Messiah. Their heart and mind was made up about Christ. It was so much so that they failed to see the true Messiah. Paul says all of this to make a point, “But when one turns to the Lord, the veil is removed” (2 Corinthians 3:16).
Those who turn to the Lord are able to see the Messiah for who He is. In Christ and being in the spirit of the Lord, we now have freedom from this veil. Rather than failing to see Christ, we can read and understand His Word for what it is, the Words of LIFE.
What happens when you wear glasses inside on a hot humid day? You can see just fine, but the second you step out of the AC and into the heat and humidity, the glasses fog up almost instantly. This is how the Jews read the Old Testament. With a pair of fogged over glasses. But those who are in Christ can see the story of the Bible. We can see the prophecies and their fulfillment. We can clearly see God’s plan for mankind, All of this is a direct result of the freedom God has given each one of us in His Son.
While we don’t have the same circumstances surrounding us today, we can still fall into a similar problem. Sometimes when we go to the Word we only search for the things we should or shouldn’t do. Instead of studying to learn more about our Savior, we get caught up in the rules and regulations of Christianity. While this isn’t necessarily a bad thing, if we only see the Bible as a rule book we will never have a deeper relationship with God. Studying like this effectively places a veil over our hearts and keeps us from finding that true, meaningful and love-filled relationship that God longs for us to have.
The Jews had a veil over their hearts that kept them from seeing Christ and the New Covenant. And we can sometimes do the same thing by treating God’s Word as a rule book rather than a Book that gives us a connection with God the Father.
These rules and guidelines are important, but there’s a lot more to Christianity than this.
Standing before a lantern flashlight, I happened to notice my shadow on the wall. I won’t lie. I was displeased by what I saw. My large stomach? No, that is not what bothered me. That has been with me most of my life. What disturbed me was seeing evidence of how advanced my ankylosing spondylitis has become. To put what I witnessed in self-deprecating humor: my shadow confirmed that a certain cathedral in France could hire me to be a bell ringer. I should start practicing my dialogue. “Sanctuary!”
Though I am confident of my person at this point in my life, I appear to be hunched over with insecurity since my head seems downcast. I admit to being perturbed by that since confidence is a part of the initial impression one makes on another. I must bend my knees to straighten upright (somewhat). It isn’t easy to walk with your knees bent! I take a TNF inhibitor to slow the progress. (Ankylosing spondylitis has no cure.) However, my shadow is a preview of things yet to come, the substance of who I will later be. If only my material substance was going to be as marvelous as the spiritual “substance” I will eventually enjoy (1 John 3.2).
Paul calls the Old Testament the “shadow of things to come” (Colossians 2.17). The New American Standard Bible adds the adjective “mere” (“a mere shadow”). Yet, what the Old Testament portended was the wondrous substance of Christ. It is odd to see the shadow of something before seeing that which cast the shadow, but that was the case with God’s eternal plan. One might philosophize about humanity’s ability to witness the substance first that he could not do so.
Suppose you recall the people’s reaction to Moses’ glowing face after he had been in God’s audience (Exodus 34.29-30). In that case, you ponder whether they could have endured seeing something as glorious as the transfigured Christ, like Peter (Matthew 17.1ff). Whatever the reason, God had selected the optimum time for the incarnation of Christ. That time coincided with the Roman Empire’s days (Daniel 2.40-45; Galatians 4.4). However, even then, the appearance of Christ remained as unexpected to them as vegetation sprouting from the parched ground (Isaiah 53.2).
Paul said that this “shadow” served like a tutor taking people to Christ (Galatians 3.23-25). A “tutor” during the days of Paul was a servant who took the master’s children to their teacher. In the twenty-first century, we might call the Old Testament the “bus driver.” I can recall several of the bus drivers I had in my youth. I think a couple of drivers would serve as a good role model, but at least one would have invited me along to commit mischief.
We note that bus drivers only need a high school diploma with no disrespect intended toward bus drivers. (I’ve had family serve as bus drivers.) On the other hand, teachers must go to college and earn a specialized degree. The teacher is the one to whom you entrust the child’s education. Yet, we have people showing a preference for the “bus driver” today. These prefer the shadow to the substance. That preference is not in the best interest of his or her undying spirit.
In what ways do people show a preference for the shadow? For example, in worship, they might indicate a preference for manmade mechanical instruments of music allowable under the Old Testament but unauthorized in the New Testament (cf. Ephesians 5.19; Colossians 3.16; Hebrews 13.15). In Hebrews 8-10, the Hebrews’ writer discusses at length the necessity for covenant change and the transference of authority from one to the other. Saying one can use a guitar or piano because David employed a lyre in his songs overlooks that David lived in the shadow.
People also show a preference for the shadow when doing things like following the kosher diet of Judaism for religious purposes. Some of these same people will likewise insist that the day of worship remains on Saturday. Even though Gregory XIII, an apostate from the Faith, changed the calendar, he did nothing to change the verbiage indicating Sunday (“the first day of the week”) as the day of observing Christ’s memorial feast and giving of one’s means (Acts 20.7; 1 Corinthians 16.1-2). We might also note that when people prefer the religious use of iconography and incense, they likewise demonstrate a desire to live in the shadow rather than walking by faith (2 Corinthians 5.7).
Yes, the Old Testament was only the shadow of things to come. It cannot save (Hebrews 10.1-4). We can enjoy and fellowship with the Substance, Jesus Christ. Come out from the shadow today! Live in the blessed Sonshine of Jesus Christ.
The Preacher Pollard Blog 