Good morning!
Could you please explain the readers how a man who died with 33 could lead his
people through the desert during 40 years? Please note: Jesus and Moses were
not the same person!!!
Have you perhaps had the same teachers as George Bush? He seems to have a similar
education.
Happy Easter!
Trudi Wullimann

Jesus and God, however, ARE the same person.  Moses led his people through the desert only by the grace of God (who later became incarnate as Jesus the Christ).

Death Bredon is on the right track, but it’s a little more than that.  Moses is a Old Testament type of the New Testament Christ, just as Israel in the Old Testament is a type of the New Testament Church.

The word “type” here is a theological term, which the Oxford American Dictionary defines as “a foreshadowing in the Old Testament of a person or event of the Christian tradition.”

This interpretation of the Old Testament in the light of the New is, in fact, the most ancient Christian interpretation.  It begins in the New Testament itself--the Epistle to the Hebrews is a very good example, which is why the Church has traditionally, during the first four weeks of Lent, offered readings from Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy in the Liturgy of the Hours, and then, in the fifth week of Lent and Holy Week, turned to Hebrews for the New Testament interpretation of those readings.

And that’s were Trudi Wullimann has it wrong--most modern Christians, especially evangelicals and fundamentalists, and those influenced by them, such as George W. Bush, hold a very literal reading of the Old Testament and are incapable of seeing Moses as a type of Christ and Israel as a type of the Church.  That’s why they so often fall into the trap of Christian Zionism.

(And, sadly, this theological ignorance and lack of understanding of how the Church Fathers interpreted the Old Testament is all too prevalent among Catholics, as well--both modernist ones and those among the traditionalists who end up going off into the fever swamps of antisemitism.)

Who is this referring to?

John 1:1-14 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe. He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

By my reading, the Messiah and Jehovah are the same “I AM”.

Christopher, I’m not sure what you’re asking.  By the Church’s reading, Christ is the Son of God--in other words, yes, He is the “I AM.”

As in, “Before Abraham was made, I AM” (John 8:58).

If you read my comment to be implying otherwise, I apologize for any confusion.  Obviously, I wasn’t denying that Death Bredon was right to say that Jesus is God (though it is a bit sloppy to refer to Jesus and God as “the same person"--when “God” is used alone to refer to a Person of the Trinity, the Person of God the Father is assumed).

Rather, I was pointing out that the story of the Exodus is not just that of God the Father leading His people out of Egypt, but of Moses, a type of Christ, leading them.  In fact, if you compare the Reproaches to the text of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, you’ll see that some of the words recall God’s words in the Old Testament, while others recall Moses’s.

That mixture is perfectly appropriate, since Christ is the Son of God, and Moses was an Old Testament type of Christ.

Mr. Richert,

A literal meaning of the Old Testament is fine, as I am sure you would agree. CCC 116. But many, on the traditional and evangelical side, I believe fail to understand, as you point out the beautiful “types” found in the Spiritual sense. CCC 117.

Mark Shea, has written a very good book Making Senses Out of Scripture, which is on the mark and expalins this topic well.

Scott -
Sorry, the initial comment in the thread by Trudi caught my attention so quickly that I forgot to address my post to her.  I agree with yours completely.  I think many people who do believe in Christ miss so much of the depth of scripture by not learning more about the traditions it is founded in, including chiasmus and the types and shadows that abound. 

And thank you Mr. Sarto for sharing that prayer.  I’m not Catholic, so I don’t often see the beautiful prayers like the one you’ve shared.

Marty:

You’re absolutely correct, and my remarks may not have been clear on that point.  Where I wrote “a very literal reading,” I probably should have written “an exclusively literal reading"--exclusively literal to the point, sometimes, of denying that the Old Testament is to be read in light of the New.  And that, it seems to me, is one of the primary sources of Christian Zionism.

Thank you very much, Mr. Sarto, for publishing this beautiful prayer and meditation here and to you, Mr. Richert, for your Biblical commentary and explanation.  Thanks also to Taki - what other forum on the web has such theological reflections as I have seen here recently?

Agreed.  Because of the empirical, public revelation of God in his Incarnation, we must add a way of reading the Old Testament to the pre-Christian interpretative arsenal.  In addition to literal/historical reading, the typology (or foreshadowing) of the New Testament/Covenant becomes clear through the lens of Christ.

Christos Aneste!

Dear Letters Editor,

If you’re Catholic, you may find my two essays in here to be of interest:

The Jesus Connection // Buckley’s Paradox
http://foundersamerica19.blogspot.com/

Best,

-Deacon

P.S. Is Taki Catholic?