Bell and Shadows

Farrell Till errancy@infidels.org
Mon, 31 May 1999 16:24:25 -0700 (00928211065, 2.2.32.19990531232425.008ef2f8@midwest.net) 

At 05:02 PM 5/31/99 +0100, you wrote:

><snip>

>

>>>>Christian Doscher

>>>>2) Where does the OT indicate that it's ceremonial laws were

>>>>only a temporary shadow, and that a future messiah was the

>>>>real "substance"?

>>>

>>>Matthew Bell

>>>Why should it need to indicate such for the NT claim to be true?

>>>

>> 

>>TILL

>>Oh, that's an easy one.  Let me answer it.  Unless the OT writers

>>indicated that they intended ceremonial laws, the tabernacle, 

>>sacrifices, and such like to be "shadows" or "types," then it would

>>have been pure speculation for the NT writers to say that they were,

>>unless, of course, you beg the question of whether the writers were

>>"inspired of God," and I suspect you do want to beg that question, 

>>don't you?

>

><snip>

>

>Matthew Bell

>I don't need to beg the question, nor raise the subject of inspiration. It

>would be more correct to say the following:

>

>That the OT does not indicate that it's ceremonial laws were only a

>temporary shadow, and that a future messiah was the real "substance" shows

>that:

>

>a) either they were merely speculating or

>b) that, after who they believed was the Messiah had appeared to them, they

>received, accepted and adopted new teachings on the ceremonial laws as

>being but a temporary shadow.

>

>Now you show me that why I should give more credence to a) than to b)?


TILL
What's wrong with b)?  You've got to be kidding!  The second alternative has
nothing to support it but mere speculation.  I could organize a religion
today and claim that the OT laws and ceremonies typified the coming of this
religion through temporary shadows and types.   My word would be no less
authoritative than Paul's or the Hebrew writer's, unless, of course, you
take the position that Paul and the writer of Hebrews were inspired of God
and I'm not, but that would be question begging, wouldn't it?  

I understand that Mormons claim that Moses was a shadow or type of Joseph
Smith.  Does their claiming this make it so?  If not, why does Paul's claim
of types and shadows in the OT make the claim true?  The only thing you can
say is, "Well, Paul was inspired of God."  In other words, on this
particular issue all you can do is beg the question.



Farrell Till
Skepticism, Inc.
jftill@midwest.net