Hello davyman,
I've posted in many threads on the view that the OT saints were not born again, although I agree completely that they were saved. I believe Paul's theses in Romans, Galatians and Heb 3:5 and 6, shed light on the reasons for this.
The abiding and binding similarity between the salvation of OT saints (right up to John the Baptist) and NT saints, is the necessity of faith in what God said to them (the OT saints) and their obedience to His leadings.
In the OT we see, as it were in slow motion, what it is to be obedient to God's word, through a steady presentation of all the issues that will face Christians. Even the term 'Christian' cannot be applied to the OT saints, saved though they are. We are indebted to the Lord Himself for making us sure of this - that they are 'living'. I firmly believe we are all part of the same body - the Church.
There is perhaps the clearest picture in the OT of the whole of biblical history in a nutshell, in the story of Abraham sending his servant to find a wife for Isaac. Isaac was the true son - the promised seed - who would inherit everything (as we see in the narrative that he did) - for whom a bride was sought - by the servant.
Of course, Jesus Christ fulfilled all the roles, being both Son and Servant, but, as with Paul's mention of
EDIT: It's ok, I realise I was mixing up Galatians and Hebrews and that we don't [i]know[/i] that Paul wrote Hebrews.... So, when I said 'Moses in Galatians' I meant.... the writer of the Hebrew's reference to Moses noted somewhere later in this post; BIG apologies! end edit.
the servant never inherits the house and the ultimate power over it or freedom which sonship bestows. In a way, that Abraham was concerned he may have to leave his 'house' to his 'servant' is a line in the sand, as God's response was, in effect [i]absolutely not![/i] - there [i]will be a son![/i] on whom you can legitimately bestow everything.
The other major strand of OT revelation on this, is the journey God makes from being completely separate from man when He walked with Adam in the Garden, to walking [u]with[/u] man [i]after[/i] the golden calf (from which time he could be [i]seen[/i] no more), to appearing in clouds in the Tabernacle and the Temple, but never being able to reside there because of the idolatry which symbolised the need for 'the new heart' and 'a new spirit'.
Following the ministry of John the Baptist, whose preparatory call to the baptism of repentance had been remarkably successful across the land, this is what makes Pentecost vitally different.
It is possible to see all through the OT that God empowered men for ministry through an anointing of the Holy Spirit, and always, had a personal relationship with the men He anointed.
This matter of relationship is radically changed by the recognition that 'our old man' was crucified with Christ. Because of this, we can receive the spirit of adoption, by which we cry 'Father!' This very real difference, can be studied in scripture, taking note of how Jesus was in big trouble with the authorities for alluding to His Father way beyond the previously accepted, but.... only ceremonial.... naming of God as 'Father' which was formally recognised within the Jewish religion.
David's point about preaching new birth to the living, is a new thought to me.
To balance this, if you search for 'Adam' in the parting of the Jordan, you'll find the waters pile up all the way (back) to a village or city 'of Adam'. Symbollically, I believe this can be understood as a reference to Christ's death being inclusive of\\for [u]all[/u] who ever lived under the death sentence through Adam's sin; that God might be righteous beyond all human reasoning, and the justifier of all who believe. As it is written 'the just shall [u]live[/u] by faith' (Rom 1:17, Hab 2:4); that is 'faith in the Son of God' (Gal 2:20).
