SPECIAL TOPIC: TYPOLOGY

SPECIAL TOPIC: TYPOLOGY

This subject is very important to my hermeneutical understanding of how to properly interpret the Bible.
1. My main presupposition is that the intent of the original inspired biblical author is the place to start understanding the Bible's message.
2. The second presupposition is that it is crucial to try to understand what the first hearers/readers
  1. could have understood
  2. would have understood
  3. should have understood
3. Typology seems to be a contradiction to these premises! In reality my main problem with typology is its close association with allegory, which I feel has been abused in the history of interpretation (see my Seminar on Biblical Interpretation [first red box on homepage] in the chapter VI, "The Historical-Grammatical Method," I.)
  SPECIAL TOPIC: THE ALEXANDRIAN SCHOOL OF BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION
Let me first try to define "typology."
1. The semantic field of the Koine Greek term, "type," is very diverse
  SPECIAL TOPIC: FORM (tupos)
2. Typology is similar to allegory
  1. Allegory seeks a hidden, deeper level of meaning in every text. It imports meaning into the text that has no relation at all to the intended meaning of the original author or his day, or even the thrust of Scripture as a whole. See Bible Interpretation Seminar online (first red box on homepage, I.).
  2. Typology seeks to focus on the unity of the Bible, based on one divine Author and one divine Plan. Similarities between the OT and NT pre-figure or foreshadow truths. These similarities rise naturally out of a reading of the entire Bible. The OT is also an inspired source for NT believers (cf. Rom. 4:23-24; 5:14; 15:4; 1 Cor. 9:10; 10:6,11; 1 Pet. 1:12).
  3. For a good discussion see
    1. G. B. Caird, The Language and Imagery of the Bible, chapter 9, pp. 160-171
    2. F. F. Bruce, Answers to Questions, pp. 244-246
3. The authors of the NT saw things happen in Jesus' life and teachings that brought to mind similar events/things that were recorded in the OT. Here are some examples.
  1. Adam (Adam‒Christ typology) ‒ Acts 3:24-26; Rom. 5:12-21; 1 Cor. 15:22-45
  2. Isaac ‒ Genesis 22 and Christ's sacrifice
  3. Moses ‒ Deut. 18:5 in Acts 3:22; Deut. 18:18-19 in Heb. 3:1-5
  4. Passover Lamb ‒ Isa. 53:7 in John 1:29; 1 Cor. 5:7; 1 Pet. 1:19-20
  5. exodus ‒ Hosea 11:1 in Matt. 2:15
  6. bronze serpent ‒ Num. 21:9 in John 3:14
  7. Israel ‒ Hosea 1:10; 2:23 in Rom. 9:25-27
NT examples of typological foreshadowing
1. Jesus uses a figurative approach in His parable of the soils (Matt. 13:1-23; Mark 4:1-20; Luke 8:4-15), where He Himself interprets the different details by assigning them symbolic meaning.
  1. the "seed" was
    1. the word of the Kingdom (see SPECIAL TOPIC: THE KINGDOM OF GOD)
    2. the gospel (see SPECIAL TOPIC: THE GOSPEL)
  2. the types of soil were the hearts of the hearers
    1. some seed never germinates (Satan snatches it away)
    2. some germinate but later die
      (1) rocky soil (shallow soil)
      (2) thorn roots already established
      (3) good soil brings forth a harvest (spiritual fruit)
  3. Jesus uses a different kind of typology, similar to Philo and the rabbis, which can be seen in His parable of the soils. The details of the parable all have symbolic meaning.
    SPECIAL TOPIC: RABBINICAL HERMENEUTICS
2. Gospel writers (one example, Matthew 2)
  1. Matthew's use of OT historical events as pointing toward Jesus is a good example
    1. Matt. 2:15 is a quote from Hosea 11:1, referring to YHWH calling Israel (i.e., His Son) out of Egypt (cf. Gen. 15:12-21)
      SPECIAL TOPIC: SON OF GOD
    2. Matt. 2:17 is a quote from Jer. 31:15, relating to the exile of the northern tribes by Sargon II, the Assyrian king in 722 B.C.
    3. Matt. 2:23 seems to be a loose reference to Isa. 11:1, where the Messiah is called "Branch" (i.e., netzer; see SPECIAL TOPIC: THE BRANCH OF THE LORD), which is a similar sound to Nazarene
      SPECIAL TOPIC: JESUS THE NAZARENE, C.
  2. While looking at Matthew 2, let me recognize the historical prophecy (i.e., not typology of v. 6), which specifically refers to the place of the Messiah's birth.
    SPECIAL TOPIC: PROPHECY (OT), V.
3. Paul ‒ the Adam-Christ typology
  1. Romans 5:12-21 is a discussion of Jesus as the second Adam (i.e., Adam ‒ Christ typology; cf. 1 Cor. 15:21-22, 45-49; Phil. 2:6-8). It gives emphasis to the theological concepts of both individual sin and corporate guilt. Paul's development of mankind's (and creation's) fall in Adam was so unique and different from the rabbis (who developed their doctrine of sin from Genesis 6), while his view of corporality was very much in line with rabbinical teaching. It showed Paul's ability under inspiration to use or supplement the truths he was taught during his training in Jerusalem under Gamaliel (cf. Acts 22:3; see Appendix of Alfred Edersheim's Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah).
  2. the two mountains of Galatians 4 ‒ In one particular context (i.e., Galatians 3-4), Paul compared the Abrahamic Covenant and the Mosaic Covenant and draws application to the New Covenant of Jer. 31:31-34 and the NT.
    Four connections in Gal. 4:21-31 may be drawn.
    1. The two mothers stand for two families; one formed by natural means, the other by supernatural promise.
    2. There was tension between these two mothers and their children as there was tension between the Judaizer's message and Paul's gospel.
    3. Both groups claimed to be descendants of Abraham, but one was in bondage to the Mosaic Law and the other was free in Christ's finished work.
    4. Two mountains were connected to these different covenants, Mt. Sinai with Moses and Mt. Zion with Abraham. Mt. Zion, or Mt. Moriah, was where Abraham offered Isaac as a sacrifice (cf. Genesis 22), which later became Jerusalem. Abraham was looking for a heavenly city (Heb. 11:10; 12:22; 13:14, New Jerusalem, Isaiah 40-66) not an earthly Jerusalem.
      Paul may have used this typology because
      (1) the false teachers had used this same approach to their advantage, claiming to be the true seed of Abraham
      (2) the false teachers may have used an allegory from Moses' writings to push their Jewish covenant theology so Paul uses the father of the Jewish faith, Abraham
      (3) Paul may have used it because of Gen. 21:9-10, which is quoted in verse 30 and says, "drive off" the natural son; in Paul's analogy this would refer to the Judaizers
      (4) Paul may have used it because of the exclusivism of the Jewish false teachers, particularly in their contempt for the Gentiles; in Paul's typology the Gentiles are accepted and the racially confident ones are rejected by God (cf. Matt. 8:11-12)
      (5) Paul may have used this typology because he has been emphasizing "sonship" and "heirship" in Galatians 3; 4. This was the heart of his argument: our adoption into the family of God by faith through
      Christ alone, not natural descent.
Bob's view of using typology
1. The inspired writers of Scripture were led in specific ways by the Spirit
  SPECIAL TOPIC: INSPIRATION
2. All beelievers still have the Spirit's help in understanding the Bible, but at a lesser level.
  SPECIAL TOPIC: ILLUMINATION
3. I personally affirm all typology found in Scripture, but do not allow post-inspiration Christians to make up new ones (i.e., the furniture of the tabernacle forms a cross, or the crossing of the Red Sea is salvation, but the crossing of the Jordon is sanctification)!

SPECIAL TOPIC: RABBINICAL HERMENEUTICAL TECHNIQUES

SPECIAL TOPIC: THE ALEXANDRIAN SCHOOL OF BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

SPECIAL TOPIC: THE ANTIOCHIAN SCHOOL OF BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION