Sunday, November 4, 2007

Typology

Please read and comment on the following essay. Note. It is a general essay on typology. I will ask you apply this to Paul's reading of Scripture below.

Typology is the strategy for discerning the correspondence, pattern, shape or structural affinity between two of God acts. These divine acts involve God’s work through persons, events, and institutions. The words “type” and “antitype” are used to express the relationship between the two events. “Type” comes from the Greek word tupos meaning “example” or “model.” In a typological interpretation “type” is used to refer to an original historical act that serves as a model for a later, corresponding act (“antitype”). The original may stand in a positive, synthetic relationship to the later event or in a negative, antithetic relationship. An example of a synthetic typology would be the reference to Jesus as “the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (e.g., John 1:29). The imagery of the lamb comes from the Passover event (Exodus 12; 1 Cor 5:7), adjusted perhaps by prophetic reference to the servant of the Lord (Isa 53:4-7). The point in this typology is the way that Jesus is similar to the Passover lamb even if his sacrifice is understood to be universal in scope. An example of an antithetical typology would be Paul’s reference to Jesus as a second Adam (Romans 5). While Adam and Jesus share a certain likeness as the heads of the first and new creation respectively, Paul’s point is their dissimilarity not their similarity. Through the first Adam sin and death come to all people; through the second Adam righteousness and life is available to all. Both synthetic and antithetic typologies illumine the contemporary act of redemption by correlating it with a known event from the past.


Several theological assumptions drive typology. First, typology assumes that history is the arena of God’s saving activity. In any typological scheme the historicity of persons, events and institutions is taken for granted and essential. When Paul refers to Adam as a type of Jesus, it was necessary that Adam had been a person in history and not some mythic figure. The historicity of the type and antitype distinguishes typological from allegorical readings. Second, typology presumes that God is faithful to his promises and that his work in history is constant. This does not mean, of course, that there are no new acts of God; what it does mean is that a new act can be understood best in reference to God’s earlier acts. So typology emphasizes the unity of God’s actions in history; as such it is employed to underscore the unity between the testaments as a witness to God’s acts. Third, typology is based upon a linear view of history in which events intensify or escalate as God’s plan moves toward its ultimate goal (eschaton). In NT parlance, the new redemptive event may be said to “fulfill” the prophet’s word even if the prophecy had an earlier fulfillment (e.g., Matt 1:23; cf. Isaiah 7). For example, the redemption associated with the Passover lamb involved a particular people at a particular time (Exodus 12) whereas the redemption associated with Jesus as “the lamb of God” intensifies and universalizes the hope.


Typology is evident in Jewish and Christian circles during the second temple period. The use of typology found in the NT is consistent with and likely derived from hermeneutical practices within the Hebrew Bible.


Hebrew Bible


The writers, editors and compilers of the Hebrew Bible employed typology to recall God’s past faithfulness and to anticipate new acts of redemption. Creation and exodus themes are common. In Isa 65:17-25, for example, the prophet describes God’s promise to create a new heaven and a new earth that stands in continuity with and yet eclipses the first creation. God’s work to repair the world effectively makes it new again, reverses the curse, and returns it to its paradisaical form. In this way God’s earlier, covenant promises to his people can be realized: long life in the land, prosperity, peace, God’s permanent presence with his people.


Because of its significance in Israelite history, the exodus becomes the “type” for new hopes for redemption as Israel is enslaved by and in exile in hostile nations. So, e.g., in Isa 11:16 the prophet foresees a day when the Lord will make a highway out of Assyria for the remnant just as he brought Israel up from the land of Egypt (cf. Isa 40:3-5; 43:16-24; 49:8-13). Similarly, in Micah 7:14-20 the prophet envisages a new act of redemption that will be like earlier times when Israel came out of Egypt. But not all the new exodus imagery is prophetic and eschatological. Within the stories of Israel’s past typological correspondence is evident. So, e.g., the Lord promises Joshua that he will be with him like he was with Moses (Joshua 1-5), thus fulfilling the earlier, divine promises. Joshua becomes a new Moses, parting the Jordan and reinitiating the Passover. These later acts of redemption take on a new meaning precisely because of their associations with the older types.


Another typology found in the Hebrew Bible involves a “new covenant.” Jeremiah prophesies that God will make a new covenant with Israel in the future (31:31-34). Because of its reference to coming out of the land of Egypt, this is a variation on the new exodus theme. But the new covenant typology is primarily antithetical, for the oracle points out all the ways in which the new covenant is not like the old.


New Testament


New Testament authors make extensive use of typology in order to express their understanding of the transcendent significance of Jesus and his work of salvation. To be successful, typologies depend on the competence of the audience. While any typology can be lost on some hearers—assuming that the NT gospels and letters were initially read aloud—the ideal audience will perceive the correspondence between type and antitype. Some of the typologies listed below, though certainly not all, derive from Jesus’ own teaching and use of scripture. Others are expansions or reflections on his significance by later theologians. As we see with the Hebrew Bible, creation, exodus, and covenant typologies dominate (Ellis, 105-106).


New covenant. In the words of institution (Mark 14:24; Matt 26:28; Luke 22:20) Jesus is said to appropriate the “new covenant” prophesied by Jeremiah (31:31-4) and link it with the pouring out of his blood. His crucifixion is understood to establish the new covenant. This is symbolized by the cup of wine from the Passover celebration. The new covenant inaugurated by Jesus is thereby linked with the both the Passover as a recollection of the exodus and the new covenant of Jeremiah.


Son of God. For many reasons the NT employs the title “Son of God” in reference to Jesus. The interest here is the typological association expressed in fulfillment language: “out of Egypt I called my Son” (Matt 2:15; quoting Hos 11.1). Clearly, this is an example of exodus typology that links the flight and return of Joseph, Mary and Jesus from Egypt with Israel’s exodus. In the type (Hos 11:1), “my Son” refers to Israel. Effectively, the evangelist’s use of the quotation constitutes Jesus as a new Israel. This means that Jesus takes up Israel’s role in relation to God’s work in the world. But the typology itself has antithetical elements because Jesus is not only like Israel, he is also unlike Israel. Whereas Hosea’s Israel (“my son”) abandoned and disappointed God (Hos 11:1-7), Matthew’s Jesus obeys and is well-pleasing to God as the Son (e.g., Matt 3:17).


Son of David. The title “Son of David” is associated with Jesus in a variety of settings (e.g., Matt 1:1, 6; Mark 11:9-10 & par.; Mark 12:35-37 & par., cf. Rom 1:3-4) and has typological overtones. The titular use is almost certainly derived from 2 Sam 7:12-16, commonly understood as God’s covenant with David. Within the narrative of 2 Samuel, the “son of David” refers to Solomon, but already by the time of the Chronicler (1 Chron 17:11-14) the promise has taking on broader, messianic significance. In Matthew’s genealogy, for instance, Jesus’ messianic status as “the Son of David” is demonstrated by tracing his lineage through the royal line (Matt 1:1, 6, 17). Further, the evangelist employs gematria to structure Jesus’ genealogy around the number fourteen (14), which is the number associated with David’s name (Matt 1:17). Although these construals are not dominical, they may depend on Jesus’ self-understanding (cf. Mark 12:35-37 & par.). By referring to Jesus as “the Son of David,” it became possible to associate God’s promise of an everlasting kingdom with him.


Son of Man. Jesus’ favorite self-designation appears to have been “Son of Man.” Since other NT writers do not use it, it is almost certainly a dominical expression. According to the intracanonical Gospels, Jesus employs it in a variety of settings. Interpreters have debated its meaning, and to date there is no scholarly consensus. One prominent theory, however, relates the expression “Son of Man” with Dan 7:12-14. In this text Daniel sees a vision in which “one like a son of man” comes on the clouds before the Ancient of Days and receives an eternal, universal kingdom. In the vision’s interpretation Daniel identifies the son of man with the saints of the Most High (Dan 7:18, 22), taken as a reference to Israel. If this is the background, the expression “Son of Man” used by Jesus connects him with Israel’s eschatological task of ruling the nations. Psalm 8 may also have played a role in the christological formulation “Son of Man.” With its celebration of creation and Adam’s dominion over it, Psalm 8 supplied the early Jesus movement with a variation on the creation typology.


Servant of the Lord. The Gospels never explicitly designates Jesus “the Servant of the Lord” (cf. Acts 3;13, 26), but a Servant typology appears beneath the surface of the narratives. The designation derives from prophetic oracles recorded in Isaiah (chs 42, 49, 50, especially 53). In the prophetic stream, the Servant is identified with Israel (e.g., 49:3) so its christological appropriation links Jesus with the covenant people. NT writers and perhaps even Jesus himself understood the vocation of the Servant as “fulfilled” in his actions. Jesus’ teachings and healings are said to fulfill the prophet’s message in proclaiming justice and bringing hope to the nations (Matt 12:17-21; quoting Isa 42:1-4; cf. Matt 8:16-17). His coming arrest and trial fulfill the oracle that the Servant must be counted among the transgressors (Luke 22:37; quoting Isa 53:12). It is particularly in the details of his passion that allusive use is made of Isaiah 53, where suffering for others is the primary vocation of God’s Servant (see, e.g., Mark 10:45). If Jesus understood himself to be the Servant of the Lord, fulfilling Israel’s destiny, then these oracles may well have directed his mission.


Prophet-like-Moses. According to Deut 18:15-18, God will raise up a prophet-like-Moses to lead the covenant people. Apparently, this expectation was current in the second temple period and assisted in the formulation and expansion of certain christological claims. While this language is more explicit in Acts (e.g., Acts 3:22; quoting Deut 18:15-20; cf. Acts 7:37), echoes of this hope can be heard in a variety of settings in the Gospels. In the transfiguration, e.g., the heavenly voice declares: “this is My beloved Son, listen to him!” (Mark 9:7 & par.). The command to listen recalls God’s directive to his people when the eschatological prophet arrives. In Matthew’s Gospel, a Moses typology is clearly at work. First, the slaughter in Bethlehem and Jesus’ escape is reminiscent of a similar carnage in Egypt under the Pharaoh’s cruel policies (cf. Matthew 1-2; Exodus 1-2). Second, as we saw above in regard to Hos 11:1, the return of Joseph and his family from Egypt to the land of promise has resonance with Moses and the exodus. Third, Jesus’ success during the wilderness temptations stands in typological antithesis to Israel’s failures in the wilderness under Moses’ leadership. Fourth, Jesus ascends the mountain and writes his teachings on the hearts of his disciples in ways similar and yet dissimilar to Moses’ ascent of Mt. Sinai. In these and other ways, the portrayal of Jesus as the eschatological prophet-like-Moses provides an important clue to the early Christians’ assessment of his significance.


Of course, Jesus’ work is linked with prophets other than Moses. For example, in announcing
the fulfillment of God’s jubilee promises, Jesus associates his mission with Elijah’s and Elisha’s work among non-Jews (Luke 4:1-30; 1 Kings 17-18; 2 Kings 5). Since rumors around Jesus relate him to prophets (Matt 16:13-20), it is likely that the earliest appraisals of his significance among “the people of the land” regard his prophetic role. If, as the Gospels portray, Jesus anticipated his death, then he did so in solidarity with prophets before him (e.g., Matt 23:37).


“Something greater”. The phrase “something greater” characterizes three typological sayings in Matthew 12. In Matt 12:6 Jesus justifies his disciples’ harvesting of grain on the Sabbath by appealing to David’s example (1 Sam 21:1-7) and the weekly violation of the Sabbath by priests performing their duties. When Jesus announces that “something greater than the temple is here” (Matt 12:6), he has in mind himself or his community. By appealing to the deeds of David and the priests, Jesus associates his activities with royal and priestly actions. It is impossible to overestimate the significance of the Jerusalem temple. However, because of corruption the temple and its leadership had already fallen out of favor with many Jews. The constitution of the community of Jesus as a temple “not made with hands” (Mark 14:58) is a typological move already made by the people of Qumran who left the temple because of its corruption and withdrew to the wilderness to establish a new temple and new covenant people.


In Matt 12:38-41 Jesus responds to the Pharisees’ demand for a sign by promising the evil generation the sign of Jonah and concludes by saying “something greater than Jonah is here.” For Matthew Jonah becomes a type of Jesus in two ways: (1) Jonah’s presence in the belly of the great fish three days and three nights corresponds to “the Son of Man” spending three days in the heart of the earth (Jonah 1-2); (2) Jonah’s success in turning Nineveh back to God (Jonah 3-4) corresponds to the success Jesus has in preaching to Israel and the nations. The competent audience will also pick up on the antithetical elements in the typology. Jonah’s recalcitrance stands in opposition to Jesus’ faithful obedience.


In Matt 12:42 Jesus commends the Queen of the South for traveling far to experience the Solomon’s wisdom and simultaneously condemns those who refuse to acknowledge God’s wisdom. He concludes by saying “something greater than Solomon is here.” Typologically speaking, Jesus corresponds to Solomon (who also happens to be a son of David); both are purveyors of wisdom. But later generations of Christians expanded the association by identifying Jesus with divine wisdom (sophia; e.g., 1 Cor 1:24, 30).


With each of these sayings the phrase “something greater” depicts an escalation which is already evident in the work of Jesus.


The Serpent in the Wilderness. According to John 3:14-15, Jesus said: “And just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, in the same way the Son of Man must be lifted up so all who believe in him may have eternal life.” The type recalls the healing of many Israelites afflicted by venomous snakes in the wilderness. Following God’s instructions, Moses fashioned a serpent and lifted it up on a standard so that anyone who looked it would have life (Numb 21:4-9). The antitype refers to the lifting up of the Son of Man, i.e., the crucifixion, and its universalized result: all who believe have eternal life.


The Stone. At the end of the parable of the wicked tenants (Mark 12:1-9 & par.) Jesus applies Ps 118:22-23 to the situation he faced, i.e., the growing opposition and final rejection (crucifixion) by the powers-that-be in Jerusalem. As it stands in the Synoptics, Jesus re-plots the story implicit in the passage to foreshadow his crucifixion (rejected stone) and resurrection (rejected stone made cornerstone). If, as some have concluded, the rejected stone referred originally to Israel, we have here another example of an Israel-Jesus typology. Jesus’ rejection is typified in Israel’s defeat at the hands of its enemies. His vindication is anticipated as “the Lord’s doing.” Stone passages are found elsewhere in the NT in reference to Jesus and the church (e.g., Acts 4:11; Rom 9:33; 1 Pet 2:1-8). Some “stone” passages may have even taken on messianic implications (e.g., Isa 8:14; 28:16; cf. Rom 9:30-33).


Conclusion


The NT’s use of the OT is central to how early Christians did theology. Typology was the primary method they used to read and appropriate their Scripture.



Bibliography

D. L. Baker. Two Testaments, One Bible. Revised edition. Downers Grove:
InterVarsity, 1991.


David Daube. The Exodus Pattern in the Bible. London: 1963.


E. Earle Ellis. History and Interpretation in New Testament Perspective. SBL Biblical
Interpretation Series. Volume 54. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2001.


E. Earle Ellis. The Old Testament in Early Christianity: Canon and Interpretation in
Light of Modern Research
. WUNT 54. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1991.


Craig Evans. “Typology” in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels. Edited by Joel B.
Green and Scot McKnight. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1992.


Michael Fishbane. Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel. Oxford: Clarendon Press,
1985.


R. T. France. Jesus and the Old Testament: His Application of Old Testament Passages
to Himself and His Mission
. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1971.


Leonhard Goppelt. Typos: The Typological Interpretation of the Old Testament in the
New.
Translated by D. H. Madvig. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982.

17 comments:

Barbara said...

Romans 5:12-21: The type here is sin that came through one man with the antitype being the free gift of grace that came through another man. These are set up as antithetic types with the first bringing death through disobedience and the second bringing justification and life through obedience. Paul is making the point that where sin increases and brings death that grace abounds all the more through justification that leads to eternal life

Romans 9:33-10:17: Paul writes about the stone here that makes people stumble and I wonder if the stone is both the law that he refers to in the remainder of the passage as well as Jesus. With the stone that is the law as the type, the righteousness that Moses wrote about (10:5), and Jesus the antitype who brings righteousness through faith and is the end of the law (10:4, 6). The synthetic relationship here is the desire for righteousness but the antithetical aspect is the way it is gained. Paul is trying to show that Jesus is the end (goal) of the law and that faith comes through him (10:17).

1 Corinthians 3:16-17: This is an example of a synthetic relationship between the type, God’s physical temple of the OT, and the antitype, the body (singular and plural) of the believer. Paul takes the belief that God dwells with God’s people in the temple of the OT and applies that to the temple of the human body and body of believers as a place that God’s Spirit resides.

1 Corinthians 5:7-8: Paul seems to be speaking again of the law when he refers to “yeast”. The type is the old yeast of “malice and evil”. He tells his readers to be a new batch, (the antitype) of unleavened bread consisting of sincerity and truth because a new Paschal Lamb has been sacrificed, Christ. Paul is trying to connect with his Hebrew readers here and free them from legalism and redefine the festival in light of Christ’s sacrificial act.

Galatians 4:22-31: The type in this passage is the two sons of Abraham – one a slave born according to the flesh and the other free and born through the promise. These correspond with the antitype which is those of the current Jerusalem (Israel) and the Jerusalem above (the church? Christians?). Paul wants to make the point to his readers that they are children of the promise and just as the child of the slave persecuted the child of the promise so it is now also (4:29) but he also makes the comment to ‘drive out the child of the slave’ saying we are children of the free woman. Is Paul telling the church to ‘drive out’ the law and to free itself from the slavery of Judaism (5:1)?

David B. Capes said...

Barbara is the first to the table on this one. Well done. She's done a good job but there's still room for comment. In particular, I wonder if she has missed something regarding 1 Corinthians 3:16-17. Go back and see if there might be a different way of reading that text. Sometimes what we think going in (our pre-
understanding) determines how we read a text.

dbc

Billi said...

Romans 5:12-21. The type is Adam, the sin-and-death-bringer, and the anti-type is Jesus Christ, the righteousness-and-life bringer. There is a point of synthesis: Adam of the first creation anticipates a human Jesus, who brings the new creation. But basically Adam and Jesus Christ are antithetical. Adam’s disobedience resulted in sin and death for all, and he was powerless to affect its sentence on mankind. The Law made sin plain, but could not muzzle it. Through his obedient death, however, Jesus offered the free gift of righteousness and justification to all. Paul teaches that Adam is typical of us all. Though our sins may differ, sin is in all. The Law points out sin but is powerless to overcome it. Only grace through Jesus Christ defeats sin and brings eternal life.

Romans 9:33-10:17. Paul uses Isaiah’s image of a stone for the word of the Law through Moses as the type, and the word of Faith through Christ as the anti-type. The word of the Law and the word of Faith are both described as being near, “in your mouth and in your heart.” They have a synthetic aspect. But Israel has stumbled over both stones, suggesting an antithetical relationship. Paul longs for the salvation of the Jews, and in verses 9-17 preaches the gospel of inclusiveness, inviting the Jews to call on the name of the Lord for salvation. He appeals to the Jews with persuasive words of faith from Isaiah and Joel. The final word from Paul is “the word of Christ.”

1 Corinthians 3:16-17. The type is the first Temple, the anti-type the church in Corinth. They are synthetic in that they are both places for worship, and just as the first Temple was destroyed, the church in Corinth is in danger of destruction. They are antithetic in that the church in Corinth is on the verge of self-destruction. Paul is responding to the Corinthians’ split allegiances among preachers. No matter the preacher, Paul says, the only foundation for that temple is Jesus Christ. The Corinthians must not destroy a holy temple of God.

1 Corinthians 5:7-8. The type is the Passover, and the anti-type is the Passover role of Jesus Christ. The Lord’s Supper also figures here, as Paul records later in 1 Corinthians 11. The two Passovers are synthetic in their purpose of life-saving. Paul focuses on one aspect of Passover, however, the old leaven, which by God’s command in Exodus must be totally swept from the house before Passover. In Corinth the old leaven symbolizes “malice and wickedness.” The “little leaven” of the sexual sin Paul descries in the first verses of chapter 5 defiles the whole church. In this way the typology is antithetical. Paul urges the Corinthians to celebrate the feast with “the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.”

Galatians 4:22-31. This typology is a bit muddled, as the principals are contemporary. (The NAB has Paul saying “This is allegorically speaking.) Basically Hagar (bondwoman), Ishmael (“born according to the flesh”), Mt. Sinai (the Law) are in slavery and “correspond to the present Jerusalem.” They contrast with the free woman (presumably Sarah), her son “born through the promise” (Isaac), and the free “Jerusalem above.” So if they are type and anti-type, they are antithetic. Paul uses this illustration to encourage the Galatians to choose freedom through Jesus Christ.

Billi said...

Romans 5:12-21. The type is Adam, the sin-and-death-bringer, and the anti-type is Jesus Christ, the righteousness-and-life bringer. There is a point of synthesis: Adam of the first creation anticipates a human Jesus, who brings the new creation. But basically Adam and Jesus Christ are antithetical. Adam’s disobedience resulted in sin and death for all, and he was powerless to affect its sentence on mankind. The Law made sin plain, but could not muzzle it. Through his obedient death, however, Jesus offered the free gift of righteousness and justification to all. Paul teaches that Adam is typical of us all. Though our sins may differ, sin is in all. The Law points out sin but is powerless to overcome it. Only grace through Jesus Christ defeats sin and brings eternal life.

Romans 9:33-10:17. Paul uses Isaiah’s image of a stone for the word of the Law through Moses as the type, and the word of Faith through Christ as the anti-type. The word of the Law and the word of Faith are both described as being near, “in your mouth and in your heart.” They have a synthetic aspect. But Israel has stumbled over both stones, suggesting an antithetical relationship. Paul longs for the salvation of the Jews, and in verses 9-17 preaches the gospel of inclusiveness, inviting the Jews to call on the name of the Lord for salvation. He appeals to the Jews with persuasive words of faith from Isaiah and Joel. The final word from Paul is “the word of Christ.”

1 Corinthians 3:16-17. The type is the first Temple, the anti-type the church in Corinth. They are synthetic in that they are both places for worship, and just as the first Temple was destroyed, the church in Corinth is in danger of destruction. They are antithetic in that the church in Corinth is on the verge of self-destruction. Paul is responding to the Corinthians’ split allegiances among preachers. No matter the preacher, Paul says, the only foundation for that temple is Jesus Christ. The Corinthians must not destroy a holy temple of God.

1 Corinthians 5:7-8. The type is the Passover, and the anti-type is the Passover role of Jesus Christ. The Lord’s Supper also figures here, as Paul records later in 1 Corinthians 11. The two Passovers are synthetic in their purpose of life-saving. Paul focuses on one aspect of Passover, however, the old leaven, which by God’s command in Exodus must be totally swept from the house before Passover. In Corinth the old leaven symbolizes “malice and wickedness.” The “little leaven” of the sexual sin Paul descries in the first verses of chapter 5 defiles the whole church. In this way the typology is antithetical. Paul urges the Corinthians to celebrate the feast with “the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.”

Galatians 4:22-31. This typology is a bit muddled, as the principals are contemporary. (The NAB has Paul saying “This is allegorically speaking.) Basically Hagar (bondwoman), Ishmael (“born according to the flesh”), Mt. Sinai (the Law) are in slavery and “correspond to the present Jerusalem.” They contrast with the free woman (presumably Sarah), her son “born through the promise” (Isaac), and the free “Jerusalem above.” So if they are type and anti-type, they are antithetic. Paul uses this illustration to encourage the Galatians to choose freedom through Jesus Christ.

brad said...

As I struggle with type and antitype, I am doing this by brail…hope I have understood these correctly!

Rom 5:12-21
Seems as though the type here is sin entering the world through Adam and the antitype is the gift of life through grace in Jesus. The relationship between them is that both Adam and Jesus brought forth life altering changes for all of mankind. One act by each changed the world affecting all that came afterwards. I think that Paul was stating was that the amount of sin experienced has direction to the amount of this grace gift that is given. As sin increased, so did the gift.

Rom 9:33-10:17
I am seeing the stone as the type and faith as the antitype. The relationship between these is that faith in Jesus is what becomes the stumbling block for the Jews as they stick to the Law as their means of righteousness. Paul is basically saying that they missed it. They are extremely zealous, but their zeal is misdirected. The word/Word was all around them.

1 Cor 3:16-17
The Temple is the type and the antitype is the body. I may be oversimplifying this but I would think that Paul was stating that the Lord lives in and loves us as the single body and body of believers as the church.

1 Cor 5: 7-8
The old yeast is the type and the antitype is the body of believers as a new batch. Bread requires yeast to rise and Paul is saying that the people should use a new yeast in them, this new yeast being sincerity and truth.

Gal 4: 22-31
The types are Ishmael and Isaac to the antitypes of Jews and Gentiles. The Jews and the law and now seen as without he inheritance while the Gentiles are the receivers of it as born of the free woman. Paul seems to be pretty clear in this one as he states the you (Gentiles) brothers are like Isaac and again stating that it is the same now as it was then, only reversed.

This exercise makes you work at it! At least I had too

David B. Capes said...

Brad calls this a struggle. It is a struggle indeed to see these connections. Some have called typology an art. I think that is probably true. The key here is the kind of relationship that exists between an OT and NT figure, institution, etc. Work on seeing the connections first in the Gospels, then in the letters of Paul.

Paul said...

The typology in Romans 5:12-21 is mentioned in David’s article—Christ is the antitype of the first Adam. They are similar in the power they exert as the initiators of certain seasons in human history: the season of death, sin and Law and the season of life, grace and righteousness. As David points out, the point that Paul draws is their dissimilarity in the result of the power they exert. Whereas death came through Adam, life comes through Christ—they could not be less similar in this respect.

In Romans 9:33-10:17, Christ is the antitype of the stone of Isaiah, which is explicit in Paul’s use of a direct quotation from Is. 8:14 (Cf. Is. 28:16). His point is that salvation comes by faith, not by the Law. Of course we have previously discussed what Paul means by ‘the end of the Law’ in this passage. In Isaiah 8, the stone is ‘The LORD Almighty,” so here Paul is attributing divine character to Christ. The stone is also used to disrupt the misguided understandings of the Jews—it causes them to stumble so that they will be shaken from their arrogant pride and recognize that their salvation comes through trust in God. In this way, Christ serves a similar purpose in bringing redemption to God’s people as they trust in him.

In 1 Corinthians 3:16-17, Paul declares that the Church (‘you’ is plural) is the antitype of God’s temple, the place wherein God dwells, the sacred place from which God’s people derive their identity. Paul is chiefly concerned with the unity of the Corinthian church, and strongly indicates that those who divide the Church will receive the wrath God reserves for those who destroy His dwelling place.

Source: Comfort, P.W. “Temple.” In Dictionary of Paul and his Letters. Gerald F. Hawthorne, Ralph P. Martin, and Daniel G. Reid, eds., 923-925. Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 1993.

In 1 Corinthians 5:7-8, Christ is described as the Passover lamb. In this way, Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross becomes the antitype of the sacrifice of the unblemished lamb which provided the people of God protection from the judgment of God. This is a synthetic typology, since the functions of the antitype are very similar to the type: the lamb is sacrificed—Jesus died on the cross; the blood of the lamb provides protection from the wrath of God—Jesus’ blood provides salvation from the consequences of our sin. The connection of Christ to the lamb is also an echo of Isaiah 53:7, wherein the messiah is ‘led like a lamb to the slaughter…”

Galatians 4:22-31 holds a typology which is complex in that it is not an apples-to-apples correlation. Paul connects believers with the promises of the Abrahamic Covenant by making them out to be the antitype of Isaac, the son of the promise. In a continuation of his discussion of the insufficiency of the Law for salvation, Paul connects the ‘present city of Jerusalem’ with Hagar, the mistress of Abraham. She is a slave woman, as those who hold to the Law are enslaved to the Law. But as Hagar is cast away with Ishmael, those who are enslaved to the Law will not receive the promised inheritance. And there is hope in the persecutions of the legalistic Judaizers, for just as Ishmael persecuted Isaac, the children of the promise now can expect persecution. But believers will gain the inheritance and have freedom, which is the antitype of the promise. The passage continues in Gal 5:1, “It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.”

Paul said...

I've noticed that a few people have read the stumbling block in Romans 9:33 to be the type/antitype of the Law. I can't remember which resource/text that I read which refutes this common misunderstanding. (I tried to find it just now--I had thought it was Gorman, but I don't see it). Both Gorman & DPL "Romans" read the stone to be Christ (not the Law). This makes sense to me because in Isaiah the stone is The Lord Almighty (not the Law). I think the implications of reading the stone=Law are much different than the stone=Lord/Jesus. If the stone is the Law, it's almost like God is playing a trick, but if the stone is God himself (OT & then Jesus), it is as if God is breaking through to disrupt those who don't see him, or misunderstand him. He is more directly calling people back to himself.

Paul said...

I am glad that Brad pointed out the mutual growth of sin & grace, in discussing the Adam/Christ typology. Paul mentions this in the passage, but I had missed it this time around. The 'how much more' of grace in response to the proliferation of sin which came through Adam is stunningly beautiful. There is great hope in that fact as we see the abundance of sin and decadence in our culture & personal lives. How much more is God's grace! He is abundantly capable to cover all of it in Christ, despite our multiplication of sin and death. Alleluia!

Barbara said...

It is always risky to go first :-) and here I go again trying to see that passage from a new perspective…in the verses preceding 1 Corinthians 3:16-17, Paul is writing about builders who lay a foundation of gold and silver and precious stones, etc. and builders that lay a foundation of Jesus Christ and how the Day will disclose the work of each builder…it will be tested by fire. So maybe another type/antitype here is the destruction of the physical temple and the destruction of the spiritual – and could the spiritual be Jesus? And that Jesus is the one, because of his sacrifice, that redefine “temple” to be his body of believers.

Robert Dulaney said...

Romans 5:12-21;

a) what is the type?
I hope that I do not have type and anti-type reversed. But I feel as if the type here is Adam as the one in whom sin entered the world

(b) what is the anti-type?
Christ is the anti-type because it is through him we receive the gift of God’s grace(15).

(c) what relationship exists between type and anti-type?
Paul uses this relationship to illustrate how the power of death entered the world and how through Christ God has provided a means of life.

(d) what lessons does Paul draw from their correspondence or pattern?
It is the contrast between the disobedience of Adam and he obedience of Christ on the cross. I think this pattern then shows how the law helps us realize even more our need for the grace of God.

(b) Romans 9:33-10:17;

a) what is the type?
The type is “the stone which causes men to stumble” which is the law. More specifically the “righteousness that comes through the law” 10:5.

(b) what is the anti-type?
The anti type is the righteousness that comes through faith. 10:5

(c) what relationship exists between type and anti-type?
Again this is the contrast between the struggle for righteousness through the law. The zeal and determination for that righteousness but in spite of that striving the end result is shame. With the ultimate righteousness that is achievable through faith in Christ.

(d) what lessons does Paul draw from their correspondence or pattern?
This passage ends with a charter to go and preach the gospel. Because the end result of the righteousness through faith leads to life, it is imperative to go spread this good news.


1 Corinthians 3:16-17;
16Don't you know that you yourselves are God's temple and that God's Spirit lives in you? 17If anyone destroys God's temple, God will destroy him; for God's temple is sacred, and you are that temple.

a) What is the type?
The temple

b) What is the antitype?
Ourselves and our bodies.

c) That both are a place to worship and sacred.

d) That we need to honor the sanctity who the other members of the church are in Christ. He is telling the Corinthian church to stay unified.

(d) 1 Corinthians 5:7-8;
7Get rid of the old yeast that you may be a new batch without yeast—as you really are. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. 8Therefore let us keep the Festival, not with the old yeast, the yeast of malice and wickedness, but with bread without yeast, the bread of sincerity and truth.

(a) what is the type?
I think there are two types. One is the old yeast, which I am assuming to be the ‘yeast of the Pharisees that Jesus talks about. Matthew 16:6. The other is the Passover lamb.

b) What is the anti-type?
In both situations the antitype is Christ. The one that has the power of true salvation.

C & D) In both situations the anti-type has lasting power where the type has not proven effective.



Galatians 4:22-31.

(a) what is the type?
The type here is Hagar, and Mount Sinai/the law.

(b) what is the anti-type?
Issaac and followers of Christ

(c) what relationship exists between type and anti-type?
The two have a link but one is in bondage and through the other there is freedom.

(d) what lessons does Paul draw from their correspondence or pattern?
That we need to live as people that are ‘free’ in Christ. That we no longer need to live under the law but rather live in freedom in Christ.

brad said...

I figured this would be a good place to pose at paper question...As I write my paper, I find myself struggling with style as far as audience of the paper is concerned. Obviously, as a school paper would denote, David is the primary audience. At the same time, I have my wife read over pages as I do them and ask her for comments. Many times the language that I use in writing a paper for class is very different from the language I use to teach or preach. Should I take the time to define these terms in my paper (Parousia, eschatological, etc) in order to make it more palpable for more readers or should I simply make this a paper that will be read by David and classmates?
Anyone else struggle with this????

Luke Gordon said...

Romans 5:12-21:
This passage names the type within the text saying, “…Adam, who is a type of the one who was to come.” Here Paul makes it clear that he is using a typology. Adam is the one through whom sin and subsequently death entered the world. It is through Adam that this sin and death spread to all mankind. This is pointing back to Genesis 3 and the fall of man. The anti-type is therefore the “one who was to come”, namely Jesus Christ who brings the free gift of life. The two are synthetic in that it was through one man that sin and death came to all and it is therefore through the one man, Christ, that the free gift of life is available to all. However, each of them brought two completely different gifts. In this way Christ is used as in antithetic relationship with Adam. In verse 15 and 16 we are told that the gift is not like the trespass. Paul uses this to make a case for the salvation that comes through Christ to all. This salvation follows the sin of many and is made available to all people. Conversely, the trespass of the one man, Adam, brought judgment and condemnation to all.

Romans 9:33-10:17:
In this passage “the stumbling stone” becomes the typology that Paul uses when trying to address the complexity surrounding Israel’s unbelief. Why are so many Jews rejecting the faith in Jesus as the Christ. Why are so many Gentiles being included in the church. Paul addresses these questions by referring to the description of the Lord Almighty in Isaiah 8. This description of the Lord Almighty becomes the type. In this passage from Isaiah The Lord Almighty is, “a stone that causes men to stumble
and a rock that makes them fall. And for the people of Jerusalem he will be a trap and a snare.” The anti-type is Christ Jesus who is calling the Israelites to stumble by lack of faith. Paul goes on the say that the Israelites are depending on the law rather than on faith. Jesus has become a trap for them because they are not embracing the righteousness of faith but rather trying to obtain is on the basis of the law and covenant.

1 Corinthians 3:16-17:
Here Paul uses the rich symbolism of the Temple as a typology in his conversation about division and fractions in the Corinthians church. In the Pentateuch the temple is the central point of cultic life for a faithful Jew. The temple is the apex of holiness and the intersection between human and divine. It is here that sacrifices are made in worship and atonement. Paul takes this imagery and applies it to the body of the believer. The people of faith become the anti-type in which the presence of God dwells through the Holy Spirit. Here we have a synthetic anti-type. This points to our place of worship and our communion with God. It also hints at our righteousness through faith which enables God to dwell within us. Paul uses this to defend his case for building faithfully upon the foundation of Christ. False teachers who cause division and destroy the people of God are in essence disgracing the temple or better yet they are defiling it. Those who are called to build up the church need to respect the sacredness of the believer.

1 Corinthians 5:7-8
This short passage is rich with typology. Here Paul uses yeast as an typology for evil behavior. There are those in the Corinthian church espoused of engaging in unbelievable sexual immorality. Furthermore, there are others in the church who are boasting of this behavior. Paul likens this to yeast that spreads through a batch of dough. The actions of just a few in the church, when not disciplined, will spread and impact the entire community. Jesus used the same analogy in Matthew16. This metaphor can also be seen in the Jewish tradition of unleavened bread during Passover. The unleavened bread represented the faithfulness of the community and their readiness to follow God in a new environment during the exodus. Here this is being likened to a new way of living that sets the church apart from the pagans around them. We see another typology of Jesus being the Paschal Lamb. This was a sign of deliverance for the people. Jesus became the new means of deliverance and provision from God. The two typologies together clearly point back to the Passover event and the heritage of the Passover Festival within the Jewish community.

Galatians 4:22-31:
Again Paul masterfully uses typology to deal with a complex issue for the church. Here Paul uses Isaac and Esau’s family status as a type to represent, respectively, those who trust in the promise and those living under the law. Paul takes the liberty to view their familial status “figuratively” to represent two covenants. Here we see two forms of typology happening in a layering effect. First, a type based on family situation and an anti-type of covenant. Then we also see this carried out with the believers who are children of the promise and the circumcisers who are the anti-type for the slave children (or Esau). This layering effect has a double impact on the theology relying on the past covenant and the past promise.

Luke Gordon said...

Barbara, I appreciate your comment that the stone in the Romans 9 passage could be both the law and Jesus. There is not doubt that the law is a "trap and snare" (Isaiah 8:14) that causes people to focus on the letter of the law rather than the heart of the law. However, the passage in Isaiah 8:14 makes the Lord Almighty analogous with the stone that causes people to stumble. For this reason I see Jesus being the anti-type for the stone. However, the issue that Paul is addressing with this typology involves the law and it's relationship with faith and righteousness.

Luke Gordon said...

I like viewing this exercise as an art that we must struggle with. I am taking the Dr. Dearman's OT Pentateuch class. After being immersed in the Old Testament this morning I find my eye is better trained to pick up the typology that is found in these passages. David is right in saying the key is to identify the relationship between the New Testament and the Old Testament. This opens up new paradigms for seeing the scriptures.

brad said...

In reading the comments on the Law/Jesus stumbling block I can almost see one inside the other. Looking at Luke's comment:

There is not doubt that the law is a "trap and snare" (Isaiah 8:14) that causes people to focus on the letter of the law rather than the heart of the law.

Could the heart of the law be Jesus? I may be stretching it here and playing with words too much but I kind of the phrase Heart of the law Luke refers to and fulfillment of the law as nearly the same thing...

brad said...

I also want to make a comment on typology in general...is there a danger in this in overinterpreting some of the OT texts? At some point I would think that we need to be careful not to take the entire OT and cause it point to the NT or Jesus. So much of it (OT) is simply beautiful writing about how much God loves us and I wonder if we attempt to stretch all OT (which I am not saying we are doing here) if it would lose some of it's intrinsic beauty? I know that through out history, some theologians have stated that ALL OT texts point to Christ and the NT, but I wonder about that...

Just some off the cuff thinking here...hoping the blog is in the safety nest! I'm staying in the nest!