Typologyin New Covenant Theology

Interpretation 1The Biblical Theology Study Center

Chad Richard Bresson

Principles of NT use of the OT The New Testament use of the Old Testament shows and/or explains fulfillment of the Old Testament

types, shadows, and promises in Christ. Typology is inherent to understanding NT use of the OT. Old Testament passages are interpreted by the NT authors (and Jesus) in light of Jesus, his life,

death, resurrection, and exaltation. The New Testament uses the Old Testament as interpretive support for its various conclusions. New Testament use of the Old Testament is contextual, making it important to read and even

understand the entire context of the Old Testament passage to get the full impact of its use. The Old Testament quote provides backdrop for the New Testament passage and moves along the

thesis/theme of the NT author’s book, even as the New Testament passage interprets the Old Testament passage from which the quote is taken.

While the whole canon is the Scriptures for the New Covenant community, the New Testament provides definitive interpretation of the Old Testament quotations and the quotations’ context.

The New Testament’s use of the Old Testament provides an interpretive pattern to follow in understanding the Old Testament in light of Christ’s life, death, resurrection, and exaltation (the Christ event).

Use of the Old Testament in the New Testament grounds Jesus’ story in the story of Old Testament Israel.

Use of the Old Testament in the New Testament provides continuity between the testaments in telling the one grand story of Jesus in the progress of redemptive history.

Use of the Old Testament in the NT draws similarities between Jesus and the Old Testament, and highlights dissimilarities between Jesus and the OT.

Often the OT quotation is a memory-marker for the larger Old Testament unit. The NT authors portray Christ as both the Grand Interpreter and Grand Interpretation of the Old

Testament.

Goldsworthy (GCH, p. 242-243):1. The things recorded in the Old Testament (as the history of

salvation) are to be interpreted teleologically – that is, as purposeful and directed to the final goal.

2. Those things in the Old Testament are shaped by the nature of the goal, while being modified by their respective place in history.

3. God acting in history presumes a goal toward which history moves.4. The eschatological resolution of history is arrived at in and through

Jesus Christ.5. Typology rests on the recognition that the way God spoke and

acted in the Old Testament was preparatory and anticipatory of the definitive word and act of God in Christ.

6. Type and antitype express the organic relationship between the events of the Old Testament that pattern and foreshadow their fulfillment in the New.

7. The heart of the antitype in the New Testament is the person and work of Jesus Christ, especially the resurrection.

Typology

McCartney & Clayton (LTRU, p. 163ff):1. Typology is the interpretation of earlier events, persons, and

institutions in biblical history as anticipating later events, persons, and institutions.

2. Typology cannot exist without history.3. Typology is possible only if history has a purpose, that purpose

being ordained by an intending Person who1. controls it2. intimates within it where it is going (Eph. 1:9-10).

4. Christological typology is not only possible, but necessary to truly understand the ultimate point of OT history as well as prophecy.

5. Typology implies: 1. earlier revelation is understood only in the light of later revelation2. later revelation can only be understood in relation to the earlier.

6. The NT understands events and institutions of the OT to be “types”.

Typology

McCartney & Clayton (LTRU, p. 163ff):1. The NT writers understood Christianity as the fulfillment of

OT expectation.2. The NT writers understood the OT as pointing to Jesus.3. If the NT fulfills the OT tradition, then we cannot

understand the NT apart from the typological expectations of the OT.

4. By showing how the later revelation reflects and completes the earlier, the earlier revelation itself can be seen to take on expanded meaning.

5. The typology of promise and fulfillment permeates the thinking of Jesus and the early church.

6. The typology of promise and fulfillment is the ultimate validation for Jesus’ and the early church’s extensive use of the Old Testament to depict and characterize their own situation.

Typology and fulfillment

Goldsworthy:1. The Old Testament is incomplete as to the

working out of God’s purposes.2. The Old Testament cannot be fully understood

apart from the fulfillment in the New Testament.3. The two Testaments are interdependent:

1. The New must complete the Old2. The New needs the Old to show what it is that is

being fulfilled.

4. The New is the definitive interpretation of the Old.

Promise and Fulfillment

The nature of typologyGoldsworthy:1. The way Christ and his apostles use the Old

Testament forms the theological substructure of the New Testament canon.

2. The comprehensive use of the Old Testament in the New Testament as referring ultimately to Jesus constitutes typology.

The importance of typology to hermeneutics

Goldsworthy:1. The canonical approach to typology presupposes a

unity to the Bible.2. The canonical approach to typology allows the

canon to establish the primary context from within which every text is interpreted.

3. The New Testament provides the only evidence that we have for the hermeneutical procedures of Jesus and the apostles.

4. In hermeneutics we are concerned with:1. Jesus’ attitude to the Old Testament as his authoritative

Scripture2. The way Jesus employed the Old Testament as the Scripture

that he himself fulfilled.

The importance of typology to hermeneutics

Schreiner:1. Typology is fundamental to biblical theology.2. What is promised in the Old Testament is fulfilled in the

New Testament.3. The New Testament represents the culmination of the

history of redemption begun in the Old Testament.4. The progress of revelation recognizes:

1. The preliminary nature of the Old Testament2. The definitive word of the New Testament

5. We can only understand the NT when we have also grasped the meaning of the OT, and vice-versa.

6. Typology is not limited to the New Testament.7. There is an escalation in typology in the Old Testament.8. Typology acknowledges a divine pattern and purpose in

history.

Reventlow’s two approaches to typology1. The correspondence of facts, persons, and events

as they occur in both Testaments.1. The type fails to be the full reality.2. Any person, fact, or event in the Old Testament is a

type of Christ to the degree that its theological function foreshadows that of Christ.

2. Typology as a method of salvation history hermeneutics.

1. Typology is a means of discovering structural analogies between the saving events attested by both Testaments.

2. The correspondence between Testaments is primarily entire epochs or stages within salvation history.

Edmond Jacob on the relationship between type and Christ, the antitype

1. A relation of similarity2. A relation of opposition (contrast)3. A relation of progress

John Currid’s four essentials in identifying typology

1. Typology must be grounded in history2. There must be notable historical and

theological (and literary; crb) resemblance between the type and antitype

3. The antitype must intensify the type (must be more theologically significant)

4. There must be evidence of the divine intention for the type to represent the antitype.

McCartney & Clayton’s five controls to identifying types

1. To be identified as a type, an event’s redemptive-historical function:

1. Must be known2. Must show an organic relationship to the later

redemptive history that it foreshadows.

2. The nature of the type must lie in the main message of the material, not in some incidental detail.

3. The antitype (fulfillment) must be greater than the type.

4. The original human meaning (the linguistic sense) must be organically related to any more extensive meaning.

5. All meaning must be related to the redemptive-historical purpose of God.

The analogy of faith1. Christ said that all of the Scriptures are about Him (Luke 24:25-

27, 44-47).2. If all of the Scriptures are about Christ, we must allow Scripture

to interpret Scripture.3. The New fulfills and interprets the Old.4. Examples of Analogy of Faith in the NT.

1. Peter preaches from Joel 2:28-29 and invokes the Davidic Covenant, both as relating to the church (Acts 2).

2. The author of Hebrews interprets Jeremiah 31:31-34, containing the promise of the New Covenant, as pertaining to the church (Heb 8).

3. Jesus is the “Suffering Servant” of Isaiah 53 (Matthew 8; Acts 8).4. Jesus is “the Rock” of Exodus 17 (1 Cor. 10).5. Abraham rejoiced to see the day of Christ (John 8:56).6. The gospel was preached to Abraham (Galatians 3:8).7. Moses gave up the treasures of Egypt for the reproach of Christ

(Hebrews 11:26).

The Analogy of Scripture (Goldsworthy)1. The sole content of Scripture is Christ. Every text in some way

testifies of Christ.2. Because Christ is the incarnate Word, the Bible can only be the

Word of God if it deals with Christ.3. Interpretation cannot succeed without reference to the reality

of the gospel.4. That every text speaks in some way to Christ gives rise to the

analogy of Scripture: Scripture interprets Scripture.5. The total scriptural context interprets any given text of

Scripture.6. We assert the unity of the Bible, not because it is a matter of

empirical observation, but because the teachings of Jesus and the apostles render it unavoidable.

7. Biblical theology is an important discipline in enabling us to discover both the revealed propositions of unity and the empirical shape of it.

The Analogy of Scripture (Goldsworthy)1. Scripture is self-authenticating.2. The church can only recognize the canon and the

authority Scripture; it does not donate them.3. No one is in a position to validate, or invalidate,

Scripture.4. The same Word who called the universe into

existence calls the church into existence and rules it.5. The WORD is known to us only through the Word of

Scripture.6. The church’s witness to Scripture is nothing more

than obedient recognition of the witness that Scripture bears to itself as God’s word.

7. The Scripture validates the church.

The Analogy of Scripture (Goldsworthy)1. Scripture is clear and self-interpreting.2. God must interpret his word.3. The standard for Scripture’s interpretation must come

from within itself.4. God, the author of Scripture, can only speak clearly and

understandably.5. God speaks so as to be understood.6. The external clarity of Scripture does not evaporate

because of the problem of internal clarity.7. Inherent to the external clarity of Scripture in

relationship to internal clarity is the thematic clarity of the person and work of Christ.

8. The clarity of Scripture has as its aim the witness to Christ.

The Analogy of Scripture (Goldsworthy)1. Christocentric interpretation is inherent in

Scripture.2. The analogy of Scripture is nothing less that

the analogy of the gospel.3. All of Scripture is interpreted by its

relationship to the gospel.4. Christ must redeem hermeneutics.5. Every principle of interpretation must be

drawn from Scripture.

McCartney & Clayton on the analogy of faith

1. Scripture interprets Scripture is simply to say that God determines the meaning of his own words.

2. Scripture interprets Scripture is a control on meaning.3. Scripture interprets Scripture confines the meaning of any

text to that which fits with the rest of Scripture.4. Obscure passages should be interpreted in light of clear

passages.5. Whenever a NT writer explicitly interprets and OT text, this

interpretation is true.6. If God is author of both the history and the text, then surely

the later is latent in all the former, and meaning in the former is expanded by the appearance of the later.

7. The NT gives the correct understanding of the OT.8. The meaning of any part of the Bible must be understood in

the context of the Bible as a whole.

Hebert and Robinson’s three stages of typology in salvation history

1. God’s kingdom is revealed in Israel’s history up to David and Solomon.

2. God’s kingdom is revealed in prophetic eschatology.

3. God’s kingdom is revealed in the fulfillment of the Old Testament expectations in Christ.

Jesus and typologyGoldsworthy (GCH, pp. 249ff)1. Christology in the New Testament shows Jesus to be the

comprehensive expression of reality in the purpose of God.2. Understanding the Bible necessitates the centrality of Christ.3. Jesus and the apostles regarded the whole of the Old

Testament as testimony to the Christ.4. The whole of the Old Testament is all about Jesus.5. There is no dimension of the Old Testament message that does

not in some way foreshadow Christ.6. An Old Testament text is about Christ in that a meaningful

portion of any given book understood as part of that book and its overall message is about Christ.

7. To say that an Old Testament text is about Christ is to point to the dynamics of the canon of Scripture.

8. Christ defines the unity of the biblical message.

Jesus and the interpretation of typesGoldsworthy (GCH, pp. 252)1. Jesus says the whole Old Testament, not merely a few selected texts,

is all about him.2. Jesus, as the one mediator between God and man, is the hermeneutic

principle for every word from God.3. Jesus, as the reason for creation, interprets the ultimate significance

of every datum of reality.4. The prime question to put to every text is about how it testifies to

Jesus.5. No text in either Testament exists without some connection to Christ.6. That the connection between text and Christ is there is a matter

determined by the word of Christ and his apostles.7. As the prime goal of all texts, Jesus is the interpreter of every biblical

text.8. No datum in the universe exists in isolation from Christ.9. No datum in the universe exists in isolation from Christ’s

interpretation of its ultimate meaning.

Goldsworthy’s macro-typology (GCH, pp. 253-256)

1. Macro-typology involves the correspondence of the major stages of redemptive history.

2. The major events of Old Testament Salvation History correspond to the prophetic eschatology of the text and to the age/eschaton’s type fulfillment in Christ.

Goldsworthy’s macro-typology (GCH, pp. 253-256)

Goldsworthy’s macro-typology

Goldsworthy’s macro-typology

Goldsworthy’s macro-typology

New Covenant Typology1. New Covenant typology presumes the priority of the antitype over the type.2. New Covenant typology presumes the superiority of the New Testament in interpreting the

Old Testament and in understanding the fulfillment of the type by the antitype in salvation history.

3. The antitype not only intensifies the type, but the antitype is also grander, more stupendous, and more glorious than the type.

4. In New Covenant typology, the antitype fulfills the intentions of the type.5. New Covenant typology presumes the incapability of the type to fulfill its own eschatological

trajectory in salvation history.6. New Covenant typology presumes the imperfection, fallibility, and (many times) the negative

context of the type.7. New Covenant typology presumes not only similarity, contrast, and progress between type

and antitype, but also “inversion” (a kind of contrast) between type and antitype.8. New Covenant typology presumes the antithesis between law and grace, while at the same

time, presuming an organic continuity between type and antitype.9. New Covenant typology presumes the necessity of the type in understanding the antitype.10. New Covenant typology presumes the progress of the type toward the antitype in redemptive

history is primarily anthropological, rather than creational.11. New Covenant typology presumes the Old Testament's anticipated Messiah (and His work) is

revealed in the Old Testament types. These types have a messianic orientation.12. New Testament typology presumes Jesus to be the interpretive key to understanding the Old

Testament and its types.13. New Testament typology presumes the goal towards which history moves is the same towards

which the types move: Jesus.