Thoughts From One Never Alone

I can remember my delight upon receiving Keach’s Preaching from the Types and Metaphors of the Bible several years ago. It was intriguing to see the internal relationships that exist within the pages of Scripture. From Adam to the exile, from the tabernacle to the Sabbath we find tremendous examples of the types that are incorporated in Scripture. They not only prove helpful in moving the story of redemptive history along, but also serve as thickening agents of God’s gracious plot (thanks to Steve Rives for this metaphor). However, I’ve encountered instances where typology was pressed well beyond exegetical limits (just recently, I ran across a rather creative idea regarding the book of Jonah which had nothing to do with the actual book).

Although I don’t intend to provide an exhaustive treatment of typology, I have provided the following for thoughtful consideration:

• The Bible does incorporate typology (in the form of shadows, signs, allegories, antitypes, etc).

• Those types clearly identified by Scripture are authoritative and deserve our attention and confidence.

• Many types helped to establish the Messianic expectation and hope that existed up to and including the time of Christ. Christ even references these Himself.

• Beyond those types identified by Scripture, one must be cautious regarding the way he ‘discovers’ the type.

• One must be careful in the development of doctrinal notions and positions based upon typology not identified by Scripture.

• The perspective that assumes there’s a type under every text is akin to the allegorical method of Scriptural interpretation (suffering similar problems).

• Creativity doesn’t reign supreme in typology; the text does, working hand-in-hand with redemptive history.

• Typology that exceeds appropriate boundaries runs the risk of paying homage to sensational creativity over faithful exegesis, overlooking God’s intend purpose of the text, leading to Scripturally unsupported notions, and contributing to a discontentedness among believers regarding the way they read and interpret Scripture.

• Typology pressed too far seems to be on a never ending quest for ‘deeper meaning.’

• Extensive typology is not required to gain an understanding or appreciation of God’s Word.

I will continue to wrestle with this issue for some time I’m sure. As I do, I will always appreciate both the complexity and simplicity of Scripture.