Guidelines for understanding Typology

I think these are pretty good overall. To use your example of Adam as a type of Christ, when a passage refers to the Bride of Christ, many people automatically assume that it's talking about everyone who's saved, which is reading into a text something that is not there (in the immediate context), just as much as saying that it's only a part of the body (which is also not in the immediate context).

So, the types or pictures that we are given, with Adam and Isaac both being types of Christ, we go to the context that we do have, and we see that Adam's bride was taken from his body. Isaacs bride was part of the family, but not all of the family.

The context is Genesis 1:1 through Revelation 22:21. Unless there is something in the immediate context that indicates otherwise, or even something in the broader context that indicates otherwise, go with the text that is given.

 

Sorry, I simply forgot about this thread in replying to all the others.

As far as Isaac goes, he's used as an example throughout the NT. He's the child of promise (but always remember that Ishmael was the child of the law, and he had an inheritance). By faith, Abraham offered Isaac in a picture or type of the sacrifice that Christ made. Look at the story of Isaac, and look at the pictures and types that are presented that are expounded upon in the NT.

The Scriptures are given to us as types. The things that happened in the lives of those in the OT are more than just neat stories or history; they are given to us for ensamples.

If you see an antitype given in the NT, look closely at the type that is given in the OT. (Personally, I think that you need to have a knowledge of the OT as a foundation for building upon, but you can always add the foundation later.)

 

"Tupos" is mentioned in 15 places in the NT, but the relevant passage to your statement does not contain the word "tupos".

Hebrews 11:17: By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,

In this passage, we see Isaac as a type of Christ.

When we see statements about the Bride, we look to the examples in the OT, which were given to us as types so that we can understand.

Adam was a type of Christ. Isaac was a type of Christ. What were their examples?

See above.

I'm glad that you see that. Many people see one as a type of unsaved and one as a type of saved, just as many see Jacob as a type of saved and Esau as a type of unsaved, even though both had an inheritance.

Was Jesus not the child of promise as well?

 

A must have in any believer's library that loves to study the Bible is the book "Wilson's Dictionary Of Bible Types" by Walter Wilson, MD, DD, LHD

My Mother sat under Wilson teachings (KC Bible College) and turned me on to his writings. My copy of this book made me love the OT and understand it more. Hardly a month goes by where I do not use it in some way.



In Christ...James

 

canadyjd the easiest method and the surest guard against error is if you find a type in the OT and it is not further explained or revealed in the NT then it is not a type. Just like you can guard against NT teachings in that if you find it in the NT you will also find it in the OT as a type or shadow.

The Bible leaves us no room for our own interpretation. It interprets Itself and it explains Itself, so that all we have to do is believe what is there.

To place any kind of limits on typology other than what God has placed on them is to study Scripture outside of the way God intended it to be studied.

Christ said if you would have believed Moses you would have believed me, because he wrote of Me. So right there it tells us that we can see Christ at least in the first five books of the Bible.

So we are to search the Scriptures to find Christ in the writings of Moses, becuase Moses wrote of Christ.

The two disciples on the road to Emaus were sat down with Christ and He opened their eyes by going through all of the prophets of the OT and how they spoke of Jesus. There is another Scripture in the NT that says the Psalms spoke of Him.

Basicially the Bible is just one giant Revelation of Christ and you have to take both to get the complete picture. To leave out one if favor of the other is to get an incomplete picture.

Hope that helps! I have been reading through a book by Ada R. Habershon called the Study of the Types. Also Theodore Epp has some good books on particular types although I don't agree with some of his theology. I have been told that F.B. Meyer has some good works on OT typology, but I haven't read any of his material yet.

I've got a couple of other resources if you would like me to PM you just let me know.

 

try Study of the Types by Ada Halbershon.

Joseph (like Isaac) makes a facinating typical study. Pop quiz: who was place with two prisoners, one of the prisoners was saved and the other wasn't?

there are a number of books about Joseph being a type of Christ. a recent one that is still in print is Joseph Makes Me Think of Jesus by William MacDonald. I also have a book by Richard DeHaan (?) i forget the name of the book, but it is full of picturest of Jesus in the book of Genesis.

 

Right on!

Canady, I think your guidelines are pretty much on target. Type casting should not go any further than scripture goes.

 

The thing about it is, you need to look at it the other direction. I've pointed out before the importance of a good foundation; you start at the beginning and build line upon line.

The type is given first, then the anti-type.

Now, just like any construction, you can add the foundation later, but you need both to have a solid construction.

The house I live in was built backwards: The main floor was built as a cabin with a loft, then an arctic entry was added, then the entire thing was picked up and set aside, while a foundation was built, then put back on top of the foundation. (Then, the back two rooms were added; this is pretty standard here in Alaska, BTW.)

We're given the types in the OT, and you are expected to understand them in the NT, instead of adding some completely new and extra-scriptural definition to things.

 

are you saying that it is only a type if it referenced in the NT? so, the high priest is a type, the veil is a type, the bread of God is a type, Jonah is a type, Solomon is a type, but....Joseph is not a type?