Old Testament

George Smeaton on Christ’s Own System of Hermeneutics

/ davidsschrock / 5 Comments

Ever wonder how the apostle’s developed their particular brand of Christ-centered hermeneutics?  This has been a frequently-discussed and hotly-debated subject over the last few years.  Numerous books have addressed the subject.  For instance, Greg Beale, ed. The Wrong Doctrine from the Right Texts?; Richard Longenecker, Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period; Dennis Johnson, Him We Proclaim; Sidney Greidnaus, Preaching Christ from the Old Testament are a handful of them.

Yet, perhaps the best answer I have found goes back nearly 150 years.  In the opening pages of his book, The Apostles’ Doctrines of the Atonement, nineteenth century New Testament theologian, George Smeaton, answers this question: How did the apostles develop their hermeneutics.

Without batting an eye, he turns to the forty days that Jesus spent with his disciples between his resurrection and ascension.  He posits that the “Lord’s system of hermeneutics” was passed on to these inspired authors and that in every instance where the disciples spoke of the terms, concepts, and types found in the Old Testament, they did so as learned pupils of their master teacher–Jesus Christ.

Smeaton’s quotation is lengthy, but well worth pondering.

But the fresh instruction which they received from personal interviews with the Redeemer subsequently to the resurrection must next be noticed.  This oral instruction received from the lips of the risen Lord is certain as to the matter of fact, and on many grounds was indispensably necessary.  Nor was it limited to the eleven alone.  Paul, too, received it at a later day, when he took rank among the apostles as one born out of due time.  How far the oral instruction of the risen Redeemer extended, it may be difficult for us to say.  Whether or not it comprehended all the great articles of divine truth, it certainly extended to the atonement (Luke xxiv. 25).  This was to be the substance and foundation of all their preaching [1 Cor 2:2], and it was indispensably necessary for them to possess the most accurate knowledge of it.  One object, therefore, which the Lord had in view during those forty days’ sojourn with the disciples after His resurrection, was to open their understandings in the course of these personal interviews, to apprehend with all possible precision the nature of His death–its necessity, consituent elements, and efficacy; against which, in every form, they had long entertained the most invincible prejudice.  He now made all things plain, showing that the Christ must have suffered these things.

How they were introduced into the theology of the Old Testament is specially worthy of notice.  A due consideration of this point serves to bring out one most important fact, viz. that Christ’s oral expositions are to be taken as THE MIDDLE TERM, or as the connecting link between Old Testament records on the one hand, and the apostolic commentary on the other.  In a word, He was Himself the interpreter of Scripture, and of His own history, in the course of those oral communications.  In the book of Acts, and in the epistles, we find numerous interpretations of the prophecies, as well as of the types and sacrifices which owe their origin to this source.  The evangelist Luke relates, that on the first resurrection-day, upon the Emmaus road, in order to instruct the two disciples with whom He entered into conversation, the Lord, beginning at Moses and all the prophets, expounded in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself (Luke 24:27); that is, He led them to a full survey of the typology and of the prophetical system of the Old Testament Scriptures.  The same evening He reviewed the whole subject not less fully in presence of the eleven and other disciples, expounding them how the Old Testament Scriptures received their fulfillment in Himself, and  opening all that related to His death and resurrection. . . . The evangelist [Luke] mentions that His exposition extended to the Law of Moses, to the Prophets, and to the Psalms.  The allusion to the Law of Moses recalls the whole range of typical theology–the sacrifices, the priestly institute, and the temple services.  The allusion to the prophets reminds us of the wide field of Messianic prophecy, form the first promise in the garden of Eden to the last of the prophets.  The allusion to the Psalms recalls those utterances which were put beforehand into the mouth of the suffering Messiah in a series of psalms in which the Lord Jesus found Himself.  He thus, in all these three divisions of Scripture, supplied them with the key which served to unlock what had never been so fully understood before in reference to His atoning death.

These invaluable expositions, which may be called in the modern phrase the Lord’s own system of hermeneutics, formed the apostles to be interpreters of the Old Testament, directing them where and how to find allusions to the suffering Messiah.  Hence the certainty and precision with which they ever afterwards preceded to expound those holy oracles in all their discourses.  Although these comments from the lips of the Messiah, have not been preserved to us in a separate form, they are doubtless to a large extent wrought into the texture of Scripture; and under the apostle’s allusions to the Old Testament we may read the Lord’s own commentary.  These expositions, whereby He opened their understandings to understand the Scriptures, introduced the apostles into the true significance of the Old Testament (Luke 24:44), throwing light on the two economies [Old and New], and thus bringing in the authority of Christ to direct them in all their future career.  His sanction is thus given to the apostolic interpretation of the Jewish rites; and we are warranted to say that we see the Lord’s own commentary underlying that of the apostles, whether we find allusion to the types, or to the prophecies, or to the Psalms, in their sermons and epistles.  These expositions made the apostles acquainted with the doctrine of the atonement, in its necessity and scope, in its constituent elements and saving results.  The apostles received the fullest instruction from the lips of their risen Lord; and on this theme it appears that the instruction was subject to none of the reserves which checked their curiousity upon another occasion, when they would make inquiries as to points bearing on the future of His kingdom (Acts 1:7).  (George Smeaton, The Apostle’s Doctrine of the Atonement, 4-7)

If you are not familiar with Smeaton, you should be.  He is a model exegete and a learned theologian.  In his day, he was the foremost New Testament scholar in Scotland and maybe beyond.  His two volumes on the atonement of Jesus Christ are excellent as is his reading of the gospels and the epistles.

May we continue to see Christ in all Scripture and faithfully show others how the Old and New Testaments are united in him.

Sola Deo Gloria, dss

The Word of God: Written, Eternal, and Incarnate

/ davidsschrock

Three times in the first verse of John’s gospel, the beloved disciple speaks of the Word, “the Logos.”  It is quickly seen that this name or title describes Jesus.  John 1:14 unmistakably unites the eternal Word with the babe born in the manger.  But why does John use this term?  What does Logos or the “Word” mean?  Today, we will examine this term in brief to help us better understand the son born of Mary, who was eternally the Son of God.

The Word (Logos)

John uses a word that would have been familiar to his hearers.  Interpreters of John have pointed to all kinds of influences: Greek philosophy (Stoicism), Jewish theology (Philo), or mystery religions (Gnosticism).  However, it is speculative that he depended upon any of these other views.  While the idea of the Logos was “trending” in John’s day, it is unlikely that the apostles derived such terms from extra-biblical sources.

Jesus followers were men of the Hebrew Scriptures, who were taught by Jesus how to read the Old Testament (Luke 24), and who were moved by the Spirit (John 14:26).  They were not students of culture, they were not writing for peer-reviewed journals, nor were they attempting anything novel.  They were simply writing for the edification of the saints and proclamation of the gospel.  Thus, the content of their words was the person and work of Christ and its earlier explanation in what we call he Old Testament.  So we should ask, what does the Old Testament say about “the Logos”?

Old Testament

In the Old Testament, the word is a central feature because God does everything by his word.  John Frame, says: “God’s word . . . is involved in everything he does—in his decrees, creation, providence, redemption, and judgment, not only in revelation narrowly defined.  He performs all his acts by his speech” (The Doctrine of God, 472-74).

The quickest glance at just a few verses show this is true.  Some of things that the Word does include the following:

God spoke the world into existence.  By the word of the LORD the heavens were made, and by the breath of his mouth all their host (Ps 33:6)

God’s word effected salvation.  He sent out his word and healed them, and delivered them from their destruction (Ps 107:20)

God’s word governs and energizes all of creation.  He sends out his word, and melts them; he makes his wind blow and the waters flow.  He declares his word to Jacob, his statutes and rules to Israel (Ps 147:18-20).

All together, “the word of God enlivens and kills; it sustains the world humans live in; it never fails in its purpose” (Thomas Schreiner, New Testament Theology, 256).  Thus, two things emerge in Old Testament that inform John’s theology. 

First, the Word is presented as divine. In the Old Testament, we that the word does a number of divine things—it creates, it kills, and it saves.  More than that, it is given divine attributes: eternal (Ps 119:89, 160), perfect (Ps 19:7-11), omnipotent (Gen 18:14; Isa 55:11), life-giving.  Nearly 300 times it is called God’s word. In many ways it is one with God.

Second, the Word is distinct from God.  In the Old Testament, the Word does not fully describe all that God is.  Rather, it is an instrument by which God works (cf. Prov 8:22ff). It is used by God, and sent out by God, and thus is not one and the same with God.  Even as there is unity between God and his word, there is difference.

But this should not come as a surprise.  God’s inscripturated Word is unified.  The Old anticipates the New, and the New depends (i.e. quotes, alludes, echoes, and builds) upon the Old.  Thus, John’s trinitarian theology of the Word in John 1:1 is not a new invention that comes from outside the Scriptures, but comes from the very Scriptures that the eternal Word inspired as he sent the Spirit to the prophets who wrote of his coming.

In the end, John 1:1 is one more evidence of how God’s progressive revelation prepares the way for Jesus Christ.  And how the eternal Word is the incarnate Word is the written Word.

Soli Deo Gloria, dss

Redemptive Roadmap: A Gospel Positioning System

/ davidsschrock / 2 Comments

When Having a GPS Makes All the Difference

A few months ago, our family traveled to Chicago.  Somewhere near Indianapolis, we learned that there was a major accident on the highway in front of us.  Fortunately, we had the information ahead of time and were able to get off the interstate in time to miss the heavy traffic.  Or so we thought.

Misjudging the exits, we got caught with all the other cars and trucks on a side road.  Nevertheless, we still had our GPS.  With our global positioning device we were able once again to get off the side road and find our way on a dirt road back to the highway.

Certainly when we set out for Chicago, we did not expect ourselves to be traveling on a dust-covered dirt road in the middle of an Indiana cornfield.  And yet that was exactly where we were.  It was a place that was totally unfamiliar to us, and one that without the GPS we would have no idea where we were.

I think this is often how we feel when we open up the Bible.  Seeking to get to the City of God, namely Jesus Christ, books that contain instructions for bodily discharges (Leviticus 15) and chapters that describing flying scrolls (Zechariah 4) can seem as out of place as the road we found in Northern Indiana.

What we need when we get into the more “remote” places in the Bible is what we have in the car.  We need a positioning device that will help explain how to get from our current location–Exodus 31, Leviticus 15, or Judged 19 to Christ. What we need is a Gospel-Positioning System.  Anyone know where to find one of those?

I didn’t.  But this week, I have attempted to put something together that may function like that.  It has six steps, and it serves as a general rule of thumb for getting from obscure OT laws all the way to Christ.  It’s aim is to avoid the traps of hasty application and mere moralizing.  It’s goal is to find Christ in all Scripture, but not by making strange leaps and speculative links.  Rather, its aim is to follow the flow of redemptive history and present a gospel-patterened schematic (another GPS), that can benefit any reader of Scripture.

Redemptive Roadmap: Gospel-Positioning System

1. Law.  In the law, you find instructions for living in ancient Israel.  These rules and commands were part of the covenant framework of Israel.  They were given so that people could live in God’s presence.  They were also given, so that the people with sinful hearts would learn that they needed something greater.  In both cases, they were designed to point people to God–to his holiness and his mercy. They list the standard expectations of God, and they point out our failures.   (Romans 3:20; 5:20; Gal 3:21)

2A. Prophets (1). Next, when Israel broke the law, God sent prophets to warn and later condemn Israel.  The purpose of the prophets was to incite repentance, but knowing the hearts of the people, God also sent his prophets to pronounce judgment (Jeremiah 25:4-5; 26:4-6).

2B. Prophets (2). At the same time that he sent prophets to proclaim judgment, he also sent prophets with a message of hope and salvation.  These prophets were given to Israel to point them to the Messiah who was to come (1 Pet 1:10-12).

Together, the prophets proclaim a message of salvation through judgment.  But this is only takes us to the end of the Old Testament.  These first three steps are what Mark Dever calls Promises Made.  What comes next are Promises Kept.

3. Christ.  God’s word of hope is always fulfilled in Christ.  He is the end of the law, and he is the one who fulfills all the predictions of the prophets.  He is the long awaited Messiah, and all the promises of God are yes and amen in him.  Thus he is the center of all the Bible.  (2 Corinthians 1:20).  

4. The Gospel.  Finding Christ in Scripture brings you to the door of the gospel.  The only question that remains is what will you do when you come to Christ?  Will you simply try to imitate his life and work?  Or will you humble yourself, repent of your sin, and believe that his obedient life and substitutionary death have effected your good standing before God?  If the latter, you have followed the Gospel-Positioning System to the right address.  You have found rest in Christ.

This is so vital, because so often we can miss Christ and the gospel, especially when we begin in the OT.  Too many Bible-believing Christians and preachers miss Christ and settle for  moral lessons and spiritual examples in the Old Testament .  But to do this ignores the way the way Christ intended for us to read Scripture (John 5:39; Luke 24:27, 45-49).

How does this kind of reading differ?  Well, a GPS reading of the Old Testament moves from the text, through redemptive history, to Jesus Christ. Call it Christotelic if you like.  A GPS reading also sees how the Law is fulfilled (Rom 10:4) and the Prophets realized in Jesus Christ (Rom 15:4), and makes us all wise unto salvation (2 Tim 3:14-16).  It does not take the short-cut to Jesus, but it follows the long road through the Scriptures until it comes to faith and repentance in Christ.  And then from there it calls us to action.

5. Christian Application.  Once we have rested our heart, soul, mind, and strength in the completed work Christ has done for us, then we are ready for action.  This is what Paul calls “Faith working itself out in love” (Gal 5:6).  It always flows out of the gospel, and it is also energized by the gospel.  It is filled with love and good works, but they are works that do not justify.  They are works that testify to the grace of God and the love of his Son.

A Final Caveat

Now let me say it: This is cheesy.  Any time you devise a system for reading the Bible, you are in danger of draining its spiritual power.  Any time the Spirit who leads us into all truth is replaced by a systematic method, something of the life of the reading experience is lost.  I get that.

Nevertheless, I am willing to take a risk, because for too long, too many people have read “by the Spirit” and have totally missed Christ, or just treated parts of the OT like ancietn ancestors.  They may be necessary for my existence, but I don’t know or care anything about them.

With that real danger in place, I think that memorizing this 5-fold pattern can make you and I far better readers of Scripture.  By seeing how the law was given to increase our trespass (1), to heighten our condemnation and our need (2A), to point to a later, greater hope (2B), to finally culminate in Christ (3), to trust in him and his work (4), and to live according to the gospel he proclaims (5), that I believe, will not have a spiritually-stultifying effect.  Rather, it will help our minds better understand the long history of the redemptive history, and how to get from places like Exodus 31 and Leviticus 15 all the way to Christ.

Tell me what you think!  Is this is a helpful tool?  What would you add?  Edit? What else needs to be said?

Soli Deo Gloria, dss

A Christ-Centered Walk Through the Old Testament

/ davidsschrock

Since January, I have been teaching the Bible, book-by-book.  Last week, I finished the Old Testament.  It has been a joy and a challenge to understand, synthesize, and communicate each book of the Old Testament.  I am thankful for the receptive congregants who attend each week.  We have had some wonderful questions and conversations, and I believe have seen how relevant the Old Testament is for 21st Century Christians.

Here are my notes for the first 39 books of the Bible.

Pentateuch
Genesis 1-11: The Beginning of It All (January 13, 2010)
Genesis 12-50: Four Families Under the Faithfulness of God (January 20, 2010)
Exodus 1-15: Salvation Through Substitution & Conquest (January 27, 2010)
Exodus 16-40: Moving Into the Presence of God (February 3, 2010)
Leviticus: Sinners in the Presence of a Holy God: (February 17, 2010)
Numbers: In the Wilderness (February 24, 2010)
Deuteronomy: God’s Royal Covenant with Israel (March 3, 2010)

History
Joshua: Into the Land (March 10, 2010)
Judges: A People in Need of a King (March 17, 2010)
Ruth: A Painful & Pleasant Providence (March 24, 2010)
1 Samuel: The Good, The Bad, and the Ruddy (March 31, 2010)
2 Samuel: The Rise and Fall of King David (April 7, 2010)
1 Kings: Redemptive History is a Royal Mess–Part 1 (April 14, 2010)
2 Kings: Redemptive History is a Royal Mess–Part 2 (April 21, 2010)
Ezra: Return, Rebuild, Renew, Repent (May 5, 2010)
Nehemiah: Rebuilding God’s City and Reforming God’s People (May 12, 2010)
Esther: Seed Warfare (May 19, 2010)

Wisdom
Job: Knowing God In The Crucible Of Satanic Suffering (May 26, 2010)
Psalms: Redemption in the Key of D(avid) (June 3, 2010)
Proverbs: Wisdom is the Way to the Obedient Son (June 10, 2010)
Ecclesiastes: To Work Wisely is Futile, To Fear Faithfully is Wise (June 17, 2010)
Song of Songs: More Than Just an Old Fashioned Love Song (June 24, 2010)

Prophets
The Prophets (1): Hearing the Spirit of Christ in the Days of Elijah (June 31, 2010)
The Prophets (2): Putting the Prophets in their Place: Before the Exile (July 7, 2010)
The Prophets (3): Putting the Prophets in their Place: During and After the Exile (July 14, 2010)
Isaiah: The Servant-King Will Lead His People Into a New Creation (August 18, 2010)
Jeremiah: A New Heart For An Idolatrous People (August 25, 2010)
Ezekiel: That You Might Know the Lord (September 1, 2010)
Daniel: Keep the Faith! The Sovereign LORD Reigns In History (September 8, 2010)
The Twelve: Judgment and Salvation is a Major Theme in the Minor Prophets (September 15, 2010)

The unifying feature of each study is Jesus Christ.  As the New Testament authors and Jesus himself make plain, the Old Testament is all about Jesus.  I hope these handouts can help you see Christ in and throughout the Old Testament.

Soli Deo Gloria, dss

Repentance as a Gift in the Old Testament

/ davidsschrock

Testamentum Imperium, an online international journal, just published a copy of a paper I wrote called “Repentance as a Gift in the Old Testament.” It traces the idea of repentance throughout the Old Testament and argues that God’s grace precedes and enables repentance, as it explicitly does in the New Testament (cf Acts 3:26; 2 Tim 2:25).

Researching this subject affirmed in my thinking how important it is to rightly understand the covenant structure of the Bible, how much greater the New Covenant is than the Old, and how humanity is absolutely dead without God’s gracious intervention.  Faith and repentance, in the Old and New Testaments depend on God’s regenerating work.

Moreover, the paper reiterated to me how many systematic disputes (e.g. Credobaptism vs. Paedobaptism, Covenant Theology vs. Dispensationalism) are tied to a misreading of the covenants in Scripture.  Differences of (scholarly) opinion on the continuity and discontinuity of the Bible lead to differing views of many doctrines.

In my paper, I argue that genuine acts of repentance under the Old Covenant anticipate the greater reality of the New Covenant.  In this way, repentance is always a gift from God that not only offers but effects contrition and corresponding faith in the life of his saints.  While there are many instances of insincere repentance–one thinks of Pharaoh–all genuine repentance is initiated by God’s sin-conquering grace.  Repentance is therefore one of God’s great gifts, as it is instrumental for the sinner’s salvation.

I would love to hear your thoughts on the paper: “Repentance as a Gift in the Old Testament”

Still learning how to read the Bible, dss

John Bright on Biblical Intertextuality

/ davidsschrock

John Bright, in his book The Kingdom of God, offers a very historically-enriching and theologically-astute presentation of the kingdom which unifies the entire Bible.  I have benefitted much from reading it, especially in the way that he looks at the people under God’s rule as a unified and yet developing body of believers.  In this outline, he is much like Graeme Goldsworthy, who emphasizes God’s people, under God’s rule, in God’s place, but Bright’s pages are more comprehensive in scope, being filled with copious details about the kings of Israel, the dynasties of foreign nations, and the who’s, the when’s, and the how’s of Israel’s history. (It is noteworthy that Goldsworthy references Bright’s work at the end of many chapters in his book According to Plan). 

In The Kingdom of God, there are many helpful subjects, but I found this description of the Bible’s intertextuality most helpful.   He writes,

The Old Testament is, therefore, as it were, an incomplete book.  It is a story whose Author has not yet written the ending; it is a signpost pointing down a road whose destination–and surely its destination is a city, the City of God (Heb. 11:10, 16)–lies out of sight around many a bend.  [The OT] is a noble building indeed–but it lack a roof!

That roof, by its own affirmation, the New Testament supplies: in announcing in Christ the fulfillment of the hope of Israel it stands as the completion of the Old Testament.  But–and this must not be forgotten–to say that is at the same time to say that it cannot be understood to itself alone apart from the Old Testament.  If the Old Testament be a building without a roof, the New Testament alone may be very like a roof without a building–and that is a structure very hard to comprehend and very hard to hold up!  It is a structure that may be put to all sorts of uses and may shelter all sorts of things, but it is a structure which may be easily be knocked down.  By this we certainly do not mean to say the New Testament is merely an appendage of the Old, or to deny Christ is himself the cornerstone of a mighty building (1 Cor. 3:11; 1 Pet. 2:4-7), but only to insist that it is impossible to set the New Testament apart and to construct a purely New Testament religion without regard to the faith of Israel.

The New Testament rests on and is rooted in the Old.  To ignore this fact is a serious error in method, and one that is bound to lead to a fundamental misunderstanding of the Bible message.  he who commits it has disregarded the central affirmation of the New Testament gospel itself, namely Christ had come to make actual what the Old Testament hoped for, not to destroy it and replace it with a new and better faith (John Bright, The Kingdom of God [Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 1953]).

May we never stop marveling at the wisdom and beauty of God’s holy Word.

Sola Deo Gloria, dss

Herman Bavinck on Scripture’s Fuller Sense

/ davidsschrock

In volume 1 of his Reformed Dogmatics, Herman Bavinck reflects on the multiple ways in which the New Testament authors use and apply the Old Testament.  In the discussions that swirl today on this subject, it is noteworthy that he writes in favor of sensus plenior.  He says,

In the case of Jesus and the apostles, this exegesis of the OT in the NT assumes the understanding that a word or sentence can have a much deeper meaning and a much father reaching thrust than the original author suspected or put into it.  This is often the case in classical authors as well.  No one will think that Goethe, in writing down his classical poetry, consciously had before his mind the things that are now found in it.  “Surely that person has not gotten far in poetry / In whose verses there is nothing more than what he had [consciously] written into them.”

In Scripture this is even much more strongly the case since, in the conviction of Jesus and the apostles, it has the Holy Spirit as its primary author and bears a teleological character.  Not only in the few verses cited above [verses from the NT that employ the OT is various fashions] but in its entire view and interpretation of the OT, the NT is undergirded by the thought that the Israelitish dispensation had its fulfillment in the Christian.  The whole economy of the old covenant, with all its statutes and ordinances and throughout its history, points forward to the dispensation of the new covenant.  Not Talmudism [i.e. Judaism] but Christianity is the rightful heir of the treasures of salvation promised to Abraham and his seed (Reformed Dogmatics: Prolegomena, vol. 1 [Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003], 396-97; Bavinck also includes a broad bibliography on this subject from Dutch, German, and English-speaking scholars).

Two things should be noted from his statement.  (1) While Bavinck  supports a view allowing for the expansion of meaning in the text as that ‘word or sentence’ is read in the light of later revelation, namely in the coming of Christ; his own theological method does not overdo this proposition.  He is rigorous, even ‘scientific’ (a term he uses positively), in his attention to the original meaning of the text in his doctrinal formulation.   Thus, it seems that in comparison with his own method interpretation, his sensus plenior is controlled by further biblical revelation (i.e. the canonical horizon) and not by spurious philosophies or extra-biblical ideas.  In fact, large sections of volume 1 are devoted to ardently rejecting theological methods that depend on such eisegesis.

(2) Bavinck’s appeal to Goethe does appear, at least today, to support a postmodern hermeneutic, namely that the reader can and should bring their own meaning to the text.  However, in Bavinck’s defense, it must be remembered that he is writing decades before the influence of postmodern literary theory with its influnence on theology. And again, the proof is in the pudding: Does Bavinck himself believe, encourage, or legitimate a reader-centered hermeneutic?  I don’t think so. 

In short, Bavinck’s quotation is helpful to reveal his own method of interpretation and to remind us of the organic unity and eschatological nature of the OT which finds its telos in Jesus Christ.  Likewise, this statement shows why the Reformed Dogmatics are so good; Bavinck recognized the progressive nature of revelation and undergirds his dogmatics with a biblical-theological framework that collects the sparks of doctrine of in the Old Testament and sets them ablaze as he moves into the New. (A great example see his section on the Trinity).

Sola Deo Gloria, dss

King David: The High Point of Old Testament Typology

/ davidsschrock / 2 Comments

For the last few weeks I have been considering the subject of typology and Christology in the OT, asking the question: Is there a progressive and increasing nature to the conception of typology in the Old Testament?  Looking particularly at personal types of Christ in the OT (i.e. Adam, Noah, Abraham, David, etc…), I believe that there is an element in which the mediatorial leaders marked out by the Spirit in the OT do in fact show more and more likeness to the Christ as redemptive history moves forward towards Christ.  So that, we can say that David depicts Christ in a more full way than does Abraham or Adam.   That is my hypothesis, at least. 

I have found some very illuminating and helpful contributions to this subject, but perhaps no more succinct and enriching as Herman Bavinck’s consideration of David as the highpoint of OT typology (and Christology).  He writes in general of typology,

The Old Testament does not contain just a few isolated messianic texts; on the contrary, the entire Old Testament dispensation with its leading persons, and events, its offices and institutions, its laws and ceremonies, is a pointer to and movement toward the fulfillment in the New Testament (Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics: Volume 3: Sin and Salvation in Christ [trans. J. Vriend; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2006], 243).

Then he highlights Davidic typology as the zenith of the OT revelation for the person of Christ to come,

Especially the office of king achieved such typical [i.e. typological] significance in Israel.  The theocratic king, embodied especially in David with his humble beginnings, many sided experience of life, deep emotions, poetic disposition, unflinching courage, and brilliant victories, was a Son of God (2 Sam. 7:14; Pss. 2:6-7; 89:27), the anointed one par excellence (Pss. 2:2; 18:50).  People wished for him all kinds of physical and spiritual blessings (Pss. 2:8f; 21, 45, 72), and he was even addressed as “Elohim” (Ps. 45:6).  The king is the bearer of the highest–of divine–dignity on earth.  Theocratic kingship…found its purest embodiment in David; for that reason the kingship will remain in his house (2 Sam. 7:8-16).  This promise to David, accordingly, is the foundation and center of all subsequent expectation and prophecy (244).

Bavinck’s comprehensive survey of Davidic typology affirms what the entire OT is seeking demonstrate–the coming of a Davidic son who will reign on the throne.  From Genesis to 1-2 Samuel, the Spirit of Christ is inspiring Biblical writers to anticipate David:  The covenantal promises to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob point to the emergence of mighty king (Gen. 17:6, 16; 35:11; 49:9-12); Deuteronomy 17 makes legal preparations for the rule of this king; Numbers 24:15-24 announces a scepter who will rise from Israel who will rule over the nations; in Judges the nation of Israel spirals out of control without a king in Israel (21:25); while the book of Ruth chronicles YHWH’s providential control of history that results in a Davidic genealogy (4:18-22).  Moreover, when David comes onto the seen in 1-2 Samuel (and Chronicles), his life is a divinely-intended adumbration of the Christ who is to come.  In this, the account of David’s life is genuinely historical.  Yet, all the while, it typifies the life of Christ to come.

In his treatment of this subject, Bavinck arrticulates how preexilic and postexilic prophets develop this Davidic typology.  Moving from the historic David to the more excellent prophecies about his greater Son, Bavinck points out that the prophecies consistently take on a Davidic shape, 

Prophecy, which is added to interpret typology, looks out from the past and present to the future and ever more clearly portrays the — to be expected — son of David in his person and work.  To the degree that kingship in Israel and Judah answered less to the idea of it, to that degree prophecy took up the promise of 2 Samuel 7 and clung to it (Amos 9:11; Hosea 1:11; 3:5; Mic. 5:1-2; Isa. 9:6-7; 11:1-2, 10; Jer. 23:5; 30:9; 33:17, 20-22, 26; Ezek. 34:23-24; 37:22-24).  This anointed king will arise from the dynasty of David when–in utter decay and thrust from the throne–it will resemble a hewn trunk (Isa. 11:1-2; Mic. 5:1-2; Ezek. 17:22).  God will cause him to grow as a branch from David’s house (Jer. 23:5-6; 33:14-17), so that he himself will bear the name “Branch” (Zech. 3:8; 6:12).  Despite his humble birth, he will be the true and authentic theocratic king.  Coming from despised little Dethlehem, where the royal house od Savid origniated and to which, driven from the throne, it withdrew (Mic. 5:2; cf. 3:12; 4:8, 13), the Messiah will nevertheless be a ruler over Israel; his origins as ruler–proceeding from God–go back to the distant past, to the days of old.  He is God-given, an eternal king, bears the name Wonderful, Counselor, mighty God (cf. Isa. 10:21; Deut. 10:17; Jer. 32:18), everlasting Father (for his people), Prince of Peace (Isa. 9:6-7).  He is anointed with the Spirit of wisdom and understanding, of counsel and courage, of knowledge and the fear of the Lord (Isa. 11:2) and laid as a tested, precious foundation stone in Zion (Isa. 28:16).  He is just victorious, meek, a king riding on a donkey; as king he isnot proud of his power but sustained by God (Jer. 33:17, 20, 22, 26; Zech. 9:9f.), a king whom the people call and acknowledge as “the Lord our righteousness” (Jer. 23:6f–cf. 33:16, where Jerusalem is called the city in which Yahweh causes his righteous to dwell).  he will be a warrior like David, and his house will be like God, like the angel of the Lord who at the time of the exodus led Israel’s army (Zech. 12:8; cf. Mal. 3:1).  He will reign forever; found a kingdom of righteousness, peace, and prosperity; and also extend his domain over the Gentiles to the ends of the earth (Pss. 2, 45, 72; Ezek. 37:25; Zech. 6:13; 9:10; etc.) (244-45).

All in all, I believe that the entire OT finds organic, covenantal ties (historically) and inscripturated revelation (textually) that point to or build off David’s person and kingdom.  Resultantly, it seems legitimate to conclude that one of the reasons why Jesus can say that all Scripture speaks of him (John 5:39), is because of David’s central role in the canon of the OT.  Since Jesus is the greater David, he fulfills in a more exalted way, the mediatorial role (i.e. prophet, priest, and king) lived out by Israel’s first true king, thus fulfilling the typological life of David in the OT, as well as all the other covenantal mediators in th OT.  In this way, David is the greatest personal type of Christ in the Old Testament, or at least that is what I am arguing.  Would love to hear your thoughts.

If this Davidic typology peaks your interest, I encourage you to listen or read  Jim Hamilton’s “The Typology of David’s Rise to Power: Messianic Patterns in the Book of Samuel.”

Sola Deo Gloria, dss

Being Human Rules!

/ davidsschrock

Good friend, Chip Dean, taught the doctrine of humanity to his youth group last year and used this title, “Being Human Rules!”  Reading through Theological Interpretation of the Old Testament  I came across a quote that reminded me of that series and that encapsulates a biblical understanding of humanity.  Ernest Lucas describes the scene in Daniel 4, the narrative that describes Nebuchadnezzars bestial degeneration, writing:

Daniel 4:10-12 paints a picture of the good that can be achieved by human rulers.  When humans image God, they have the right to rule in his name.  When they try to be God, they forfeit that right and may become ‘bestial.’  Those who recognize God’s rule over them are in a position to allow God to rule through them (242).

May we, in the power of the Spirit, in humble submission to our Savior, and for the glory of our Heavenly Father, rule well.  After all, being human rules!

Sola Deo Gloria, dss

ps.  By the way, who teaches their youth group doctrine?  No one!  Youth pastors would do well to consider what Chip is doing at Capshaw Baptist in Huntsville, AL.

Toward an Old Testament Theology

/ davidsschrock

Josh Philpot of Zoostation 23 posted a helpful review of Walter Kaiser’s Toward an Old Testament Theology.  Kaiser’s 1978 work is a serious attempt at biblical theology in the Old Testament by one of evangelicalism’s  finest Old Testament scholars.  He keys in on the central theme of promise that runs throughout the Old Testament (cf. his more recent The Promise-Plan of God).

One of the major contributions that Kaiser makes in Toward an OT Theology, which Josh highlights, is Kaiser’s use of antecedent theology in understanding the epochal context of any given passage.  This idea asserts that to understand any passage, it must be read in light of the revelation that has been given prior to the passage in question.  It delimits unwarranted cross-references to New Testament explanations, short-circuiting genuine exegesis.  This hermeneutical guideline comports with an argument for reading Scripture chronologically, according to progressive revelation, and with an eye towards seeing patterns re-iterated throughout the canon.  I commend the book and Josh’s concise review.

Sola Deo Gloria, dss