Typology

From Creation to New Creation: A Seven Day Pattern in Genesis 1–3

/ davidsschrock / 2 Comments

time lapse photo of stars on night

Both James Jordan and Alistair Roberts have made a case that the literary structures of Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 mirror one another.[1] As evidenced in Genesis 1:1–2:3, creation took place over the course of seven days—six days of work, one day of rest. Equally, Genesis 2:4–25 follows a similar pattern, as observed below, as does Genesis 3, which Jordan develops in his book Trees and Thorns: Studies in the First Four Chapters of Genesis.

If this reading is correct, then the first three chapters of Genesis give us three parallel events—three weeks that speak of the same creation week. To put it in temple terms, Genesis 1 gives us the creation of the macro-temple, the cosmos; Genesis 2 gives us the formation of the micro-temple, the garden; and Genesis 3 gives us the defilement of the garden which leads to the de-creation of the cosmos, what I might call the massacred-temple.

If this approach is correct, then it not only stresses the seven day pattern of creation, with each chapter following the same basic pattern (see below). But it also situates the first three chapters as following.

  • Genesis 1 outlines the full, seven-day creation week (Gen. 1:1–2:3),
  • Genesis 2 returns to Day 6 to detail how God created man at the beginning of the day and woman at the end of the day (Gen. 2:4–22),
  • Genesis 2:23–25 develops the glory of God’s good creation, as the woman comes to the man when he awakes on Day 7. But it continues to watch that glory turn to shame, as the rest of Day 7 follows the tragic sin of humanity to believe the serpent, eat the fruit, and rebel against God. As a result, man’s first disobedience results in him being cut off from the Tree of Life (Gen. 3:1–24; cf. Rom. 5:12, 18–19).[2]

Following Jordan and Roberts, therefore, I offer the following seven day outline of Genesis 1–3. Let me know what you think and how it might be improved. At the end, I’ll share why reading these chapters in this way matters. Continue reading →

A Tale of Two Fishermen: Peter, Jesus, and the Meaning of 153 Fish

/ davidsschrock / 2 Comments

people standing on brown wooden dock

If you have ever fished, or known someone who has, then you know the temptation to embellish. What began as a small catch, becomes a medium catch, becomes a large catch. Maybe this is a stereotype, but fishermen are notorious for letting their stories grow over time.

The same can be true with Scripture, especially in books like Revelation, Daniel, or John. When a biblical author uses symbolism to portray his message, the true words of God can be enlarged, exaggerated, or embellished over time.

This method of embellishment often is often associated with something called allegory, as interpreters of Scripture take something in text of Scripture and interpret it by something outside of Scripture. This extra-biblical ‘thing,’ might be a philosophy, a moral imperative, or a doctrinal truth. But what it is not is something that immediately comes from the text of Scripture.

Historically, this allegorical method of interpretation has taken a number like 153—the number of fish in Peter’s catch (John 21:11)—and turned the fish into a symbol for something else. For instance, Augustine, who is at times helpful and at other times allegorical, derived from this number a proof text for the Trinity (See Klink, John, 902). How so?  

Well if you add 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 all the way up to 17, you arrive at the total of 153. One hundred fifty-three is a perfect triangle number for 17. Even more, when you add the 10 Commandments to 7 gifts of the Holy Spirit, you get 17, which gives you a triangular number of 153 that symbolizes the Trinity.

It’s as simple as that. Can’t you see it? No? Neither can I. Continue reading →

“The Court of the Sheep”: A Temple Reading of John 10

/ davidsschrock

herd of sheep on grassland

Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber.
— John 10:1 —

In John 16:25, Jesus says to his disciples, “I have said these things to you in figures of speech [paroimia]. The hour is coming when I will no longer speak to you in figures of speech [paroimia] but will tell you plainly about the Father.” In that context, Jesus was speaking of his going away and the resulting sorrow his disciples would experience (John 16:16–24). In this exchange, Jesus’s disciples did not understand what he was saying (v. 18), and so verse 25 is a pivot in the conversation.

Starting here, Jesus begins to explain what his going away means—soon he is going to leave the world and return to the Father. It is unlikely, in that moment, that the disciples understood how this departure (his exodus) would take place (by means of a cross, resurrection, and ascension), but they say in v. 29, “Ah, now you are speaking plainly and not using figurative speech.”

Importantly, this word for “figure of speech” is used only one other time in John’s Gospel. In John 10:6, John narrates and says, “This figure of speech Jesus used with them, but they did not understand what he was saying to them.” Structurally, John 10:1–21 works very similarly to John 16:16–33. Jesus says something figuratively, i.e., in a figure of speech, which his audience does not understand (compare John 10:6 and John 16:18). Then, after acknowledging the confusion, Jesus speaks again more plainly. In John 16, the focus is on Jesus’s coming departure. In John 10, the focus is similar, as Jesus describes the way he will lead his sheep out of something.

But what is that something?

In John 10:3, Jesus speaks of an unidentified shepherd, “To him the gatekeeper opens. The sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out.” In these five verses, the place from which the sheep are led out is the “sheepfold.” As verse 1–2 indicate, the thief enters the sheepfold falsely (v. 1), but the true shepherd enters the sheepfold by means of the door (v. 2). This is the contrast that Jesus sets up in figure of speech, and it is repeated in verse 4–5, when he explains how sheep follow the true shepherd (v. 4) but not the stranger (v. 5). As John notes, this figure of speech is lost on Jesus audience. Continue reading →

Was Jesus Among the Larpers? How Reading John 4 with Genesis 29 Helps Us Understand Biblical Typology and Jesus’s Identity

/ davidsschrock / 1 Comment

gabriel-rissi-MrdSyMik4ao-unsplash

Well, Well, Well, Look What We Have Hear: A Marriage, A Mountain, and a Messiah (pt. 1) — A Sermon on John 4:1–18

In John’s Gospel we learn that Jesus is the Word made flesh (1:14), the Only Begotten God (1:18), the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (1:19), and the one to whom all the Law and Prophets wrote (1:45). But did you also know that Jesus was also a Larper? Not a leper, mind you, but Larper—a Live Action Role Player.

As best I could find online, Larping is a type of game where a group of people wear costumes representing a character they create to participate in an agreed [upon] fantasy world. Most recently, Larping gained attention in the Marvel Comic series Hawkeye, but it’s been around a lot longer than that. If you need an example of what Larping looks like up close, just go to a Medieval festival near you, and you will surely find a group of Live Action Role Players.

Now, if you don’t want to go to a Medieval Festival to see LARP-ing, you could also read John 4. In this famous chapter, where Jesus confronts the woman at the well, the Lord assumes the role of particular character from the world of the Patriarchs. Indeed, as John tells it, Jesus is a man (or “bridegroom,” see John 3:29) who meets a woman at a well, who will in time, become his bride. Let’s consider how this works. Continue reading →

Typology That Is True to the Text: What Elijah and Elisha Point Out for Modern Interpreters of Scripture

/ davidsschrock / 3 Comments

roadway sign in desert land

How does typology work? Is it something that we do when we interpret Scripture? Or, is it something that Scripture does and we recognize when we read and interpret? In other words, is typology a method of interpretation, distinctive from a literal interpretation and similar to an allegorical method? Or, is typology something that is inherent to Scripture itself?

This is no small question. Volumes have been written to debate the point. And for more than the last decade I have thought about, written about, and preached about this very thing. It my conviction, outlined in a forthcoming article co-written with Sam Emadi, that typology is found in Scripture and it not something that the interpretive community brings to Scripture. To illustrate, consider the storyline of Elijah and Elisha. Continue reading →

The Proof is in the Patterns: How Typology Demonstrates the Trustworthiness of the Bible

/ davidsschrock / 7 Comments

empty gray and white concrete spiral stairs

In a few weeks, I will be teaching a class on Scripture at my church, followed by teaching Systematic Theology at Indianapolis Theological Seminary. In preparation for those classes, I have begun thinking through many of the facets related to the doctrine of Scripture, especially as it pertains to Scripture’s trustworthiness.

For those who question Scripture and its veracity, they often make claims regarding errors in the manuscripts, discrepancies in the text, or immoral teachings in the Law or Paul. Each of these must be and can be answered by a careful reading of the text. But one aspect of Scripture that has repeatedly born witness to its reliability, unity, and even its divine authorship is typology—namely, the way that types and shadows, patterns and persons (in their public actions and offices) are repeated and fulfilled throughout the Bible.

Most recently, I encountered this in the book of 1–2 Kings, where Solomon is presented as a new Joshua. Previously, I had seen Solomon as a new Adam, but in reading again from Peter Leithart’s commentary on 1 and 2 Kings, I found his observations compelling, in that the author of 1–2 Kings presents Solomon as a new Joshua. Continue reading →

On the Hill of the Lord It Will Be Provided (Genesis 22)

/ davidsschrock / 1 Comment

1920x1080-it-is-finished

God said what?

He told his servant Abraham to go and sacrifice his son, only son, Isaac, the one whom he loved.

And did he? Is that what God requires? Why would God do that? And why would Abraham obey?

If the conversation about Genesis 22 is challenging, imagine how difficult the conversation between father and son was between aged Abraham and Isaac, his teenage son. As they walked for three days to the hill of the Lord:

Isaac: Father, where is the sacrifice?  

Abraham: The Lord will provide, son.

And gloriously, the Lord did provide—for Abraham, Isaac, Israel, and us!

In Genesis 22, we enter one of the richest passages in the Bible. Every verse says something to us about God, his demands on humanity, his provision for humanity, and the pathway of death that leads to life.

Indeed, if you are feeling tried and tested and on the verge of despair and death, Genesis 22 is for you. And in this sermon you will hear a message of gospel hope that begins in Genesis, leads to Christ, and comes to us. Even more, after seeing how Genesis 22 prepares the way for Christ’s death and resurrection, we also find model of obedience that every disciple of Christ is called.

You can find the sermon here. If you want to dig deeper into Genesis 22, you can also check out my dissertation. Start on page 71 (PDF p. 86) and you will find 20 pages on the typology of this glorious chapter. For more on the cross of Christ, stayed tuned to our most recent sermon series.

Soli Deo Gloria, ds

A Better Inheritance: Letting Israel’s Land Promises Inform Our Eternal Hopes

/ davidsschrock / 1 Comment

farm land during sunset

 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! According to his great mercy,
he has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,
4 to an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you,
— 1 Peter 1:3–4 —

Whenever I read or preach a passage of Scripture that includes a list or series of names, actions, vices, virtues, or any other kind of description, I am looking to see if there is an order or a concrete image that gives shape or cohesion to the list. Sometimes there is not, but often there is. And in the case of 1 Peter 1:4, where Peter speaks of the inheritance that is kept in heaven for those who have been raised to new life in Christ, we find a helpful word picture in Edmund Clowney’s commentary on this passage.

Drawing on a typological connection between Israel’s land and Christ’s new creation, Clowney compares two types of inheritance. He describes how the inheritance that Christians will receive from Jesus on the last day far exceeds the inheritance Israel received at the hands of Joshua. In this way, Clowney provides a faithful and fruitful description of what Christ holds for us in heaven—namely, a place in the kingdom that he will reveal on the last day. Indeed, this promise is glorious, but to fully appreciate what it means, we need to read 1 Peter 1:4 with what the Old Testament says about Israel’s inheritance.

This is what Clowney does, and it is worth our patient reflection, as he explains how “the words that Peter uses to describe our unchangeable inheritance all relate to the land that was the inheritance of Israel” (47). In keeping with the three words that Peter uses (imperishable, undefiled, and unfading), Clowney lists three comparisons. He writes Continue reading →

Redemption, Covenant, and Dwelling: Seeing the Three-Fold Pattern of Salvation in the Book of Exodus

/ davidsschrock / 2 Comments

jesus saves neon signage

Patterns are everywhere. In aviation, you have flight patterns; in economics, you have patterns in the stock market, in detective work, police look for patterns of suspicious behavior; and in sports, defensive coordinators look for patterns in the offensive schemes of opposing teams. In short, we live in a world full of patterns!

And these patterns are just one hint that behind the created order, there is a Creator who has stamped his design on creation. Similarly, in the Bible we learn that there are patterns in redemption. And nowhere is this more true than in the book of Exodus. In Exodus we are introduced to God’s pattern of redemption—substitution, conquest, covenant, and glorious dwelling. These patterns repeat again and again in Scripture, and they are so important that even Jesus says to Moses and Elijah in Luke 9:31 that he is soon going to lead his own New Exodus. So today, as we begin to look at Exodus, we do so by recognizing the pattern of salvation found therein. Continue reading →

David Among the Priests: Seeing the Royal Priesthood of David in the Book of 1 Chronicles

/ davidsschrock

priestcolorIn 1 Chronicles 1–9, the central feature of the genealogy is the priestly service of sons of Aaron and Levi. (See this post). Yet, as the book unfolds, there is another “priest” who takes center stage. Who is this priest? It is none other than David himself, a royal priest after the order of Melchizedek, we might say.

His priesthood, however, may be veiled to many readers because of the fact that David is not called a priest and because passages like Exodus 28 and Deuteronomy 33:8–11 restrict priesthood to the sons of Aaron. Yet, taking those Levitical instructions seriously, we should not miss how 1 Chronicles presents David.

In what follows, I will present four evidences of David’s priesthood, the last includes five actions that identify David as a priest. If time permitted, we could find more evidences for David’s priesthood and give rationale for how this works in Scripture. Some of these things will become clear below; others we will have to explore later. For now, let us content ourselves with what Scripture gives us in 1 Chronicles and how David is presented in priestly ways.

Continue reading →