Interview with Vern Poythress on Biblical Theology

 

Just today, Beginnningwithmoses has posted an interview with Vern Poythress on the theme of finding Christ in the Old Testament. Here’s the link.

*Update: Beginningwithmoses has just posted the second part of their interview with Poythress here.

Also, by Dr. Poythress is the lead article for the upcoming ESV Study Bible (released on Oct. 15) titled, Overview of the Bible: A Survey of the History of Salvation.

Here’s a sample from the article (a helpful definition of a type)

A “type,” in the language of theology, is a special example, symbol, or picture that God designed beforehand, and  that he placed in history at an earlier point in time in order to  point forward to a later, larger fulfillment.

According to Pattern: What is Typology?

The According to Pattern series I’m developing here on Kingdomview is an entry level examination of what’s commonly called by theologians typology. In the first 2 part series I cover the linked between Joseph in Genesis and Christ (part 1, 2), and the second installment I’ve touched upon the shadow of Christ in the life of Noah (part 1, 2).

The name typology comes from the Greek word tupos. In Rom. 5 Adam is explicitly said to be a type of Christ. but what does this mean? Tupos has a number of similar, overlapping meanings. Sometimes it can refer to a mold, the type that idols were made from. But most commonly it is translated ‘pattern,’ or ‘example’ (others translations of the word tupos are “imprint” and “form”). Types are what you could call historical prefigurings of either a person, place or thing.

The simplest way to break this down is that the type is found in the Old Testament and it’s fulfillment in the New. The fulfillment of the type is known as the antitype.

Graeme Goldsworthy, in his book According to Plan, contrasts a typological reading of Scripture with both the literalistic and the allegorical method. The literalistic method finds history (and especially, given the context of this post, salvation history) as self-interpreting. So, symbols and the like in the Old Testament need not later be explained and clarified, because what they mean is evident at any point in the history of redemption. So, when the Temple is spoken of by the Prophets as being rebuilt ‘in that day’, it represents exactly what you would think it means upon first reading, the literal, stone and mortar Temple in Jerusalem.

On the other hand, the allegorical method, often confused with the typological method, is nearly the opposite of the literalistic approach. If the literalistic approach states that the interpretation of salvation history is self-evident, the allegorical method holds that history is essentially unimportant. The allegorist looks ‘beyond’ the historical meaning of a biblical passage in order to get to the truly ’spiritual’ meaning. Unfortunately, this method often boils down to making loose connections between people, places or institutions of the OT with those of the NT. So, the scarlet cord held out by Rahab from her window when Joshua and his men spied on the city of Jericho is really speaking to us today about the crimson blood of Christ (the connection here being the color). So you can wind up having as many allegorical interpretations as you have allegorical interpreters! (or maybe more, depending on their creativity)

The typological method steers clear of both errors. Unlike the literalistic approach, typology recognizing that God is the ultimate interpreter of history. Redemption is His plan, and He is free to historically unfold the deeper meaning of any person, place, or institution as He wishes. As an example, this is seen in Acts 2 when Peter explains the resurrection and ascension of Christ as the fulfillment of God’s promise to David that he (David) would always have a descendent to sit on the throne. Yet, the typological approach also parts ways from allegory. Typology insists that history is important and vital, and the meaning of God’s work is found in the actual space-time events recorded in the Bible. The antitype (fulfillment) really is related to the type. Going back to the example of Peter, we see that Peter wasn’t just making this stuff up. Jesus truly was the biological and legal descendant of David (the real historical king of Israel), and was truly given David’s throne.

The difference is that Christ’s reign, while organically related to David’s, 1) fulfills what David hoped for, and 2) supersedes and elevates the original covenantal promise. Typological recognizes the importance in interpreting the BIble of progressive (i.e. historical) revelation (i.e. God reveals truth that we could not otherwise find out).

For more on typology, see:

According to Pattern: Noah (part 2)

We’ve taken a quick look at some of the characteristics that defined Noah. Now we’ll sketch out how Christ’s brigs to completion those salvation-historical themes that Noah introduced.

Jesus is the final hope that the promised ’seed of the woman’ pointed to (Lk. 3:23-38). Noah’s birth pointed in his direction as well. Noah’s father thought that perhaps his son would be the final deliverer, but he wasn’t. The final champion send from God is Christ, who will ultimately reverse the curse (1 Cor. 15:50-57).

Likewise, will Noah’s name meant ‘rest, Christ Himself is the rest for the people of God (Heb. 3-4). In fact, jesus is the ultimate rest to which the sabbath pointed (Heb. 4:9-10).

Christ is not just ‘another’ Adam (like Noah), but is the final, second, and eschatological Adam (1 Cor. 15:45, 47). But he doesn’t repeat what Adam does, he corrects Adam’s failure. Adam’s sin brought death into the world, and ruined all those whom he represented (all humanity). Christ’s life and death of obedience to the Father brings life, blessing and unending grace to those whom He represents (the Church), see Rom. 5:12-21.

But while there is a difference between how Christ is another adam, and how Noah is another Adam (Jesus fixes the mess Adam plunged us all into), there are also parallels. Both Noah and Christ (as ‘Adams’) are commissioned to be fruitful and multiply. But, while Noah obeys in the short run, ultimately he fails, and we need to look to another to fulfill this creation mandate. At first it looks like the call of Abraham, and the creation of the nation of Israel (after the Exodus) will ‘fix’ this problem, but again, ultimately, they fail as well. But not so for Christ!! Listen to this text from Ephesians 1:

15 For this reason, because I have heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love toward all the saints, 16 I do not cease to give thanks for you, remembering you in my prayers, 17 that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of him, 18 having the eyes of your hearts enlightened, that you may know what is the hope to which he has called you, what are the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, 19 and what is the immeasurable greatness of his power toward us who believe, according to the working of his great might 20 that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, 21 far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. 22 And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church, 23 which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all.

Everything that’s bolded demonstrates how the Apostle Paul understood the work of Christ in terms of fulfilling the original task given to Adam (and later given to Noah). Adam was called to multiply, and this is fulfilled by Christ in the creation of the Church of which Christ is head (meaning source and authority over). Next Adam is given dominion over the earth (a dominion that he neglected and in fact renounced by his obedience to the serpent). Christ on the other hand has “all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named,” and is the ‘head over all things.” Adam was to fill the earth, while Christ Himself is said to be (through His body the Church) the “ fullness of him who fills all in all.” Without a doubt Paul conceived of the work and ministry of Christ as the perfect fulfillment to what was originally the goal of humanity.

Lastly, in contrast from Noah, Christ is vindicated and glorified through judgment. Noah, and his family, were spared the wrath of God poured out on the Earth. Jesus, on the other hand, spares others (i.e. the Church) not by avoiding God’s judgment and wrath, but by absorbing it completely. Jesus, who never committed any sin, paid the penalty for sins of His people, so that through the redemption He provides we could be accepted as God’s children (Cf. 2 Cor. 5:21) Christ drank the cup of God’s wrath to the dregs, thus there is no one condemnation for those in Christ Jesus (Rom. 8:1)

According to Pattern: Noah (Part 1)

In the last According to Pattern post (on Joseph, part 1 and 2), we took a look at how Joseph served as a type, or historical pre-figuring, shadow, and pattern of Christ who was to come. Here now, we’ll took a quick look at Noah.

Noah is (at his place in salvation history) the ’seed of the woman.’ In fact, his father, Lamech, ponders whether he will be the one to deliver the creation from the curse (Gen. 5:28-29). (Note that even this early in Scripture we find the connection between the curse of the ground, found in Gen. 3:17-19, with a promised deliverer who will grant release from this ‘bondage.’ cf. Rom. 8:20-21)

The name ‘Noah’ is derived from the Hebrew word for ‘rest.’ 

Noah is a type of new Adam, this we can see in God’s recommisioning him with the original mandate given in the garden to ‘be fruitful and multiply” (Gen. 9:1).

Noah is preserved in order to provide blessing through judgment (cf. the entire flood narrative).

For more on the typological significance of Noah, see Meredith Kline’s Kingdom Prologue

According to Pattern: Joseph (Part 2)

Now, let’s see how in the story of Jesus, God is retelling the story of Joseph in a dramatic new way.

Jesus is the ultimate son of Jacob/Israel (Matt. 1:1, Rom. 9:5), and the full and final fulfillment of the ’seed’ of Abraham (Gal. 3:16) and the serpent-crushing ’seed’ of the woman in Gen. 3:15.

Jesus is given preeminence above his brothers by God the Father (Heb. 2:11), and is the firstborn of all creation (Col. 1:15). As the climactic descendant from the royal line of David He is also the firstborn in the sense of Kingship (Matt. 27:11, Rom. 1:3).

Jesus is persecuted by his brethren and suffers “exile” (“the curse of the Law”, Gal. 3:13) for His people (2 Cor. 5:21).

Jesus is falsely accused and is silent when reviled (Acts 8:32, 1 Pet. 2:23).

Jesus is the suffering servant, and as a result of his humiliation is later exalted (Isa. 52-53, Phil. 2:5-11).

Jesus becomes a source of life, not only for the people of Israel, but also for the surrounding pagan nations (Isa. 49:6, 52:10, Rev. 7:4-10).

The parallels are clearly seen once you do a little digging. Joseph serves as a historical prefiguring of Jesus. Or, put another way, Jesus repeats the essential acts of Joseph’s life, but on a cosmic scale.

Joseph was great, but a greater than Joseph has come!

According to Pattern: Joseph

Have you ever noticed just how much the story of Jacob’s son, Joseph, is a type (i.e. a historical prefiguring and pattern) of Jesus? Actually, it’s pretty amazing. Let’s take a quick run through to see the ways in which the life and story of Joseph sets a pattern for a servant of God that Jesus fulfills.

First, let’s refamiliarize ourselves with the story of Joseph.

Joseph is the son of Jacob (Israel), and the ’seed’ of Abraham (Gen. 37:2).

Joseph is given preeminence above his brothers by his father, and treated as his firstborn (Gen. 37:3).

Joseph is persecuted by his brethren and is taken into “exile” (Gen. 37:18-36).

Joseph is falsely accused and is silent when reviled (Gen. 39:6-20).

Joseph is a servant and later is exalted (Gen. 39:1-6, 41:37-45).

Joseph becomes a source of life, not only for the people of Israel, but also for the surrounding pagan nations (Gen. 41:56-57, 42:1-3, 50:15-21).

Next we’ll look at how in Jesus the full theological freight of Joseph’s story is unfolded in Israel’s Messiah…

Superman: Jesus in Disguise? (Part 2 of 2)

In the last post we looked at the parallels with Kal-El son of Jor-El (Superman), and Jesus, Son of David (Christ). Now, I hope to touch what these parallels mean for our culture and what they mean for the gospel. Sounds like a huge goal, doesn’t it? Well, I suppose it is, but I’m only working out a sketch.

What the Superman/Christ connection means for culture. Insofar as Superman embodies the ideals of generations gone by as well as today’s generation, his iconic status clues of in on a couple of things. First, since humanity is created with a purpose, and history is unfolding toward God’s goal, humans cannot escape their design. We cannot help but notice that the world is not as it should be. There are wrongs in this world that demand righting. Second, We need a hero. But, we need a hero that can do what we never could. One that is like us, yet not like us. Third, this hero must stand against all that is evil, and must embody justice to the fullest. Fourth, despite the argument to the contrary we still, deep down at our God-created core, know good from evil, and desire good to triumph over evil. Fifth, we cannot save ourselves. We are helpless to bring about the change that we so desperately need.

What the Superman/ Christ connection means for the gospel. First, the gospel presents us with the true myth. Part of the conversion of C. S. Lewis was his realization that the story of Jesus is the “true myth.” There was a time, during his “B.C.” days, when he thought the parallels between the Gospels (i.e. Matt, Mrk, Lk, and Jhn) and ancient pagan mythology proved that the story of Jesus couldn’t be true. But, in his conversion (which came about as a result of long conversations with Lord of the Rings author, J. R. R. Tolkien) he had a life-changing “aha” moment. The similarities between the Gospels and pagan myths, rather than invalidating the story, actually proves it! God’s was guiding history, in a manner of speaking, to set the stage for Christ to walk on the stage. The belief in creation, sin, judgment, and redemption (in one form or another) are universal themes, and they strike a chord with nearly every human heart. All the highest hopes of men, and the greatest themes in all stories find their fulfillment in Christ.

Second, the story of Superman provides Christians with a cultural point of contact to share the gospel. If you live in America, then chances are on more than a number of occasions you’ve seen people wearing Superman “S” t-shirts. They’re all over the place (and Yes, I own one). The Man of Steel is probably the largest cultural icon other than Jesus in America. So, this provides us with the opportunity to turn an ordinary conversation about Big Blue into an evangelistic conversation without it seeming forced (recall the similarities in part 1). This demonstrates that anything can be used as a springboard to presenting the gospel.

Oh, and here’s another parallel between Superman and the God-man: when both were resurrected, they came back transformed. Jesus was resurrected in a glorified body, never to die again. With the resurrection of Superman (though the weaker term “resuscitation,” might be more fitting) a serious question of his immortality has been raised. It is possible that so long as Superman is exposed to our yellow sun, nothing can kill him? He is, after all, a solar battery, more or less.

Ok, I’m tapped out…

Superman: Jesus in Disguise? (Part 1 of 2)

I know I haven’t been the first to notice this, but maybe what I’m about to say is new to some of my readers. Our culture is, in a very real sense, a culture without it’s own mythology. This is one of the chief reasons why films like the 300, TV programing like professional wrestling, and comics books are so popular. One function that mythology plays is to flesh out the deepest values that a culture holds dear. For the past nearly 30 years, a ideological struggle has been going on in the comic book world. And this is a crisis in Worldviews. In 1938, two Jewish boys, Jerry Siegel and Joel Shuster, created Superman, a larger than life hero that would save us from all our fears. Superman reflected the ideals of 1) those who created him, and 2) the larger culture into which he was born. Now, this isn’t to say that those in the 1930’s lived up to those ideals (we do remember that that’s when WWII started, right?), but the point is that truth, justice, honesty, and integrity (and yes, the American way) were held up as things that should be sought before all other things.

Today, the comic industry (again, reflecting the larger culture) has struggled because while heroes such as Superman, Batman, and Spider-Man (who have vowed to never purposefully take a life) are still amongst the most popular, on the flip side we have characters such as Spawn, The Darkness, and the Punisher (anti-heroes for whom killing is part of daily lives) who are also clearing the racks. Admittedly, the line between a Batman and a Punisher isn’t absolute, but then again, nearly nothing is.

But all of this is preamble to my main point. I believe that the global and time tested success and popularity of Superman has a theological explanation. I’ve grown increasing convinced that Superman is a profound Christ figure, not only in his original story, but also in the development of his character. Both Superman and Christ, in an important sense, are not of this earth. Both are sent by their father, and come from a place far away. Both are saviors, both died, taking the very wrath of doomsday it/himself upon them (for those of you who don’t know the story of Superman’s death in the early 90’s, he died saving the city of Metropolis from a creature literally named Doomsday), and lastly, both were resurrected because death could not overcome them. Notice also how “oddly” Superman’s dual identity strangely mirrors Christ’s dual nature. Clark reflects the lowly, servant nature of Christ, while the Man of Steel resembles the glorified, divine nature of Jesus.

Is this a pure coincidence? I don’t think so. The original creators of Superman were not Christians, yet Siegel and Shuster were raised in a biblically saturated environment. They have claimed that Superman was loosely based on Moses and Samson. The rocket that Superman’s father, Jor-El (El is Hebrew for God), sends him to Earth in is a parallel to the basket that Moses was saved in as a baby. And, of course, Samson is the prototype for Superman’s heroic strength. But, being that Moses (as prophet and savior of the people of Israel) and Samson (as judge and defender of the nation) are Old Testament types pointing to their ultimate fulfillment in Christ, is it any wonder why Big Blue bears such a striking resemblance to God’s Son?

I think the clear parallel between Christ and Superman are already being acknowledged by a wide variety of people. As an example, look at this splicing of two movie trailers. We’ll take a closer look at what these parallels mean both for our culture and the gospel in part 2.