otomal ononoss of God. Tio unoiianglng promlaoe of God
tlirougii all diverse ooonasxios io tho matrix whioh givea a
typo ita form. Throu^ÿi typology Paul affims tliat tlio prior oovenant has not boon abolished, but has boon comploted and given its true aignifioance in tho contomporary sphere.
Througli his types ho oxliibits tlie intimato continuity and cohesion of the divine action, showing thereby that the acts of God aro not disconnected ©mptlons but aro contributing
parts of an organic unity. Christ is the climax of this divine action; He gives cœipletoness to the whole process. Tlie
first adimbrations of God's acta in tho Old Covenant as well as tho full effulgence of their culmination in the Hm? are included in tlie plan. All ia viewed as acts of a divine drama of rod(Kiption vfith Clirlst as the plot. Or, to use another metaphor, history as traced by Paul is successive ovorturos of a ooamic symphony wîiich ia conducted by God who uaos ciirist as tlie principal air. It is tlie function of
Paulino typology to show that tlie O.T. looks forward and the IÎ.T. looks backward to Cliriat who ia tho center and unifying tbomc of liis tory.
By bringing Into focus wliat constitutes legitimate typology v/e have secured a criterion for clearing away gro- tosquo perversions of it. Biblical Intorpretors who liave re sorted to such perversions liavo plagued Church history from tlio second century onward, and in tlieir lianda revelation lias
179 assumed tao olmraoter of a puzzle book.® To study
tho typology of scmio of tiie aohooltaon ia as unrewarding and as frivoloua as to v/atoii a magician pulling rabbits out of on empty hat. Dy tiieir oxogotical monstrosities these quon dam champions of a moclianioal typological tlieory have brought a sti^jsia upon tliis method of interpreting Scripture. Modem scholars havo not only pruned away the unsightly ranimeso of formor growth, but iiave also laboured to uproot the tree. Today typology tlirives only in those circles where the re sults of Biblical criticism aro unwelooKied. Brunner, evi dently beoauso lie associates typology solely v/lth tlieso er roneous methods wliich trace a tlioological corroapondonoo be tween certain IT.T. doctrlnos and tliose of the O.T. by ignor
ing tho proper historical context, writes2 "To argue that it
is ri{ÿxt to use typology as exposition beoauso it was used by tlie Apostles, is an argument tliat would only enter the head of a Fundamentalis t" # 9 if Brunner means tlmt we should not follow antiquated methods of exposition merely because tiioy aro evidenced in 'Scripture, he is right. Our conten tion is tliat tliore is Justification for using Paul's
motliod not because piety demands it, but because typology U# H.g. Y Clojaont 12:7. As regards Raiiab, tlie iiarlot, who
hung a piece of scarlet cloth from her house in order to notify the Hebrew spies, it is written in tliis epistle as follows: "By tiiis they T ^ e sjlos/ made it clear that it was by tlio blood of the Lord that redemption was going to came..*." Also, in Barnabas ? : Iff., tlie trees and stroana of ?s. 1 donote the cross of Jesus and Christian baptism.
9# Brunner, The Cliriatian Doctrine of Croat ion and ‘.odcmipticMi, p$213.
180. baa an Immonao value inasmuch as it domonstratos tliat history ia a moano for aocomplisMng the divine purpose. Acceptance of aoientific critiolam dooa not nocooaarily make typology obsolete. Much arbitrariness and trifling have aaaurodly crept into the application of tlie typological method, even in recent exposition,but tliat the method itself ia es sentially a sound one cannot bo denied. Aa long as theology is Biblical, typology cannot bo regarded as merely incidental and periplieral. ?;riglit succinctly states i "it is impossible for ua to discard How Testazaent typology without separating oursolvos from Biblical f a i t h " T y p o l o g y , in so far as it is modelled on tho Paulino pattern, io valid, necooaary, and laudable. Tills method is tlie apostle'a moot effective v/ay of revealing tlie signifioanoo of tlie old Covenant and its unity with tho Now.
Having said this of Paul's typology, wo aliall do
well to bo cautious in attempting to originate now typological constructions. Again we quote V/rightj
^^loro is/ serious danger in a static approach to tlio Bible through the use of typology. While an immanent historical truth is soon as relating two or moro his torical events, tlio truth looked for may be the time less, eternal verity or idea which ia merely act with in the crude frmie of history. By talcing off tlie
Ï6. i>.g. Vlachor (Tly> witness of tlie Old Toatamont to Clirist ) and ThoTOton (RovoTati^on the !!o3em norYdj wlio aro " m o d e m exponents of an artTfioïa'l "typolo^ Vxhibit little moro tlian lively conjuring. The rosult of their treat ment is tliat the historical difforencos between tlie O.T.
and tlie N.T. wither ai7ay. Their romancing is unwarranted since their interpretation of history is not congruous with tlio evonta of history.
lOl. frazrio wo do-hîstorlclso it, even while paying lip-
aoi'vice to tlio liistorioal context in v/hich it is found* ;Vbon tlius used, tyjiology can be more dan gerous tlian allegory because it achiovos tho same end vritliout being so openly unhlqtoriool* It can be made into a synthesis between tho Greek search for eternal truth and tho Biblical concern for his tory. Yet Biblical "truth" ia fundamentally active; it la on interpreted act or event Involving faith, decision and participation. Consequently, our inter pretation must always be on the alert lost it slip into the abstract tiuolessness wliioh is tlio subtle danger forever lurking at our stops — especially when wo desire to exliibit our rational excellence.
Per tlioso reasons, tyiiology ia a dangerous exorcise when elaborated systematically by any modem. It is bettor, tliero foro, tliat wo romain confined to, and diociplinod by, tlio cliiof typos wliich the iTow Testa ment itself employa, and further that wo no moro
attempt to uao tliese types as material for tlio oroo- tion of a systematic liermenoutics tlian did tho writ ers of the How Testament.“
We need to rwiember tliat typology is found not only in the H.T. writings but also in tho O.T. prophetic litora- tm*e. The prophets continually recall past events not be oauso of their préoccupation with the bare facts of Israel's iiistory, but because they seek to show tliat tliroughout tills Ills tory there has boon a continuing encouator of God with
Israel. Were not the motifs of the second Exodus from oap- of
tivity, the M-entering/tlie land of Canaan, and the new cre- ation^^ found in Doutoro-Ioaiah rooted in the same belief in tho ro capitulât ion of Iiiotory which blosscmod to maturity in Paul's tyi>ea? Moreover one of tiio favourite themes of the psalmists is tliat there is trauoforr*od to now generations the covenant wliich was inaugurated at tlie y^odus and which showed izr TBItnT pp. 65-6.
182
.
In an amazing v/oy tliat Yaliwoh liad adopted Israel as Tila son by an act of grace.Hai^polnta out tliat oven Israel'searliest confessions of faith contain tlio recurrent refrain of til© great saving acts of God. The only different be- ti7©en tlie O.T. and N.T. interpi^eters of history is tliat
tho latter liad tho opportunity of looking back upon
a broader panorama of tlio flellageachichte.
Paul's typology, grasping; as it does tho essence of the Biblical conoopt of history, contains truth whioli is laolcing in tlio idea of inovitable pro;p?o9s that infiltrated into Cliriatian doi^ia fraa tlu> secularist optimism wliich on- tlirallod many intellectuals of tho last century.^® The Christian \7eltonscliauunj^ presented in tills typology shows religious history not as a gradual evolution of the idea of God, but as a totally unique theophany of tlie covenant and election which liave boon normative for countless gonorations. Tlio cliristian view assumes tlmt the two-fold rhytimi of Judg ment and mercy in God's approadi to man is found in the be
ginning of Israeli to Iiiotory, and that the Messiah is tho final cffribodiiaeat of this pattern. Hence the Gospel of grace is not an innovation and an afterthought; it has always been God's way of salvation. Ever there is tlie same God who in itiates, the some recipient who approliendo îHa will accord-
liee ps. 78, 105# 106, ot.al*
15# Had, Das f omgea chi oht li oho Pvdblem dea Hexa toucha j of.
Dt. 9.
l6. v/e find a noteable example of the humanistic conception of tlio development of religion according to an evolutionary pattern from the crude idea of a tribal, God to an etliioal monotheism in '^sdlck's Guide to undorstanding the r^ble.