Relatives who permit typology as a spot on limit of interpretation dependence that what God did in the lives of some ancestors and in some accomplishments in the Old Testament is the spot on key to understand what God did in the life, death, and rebirth of Christ and in the ministry of the yet to be church.
The authority of typology as an exegetical tool has been raised by Pauline Viviano, Merge Educationalist of Holiness at Loyola Bookish Chicago, in her review of Peter Leithart's interpretation on 1 & 2 Kings, Brazos Theological Remarks on the Bible (Commanding Rapids: Brazos Compel, 2006). Viviano raises several issues about the typological interpretation of 1 and 2 Kings. The agree with is an illustration of Viviano's comments:
Of the masses criticisms of the work of biblical scholars the one I restrain peak merely been "attacked" with is that we are not theological heaps, so it was with some tingling that I array to review a theological interpretation on 1 " they are honestly on every page of the interpretation. Among the peak furtive is Jehu as a type of Christ. You find again Jehu, don't you? He was the widespread of Israel's army who led a auto in which he butchered the former stock and burned to death the people attending worship of Baal whom he had get in their temple. If you couldn't find the likeness to Christ portray, you are not alone; I couldn't find it either. My lovely quote from the book is "Moses is Elijah is John; Joshua is Elisha is Jesus. Yet very, Moses is Elijah is Jesus, and Joshua is Elisha is the church." If you can remove this quote for me, gist do so; it impartial makes me giggle. It was clear as the first few pages of this interpretation that every reckon "3" in the books of Kings was leave-taking to be tiring as a soothsayer of the Resurrection; every almost all of water, a reference to Baptism; and every anointing, messianic. The story of Elisha and the self-assured ax in the beginning is seen as a type of moreover Renewal and Baptism! I restrain masses self-important examples, but I atmosphere my indicate has been made: this "resurrected" form of typological exegesis is impartial empty laughable.
Shed light on Viviano's remarks in its totality by clicking portray.
I persist in to prearranged with Viviano's remarks. In the name of typology, commentators of the biblical impersonate restrain found Christ everyplace Christ necessitate not be found. Sometimes, even a bad restatement of the biblical impersonate allows for a typological interpretation of the impersonate, as I restrain demonstrated in my post on the be deprived of of Isaac in Start 22:8. Interpreters requirement be very trivial not to build in their own preconceived notion within the impersonate. This form of interpretation is not exegesis; it is eisegesis.
Claude Mariottini
Educationalist of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Institution
Tags: Eisegesis, Exegesis, Hermeneutics, Observations, Pauline Viviano, Peter Leithart, Typology
