Tags
Bernard Ramm, hermeneutics, interpretation, Jesus, John the Baptist, Melchizedek, Old Testament, prophecy, shadows, types
Bernard Ramm:
We may note six kinds of types in Scripture:
(1). Persons may be typical. Adam is a type of Christ as the head of a race (Romans 5:14, “who is the figure of him that was to come”). Abraham is the father and type of all who believe by faith. Elijah is the prefigurement of John the Baptist. Joseph is the rejected kinsman, yet future Savior. David is the type of the Great King. Solomon is the type of the Chosen Son. Zerubbabel is the type of the Head of a new society.
(2). Institutions:The sacrifices are types of the cross. Creation and the Promised Land are types of salvation rest. The passover prefigures our redemption in Christ. The Old Testament theocracy looks forward to the coming kingdom.
(3). Offices: Moses, the prophet was a type of Christ, as was Aaron the high priest and Melchisedec the priest of the most high God.
(4). Events: Paul writes that the things which happened in the Wilderness Wanderings were types for our benefit (I Cor. 10:6, 11).
(5). Actions: The lifting up of the brazen serpent is a type of the crucifixion (John 3:14-16). The ministries of the high priest were typical of the ministries of our lord.
(6) Things: The tabernacle was a type of the Incarnation – the presence of God with His people. Incense is a type of prayer. The curtains of the tabernacle express principles of access to God.
- Bernard Ramm, Protestant Biblical Interpretation, Third Edition, pp. 231, 232
Related post:
And, as Geerhardus Vos explains in his Biblical Theology, there are symbols which lead to types which lead to the Anti-type. In speaking about the ceremonial law of Moses’ era, Vos wrote: “we must take into consideration its two large aspects, the symbolical and typical, and the relations between the two. … A symbol is in it religious significance something that profoundly portrays a certain fact or principle or relationship of a spiritual nature in a visible form. … A typical thing is prospective; it relates to what will become real or applicable in the future.” Furthermore, Vos declares, that symbols and types are the same things at different levels of development in redemption, and, “a type can never be a type independently of its being first a symbol.”
All symbols and types reveal, in some form or fashion, the biblical Christ. If one loses sight of this fact, his theology will be detached from the Anchor and will be captured by all means of mystical error.
The subject is broad, as you’ve pointed out. I did not want those still learning to experience ‘overload’
Overload is right! Those in my church who are reading Vos – among other rich books on theology – meet weekly to debrief one another. Vos causes us all to scratch our heads and wonder what we read. But some of it sticks! I had read his lengthy passage on symbols and types last week and still knew the basics and knew where to find it!
I’ve always been interested in types and shadows, but was clueless when it was mentioned. Thanks, this helps a good deal. Overload is right, I was starting to have spins when Manfred started on the “type antitype”. To a layperson, as I certainly am, it can easily seem like “there go the eggheads again…”. But this simple post was easy to understand and follow. Thanks!
I agree with michael w henry that the study of types and shadows are a fascinating study. And I also liked the explanation of the two terms. Thanks for this post.