The Old Testament Witness to Christ and His Kingdom, Mentor's Guide, MG09

/ 1 5 1

T H E O L D T E S T A M E N T W I T N E S S T O C H R I S T A N D H I S K I N G D O M

between the two, their own theological bias makes it difficult for them to properly interpret the way in which they are linked. Denying the bodily resurrection of Jesus, they interpret the text in 1 Corinthians 15 as meaning that Jesus was raised as a spirit being , that his physical body is still dead, and that the corporeal nature of his resurrection “body” does not exist. Obviously, such a view contradicts the plain teaching of the NT, and the reporting of the apostles on the literal resurrection of Jesus’ body. Those doubting the usefulness of character types use this obvious error as evidence that typology and analogy, if used at all, must be done with the strictest of care. What do you make of the Jehovah’s Witness interpretation? Is their view a common use of typology, or is it the exception to the rule? Can one use character types of Christ and not fall prey to the kind of theological mistake the Witnesses make, and if so, how does one do it? Those who are concerned about the use of the OT in a way that points to Christ will admit that both Jesus and the apostles actually used the Bible in the way. While this is admitted, they say that such a method could be used fruitfully to show how the OT bears witness to Christ in a typological way if and only if we limit our use of the types to the ones mentioned in the NT. They argue that the typological hermeneutic of the OT is so prone to error, abuse, and misinterpretation that it may only be justified in cases where the NT authenticates the links and connections made by the interpreter. While such a rule might make those doubtful of typology and analogy somewhat more assured of its right use, this limitation does severely constrict the use of the OT. For instance, the character of Joseph is perhaps the clearest and most moving type of Christ in the OT, and yet we find none of the NT authors exploring its richness and depth. Would we be excluded from using Joseph as a type of Christ because the NT does not mention or interpret it? Can you think of a way to change the rule to make it more “user friendly” when it comes to our use of the types of the OT and their relationship to the NT? Only the Ones Mentioned in the Bible, Please!

3

Jesus, Our Representative Head?

Sometimes, our use of analogies or types in the OT can lead to fundamental misinterpretations about their meaning in the NT. For instance, in conservative theological circles, Adam and Jesus are both seen as the federal heads of their respective “races,” Adam of the sinful and doomed race apart from God’s mercy,