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

3 1 8 /

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

of this, not in our brilliance or super-spiritual nature. God, the Holy Spirit, has made these connections, and the possibility of them being “there” is shown not on the basis of our genius or super-prophetic gifting, but on the basis of the text itself. John Alsup concludes his fine article on this subject with a well reasoned and fair critique of the main issues associated with this methodology and those who want to rightly and properly employ it: It is true that some who utilize typology relinquish claims to the limitations of its being a formal hermeneutical method with rules for systematic application; they would prefer to operate in the “freedom of the Spirit” (von Rad 1963. 38) or to consider it more appropriate to refer to typology as a “spiritual approach (Goppelt 1982.202 and passim), “the thought of the consummation of salvation history” (TDNT 8.254, 259), a “meditatively applied understanding of the Old Testament” (Goppelt 1981–82, 2.58), or a “salvation-historical optical lens” (Goppelt 1981–82, 2.245). On those occasions, other scholars naturally become quite nervous and skeptical in light of potential abuse. Only in concert with, and not in repudiation of, the checks and balances of historical-critical methodology can typology serve with integrity today [emphasis mine]. For the most part, typological thinkers insist on the personal, present reality of God in the “historical antecedents” of type determination: types are types because God put them there toward the end of an unfolding, consummation-oriented, redemptive self-disclosure of God’s very person (typology’s fixed point is the gospel). It is acknowledged that this is not self-evident to any observer; it is hidden and cannot be documented as a demonstrable datum; it has to do ultimately with faith in Christ and faith’s posture toward the sovereignty of God. It will do little good for “liberals” and “fundamentalists” to fault one another for the other’s perceptions in this area. Typological thinking cares about the unity of the Christian Bible and is serious about understanding the saving activity of God to which it bears witness; all who care and all are serious about these matters—perhaps even the Jewish-Christian dialogue—will find typological understanding helpful if it can be directed toward subject matter about which people of today are deeply concerned. It is in connection with these related lines of questioning, and not as a