Comment by Forrest Curo on 6th mo. 2, 2011 at 3:49pm

You know, the people who wrote this stuff... didn't think that "types" or "figures" were valid or significant features of it. That makes the whole notion really dubious in my eyes. 

Granted, Jewish interpretations of their scriptures and of God's intentions have undergone significant shifts over the millennia, which might as well include the formation of the Christian sect... but that sect has committed a number of howlers, put scriptural material through some real funhouse distortions in various polemics defending Jesus' claim to be the true Messiah. (I happen to think that's a valid claim, but see more devotion and zeal than validity in typical Christian justifications for it. Especially because so much NT narrative looks like remakes of OT stories.)

Comment by Irene Lape on 6th mo. 2, 2011 at 4:35pm

I think it's definitely true that the idea that Old Testament stories contained "types" and "figures" that were realized in some way in the Christian narrative is probably something Jews do not relate to today, but don't forget all those early disciples pouring over scripture or remembering scripture they likely knew very well were almost all Jews for whom the idea that the narrative would somehow be fulfilled in the Messiah they were waiting for. But there are already some "types" that will become pretty important even within the Jewish tradition: the covenants, the model of offering sacrifice for sin, the seemingly untraditional favor that falls on the younger sibling - Abel, Isaac, Jacob - and the shepherd, the faithfulness and obedience of Abraham. These are patterns and types that will develop as the narrative progresses. I am not sure what validity you are looking for. Some of these are just stories, but the repetition of types of characters or symbols or other imaginative figures enriches the fabric of the narrative, gives it a feeling of unity even though we know that the authors were many and diverse, the time span covered by the many books fairly enormous. That it feels unified and coherent at all seems to me somewhat miraculous. But that's just me - English major turned history teacher.

 

I can just see those early Christians combing the pages of their Torah and their prophets, their Wisdom books and their rabbinical writings and finding buried treasure in these writings: the Word that emanated from the Creator, so connected with the creative power of God, now made flesh; the Light of God's presence living in history, so we could see it and follow it; the offspring of Adam [Son of Man] and Eve [the woman], now bruising the head of the serpent; the "only son" faithfully offered up in sacrifice, carrying the wood, and finally saved because God intervenes; the ark, a vehicle of salvation that will later reappear carrying the law and then later the holy of holies in the Temple. There will be so much more too as we get into the rest. 

Comment by Forrest Curo on 6th mo. 2, 2011 at 5:36pm

The order was probably like this:

1) Many of Jesus' contemporary Jews recognize him as the Messiah ( not == "Christ").

2) The Messiah is not supposed to be captured by evil pagan foreigners and tortured to death, but

3) This happens. Everyone says, "Oh well, he can't have been the Messiah."

4) Jesus' resurrection (however people experienced that) forced his followers to radically reconsider everything; this was after all a rather drastic divine intervention that not only returned him to life, but thereby restored his status as a) a potential actual ruler and b) presumably still the ruler appointed by God.

5) At this point, people who wre already convinced that Jesus is the Messiah started digging through the scriptures for anything they could find to persuade others that what happened was what said scriptures had predicted all along. (If one doesn't already believe this, the evidence does not seem particularly convincing. The scriptures are, in fact, full of inconsistencies, with as many signs pointing diverse directions as this world where we find it (which God also created.))

 

Nothing in this world, not one detail, is truly "accidental." But our ability to find meaning in it-- is subject to significant mistakes.

Comment