Preaching Christ in All of Scripture E-Book

Edmund P. Clowney

• Herausgeber: Crossway
• Kategorie: Religion und Spiritualität
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 308

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2003

Beschreibung

Voicing one theme for the entire Bible and structuring all sermons around that idea may seem to be an impossible challenge. For veteran pastor and preaching professor Edmund Clowney it will not do to preach a text from either the Old or New Testaments without fully preaching its ultimate and primary focus-the person and work of Jesus Christ. He writes, "To see the text in relation to Christ is to see it in its larger context, the context of God's purpose in revelation." Clowney's rationale for emphasizing Christ's presence in the Old Testament rests on the purpose of the Hebrew Scripture. The Old Testament follows God's one great plan for human history and redemption, and the plan is not only from him but centers on him: his presence in his incarnate Son. The witness of the Scriptures to Christ is the reason they were written, so it is appropriate to emphasize this element in the Old Testament as well as in the New Testament. By offering numerous full-length examples of his own sermons that emphasize Christ as the principle theme of Scripture, Clowney illustrates for those who will never have the privilege of being his students how they can craft sermons which present Christ as the primary consideration of the text. He also offers specific instructions on preparing such a sermon. He discusses the personal habits of prayer and Bible study that prepare pastors to seek out Christ's presence. Clowney emphasizes the importance of including a specific application in every sermon so that Christ is presented both in what he says and does to reveal himself in the biblical text and in what he says and does to direct Christians' lives today. Students preparing for the pastorate, pastors desiring to increase their emphasis on Christ in their sermons, and those seeking Christ's presence in all of Scripture will find a help in Clowney's writings.

Leseprobe

PREACHINGCHRISTIN ALL OFSCRIPTURE

EDMUND P. CLOWNEY

CROSSWAY BOOKS

A DIVISION OFGOOD NEWS PUBLISHERSWHEATON, ILLINOIS

Preaching Christ in All of Scripture

Copyright © 2003 by Edmund P. Clowney

Published by Crossway Books,a division of Good News Publishers,1300 Crescent Street,Wheaton, Illinois 60187.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher, except as provided by USA copyright law.

Cover design: Josh Dennis

Cover photo: David Alan Wolters

First printing 2003

Printed in the United States of America

Scripture references marked ASV are from the American Standard Version of the Bible.

Scripture quotations marked ESV are from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, copyright © 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a division of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

Scripture references marked NKJV are from the New King James Version. Copyright © 1982, Thomas Nelson, Inc. Used by permission.

Scripture references marked NIV are from the Holy Bible: New International Version.® Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan Publishing House. All rights reserved.

The “NIV” and “New International Version” trademarks are registered in the United States Patent and Trademark Office by International Bible Society. Use of either trademark requires the permission of International Bible Society.

Scripture references marked KJV are from the King James Version of the Bible.

Scripture references marked JPS are from The Holy Scriptures According to the Masoretic Text: A New Translation (The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1917).

____________________________________________________________

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Clowney, Edmund P.Preaching Christ in all of Scripture / Edmund P. Clowney.p. cm.Includes bibliographical references and index.

1. Jesus Christ—Person and offices—Sermons. 2. Bible—Sermons.3. Sermons, American. 4. Reformed Church—Sermons. 5. Bible—Homiletical use. 6. Preaching. I. Title.BT203.C57 2003251—dc21

2002154807

____________________________________________________________

BP               13     12     11     10     09     08     07     06     05     04     03

15      14     13     12     11     10     9     8     7     6     5     4     3     2     1

CONTENTS

Preface

1 Christ in All of Scripture

2 Preparing a Sermon That Presents Christ

3 Sharing the Father’s Welcome (Luke 15:11-32)

4 See What It Costs (Genesis 22:1-19)

5 When God Came Down (Genesis 28:10-22)

6 The Champion’s Strange Victory (Genesis 32)

7 Can God Be Among Us? (Exodus 34:1-9)

8 Meet the Captain (Joshua 5:13-15)

9 Surprised by Devotion (2 Samuel 23:13-17)

10 The Lord of the Manger

11 Jesus Preaches Liberty (Luke 4:16-22)

12 The Cry of the God-Forsaken Savior (Psalm 22:1)

13 Our International Anthem (Psalm 96:3)

14 Jesus Christ and the Lostness of Man

15 Hearing Is Believing: The Lord of the Word

PREFACE

BIBLE READERS AND TEACHERS know that the Bible is a storybook. My Sunday school teacher in the primary department recommended the Bible to me, and I began to read it. At a crisis in my college days I knew that my one hope was to read the Bible. I read it, not in snatches, but in hours and days out of desperation. I started in Genesis chapter 1. When I reached the book of Jonah, I came upon the verse, “Salvation is of the Lord!” I realized then that the Bible did not give a full history of Israel, but a history of God’s work of saving his chosen people. It is all about what God did. He who holds the worlds in his hand came down to save us. The Bible is the story of how God came down to be born of the Virgin Mary, to live and die for us, and to rise in triumph from the tomb. It was not my grip on God that was my hope, but his grip on me.

As I continued to study and teach the Bible, I saw increasingly that God’s promise in the Old Testament was kept in the New Testament. It was kept in the coming of God the Son. John’s Gospel witnesses to the deity of Jesus Christ, the Word made flesh. Jesus, John tells us, is the one whom Isaiah saw in his vision of God seated on his throne between the cherubim (John 12:41).

The Angel who appeared to Moses at the burning bush in the desert identified himself as the “I AM” God. Not only do the four Gospels tell the story of Jesus. So do the five books of Moses, who gave God’s promise of the Prophet to come. So does the rest of the Old Testament. Remember that the apostle Paul, preaching in every synagogue from the Scriptures, was preaching from the scrolls of the Old Testament. Paul gave the apostolic witness to Jesus in whom all the Old Testament Scripture is fulfilled.

Preachers who ignore the history of redemption in their preaching are ignoring the witness of the Holy Spirit to Jesus in all the Scriptures.

This book begins with two chapters, then adds more than a dozen sermons that reflect the united witness of the Old and New Testaments to Christ. Chapter 1 seeks to show that Christ is presented in the whole Old Testament. Chapter 2 offers help in “Preparing a Sermon That Presents Christ.” The sermons that follow are given as examples of messages showing how particular texts, seen in their context, do present Christ. Other Bible passages alluded to in the sermons are not referenced, unless quoted. The sermons are offered as messages to be heard as preaching, not as footnoted theses for study.

I do pray that readers may be encouraged to turn to the Scriptures and know for themselves the joy of hearing Jesus, as they travel with him to Emmaus on Easter Morning.

—Edmund P. Clowney

1: CHRIST IN ALL OF SCRIPTURE

PREACHING CHRIST FROM the Old Testament means that we preach, not synagogue sermons, but sermons that take account of the full drama of redemption, and its realization in Christ. To see the text in relation to Christ is to see it in its larger context, the context of God’s purpose in revelation. We do not ignore the specific message of the text, nor will it do to write an all-purpose Christocentric sermon finale and tag it for weekly use.

You must preach Christ as the text presents him. If you are tempted to think that most Old Testament texts do not present Christ, reflect on both the unity of Scripture and the fullness of Jesus Christ. Christ is present in the Bible as the Lord and as the Servant.

CHRIST THE LORD OF THE COVENANT

The New Testament applies the title kurios (Lord) to Christ (e.g., Heb. 1:10; 1 Pet. 3:15). That Greek term, used in the Septuagint version of the Old Testament to translate “Yahweh,” became the short designation of the Lord Jesus Christ. Both the Old Testament and the New also use the term “Lord” to designate “the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,” as in Peter’s quotation of Psalm 2 in Acts 4:26 (NKJV):

The kings of the earth took their stand,And the rulers were gathered togetherAgainst the LORD and against His Christ.

Most of the designations of God in the Old Testament refer to the living God with no distinction of the persons of the Trinity. But the Second Person of the Trinity appears as the “Lord” in many passages. John’s Gospel shows that this is the case when John quotes Isaiah 6:10 and adds, “These things said Isaiah, because he saw his glory; and he spake of him” (John 12:41, ASV). Since the quotation is from Isaiah’s vision of God’s glory in the temple, it is clear that John views that glory of the Lord enthroned as the glory of Christ, the Logos.

Paul does the same in Ephesians 4:8 when he quotes from Psalm 68:18 (NKJV), applying to Christ’s ascension words spoken of the Lord’s exaltation:

When He ascended on high,He led captivity captive,And gave gifts to men.

The living God revealed in the Old Testament is the triune God. To be sure, the Incarnation brought to light Old Testament teaching that had still been in shadow. Yet the Angel of the Lord’s presence did reveal the mystery of the One who could be both distinguished from God and identified with him. When the Commander of the Army of the Lord confronted Joshua in front of Jericho with a drawn sword, he told him to take off his sandals, because he was on holy ground. The Commander revealed himself to Joshua as the Lord himself (Josh. 5:13–6:5). The Lord God had given that same warning when he called to Moses from the flaming bush. The Angel of the Lord spoke to Moses from the bush, but identified himself as I AM, the God of the fathers. This is a well-established pattern in the theophanies of the Old Testament. The Angel was, in fact, God the Son, the Lord. He is the Angel of God’s presence who spoke with Abraham (Gen. 18:1-2, 22, 33), who wrestled with Jacob (Genesis 32), who went before Israel (Ex. 23:20), whom Moses desired to know (Ex. 33:12-13), and who appeared to Manoah to announce the birth of Samson (Judges 13). The Angel speaks as Lord, bears the name of God, and reveals the glory of God (Ex. 23:21). Glimpsing his face in the early dawn, Jacob says he has seen the face of God (Gen. 32:30).

Anthony T. Hanson has argued that “the central affirmation [of the New Testament writers] is that the preexistent Jesus was present in much of Old Testament history, and that therefore it is not a question of tracing types in the Old Testament for New Testament events, but rather of tracing the activity of the same Jesus in the old and new dispensations.”1

To support his thesis, Hanson examines Pauline references, the book of Hebrews, Stephen’s speech in Acts, the Fourth Gospel, and the Catholic Epistles. He examines Paul’s account in 1 Corinthians 10:1-11 of the experiences of Israel under Moses. Hanson then appeals to the Greek Old Testament, the Septuagint, to note the use of kurios in Exodus 14. Kurios or ho kurios is used throughout the chapter, while theos (God) appears in verses 19 and 31. Hanson finds that such verses support Paul’s distinguishing God from Christ the Lord in this chapter. He holds that Paul read “Christ” wherever kurios appears in the Septuagint passage. Christ was the Lord who delivered Israel from Egypt. As the Angel of God in the pillar of cloud, the Lord guided and guarded the Israelites in the Exodus. He led them from ahead, then went behind them to remain there through the night. There he screened them from the pursuing Egyptians (Ex. 14:19):

And Israel saw the mighty hand, the things that kurios did to the Egyptians; and the people feared kurios, and they believed God and Moses his servant (Ex. 14:31, literal translation).

The cloud of which Paul speaks (1 Cor. 10:1) is the cloud of Exodus 14, but it is worthy of note that in the Septuagint of Exodus 13:21 it is God (theos) who “led them, in the day by the pillar of cloud, to show them the way, and in the night by a pillar of fire.”2 (In Hebrew, the name of God is “Yahweh” in this passage.)

Pressing the point that Paul thought “Christ” where he read kurios in the account of the Exodus, Hanson so interprets 1 Corinthians 10:9, “Nor let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed by serpents” (NKJV). Paul, he holds, simply identified the Lord who led Israel through the wilderness as the Lord Christ.

In 1 Corinthians 10:9 the reading Christon (with the weight of the Chester Beatty papyrus) may be preferred to kurion (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus). On either reading, Hanson appears to be correct in claiming that Paul is thinking of Christ as the Lord who delivered Israel from Egypt, leading them through his presence manifested in the Angel.

Hanson refers to an important comment by C. H. Dodd on Romans 10:12-13: “Wherever the term Kyrios, Lord, is applied to Jehovah in the OT, Paul seems to hold that it points forward to the coming revelation of God in the Lord Jesus Christ.”3 Hanson holds that this statement is “at once too sweeping and too tame.” Too sweeping, because Paul does not always refer kurios in the Greek Old Testament to Christ (e.g., Rom. 9:28; 11:3).4 Too tame, because in Paul’s view kurios does not simply point forward to Christ, but names Christ, present as Lord.

We may not be convinced of all the intricate exegetical reasoning that Hanson mounts to demonstrate his thesis. We may conclude that at times he stresses an identification of the Lord with Christ in Paul’s thinking that is too dependent on Septuagint use, or too superficial for Paul’s profound theology. Orthodox trinitarian theology took centuries seeking to unpack the distinction of persons and the unity of being (or “substance”) that are implied in the way Paul worshiped the one God of his fathers in the full revelation of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. It was easier for Paul to pass from the Father to the Son, or from the Son to the Spirit, than it is for scholars who have tried to formulate the mystery.

Where Hanson has traced out the strong recognition of Christ as the kurios in Paul or Hebrews, other studies could balance the picture by demonstrating how strongly Paul’s theology is centered on the Father, or by discovering Paul again as the theologian of the Holy Spirit. Yet Hanson rightly alerts us to a more New Testament understanding of the centrality of Christ in the Old Testament. Jesus Christ is one with the Lord. It was the Spirit of Christ who spoke through the prophets (1 Pet. 1:10-12). Interpreting a Septuagint passage that says to fear nothing but the name of the Lord of Hosts himself, Peter substitutes “the Christ” for “himself ” (1 Pet. 3:15; Isa. 8:12-13).

Hanson, however, uses the clear presence of Christ as Lord in the Old Testament to minimize typology. He takes it to be evident that we cannot have in any particular passage both the actual presence of Christ as Lord and also a type of Christ. This may seem evident, but it ignores the richness of Old Testament revelation. A text to the point is one that Hanson discusses without taking account of the symbolism at its heart—the passage where Moses strikes the Rock at God’s command (Ex. 17:1-7). There the Lord is present, standing on the rock, but the Rock itself becomes a symbol, associated with the name of God, and therefore with God the Rock in symbol (Deut. 32:4). Symbolically, the Rock represented the incarnate Christ, as Paul says (1 Cor. 10:4).

John’s Gospel emphasizes the full deity of Jesus Christ as the Logos, the Word who is not only with God but is God (John 1:1). Jesus says, “Before Abraham was, I AM” (John 8:58, NKJV). John, therefore, speaks of the glory that Isaiah saw in his vision of the Lord enthroned in the temple as the glory of Christ: “Isaiah said this because he saw Jesus’ glory and spoke about him” (John 12:41, NIV).

Paul affirms the deity of Christ when he writes, “For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form” (Col. 2:9, NIV). The Son of God possesses all the attributes of God. He is “a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable, in his being wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth” (Westminster Shorter Catechism, question 4). The Second Person of the Trinity became man to be one with his creatures.

Therefore, the Lordship of Christ does not begin with his resurrection glory and ascended rule. The divine Lordship is his eternally. For that reason we do not understand the Lordship of Christ first in terms of the covenant. Rather, we understand the covenant as established by the Lord. Traditional Reformed theology has spoken of the “Covenant of Redemption.” This term has been used for the covenant between the Father and the Son that established God’s plan of redemption. The Father willed to send the Son into the world to redeem those given by the Father to the Son (John 17). The Son willed to come into the world and to complete the work of salvation. Jesus therefore speaks of coming from the Father and returning to the Father (John 3:13).

The promise of God’s covenant is the goal of Old Testament history. It is grounded in his sure oath that the Son of God would become man to save his people from their sins. John Murray, in his conversations with me, has well pointed out that John 3:16 speaks of the giving of the divine Son, since that giving included the sending of the Son into the world (John 17:3-4). Paul rejoices in the order of God’s eternal plan (Rom. 11:33-36). God’s covenant promise to Abraham required his own coming in the person of his Son.

The history of redemption is structured by God’s covenant promise and moves forward in the “seasons” of God’s saving work. After the resurrection, the disciples asked Jesus, “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?” (Acts 1:6, NIV). Jesus replied, “It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority” (v. 7, NIV).

The author of Hebrews also speaks of the times in the history of God’s revelation. These seasons or epochs are marked by major events in the unfolding of God’s plan. The popular Scofield Reference Bible speaks of the periods of the history of redemption as dispensations. According to the 1917 edition of the Scofield Bible, the period concerned with Israel lasted from the call of Abraham to the beginning of the church in Acts 2. Dispensationalism teaches that God offers different means of salvation in the different periods. Salvation by works was the way of salvation in the period of Israel, and will be again in the millennium. The “church age” was an unforeseen interruption in the history of salvation. The four Gospels therefore are for Israel, not the church. No Old Testament prophecies predicted it. The prophetic clock stopped.

On this view, the Lord’s Prayer is not given to the church, but to Israel. The Scofield note explains that “forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors” cannot be a prayer given to the church, for the petition rests “on legal ground.” Israel asks for forgiveness on the ground of the good work of forgiving. Scofield dispensational theology was for many years the standard evangelical theology in many churches and Bible schools. At present, leading dispensational theologians have come to realize that the Old Testament, as well as the New, teaches salvation by grace. Few scholars now follow this works/grace division between the Old Testament and the New.

On the other hand, the spread of the redemptive-historical understanding of the Scriptures in Reformed circles has brought fresh emphasis on the importance of the periods of that history. We may rejoice that the division between Reformed and dispensational theologians has been diminishing as both turn to the Scriptures.5 Before Geerhardus Vos at Princeton Theological Seminary brought into American Calvinism the history of redemption and of revelation, classical Reformed theology used separate proof-texts to establish biblical doctrines. John Murray at Westminster Seminary in Philadelphia, however, had studied under Vos at Princeton. Murray taught a course in biblical theology. He proceeded through the periods of the history of redemption: creation to fall; fall to flood; flood to the call of Abraham; Abraham to Moses; Moses to Christ. Murray summarized the theology of each period and showed how each prepared for and pointed toward the full range of systematic theology in the New Testament.

Recent Bible commentaries, for example, the Word series,6 use the insights of biblical theology in their expositions. Some of these commentaries are too concessive to critical theories and the documentary hypotheses, but they provide exhaustive bibliography and condensed scholarship for biblical-theological understanding of texts.

The epochs of the history of redemption show the Lordship of the Second Person of the Trinity. It is the coming of the Lord that is the climax of the epochs of redemption. The Lord comes to possess his people. In covenantal blessing he possesses them that they may possess him. “I will walk among you and be your God, and you will be my people” (Lev. 26:12, NIV). The promise of his coming mounts like a sea-wave in Old Testament history. The Lord always takes the initiative in redemption. From the sin of Adam in the garden through the triumph of evil in the generation of the deluge, the promise remains, and is marked by the sign of the rainbow. The Lord called Noah, and swore his faithfulness to Abraham. He revealed himself to Jacob at Bethel, and came down the stairway from heaven to stand over Jacob and repeat the promise. He called Moses, and demanded that Pharaoh let his people go that they might serve him in worship. He is Lord. He delivers his people that they may be his servants. Moses declared to them the Lord’s blessing if they remained faithful to him, but his curse if they rebelled. After Joshua led them into the land God had given them, the people turned aside and worshiped the Baal of the Canaanites. The Lord sent invaders in judgment but repeatedly delivered his people from those invaders, until at last he abandoned them to their idolatry. The period of the judges pointed toward Israel’s need for a king. Samuel anointed Saul, then David, as king of Israel. David subdued the surrounding nations, and prepared for the building of the temple where the Lord would dwell in the midst of his people.

When Solomon dedicated the temple, he confessed that God had kept all his promises to Moses. Israel had received the peace and prosperity the Lord had promised them in the land (1 Kings 8:56). The blessings had been given. Half of the tribes recited them on Mount Gerizim. But then came the curses that had been recited on Mount Ebal (see Deut. 11:29).

CHRIST THE SERVANT OF THE COVENANT

Christ who is the Lord is also the Servant of the Lord. He is the true vine, the true Son, the true Israel. Where a righteous servant of the Lord appears in Old Testament history, it is the true Servant who is prefigured. God makes his covenant, claiming his people as his, and giving them a claim on him. “Lord” and “Servant” express that relation. The Lord’s demand to Pharaoh was, “Let my people go, that they may serve me” (Ex. 10:3, ESV). Serving the Lord means worship and obedience. Jesus Christ consummates the covenant relation from both sides.

The Old Testament promises the coming of the Lord and also the coming of the Servant of the Lord. When the Lord condemns the failure of Israel’s shepherds to care for the sheep, he declares that he himself will come to shepherd them (Ezek. 34:11-16). He also says that he will set up one shepherd, his servant David, over them to feed them: “I the LORD will be their God, and my servant David will be prince among them” (Ezek. 34:24, NIV).7

Old Testament history is prophetic history, describing covenant blessings, the covenant curse, and the wonder of God’s great salvation to come in the latter days. For the “day of the LORD” to come, for God’s kingdom to come, the covenant must be fulfilled from both sides. Hanson seeks to shrink typology in the New Testament by his interpretation of the terms that express it. He concludes that it was only beginning to infect the writers of the New Testament. Where it seems to have arrived, as in the sign of Jonah in Matthew’s account (Matt. 12:38-41), he is ready to suggest that it originated in the early church’s study of the Old Testament. He even pleads with respect to Jesus’ reference to the lifting up of the serpent in the wilderness (John 3:14-15), that since no word for “type” is used, “we are left to draw the conclusion ourselves.”8

It is true that the New Testament does not often speak of the way it interprets the Old, and we are often left to draw our own conclusions. But the grand structure is clear. What Jesus does as the Servant of the Lord cannot be described as a mere “‘parallel situation’ phenomenon,” a term Hanson uses to explain away the typical reference.9 He is right in insisting that the activity of the Lord himself in the Old Testament is not merely a type of his activity as Lord in the New Testament. However, the actions and roles of Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Aaron, Joshua, David, and the rest are not to be set alongside the person and work of Jesus Christ as less effective performances of the same kind of service. Leonhard Goppelt, in his article “typos” in the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, and in his book entitled Typos, has shown the distinctiveness of Paul’s typology in Romans 5. It is found in Paul’s eschatological focus. The coming of the Messiah does not take us back to a golden age of the past, restoring its glories. Rather, the coming of Christ brings the fulfillment, the realization of what was anticipated by God’s servants, the saviors, prophets, kings, priests, and judges of the Old Covenant. Countering other views, Goppelt says, “Instead, the typological idea of the consummation of God’s redemptive plan appears to be the heart of the Old Testament eschatology.” He acknowledges the theme of restoration, but insists that “the typological idea of consummation of salvation is the core; the concept of restoration provides the appropriate clothing”10 (see Sidney Greidanus, Sola Scriptura, The Modern Preacher and the Ancient Text, and Preaching Christ from the Old Testament).11

SYMBOLISM AND TYPOLOGY

The history of the covenant that leads to Christ also anticipates Christ in its symbolism. Symbolism has a bad name in current Reformed exegesis. It is well known that Origen indulged in fantastic allegorizing to extract profitable spiritual lessons from what appeared to be unedifying Old Testament stories.12 In this he was following the pattern of Stoic and Platonic philosophers who had allegorized Greek mythology. Philo used the same method in order to commend the Old Testament to cultured Hellenists. The Gnostics went to much greater excess as they used allegorizing to draw out secret doctrines that were not only absent from Scripture but contradicted it.

But, as Francis Foulkes points out, allegorizing as a method differs from typology, since it characteristically exegetes words rather than texts.13 By assigning arbitrary meanings to words, the allegorist can avoid or subvert the meaning of the text.

Biblical hermeneutics, on the other hand, must take account of the text of Scripture, including the symbolism found in it. The Lord made us in his image, and the principle of analogy is fundamental in God’s creation and revelation. Analogy always combines identity and difference. Interpretation may so press the identity as to reduce or remove the difference. This is the case in the Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation: the Host is identified with the physical body of Christ. For the same reason, many were offended by Christ’s teaching after his feeding of the five thousand. “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” they asked ( John 6:52, NIV). For these literal interpreters, Jesus was advocating cannibalism.

On the other hand, the aspect of identity cannot be ignored. That is the point of the comparison. Sometimes the text itself will assign meaning to a word, a fact that has been exploited by arbitrary allegorizing. When the Lord shows Jeremiah the rod of an almond tree to symbolize the sure fulfillment of his Word (1:11-12), the point is the word “almond.” It means “watcher” ( the almond is the “watcher” tree, heralding the approach of spring). God will watch over his Word to fulfill it. So, too, the wonder of our addressing God as Father flows from the element of identity in the figure of Fatherhood.

Language itself is grounded in symbolism, and the human ability to employ symbols in contrast to animal response to signals remains the great distinction between human language and communication among animals.14 In language we constantly use metaphors. We speak not only of a brave man being like a lion (a simile), but we call him a lion (a metaphor). Some metaphors have become “master metaphors” organizing a whole body of thought and practice. The term “body” has been used as a master sacramental metaphor in Roman Catholic ecclesiology. At the Second Vatican Council, the description of the church as the people of God as well as the body of Christ marked a departure from the exclusive use of the body metaphor. We may speak of discursive and presentational symbols.15 Discursive symbols are linguistic. While they bring together incompatible spheres of thought, and carry suggestion beyond precise meaning, they do, nevertheless, communicate shared meaning which may be expressed in propositional form. Presentational symbolism, on the other hand, is the symbolism of art and of music: symbolism that is intuitive rather than discursive, having an emotional power rather than communicating rational meaning.

While the symbols of Scripture do evoke emotional response, they are also filled with discursive meaning. The vision of Ezekiel in the valley of dry bones is a compelling image. We even hear the rattling of the bones as they come together at the Word of the Lord. But the meaning of the vision is perfectly clear: the Lord has power to deliver his people from exile and fill them with new spiritual life. In the book of Revelation the images are discursive. They continue Old Testament images. The vision of Christ at the beginning of the book is not a representation of some archetypal dream image but a mosaic of Old Testament allusions that have meaning in revealing the glory of Christ.

While it must be granted that it is difficult to separate absolutely between meaning and significance, E. D. Hirsch, Jr., has well advocated the need for distinction.16 Certainly, as interpreters of the Word of God, we must discover the meaning of the text and show its significance for our hearers. The Word of God has an established meaning, established by the primary Author as it is expressed through the inspiration of the Spirit. Further, the Spirit also interprets the Word to our understanding. In interpreting the symbolism of the Bible, we claim the doctrine of the perspicuity of Scripture. There are difficult passages; we may be uncertain or mistaken about the meaning of a passage, but Scripture is God’s revelation, and workmen in the Word must seek his illuminating blessing.

Ceremonial Symbolism

Ceremonial symbolism in the Old Testament uses the fundamental distinction between the clean and the unclean. The comparison of sin to filth is linked with the need for cleanness to approach holy things or the holy Lord. The prevailing power of sin is shown in the fact that the unclean pollutes the clean, never the other way round. Haggai’s message focuses on this feature (Hag. 2:10-14). In fulfillment, the prevailing power of Christ reverses the principle. When Jesus touches a leper, Jesus is not defiled, but the leper is cleansed and can claim his new status through the priest and sacrifice. This same reversal appears when Paul teaches that those converted to Christianity are not required to separate from their unbelieving spouses, as was necessary in the Old Testament. (Think of the reform among the returned Jews under Nehemiah, when those who had taken Gentile wives were required to divorce them.) The believer is to seek the conversion of the unbeliever, but in the meantime, the marital union is not to be thought of as making the Christian unclean. To the contrary, the unbeliever is cleansed insofar as that union is concerned, for the children who are the fruit of the union are holy (1 Cor. 7:14).

The whole sacrificial system, linked as it is with the dwelling of God in the temple among his people, is sacramentally symbolic, for it symbolizes the participation of the offerer in the benefit of the offering. The author of Hebrews describes at length the meaning of ceremonial symbolism and the building of the tabernacle “like in pattern to the true.”

Prophetic symbolism must also be recognized in the Old Testament. We think of the relations between Hosea and Gomer; Jeremiah’s buying a field in Anathoth (Jer. 32:9); Ezekiel’s digging through the wall of his house to carry out his belongings as though fleeing into exile (Ezek. 12:5).

“Official” Symbolism

Historical Symbolism

The Old Testament also discerns the symbolic aspect of historical events, especially as these reveal God’s ongoing work of redemption. God passes between the divided carcasses to take an oath to his covenant with Abraham; Abraham’s actions contribute to the symbolism (Genesis 15).

Historical symbolism appears in Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac. On the one hand, it is clear that God’s command to sacrifice Isaac was given to test Abraham. The passage begins with that statement of God’s purpose (Gen. 22:1). Near the end of the passage, God says that he will bless Abraham because he has not withheld his only son (vv. 16-17). It has been argued, therefore, that to imagine any symbolism in the sacrifice of Isaac is importing into the text a meaning that is not to be found. Yet we must not skip over the name that is given to the event in the text. Abraham called the name of the place Jehovah Jireh—“the Lord will provide.” An explanation is given: “As it is said to this day, In the Mount of the LORD it shall be provided” (v. 14, NKJV). The verb jireh is a form of a common verb for “see.” The meaning “provide” or “see to it” is derived from the context in verse 8, where God’s “seeing” the lamb is understood as providing it. More is involved here than simply the testing of Abraham’s faith. The issue is the meaning of the sacrifice of Isaac. He, not Ishmael, is the seed of the promise. It is impossible that Isaac should be destroyed: “in Isaac your seed shall be called” (Gen. 21:12, NKJV). It is through the promised seed that redemption must come. The author of Hebrews takes seriously Abraham’s word to the servants promising that we will return (Gen. 22:5). He interprets that to mean that Abraham was expecting to receive his son, if need be, by a resurrection from the dead (Heb. 11:17-18). The author adds that Abraham did, indeed, in a figure (en parabol.ƒ°i) so receive him.

The place to which God directed Abraham is significant. The first use of the verb “to see” in Genesis 22 occurs in verse 4: “On the third day Abraham looked up and saw the place in the distance” (NIV). Abraham sees the ram caught in the thicket on the mount (v. 13). The place is again emphasized in the saying, “In the Mount of the LORD it will be seen,” or “he will be seen.”

Quite evidently there is significance in both the place and the seeing. Joining that to the significance of Isaac, we perceive that the Lord sees, or provides, a sacrifice as a substitute for Abraham’s beloved son, at a place, and by a sacrifice, that are significant. Need we wonder that Paul alludes to this passage when he says, “He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all—how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things?” (Rom. 8:32, NIV).