How to Study the Bible: Study 2

Study Approach #2: “Types and Antitypes”

1 Corinthians 10:11 Now these things happened unto them by way of example; and they were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages are come.

In our previous article on “How to Study the Bible”, we examined the importance of topical study when trying to determine meaning from the Bible. We examined how tools such as a concordance can help to understand the meaning behind words used in the Bible. Even more so, we saw how the use of a concordance can help with obtaining a better grasp of the author’s meaning, by examining the original Hebrew (for Old Testament words) and Greek (for New Testament words), and seeing the definitions of these words in their native languages; as well as being able to see other uses of the same word in different parts of the Bible. By doing so, this can help the student obtain a frame of reference for words, and the consistency of their usage in other contexts.

More recently, in one of the studies of God’s plan, a reference was made to the Passover. As we examined in the post, the Passover was a remembrance that God commanded the descendants of Israel to keep yearly, to mark the occasion that He delivered them from the last and most terrible of the plagues set upon Egypt. God delivered the descendants of Israel from the plague, which was the death of all first born children, by instructing them to slay a lamb in a particular way and spread some of its blood over their doorposts. This marked the household as protected by God, and thus the inhabitants were “passed over” by death during the plague. God commanded the descendants of Israel to keep this “Passover” every year. In that study we also discussed how many years later, Jesus would be referred to as the Passover, or the Passover lamb. Some occurrences of this in the New Testament are:

1 Corinthians 5:7 Purge out the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, even as ye are unleavened. For our passover also hath been sacrificed, [even] Christ:

John 1:29 On the morrow he seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold, the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world!

Even a casual reader of the Bible is no doubt familiar with the concept that some of the content of the Bible is symbolic. Readers, or students, throughout the centuries, particularly in the centuries after Jesus’s death, have looked through the various accounts of the Old Testament, and found that some of the situations and events and people seem to form pictures of situations, events and people in the New Testament. In some cases, such as in the case of the Passover, these pictures stand out from others in several key ways. First, some pictures seem to have more detail to them than others; detail that can be tracked down and seen in the New Testament. Second, some pictures in the Old Testament, seem to be delivered by God, as in the case of the Passover. Remember that God Himself directed the Israelites, in Exodus chapter 12, on the exact specifications of the Passover lamb, and further that the Passover should be kept by the Israelite’s not just on that one occasion to gain them deliverance from the plague that was soon to be spread across the land they lived in, but on a yearly basis. Third, some pictures have their fulfillment directly referenced by either Jesus or the apostles, inspired by the Holy Spirit, in the New Testament. Pictures that share these characteristics are sometimes referred to as types. The fulfillment of these pictures, conversely, are sometimes referred to as antitypes. In the Passover type, therefore, the lamb sacrificed by the Israelites to allow death to “pass them over” is the type; Jesus, many years later, is the antitype, and is thus sometimes referred to by Bible Students as “the anti-typical lamb”.

The term “type”, referring to a kind of picture, isn’t directly referred to in the actual scriptures; at least, according to Strong’s Concordance. However, the concept behind the type/antitype relationship, and events, people or things in the Bible being used as pictures that have a later fulfillment, is nevertheless well-established. Easton’s Bible Dictionary provides the following definition of “type”, as well as some examples where this same concept of, people, events or things occurring earlier as a “picture” of future events or concepts, elsewhere in the scriptures:

Type occurs only once in Scripture (1 Cor. 10:11, A.V. marg.). The Greek word _tupos_ is rendered “print” (John 20:25), “figure” (Acts 7:43; Rom. 5:14), “fashion” (Acts 7:44), “manner” (Acts 23:25), “form” (Rom. 6:17), “example” or “ensample” (1 Cor. 10:6, 11; Phil. 3:17; 1 Thess. 1:7; 2 Thess. 3:9; 1 Tim. 4:12). It properly means a “model” or “pattern” or “mould” into which clay or wax was pressed, that it might take the figure or exact shape of the mould. The word “type” is generally used to denote a resemblance between something present and something future, which is called the “antitype.” – Easton’s Bible Dictionary

The difference, if there is one, between a picture and a type within the Bible isn’t always clear, even to the careful student. In an attempt to provide some distinction between the terms, Pastor Charles Russell offered these thoughts, when questioned about this exact topic:

QUESTION.–What is the difference between the words “type,” “figure,” and “picture”? Answer.–There is a very strong relationship between these words. To some people they would all mean the same; to others there would be a slight difference of meaning. A type is a figure, and is also a picture, designed to bring out certain important matters and details as Divinely appointed. A figure is a much less exact representation or statement of matters than a type. Abraham received Isaac from the dead in a figure (Hebrews 11:17-19); that is, there is a pictorial illustration connected with the matter, but it is not so sharp as in a type. A parable is a figure; it is a word-picture, but not a type. It has not the exactness of a type. We would use the words parable and picture in the same way; for we see no difference. A type is an exact pattern of its antitype, just as a printer’s type corresponds to the matter printed therefrom. Isaac was a type of Christ; Rebecca, his wife, a type of the Bride of Christ; Ishmael, Abraham’s son by Sarah’s bondmaid, was a type of the nation of Israel, developed under the Law Covenant, which was typified by Hagar, the bondwoman.

A picture, a figure or a parable would have weight and value according to the character of the person who made the picture or the parable, and in proportion as it had intrinsic merit. A type would be beyond all this, in that it is very clearly defined and implies Divine foreknowledge and arrangement. God gives types. Men may give pictures, figures or parables. – R5966

Given these two examinations of the nature of a type versus a picture or a parable or a symbol it may be reasonable to conclude that a type can be defined people, events or things in the Bible, mainly in the Old Testament, that, later in the Bible, primarily in the New Testament, ends up having parallel or related people, events or things later in the Bible, primarily in the New Testament. Using this approach to the concept, the event that happens first, in the Old Testament usually, is that a type, and its parallel, that happens later, usually in the New Testament, is the antitype. This concept, that an event that could possibly be considered a type should also be seen to have a corresponding antitype, can be helpful in distinguishing types from other valid structures used in the Bible, such as pictures, symbols or parables.

Before examining some people, concepts or things in the Bible that most Bible Students agree upon as being actual types and antitypes, one further thought on a helpful strategy for identifying types and antitypes is that as a rule of thumb, an antitype will usually be far grander in scope and glory than its corresponding type. At the beginning of this study, we examined the Passover, specifically the Passover lamb. Earlier, we cited several scriptures in the New Testament that supported this concept. During the time of the final plague on Egypt in Exodus chapter 12, the sacrifice of the Passover lamb, and the sprinkling of its blood on the door posts of the houses of the Israelites, saved many of the people from the certain death that would claim so many others that night. Although that in itself is a miraculous cause for rejoicing, Jesus’s death, as the antitypical lamb, has a much more profound and far-reaching meaning. Through the sacrifice of his perfect human life, Jesus was able to provide a corresponding ransom price for mankind, as simply and beautifully stated in the often quoted scripture:

1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, one mediator also between God and men, [himself] man, Christ Jesus,

1 Timothy 2:6 who gave himself a ransom for all; the testimony [to be borne] in its own times;

In addition to the Passover lamb, another example, generally agreed on by Bible Students, of a type/antitype relationship is Abraham and his family. Abraham’s life is chronicled in the early chapters of Genesis. He is an important character in the Bible, in that his great faith in God earned him a special relationship with God, and was one of the things that led God to deliver a great promise to Abraham. Bible Students often break down Abraham’s family into the following types and anti-types:

Abraham (type) – God (antitype)
Sarah, Abraham’s wife (type) – the New Covenant (antitype)
Isaac, Abraham and Sarah’s son (type) – Christ (antitype)
Rebekah, Isaac’s wife (type)– the church (antitype)
Hagar, Sarah’s handmaiden (type) – the Law Covenant (antitype)
Ishmael, Abraham and Hagar’s son (type) – the nation of Israel (antitype)

In Genesis chapter 12, one of the earliest chapters of the entire Bible, we see God giving a command to Abram (whom would later be renamed “Abraham”), and a corresponding promise, if Abram obeyed the command:

Genesis 12:1 Now Jehovah said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, unto the land that I will show thee:

Genesis 12:2 and I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make they name great; and be thou a blessing;

Although it was no doubt not always easy, Abram/Abraham did indeed maintain his faithfulness to God, and as a result, God repeated His promise to Abram/Abraham several times throughout the following years. One example is from Genesis chapter 22:

Genesis 22:18 And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed. Because thou hast obeyed my voice.

The term “seed” used here is Strong’s Hebrew word 2233. According to Strong’s, it carries the thought of posterity; or in other words, descendants. When considering the thought of Abraham’s descendants, it is logical to consider Abraham’s wife. Abraham did have a wife who he loved dearly. Her name was Sarai, and she, like Abraham, would later have her name changed as well. Sarai’s name would become Sarah (Genesis 17:15). Both Abraham and Sarah no doubt understood the meaning behind God’s promise, and had an expectation that the fulfillment of the promise would come from one of their children. However, as we read in Genesis chapter 16, Abram and Sarai continued to have no children, a concept that troubled Sarai, perhaps on many levels.

In Genesis chapter 16:1-4, we see that Sarai had a handmaid named Hagar, whom she convinced Abram to take as an additional wife, for the purpose of having a a child. Abram complied, and Abram and Hagar produced a son, who was named Ishmael.

Many years again passed and Abraham and Sarah grew old together. Genesis chapter 18 tells of a day when Abraham was at least 90 years old. On this day, a messenger from God, an angel taking human form, visited both Abraham and Sarah. Perhaps the thought of Abraham’s descendant and God’s promise was settled in Sarah’s mind by this time; she, like her husband, was elderly and considered herself beyond the point in life of being able to have children:

Genesis 18:11 Now Abraham and Sarah were old, [and] well stricken in age; it had ceased to be with Sarah after the manner of women.

Nevertheless, the angel was about to deliver a profound lesson to not only Abraham and Sarah, but to all mankind, even to us in today’s world, that God’s plan will execute exactly as He intends, and exactly on His timetable, despite how any of us may think otherwise. The angel told Sarah that she would have a child, despite her age:

Genesis 18:10 And he said, I will certainly return unto thee when the season cometh round; and, lo, Sarah thy wife shall have a son. And Sarah heard in the tent door, which was behind him.

True to God’s promise, Abraham and Sarah did in fact have a son, who was in turn names Isaac:

Genesis 21:1 And Jehovah visited Sarah as he had said, and Jehovah did unto Sarah as he had spoken.

Genesis 21:2 And Sarah conceived, and bare Abraham a son in his old age, at the set time of which God had spoken to him.

Genesis 21:3 And Abraham called the name of his son that was born unto him, whom Sarah bare to him, Isaac.

Abraham now found himself with two sons; his first son, Ishmael, who was born with Hagar, Sarah’s handmaiden and a “bondswoman” (Genesis 21:10), and Isaac, whom God had specifically promised, born later, with Sarah, his beloved wife. God removed any doubt as to whom his promise was intended to be fulfilled by in Genesis 21:12:

Genesis 21:12 And God said unto Abraham, Let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of thy handmaid. In all that Sarah saith unto thee, hearken unto her voice. For in Isaac shall thy seed be called.

However, notice that, in the context of this verse, Abraham is “grieved”, because he did love Ishmael, his first son, as well. It is extremely noteworthy that God also remembers Ishmael in the very next verse:

Genesis 21:13 And also of the son of the handmaid will I make a nation, because he is thy seed.

In this brief examination of Genesis, we have seen God’s promise, Abraham and Sarah, and now Isaac. However, for the promise to be fulfilled, Abraham’s line needed to continue through Isaac, the son noted by God. In Genesis chapter 24, we see Abraham, now very old and without his beloved Sarah, who had passed away some time earlier. Although he was now old and “stricken with age”, Abraham still considered it his responsibility to find a bride for his son. Furthermore, God had special qualifications for this bride. The bride was to come from the land that Abraham originated from, prior to his move as instructed by God. Genesis chapter 25 sees Abraham instructing his faithful servant to go back to this land, and find a woman who would be willing to return and become Isaac’s bride:

Genesis 24:7 Jehovah, the God of heaven, who took me from my father’s house, and from the land of my nativity, and who spake unto me, and who sware unto me, saying, Unto thy seed will I give this land. He will send his angel before thee, and thou shalt take a wife for my son from thence.

Abraham’s servant (who was most likely named Eliezer, as referred to in Genesis 15:2), then left and traveled back to this land, which the Bible refers to as Nahor, a city in Mesopotamia (Genesis 24:10). Once arriving at his destination, Abraham’s servant almost immediately encountered a young woman named Rebekah, who agreed to return with Abraham’s servant and become a bride to Isaac.

The above history spans a full twelve books of the Bible, from Genesis 12 to Genesis 24, and to fully consider the types involved here, as well as the antitypes, requires a great deal of study and consideration. As one of the major types of the Bible, entire studies, perhaps even entire books, could be written about any number of facets of these types. Let us consider a few, abbreviated characteristics of these types, as well as there potential antitypical application in the New Testament.

Starting with Abraham, the Genesis account describes God’s promise being made to Abraham, and that the promise would be through him and his descendants. From this, it may be appropriate to consider Abraham as the beginning point of the implementation of God’s promise. If there was no Abraham, it seems obvious that there would be no descendants of Abraham. As such, it may be appropriate to consider Abraham to be a type of God in this grander type of God’s promise. As further consideration, later in Genesis, Abraham searches for a wife for his son. He searches for a bride for his son, one who would meet very specific qualifications, and eventually finds one. This seems to correspond to the search for the true Church class, who seek to come to God and serve Him by believing in the sacrifice and ransom price paid on our behalves by Jesus; which brings us to the final point for considering Abraham as a type of God in this scenario. Although different branches of Christianity perceive the relationship between God and His son differently, Bible Students believe that the Bible teaches that this relationship is, in actuality, quite simple. John chapter 1 describes a being called the Word (or Logos in the Greek translation). John chapter one describes the Logos, and how he took the form of a human, who became known as Jesus. The Logos is described as created by God; in fact, the only creation directly created by God. In this sense, the Logos was in a very real sense God’s “only begotten son”; the only creation directly created by God. All else was created by God through the Logos (John 1:3). This relationship is simply affirmed by God Himself, as recorded in the book of Matthew:

Matthew 3:17 and lo, a voice out of the heavens, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

Just as God allowed His only son to take on human form to advance His plan and fulfill His promise, so it seems feasible to consider Abraham, who is the father of Isaac (who, in the type, fulfills the role in God’s promise of “Abraham’s seed/descendant), to be a type of God.

Turning attention to Abraham’s two wives, Sarah and Hagar, Paul directly refers to “the bondmaid” (Hagar) and “the freewoman” (Sarah) in Galatians chapter 4. In this chapter, Paul is laying out a contrast to those who follow God under the Law, given to the Israelites in the Old Testament, and those who follow God upon believing that Jesus fulfilled the Law, and that following God now relied on the belief that Jesus’s sacrifice freed followers from the price of following a law they could not keep perfectly:

Galatians 4:22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, one by the handmaid, and one by the freewoman.

Galatians 4:23 Howbeit the [son] by the handmaid is born after the flesh; but the [son] by the freewoman [is born] through promise.

Galatians 4:24 Which things contain an allegory: for these [women] are two covenants; one from mount Sinai, bearing children unto bondage, which is Hagar.

Galatians 4:25 Now this Hagar is mount Sinai in Arabia and answereth to the Jerusalem that now is: for she is in bondage with her children.

Galatians 4:26 But the Jerusalem that is above is free, which is our mother.

Galatians 4:27 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; Break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: For more are the children of the desolate than of her that hath the husband.

Galatians 4:28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise.

In these verses, Paul lays out an explanation of both type and antitype in this chapter, and calls attention to the fact (in verse 24), that Hagar, Sarah and the circumstances surrounding have a antitypical application to much wider concepts. Ishmael, the son of Hagar, represents the nation of Israel, who came to know God (whose type is Abraham) through the Law given to them in Exodus, Leviticus and Deuteronomy. This relationship is sometimes referred to as the “Law Covenant”, since God’s promises of life to the Israelites were dependent on them keeping this law perfectly (see Leviticus 18:4,5). This Law Covenant was in place centuries before the birth of Jesus, just as Ishmael was born before Isaac. In contrast, Isaac represents the covenant given to the followers of God who believe that Jesus provided them with a means to have a relationship with God would now be the inheritors of God’s promise (See John 3:15-17 and Galatians 5:1-6).

Before leaving the examination of these specific types and their antitypes, let us consider the final two types proposed earlier; namely, Isaac as a type of Christ, and Rebekah as a type of the Church. After fulfilling the Law with the sacrifice of his perfect human life, and being elevated by the Heavenly Father to a new position of glory, Christ formed the cornerstone of a new class; a new hope for the fulfillment of God’s promise to mankind. Isaac was the son of Abraham and Sarah; Sarah, as we discussed earlier, representing the New Covenant; one that required faith over rote adherence to the Law. Rebekah, the searched for bride, represents a class of people searched for, to join Isaac in marriage.

Paul examines the concept of a husband and wife, as applicable to Christ and the true church, in the book of Ephesians:

Ephesians 5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, and Christ also is the head of the church, [being] himself the saviour of the body.

Ephesians 5:24 But as the church is subject to Christ, so [let] the wives also [be] to their husbands in everything.

Ephesians 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself up for it;

Isaac, being the son of Abraham and daughter of Sarah, and the husband in the picture from Genesis we have been examining, seems to fit as a type of Christ. Rebekah, who left everything to become Isaac’s bride, seems to fit as a type of the true church, who, upon understanding the nature of the calling they have been privileged to hear, leave everything to go out from their own land and join in the great honor they are called to.

As can be seen, a consideration of types and their corresponding antitypes can add great depth and meaning to Bible study. The types and antitypes of Abraham and his family, as we have touched on in this study, are worthy of much more in-depth consideration than a single study allows. We would like to end this topic of types and antitypes with a few words of, perhaps caution. First, not every scholar interprets types and antitypes the same way. The same scriptures can sometimes lead even the most conscientious of students to different conclusions. However, any earnest study of God’s word, and the desire to truly understand His plan, increase our faith, and grow in our love and ability to serve Him, will doubtlessly be pleasing to Him, especially when we do so with others who share similar intentions. Our Lord was quite clear on this, in one of the precious promises he made to his followers:

Matthew 18:20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

Second, it is important to realize that not everything in the Bible is a type or antitype. Types and antitypes like the ones we examined in this study are perhaps more “solid” to consider, as many of the relationships between the types and antitypes were commented on directly by the Apostles, as cited in this study. The Apostles, having the direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and many of whom knew our Lord directly, and were given to direct revelations that we do not share, should be considered a sound and firm source. Although it is perhaps, at times faith strengthening, and perhaps even pleasing to the way our human reasoning works, to see pictures and allegories of concepts, either in scripture or in the world around us, we should always be careful to temper this desire with the need to “prove all things”, and not allow ourselves to become too wrapped up with our own interpretations of scriptures whose potential applications as types/antitypes, or perhaps just pictures, seems to lack firm scriptural basis. As always, one of the best aids to any Bible study is the prayer for continual guidance in our thoughts and heart intentions, and that any conclusions or behaviors we develop may please our Heavenly Father, from whom they originate.

How to Study the Bible: Study 2

Posts in the “How to Study” Series

Further Readings and References

Leave a comment Cancel reply

Posts in the “How to Study” Series

Further Readings and References

Share this:

Related

Leave a comment Cancel reply