38-CHAPTER XXXII "SPIRITUALIZATION IS THE METHOD OF NEW TESTAMENT INTERPRETATION OF OLD TESTAMENT...

CHAPTER XXXII "SPIRITUALIZATION IS THE METHOD OF NEW TESTAMENT INTERPRETATION OF OLD TESTAMENT KINGDOM PROPHECY"

"It is quite plain that the Old Testament writers have often employed pictorial language. The New Testament writers (though by no means always) have applied their quotations from Old Testament prophecies not only literally to the last times and the future but spiritually and morally to the present. To a wide extent ’spiritualizing’ is the New Testament method of exposition. Does it not follow from this that the Old Testament prophecies of the kingdom are not usually to be understood literally but symbolically and typically; so that a literal fulfillment in a possibly still coming kingdom of God at the end was never meant and therefore is not to be expected?"

It is quite evident that the Old Testament prophets often employ figurative language, and with the highest effect apply it in manifold forms—types, metaphors, allegories. Quite often their message rises indeed to the highest forms of human speech. Prophecy and poetry unite and form magnificant works of art, such as belong to the highest pinnacles of all human literature (especially Isaiah.) At the background of all figurative speech stands the revelation of God in Nature. As an outflow of the Divine will Nature is the material expression of the thoughts of the Creator. The spiritual laws of the Eternal are reflected in the world of Nature. There is so fundamental a parallelism between the infinite and the finite, the ideal and the actual, that the visible becomes direct embodiment of the invisible, a mentally comprehensible figure of what is beyond our comprehension. Therefore human language in general constantly sets the material and the spiritual side by side and interweaves them. Thus speech humanizes the material and speaks of a "laughing" sun and "cheerful" brook; and conversely it sometimes applies material epithets to human attributes, and speaks of a "cold" unkindness, a "sunny" disposition, or a "radiant" joy. Similarly Isaiah carries the bodily into the spiritual and speaks of a "festering" wound of sin (Isaiah 1:6), as conversely he brings the natural into the human and speaks of Israel as " budding " and " blooming " (27:6 ). The psalmists and other prophets so speak. At times their language ascends to the use of living personification and then they shape these personifications according to certain chief human features and activities. Thus they speak of jubilant mountains (Isaiah 49:13), exulting fields and singing trees (Psalms 96:12), of deserts rejoicing and singing (Isaiah 35:1), indeed of the trees of the field clapping their hands (Isaiah 55:12). Hosea declares that corn, new wine, and oil will "hear" the prayers of men asking them for food (Hosea 2:22). It is poetical language when Joel declares that the mountains will run with new wine and flow with milk (Joel 3:18).

(b) To the essence of the prophetic style of presentation belongs further a frequent application of types. This is the ground on which in not a few places the New Testament spiritualizes the Old Testament kingdom prophecies and applies them to the present period of the church. Only so can certain arrangements and appointments by the Lord Himself be rightly understood.

Thus the twelve disciples of Jesus correspond to the twelve patriarchs, being so to speak, ancestors of a new people of God; and the sending forth of the 70 disciples (Luke 10:1-42) somehow reminds us of the 70 elders of Israel.

Thus the literal Israel is at the same time a type of a spiritual people of God; on which account Paul names the members of the New Testament church (spiritual) "sons of Abraham," even in a letter addressed to Gentile Christians (Galatians 3:26; Galatians 3:29); and Peter applies to the New Testament church the great titles of honor of the Old Testament people of God:"chosen race," "royal priesthood," "holy nation" (1 Peter 2:9, comp. Exodus 19:6; Isaiah 43:21). Similarly John states that the Lord has made us to be "kings and priests" (Revelation 1:6; Revelation 5:10) and Paul calls Christ the "passover lamb" (1 Corinthians 5:7). The Lord’s Supper is a parallel to the Passover, and baptism to the passage through the Red Sea (1 Corinthians 10:1-2). This whole typical connection is the ground upon which Jesus introduced His Supper just at the feast of Passover, so that the New Testament holy festival came on the day of the Old Testament holy festival, indeed, as its continuation, fulfillment, and transfiguration.

Thus all the three great apostolic leaders, Peter, Paul, and John, see in the New Testament church a royal and holy "priesthood" taking this expression from the Old Testament calling of Israel (1 Peter 2:4-5; Romans 15:16; Revelation 1:6; Revelation 5:10). Both Peter and Paul view their acts of worship and practical devotion as spiritual "sacrifices" (1 Peter 2:5), as "sacrificial victims" (Romans 12:1), as "drink offerings" (Php 2:17; Gr. spendomai), as does the Writer of Hebrews (13:15-16). Indeed Paul applies the prophecy of the royal rule of "the root of Jesse, who arises to rule over the nations" (Isaiah 11:10), as direct ground for the acceptance of believing Gentiles in this age of the church, and draws from it the conclusion that the believing Jews should receive these believing Gentiles, and so there be mutual acceptance by both groups (Romans 15:12; Romans 15:7).

Likewise circumcision is regarded by Paul as a type of a spiritual experience of the members of the New Testament church. This experience deals with something invisible, spiritual, inward, to which New Testament baptism has relationship. According to Paul circumcision is not a direct type of baptism, but as he expresses it in the Colossian letter, of something which is "not made with hands." No one however can baptize, whether it be infants or believers, without using his hands. But it is indeed a type of that " cutting off of the impulse to sin, even to the very root of our existence," or as Paul says, " of the putting off of the body of the flesh" (Colossians 2:11), that is, the surrender of our old life unto death, our basic and practical fellowship with Christ as the Crucified One, Who both died and rose again for us. The same truth is the essential spiritual germ of the original Christian baptism, in the one aspect of its meaning represented by the act of immersion, which is symbolic burial (Romans 6:3-4). The other aspect of its meaning is fellowship of life with the Risen One, represented by coming up out of the water, which act is symbolic resurrection. The relationship of circumcision and baptism is therefore as follows: Both refer to the "putting away of the old man"; circumcision indeed in the foreview of the Old Testament preparation for salvation, but the original Christian baptism looking backwards from the New Testament experience of salvation, namely on the principle of fellowship with the Cross of Christ realized by faith.

Thus they both have in common the same central spiritual truth. But they do not stand in direct relation to each other as type and fulfillment (antitype), but are as two fingerposts standing at a certain distance from one another with a common centre lying between, the one (circumcision) pointing forwards, the other (baptism) backwards. But neither points directly to the other. In all this indeed "spiritualizing" of a type is found in its noblest and deepest sense (Colossians 2:11; Php 3:3).

(c) Sometimes, though but seldom, prophetic speech goes so far that it employs even the name of the original type itself to describe the antitype, retaining the same description. Christ, the Davidic Messiah king, is by Ezekiel and Hosea called simply "David":"afterward shall the children of Israel return and seek Jehovah their God and David their king" (Hosea 3:5; Ezekiel 37:24; Ezekiel 37:22). So the name of an Old Testament person was used to point to a New Testament person who was not literally the same person and did not literally bear the same name. Christ is the announced David but not the literal David. The reason for this joint use of these names is to emphasize heavily the correspondence between type and antitype, prophetic symbol and fulfillment. But such an individual instance is in no way proof that consequently the whole of Old Testament prophecy of the kingdom in general is not to be taken literally. Moreover even in this particular case there is no merely " spiritual" fulfillment. For die New Testament David (= Christ) is a literal person, even Jesus of Nazareth.

(d) Thus the Old Testament is full of symbols and types. They are persons, acts, arrangements, and events. In the New Testament the Lord Himself refers to this, as also Paul, and especially the Hebrews epistle. In this respect there are types with single, double, and even treble New Testament fulfillments. Not seldom they have a near, then a later, and at last a final fulfillment; first a fulfillment following immediately, then one at a remoter distance, and at last a complete fulfillment. So have they also different forms of fulfillment—spiritual, literal, and super-historical-eternal. And there are different times and stages of fulfillment—prior fulfillment, enlarged fulfillment, and complete fulfillment.

All this arises from the unity of the whole plan in Biblical history and the educative wisdom of God, who in all prior developments has always the final goal in view, and it arises from the planned, progressive, actual carrying forward of the revelation to the established eternal goals of perfection.

(1) Types with one New Testament fulfillment are the serpent lifted up in the wilderness, which pointed to the Cross (John 3:14); the Passover lamb as pointing to Christ and His sacrificial death (1 Corinthians 5:7-8); Adam as the first head of mankind, as the counterpart of Christ as the "last" Adam (Romans 5:12-21; 1 Corinthians 15:45).

(2) Of typical prophecy with double fulfillment the prophecy concerning Immanuel is an example. For the Immanuel announced by Isaiah is first a little Jewish boy of Isaiah’s time, that is, the eighth century B.C., who would still be quite young at the collapse of the kingdoms of Damascus and north Israel (Damascus conquered 732 B.C., Samaria destroyed 722 B.C. See Isaiah 7:14; Isaiah 7:16, comp. 4-8). But at the same time this boy became a type of the great Immanuel, the Messiah, whose birth was likewise in poverty and simplicity, whose contemporaries were likewise in political oppression and distress, but whose life and service likewise stands under the promises and faith Savior of Jehovah, so that His task and victory will merge finally into ocean-wide salvation and glorious triumph (Isaiah 8:8; Isaiah 10:9; Isaiah 10:6; Matthew 1:21-23). A further typical prophecy with double meaning is the word in Hosea, "Out of Egypt have I called my son" (11:1). In the meaning of the prophet there is here a backward view at the exodus of Israel from Egypt under Moses. But at the same time there was here a God-intended foreview, not unknown indeed to Hosea himself, of the early days of Messiah (Matthew 2:15; comp. 1 Peter 1:11-12).

(3) Numerous prophecies of the Old Testament have even a threefold accomplishment. To these belong very many prophecies of the kingdom. In the meaning of the prophet such belong mostly to the earthly kingdom of God in Israel at the End time. But this kingdom of God of the preliminary Perfecting he often sees in one picture with eternity (Isaiah 65:17; Isaiah 65:20; Isaiah 66:22; comp. TheTriumphoftheCrucified p. 143 and p. 169 of this present book).

According to the New Testament however the period of the church is already a spiritual advance fulfillment; for the New Testament writers connect many Old Testament prophecies of the kingdom with the present age of the gospel (see p. 171 ff).

Moreover, because, in addition to all this, many prophetic words have a pronounced reference to the contemporary affairs of the prophet himself (comp, the "first" Immanuel of Isaiah 7:1-25), it must be said that Old Testament kingdom prophecy has a fourfold reference and must therefore have a fourfold explanation:

But it would be precipitate if from the fact that the New Testament speaks of a spiritual fulfillment of the Old Testament kingdom prophecies the conclusion were drawn that this is the complete fulfillment and no further fulfillment is to be expected. With the same right one could as well deny their application to an eternal and ultimate fulfillment, which however no one does and which, on the contrary, every sound Bible expositor regards as their essential and chief meaning.

Much rather by this manifold fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy it is proved that "on the way to the consummation each stage in turn is first of all a porch. The Old Testament is the vestibule to the church age; the church age is the vestibule to the visible earthly kingdom of God, But even that visible earthly kingdom of God is not the final goal, but likewise only a vestibule. Only in eternity, in the new heaven and on the new earth, is the royal palace of perfection opened" (TheDawnofWorldRedemption, p. 147).

(e) From all this it arises that:

According to the Scripture both the literal and symbolic spiritual explanations are justified in principle. In any case all prophecy, whether literal or spiritual, will have actual, matter- of-fact fulfillment. In reality no one on either side explains everything as only literal or only spiritual. Much rather do all on both sides defend both explanations. The difference is that what on the one side is the rule, on the other side is the exception. And here must both sides beware of extremes. Extravagancies have been known on both sides. But this never justifies the other side in going to the opposite extreme.

There is no iron rule applicable to all details to settle when the literal or the symbolic explanation is alone justified. Decision can be reached in each case only by careful exegesis made with regard to the local context and to the whole of Scripture. As a pilot between two rocks there serves here the principle:"Each word is to be taken in its simplest, literal significance unless the wording, context, or other related passages of Scripture make clear that it is to be understood otherwise." Or we think of that sound rule of reliable exposition:"If the literal sense of a passage gives simple common sense, seek no other sense. Take each word in its original, common, simple sense, unless plain facts from the context demand another sense." Neglect of this law leads to uncertainty, confusion, and arbitrariness. But if this law be observed and rightly applied God’s Word unfolds itself as a harmonious and connected whole. In most cases the context and the general thought will make clear in advance to the impartial reader whether the statement is literal or figurative. For example, to take a drastic instance, when Isaiah, in his prophecy concerning the Forerunner of Messiah (40:4), says that "every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low," it is obvious that this is meant figuratively, and that he is not speaking of ground levelling operations (comp. Luke 3:2-6). Or when Zechariah declares that in the coming kingdom of Messiah ten Gentiles will take hold of the skirt of one Jew, it is clear that, while the expression is drastic and impressive, it is not intended literally, but means that the nations will perceive how much God has blessed saved Israel and that through Israel help and salvation can become their portion also (Zechariah 8:23). On the other hand it is equally clear that prophecy must be meant literally when, with the most distinct mention of quite well-known lands and districts, and with direct use of their political and geographical names, such as Gilead and Lebanon, it declares that in the time of Messiah Israel will live in the regions thus unmistakably indicated. And it does this yet further by distinct emphasis on the expressions "this" land (Jeremiah 32:41), "their own land" (Ezekiel 28:25), "the land of their fathers" (Jeremiah 16:15).

It is said that "they shall dwell in their own land, which I have given to my servant Jacob" (Ezekiel 28:25); "I will bring them back to their land, which I have given to their fathers" (Jeremiah 16:15); "I will plant them in this land" (Jeremiah 32:41). The context in these three places makes clear that it is not the return from Babylon that is meant, but the future and final salvation of Israel. For the first passage defines the time as "when I shall gather the house of Israel from among the peoples among whom they have been scattered"; and the second says that they shall dwell in "their" fatherland "when the Lord has brought out the children of Israel from the land of the north and from all the lands" where they were driven. This goes far beyond the region of Babylon, as does also the third passage, carrying on the thought to the final salvation of the people by the immediately previous statement "I will make with them an eternal covenant."

Again we read:"I will bring them back into the land of Gilead and to Lebanon" (Zechariah 10:10). The prophet Zechariah through whom God gave this last prophecy, began his ministry not earlier than fifteen years after the return from the captivity in Babylon (in the second year of Darius, 512 B.C.,Zechariah 1:1; Ezra 4:24; Ezra 5:1). This makes clear that the return of which he, from his point of time, speaks as being still future must lie later than the return from Babylon, and therefore must still be future.

(i) From all this it follows that the presence in the prophets of numerous symbolic and typical forms of speech creates no objec­tion to the expectation of a final and visible kingdom of God. On the contrary, the many magnificent symbolic and typical expressions in prophecy only show how important and glorious this coming kingdom will be, how they all rejoiced in it in advance and set forth its splendour in such gorgeously colored prophetic symbols.

(g) It is right that the literal conception must acknowledge that symbolic explanation of some details is justified.

It is further right that the literal conception must guard against a too vigorous introduction of fanciful elaborate details into the Millennium.

It is also right that the literal conception must not give to the Millennium an excessive importance in relation to eternity. For even the Millennium is still but a portico to eternity. It is the first, lesser, and likewise the introductory period of the coming kingdom of God. For of all the literality and historicity, of all the brilliance and might of the Millennial kingdom it must be said, that the true essential core of the Perfecting is not the earthly kingdom of God on the old earth (this first stage of the coming kingdom of God), but the eternal, of which that will be only the court and porch of the second and chief portion of the coming kingdom of God, even the nations on the new earth with the new Jerusalem there. In this sense the kingdom prophecies of the Old Testament, when they speak of a coming visible kingdom of glory on the old earth, are at the same time quite often a typical prophecy of the complete Perfecting on the new earth. For were it not so we should face a fact simply beyond explanation, even that the whole of the Old Testament kingdom prophecies would refer to only a very short period of one thousand years and say virtually nothing of the real and final goal of history. But no; it is at the same time typical prophecy of eternity. In this deepest and noblest sense "spiritualizing" is decidedly in place.

Thus these two kinds of prophetic explanation are by no means irreconcilable. In prophecy literal and symbolical speech unite in harmony. But as regards the earthly kingdom of God, it is not at all contradicted by the following facts: that the prophets often expressed their message in the form of symbols and types. This rather shows that the prophetic message often moves on the highest heights of the spirit, emotions, and perceptions; that from one common outlook they combine the earthly and the heavenly into one magnificent picture; that the earthly and the present are a type and introduction of the heavenly and the future; that of these heavenly and future things God, in condescend­ing and educative wisdom, has given in advance types and parables; that up to eternity everything is preparation and introduction, preliminary stage and prior exhibition, porch, portico, vestibule; that therefore before that actual complete fulfillment, in these prior stages numerous prior fulfillments have place; that all things, growing and advancing, go onward to the final goals, and that therefore the last time, indeed eternity itself, is presented in all these introductory stages and pre-developments; that therefore in all its preparatory ways and prior exhibitions, even before the arrival of the perfect day, eternity more or less clearly shines forth like the light of dawn.

Eternity in time Ever clear doth shine; That to us the small be smaller, And the great appear as greater!

Blest eternity!