1. Home
  2. Tipologie
  3. Tipologie – Voorbeelde

Tipologie – Voorbeelde

1. Kain en Abel. Waaroor het die oorlog gegaan?

Manier van aanbidding.

Wat was effek op die aanbidders?

Een het vervolg en een het gesterf

Waar vind ons die antipiese?

Elia en Agab

Johannes die Doper en Herodus

Die vrou van Openbaring 12 en die draak.


4)Typology involves a heightened correspondence—the antitype is greater than the type (see Jesus’ announcing of Himself as “something greater than” the temple, the prophet, and the king [Matt. 12:6, 41, 42]). This is to be distinguished from a spiritual illustration or comparison, such as Peter’s exhortation for women to be sober and modest as was Sarah (1 Peter 3:1–6). Sarah is an example, a model of behavior, but not a type.[1]

(5)A type is divinely ordained to function as a prefiguration of the antitype. This is in contradistinction to a natural analogy, which many modern critical scholars have called typology. There are many analogous or similar situations in Scripture, but the NT writers reserve the word “type” for historical realities that God has divinely designed to foreshadow their antitypical fulfillment.

In their exploration of the typological fulfillment of OT persons, events, and institutions, the NT writers do not read back into the OT what is not there. Rather they remain faithful to the OT Scriptures, which have already indicated which persons, events, and institutions God has divinely designed to serve as types. The NT writers simply announce the antitypical fulfillment of what has already been indicated by the OT prophets. For example, John announces that Jesus is the antitypical Moses and refers to Deuteronomy 18:15–19, which predicts that the Messiah would be a new Moses (see John 1:21; 6:14). Again, Hebrews 8:5 announces the typological relationship between the earthly and heavenly sanctuaries, and substantiates the point by citing the OT indicator of sanctuary typology, Exodus 25:40.

The NT writers do not give an exhaustive list of OT types, but show the hermeneutical procedure, controlled by the OT indicators, of identifying biblical types. Furthermore, Jesus and the NT writers under inspiration point out NT events that God has divinely designed to be types of later events in the plan of salvation (for example, the destruction of Jerusalem as a type of the end of the world [Matt. 24]).

The NT writers all work within the same eschatological framework in announcing the nature of typological fulfillment. There are three aspects of the one eschatological fulfillment of the OT types: (1) a basic fulfillment in Christ at His first advent; (2) the derived spiritual aspect of fulfillment in the church, both individually and corporately; and (3) the final, glorious fulfillment at the second coming of Christ and beyond. So, for example, Jesus is the antitypical Israel (Matt. 2:15); the church as Christ’s body is the “Israel of God” (Gal. 6:16); and the apocalyptic 144,000 at the end of time are the antitypical 12 tribes of Israel (Rev. 7; 14:1–5; 15:1–4).

What is true of historical (or horizontal) typology is also true of typology involving a vertical dimension, namely, sanctuary typology: there are three aspects of the one eschatological fulfillment. Thus Jesus is the antitypical temple (John 1:14; 2:21; Matt. 12:6); the church as His body is the temple of God, both individually and corporately (1 Cor. 3:16, 17; 2 Cor. 6:16); and Revelation portrays the apocalyptic “dwelling of God” that is with men (Rev. 21:3). But there is an additional aspect in sanctuary typology: the heavenly sanctuary existed even before the earthly sanctuary (Ex. 25:40; Heb. 8:5), and thus there is the overarching vertical dimension throughout both OT and NT history. The OT earthly sanctuary pointed upward to the heavenly original, as well as forward to Christ, to the church, and to the apocalyptic temple.

Not every minute detail of the type is significant. For example, there are descriptions of three different earthly sanctuaries/temples in the OT that corresponded typologically to the heavenly temple (the tabernacle of Moses, Solomon’s Temple, and the eschatological temple of Ezekiel 40–48). Each was different (materials used, number of articles of furniture, dimensions, etc.), but certain basic contours were constant (number of apartments, kinds of furniture, spatial proportions, rituals and participants, sacred times, etc.). These common elements point up the basic contours of sanctuary typology, which are summarized in Hebrews 9:1–7.


c.Symbolism. A symbol is in itself a timeless representation of truth. Thus a lamb symbolizes innocence; a horn, strength. But symbols in Scripture often become the building blocks of prophecy and typology. Thus the sanctuary lamb symbolizes Christ the Lamb of God (John 1:29); the four horns and the little horn of Daniel represent specific political or religiopolitical powers. (See Apocalyptic II. E.)

In interpreting the symbols of Scripture, basic principles may be derived from Scripture’s own use of symbolism.

d.Parables. Fully one third of Jesus’ teachings, as recorded in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, are in parable form (some 40 different parables). We also find parables in the OT, such as Nathan’s parable of the ewe lamb (2 Sam. 12:1–4) and Isaiah’s parable of the vineyard (Isa. 5:1–7). The OT word for “parable,” māšal, is also a common word for “proverb” in the book of Proverbs, thus revealing the Wisdom background of Jesus’ parables. The NT word for “parable” is parabolē, with an etymological meaning of “placing alongside of” for the purpose of comparison.

The parable genre has a number of different forms: proverbs (“Physician, heal yourself” [Luke 4:23]), metaphors (uprooting the plant [Matt. 15:13]), figurative sayings (parable of the wineskins [Luke 5:36–38]), similitudes or similes (the parable of the mustard seed [Mark 4:30–32]), story parables (the ten virgins [Matt. 25:1–13]; the good Samaritan [Luke 10:29–37]), and allegorical parables (the parable of the sower [Mark 4:1–9, 13–20]). All the forms used by Jesus have one common element: the use of everyday experiences to draw comparisons with the truths of His kingdom.

Many of Jesus’ parables have only one main point, stated by Jesus or reiterated by the Gospel writers (Matt. 18:35; 20:16; Luke 15:7, 10; 16:31). But there are also those that have several points (e.g., the parable of the sower, Matt. 13:1–23). The assigning of meaning to the parts of the story obviously is justified in these instances, because Jesus intended the deeper level of meaning and indicated its interpretation. This is different from allegorizing, in which the later interpreter reads into the text a deeper level of meaning that was never intended or indicated by the original writer.


6.Typology, Symbolism, and Parables

“The ceremonial system was made up of symbols pointing to Christ, to His sacrifice and His priesthood. This ritual law, with its sacrifices and ordinances, was to be performed by the Hebrews until type met antitype in the death of Christ, the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world” (PP 365; see also 6BC 1095; 7BC 933).

“The language of the Bible should be explained according to its obvious meaning, unless a symbol or figure is employed” (GC 599).

“Jesus taught by illustrations and parables drawn from nature and from the familiar events of everyday life…. In this way He associated natural things with spiritual, linking the things of nature and the life experience of His hearers with the sublime truths of the written Word. And whenever afterward their eyes rested on the objects with which He has associated eternal truth, His lessons were repeated” (CT 140).

“Natural things were the medium for the spiritual; the things of nature and the life-experience of His hearers were connected with the truths of the written Word. Leading thus from the natural to the spiritual kingdom, Christ’s parables are links in the chain of truth that unites man with God, and earth with heaven” (COL 17, 18; see also 21).


[1]Dederen, Raoul: Handbook of Seventh-Day Adventist Theology. electronic ed. Hagerstown, MD : Review and Herald Publishing Association, 2001, c2000 (Logos Library System; Commentary Reference Series 12), S. 84

NT New Testament

OT Old Testament

Heb. Hebrew

[2]Dederen, Raoul: Handbook of Seventh-Day Adventist Theology. electronic ed. Hagerstown, MD : Review and Herald Publishing Association, 2001, c2000 (Logos Library System; Commentary Reference Series 12), S. 84

OT Old Testament

NT New Testament

[3]Dederen, Raoul: Handbook of Seventh-Day Adventist Theology. electronic ed. Hagerstown, MD : Review and Herald Publishing Association, 2001, c2000 (Logos Library System; Commentary Reference Series 12), S. 85

PP Patriarchs and Prophets

GC The Great Controversy

CT Counsels to Parents, Teachers, and Students

COL Christ’s Object Lessons

[4]Dederen, Raoul: Handbook of Seventh-Day Adventist Theology. electronic ed. Hagerstown, MD : Review and Herald Publishing Association, 2001, c2000 (Logos Library System; Commentary Reference Series 12), S. 100

Was this article helpful?

Related Articles