Robert, don't you know about the role of typology in Christian theology? It is like 'as above, so below' but primarily refers to elements of the Jewish saga.Robert Tulip wrote:Is this typology like a fractal reading - as above so below?Thomas Hood wrote:the crucifixion is an antitype of the cosmic type
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typology_(theology)
-- not very good, but handy.
Chapter 10, "Biblical Exegesis and Typology," in Classical and Christian Ideas in English Renaissance Poetry, by Isabel Rivers. A good book if you can get to it.
Milton uses typology heavily. To give you the flavor, I'll type this in from _Handfuls on Purpose_:
"In seeking to give an exposition of the Tabernacle we do not wish to dogmatise, but humbly to follow the method of Paul as seen in his letter to the Hebrews. In referring there to the Tabernacle and the Priesthood he reveals his method of interpretation by such keynote sentences as the following: "The shadow of heavenly things" (Heb. 8.5), "The patterns of things in the heavens" (Heb. 9.23), ""The figures of the true" (Heb. 10.1). Seeing that these things were shadows, patterns, and figures of heavenly or spiritual things yet to come, I think we have sufficient warrant for taking all the spiritual teaching out of them we possible can. The question is not, Does the Tabernacle _teach_ this or that New Testament truth? but, Do you not _see_ this or that spiritual truth prefigured in it?"
And _Handfuls on Purpose_ then goes on to consider the Tabernacle in detail.
A simple example: The sacrifice of Isaac is type; the death of Christ is antitype. Jonah is type; Christ is antitype: "For as Jonah was three days and three nights . . . "
Tom