The Predictive Nature Of Typology In John 12:37–43 -- By: Todd A. Scacewater

Journal: Westminster Theological Journal
Volume: WTJ 75:1 (Spring 2013)
Article: The Predictive Nature Of Typology In John 12:37–43
Author: Todd A. Scacewater


The Predictive Nature Of Typology In John 12:37–43

Todd A. Scacewater

Todd A. Scacewater is a Ph.D. student in New Testament at Westminster Theological Seminary.

Typology is defined in Leonhard Goppelt’s seminal study, Typos, as the study of “historical facts—persons, actions, events, and institutions” which are “considered to be divinely ordained representations or types of future realities that will be even greater and more complete.”1 Goppelt’s definition represents an aspect of the traditional view of typology, namely, that it is not only analogical, but also predictive or prophetic. Thus, typology is not in consideration if “the interpreter does not view the connection between the two as being foreordained in some way, but as being accidental or deliberately contrived. . . .”2 An alternative, modern view of typology denies the prophetic element, leaving only the analogical correspondence between type and antitype. 3This position may deny or recognize the escalation inherent within the antitype, but in either case the prophetic element is denied.4

To posit a “predictive nature” for typology assumes an intentionality of God to foreshadow future events by his sovereign guidance of former events. It may also suggest that the OT author was aware of a forward-looking element inherent within the passage itself.5 If this is true, then the NT writers did not retrospectively label an OT counterpart as a “type” solely because of its analogical similarity to the “anti-type.” The NT authors not only believed God had guided history in an ever-increasingly climactic manner so that “fulfillment” in Christ is perfectly appropriate. They also believed that, along this climactic progress of salvation history, God sovereignly prefigured future persons, actions, events, and institutions by their corresponding types. If true, the intentionality of God thus necessitates the fulfillment of the type, meaning types are predictive by nature.

This article intends to argue that John viewed typology as predictive by nature, which is most evident in 12:37–43 of his Gospel. In order to explain the Jewish rejection of Jesus’ ministry, John argues that the rejection of Jesus’ ministry is the fulfillment (i.e., antitype) of the rejection of Isaiah’s ministry. We will argue first that the best grammatical understanding of

You must have a subscription and be logged in to read the entire article.
Click here to subscribe
visitor : : uid: ()