"Membership in the family of God is neither inconsequential or something to be casually ignored. The church is God's agenda for the world. Jesus said, "I will build my church, and all the powers of hell will not conquer it." The church is indestructable and will exist for eternity. It will outlive this universe, and so will your role in it."

- Rick Warren
Oh!: The Difference Between Christian Instinct and Typology

I remember when it was cool to see Jesus in The Matrix. When that five minutes was over, and even your father in law was reading up in 2 Kings to figure out the significance of Neo's spaceship, the whole thing was a joke. The tide had turned from a Lewisian seeing of celestial beauty in the jungle of filth and imbecility that is Myth to a marketable spotting of Christian symbolism in every pop cultural artifact imaginable. Jesus became Waldo.

I remember when it first hit me to see Christ at the center of the Old Testament narratives. It was only a few years ago—I'm a late bloomer, so sue me—listening to a sermon by Tim Keller given at the inaugural Gospel Coalition Conference. I mean, I wasn't so dense not to see Jesus in the story of Abraham's willingness to sacrifice Isaac, and of course I knew about the messianic psalms and prophecies, but Keller's address, replete with appeals to Jonathan Edwards's non-allegorical homiletical beauty, outlining of the gospel as news not advice, and laser accurate delineation of what constitutes Gospel-Centered Ministry (the name of the sermon, actually), didn't just blow the rockface off of my understanding. To borrow one of his own illustrations, it burrowed in, planted dynamite, and devastated me. In a good way.

In his message, Keller presented the following:

* Jesus is the true and better Adam, who passed the test in the garden and whose obedience is imputed to us.
* Jesus is the true and better Abel, who, though innocently slain, has blood now that cries out not for our condemnation, but for our acquittal.
* Jesus is the true and better Abraham who answered the call of God to leave all the comfortable and familiar, and go out into the void, not knowing whither he went, to create a new people of God.
* Jesus is the true and better Isaac, who was not just offered up by his Father on the mount,but was truly sacrificed for us. And when God said to Abraham, “now I know you love me, because you did not withhold your son, your only son whom you love from me, now we can look at God, taking his son up the mountain and sacrificing Him, and say,” now we know that you love us, because you did not withhold your son, your only son whom you love from us.”
* Jesus is the true and better Jacob who wrestled and took the blow of justice we deserve, so we, like Jacob, only receive the wounds of grace to wake us up and discipline us.
* Jesus is the true and better Joseph, who at the right hand of the king, forgives those who betrayed and sold Him, and uses His new power to save them.
* Jesus is the true and better Moses, who stands in the gap between the people and the Lord and who mediates a new covenant.
* Jesus is the true and better rock of Moses who was struck with the rod of God’s justice, and now gives us water in the desert.
* Jesus is the true and better Job, the truly innocent sufferer who then intercedes for and saves his stupid friends.
* Jesus is the true and better David, whose victory becomes his people’s victory though they never lifted a stone to accomplish it themselves.
* Jesus is the true and better Esther, who didn’t just risk losing an earthly palace, but lost the ultimate and heavenly one, who didn’t just risk his life, but gave his life to save his people.
* Jesus is the true and better Jonah, who was cast out into the storm so we could be brought in.
* He is the real passover lamb, innocent, perfect, helpless, slain so that the angel of death would pass over us

That'll preach. And it did.

But Keller says something curious after his recitation of this list (which I've seen attributed to everyone from Sinclair Ferguson to Martyn Lloyd-Jones to Keller himself and to nobody) that still sticks with me: "That's not typology," he said, "that's an instinct."

Well, what's the difference? How do you see Christ in the Old Testament—or in The Matrix or Harry Potter or the actual greats of film and literature—and in the face of a hobo or street urchin in an instinctual way, not a typological way?

My best guess is that gospel-wakefulness makes the difference. Typology is mechanical. Instinct is supernatural.

I think this is one reason why, for all my appreciation (and utilization) of good scholarship, when a blogger goes academic about the Christian life and ministry, my eyes glaze over. It is why something John Piper said at the last Gospel Coalition Conference resonated with me so strongly: "Commentaries can be sermon killers. No commentary has the word Oh! in it."

I think that's the difference between Christian instinct and Christian typology: the word "Oh!"

Trackbacks:

Trackback URL: http://thinklings.org/bloo.trackback.php/5628.

Comments on "Oh!: The Difference Between Christian Instinct and Typology":
1. Richard - 10/24/2009 3:55 pm CDT

If I may repost here my comment from the GDC this is brilliant stuff, both by Jarred and by Dr. Keller.

The thing about instinct is it can't really be taught or explained. It has to be acquired by long and patient practice and contact with scripture and Christian tradition - through such disciplines as daily and varied bible reading and meditation, along (for me, anyway) with stuff like the Book of Common Prayer, liturgy, etc. It doesn't happen overnight. One has to be patient and take the long view. I know people who can see hints of Christ in movies but not in the OT. That's because they know movies really well but not the Bible.

2. nhe - 10/24/2009 9:17 pm CDT

I don't know if I completely agree Richard, as it seems (though unintentionally) that you're reducing it to Christian disciplines rather than the "gospel wakefulness" Jared refers to that is to be present in us whether we're in the Word or at a movie theater. Gospel wakefulness certainly can be "developed" in us, but we certainly don't attain it ourselves.

I love this sermon by Keller - a great listen, even at 45 mins+.

3. Jared - 10/24/2009 9:24 pm CDT

I took Richard to mean it's not something you can turn on or off, but rather something God does in you through attentiveness to the gospel.

But you're right, nhe, it does sort of sound like saying if you study hard enough you can get it. Richrd can clarify if that's what he means.

I would disagree, though, that it can't happen "overnight."
I believe gospel wakefulness happens at the intersection between crisis/brokenness and hearing the gospel, something wrought by the Spirit which can be a long time developing but instantaneous in its arrival.
It was that way for me, anyway.

The Keller message may be my favorite sermon ever. I listen to it at least once every quarter. It is incredible and "required" for anyone interested in gospel-driven ministry.

4. Jared - 10/24/2009 9:25 pm CDT

Richard's take does remind me of something my friend Ray Ortlund has said: "Stare at the glory of God until you see it."

I think what Richard is advocating could be related to Luther's admonition to beat the gospel into our heads continually.

5. nhe - 10/25/2009 7:23 am CDT

You're right Jared.......Keller says often (when asked, "how can I be changed by the gospel?") "You've got to work it deep into your craw." That certainly comes (at least in part) via the things Brian mentioned.

Ultimately though, I don't know that our "methods/disciplines/focal preferences" matter if the the gospel wakefulness you mentioned isn't preeminent - maybe I'm too hung up on that term, but I really like it.

6. Quaid - 10/25/2009 7:59 am CDT

Don't glaze over -- Some smart people at the school I go to would argue that Biblical typology can only be called such when the text actually refers to the event/person as a type of Christ - showing it as an example of Him. (While the term "type" is not explicitly used, it is made evident by the NT writer that an OT event is to be interpreted in such a manner. Using this theological methodology results in only a small number of literal types - app. 12 or so).

This might be what Keller is speaking of (or it might not). To make certain that he is theologically correct, it may be possible that he's not speaking of these things as types, but as small prophetic revelations demonstrating the need our world has for Christ, Christ's sacrifice and His resurrection. The insight is not gained by applying careful theology to the text, but out of revelation by the Spirit.

This may be semantics and I might be wrong. I'm certainly not prepared to defend this idea as I've spent no decent amount of time thinking on it- still, it might explain why he splits hairs over typology v. instinct.

Having said this, I think Christ presents Himself through creativity every day in many ways both by those who "preach" through selfish gain along with kindgom-centric guys like Jared. But what does it matter? Whether out of selfish gain or honest motives, Christ is preached.

Seeing God instinctively in these extra-Biblical things requires knowing Him. The more we know Him through drawing close to Him (and He drawing near to us), the better we see Him. The better we see Him, the better we preach Him. The better we preach Him in word and deed, the better we fulfill the mission to which we are called.

So - regardless of the technical nuances of typology, I tend to think that instinct is a result of divine insight given by the Spirit, based on faith and us "working out our salvation with fear and trembling."

7. Richard - 10/25/2009 9:07 pm CDT

Yes, I meant it in the way of Keller when he says "You've got to work it into your craw". Good post and good comments

8. Karl - 10/26/2009 9:57 am CDT

I like Lewis' comment about the character Psyche in 'Till We Have Faces:

"She is in some ways like Christ not because she is a symbol of Him but because every good man or woman is like Christ. What else could they be like?"

Tolkien made a similar point in his letters re. one or more of his characters, when asked if the character was a type or figure of Christ. What or Who else IS "goodness" *like*?

Leave a Comment:
Name:
URL: (optional)
Email: (optional - will not be published)
Comment:

Please enter the characters you see in the above CAPTCHA image:


Notify me via email if any followup comments are added to this post (show help)