The tendency of many, especially older, theologians has been to see hints, shadows, and “types” of Christ throughout the OT (e.g., the wood of the cross prefigured in the wood of Noah’s ark or the wood that Isaac carried up Mt. Moriah; Jesus’ blood prefigured in the Red Sea or in Rahab’s scarlet cord; etc.). However, there are two great problems with this approach:
- “Types” in Scripture can surely be recognized only when they are specifically identified by a NT author as types. Otherwise, there are no limitations on the meaning of Scripture. Scripture can mean anything that the modern reader wants it to mean. And a Bible that can mean anything really means nothing at all.
- The need to see Jesus in the OT operates on the assumption that there is no progress in revelation. That is, all the teachings of the New Testament must somehow be hidden in the Old Testament. But this is not true. Old Testament saints, especially early ones, simply did not know about Jesus. They knew that God had promised a redeemer through the seed of Eve (Gen 3:15), then later that this seed would be through Abraham’s (Gen 12:3), Judah’s (Gen 49:10) then David’s line. Later they knew that some details of the place and manner of birth (Isa 7:14, Mic 5:2), some details of his death (Isa 53), and even that this redeemer would be called God (Isa 9:6). But the details came slowly over thousands of years, and the whole plan was never fully understood until the New Testament: the fact that the second person of the Trinity would spill his blood on a cross in vicarious payment for sin was not envisioned until it actually happened.
Nonetheless, as we shall see, the second person of the Trinity does make appearances in the Old Testament, and in the OT is enough material about Christ to enable him to say that “the Scriptures…bear witness of me” (John 5:39).
Stand Firm! 