TYPE
610
TYPE
assured him that, just as by sacrifice he had been re- stored to liis place in the Jewish State, so by the great sacrifice he mittht be restored to tlie divine favor, and to a place in tliat spiritual kingdom of which the Jew- ish nation was the type.
4. Though resfinbliince to that which it is designed to prefigure does not constitute the only, or even the ])rimary, condition of a type, it is obvious that this must form a very important element in the adaptation of the type to serve its designed end. Hence we may expect to find some obvious analogy not only between the symbol and that which it symbolizes, but also be- tween the divinely appointed act or institute and that which it was designed to prefigure.
On the other hand, as tliere must be a similarity or analogy between the type and the antitype, so there is also a dixparity or dissimilitude between them. It is not in the nature of type and antitype that they should agree in all tilings; else, instead of similitude, there would be idenii/i/. Hence the apostle, wliile making Adam a type of Christ, yet shows how infinitely the latter excelled the former (1 Cor. xv, 47). So the priests of old were types of Christ, though he infinitely excelled them both as to his own person and as to the character of his priesthood (see Heb. vii. viii, ix, x). Chrysostom observes {floin. Gl, in Gen.) that there must be more in the type than in the antitype. Hence the distinction must be observed between fotal and partial tvpes. This distinction Qicumenius also draws in com- menting on Heb. vii, p. 829. He says: 'O tvtvoq ob Kara iravra iaoQ tarl t)j c'lXijieia (tTrtt ki'i avTog d\r)- Bna si'pinKtTai, icai TavTurrjg ndWov, i) ThiroQ), aW tiKovag tx^i Tirug Kai ivcaXfiara — "A type does not express tliat which it represents in every minute par- ticular, for then, instead of similitude, there would be identitv, but it contains certain outlines and assimila- tions of the antitype." Cyril of Alexandria, in Amos vi, p. 315, also observes on this subject: 'O tvttoq ovk aXi^^ua, jx6p<pio<nv Ct f^idWor tijc; aX/jS'siot,' eicrcpipti — "A type is not tlie very truth itself, but its representa- tion."
IV. delation to other Modes of Teacki/if/. — Having thus indicated the nature of a type, we would now point out the relation of this mode of teaching divine truth to other modes employed in Scripture more or less akin to it.
1. Relation to Prophect/. — Type stands related to prophec}' as its parallel. Like it, it teaches a present truth, and announces a future fulfilment of it: like it, also, it has in its capacity of a type one definite mean- ing and one definite fulfilment, to both of which it was intended and designed to point. The difference be- tween a prophecy and a type lies only in this, that the former teaches by words, the latter by things; the for- mer, that is, b_v an artificial combination of signs, the latter by a scenical representation of the whole truth at once. A word is the symbol of an idea; a type is the symbol of some principle or law, and the prediction of some great general fact in the economy of redemp- tion. See Pisoi'iiKCY.
2. Relation to Parable. — From the word 7rapaj3u\j] being used to designate a type, it may be inferred that the connection between the two is intimate. A type, in fact, may be viewed as a sort of acted parable. Let us suppose, for instance, that our Lord, instead of de- scribing in words the conduct and circumstances of the prodigal son, bad. by the help of suitable actors and scenes, made the whole to pass before the eyes and ears of his auditors, the lesson woidd have been conveyed to them much in the same way as the truth concerning himself was conveyed to the ancient Jews by the typi- cal rites of the jMosaic economy. In neither case is the lesson neiv, nor fully to be understood without an eluci- datory comment; the object of both being to impress vividly a truth, otherwise reasonable or familiar, upon the minds of those to whom it is presented. There is this difference, however, between such a representation
and a type— that the former, being merely doctrinal, would be exhausted in inculcating a present truth, while the latter would, with the doctrine, incorporate a prophetic reference to some great event yet to hap- pen on wliic'h the doctrine was based. See I'araule.