The following is an examination of the differences between the system of "typology" employed by the Progressive Dispensationailists and the one used by Traditional Dispensartionalists. Progressive Dispensationalist Craig Blaising says that "Progressive Dispensationalists view typology as an aspect of historical-literary interpretation. This is not the same kind of typology as practiced in classical dispensationalism...typology in historical-literary hermeneutics refers to patterns of resemblance between persons and events in earlier history to persons and events in later history...Texts that reflect pattern can be called 'typological-prophetic.' " (Blaising & Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, p.52, 102).

A "type" is merely a sketch or illustration of the antitype. The earthly sanctuary or tabernacle was built according to a "pattern," and this pattern was a sketch or "type" of the earthly sanctuary:

"Our fathers had the tabernacle of testimony in the wilderness, just as He who spoke to Moses directed him to make it according to the pattern (typos) which he had seen" (Acts 7:44; NASB).

The Greek word "typos" means "in the technical sense, the pattern in conformity to which a thing must be made" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

In a sense it could be said that the "pattern" which the Lord gave Moses was a blueprint that illustrated how the earthly tabernacle should be made. That blueprint or pattern was the "type" and the "antitype" is the earthly tabernacle. Now let us look at verses which speak of the same thing:

"If he were on earth, he would not be a priest, for there are already men who offer the gifts prescribed by the law. They serve at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven. This is why Moses was warned when he was about to build the tabernacle: 'See to it that you make everything according to the pattern shown you on the mountain' " (Heb.8:4-5; NIV).

In the later part of verse five we can understand that Moses made the earthly sanctuary according to the "pattern" or "type" which was shown to him by the Lord. In the early part of the same verse the author of Hebrews describes another typological relationship.

The earthly sanctuary was a "copy and shadow" of what is in heaven, the heavenly sancuary. The Greek word translated "copy" means "a representation, figure, copy" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

The Greek word translated "shadow" means "an image cast by an object and representing the form of that object...a sketch, outline, adumbration, Heb. viii. 5" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

So the earthly sanctuary was merely a "type" or sketch of the heavenly sanctuary. Some people misunderstand the meaning of a typological relationship by assuming that "types" are "predictions" of things to come. R.T. France clears up this misconception, writing that “a prediction looks forward to, and demands, an event which is to be its fulfillment; typology, however, consists essentially in looking back and discerning previous examples of a pattern now reaching its culmination” (France, Jesus and the Old Testament [London: Tyndale, 1971], p.40).

Even though France speaks of finding "types" by "looking back and discerning previous examples of a pattern" it is also true that we can also see "types" or "sketches" of things which remain in the future. For example, the "river" in the following verse from the book of Revelation is a "type" of the Holy Spirit:

"And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb. In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations" (Rev.22:1-2).

Ada R. Habershon writes that " 'The river of God, which is full of water,' is throughout Scripture a beautiful type of the Holy Spirit...in the book of Revelation we see it proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb...there is a description of the trees growing on either side of this river; for wherever it goes the result is sure to be fruitfulness...Where the river flows now, there will be all manner of fruit all the year round, which is described in Gal. v. 22,23" (Habershon, Study of the Types [Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1974], p.153).

Therefore typological relationships can be found by looking back in time or by looking forward.

We can see the difference between the two different approaches to "typology" when we examine Paul's words at Romans 925-26:

"Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles? As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved. And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God" (Ro.9:24-26).

Paul quotes two verses from the OT book of Hosea (2:23; 1:10) in the context of teaching regarding the Body of Christ even though these verses apply directly to the northern kingdom:

"Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God" (Hosea 1:10).

According to the traditional approach to typology Paul looked back to the book of Hosea and drew analogies between Israel and the Body of Christ. These anologies represent a typological relationship between the two. Here F.F. Bruce summarizes this analogous relationship:

"Great numbers of Gentiles, who had never been 'the people of God' and had no claim on His covenant mercy, were coming to be enrolled among His people to be the recipients of His mercy. The scale of the divine action was far wider than in Hosea's day, but the same 'pattern' and 'principle' was recognizable" (Bruce, The Epistle of Paul to the Romans, TNTC [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1963], p.196).

According to the "typology" practiced by traditional dispensationalists the "patterns" found at Hosea 1:10 and 2:23 are merely "sketches" or "illustrations" that picture and explain the truths in regard to God's relationship with those in the Body of Christ.

However, Progressive Dispensationalist W. Edward Glenny writes that "there are several indications that Peter's use of Hosea 1-2 in 1 Peter 2:10 also involves fulfillment of prophecy. First, Paul uses the same context and concepts from Hosea in Romans 9:25-26 to show that the conversation of Gentiles fulfills these prophecies in Hosea" (Blaising & Bock, Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church, p.182).

According to the "typological-prophetic" hermeneutics practiced by the Progressive Dispensationalists the verses that Paul quoted from Hosea are not just "sketches" that picture God's relationship to those in the Body of Christ. Instead, Paul quoted these verses to "show that the conversation of Gentiles fulfills these prophecies in Hosea."

Glenny says that some verses, such as Romans 9:25-26, "show that the intended meaning of the Old Testament prophet did not exhaust God's intended meaning" (Ibid., p.183).

According to Bock the texts of the various authors of the Bible "have a message that extends beyond the original settings in which they were given" (Ibid., p.64). He says that "Old Testament promise has not been replaced; it has been opened up, clarified, expanded, and periodized in the progress of apolostic reflection on Jesus' teaching and actions" (Ibid., p.59).

Blaising and Bock say that "the New Testament does introduce change and advance; it does not merely repeat Old Testament revelation. In making complementary additions, however, it does not jettison old promises. The enhancement is not at the expense of the original promise" (Ibid., p. 392-393).

In order to make the assertion that the "conversation of Gentiles fulfills these prophecies in Hosea" it is necessary to "spiritualize" the verses from Hosea in such a way that "Israel" means the "Body of Christ" or that the Body of Christ is "spiritual Israel." John A. Battle recognizes this truth:

"The OT verses quoted by Paul, Hos 2:23 and 1:10, predict the future restoration of Israel to God's favor and blessing after a period of estrangement and judgment caused by Israel's unbelief. Nearly all commentators recognize that Hosea has literal, national Israel in view-particularly, the ten northern tribes. Furthermore, the predicted blessings seem to fit perfectly with the future millennium. Hosea emphasizes Israel's future repentance and reinstatement as God's people, the objects of his mercy. But in Rom 9:25-26 Paul quotes these verses in a surprising manner. V 24 speaks of "us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles," indicating Christians of his day. Paul then continues, "as also it says in Hosea," and quotes these verses. Many believe that here he equates the Christian church with the promised restoration of Israel, employing a "spiritualizing" interpretation of Hosea's prophecy" (Battle, "Paul's Use of the Old Testament in Romans 9:26-26," Grace Theological Journal 2.1 [Spring 1981], p.117).

Of course it is obvious that if Paul is equating the Body of Christ with the promised restoration of Israel then the verses quoted from Hosea 1-2 must be spiritualized.

George Eldon Ladd writes that "Paul deliberately takes these two prophecies about the future of Israel and applies them to the church. The church, consisting of Jews and Gentiles, has become the people of God. The prophecies of Hosea are fulfilled in the Christian church. If this is a "spiritualizing hermeneutic" so be it...It is clearly what the New Testament does to the Old Testament prophecies" (Robert G. Clouse, The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views [Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1977], p.24).

However, Craig Blaising denies that Progressive Dispensationalists employ a "spiritual interpretation":

"It should be noted that progressive dispensationalism is not an abandonment of 'literal' interpretation for 'spiritual' interpretation" (Blaising & Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, p.52).

Darrel Bock also denies a spiritualizing hermeneutic, saying that "progressive dispensational hermeneutics is not against the pursuit of original meaning or stable meaning. It is not engaged in allegorizing, spiritualizing, or pursuing 'sensus plenior' ” (Bock, "Hermeneutics of Progressive Dispensationalism" in Three Central Issues in Contemporary Dispensationalism: A Comparison of Traditional and Progressive Views, ed. Herbert W. Bateman IV [Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1999], p. 92–94).

Of course the Progressive Dispensationalits employ a “spiritualizing hermeneutic” whether they will admit it or not.

Next