While working on a comments for one of the articles in the March 15, 2015 Watchtower (on Types and Antitypes) I decided to make a transcript of the talk that turned into that particular article. As usual, the article that finally saw print had evolved quite a bit from the original.
Anyway, here's the transcript that I also put up on the ad1914.com site.
The 2014 Annual Meeting Program video can be found on tv.jw.org
(currently found under Programs and Events). The following speech can be
found about the 2 hour and 8 minute mark in the video. It ends at about
the 2 hour and 25 minute mark.
“David Splane of the Governing Body will speak to us on the theme: ‘Types and Antitypes.’”
IT’S NOT FUNNY IF YOU HAVE TO “SPLANE” IT
The following is an unofficial transcript of that talk. It is very
informative to note the differences between this, the original talk, and
the Watchtower article that was derived from it. Our site’s commentary on the March 15, 2015 Watchtower article is found here.
______Transcript follows__________________________________________
Let’s get right into our subject: types and antitypes.
Now, years ago, our publications often applied certain bible accounts
and certain bible characters as types of something greater. But you’ve
noticed that, in recent years, that is seldom done, and the purpose of
this talk is to explain why.
First of all what is a type and what is an antitype? Well, the Watchtower of September 15, 1950 defined them this way:
It said, “A type is a representation of something that will come to
pass at a future time. The antitype is the reality of the thing which
the type represents.”
So that is the definition that was given by The Watchtower. And we
might add that Jehovah is usually involved in designing the type.
Now, take the tabernacle. Jehovah was very clear about the
construction of the tabernacle. What materials were to be used, the
dimensions and so forth. Why? Well, apparently because he had designed
the tabernacle to be a type of something greater: his great spiritual
temple. And the temple was the antitype.
The sacrifices on the Day of Atonement: Jehovah was very careful
about how events on the day of atonement were to unfold. And again, we
have to realize that something was going to have to picture or
foreshadow the perfect sacrifice of Jesus Christ. So the sacrifice on
the Day of Atonement, the type, and the perfect sacrifice of Christ, the
antitype.
Now consider another example. When the disobedient Israelites in the
wilderness were bitten by poisonous snakes, Moses is told by Jehovah to
fashion a copper serpent and to place that serpent on a pole. Now that
was a type. Now Jesus explains what it was a type of. Let’s turn to John
chapter 3, John chapter 3 and verses 14 and 15. John 3: 14 and 15 If
you are using an iPad, I’ll give you a chance to catch up. [Laughter] I
couldn’t resist. “And just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the
wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, so that everyone
believing in him may have everlasting life.” Now, would anyone doubt
that this is a type? Of course not. Because Jesus said it was.
Well notice that in both these examples, the tabernacle and the
copper serpent, Jehovah was involved. He designed the type so that it
would fit the antitype. He told Moses, for example to fashion a copper
serpent and put it, not on a rock, but on a stake. And of course the
tabernacle prefiguring the great spiritual temple.
And from the apostle Paul we learn even more about types and
antitypes. For example, Paul, in Hebrews: Isaiah and his 2 sons
represent Jesus, and the anointed. He also explains that Moses, the
mediator of the law covenant, represents Christ the mediator of the new
covenant. And we learn from the letter to the Galatians that Abraham’s
relationship with Sarah and Hagar, represents Jehovah’s relationship
with the nation of Israel, and with the heavenly part of his
organization. Type and antitype.
Now we know that these were genuine types because, the word of God says they are. But here is the question:
Who is to decide if a person or an event is a type if the word of God
doesn’t say anything about it? Who is qualified to do that? Our answer?
We can do no better than to quote our beloved brother, Albert
Schroeder, who said: We need to exercise great care when applying
accounts in the Hebrew Scriptures as prophetic patterns, or types, if
these are accounts are not applied in the Scriptures themselves. Wasn’t
that a beautiful statement? We agree with it.
Now the study of types and an is not unique to Jehovah’s Witnesses.
During the past 2,000 years, Catholic and Jewish scholars have made
quite a diligent study of types and antitypes. In fact, there is even a
name for the study. They call it typology. The first century Jewish
scholar, Philo of Alexandria, for example, suggested that the serpent in
the garden of Eden, the tree of knowledge and the cherubs that were
guarding the entrance to the garden were all typical of something
greater.
And then describing the teachings of such early writers as Origen,
Ambrose and Jerome, the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia says
this: “They sought for types and of course found them, in every incident
and event, however trivial recorded in Scripture. Even the most simple
and commonplace circumstance was thought to conceal within itself a
hidden truth. Even in the number of fish caught by the disciples when
the risen Savior appeared to them,” he says, “How much some have tried
to make of that number:, 153 .”
One scholar made much of Jacob’s purchase of Esau’s birthright with a
bowl of red stew. Very significant that the stew was red. To him, the
red stew pictured the red blood of Christ. The inheritance pictured the
heavenly inheritance. It’s all… By that reasoning, Jacob pictures Jesus,
Esau’s birthright pictures the heavenly inheritance, and the red stew
pictures Jesus’ precious blood.
Now on the surface that might sound plausible to some, until you
think about it. When you think about it you see three problems. First of
all, Jehovah didn’t design the type. Jehovah did not tell Esau to sell
his birthright. Selling his birthright was wrong, and Jehovah never
tells us to do something that’s wrong. Second, who ate the stew? Esau
did. So are we to conclude that, by giving up his inheritance, Esau put
himself in line for the ransom sacrifice of Jesus Christ? That doesn’t
make any sense. And most importantly, nowhere in Scripture do we read
that the event was a type.
Now the study of types and antitypes was not only common among
Catholic and Jewish scholars, but were very prominent among Protestant
scholars as well. The Puritans, like Edward Taylor, applied many Bible
events to themselves. The Baptists and Congregationalists did likewise.
So it’s not surprising that the early Bible Students, who generally
belonged to these groups were also really fond of types.
And as many of us have been. Many of us have remembered happy moments
at the congregation book study studying all about types and antitypes.
And it’s true that the study of types could be thrilling!
So now here’s a question. If the study of a certain subject make
chills run up and down your spine, could it possibly be mistaken? And
the answer is yes.
The case of brother Arch W. Smith is an example. In 1886, Brother
Russell published a book that contained a chart linking the ages of
mankind to the Great Pyramid of Egypt. Now that pyramid was called by
the Bible Students, the “Bible in stone.” They loved the study of the
Pyramid. In fact, if you have seen pictures of Brother Russell’s grave,
you’ve noticed that there was a pyramid nearby. And that’s because the
Bible Students believed very much in the Great Pyramid of Egypt, and
some became very engrossed, in measuring certain rooms and certain
features of the pyramid and to try to determine, for example, how long
they had to wait before they went to heaven and so on.
And so one who was just thrilled by the study of types was Arch W.
Smith. It was a hobby of his, he loved it. In fact he gave a lot of
prayerful thought to the dimension of the pyramid and from time to time
he would write in to Bethel and let them know what his findings were, to
support the idea that the Great Pyramid had a place in Jehovah’s
purpose. He loved it!
But when the Watchtower of 1928 came out and said that Jehovah
doesn’t need a stone monument built by pagans to accomplish his purpose,
Brother Smith accepted it. He let reason win out over emotion.
Well, in recent years the trend in our publications has been to look
for the practical application of Bible events, and not for types where
the scriptures themselves do not clearly identify them as such. We
simply cannot go beyond what is written. Now there’s a real advantage in
looking for the practical application of Bible accounts, rather than
confining certain applications to one class: “This applies only to the
anointed.” “This applies only to the other sheep.”
Let’s just see why. Turn to Romans chapter 15 and verse 4. Now
remember that Paul is writing to his anointed brothers here. Romans
chapter 15 and verse 4. And he says, “For all the things that were
written beforehand” . . . Well what things? The Hebrew Scriptures
obviously. . . “were written for our instruction so that through our endurance, that through the comfort of the Scriptures, that we
might have hope.” What is Paul telling the anointed? He’s telling them
that you can learn from these accounts in the Hebrew Scriptures. You can
apply principles of the Hebrew Scriptures to yourselves.
Let’s consider an example: Now soon after his conversion, Paul is
preaching in the city of Damascus. The Jews are furious and they try to
kill him. So anointed disciples take Paul and they lower him down the
city wall in a basket. Is it possible that some of those anointed ones
they thought of Rahab? Who helped the two spies escape from Jericho by a
similar method? Would anyone say to them, You can’t apply that to
yourselves…Rahab pictures the other sheep, you are of the anointed? No!
They could apply the lessons of that account to themselves.
Now let’s consider another example, a modern one. In the Song of
Solomon we read of a chaste young virgin who falls desperately in love
with a poor shepherd boy. Solomon, who incidentally was still an
inspired Bible writer at the time, but he’s a very wealthy man, he tries
to lure her away but he’s unable to do so. Now suppose that in a
certain congregation there’s a sweet young sister, who falls head over
heels for a poor pioneer brother, who’s a real spiritual man but he
doesn’t have a penny to his name. Now her friends encourage her to marry
a wealthy brother, who is very rich but he doesn’t have a lot of time
to spend on spiritual things. The sister remains firm. They say, you
wouldn’t have to work! You can pioneer. She says no my love is for that
pioneer boy. Would anyone say to her, the Song of Solomon doesn’t apply
to you because you’re of the other sheep, not of the anointed?
You see how practical it is to take these Bible accounts and really apply them to the everyday life of people.
What about others of the other sheep today. In this audience there
are modern-day Nehemiahs who are spurring the building programs we have.
Wonderful young Timothys, graduates of our Bible schools, warm-hearted
Tabitha’s, hospitable Lydias. And don’t we find exceptional young
Circuit Overseers who are like Elihu in giving wise counsel to elders
who are much older. And don’t many Christian young women remind us of
dear Rebekah who was willing to follow her husband to a distant land for
the accomplishment of Jehovah’s purpose?
We deeply appreciate the spiritual heritage that was passed on to us by the early Bible Students.
In harmony with Zechariah chapter 4 and verse 10: “We do not despise
the day of small things.” However the light does get brighter. And we
feel that we must follow the light, wherever it leads us. Our love
should be for the truth and not for a particular doctrine or teaching.
Well how would you sum this talk in a few words?
The wrong answer is, “We don’t believe in types and antitypes any
more.” We do! We certainly do. Where the scriptures identify them as
such, we embrace them. But where the Bible is silent, we must be silent.
Now in the three talks that follow there are going to be important clarifications in our beliefs.
Perhaps a certain adjustment will touch a spiritual nerve, make us
rethink a cherished teaching. Our love for Jehovah and the truth will
make us receive this information gladly and with open hearts.
Often today we hear brothers say, we’re having a hard time keeping up
with the celestial chariot. So are we. So are the Governing Body. We’re
not driving the chariot. Jehovah is driving the chariot and we’re
running just as fast as you are, trying to keep up. So let’s all do our
best to keep up with it. And let us thank Jehovah for continuing to deal
with us. And for continuing to provide nourishing spiritual food.
__________________end transcript________________
http://ad1914.com/2015/03/30/types-and-antitypes-transcript-of-discourse-by-david-splane-at-october-2014-annual-meeting/
