顯示具有 預表 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章
顯示具有 預表 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章

2021-03-11

 

預表法在彌賽亞先知預言中的用途和濫用
The Use and Abuse of Typology in Messianic Prophecy

作者Eric Chabot  誠之譯自
https://chab123.wordpress.com/2017/01/09/the-use-and-abuse-of-typology-in-messianic-prophecy-2/
https://yimawusi.net/2021/03/04/eric-chabot/
https://yimawusi.net/2021/03/04/eric-chabot/
 
萊特Christopher Wright在他的書Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament暫譯《透過舊約認識耶穌》中描述了預表法typology的重要性以及它如何被用在先知的話裏。他說到:
In his book, Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament (Knowing God Through the Old Testament Set), Christopher Wright describes the importance of typology and how it is used in relation to prophecy. He says:
 
「預表法」這個詞有時候會被用來描寫我們如何看待舊約和耶穌之間的關係。舊約讓我們認識耶穌的畫像(images)、模式(patterns)和模型(models)都被稱為「預表」(types),而新約聖經中與預表相當的或平行對應的,就被稱為「對範」(antitypes;可意譯為對應於預表的實體)。(《透過舊約認識耶穌》,IVP2014第二版,p.117
The word typology is sometimes used to describe this way of viewing the relationship between the Old Testament and Jesus. The images, patterns and models that the Old Testament provides for understanding him are called types. The New Testament equivalents or parallels are then called antitypes. – Wright, Christopher J. H,  Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament (Knowing God Through the Old Testament Set)  InterVarsity Press.
 
預表法有幾個特色,其中包括:
Some of the features of typology are the following:
 
1. 眾先知並不只是在作一些孤立的預言,而是提供一些在人類歷史上會重覆出現或重覆應驗的主題或模式。
The prophets did not so much make singular predictions but gave themes or patterns and that these themes have several manifestations or fulfillments in the course of human history.
 
2. 預表和對範(實體)有一種天然的對應性和相似性。最早出現的被稱為預表(如:人物、物件,事件),後來的應驗被稱為對範。
The type and the antitype have a natural correspondence or resemblance. The initial one is called the type (e.g., person, thing, event) and the fulfillment is designated the antitype..
 
3. 預表是歷史上實際發生的(例如:保羅宣告亞當是「那將要來之人的預像(即預表),也就是彌賽亞的預表。」
The type has historical reality (e.g., Paul declares that Adam “is a figure (a type) of him that was to come”, i.e., the Messiah).
 
4. 預表是對範的預兆(prefiguring)或預示(foreshadowing)。預表具有預測或先知預言的性質;它會展望歷史,並指向對範。
The type is a prefiguring or foreshadowing of the antitype. It is predictive/prophetic; it looks ahead and points to the antitype.
 
讓我用三個標題來舉幾個具有預表性質的先知預言(譯按:標題的數目字是筆者自己加上的):
Let me give some examples of typological prophecies which fall under three headings:
 
一、一些制度
Institutions

 
1. 例如,逾越節毫無瑕疵的羊羔(出十二5),被宰殺時一根骨頭也不可折斷(十二46)。在這個例子裏,猶太聖經的逾越節羔羊就是一個預表,而其對範是彌賽亞(參見林前五7),祂是無瑕疵、無玷污的;祂被宰殺了,而骨頭卻一根也沒有折斷(約十九3337)。
1.The Passover, for instance, with its spotless lamb (Exodus 12:5) which was slain without any bones being broken (12:46).  In this case, the Passover Lamb in the Jewish Scriptures is the type while the antitype is the Messiah (cf. 1 Corinthians 5:7), who was without spot or blemish (1 Peter 1:19) and who was slain  and also had none of his bones broken (John 19:33ff).
 
2. 初熟節(利未記廿三10),即七七節、五旬節(Shavuot),這是把莊稼的第一批作物獻給上帝的節慶,象徵接下來完整的收成。在這個例子裏,這個預表(初熟節)在彌賽亞復活這個對範上得到了應驗,因為彌賽亞就是獻給上帝的「初熟果子」(林前十五2023)。
2.The feast of the firstfruits (Leviticus 23:10), i.e., Shavuot was a celebration in which the initial produce of the harvest was offered to God as a token of the full crop to follow. In this case, the type (the Feast of first fruits) is fulfilled in the antitype which is the resurrection of the Messiah who is the “first fruits” offered to God (1 Corinthians 15:20, 23).
 
3. 會幕和聖殿都是猶太人獻祭體系最核心的特色。它們都是上帝設立的,也是猶太人接近上帝的方式、途徑。在聖經裏,上帝至聖的同在(Shechinah舍金納聖雲彩)是上帝同在的有形顯現,祂降臨在榮光中,與人同住。舍金納榮耀的同在會以各種可見的顯現被人看見,例如光、火焰、雲彩、耶和華的使者,或以上的組合。上帝的榮耀會降在會幕,也會降在聖殿。
3.The Tabernacle and Temple were both central features of the Jewish sacrificial system. They both were initiated by God and were a means where the Jewish people could approach God. In the Bible, the Shechinah is the visible manifestation of the presence of God in which He descends to dwell among men. The Shechinah glory is seen in a variety of visible manifestations such as light, fire, a cloud, the Angel of the Lord, or a combination of all of these. The glory of God would descend in both the Tabernacle and Temple as well.
 
因此,與彌賽亞的降臨有關的,在約翰福音一章14節裏,上帝至聖的同在,就有了更偉大的意義。因為約翰說,「道成了肉身,住在我們中間,充充滿滿的有恩典有真理。我們也見過他的榮光,正是父獨生子的榮光。」
Therefore, in relation to the coming of the Messiah, the Shechinah takes on greater significance in John 1: 1-14. As John says, “And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.” “Dwelt” ( σκήνωμα), means to “live or camp in a tent” or figuratively
 
在新約聖經中,「住在」(Dwelt [σκήνωμα])的意思是「生活在或紮營在帳棚裏」,或象徵「居住在,把居所設立在……當中」。因此,約翰福音一章14節的意思是說:「道成了肉身,在我們中間支搭起帳幕」。
in the New Testament to”dwell, take up one’s residence, come to reside (among).” So i John 1:14 literally says,” the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us.
 
因此,無論是會幕或聖殿,在猶太人的聖經裏都是預表,而在對範裏應驗了,也就是在耶穌身上應驗了。
Therefore, both the Tabernacle and the Temple were types in the Jewish Scriptures that are fulfilled in the anti-type which is the person of Jesus.
 
二、人物
Persons
 

1. 以撒被綁的故事
The Binding of Isaac Story
 
以撒被綁(希伯來文= Akedah Yitzchak [עֲקֵידַת יִצְחַק])所講述的是上帝要求亞伯拉罕獻他兒子以撒的故事。因著亞伯拉罕的信心,上帝可以使被殺的以撒死而復活。以撒獻祭是預表,因著以下的幾個原因,彌賽亞就是這個預表的對範:(1) 它們都和一位父親獻他的獨生子為祭有關;(2) 它們都象徵獻祭者完全的奉獻;(3) 它們都說到了死亡和復活。
The Binding of Isaac or the “Akedah” tells the account of when God asked Abraham to sacrifice his son, Isaac. Because of Abraham’s faith God would be able to resurrect the slain Isaac. The sacrifice of Isaac is the type in that the Messiah is the antitype in the following respects: (1) They both involve the sacrifice by a father of his only son; (2) They both symbolize a complete dedication on the part of the offerer; (3) It speaks of both a death and resurrection.
 
2. 大衛王
King David
 
雖然我們已經提到過,大衛王是彌賽亞的預表,因為他既然是大衛家的君王,就成為神的兒子;他統治以色列,與上帝有一種親密的關係。但是大衛王的角色指向一位更偉大的君王,他是彌賽亞的對範。
Even though we have already mentioned this King David was was type of the Messiah in that he was a son of God in the sense of being a Davidic King who was a ruler and who had an intimate relationship with God. But the role of King David pointed towards a greater king who is the antitype- the Messiah.
 
讓我們查考羅馬書一章15節:
Let’s look at Romans 1:1-5
 
耶穌基督的僕人保羅,奉召為使徒,特派傳神的福音。 這福音是神從前藉眾先知在聖經上所應許的, 論到他兒子我主耶穌基督。按肉體說,是從大衛後裔生的; 按聖善的靈說,因從死裏復活,以大能顯明是神的兒子。 我們從他受了恩惠並使徒的職分,在萬國之中叫人為他的名信服真道。
“Paul, a bond-servant of Christ Jesus, called as an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, which He promised beforehand through His prophets in the holy Scriptures, concerning His Son, who was born of a descendant of David according to the flesh, who was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, according to the Spirit of holiness, Jesus Christ our Lord, through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith among all the Gentiles for His name’s sake, among whom you also are the called of Jesus Christ; to all who are beloved of God in Rome, called as saints:Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.”
 
我們可以看到:
We see the following:
 
保羅說,耶穌藉著復活被上帝立為神的兒子(羅一4)。保羅不是說耶穌被指派為神的兒子,耶穌的本質就改變了。這指派不是就祂的本質來說的,而是就祂作為中保的工作來說的——彌賽亞時代已經降臨了。耶穌是主,即舊約聖經裏先前的「眾子」(亞當、大衛、以色列)的對範。
Paul says through the resurrection, Jesus is installed (by God) as the Son of God (Rom. 1:4). Paul is not saying Jesus is being appointed as The Son of God is a change in Jesus’ essense. The appointment is not in terms of his nature but in terms of his work as a mediator—the messianic age has dawned. Jesus is the Lord—the anti-type of the previous “sons” in the Old Testament (Adam, David, Israel).
 
3. 麥基洗德
Melchizedek
 
麥基洗德既是撒冷王,同時(創十四1820)也是至高神的祭司,也是彌賽亞的預表。耶穌是對範,祂開始在大衛的寶座上作王,並同時成為我們的大祭司(參:詩一一〇4;亞六1213;來五510,七117)。
Melchizedek was both king of Salem and a priest of God—at the same time (Genesis 14:18-20)and a a type of  Messiah.  Jesus as the anti-type  began to reign on David’s throne and to simultaneously function as our high priest (cf. Psalm 110:4; Zechariah 6:12, 13; Hebrews 5:5-10; 6:20; 7:1-17).
 
三、預表法的濫用
Abuse of typology

 
萊特接著討論了基督徒圈子裏對預表法的濫用,我自己也見過許多。他說到:
Wright goes on to discuss the abuse of typology in Christian circles.  I have seen a lot of this myself. He says:
 
預表法的舊觀點不再受人歡迎,是因為它關心的只是在整本舊約聖經中找到基督的一些「預兆」(prefigurations)。這種觀念認為,一個「預表」的核心特徵是:這個預表會預示出基督。但是這並不是被視為在基督的亮光下才被人觀察到的事,而是因為這是任何被視為一種「預表」的,其本身存在的唯一理由。按照這種看法,一個「預表」就是在舊約聖經裏,任何受上帝的安排,其主要目的是為了預示基督的事件、制度、人物。這會帶來兩種不幸的副作用。
The older view of typology fell into disfavor because it was solely concerned with finding “prefigurations” of Christ all over the Old Testament. The idea was that the central feature of a “type” was that it prefigured Christ. But this was handled not as something observed afterward in the light of Christ but rather as the very reason for existence of whatever was being regarded as a “type.” So a “type,” in this view, was any event, institution or person in the Old Testament that had been arranged by God for the primary purpose of foreshadowing Christ. This had two unfortunate side effects.
 
首先,它通常意味著解讀舊約的人無法在舊約的事件和人物身上找到事實和意義。因此沒有必要花時間在以色列人自己的歷史語境和背景下去明白和解讀經文,或者問這些經文對當時的人來說是什麼意思。你可以直接跳到基督,因為這是你會找到所謂「真正」意義的地方。這樣作的結果是用一種非常「柏拉圖式的」方法來看待舊約。也就是說,這其實只是蒐集了一些無關緊要的事情的「影子」罷了。這種閱讀聖經的方法,貶低了舊約的以色列,以及上帝在他們身上、藉著他們所成就的一切事的歷史真相和確實性。其次,這類預表法會有一種傾向,會陶醉在各種稀奇古怪的嘗試裏,企圖要把舊約聖經裏的一個「預表」裏的所有細節,解讀為是在預示耶穌某種晦澀難明的細節。你一旦把這個事件、制度、人物,與其以色列實在的歷史根源斬斷,這些細節就不再被視為舊約敘事者所說的、這個故事中單純的一部分。既然「真正的意義」其實只能在耶穌裏、在新約裏被找到,所有的細節就必須含有某種隱藏的、可以被應用到基督身上的意義。這要靠作家或傳道人的技巧或想像力,才能闡發這些意義,像一位魔術師從帽子裏拉出兔子來一樣,讓那些帶著仰慕之情的讀者或聽眾驚嘆連連。會幕中所有的彩色絲繩都可以用來象徵耶穌的某些特點。大衛撿起來的五塊石子分別代表基督的五處傷口,或者,祂用來餵飽群眾的五條麵包,或基督賜給教會的五重職事。祂是從溪水中撿起這些石子的,因此這條溪流就是聖靈,等等千奇百怪的解釋。這種處理希伯來經文的方式,如今已經被正確地視為是無效的、主觀的解讀。(萊特,《透過舊約認識耶穌》, p.121
First, it usually meant that the interpreter of the Old Testament failed to find much reality and meaning in the events and persons of the Old Testament in themselves. There was no need to spend time understanding and interpreting the texts in their own Israelite historical context and background or to ask what they meant to those people at that time. You could just jump straight to Christ, because that is where you would find the supposed “real” meaning. This ends up with a very “Platonic” view of the Old Testament. That is, it is really only a collection of “shadows” of something else. Such a way of reading the Bible devalues the historical reality and validity of Old Testament Israel and all that God did in and through and for them. Second, this kind of typology had a tendency to indulge in fanciful attempts to interpret every detail of an Old Testament “type” as in some way a foreshadowing of some other obscure detail about Jesus. Once you had severed the event, institution or person from its actual historical roots in Israel, then the details would no longer be seen as simply part of the story as the Old Testament narrator told it. Since the “real meaning” was actually to be found in Jesus and the New Testament, all the details must have some hidden significance that could be applied to Christ. preacher to bring such meanings out, like a magician bringing rabbits out of a hat to the astonished gasps of admiring readers or listeners. All the colored threads of the tabernacle could signify something about Jesus. The five stones that David picked up represent the five wounds of Christ, or the five loaves he used to feed the crowd, or the five ministries that Christ has given to the church. He took them out of a stream, which was the Holy Spirit. And so on. This way of handling the Hebrew text is quite rightly now regarded as invalid and subjective.- Wright, Christopher J. H,  Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament (Knowing God Through the Old Testament Set)  InterVarsity Press.
 
結論
Conclusion

預表法是認識上帝如何藉著以色列人歷史來行事,以及認識以色列歷史和耶穌的位格與工作之間關係的一種有益的方式。然而,正如萊特所說,當我們自己在使用預表法時,必須謹慎從事。
Typology is a helpful way of understanding how God worked with Israel’s history and how it relates to the person and work of Jesus. However, as Wright says, we need to exercise caution in our own approach to the use of typology.

 

預表法的倍加
Doubling Up on Typology

作者Barry York 誠之譯自
https://gentlereformation.com/2021/03/01/double-typology/
https://yimawusi.net/2021/03/03/barry-york/
 
隨著我們對聖經的理解不斷加深,我們認識到上帝在舊約聖經中使用了預表法(typology)來預示新約聖經中的事件或人物,特別是基督和祂的救贖。
As we grow in our understanding of the Scriptures, we recognize that God uses typology in the Old Testament to foreshadow events or persons in the New Testament, particularly Christ and His salvation.
 
麥基洗德這個影兒般的人物被稱為基督我們的君王和祭司的樣式(來七15)。
The shadowy character of Melchizedek is called a likeness of Christ as our king and priest (Heb. 7:15).
 
亞伯拉罕只差一步就將以撒獻為祭物,然而他的兒子卻從祭壇上安然無恙地站立起來,這是在描繪聖父在十字架上獻上祂兒子,並使祂從死裏復活(來十一19)。
Abraham's near sacrifice of Isaac and his son rising up unharmed from the altar pictured the Father offering His Son at the cross and raising Him from the dead (Heb. 11:19).
 
透過摩西解救以色列人脫離埃及為奴之家,就象徵了基督把我們從罪的捆綁中拯救出來。這樣的預表方法持續不斷地進行著。
The deliverance of Israel through Moses from Egypt's bondage typifies our deliverance by Christ from our bondage to sin. On and on the typologies roll.
 
然而,就其本質而言,這些預表法是不完整的。作為預言性的象徵,舊約的預表(type)永遠達不到新約實體(antitype)的地位。簡單地說,麥基洗德、以撒和摩西都不是耶穌,頂多能描繪我們救主的某些方面。
Yet by their very nature, typologies are incomplete. As prophetic symbols, the type can never achieve the status of the antitype. Simply put, Melchizedek, Isaac, and Moses are not Jesus, but simply pictorial aspects of our Savior.
 
因此,上帝的靈有時會把一些預表串聯起來,好賜給我們更豐富的圖景,描繪出在基督裏的救贖。我們可以把這些預表法稱為雙重預表,或雙倍預表。我們可以從一些不同方面看到這些雙重預表。
For this reason, then, the Spirit of God sometimes strings together typologies to give even richer imagery of our salvation in Christ. We could refer to these as double, or dual, typologies. We can see these double types in a variety of ways.
 
例如,在亞伯拉罕獻以撒為祭的故事裏,故事所描繪的神格裏的位格不只是聖子基督而已。以撒當然是在描繪主耶穌,但亞伯拉罕也預示出天父將祂的兒子送上髑髏地十字架的計劃和工作。上帝賜給亞伯拉罕一隻公羊,讓他獻上,亞伯拉罕作為回應,將那個地方命名為YHWH-jireh(耶和華伊勒,「耶和華必預備」,見創廿二14),就凸顯了這個真理。這座山就是後來被稱為「髑髏地」的地方,這幅榮耀的圖畫就這樣具體活現出來。
For instance, in the sacrifice of Isaac by Abraham, Christ is not the only person of the Godhead represented in the story. Certainly Isaac pictures the Lord, but Abraham also prefigures the plan and work of the Father in sending His Son to Calvary's cross. This truth is highlighted by God giving a ram to Abraham to offer instead, and Abraham in response named that site YHWH-jireh ("the Lord will provide"). That this mountain was the very place that became know as Calvary solidifies this glorious picture.
 
有時,基督的形象是由兩個彼此相關的人物來描繪的。摩西帶領以色列人抵達應許之地,但由於他的罪,上帝不允許他帶領以色列民進入那地。他死後,被上帝埋葬了。但後來他的繼任者約書亞興起,征服了那地,是因為上帝與他同在(書一8-9)。這兩個人物共同描繪了在基督裏臨到我們身上的救贖和勝利。摩西在新約中被確認為是一個預表(來三1-6),約書亞名字的意思是「耶和華拯救」,而耶穌的名字則是它的希臘文版本,這些都有助於為我們進一步把這個圖景串聯在一起。
Sometimes the person of Christ is pictured by two related figures. Moses led Israel to the Promised Land, but because of his sin he was not allowed to take them into the land. He died and was buried by God. But then his predecessor Joshua rose up and conquered the land as the presence of God was with him (Josh. 1:8-9). These two personages together picture the deliverance and victory that come to us in Christ. That Moses is confirmed to be a type in the New Testament (Heb. 3:1-6), and that Joshua's name means "The Lord saves" of which  Jesus' name is the Greek version of it, help connect further this imagery for us.
 
基督的工作也可以用這種雙重強調的方式來想像,有時非常簡單。例如,在贖罪日,兩隻山羊被帶到大祭司面前(利十六6-10)。大祭司為這兩隻山羊撚鬮,一隻被認為是獻贖罪祭的山羊,另一只是替罪羊。在為兩隻山羊認罪之後,第一隻山羊被殺,獻在耶和華面前,而第二隻山羊則被打發到曠野去了。正如畢哲思(Jerry Bridges)所解釋的那樣:
The work of Christ can also be pictured with this double emphasis, sometimes very simply so. For example, on the Day of Atonement two goats were brought before the high priest (Lev. 16:6-10). He cast lots for the goats, and one was deemed the goat for a sin offering and the other the scapegoat. After sins were confessed over both of them, the first goat was slain and offered before the Lord, whereas the second was sent off into the wilderness. As Jerry Bridges explains,
 
第一隻山羊代表基督的贖罪工作,因為它被殺了,它的血灑在施恩座上。第二隻山羊代表基督的贖罪工作,除去或抹去了我們身上的罪惡。
The first goat represented Christ’s work of propitiation as it was killed and its blood sprinkled on the mercy seat. The second goat represented Christ’s work of expiation in removing or blotting out the sins that were against us.
 
換句話說,前一隻山羊代表主把我們從罪的刑罰中救贖出來;後一隻山羊則代表主是如何從我們的生命中除去罪的存在。
In other words, the former goat represents the Lord redeeming us from the penalty of sin; the latter goat on how the Lord is removing the presence of sin from our lives.
 
如果我們祈求一付由聖靈特別強化的眼睛,就會看到這些雙重預表在聖經中是很常見的,例如該隱和亞伯,大衛和歌利亞,還有會幕和聖殿,這份清單還可以繼續列下去。這些成雙成對的人物或角色,都在同步教導著我們,主為我們成就的事。就像一道雙彩虹,它們都彰顯出祂的榮耀。
If we pray for the Spirit-enhanced eyes to see it, these dual typologies are pretty common in the Scriptures. Cain and Abel. David and Goliath. The tabernacle and the temple. The list could go on. These paired personalities or figures all teach us in tandem what the Lord has done for us. Like a double rainbow, they magnify His glory.
 
Barry York
生來是罪人,卻靠恩典得救。米利暗的丈夫,為特權而感恩。六個孩子的父親,有上帝的祝福。RPTS校長,以感恩之心服事。Hitting the Marks 一書作者。

2020-06-11


預表;預表釋經法(Type,Typology)

《證主聖經神學辭典》

在有關聖經預言的解釋學中,「預表」也許是我們明白得最少,卻又最重要的一個觀念。預表性質的預言在聖經中隨處可見,可以說是眾先知──包括耶穌──談論未來的一種「正常」方式。我們若忽略這種談論的方式,便會完全扭曲了預言的信息。

預表與其他釋經法的異同

預表經常跟寓意解釋互相混淆,有時又會被錯誤地標籤為「雙重應驗」。它亦會被拿來與有人稱之為的「按字面直解」相互對立。

寓意手法在基督教出現前的希臘文化中興起,早期的哲學家便藉此法來解釋希臘神話中那些荒淫和令人反感的部分。一些學者(例如:Metrodorus of Lampascus〔主前331-278年〕和Chrysippus of Soli〔主前280-207年〕)便運用寓意方式來解說諸神故事中淫褻和令人反感的內容,在背後找出種種道德和哲學教訓。後來的基督徒──尤其是屬於亞歷山太學派的思想家──亦採用了寓意解經法來指出舊約所蘊藏的基督教神學和屬靈真理。亞歷山太的革利免和俄利根便追隨猶太學者斐羅所奠下的基礎,採用隨意類比和借喻的方式來解釋聖經,錯誤地把許多不屬於經文的意思強加進去。整個基督教一直至到中世紀都以這種解經方式為主。像雅歌這類書卷便最常被寓意解釋(例如:歌一2所暗示的兩片唇,便被解作律法和福音),不過,其他的經文亦無一倖免。經文之中其實極少寓言,如果是真正的寓言,也會是一目了然的那一種(例如:士九7-20)。

有關預言是「雙重應驗」的觀念,與預表的觀念較為接近,但作為一種解經的模式,它卻是過於粗糙和有欠準確。兩座山的比喻就經常與這個雙重應驗的觀念如影隨形。這就是說,先知看見兩件發生在將來的獨立事件,就好像兩座並排的山,一前一後。第一件事比另一件事會在較近期發生,但他卻透過「先知的透視縮短法」看見兩件事連在一起。這個模式並沒有解釋為何先知會把那兩件具體的事並排;為何是兩件事而非三件、四件或五件事並排;以及甚麼是「透視縮短法」的依據。

部分人士又喜歡宣稱要堅持「按字面」或「盡量按字面」的解經法。那些依循此模式的人便經常為某一個預言尋找單一次和極為具體的應驗事例,姑勿論它可能是耶穌在地上事奉的某次事件,抑或某些聲稱要等到「大審判」或千禧年來到才應驗的事件。

這種解釋的方法通常要面對三個困難。第一,解經者通常沒有考慮到先知在發出某個預言時的歷史背景,以及該個預言在其原來書卷中之上下語境。簡單來說,預言被視為是針對某個發生在久遠將來的事件而發出,完全與當其時聽見這預言的人無關,也與記載該個預言的書卷之中心信息無關。第二,這種解經法混淆了一個事實,就是所有對預言的合理解釋,都是某程度按字面的解釋,某程度按比喻的解釋。第三,新約本身也不接受這種解經法;它沒有要求在解釋預言的「單一次應驗」時要保留原有的字面意思。例如,當耶穌聲稱施洗約翰會成就有關以利亞要在彌賽亞之前先來的預言時(太十七11-13;可九11-13),儘管約翰並不是「字面上」的那個以利亞,但耶穌並不認為祂這個解釋有任何不當。就正如真正的寓言在聖經中極為稀少,這類單一事件的預言也同樣罕有,而且,出現的時候亦會用清晰和明確的方法表達出來(例如:王上十三2,當中有一位先知明確預言約西亞將會褻瀆伯特利的祭壇)。

以預表方法解釋預言

至於以預表方式來解釋預言,其主張乃是眾先知在宣講某些神學要旨或模式時,極少是預言單一次的事件,而他們所講的這些要旨,通常會在歷史的進程中有多次的彰顯或應驗。預言中的模式往往會在基督的生平或是末世的時候作最大的彰顯,但是,在歷史的其他時間則可能有另一次或多次的應驗,尤其是在發出預言的那位先知當下所處的歷史背景裏。

耶穌本人所講的一個預言,正好用來說明這個解釋的原則,馬太福音二十四至二十五章記載了耶穌的「橄欖山講論」,祂在當中同時提及耶路撒冷聖殿的被毀(太二十四2),以及「世界末了」的事情(太二十四3)。耶路撒冷在主後70年被毀,以及大審判這兩件事,都可以在有關神的憤怒這神學主題下並列。這段預言的某些方面用來指到主後70年較為準確(例:太二十四17-20),而其他方面則是指到世界的末了(太二十四27-31),但是,經文卻沒有嘗試將這兩件事所發生的年代分開,因為它們在觀念上是互聯起來的。這段經文的真正重點,是在於指出神發出其憤怒之前的徵兆,而非某些具體的事件。

此外,用預表的方式來解釋「橄欖山講論」,可清楚顯示出一段經文怎樣在一或兩次具體應驗的事例之外,還可以正常地應用到其他情況。耶穌在全篇講論中不住提醒信徒要防備將來會出現假基督。然而,這段經文卻描述了在神傾出其憤怒之前的各種徵兆和變亂,而不是某些個別和具體的事件,因此,我們不能把經文單純理解為預言某個敵基督會在末時出現。所有假基督的出現都是這個預言的一次應驗;同時,他們的出現亦標示著一個禍患時代的開始,神的審判將要臨到。

另一個例子,就是約珥理解到「耶和華的日子」(珥二31)不是單一次事件,而是一個有多次應驗的神學觀念──或者更恰當的說法,是有多次彰顯。蝗蟲之災是神對其百姓所施行的一次可怕審判,是耶和華的日子的彰顯;可是,末世還有另一次大災難(珥二1-11,所指的是人類的大軍而不再是蝗蟲),則也是耶和華的日子另一次彰顯。即使如此,耶和華的日子亦同時是神施恩拯救百姓的時間,從土地得到復興(珥二21-27)、聖靈的澆灌(珥二28-32)和審判列國(珥三1-21)等事例中反映出來。當中每一件事都是耶和華的日子的一次獨立彰顯,而每件事都可以說是一次「應驗」。因此,彼得便可以引用約珥書二章2832節整段經文,來表明耶和華的日子已經在五旬節的那個星期應驗,因為神在那天澆灌祂的聖靈;其實,彼得和約珥所理解的,都同樣是耶和華的日子。簡單而言,發生在約珥時代的蝗蟲之災、耶路撒冷遭到軍隊進侵而被大肆破壞、聖靈的澆灌,以及列國要遭受最後的審判等,全都真實地應驗了耶和華的日子這觀念。

預表的解釋可以清楚說明某個預言怎麼能夠最終應驗在耶穌身上,但同時還能夠在其他地方應驗。也許,以賽亞書的連串「僕人之歌」(賽四十二1-4,四十九1-6,五十4-9,五十二13至五十三12),正是這方面的一個最清晰例子。一直以來,最核心的問題是在於那僕人的身分。在某處地方,以賽亞明確指出那僕人就是以色列(賽四十九3),但是,在五十章49節,他卻採用非常個人化的措辭來形容這位僕人,而且來到第9節,先知甚至以第一人稱的代名詞來表達,似乎是想指出自己正是那位僕人。他還表明這僕人身兼多個重任;主要是負起把福音帶到列國的角色(賽四十九5-6)。然而,在五十二章13節至五十三章12節,這位僕人卻要受苦,為了承擔世人的罪而代死,但最終卻被證明是清白無罪和被神升為至高。難怪這位僕人的身分,一直成為激烈辯論的題目。

然而,當我們明白以賽亞並不是在談論任何一個人,而是耶和華的僕人這觀念,要理解這些「僕人之歌」的難度便大大消減。這個觀念可以在整個群體上(在以色列身上)得以應驗,亦可以在個人身上應驗(例如在眾先知身上),但最終和最完全的應驗,則惟有在基督本人身上。因此,並非每一個可以稱得上是「耶和華的僕人」的人,都應驗了這些預言的每一方面;惟獨彌賽亞能夠代贖世人的罪。即使如此,任何人若能為神的緣故忍受困苦和逼迫,繼續承擔向列國宣揚神的信息之使命,都可稱為「耶和華的僕人」和應驗此預言。因此,保羅能夠說自己的受苦能填補基督患難的缺欠(西一24)。而且,這種解釋在「僕人之歌」得以最終應驗的時候,基督的榮耀不但不會減少,反而會增多。

預表亦說明了在耶穌的生平和事奉中有多少件事情是應驗了舊約的模式。耶穌像昔日的以色列國一樣,是從埃及出來(太二15),在曠野逗留了40天(相對於以色列在曠野飄流40年),以及在山上頒佈律法。耶穌的個人成就了以色列作為神的僕人這角色的最高理想,而祂亦是在這種意義上道成了以色列國。

在關於罪惡的預言方面,預表亦發揮其作用。例如,巴比倫在文化和建制方面,是與神百姓為敵的預表。它就是啟示錄十七至十八章出現的那種與神國對敵的勢力和重要人物。不過,我們卻無須──甚至是一種誤導──去追問這段經文中的巴比倫,究竟是「按字面直解」的巴比倫,抑或是羅馬,因為它同時是這兩個城市,但又不僅是它們。任何城市或人類的文明,只要其建制、文化、財富、對人的壓制和權力架構是與神的城為敵的,即是所指的「巴比倫」。因此,啟示錄的這兩章經文,是直接向每一個世代、每一個文化的每一位信徒發出,並沒有限制是適用於古代,抑或只是預言將來。

預表的價值

預表的價值有兩方面。首先,它為處理聖經中的預言,提供了一個清晰易明的釋經法。解釋預言──尤其是有關基督的預言──之困難所在,往往是要求解經者面對痛苦的抉擇,一就是為了證明經文是指向基督,而妄顧經文的歷史背景和上下文語境,一就是只顧專注於先知當時的歷史處境,以致顯得該段經文實際上與基督完全無關。面對這種兩難之間的抉擇,有些解經家便把以賽亞書七章14節完全解釋為是有關基督乃由童貞女所生的預言,卻幾乎絕口不提為何以以賽亞要在這段有關敘利亞與以法蓮戰爭的經文中作出這樣的一個預言。另一些解經家則只從歷史背景來解釋以賽亞書七章14節,其實可以說是認為馬太引用這節經文來預言基督降生是一種錯誤(太一23)。然而,若以預表的方法來解經,這兩難的抉擇不僅可以避免,而且還顯得毫無意義。

其次,預表可以容讓信徒將預言性經文非常直接和實際地應用在日常的處境中。基督徒無須為敵基督而困惑,亦不應以為只有將來的世代才會面對敵基督的試煉和逼迫。例如,在尼祿或史太林手下受苦的殉道者,便正如在他們之前或之後的信徒一樣,親身經歷過敵基督。

Duane A. Garrett

另參:「先知;女先知;先知預言」;「寓言文體」;「新約中的舊約」。

參考書目:

F. F. Bruce,  New Testament Development of Old Testament Themes; D. A. Garrett,  An Analysis of the Hermeneutics of John Chrysostom's Commentary on Isaiah 1-8 with an English Translation; L. Goppelt, Typos: The Typological Interpretation of the Old Testament in the New; G. Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral.



2017-01-13

預表論 typology

聖經神學看到神的啟示中有一個一再重覆的模式,稱為“預表”(type)。研究此預表與其對應的實體的學問,就是“預表論”(typology)。這是一篇文章對預表論所下的定義:
預表論是研究神以祂的主權在人類歷史工作的當中,所諭旨的、重覆發生的模式(神用這些模式來成就祂的旨意)。在啟示的漸進過程中,早先的歷史情境(人物、事件,制度),被視為一種模式(預表-type),與後來發生在耶穌的一生和祂的事工中的歷史情境,有非常緊密的對應關係。後來的歷史情境,以一種清楚的、可以辨識的、逐步升級/強化的方式,重覆(應驗)了先前的模式(預表)。因此,“預表”(type)就是不斷重覆的模式之最早的事例,神要在未來的啟示中,用這個事例來說明祂的工作。而預表的實體(antitype)則是神使祂先前之作為的模式不斷地升級,然後重覆在耶穌的位格和工作當中。這預表的實體是要彰顯神的榮耀,將額外的意義添加在先前的預表上,好讓神的百姓能更好地領略神在歷史中主權的旨意。


《揭開奧秘》這本書背後的方法。Clowney 在他的著作,Preaching and Biblical Theology 中,對此有詳細的介紹。

2017-01-12

在舊約預表中看見基督Seeing Christ in Old Testament Types

作者:Daniel Ragusa譯者:駱鴻銘

最近威斯敏斯特神學院的教師們發表了一本新書,書名為《在整本聖經中看見基督》。這本書的目的是要幫助人明白聖經裏這個美麗的、以基督為中心的結構,這當然值得大力推薦。Recently the faculty of Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia released a book entitled Seeing Christ in All of Scripture. The books intent is to help people understand the beautiful, Christ-centered structure of the Bible—certainly something to be commended for.

不過,當我們談到舊約時,承認這個「以基督為中心的結構」,對我們來說往往會是一個挑戰。我們如何在那裏看見基督拯救的大能和恩典呢?其中一個方法是透過「預表論」(typology)。幾年前,我們在「以基督為中心」(Christ the Center)這個廣播節目的一集中,曾經和帕頓博士(Dr. Matthew Patton)討論過這個題目,他闡釋了預表論的預設前提和理由,然後用約雅斤王(王下廿四~廿五)當作基督的預表的一個非常迷人的例子。以下我們會試著總結他所說的其中的一部分,不過,先定義什麼是「預表論」也許會有幫助。Recognizing this Christ-centered structure, though, is often a challenge for us when it comes to the Old Testament. How do we see Christ there in his saving power and grace? One way is through typology. A few years ago we sat down with Dr. Matthew Patton in an episode of Christ the Center on this topic. Dr. Patton elaborated on the presuppositions and rationale for typology and then employed King Jehoiachin (2 Kings 24-25) as a fascinating example of a type of Christ. We’ll look to summarize some of what he had to say below, but before we get there it might be helpful to first define “typology.”

什麼是預表論?What is Typology?

克羅尼在他那本很有用處的書《揭開奧秘——發現舊約中的基督》中,談到了什麼是「預表論」:In his helpful book on this topic, The Unfolding Mystery: Discovering Christ in the Old Testament, Edmund Clowney has this to say about typology:

舊約給了我們一些預表(type,或譯為表型),預示出新約的應驗(即對範,antitypes,或譯為原型)。預表是一種類比,是聖經獨有的。和所有的類比一樣,預表的對象和預表本身有相同之處,也有相異之處。大衛和基督一樣都被賦予王權──雖然大衛和基督的王權有許多不同之處,他們之間仍有許多共同點,使比較兩者的嘗試顯得很有意義。… [T]he Old Testament gives us types that foreshadow the New Testament fulfillment [i.e., the antitype]. A type is a form of analogy that is distinctive to the Bible. Like all analogies, a type combines identity and difference. David and Christ were both given kingly power and rule. In spite of the vast differences between David’s royalty and Christ’s, there are points of formal identity that make the comparison meaningful.

而預表的對象和預表本身的差異,使這些聖經中的預表更顯得獨特。上帝在聖經中的應許並不是要回到過去的輝煌時代。「大衛未來的子孫」(參:太一1),不只是另外一個大衛,其實祂比大衛偉大太多了!以致於大衛要稱祂為主(參:詩一一○1)。(註1Yet it is just this degree of difference that makes biblical types distinctive. The promises of God in the Bible do not offer a return to a golden age of the past. David’s Son to come is not simply another David. Rather, He is so much greater that David can speak of Him as Lord (Ps. 110:1).[1]

用更專門的術語來說,預表論「把過去和現在聯繫起來,這是就歷史上的對應和逐步升級來說的,而在這當中,上帝所預先定旨的事,在後來的、更大的事件中得到了補充。」(註2)因此,「預表」就和人物(例如:摩西和大衛),制度(例如:會幕和獻祭系統)或事件(例如:洪水和出埃及)有關。In more technical terms, typology relates the past to the present in terms of a historical correspondence and escalation in which the divinely ordered prefigurement finds a complement in the subsequent and greater event.”[2] Types, then, have to do with persons (e.g., Moses and David), institutions (e.g., tabernacle and sacrificial system) or events (e.g., the flood and the Exodus).

預表論預設了什麼?What is Typology Presupposing?

為了建立起這些預表上的關聯,我們對聖經的本質和作者必須作一些預設。聖經是上帝所默示的(提後三16),意思是它們有一個基本的合一性,以上帝為它們的作者。基於這個理由,整本聖經正典對詮釋聖經來說都是很重要的。帕頓博士正確地說道:「為了瞭解個別的經文,必須去瞭解整本正典。」In order to make these typological connections, we presuppose something about the nature and authorship of Scripture. The Scriptures are divinely inspired by God (2 Tim. 3:16), which means they have a fundamental unity with God as their author. For this reason the entire canon of Scripture is so crucial for interpretation. Dr. Patton rightly states, “It’s a whole canon pursuit to understand any individual text.”

只有新約聖經明確說明的預表才是有效的預表嗎?Does a Type have to be Explicitly Stated in the New Testament to be Valid?

帕頓博士基於兩個理由,回答了這個問題:不是。Dr. Patton answers this question, No. And he does so for two reasons.

首先,我們必須問,我們理解聖經的方法是打哪兒來的?是不是從聖經本身而來的?倘若我們想要瞭解如何讀舊約聖經,那麼我們就必須看新約作者讀舊約的方法。克羅尼博士曾經很有智慧地說到:「新約聖經是在數學練習題書本的後面,奇數題的問題解答」。通過使用其方法,我們就可以用同樣的方法來解答偶數題的問題。First, we need to ask where are we getting our method for understanding the Scriptures, if not from the Scriptures themselves? If we want to understand how to read the Old Testament then we need to look to the method of the New Testament authors. Dr. Clowney once wisely remarked, “The New Testament is the answers in the back of the book to the odd number problems.” By using its method, then, we can answer the even number problems in the same way.

其次,帕頓博士表明,把新約讀回到舊約(用新約的觀點來讀舊約)並不是一種「讀入」(eisegesis)的解經方式(把一些原來沒有的觀念讀入你所閱讀的經文裏)。既然新約和舊約聖經基本上是同一位作者所寫的,把新約觀念帶回到舊約裏,或者用新約的亮光來照明舊約,就不是一種入侵。Second, Dr. Patton makes the point that its not eisegesis (reading something into the text) to read the New Testament into the Old as though it were something foreign that you were reading back into it. Since the New and the Old Testament have fundamentally the same author, it’s not an intrusion to bring the New back into the Old or to have the New shed light on the Old.

霍志恆(Geerhardus Vos)一定會同意以上的這個結論,他曾經說到:Geerhardus Vos would agree with this conclusion:

我們不能單單因為新約作者從來沒有把某種特質視為是預表性的,就證明了這種特質缺乏預表的價值。在這方面,預表和預言是一致的。新約聖經多次要我們注意某些預言的應驗,有時候連我們都沒有注意到它們是預言。然而這點並不會攔阻我們從事預言的研究,並且在新約聖經中尋找其他預言的應驗。新約作者所提出的預表的例子,本身並沒有什麼特殊之處。如果只接受新約作者提到的預表才算是預表,我們對預表就不會有一個完整及連貫一致的認識。(註3The mere fact that no writer in the New Testament refers to a certain trait as typical, affords no proof of its lacking typical significance. Types in this respect stand on a line with prophecies. The New Testament in numerous cases calls our attention to the fulfillment of certain prophecies, sometimes of such a nature that perhaps we might not have discerned them to be prophecies. And yet we are not restrained by this from searching the field of prophecy and looking in the New Testament for other cases of fulfillment. … The instances of typology vouched for by the New Testament writers have nothing peculiar to themselves. To recognize only them would lead to serious incompleteness and incoherency in the result.[3]

約雅斤是基督的一個預表King Jehoiachin as a Type of Christ

約雅斤在耶路撒冷作王只有三個月,之後他就被擄到巴比倫了(王下廿四6以下)。他沒有作任何抵抗,只是單純地把自己交付給舊約聖經所說的「地獄」,即被擄。根據耶利米的記載,他是帶著咒詛而去的。在列王紀的最後一章裏,約雅斤再次出現,這次是以受巴比倫王恩待的面貌出現的。他從監獄被釋放出來,巴比倫王賜給他新的外袍,並且終其一生都在巴比倫王面前吃飯——部分地恢復了他的地位(王下廿五27-30)。Jehoiachin reigned only three months in Jerusalem before he was carried away in exile to Babylon (2 Kings 24:6ff). He didn’t put up any resistance, but simply consigned himself to Old Testament “hell,” that is, exile. According to Jeremiah, he goes bearing a curse over him. In the next and final chapter of 1-2 Kings, Jehoiachin reappears as one who is graciously dealt with by the king of Babylon. He’s released from prison, given new garments to wear and for the remainder of his life dines at the king’s table—a partial restoration has taken place (2 Kings 25:27-30).

令我們著迷的是,他那個時代的每位大先知都對以色列人說,「倘若你要認識上帝子民的未來,你必須看約雅斤。」在以西結書十七章裏,一條嫩枝——象徵約雅斤——從香柏樹的樹梢被擰去,被上帝帶到錫安山,而長成佳美的香柏樹。就以西結而言,大衛譜系的未來必要通過這個隱秘的人物——約雅斤——來延續。這個看似矛盾的悖論是先知信息的中心,這位身上籠罩著咒詛的被擄君王,會是上帝子民的未來。帕頓博士說,「只有受過審判,才能成為復興的後嗣。」這也是耶利米信息的核心。事實上,在以色列人被擄之前,耶利米也沒有什麼嘉言能對以色列人說。就在約雅斤被擄之後不久,耶利米書廿四章的記載,說到極好的無花果,這是象徵那些被擄的人,然而他們卻會有一個極為美好的未來,因為上帝會以極大的恩典復興他們。What is fascinating about him though is that each of the major prophets of his day say to Israel, If you want to know the future of the people of God, then you need to look to Jehoiachin.” In Ezekiel 17 a sprig is taken from the top of a cedar—a symbol of Jehoiachin—which God brings to Mt. Zion where it grows into this noble cedar. So as far as Ezekiel is concerned the future of the Davidic line is through this cryptic figure, Jehoiachin. The paradox that this exiled king with a curse looming over him would be the future is at the heart of the prophet’s message. Dr. Patton says, “Only once you have gone through judgment can you become an heir of restoration.” This too is at the heart of Jeremiah’s message. In fact, Jeremiah has no good words to speak to Israel until after they have been exiled. Right after Jehoiachin is exiled, Jeremiah 24 is penned which speaks of the good figs, which symbolize those who have gone through exile and yet have a future because God will graciously restore them.

然後我們來到新約,基督自己這樣說:「基督這樣受害,又進入祂的榮耀,豈不是應當的嗎?」(路廿四2-26)當然是應當的!你可以在約雅斤身上看到這點。他首先經歷了盟約咒詛(被擄)的懲罰,然後繼續以基督的一個預表的身份,成為上帝子民的未來。這個救贖歷史的模式(尤其是在君王的意義上存活下來)乃是指向耶穌的,祂必須先上十字架,承受咒詛。基於這個理由,彼得的反駁——「這事必不臨到你身上」(太十六22)——就是來自撒但的。因為若基督不上十字架,就會徹底破壞完整的救贖歷史,而接下來的復興與伴隨而來的祝福,就會被封閉起來,沒有人可以得到。以色列歷史中沒有其他的王像約雅斤一樣,如此清晰地顯明這個「榮耀之前必須受苦」或「復興之前必須受審判」的模式。約雅斤正是基督的一個預表。We then come to the New Testament and the rhetorical words of Christ himself, Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory? (Luke 24:25-26). Of course it was! And one place you could’ve gone to learn this was Jehoiachin. He first undergoes the punishment of the curse of the covenant (exile) and then goes on to become the future as a type of Christ. This redemptive-historical pattern (especially as it is lived out in a kingly sense) points forward to Jesus who must go to the cross and suffer the curse first. For this reason Peter’s rebuke—”this shall never happen to you” (Matt. 16:22)—is satanic. For Christ not to go would rip apart the very fabric of redemptive-history and the subsequent restoration and accompanying blessings would remain locked and inaccessible. No other king in Israel’s history so clearly shows this pattern of “suffering unto glory” or “judgment unto restoration” like Jehoiachin, a type of Christ.

註:
[1] Edmund Clowney, The Unfolding Mystery: Discovering Christ in the Old Testament, 14-15.
[2] Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible, gen. ed. Kevin J. Vanhoozer, 823.
[3] Geerhardus Vos, Biblical Theology, 146.




預表(type)與對範(antitype,預表的實體)的關係

摘自〈從舊約宣講基督〉Preaching Christ from the OT
隨著應許和應驗在基督裡原則的發展我們看到救贖歷史餘下的部分如何作為創世記三章15節的注腳在同樣的意義上西方哲學有時被說成是柏拉圖和亞里士多德的一個注腳。

然而我們也發現應許本身的發展是漸進和積累的隨著救贖歷史的展開它的含義也變得更為清晰。在特定的歷史階段,上帝會暗示出將要發生的事情(像一個偉大藝術家的素描會指向最終的創作)。上帝工作模式的一些例子會鑲嵌在救贖歷史當中。上帝會在祂的傑作中使用這些例子,也就是會在基督這個對範(預表的實體)中得著應驗的一些預表。保羅認為亞當和基督的關係是這種模式最重要的例證;亞當,作為一個真實的歷史人物,是那將要來之人的「預表」(tupos,羅五14[和合本譯為「預像」],儘管這類比既是正面的又是負面的,羅五12-21)。

摩西禮儀和獻祭制度有類似的功能,這是希伯來書作者的神學裡突出的主題。有真正的祭司,真正的獻祭制度和真正的血。但這些,雖然是真實的,也表徵著一個更偉大的現實,這個現實會完成它們只能描述的。希伯來書暗示,一個被祭物的血的惡臭堵塞鼻孔的真正舊約信徒,從祭司這樣日復一日,年復一年地獻祭的事實中,會推論出這些獻祭不可能帶來赦罪。他的目光必須超越這個系統(才能),望向這些獻祭所預表的——即有待應驗的上帝聖約的應許(正如希伯來書清楚表明的),望向耶穌基督自己。

但這個預表與對範(預表的實體)的原則,也在另一個、不那麼技術性的意義上運作,我們可以把這個原則稱為上帝在救贖歷史上「建立模式」(the diving patterning)。當我們把這個「基督事件」放在顯微鏡下檢視,我們會看到有一個首次出現在舊約聖經的基本表達模式。根據這個發現,當我們戴著新約眼鏡重讀舊約,我們會看到這些「基督模式」會更加清楚。上帝的足跡在舊約裡已清晰可見。

這模式的一個有趣實例,是馬太福音二章15節引用何西阿書十一章1節:「我從埃及召出我的兒子來。」馬太說, 這些話應驗在基督身上。但難道這不是深奧或天真的聖經閱讀方法嗎?何西阿是在談論出埃及記中,上帝百姓出埃及的歷史事件,而不是談論關於耶穌幼年期返回埃及的事件。那麼,馬太是怎麼想的?他是說何西阿書十一章1節,就像以賽亞書第五十三章那樣,應驗在基督身上了嗎?是的。但意義不同。反而,馬太根據道成肉身、耶穌基督的死和復活的事實,在聖靈的引導下得出這結論,意識到出埃及記的神聖模式(脫離埃及,引到曠野,被賦予盟約的束縛和國度標記)構成了一種要應用在真以色列人、耶穌基督的經歷的模式。在得出這結論的過程中,馬太提供給我們一個閱讀並闡釋整個出埃及故事的關鍵,就是以基督為中心的方法,而實際上,他自己的敘事背景豐富了我們對耶穌的身份和事工的理解。

在救贖歷史上,另一個這種重複模式的例子,是以利沙治癒書念婦人的兒子(王下四8)。以利沙通過施行神蹟,展示出上帝對普通卑微的窮人---寡婦和不育婦女的密切關心。後來,治癒書念婦人兒子的事件重現在拿因城,耶穌也醫好了寡婦的兒子(路七11)。路加的意思是向他的讀者強調,根據拿因城人的心態,他們熟知以利沙(跟隨以利亞)在他們小城內施行神蹟(瑪拉基書第四章5節關於他會回來的應許,應驗在馬太福音第四章5節施洗約翰身上)。拿因城在舊約書念這地點的附近。甚至拿因城人對耶穌的反應重現了這遙遠的典故事件:「一位偉大的先知在我們當中出現了!上帝眷顧祂的百姓。」他們彷彿是在說:「以前這裡發生過這樣的事;自以利沙以來,我們仍然期待更好的事情會出現---先知本人。難道這就是祂?」

所以我們應該看到重複的模式,在耶穌基督身上完滿實現。祂是醫治人的偉大先知,不只是通過上帝委派給祂的權力,而且憑著祂自己的權柄,不必通過儀式和禱告,而是用帶著能力的簡單一句話。這是偉大的上帝和在肉身中顯現的以色列救主,祂的位格既是所有模式的原版,也是所有模式的終末成全,並且呼應著向歷代百姓所預言的恩典。是的,上帝終於在祂兒子的道成肉身上,眷顧祂的百姓。但很明顯地,這回過頭顯明了以利沙的作用。現在我們既在他個人背景的微觀現實之内,又在他救贖歷史模式的宏觀現實意義之內,明白他的醫治的重要意義。

當我們深入地了解兩約,會越來越認識舊約當中的迴響。當我們對這些模式和典故變得敏感,從舊約到基督的線索就會變得更加清晰,也更容易去繪描。