# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_1998_S60
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

60

9

10
1]

SYNODICAL REPORTS

the one hand, their exegesis is viewed as frequently insightful
and their writings as legitimate conversation partners in our
present exposition of the Bible. Martin Chemnitz might serve
as a paradigm for this methodology.

On the other hand. the Bible, with some attention to Luther,
Walther, etc., is seen as the basic scope of theological exposi-
tion. There is such an emphasis on sola scriptura (Scripture
alone) that no effort is made to show continuity with the lower-
case ‘catholic’ tradition. Here a variety of exegetes could be
cited who consistently go directly from Bible to exposition
without benefit of consulting the patristic and Reformation un-
derstandings of the texts.

According to this view, it is proper to understand the
intervening referent as both a sign (Is. 7:14) pointing to, and a
seal (Hag. 2:23) upon, the sure fulfillment in Christ.

Thus, Robert Preus reminds us (The Theology of Post-
Reformation Lutheranism: A Study of Theological
Prolegomena [St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1970},
329), in discussing the interpretation of Hosea 11:1 and the
differing views of Calov (rectilinear) and Michael Walther
(typological): “In all the long discussions of the Lutheran
theologians on allegory (always as an extended metaphor) and
typology we notice that the basic principle of sensus literalis
unus est is never violated or weakened.”

Paul (Phil. 3:17; 1 Thess. 1:7; 2 Thess. 3:9; 1 Tim. 4:12; Titus
2:7) and Peter (1 Pet. 5:3) can use the same word (tuxoc) in
the simple sense of an order or pattern of life which the
Christians should exhibit. It is, however, clearly the broader
usage of the word that is in view in the discussion on
prophecy and fulfillment.

Additional examples are surveyed by Paul Althaus in The
Theology of Martin Luther (Philadelphia: Fortress Press,
1966), 96-102. See Friedrich Ohly, “Die Typologies in
Luthers Schriftauslegung,” Gesetz und Evangelium. Zur
Typologie bei Luther und Lucas Cranach. Zum Blutstrahl der
Gnade in der Kunst (Miinster: Aschendorff, 1985), 11-15.
E.g., Luther encourages Christians to pray Psalm 111, a
Passover psalm, upon reception of the Lord’s Supper, and he
views the physical sufferings of the people of Israel as a
symbo! of the sufferings endured by the Christian church.

An even fuller treatment of the Reformer’s typological
methodology is Akira Takamori’s dissertation “Typologische
Auslegung des Alten Testaments? Eine wortgeschichtlich Un-
tersuchung.” Unpublished Dissertation. University of Zurich,
1966. See also Giinther Bornkamm, Luther and the Old Testa-
ment (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1969).

Wherever “type” is used in the translation, the Latin
equivalent is typus.

Philogia Sacra, Leipzig: 1713, especially pp. 441-71.

A type sets forth some fact from the Old Testament which
prefigures or foreshadows an episode or event in the New
Testament. Allegory expounds a matter from the Old or the
New Testament in a new sense or adapts it to a spiritual
doctrine or a facet of spiritual life. Typology consists in the
comparison of facts. Allegory is not so much concerned with
facts as with their arrangement, from which it draws out a
useful or hidden doctrine. Loci Theologici (1. Tiibingen: I. B.
Cotta, 1762), 69.

The mystical sense, as it may be loosely styled, is divided by
the Lutheran theologians into allegorical, typical, and
parabolical. It is called the allegorical sense when a Scriptural
historical narrative of things that really occurred is applied to
a certain mystery or spiritual doctrine by the intention of the
Holy Spirit in an allegorical manner; it is typical when, under
external called facts or prophetic visions, things hidden, either
present or future, are prefigured, or especially matters related
to the New Testament are shadowed forth; and parabolical
when something is described as having really occurred, and
yet applied to designate something else that is spiritual.
System Locorum Theologicorum 1, 665.

See Harmonia Biblica sive Brevis et Plana Conciliatio Locorum
Veteris et Novi Testamenti Apparenter sibi Contradicentium
(Nuremberg, 1645), 204-206.

14
15

16
17

18

20

William F. Arndt, Commentary on Luke (St. Louis: Concordia
Publishing House, 1956), 427.

Fuerbringer, L., Einleitung des Alte Testament (Saint Louis:
Concordia Publishing House, 1913); Stoeckhardt, G., Christ
in Old Testament Prophecy (Fort Wayne: Concordia
Theological Seminary Press, 1984); Maier, W., The Psalms
(Saint Louis: Concordia Seminary Mimeo Co., n.d.); Laetsch,
T., Bible Commentary: Jeremiah (Saint Louis: Concordia
Publishing House, 1952).

See Lehre und Wehre, Vol. 66 (1920), 132-35.

William J. Hassold, “Rectilinear or Typological Interpretation
of Messianic Prophecy?” Concordia Theological Monthly 38
(1965), 155-67. ;
Thus, the overture to the 1965 synodical convention “To
Petition the Detroit Convention to Reaffirm the Historical
Christian Doctrine that the Old Testament Directly Predicts a
Personal Messiah,” which sought to legislate the exegesis of
certain passages, was given the response of Resolution 2-26,
“To Reaffirm Our Belief that the Old Testament Prophecies
of the Savior Are Fulfilled in Jesus Christ.” Resolution 2-26
resolved that “we reaffirm our belief that the Old Testament
prophecies of the Savior find their fulfillment in Jesus Christ,
the Son of God and the Savior of sinners.” No specific
prophecies are articulated.

Indeed, it is clear that a simplistic, surface reading of the
New Testament evidence about the fulfillment of specific
prophecies may lead one astray. For example, it is sometimes
objected that the speakers in the New Testament negate the pos-
sibility of the fulfillment of an Old Testament passage/prophecy
prior to the fulfillment in Christ. See, e.g., Acts 2:34-36:

For David did not ascend to heaven, and yet he said, “The
Lord said to my Lord: “Sit at my right hand until I make your
enemies a footstool for your feet.” “Therefore let all Israel be
assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified,
both Lord and Christ” (NIV).

It should be noted, however, that on the surface Scripture
negates statements or ideas that are clearly true. St. Paul pre-
sents an interesting example in | Cor. 9:9-10a, with the inter-
pretation of Deut. 25:4: “For it is written in the Law of Moses:
‘Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain.” Is it
about oxen that God is concerned? Surely he says this for us,.
..” (NIV). Surely it is not right to understand Deut. 25:4 simply
and only as a text referring to New Testament proclaimers of
the Gospel and not to the treatment of animals of labor. No Old
Testament Jew would have been allowed to muzzle his live-
stock while working, on the basis of the argument that the
words of this text were not talking about muzzling livestock at
all but only about activity related to the preaching of the Gospel
in the time following the coming of the Messiah, when apos-
tles, evangelists, and other proclaimers of the Good News
would appear! Paul’s point is that the Old Testament referent
of this text is of penultimate concern. This construction has
been called dialectical negation, i.e., one in which one possi-
bility is denied to emphasize and to highlight what is finally im-
portant, and to bring that point into focus.

See e.g., Charles P. Arand and James W. Voelz, “The
Lutheran Confessions as Normative Guides for Reading
Scripture,” Concordia Journal 21 (1995), 371-75.

See Robert Preus, The Theology of Post Reformation
Lutheranism, 2:328. Here Preus states: “With its emphasis on
types in the Old Testament (Melchizedek, Adam, the stairs of
Jacob, the sacrifices, the crossing of the Red Sea, the manna,
the fiery serpent, etc.) and on direct predictive prophecy
where the prophetic words themselves pointed directly to
Christ, classical Lutheranism shows that in a sense it regarded
the entire Old Testament as typological, as a foreshadowing
and a blueprint, as it were, for the work of Christ and the
coming of His kingdom. This would account for the fact that
the New Testament so often and at times with apparent
caprice finds allusions and types and prophecies of Christ
throughout the Old Testament. The same Spirit of God is
author of the Old Testament Scriptures, which point to the
coming Christ and prepare for Him, and of the New
Testament Scriptures, which testify of the Christ who has