Christotypism

i may have already mentioned my sermon series on Lamentations, thankfully the moose is up. it's done, done, done.

i had a squiz at the Perspective website (a resource set up by a bunch of pastors with helpful tips for preachers)

for interest's sake i had a look, and they gave three ways of looking at the OT, and specifically the book of Lamentations;

1/ A Christotelic Approach - Jesus the fulfillment of the OT. OT sets up the problem, Jesus is sent by God as the solution to them.

2/ A Christotypic Approach - the OT provides the shadow, Jesus is the epitome.

3/ An Exemplary Approach - look at the examples of good and bad. learn from it.

(this was from Bryson Smith's outline - not to be confused with Byron Smith)


i think there are places for all three of these approaches.

my previous post refers to a group who may use 3/ a whole heap, i'm not sure of the extent of the other two.

in our church's series on the story of life used 1/ a heap more.

going through Lamentations, a few years ago i would definitely have used 1/ and 3/. but this time around it was 2/ all the way.


it was hard, it felt almost wrong to say that Jerusalem was a "type" of Christ. the language is of Jerusalem being the annointed one, God's holy one, almost messianic. [like the (relatively) new Jewish reading of Isaiah 52-53.]

Jesus came as Jerusalem, was punished as Jerusalem.

and thinking through the atonement after having read Lamentations in a Christotypic way made it a whole lot clearer.

and i pray this was also true for the fellow-travellers.