I very much appreciate your keen eye for typology and the like. As a pastor, I continually find myself thinking “That’s cool. So what?” I know that’s what many of my parishioners are thinking, so I try to show the importance and application of intertextual connections. I’d very much like to hear your reflections on the pastoral value of typology.
Today, I talk to James Bejon about the book of Judges. You should follow him on Twitter.
What are we to make of the echoes of Genesis 1-2:3 in John 1-2:11? Is there any correlation between the days in Genesis and the days in John?
Could you respond to some of the criticisms raised by this review of Echoes of Exodus?
I would like to ask a two-part question: (a) could you give a defense from the Scripture for figural preaching and typological reading; (b) how would you respond to the criticism of typological exegesis as a way seeking hidden meanings and connection that probably no one else has noticed, thus focused a lot on novelty?
Why does Paul say that Sarah and Hagar represent two covenants in Galatians 4:21-31? Where can we see this reality in the Old Testament?
I loved your observations on how Gen 12-14 traces out the history of Israel (in advance of that history!). Fascinating stuff! Could you kindly elaborate some more on that? For example, is Sarai representative of Israel in Egyptian captivity? Who does Lot represent, etc.?
A plug for James Jordan’s Through New Eyes: Developing a Biblical View of the World and some other books for those wanting to read the Bible for all its worth.
Is the task of exegesis limited to discovering the author’s original intention, or can meaning somehow overflow intention? If so, in what way? What guardrails are in place that would enable us to recognize certain readings as off-limits? A common text referenced in these discussions is Matthew 2:15’s usage of Hosea 11:1, so I’d be interested to hear your take on that as well.