ection>
Who is this Rock?
Hearing the Gospel in the Rocks and Stones of Scripture
by Garrett Soucy
Who is this Rock?
Hearing the Gospel In the Rocks and Stones of Scripture
Copyright © 2018 Garrett Soucy. All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations in critical publications or reviews, no part of this book may be reproduced in any manner without prior written permission from the publisher. Write: Permissions, Wipf and Stock Publishers, 199 W. 8th Ave., Suite 3, Eugene, OR 97401.
Wipf & Stock
An Imprint of Wipf and Stock Publishers
199 W. 8th Ave., Suite 3
Eugene, OR 97401
www.wipfandstock.com
paperback isbn: 978-1-5326-1917-5
hardcover isbn: 978-1-4982-4533-3
ebook isbn: 978-1-4982-4532-6
Manufactured in the U.S.A.
“Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture quotations are from the ESV® Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®), copyright © 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
To Siiri.
You are my heart.
And to my father and mother.
Thank you for your faithfulness to God.
Chapter 1
Gregory of Nazianzus has famously said of the Trinity that we cannot think of the Father without thinking of the Son and the Spirit; and we cannot think of the Son without thinking of the Father and the Spirit; and we cannot think of the Spirit without thinking of the Father and the Son. An image is conjured of the Apps page on the desktop of a computer with one icon positioned in the direct center, in full color; flanked on either side, by all the other (slightly transparent) apps that one could engage. As soon as one is brought to the center, the others reorganize around it—still visible, but in the wings.
Gregory’s triad is helpful on a number of Scriptural fronts, typology being one of them. When a passage on the Lord’s Supper says that in partaking we “proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes” (1 Cor 11:261), we must not ever think of his death as something to be considered without the resurrection and the gospel being fixed in the margins. We don’t only remember his death; we do, however, remember his death as a focus during the meal. And so on.
This kind of multiplicity in our thinking is important, so that one does not become one-dimensional when viewing types and allegories in the Scriptures. According to Galatians 4, Sarah and Hagar are both historical and allegorical placeholders. Similarly, there needn’t be undue pressure if a passage apparently speaks to both Christ’s suffering and his resurrection. The serpent in Genesis must be read both literally and allegorically. No one believes it was merely a snake.
The ability to handle any multiplicity of textual meaning, however, does not solve the problem of understanding whether or not an Old Testament passage is positioned to be interpreted typologically. And if it is, what is the right interpretation? If Paul had not told us that Sarah was the New Covenant and Hagar was the Old Covenant, what would keep us from interpreting Hagar as the present age and Sarah as the age to come? When we try to understand a portion of text or a concept, based on its place in a larger context, we are practicing hermeneutics. Hermeneutics has long been defined as the art and science of interpretation. Here is one of the many places in which both art and science are required to cooperate, in order to more fully benefit the student.
In order to see clearly, we need to know what we are using for a lens. In order to best understand the Old Testament, we need a healthy understanding of the historical context, the intended audience, and a bit about the author. Once we have that, however, we are best fitted to feast on the passage when we don the lens of the promises being fulfilled in Christ. Without this, we will be sorting through a mess of loose ends. A helpful maxim to remember is, “we interpret the Old Testament in light of the New Testament.” Old Testament typology and redemptive history both employ a Hebrew syntax. By that, I mean that they are better understood when read from right to left—Biblical understanding begins in the clear light of the New Testament, and works its light backwards. This is why the apostles’ names are on the foundation stones of the heavenly city and not the patriarchs, even though the patriarchs came first (Rev 21:14).
The fact that hermeneutics is defined as a double-helix of both art and science tells us that some people will be inclined to err in the direction of the scientific. These people are often suspicious of any artistry and imagination in the work of exegesis. They avoid the works of the church fathers who tended to not be afraid of allegory and typology. In the same manner, those who err in the direction of the artistic are often guilty of eisegesis.
A good hermeneutic is like a geometrician who can acknowledge that his math, when it is true, graphs out beautifully and accurately. Again, a good hermeneutic is like a painter who can acknowledge that her painting is more beautiful when it is true. These three ancient qualities of truth, goodness, and beauty are not pitted against each other; on the contrary, they may be the closest thing we have to an abstract analogy of the Trinity.
No doubt, many will dismiss this work as having put too much weight on the artistic leg. Some will accuse it of finding Jesus under every rock in the Old Testament. To that I can only say, “Well, not every rock.”
Mortimer Adler says that the goal of all reading is to create syntopical thinkers.2 By this, he means that, regardless of the text one is reading at present, one is able to make connections between countless other writings—across genres, yielding manifold applications to the conversation or text in hand. In a similar sense, the goal of this book is to create syn-textual readers of the Bible. When we learn to think, within bounds, in a typological and allegorical manner, the recognition of one character, one trait, or one motif in any passage of Scripture can then stimulate cross-textual referencing and understanding. When seen as a vast network of connected meaning, our appreciation of the Bible will only grow. As our understanding expands, in light of the continuity that exists in shared imagery throughout the text, we will love the nourishment we find in this Book that will forever dwarf us.
Of course, this is not to suggest that imaginative readings, allegory, and typology should displace a grammitico-historical method of interpretation; it should accompany it. It is my desire to practice Biblical exegesis, and to serve others from streams that have refreshed me. If the art and science are clumsy dance partners, if there is a limp from favoring the artistic leg, that is my fault. My hope is that the reader will find the water to be real, and not a mirage.
1. Unless otherwise indicated, the English Standard Version is used when citing Scripture in this book.
2. Adler, How to Read a Book, 301.
Chapter 2
So early in the morning Jacob took the stone that he had put under his head and set it up for a pillar and poured oil on the top of it. He called the name of that place Bethel, but the name of the city was Luz at the first. Then Jacob made a vow, saying, “If God will be with me and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to eat and clothing to wear, so that I come again to my father’s house in peace, then the Lord shall be my God, and this stone, which I have set up for a pillar, shall be God’s house. And of all that you give me I will give a full tenth to you.” (Gen 28:18-22)
When the Biblical patriarchs