Baptist Press puts together a helpful comparison here.
Filed under Bible and Theology, Cultural Engagement, Evangelism and Apologetics
Sorry, but I’m not sure the link is working.
I think it’s working now,
You may remember me as I wrote last winter about your essay on Skull Crushing Seed and whether Golgotha could have a connection to the skill of Goliath as a typological escalation of the OT examples of that running theme. I’ve continued to study and have enjoyed many of your other articles. In looking at cited Advent text along with reading your essay on Is 7:14, I have a question. I understand your point that Matthew may be using a formula with the word “fulfilled” in ch’s 1-2 of his Gospel to point to a type rather than a predictive fulfillment. But when I read Micah 5:2, it seems like the historical context there is not too different from Is 7 & 8, with themes of judgment and deliverance from Assyria mentioned. Why isn’t the quote of Micah 5:2 by Matthew typological rather than predictive?
Thanks for your note. I’ll return to the wider context of Micah 5 to give it further thought, and I may wind up agreeing with you that it’s more typological than predictive.
I think what initially led me to the position that it seems more predictive than typological was the fact that Matthew doesn’t use the “this was spoken to fulfill” language when he introduces that quotation from Micah 5:2.
Thanks for encouraging me to take another look!
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out / Change )
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.
Join 191 other followers