An update to "The maleness of Christianity"

For background, see my original post "The maleness of Christianity".

Me to blogger:

You said, “I would argue that God did not appoint all priests in the OT to be men; society appointed all priests to be men. The Son of God was a man yes, but he came in the world to be human (there is a significant difference).”

Please be careful not to undermine the reason why God gave the priesthood to Aaron and his sons (all male) (Numbers 3). The priests were to be male because God was sending his Son (who was male) to be the everlasting high priest and all other priests were simply types pointing to Christ (Heb 4:14). Similarly, when God told Moses in Exodus 12:5, “Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male a year old” He was also creating a pointer to Christ. Christ would be a male without blemish.

As much as people want to make this a male vs female thing, this “male requirement” has absolutely nothing to do with how much God values males or females. It has everything to do with pointing us to Christ. The maleness of the priests and the lambs was important, not trivial, God-dictated, not society-dictated. To say otherwise misses the point in it all.

Blogger:

Thank you for your response!
Your hermeneutic is valid, yet one that I disagree with. Typology removes the human element from scripture, and reduces it to nothing more than divine dictation.

Me:

I never cease to be amazed by the diversity of opinions among Christians. And yours is quite interesting indeed! It seems clear enough you mean for “divine dictation” to be derogatory, as if words from God are somehow less personal and meaningful than words from humans. Yet, “divine dictation” (words that proceed from God’s mouth) is exactly how Paul describes Scripture in 2 Timothy 3:16 and Peter in 2 Peter 1:20-21. Oh that everyone would see the Bible as divine dictation! We’d all take the Bible much more seriously then! Seeing the Bible any other way is what reduces it. I’d embrace truth sourced from God over “truth” sourced from humans any day.

That said, types are used rather explicitly in the Bible, and for good reason:

the flood is a type of baptism (1 Peter 3:20-21)
the tabernacle where the priests served was a type of what is in heaven (Hebrews 8:5, 9:24)
the entrance procedure into the Most Holy Place by the High Priest was a type of the present time (Hebrews 9:8-9)
the veil of the tabernacle is a type of Christ’s body (Hebrews 10:19-20)
the feasts and Sabbath are a type of things to come (Colossians 2:16-17)
the whole sacrificial system is a type (Hebrews 9:19-26)
the Passover lamb is a type of Christ (1 Corinthians 5:7)
Adam is a type of Christ (Romans 5:14)
the bronze serpent, lifted up in the wilderness for physical healing of the people is a type of the lifted-up Christ (Numbers 21:8, John 3:14, John 12:32, Isaiah 53:5)
Melchizedek was a type of Christ….(Hebrews 7)
the rock the Israelites drank from was Christ….(1 Corinthians 10:4)
the bread at communion is a type of Christ’s body (Matthew 26:26)
the wine at communion is a type of Christ’s blood of the covenant (Matthew 26:28)

Is the significance of the wine I drink at communion “reduced” because it is a “type” of Christ’s blood? No, in fact the only reason the wine has significance at all is because it is a “type” of Christ’s blood.