Abraham was a type of Christ. Moses was a type of Christ. King David was a type of Christ. These patriarchs were types of Christ, but they were not Christ. This means they possessed many characteristics of Jesus, yet they were also humans born into sin and had many flaws. Although they made mistakes, should we follow those mistakes to justify our own weaknesses or lack of faith? No, we are to learn and follow their decisions of righteousness and truth.
Definition of Type:
1 A category of people or things having common characteristics.
2 A person or thing symbolizing or exemplifying the ideal or defining characteristics of something.
Let us first examine the story of Abraham. God promised Abraham an heir, but due to human nature and impatience, Abraham and Sarai decided—particularly at Sarai’s urging—to have her handmaid, Hagar, bear a child for Abraham. This decision interfered with God’s original plan. In their culture, when a handmaid like Hagar produced a child for Abraham, the child legally belonged to Sarai, not Hagar. The handmaid served as a proxy for the wife. In modern terms, this would be akin to a wife arranging for another woman to act as a surrogate, using her husband’s sperm, with the surrogate being paid for her services and the relationship ending afterward. Although Ishmael was born and declared the father of princes, he received only gifts and was sent away from the promised heir, Isaac. Moreover, his descendants became a persistent thorn to the promised people.
If we compare this to Jacob’s secondary wives, what is the difference between the two stories? Why were some of Jacob’s sons, born to the handmaids Bilhah and Zilpah, included among the Twelve Tribes of Israel? I asked AI about Bilhah and Zilpah and their nationality. The AI referenced rabbinical teachings, such as Pirke De-Rabbi Eliezer, which suggest that Bilhah and Zilpah were daughters of Laban by his concubines, making them half-sisters to Leah and Rachel. In contrast, Hagar was an Egyptian, and thus Ishmael was sent away. Regardless, the sons produced by Bilhah and Zilpah legally belonged to Leah and Rachel, respectively, as the handmaids acted as proxies. In that culture, secondary wives were still considered concubines. The handmaids return to their position as servants. Being a type of Christ does not mean Jesus Himself would engage in intimacy with concubines or secondary wives. He comes for His Bride, the Church.
Moses was a type of Christ, and God’s original plan was for him to lead the Israelites into the Promised Land. However, because Moses burst into rage and disobeyed God by striking the rock, he was denied entry. Should we say we can burst into rage and misrepresent God, yet still expect our children to enter the Promised Land? Jesus did not give in to rage like a mere human.
King David was a type of Christ, but he was also a murderer and an adulterer who stole another man’s wife. Should we say we can murder and steal a wife to produce a king? Through this sinful ordeal, Solomon was born and eventually became king. Should we justify our sins and weaknesses by claiming that if sin abounds, grace abounds more? Most likely, Solomon was not God’s original plan but an alternative.
Adam and Eve interfered with God’s original plan by sinning and eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Yet God covered their shame by making clothes from animal skins, requiring animals to die for humanity’s sake. Should we say that because of Adam’s actions, we can experience the love of Jesus, who came to save the world? Does grace give us a license to sin because grace will abound? The Bible addresses this clearly: “Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? Certainly not!” (Romans 6:1–2).
If we misuse grace, we miss its purpose and risk trampling on it. God weaves our constant mistakes into His plan through His grace, adjusting from the original design to save us and remain faithful to His Word.
As the Bible says, “According to your faith, let it be unto you!” (Matthew 9:29).
Senior Pastor Steve Kim