I'd want to investigate the possibility that typology (as a view of history) is the fundamental presupposition/ basis for the way the different phases of the bible relate to one another, in particular for the relationship between the new and the old testaments. I'd probably want to investigate in particular my hunch that typology undergirds the ways the apostles and other NT authors interpreted the OT, and that all the different ways of describing how we 'get to Christ' from the OT are bound together by typology in some way.
I think some of the cash-value would be;
- Rescuing apostolic exegesis from those who want to say we can't imitate their methods.
- Opening up a greater appreciation for some patristic exegesis (and providing a proper framework for assessing when analogical stuff goes too far).
- Moving towards developing a philosophy of history that is biblical and Christological.
- Increasing people's appreciation (including my own) for Hebrew narrative (which, it strikes me, has a fair bit of typology in it).
- Thinking through issues of referent and fulfilment(s) of prophecy in all the bible.
- Opening up levels of typological allusion that will enrich the church's understanding of scripture and combat exegetical minimalism.
- Moving towards providing a framework for a balanced assessment of maximalism and its proper bounds.
- Give some tools for genuine word ministry among not-so-wordy cultures (I suspect typology, with its associational way of thinking has lots to help 'less booky' people)..