My pastor had taught me that the sacrificial system pointed toward Christ, but I had never heard this language of type. As I listened to him, I was intrigued and confused. What I realized that night is that the Old Testament is far more interesting than I could have ever imagined.

I came for teriyaki, what I got was typology.

 

Defining Typology

What our English versions translate as “type” comes from the Greek τύπος. Typos means “a mark made as the result of a blow or pressure, mark, trace.”[1] It can also mean, “an archetype serving as a model, type, pattern.”[2]

Typos appears fifteen times in the New Testament. Paul identifies Adam as a type of one who was to come, namely Christ (Ro 5:14). The Exodus and God’s provision for Israel is described as an example for us to follow (1Co 10:6). Thomas declared that he would not believe in the resurrected Christ unless he saw the nail mark on his body (Jn 20:25). While not using the exact word, typos, the author of Hebrews conceptually illustrates it when he writes that, “the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities” (Heb 10:1). These examples reveal that a type is something that directs us to a greater reality. Some definitions from biblical scholars will help us complete the picture.

Vern Poythress writes, “Typology is the study of types. This study belongs to the larger subject of principles for interpreting the Bible. And what is the type? Roughly speaking, a type is a symbol specially designed by God to point for- ward to a fulfillment.”[3] James Hamilton says, “Typology is God-ordained, author-intended historical correspondence and escalation in significance between people, events, and institutions across the Bible’s redemptive-historical story.”[4]

Michael V.P. Barrett gives this helpful definition: “Type and antitype must be defined together. A type is an object lesson, a symbol, that foreshadows or predicts the actual, future realization or fulfillment of the pictured truth. This is why I like to define a type simply as a ‘picture prophecy.’ An antitype is the future realization to which the type points; it is the fulfillment of the picture prophecy. Types are divinely inspired analogies whose salient points not only correspond to but also predict the reality, the antitype, the main topic of the revelation…typology is not simply an interpretation technique arbitrarily foisted on a text to give it Christian relevance; instead, it is an integral and divinely intended part of the revelation.”[5]

Fundamentally, a type is a person, place, event, or thing that pictures, points, and peaks in Jesus Christ. Typology is the study of types.

 

Depicting Typology

When it comes to identifying types, we immediately run into a problem. There is no consensus among biblical scholars in recognition of types. Even scholars who share the same hermeneutical approach and teach at the same seminary disagree about specific types.[6]

While a thorough review of the types is beyond the scope of this article, a brief mention of the widely recognized types is beneficial.[7]

Person

Adam is called a type of Christ (Ro 5:14). Whereas Adam brought sin and death into the world (Ro 5:12-13), Christ brings righteousness and life into the world (Ro 5:15-21).

Place

Central to Israel’s religious identity was the Tabernacle and later the Temple. Here, God dwelt with his people (Ex 25:8), sacrifices for sin were made (Lev 4-6), and the High Priest mediated for his people (Lev 16). In his incarnation, John stated that Jesus dwelt (skēnoō: pitched his tent or “tabernacled”) among us (Jn 1:14). In Jesus, is all the fullness of God (Col 2:9), who is God’s presence (Mt 1:22-23), he is the sacrifice (Heb 9:11-12, 26-28, 10:10-14), and he is the High Priest through whom we have access to God (Jn 14:6; Heb 4:4-16, 10:19-22).

Event

Passover involved the slaying of a spotless lamb, its blood being applied to the home’s doorposts, leading to that inside being passed over from God’s judgment and redeemed from slavery (Ex 12). Jesus is the spotless (Jn 19:36, 1Pe 1:19), Passover lamb (1Co 5:7) who was sacrificed as the Passover lambs were being sacrificed (Jn 19:14)

Thing

God’s people sinned and were judged with deadly serpents. God instructed Moses to construct a bronze serpent and place it on a pole. Anyone who looked at it would be delivered and live (Nu 21:4-9). Jesus told Nicodemus, “And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilder- ness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life” (Jn 3:14-15).

In each of these depictions, Barrett’s definition of “picture prophecy” is vindicated. Each type pictures Christ and prepares for his greater fulfillment. At this point, an important clarification is needed. Recognition of types does not warrant typological interpretation.

 

Distorted Typology

Some erroneously charge Dispensationalists with rejecting types and typology. Though differing in identification and methodology, Dispensationalists have always employed typology—some more precisely than others.[8] What Dispensationalists reject is typological interpretation. In his response to James Hamilton’s assertion that Dispensationalism blinds people from typology, Michael Vlach clarifies, “Dispensationalism affirms types in Scripture. Certain Old Testament entities prefigure or point to greater New Testament realities. We see this with Adam and Jesus, David and Jesus, the Mosaic Covenant and the New Covenant, the feasts of Israel and Jesus, and more. Thus, types and the study of types (i.e., typology) are legitimate topics for study. Dispensationalism affirms the importance of types and their significances. These reveal God’s hand as He providentially moves in history. With them, we also see important patterns and connections in the Bible.”[9]

He goes on to explain, “While recognizing types in Scripture, Dispensationalism rejects typological interpretation. Typological interpretation is a hermeneutical tactic that views typological connections as the primary way to understand the Bible’s storyline—even over explicit statements in Scripture. The Old Testament is viewed as a vast landscape of inferior types that lose significance with the coming of Jesus. Typological interpretation leads to the removal of the significance of matters like national Israel, land, and physical blessings.”[10]

Reckless typology gives way to allegory. The Tabernacle’s bars are seen as representative of the Holy Spirit and eternal security.[11] Sermons from Joshua allegorize Rahab’s deliverance. The red rope represents Christ’s blood, and like Rahab, we find deliverance through the scarlet. The truth that Jesus is the true Israel is taken to mean that Israel’s nation- al identity, promised land, and future dissolve into an undefined Christology.

This is the heart of the matter.  If typology changes authorial intent, original meaning, or leads to embracing novel interpretation, allegorization, or spiritualization, it must be rejected.

A feature of covenant theology is the failure to apply a consistent literal, grammatical, historic hermeneutic. This is most seen in its handling of prophecy. Two centuries ago, with sharp clarity, J.C. Ryle admonished us, “Cast aside the old traditional idea that Jacob, and Israel, and Judah, and Jerusalem, and Zion must always mean the Gentile Church, and that predictions about the second Advent are to be taken spiritually, and first Advent predictions literally. Be just, and honest, and fair. If you expect the Jews to take the 53rd of Isaiah literally, be sure you take the 54th, 60th, and 62nd literally also.”[12]

Failure in normative hermeneutics is not limited to prophecy. Typology is often a vehicle for spiritualizing and allegorizing biblical texts—especially about Israel.[13]

Darrell Bock identifies spiritualized typology as inherently Platonic.[14] Allegorizing, spiritualizing, or using typology to evade normative reading of texts is a holdover from Roman Catholicism. While Dispensationalists are routinely chided and dismissed by Reformed theologians, it is Dispensational hermeneutics that is the true heir of Sola Scriptura. The Reformers recovered a literal, grammatical, historic hermeneutic and employed it consistently in their doctrines of the Scripture, Christ, and salvation. They were inconsistent in their doctrines of the church and the end times, giving way to spiritualizing and allegorizing texts. Dispensationalism brought the reformed hermeneutic to completion.[15]

We must appreciate the Reformers, but we need to advance past them at this point. Ryle reflected, “The Protestant Reformers were not perfect. On no point, I venture to say, were they so much in the wrong as in the interpretation of Old Testament prophecy.”[16] Additionally, he wrote, “I consider the best of men are not infallible. I think we should remember that we must reject Protestant traditions which are not according to the Bible, as much as the traditions of the Church of Rome.”[17] Our objective is not fidelity to a system, but to Scripture.

 

Dispensationalist Typology

Because of abstruse and conflicting expressions of typology, interpreters may be tempted to abandon it altogether.[18] If we give way to this frustration, we rob ourselves of discovering divinely planted picture prophecies. Two typological errors must be avoided: ignoring them and obsessing over them. A consistent and careful literal, grammatical, and historical interpretation will safeguard us against typological ignorance and excess. A normative reading of Scripture enables us to recognize them.

Roy Zuck cautions, “Seeing types in the Old Testament does not mean the Bible student should look for hidden or deeper meanings in the text. He should stick with the historical facts as recorded in the Old Testament. In other words, the type should rise naturally out of the text, and should not be something the interpreter is reading into the text.”[19]

Sinclair Ferguson encourages a judicious typology, “Stick to the clear indications from the New Testament regarding how typology operates…My advice is to have good controls on the way you do typology. The best way is to begin with the clear teaching of the New Testament rather than to start making up types from the Old Testament.”[20]

When identifying types, innovation is no virtue. God has planted these pictures. The interpreter’s task is not to invent but uncover them. We discover types as we read the Bible in a normal way, seeing biblical writers allude to or identify types. Additionally, types come into focus as we see Christ and his atoning work clearly prefigured.

With careful, prayerful, normative reading of Scripture, we can practice a biblical typology.[21]

 

Devotional Typology

All of Scripture is about Jesus Christ. Quoting a Welch minister, Spurgeon told his congregation, “From every text in Scripture, there is a road to the metropolis of the Scriptures that is Christ”[22] While Spurgeon may be overstating,[23] the sentiment of Christ’s scriptural centrality is true.

To his disciples, Luke records that Jesus, “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets…interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself” (Lk 24:27). The result? “They said to each other, ‘Did not our hearts burn within us while he talked to us on the road, while he opened to us the Scriptures?’” (Lk 24:32).

Biblical typology can be a rich expression of biblical theology. Biblical doctrine is fuel for devotional affection.  When not distorted, typology enlightens the mind and warms the heart. It reinforces Scripture’s unity and helps us savor Jesus Christ.

“Let it be a rule with us, in the reading of our Bibles, to study the types and ordinances of the Mosaic law with prayerful attention. They are all full of Christ. The altar, the scape-goat, the daily burnt-offering, the day of atonement, are all so many sign-posts pointing to the great sacrifice offered by our Lord on Calvary. Those who neglect to study the Jewish ordinances, as dark, dull, and uninteresting parts of the Bible, only show their own ignorance, and miss great advantages. Those who examine them with Christ as the key to their meaning, will find them full of Gospel light and comfortable truth.” – J.C. Ryle[24]

 

---

ENDNOTES

[1] William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 1019.

[2] Ibid., 1020.

[3] Vern S. Poythress, Biblical Typology: How the Old Testament Points to Christ, His Church, and the Consummation (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2024), 5.

[4] James M. Hamilton Jr, Typology: Understanding the Bible’s Promise-Shaped Patterns (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2022), 26.

[5] Michael V.P. Barrett, Beginning at Moses: A Guide to Finding Christ in the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 2018), 229-230.

[6] For an illuminating example of this, see this three-part series by Bob Jones University Semi- nary faculty debating the validity of Joseph as a type of Christ: Greg Stiekes, “Seeing Joseph as a Type of Christ,” Ken Casillas, “Joseph Retyped,” and Layton Talbert, “To Type or Not to Type” at seminary.bju.edu/theology-in-3d.

[7] For more thorough treatments of types, see Michell L. Chase, 40 Questions about Typology and Allegory (Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic, 2020), 123-189; and James M. Hamilton Jr., Typology: Understanding the Bible’s Promise- Shaped Patterns (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2022), 33-330.

[8] See Roy B. Zuck, Basic Bible Interpretation (Colorado Springs: David C. Cook, 1991), 169-193; J. Dwight Pentecost, Things to Come (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1958), 50-53; Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism (Grand Rapids:  Baker Books, 2000), 52.

[9] Michael J. Vlach, Dispensational Hermeneutics (Cary, NC: Theological Studies Press, 2023), 72.

[10] Ibid., 74.

[11] C.H. Hinman, Lectures on the Tabernacle in the Wilderness (Palmerston North, New Zealand: Gospel Publishing House, 1897), 90-91.

[12] J.C. Ryle, Are You Ready for the End of Time? Understanding Future Events from Prophetic Passages of the Bible (Fearn, Scotland: Christian Focus Publications, 2001), 144.

[13] For an excellent critique of supersessionism, see Michael J. Vlach, Has the Church Replaced Israel? A Theological Evaluation (Nashville: B&H Academic, 2010).

[14] Darrell L. Bock, “Progressive Dispensationalism” in Covenantal and Dispensational Theologies, eds. Brent E. Parker and Richard J. Lucas, (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2022), 118.

[15] See Andy Woods, “The Protestant Reformation:  An Important and Yet Incomplete Hermeneutical Reformation,” and Jeremiah Mutie, “Neither Woodenly-Literal nor Allegorical: The Dispensationalist Legacy of the Reformers’ Doctrine of Sola Scriptura,” in Forged from Reformation: How Dispensationalist Thought Advances the Reformed Legacy, eds. Christopher Cone and James I. Fazio (El Cajon, CA: Southern California Seminary Press, 2017).

[16] Ryle, 46.

[17] Ibid., 46.

[18] Mark Snoeberger, “Traditional Dispensationalism” in Covenantal and Dispensational Theologies, eds. Brent E. Parker and Richard J. Lucas (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2022), 158-163.

[19] Roy B. Zuck, Basic Bible Interpretation (Colorado Springs, CO: David C. Cook, 1991),172-173.

[20] Sinclair Ferguson, “What Is Typology? How Can We Use It Responsibly in Bible Study?” Ligonier Ministries accessed January 6, 2026, https://learn.ligonier.org/qas/what-is-typology-how-can-we-use-it-responsibly-in-bible-study/.

[21] For detailed steps of typological discovery and practice, see Barrett, 231-236.

[22] C.H. Spurgeon, “Christ Precious to Believers,” Sermon #242, delivered March 13, 1859, in The New Park Street Pulpit (Vol. 5), Spurgeon Gems (PDF), accessed January 6, 2026, https://www.spurgeongems.org/sermon/chs242.pdf.

[23] A forced Christological paradigm can be abused in hermeneutics and homiletics. See Abner Chou, “A Hermeneutical Evaluation of the Christocentric Hermeneutic,” The Master’s Seminary Journal 27.2 (Fall 2016), 113-139.

[24] J.C. Ryle, Expository Thoughts on Mark (Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 2012), 240-241.