`For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true' (Heb. 9:24). The

Tabernacle was a type or figure of realities in the heavens (Heb. 8:5).

These words establish beyond doubt the typical character of much of the Old Testament, and the whole of the

epistle to the Hebrews revolves around these types and adumbrations, without which it could not be understood.

There is no doubt therefore that the doctrine of the types is Scriptural and important to the student of the Scriptures

and the seeker after truth. The fact that typical teaching has been abused does not invalidate its truth. The early

church fathers doubtless erred in this respect, as have many Roman Catholic theologians, realising that such

teaching could strengthen Romish doctrines. But the Protestant has not been guiltless either, for some, in order to

support devotional ideas, have pressed typological teaching beyond its proper limits.

So we ask ourselves, have we any Biblical guiding principle to lift us above mere human opinion and the

doctrines of men? The answer is, yes, and it is this: a character or event in the Old Testament is a type, if the New

Testament specifically designates it to be such. This may be too narrow for some interpreters, but at least we are on

sure ground when we put it into practice. It may be true that there are inferred types, but we need to be careful here

and make certain that the immediate or the remote context justifies them. That Adam was in some respects a type of

Christ Romans 5:14 makes clear:

`Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of

Adam's transgression, who is the figure (type) of Him that was to come'.

Melchizedek, who appears suddenly in the narrative of Genesis 14 and disappears mysteriously, is typical of the

Priesthood of the Lord Jesus. This is expressly stated in Hebrews 7:3, 15-17. Moses the Prophet, the mouthpiece of

God, is a picture of the greatest of all prophets, Christ Himself (Deut. 18:15-19; Acts 3:22-23). The sacrificial lambs

of the Old Testament were all foreshadowing the Saviour (John 1:29; 1 Cor. 5:7). The manna in the wilderness

finds its fulfilment in Christ (John 6:30-35). The brazen serpent of the Old Testament was likewise a type of Christ,

(John 3:14,15). The veil of the Tabernacle was a picture of the Lord's humanity (Heb. 10:20). The smitten rock

(Num. 20:11) typified the Lord Jesus Christ as 1 Corinthians 10:4 asserts, `... for they drank of that spiritual Rock

that followed them: and that Rock was Christ'. Joshua, the captain of Israel and leader into the promised land,

prefigured Christ, and we should remember that Jesus is the Greek equivalent for Joshua (Heb. 2:10; 4:8, and note

the margin).

And so we might go on. A rich field for study is opened here, and when we have the controlling guide of the

New Testament we are delivered from interpretive schools, and many fanciful ideas and the opinions of men. Some

students of Scripture identify typology with allegory, but this is a mistake, for, as we have seen, allegory is a figure

of speech, a continued metaphor, whereby one story or aspect of truth is given in terms of another, not necessarily

that of the New Testament, whereas true typology is based on the unity of Old Testament and New whereby

something in the Old foreshadows something in the New. In dealing with types we must be careful to note

dissimilarity as well as similarity. As well as there being points of similarity between Christ and Adam, or Christ

and Moses, there are many points of dissimilarity, especially when we consider the sin and weaknesses of both

Adam and Moses. One of the errors that can arise is to make typical the elements of dissimilarity in a type, but this

is guarded against if we carefully note how the New Testament comments upon the types of the Old.

True typology is a species of prophecy, and in the Old Testament we have some of the major and basic doctrines

of the New Testament set forth in picture form, such as redemption, justification and atonement. We should take

care in typical study to avoid extremes and flights of fancy. Some have been put off such study because of the

extremes to which certain expositors have gone. The doctrine lying behind the Tabernacle needs care. A spiritual

equivalent cannot be found for every single detail, and to try and produce this is not a mark of spirituality, nor is it

sound. Another important thing to remember is that we should never seek to prove doctrine from types unless there

is New Testament authority. There are at least six kinds of types in the Word of God:

(1) Persons, as we have seen, (2) Institutions such as Old Testament sacrifices, (3) Offices, Moses as prophet,

Melchizedek as Priest-King, (4) Events, The wilderness wanderings, (5) Actions, The lifting up of the

brazen serpent in the wilderness, (6) Things, such as the Tabernacle and its furnishings.