This is taken from Lesson #251–252 of the Genesis study (HTML) (PDF); it is also found in Gen. 22 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).
Moses and the Rock (A graphic)
Moses Lifting up the Serpent (a graphic)
Preface: A type is a preordained representation wherein certain persons, events, and institutions of the O.T. stand for corresponding persons, events, and institutions of the N.T.
The Doctrine of Typology
(1) The Concise Oxford English Dictionary defines type as a foreshadowing in the Old Testament of a person or event of the Christian dispensation.
(2) Nelson’s Illustrated Bible Dictionary defines a type as a figure, representation, or symbol of something to come, as an event in the Old Testament foreshadows another in the New Testament. The Nelson’s Illustrated Bible Dictionary says an antitype refers to a fulfillment or completion of an earlier truth revealed in the Bible.
(3) Altogether Lovely Ministries: A “Type” is some person, event, or ceremony that is recorded to “foreshadow” some future person, event, or ceremony. In types, we see the Bible was written by one author; the Holy Spirit, for who else could write these kinds of amazing types and antitypes.
(4) Dake: A type is a preordained representation wherein certain persons, events, and institutions of the O.T. stand for corresponding persons, events, and institutions of the N.T. Types are pictures or object lessons by which God has taught His redemptive plan. They are a shadow of things to come, not the image of those things (Col. 2:17 Heb. 8:5 10:1). The Mosaic system, for example, was a kind of kindergarten in which God's people were trained in divine things and taught to look forward to the realities of things yet to come. What is particularly good about Dake’s definition is, he points out that a type and an antitype are preordained. God the Holy Spirit, when recording specific events in Old Testament Scripture, was fully aware that there would be future parallels to these events in the gospels, even though, at the time of their writing, this was not necessarily known to the writer or the readers.
(1) As an aside, bear in mind that there are two authors who coterminously wrote down the words of Scripture. The human author and the Holy Spirit.
(2) The Holy Spirit sees that certain words, phrases, and historical situations are recorded, for these things often carry a different meaning than intended by the human author.
(3) So, whereas Abraham or Isaac recorded information about Isaac’s birth and offering as factual information; God the Holy Spirit saw to it that all of these things looked forward to the birth and sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ.
(4) Just as Jesus Christ is fully God and fully man; the Holy Scriptures are written by God the Holy Spirit and by man.
(5) Dake: It is clear from the Scriptures listed below that the New Testament writers used the word type with some degree of freedom; yet they had one general idea in common, namely, that all types show a likeness existing between two persons, events, or institutions. The one resembles the other in some essential feature. In typology these two are called type and antitype, and the link that binds them is the correspondence or similarity of the one to the other. The type is the preordained shadow of the antitype. The type is the object lesson, the temporary and shadowy resemblance of some predicted person, event, or institution. The antitype is the fulfillment of that which has been predicted.
(6) Dake continues: A genuine type is a true figure or shadow of the reality to come, which is the antitype (John 3:14 Rom. 5:14 Heb. 9:23-24 10:1 1Peter 3:21). Centuries or even millenniums may lie between them but the shadow is never lost and the figure is never destroyed. The fulfillment or reality always comes. Furthermore, a type has its own meaning apart from the antitype (John 3:14 with Num. 21). The details of a type (as with parables, allegories, and symbols) are not to be stressed; nor are they to be interpreted apart from the antitype; only the intended truth should be emphasized.
(1) When Dake says that a type has its own meaning apart from the antitype, this means that, the incident recorded really happened; the person recorded really existed. No one at that time of the type (person, event, ceremony) understood the type to be a type. No one during the Old Testament, when they knew about Abraham offering his son (or read about Abraham offering his son), thought, “God the Father will offer up His Son in the future.” As an aside, angels did not know this either. As a further aside, even people today do not know this. Anti-Bible people and atheists often question and mock this narrative of Abraham offering up Isaac as a human sacrifice.
(2) Again, this is the co-authorship of Scripture. The human author records information about an incident or a person, and to that human author, there is nothing more to it than that. When it comes to the birth of Isaac and the offering of Isaac, the human author is simply recording what the facts were.
(3) However, at the same time, God the Holy Spirit made certain that these facts would be typical of what is to come, so that we can look back and think, “Whoa!”
2) New Testament justification for typology:
(1) Hebrews 10:1 The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realties themselves, for this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make complete those who draw near to worship. This does not mean that the Mosaic Law was simply made up, or that people did not know and follow the Mosaic Law; it simply means that the purpose of the animal sacrifices (the illustration used here) was to look forward to the ultimate sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ for our sins.
(2) Jesus spoke of typology in a parable: He said, “Therefore every teacher of the law who has been instructed about the kingdom of heaven is like the owner of a house who brings out of its storeroom new treasures as well as old.” (Matthew 13:52). The “old” are “types of the Old Testament” and the “new treasures” stand for the antitypes found in the New Testament. A person who would teach the Old Testament would teach exactly what is there (the old treasures); and then that teacher would show how many of these things are shadows of the spiritual reality of Jesus Christ and His sacrifice for us (the new treasures).
(3) This brings us to the following conclusion: Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ (Col. 2:16–17). When the disciples began to teach, they were teaching Church Age doctrine during the Church Age. The various Old Testament celebrations and ceremonies were designed to look forward in time. Once these things had found their fulfillments in the actual events of the New Testament, there was no longer a reason to celebrate to those ceremonies or to adhere to the laws which were typical. However, people were confused by the transition, so people who followed the traditions of the Jews, often continued in the ancient celebrations, ceremonies and observances, not fully understanding that God looked forward in time by means of these things.
(4) As an aside, this does not mean that we just throw out the Old Testament. Contained in the Old Testament are moral values and spiritual truths and revelations which are still relevant to today. Although types are prominent in the Old Testament, they certainly do not make up the entirety of the Old Testament.
3) Greek words related to type:
(1) The masculine noun tupos (τύπος) [pronounced TOO-poss], which means, 1) the mark of a stroke or blow, print; 2) a figure formed by a blow or impression; 2a) of a figure or image; 2b) of the image of the gods; 3) form; 3a) the teaching which embodies the sum and substance of religion and represents it to the mind, manner of writing, the contents and form of a letter; 4) an example; 4a) in the technical sense, the pattern in conformity to which a thing must be made; 4b) in an ethical sense, a dissuasive example, a pattern of warning; 4b1) of ruinous events which serve as admonitions or warnings to others; 4c) an example to be imitated; 4c1) of men worthy of imitation; 4d) in a doctrinal sense; 4d1) of a type, i.e. a person or thing prefiguring a future (Messianic) person or thing. BDAG says it refers to “(1) a mark made as the result of a blow or pressure, mark, trace (John 20:25); (2) embodiment of characteristics or function of a model, copy, image; (3) an object formed to resemble some entity, image, statue of any kind of material (Acts 7:43); a kind, class, or thing that suggests a model or pattern, form, figure, pattern (Rom. 6:17); (3) the content of a document, text, content (Acts 23:25); (4) an archetype serving as a model, type, pattern, model; (a) technically design, pattern (Acts 7:44 Heb. 8:5); (b) in the moral life example, pattern (1Tim 4:12 Phil. 3:17 1Thess. 1:7 2Thess. 3:9 Titus 2:7 1Peter 5:3); (c) of the types given by God as an indication of the future, in the form of persons or things (Rom. 5:14).” Thayer and BDAG definitions only. Quite obviously, the word type is a transliteration of tupos. Strong’s #5179.
(2) The New Testament adjective is antitupon (ἀντίτυπον) [pronounced an-TEET-oo-pon], which means, a thing formed after some pattern; a thing resembling another, its counterpart; something in the Messianic times which answers to the type, as baptism corresponds to the deluge (1Peter 3:21). Thomas defines [antitupos] as a compound of anti [over against, opposite] and tupos [the mark (of a blow), i.e., an impression, stamp (made by a die), type, pattern], meaning “struck back, corresponding to” . BDAG say antitupos, used generally “of something that corresponds to another; esp. used metaphorically,” specifically “(1) pertains to that which corresponds to something else, adj. corresponding to; (2) substantivally, a copy, antitype, representation.” Antitupon is translated like figure (1Peter 3:21) and figure (Heb. 9:24). Thayer, Thomas and BDAG definitions only. The word antitupon is transliterated antitype. Strong’s #499.
(3) The neuter noun hupodeigma (ὑπόδειγμα) [pronounced hoop-OD-igue-mah], which means, 1) a sign suggestive of anything, delineation of a thing, representation, figure, copy; an example: for imitation; of the thing to be imitated; for a warning, of a thing to be shunned. John 13:15 Heb. 4:11 8:5 9:23 James 5:10 2Pet. 2:6. Thayer definitions only. Strong’s #5262.
(4) The feminine noun parabolê (παραβολή) [pronounced par-ab-ol-AY], which means, 1) a placing of one thing by the side of another, juxtaposition, as of ships in battle; 2) metaphorically; 2a) a comparing, comparison of one thing with another, likeness, similitude; 2b) an example by which a doctrine or precept is illustrated; 2c) a narrative, fictitious but agreeable to the laws and usages of human life, by which either the duties of men or the things of God, particularly the nature and history of God’s kingdom are figuratively portrayed; 2d) a parable: an earthly story with a heavenly meaning; 3) a pithy and instructive saying, involving some likeness or comparison and having preceptive or admonitory force; 3a) an aphorism, a maxim; 4) a proverb; 5) an act by which one exposes himself or his possessions to danger, a venture, a risk. This word is mostly limited to the parable or illustration in the N.T. Types are illustrations, but they are also the preordained shadow or likeness of things to come, while parables may be illustrations of something in the past, present, or future. Scriptural types and prophecy are the same in substance, differing only in form. This fact distinguishes between types, parables, symbols and other forms of human expression. Parabole, translated figure in only two places, may also refer to types (Heb. 9:9; 11:19). Thayer definitions only. Strong’s #3850.
(5) The feminine noun skia (σκία) [pronounced SKEE-ah], which means, 1) shadow; 1a) shade caused by the interception of light; 1b) an image cast by an object and representing the form of that object; 1c) a sketch, outline, adumbration; 2) shade, shadow, foreshadowing. Skia is translated shadow three times, referring to types (Col. 2:17 Heb. 8:5 10:1). The English word type best corresponds with skia because it means a shadow, a limited idea or likeness of the reality it foreshadows. Thayer definitions mostly. Strong’s #4639.
4) Remarks on typology:
(1) There are certain doctrines and topics which generally do not get screwed up by various theologians, groups, and even cults. The problems with evolution, the fulfillment of prophecy, and use of typology in Scripture, all come to mind. Interestingly enough, in searching out various references on typology, much of the information posted was Church of Christ.
(2) This does not mean that we do not find error in these topics, but we generally do not find as many. Finis Jennings Dake, from which most of this doctrine comes, requires that a divine type is confirmed by at least two or three plain statements in God's Word. Although the bulk of his doctrine is spot-on, having two or three plain statements in the Bible is not necessary, unless we understand it to mean that we can back up a topological example with clear statements from the Word of God (which is not what he meant). For instance, Isaac is a type of Christ, both in his birth and in his being offered up by his father Abraham. When these topics are pursued, the parallels are both obvious and remarkable. Isaac is mentioned many times in the New Testament, including the portion that we are studying, but he is not clearly called a type of Christ, though he clearly is. However, Abraham’s act of obedience in offering Isaac up is expressed as a type of crucifixion in the New Testament, but in only one passage (Heb 11:19 He considered God to be able even to raise someone from the dead, from which Abraham also got Isaac back as an illustration.).
(3) On the other hand, Dake makes a comment on this topic on restraint, which is worth noting: The Bible is not as full of types...Some make nearly every person and event of the O.T. typical. Such a method of interpretation leads to confusion and a wrong understanding of the Word of God. Searching for hidden meaning in every passage and pressing the typical teaching so far imperils the literal teachings and soundness of many biblical truths. Also from Dake: The objection to this method of interpretation is that it wrests the scriptures out of their natural and historical setting and intent. It destroys the simplicity of the Word of God, detracts from its trustworthiness and leads men to believe there is a hidden and mysterious meaning to every detail of Scripture. The safe way is to prove every doctrine with plainly related passages, and use any historical event or resembling detail as an illustration of some point in teaching. Innumerable applications can rightly be made apart from the authentic types and antitypes, but that is all they are--illustrations or applications.
(4) So, in a way, a type is like the chiasmos—we do not find one in every chapter, but when we come across one, it is really quite cool.
(5) Typology should not be used to prove specific doctrines of the Bible, but to illustrate those things which we already know to be true. Dake gives the examples of some who try to prove the Trinity by using the 3 stories of Noah’s ark; or the pre-tribulational rapture by using Enoch being translated before the flood. Not only would these illustrations not prove anything, but they are not even reasonable types for the things that apparently some use them to prove.
(6) Typology is not the same as prophecy. Concerning both the birth and the offering up of Isaac, at no time in the Old Testament did anyone say or even think, “This will illustrate the birth and the crucifixion of the Messiah.” So, very often, something which is a type in the Old Testament, is not known as being a type in the Old Testament among the Old Testament saints. We can look back in retrospect and recognize types; but in most cases, something actually being a type was not known until the antitype is known.
(7) My personal concern is typology and the Church Age. I don’t know that there is anything in the Old Testament which clearly predicts or typifies events in the Church Age specifically. My inclination is to say unique church age doctrines are not to be found in typology. However, this is one of the things which I am still sorting out.
(8) Consequently, typology can certainly be overdone. When there are 2 or 3 parallels which are clear, possibly unusual, and stand out, then it is likely that we are viewing a type and its antitype. When Absalom, David’s son, is killed during his revolution against David, it would be a bridge too far to try to show that his hanging in a tree by his long hippy hair is a picture of Jesus on the cross. This topic is discussed in depth in 2Sam. 18 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).
(9) Types are real people, real events, or real ceremonies; and these things are generally seen quite differently in their time. For example, when Abraham showed himself willing to offer up the son of promise, Isaac, this was viewed in the Old Testament as a great act of obedience, but not as a shadow of what God would do on our behalf through Jesus Christ. On the other hand, Old Testament Jews viewed many other passages of Scripture as being Messianic.
(10) Theology does not base doctrines upon types. That is, we do not discover something new about the crucifixion of Jesus Christ because we study Gen. 22.
5) Five essential characteristics of types:
(1) A type and its antitype should have one or more points of resemblance. Col. 2:14-17 Heb. 10:1
(2) A type is prophetic of the antitype. The type must foreshadow something which is to come. John 3:14 Rom. 5:14 Col. 2:14-17 Heb. 8:5 9:23-24 10:1 1Peter 3:21
(3) The type is merely the shadow of the realities to come, the type is never the reality that it typifies. Col. 2:14-17 Heb. 8:5 10:1
(4) The type is always an earthly person or event while the antitype could be earthly or heavenly. The Angel of the Lord, for instance, is Jesus Christ; but the Angel of the Lord is not typical of the Lord. Heb. 8:5 9:24 1Peter 3:21
(5) Since both type and antitype are preordained as part of the plan of God, they cannot be chosen by man, developed simply because certain details resemble some future truth. Rom. 5:14 Heb. 9:23-24 10:1-21
6) Typology should be distinguished from parables, symbols, allegories, riddles, figures of speech, figurative statements and prophecy. For instance, type and antitype relationships are to be differentiated from:
(1) Allegory, which is the representation of abstract ideas or principles by characters, figures, or events in narrative, dramatic, or pictorial form.
(2) Parable, which is a story that uses familiar events to illustrate a religious or ethical point.
(3) Most prophecies of future events are understood as such from the beginning; types are real people or historical events which are not understood to be anything else during their time period.
7) Five Classes of Types (the list below is not exhaustive):
(1) Typical Persons:
(1) Adam was a type of Christ. Adam is an interesting type, because Adam and Christ are also spoken of antithetically as well. Rom. 5:12–21 2Cor. 15:45–49
(2) Melchizedek represents the eternal priesthood of Jesus Christ (Gen. 14:18-24 Heb. 5:5-9 6:20 7:1–10, 17); the combined kingship and priesthood (Heb. 7:1-3 with Zech. 6:12-13); as well as our Lord’s eternal existence (Heb. 7:3, 6 with Micah 5:1-2 John 1:1–3 Heb. 1:8).
(3) Moses was a type of Christ as the prophet of God (Deut. 18:15–19 Acts 3:19-26), and in terms of his faithfulness toward his house (Heb. 3:1–6).
(4) Aaron as the high priest was a type of Christ. Heb. 5:1-5
(5) Jonah was a type, revealing our Lord’s death, burial, and descent (into the lower parts of the earth for three days), as well as the resurrection of Christ. Jonah 2 Matt. 12:40 Eph.4:8-10
(2) Typical events:
(1) The flood was a type of baptism (the baptism of the Holy Spirit into Christ). 1Peter 3:20-21
(2) Isaac’s birth was typical of the birth of our Lord. (HTML) (PDF) (WPD)
(3) Some of the events during Israel's wandering in the wilderness were typical of salvation through faith in Christ. These things also provided a clear delineation between right and wrong throughout many dispensations. 1Cor. 10:1-13
(4) The lifting up of the bronze serpent in the wilderness was typical of the crucifixion of Christ and benefits of the cross realized by those who believe in Him. John 3:14 Num. 21
(3) Typical acts:
(1) Abraham offering up his uniquely-born son was a type of God offering up His uniquely-born Son. Gen. 22 John 3:16 Heb. 11:17-19
(2) Striking the rock as in Ex. 17 was typical of Christ being crucified or stricken by God. 1Cor. 10:4–6
(3) Striking the rock the second time instead of speaking to it was typical of crucifying Christ afresh. Moses was supposed to have only spoken to the rock, in order to maintain the type. Jesus Christ was crucified one time for our sins; so Moses was not to strike the rock a second time. He failed to continue the type. Because of this (he disobeyed God’s clear directive), God would not allow Moses to lead his people into the Land of Promise. Num. 20 2Cor. 10:4 Heb. 6:6
(4) Men who rejected the chief cornerstone was typical of the rejection of Jesus Christ. Isa. 28:16 Matt. 21:42
(4) Typical ceremonies:
(1) The many acts of the priests in the tabernacle worship as directed by the Mosaic Law were typical of various aspects of redemption through Christ: sacrificing the animals; shedding and sprinkling blood; burning incense; the showbread; lighting lamps; and the daily and yearly rituals were all typical acts, fulfilled in Christ and His redemptive work. Ex. 12-13 25:1 - 40:38 Heb. 7:11-28 8:1-6 9:1-28 10:1-22
(2) The feasts of Israel were typical of various aspects of redemption through Christ. Ex. 12 Lev. 23 2Cor. 5:7 Heb. 5-10
(3) The temple and all the rituals of worship carried on in it were typical of the same things the tabernacle and its worship were typical of. The only difference is, the Temple represented our Lord’s permanent reign over the world.
(4) The Day of Atonement, when the High Priests enters into the Holy of Holies once a year was typical of God the Son coming before God the Father after dying for our sins and being resurrected. Ex. 26:33–34 Heb. 9:25 10:19 13:11
(5) Typical Institutions:
(1) The Aaronic priesthood, the garments of the priests, and other aspects of the ministry of the law spoke of Jesus Christ and His redemptive work. Ex. 28-29; Heb. 7-10
(2) The Sabbath for Israel was typical of the eternal rest in Christ and of that which is to come for all the redeemed. In fact, the Sabbath is a good illustration of two ways to look at a thing: celebrating the Sabbath looks backward to the fact that God has provided everything for us, and has no need to do anything else. And, as mentioned, the Sabbath speaks of our own rest from works. Gen. 2:1–3 Ex. 20:8-11 25:21 26:22, 34–35 27:9–13, 21 31:12–18 Deut. 5:15 Heb. 4
(3) The tabernacle and temple, their compartments, and furniture were themselves typical of the heavenly tabernacle Christ entered into; and the furniture was arranged in the shape of the cross. Heb. 8:1-5 9:1-10, 23-24
8) The two comparative words "as" and "so" are often found together, connecting a type with its antitype. The first thing named is historic; the second thing named is prophetic.
(1) As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 1Cor. 15:22.
(2) “As the days of Noah were, so shall also the corning of the Son of Man be.” Matt. 24:37.
(3) As Moses lifted up the serpent in the Wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up. John 3:14. The serpent is often used to represent Satan and what Satan has done. It is because of Satan’s deception that Adam and the woman fell. Jesus takes upon Himself all of the sins of the world, as if all the evil in the human race first caused by Satan, was poured out on Him. The people during the time of Moses looked to this serpent held up on a stake in order to be delivered from their illness (Num. 21:7–9).
(4) “As Jonah was three days and three nights in the Whale's belly; so shall the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” Matt. 12:40.
9) Interpretation of Types:
(1) Only the point or points of resemblance between the type and the antitype should be emphasized.
(2) Types are not designed to be used as proofs for other doctrines or as the basis of other doctrines which they do not typify.
(3) Types should be understood and interpreted only in the light of their plain historical facts.
(4) Plain historical events should not be forced into some sort of type simply because there are some points of resemblance between them and New Testament truths.
(5) The type and the antitype must agree with each other as well as with all related scriptures.
(6) The historical sense of Scripture or the literal meaning of the words telling of the type or antitype should never be destroyed.
(7) All "hidden" meanings of the words should be avoided, for such explanation only leads to confusing interpretations.
10) Examples of Types in the Old Testament.
(1) That the above mentioned O.T. persons, events, acts, and institutions are types is proved by plain statements in the N.T. How much more, if any, of the O.T. is typical is speculation. Portions of the O.T. are typical only as the N.T. affirms them as such. Anything beyond this should be considered as illustration in teaching. Many applications can be taken from similarities between O.T. facts and N.T. truths; but to make these types and antitypes is not allowed by Scripture. True types meet all the above requirements on definition, essential characteristics, etc.
(2) Biblical characters are often presented as types. While they make interesting studies, they aren't true biblical types, because they lack identification as such in the N.T. The life of Joseph compared to that of Christ is such an example. Not recognized as type and antitype in Scripture, the two lives nevertheless have many similarities and the facts about them make impressive illustrations.
(3) Similarities Between Joseph and Christ:
(1) Both were familiar with the shepherd's life (Gen. 37:2 John 10)
(2) Loved by Father (Gen. 37:2 John 17:24)
(3) Hated by brethren (Gen. 37:8 John 15:25)
(4) Brethren did not believe in them (Gen. 37:20 John 7:5)
(5) Rule rejected (Gen. 37:8 John 19:15)
(6) Envied (Gen. 37:11 Mk. 15:10)
(7) Sayings observed (Gen. 37:11 Luke 2:51)
(8) Sent to brethren (Gen. 37:13 Luke 20:13)
(9) Went after brethren (Gen. 37:14 John 1)
(10) Brethren conspired against them (Gen. 37:18 Matt. 26:15)
(11) Stripped (Gen. 37:23 Matt. 27:28)
(12) Brethren sat down to watch them in sufferings (Gen. 37:25 Matt. 27:36)
(13) Sold for money (Gen. 37:28 Matt. 26:15)
(14) Under trial both went to Egypt (Gen. 37:36 Matt. 2:14-15)
(15) The Lord was with them (Gen. 39:2 John 16:32)
(16) Fully trusted (Gen. 39:4-8 John 3:35)
(17) Men blessed for their sake (Gen. 39:5 Eph. 1:3)
(18) Compassionate (Gen. 40:7 Luke 23:17)
(19) Servants (Gen 40:4 Luke 22:27)
(20) Both asked men to think of them (Gen. 40:14 2Cor. 11:24)
(21) Anointed (Gen. 41:38 Acts 10:38)
(22) Ruled own house (Gen. 41:40 Heb. 3)
(23) Sovereigns (Gen. 41:44 John 15:5)
(24) Enemies bowing to (Gen. 41:43 Phil. 2:10)
(25) Began great work at thirty years of age (Gen. 41:46 Luke 3:23)
(26) Men were told to obey both (Gen. 41:55 John 2:5)
(27) Opened storehouses (Gen. 41:56 Luke 24:27-52)
(28) Supplied all countries (Gen. 41:57 Rev. 5:9-10 7:9-17)
(29) Knew men (Gen. 42:7-8 John 2:24-25)
(30) Brethren knew them not (Gen. 42:8 John 1:10)
(31) Wept (Gen. 42:17 John 11:35)
(32) Met all needs (Gen. 42:25 Phil. 4:19)
(33) Made themselves known to brethren (Gen. 45:1 Luke 24:31)
(34) Introduced selves (Gen. 44:3 Acts 9:5)
(35) Invited men to come to them (Gen. 44:18 Matt. 11:28)
(36) Discovered alive after thought dead (Gen. 44:26 Acts 25:19 Rev. 1)
(37) Bought men (Gen. 47:23 2Cor. 6:20)
(38) Comforted men (Gen. 50:19 John 14:11)
(39) Told men not to fear (Gen. 50:19 Matt. 14:27 17:7 28:10)
(40) Forgave brethren and made promises to them in the end (Gen. 50:17-21 Luke 24:47-51 Acts 1:8-14)
(4) Some "Types" have a double application. Take the Prophet Jonah. Jesus uses the swallowing of Jonah by a "great fish," and after 3 days being vomited up alive, as a "Type" of His own Resurrection from the Tomb of Joseph of Arimathea. Mat 12:40. But Jonah is also a "Type of the Jewish Nation."
(1) Jonah was called and sent to preach to a heathen city Nineveh, so the Jews were called and sent to preach to the heathen nations.
(2) Jonah disobeys and flees to Tarshish, so the Jews fail in their mission to the heathen.
(3) Jonah for his disobedience was cast overboard, so the Jews have been scattered among the nations.
(4) Jonah was miraculously preserved in the stomach of the fish, so the Jews have remained undigested by the nations.
(5) Jonah repented in his "grave" in the stomach of the fish, so the Jews will mourn their lost condition in the "graveyard of the nations."
(6) Jonah was restored to the land, so the Jews will be restored to their own land.
(7) Jonah received a "Second Call" and obeyed, so the Jews will have a second opportunity to witness to the nations and will obey.
(5) Take one more "Typical Person." JOSEPH A TYPE OF CHRIST
(1) Joseph was "beloved" of his father, so was Jesus.
(2) Joseph was sent unto his brethren, so was Jesus.
(3) Joseph's brethren refused to receive him, so did the brethren of Jesus.
(4) Joseph was sold by his brethren, so was Jesus.
(5) Joseph was unjustly accused and condemned, so was Jesus.
(6) Joseph was buried in prison, so was Jesus in the Tomb of Joseph
(7) Joseph was resurrected from prison and exalted to sit with Pharaoh on his throne, so Jesus was resurrected and exalted to sit on His Father's Throne.
(8) Joseph on the throne became the dispenser of bread to starving Egypt, so Jesus on His Father's Throne is the "Bread of Life" for a perishing world.
(9) After Joseph was exalted he got a Gentile bride, so Jesus will get a Gentile Bride-THE CHURCH.
(10) After Joseph got his bride his brethren suffered famine and came to him for corn, so after Jesus gets His Bride, His brethren, the Jews, will turn to Him, during the time of "Jacob's Trouble," the "Great Tribulation," for relief.
(11) Joseph knew his brethren the first time, but they did not know him, so Jesus knew His brethren when He came the first time but they knew him not.
(12) Joseph made himself known to his brethren when they came the "Second time," so Jesus will be recognized by the Jews when He comes the SECOND TIME.
(13) After Joseph's revelation of himself to his brethren, they go forth to proclaim that he is alive and the "saviour of the world," so when Jesus reveals Himself to His brethren the Jews they will proclaim Him alive and the SAVIOUR OF MANKIND.
(14) Joseph then establishes his brethren and their families in the "land of Goshen," so Jesus will re-establish the Jews in the LAND OF PALESTINE.
http://www.dake.com/dake/types.html accessed July 30, 2013. Most of the material comes from this source and all of the direct quotations from Dake are found on this page.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/study/larkin/dt/28.cfm accessed July 30, 2013.
http://www.altogetherlovely.org/downloads/11.%20TYPES%20IN%20THE%20BIBLE.pdf accessed July 30, 2013.
I may want to explore this resource: