Typology in Scripture....How Do Protestants View It?

[Tonks40]

Hi! I’ve been listening to a couple of apologists recently (Steve Ray, Scott Hahn, Patrick Madrid) and I noticed that typology in Scripture is very important in understanding the full meanings of the teachings of Christ. I wonder how non-Catholic Christians feel about looking at Scripture in this manner?

For those who don’t know what typology is:

NOUN:
pl. ty·pol·o·gies

1. The study or systematic classification of types that have characteristics or traits in common.
2. A theory or doctrine of types, as in scriptural studies.

Forgive me for my ignorance…never really saw how non-Catholics saw this.

 

[Marquette]

Tonks40:

Hi! I’ve been listening to a couple of apologists recently (Steve Ray, Scott Hahn, Patrick Madrid) and I noticed that typology in Scripture is very important in understanding the full meanings of the teachings of Christ. I wonder how non-Catholic Christians feel about looking at Scripture in this manner?

For those who don’t know what typology is:

NOUN:
pl. ty·pol·o·gies

1. The study or systematic classification of types that have characteristics or traits in common.
2. A theory or doctrine of types, as in scriptural studies.

Forgive me for my ignorance…never really saw how non-Catholics saw this.

I’m in RCIA and was protestant for 57 years or so, first Baptist then Covenant. They both taught “types,” very much so. It was especially prevalent in the Scofield Reference Bible that we used in the Baptist church I attended.

 

[Veritas41]

“Types” in the OT are very important in Reformed theology (I was Presbyterian and Reformed Baptist, and both churches taught about types in the OT).

 

[Archbishop]

Types and shadows are very important to non-Roman Catholics when studying the Scriptures. Through the study of typology we learn how Christ fulfilled various Old Testament offices, laws, sacrifices, etc., and thus we come to have a fuller understanding of the glory of the New Covenant and the work of Christ in redemption.

 

[Tonks40]

So, I guess if I was discussing Scripture to a non-Catholic and using typology, then this wouldn’t be so far-fetched to them.

 

[sandusky]

Tonks40:

Hi! I’ve been listening to a couple of apologists recently (Steve Ray, Scott Hahn, Patrick Madrid) and I noticed that typology in Scripture is very important in understanding the full meanings of the teachings of Christ. I wonder how non-Catholic Christians feel about looking at Scripture in this manner?

For those who don’t know what typology is:

NOUN:
pl. ty·pol·o·gies

1. The study or systematic classification of types that have characteristics or traits in common.
2. A theory or doctrine of types, as in scriptural studies.

Forgive me for my ignorance…never really saw how non-Catholics saw this.

Protestants are amenable to typology, but are much more conservative in their typology than Catholics.

We know that there are types in the Bible, as the N.T. writers explain that certain things from the O.T., i.e., the Passover lamb, the Levitical sacrifices, Noah’s ark, are types that prefigure Christ.

So the view among most Protestants is that types should point to Christ, as He, Himself, says that scriptures are about Him.

If not, than one can find types for almost anything.

 

[joshua_b]

sandusky:

…So the view among most Protestants is that types should point to Christ, as He, Himself, says that scriptures are about Him.

If not, than one can find types for almost anything.

Oddly enough, that is the exact same view the Catholic Church holds. I may be starting a firestorm with this one, but I’ve tended to notice (in my own humble opinion) that Protestants are very well versed in typology, but they will quickly reject any typology that points to Catholic teaching, dismissing it as an erroneous interpretation or “reading something into scripture that simply isnt there”. A perfect example of this is typology that would point to Mary as sinless or perpetually virgin. If I were Protestant, I can’t say that I wouldn’t be the exact same way.

 

[Tonks40]

joshua_b:

Oddly enough, that is the exact same view the Catholic Church holds. I may be starting a firestorm with this one, but I’ve tended to notice (in my own humble opinion) that Protestants are very well versed in typology, but they will quickly reject any typology that points to Catholic teaching, dismissing it as an erroneous interpretation or “reading something into scripture that simply isnt there”. A perfect example of this is typology that would point to Mary as sinless or perpetually virgin. If I were Protestant, I can’t say that I wouldn’t be the exact same way.

I would tend to think that if given the typology found to prefigure things such as the Immaculate Conception of Mary, or the priesthood would definately point to Christ. I don’t think that these doctrines and traditions divert from the real focus.

 

[joshua_b]

I agree with you wholeheartedly, and would even go so far as to say that these things lead us more deeply into the reality of who Christ is, and ultimately what that means to us. But, Protestants don’t hold the same opinion as us on those matters, and it seems to me from my subjective observation that any typology that would point them in that direction is very readily dismissed with whatever rationalization they may choose.

 

[Matt16_18]

Tonks40:

I wonder how non-Catholic Christians feel about looking at Scripture in this manner?

Anyone that reads the New Testament would know that typological arguments are nothing unusual. Protestants understand typology the same way that they understand everything else in scripture – through the dark light of their private interpretations that reflects the biases of the particular sect that they belong to.

Types in Scripture

“the definition of the type is … a person, a thing, or an action, having its own independent and absolute existence, but at the same time intended by God to prefigure a future person, thing, or action.”

The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XV
Copyright © 1912 by Robert Appleton CompanyYet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sins were not like the transgression of Adam, **who was a type ** of the one who was to come.
Romans 5:14

Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a sabbath. These are only a shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ.
Colossians 2:16-17

… there are priests who offer gifts according to the law. They serve **a copy and shadow ** of the heavenly sanctuary …
Hebrews 8:4-5

For since the law has but** a shadow of the good things to come ** instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices which are continually offered year after year, make perfect those who draw near.
Hebrews 10:1

Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” ] The Jews then said, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?” But he spoke of the temple of his body.
John 2:19-20

Do you not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you? If any one destroys God’s temple, God will destroy him. For God’s temple is holy, and that temple you are
1 Cor. 3:16-17

The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!
John 1:29

And Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine; he was priest of God Most High.
Gen 14:18​

 

[Veritas41]

No, it shouldn’t be, at least if they belong to a more traditional, Reformation-rooted denomination. Some of these newer, non-denominational churches may or may not have the same level of understanding of typologies as more traditional Protestant groups. I have frequently used typologies in the OT in explaining to Protestants various Catholic teachings about the Eucharist, Mary, etc. because it provides a good basis for explaining the Scriptural foundation of many Catholic teachings that Protestants think are unbiblical.

 

[Archbishop]

Anyone that reads the New Testament would know that typological arguments are nothing unusual. Protestants understand typology the same way that they understand everything else in scripture – through the dark light of their private interpretations that reflects the biases of the particular sect that they belong to.

This jab is really pretty weak. What makes you think some some Protestants don’t do a lot of reading in the Fathers and other solid sources when studying types? I would venture to say that many Protestant theologians have a better understanding of types than some Catholic theologians who come from the higher critical school of Biblical interpretation. Must we always assume that Protestants are a lower form of life and not intelligent enough to grasp the true meaning of Scripture?

 

[Kitty_Chan]

Matt16_18:

Anyone that reads the New Testament would know that typological arguments are nothing unusual. Protestants understand typology the same way that they understand everything else in scripture – through the dark light of their private interpretations that reflects the biases of the particular sect that they belong to.

As a note about this statement too Please dont forget this is how the world views ALL THOSE WHO BELIEVE IN CHRIST. No matter if catholic or not.

Dark light of stupid interpertions of a book of fariy tales of stuff that didnt happen. And now they cause wars over it.

This is a public forum and many lurk here, and go back to their own forums and laugh. We are to be a light to the world.

 

[shawnbm]

Archbishop:

This jab is really pretty weak. What makes you think some some Protestants don’t do a lot of reading in the Fathers and other solid sources when studying types? I would venture to say that many Protestant theologians have a better understanding of types than some Catholic theologians who come from the higher critical school of Biblical interpretation. Must we always assume that Protestants are a lower form of life and not intelligent enough to grasp the true meaning of Scripture?

Here, here. I completely concur, even though (as an Episcopalian) I at times have a hard time getting thorugh to my more conservative, evangelical brethren on issues like the necessity of the sacraments, to be part of the “holy catholic and apostolic church”, the importance of God choosing Saint Mary to be the new “ark”, etc. Even so, many Protestant scholars are utterly brilliant and no less a scholarly giant than the late Fr. Raymond E. Brown (a Catholic priest and professor) said so often through the years.