Typology is a literary technique which was used by the early Church to help understand the patterns in Scripture. Typology mixes the literary techniques of “foreshadowing” and “allegory”.
It was originally used by the Jewish writer, Philo of Alexandria (20BC-50AD). He was an influential Jew and even met with the Roman Emperor Caligula, in order to argue for Jewish interests. Philo likely knew of Jesus and there is an old tradition which tells of how Philo met with St Peter in Jerusalem before he died. there is no record of him becoming a Christian, though he is honoured by some Orthodox Churches.
We don’t know whether Philo developed this Biblical typological technique, but he certainly used it to compare Old Testament scriptures.
The New Testament writers utilised typology too. And even Jesus is recorded to use it in the Gospels.
The Second Adam
Paul used typology in the Book of Romans:
Romans 5 v 14
Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a type of the one to come.
The word ‘type’ in Greek is typos and means to ‘strike repeatedly’. Like when a mint strikes a blank metal round and creates a coin. Every coin has the same pattern, because it shares the same template. But each coin is separate entity to the image which strikes it.
Paul uses this in Romans when he says Christ is the Second Adam. The One who would undo the Curse. So Christ is a type of Adam. Adam is the pattern which Christ follows, but instead of failing, He succeeds.
The Priest-King Melchizedek
Another New Testament example is found in the Book of Hebrews. The writer explains how Christ is like the priest-king Melchizedek (Genesis 14).
Hebrews 7 v 2-3
First, the name Melchizedek means “king of righteousness”; then also, “king of Salem” means “king of peace.” Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever.
Here, Jesus is compared to Melchizedek; the king of righteousness, the king of peace, without beginning or end of life, like the Son of God and a priest forever. The writer is pointing out that Christ is a type of Melchizedek.
Jesus and Jonah
Jesus even engages with typology in the Gospels.
Luke 11 v 29-30
As the crowds increased, Jesus said, “This is a wicked generation. It asks for a sign, but none will be given it except the sign of Jonah. For as Jonah was a sign to the Ninevites, so also will the Son of Man be to this generation.
Matthew 12 v 39-40
He said to them, “The sinful people of this day look for something special to see. There will be nothing special to see but the powerful works of the early preacher Jonah. Jonah was three days and three nights in the stomach of a big fish. The Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the grave also.
Here He compares Himself to Jonah. The pattern He draws out is how that like Jonah was in the belly of the fish for three days, so He will be in the grave for three days and three nights. There are numerous other connections between Christ and Jonah. I have previously written about them here.
Jesus is a type of Jonah. So when we read the story of Jonah, we can use it to better understand Christ’s story too.
Road to Emmaus
In the Gospel of Luke, we read about two disciples who were walking along the road to Emmaus. They meet Jesus, who then proceeds to tell them about where He is found in the Old Testament. I like to think, He would have used typology to show this. And if this was the case, we can see that Jesus is not only a type of Adam, Jonah and Melchizedek, but also Noah, Moses, Joshua, David, Solomon and so on.
Each of these famous Bible characters and more, find their story in the life of Christ.
For example, Jesus is a type of Noah, who saves His family from God’s Judgement. He is a type of Moses, who frees His people from a corrupt and sinful world through the waters of baptism. He is a type of Joshua, who leads the people of God into the Kingdom of Heaven. He is a type of David, who though he was a lowly man, he conquered the goliath of this world, Death. And he is a type of Solomon, the wisest of all kings.
I have personally found seeing the Gospel through the lens of Noah’s story has helped me understand it in deeper ways. So I’d encourage you to read the Scriptures, finding the typological connections in them, and see Jesus shining through the Old Testament.
Additionally to the comments of it being essential to refer to others being a type of Christ, rather than the other way around, I will also say that I see something that I have not heard others comment on. Some people will try to claim that Mordecai is like a type of Christ. I could not disagree more strongly. I absolutely believe that Esther is the type of Christ. Gender need not be an issue. There was never any evidence of Jesus being hung up on gender as far as what a woman could do. He just did not go into it within a culture that was tone deaf to it.
I am not convinced you have it the right way round. The OT characters were to foreshadow the coming Christ, that is to say, the earlier folks were there to show the form and shape of the later one to come - they are the mere shadow on the ground - not the true upright form. Those who came earlier were the type of the later fuller form - that is the Christ. Vorbild and Nachbild in the German help make this distinction. Cookie cutter and cookie are a useful if limited illustration when teaching this principle.