"Virtually every line assumes the Old Testament background"

"Another very common device is the use of analogy, and here we begin to arrive at typology per se. As Frei points out, typology means that earlier characters and events are understood as figures of later characters and events, and the text is written in a way that brings out the connection. Through analogy, the writer guides his reader’s re­sponses and judgments about characters and events. A character, for example, described in terms reminiscent of Esau (abundant hair, a hunter, very hungry) is almost bound to be a villain, and if he is not, we will conclude that he is deliberately being contrasted with Esau. A writer who describes a character in a way that reminds readers of Joseph (handsome, successful, resistant to sexual temptation) wants to commend this ”new Joseph” to his readers, The analogies between different characters can be brought out by names, quotations, allu­sions, physical details, actions, and so forth. The analogies between different events can be brought out by location, similar sequences of events, repetition of key words or phrases, and so on, Whatever the specific means used, biblical writers resort to internal typology to guide the reader.

"…analogies are foundational for the theological conclusions that can be drawn from an Old Testament book, and thus fundamen­tal to any Christian reading of the Old Testament. It is commonly said that typology should not be used to formulate doctrine. This claim, popular as it is, is not only wrong; it is preposterous. The whole of New Testament Christology is built on analogies (i.e., typologies) be­tween Jesus and Aaron, Jesus and Moses, Jesus and Melchizedek, Jesus and David, Jesus and Jeremiah, and so on. Even apparently more ”lit­eral” Christological titles and descriptions are fundamentally typo-logical: To say Jesus is Son of Man is to say He is Last Adam; to say He is Son of God is to say (among other things) that He is the Heir to the Davidic throne (2 Sam, 7:14); to say that he is Prince of Peace is to say that He is a new Solomon. No one with a knowledge of the Old Testament can read the gospels and fail to realize that virtually every line assumes the Old Testament background. Even the most “systematic” of New Testament writers, Paul, draws not only theo­logical but ethical conclusions from an avowedly “allegorical” reading of the story of Ishmael and Isaac (Gal. 4:21—3 1) and from a typological summary of Israel’s wilderness experience (1 Cor. 10:1— 10). Far from being illegitimate grounds for theology, typology, I submit, is the only ground for understanding the theological contri­bution of the Old Testament." -- Peter Leithart, "A Son to Me", pp. 13, 15-16

Workshop: Rest Beneath His Wings

This was my presentation for the workshop on Ruth 3.

SIMEON TRUST WORKSHOP PREPARATION WORKSHEET for May 4, 2006

Text: Ruth 3

Title: Rest Beneath His Wings

Theme: Naomi affirms the covenant rest, expresses her confidence that God will provide and act on hers and Ruth’s behalf through Boaz, and acts on that confidence. Anticipated rest beneath His wings.

Aim for the hearers: As alien participants in the New Exodus, our confidence is to be in our Redeemer-Kinsman, who kept covenant on our behalf. Our satisfied response to what Christ has done for us should reflect a confidence that there is rest in Christ (Matthew 11:28), and there will be rest in Christ, our Kinsman-Redeemer (Hebrews 4:11; Revelation 5:9).

Immediate Context: This chapter is about finding rest in a redeemer. The chapter opens (verse 1) and ends (verse 18) with the thought of rest… the rest anticipated in a redeemer husband is an allusion to the rest Israel was to seek in the provisions of its redeemer. Ruth, the Moabite, by the hand of providence, has been working in the field of one who is her relative, Boaz. Chapter 3 is set up by the words of Boaz in Ruth 2:11,12 in which Boaz pronounces God’s covenantal blessing on Ruth… Boaz himself, in chapter 3 begins to fulfill his own covenantal blessing by foreshadowing the refuge, reward, and satisfaction that he had pronounced in the blessing and then experienced by Ruth in chapter 2. Naomi’s plan of action and Ruth’s response to Naomi in chapter 3 is guided by her experience of her satisfaction from Boaz’s table (Ruth 2:14). From 2 hearts that have tasted satisfaction arises a faithful obedience that acts from the grace that has been given them. That satisfaction and the rest pursued by Naomi for Ruth anticipates the fulifillment of the satisfaction in chapter 4 verses 14 and 15. Their pursuit of “the rest” (3:1), is emphasized by the author of Ruth in highlighting physical posture… various versions of “lie down” are repeated 8 times between verses 4 and 14 in chapter 3. The climax of the drama is verse 9 where Ruth explains verse 7… the one in need of a redeemer lies at the feet of the redeemer and asks for refuge and rest under the wings of the redeemer. The eventual satisfaction and blessing of the redeemer (it's interesting to note that Boaz himself is a descendent of an alien/foreigner, Tamar; compare Ruth 4:18-22 with 1 Chronicles 2:4-15 and Genesis 38:29) is highlighted by the six measures of barley given to Naomi via Ruth (3:17).

Context of Book: The story of the book of Ruth is the story of Naomi (the name of the book should be Naomi, not Ruth) who has departed from Israel in famine (as Jacob does in Genesis), has returned in her own Exodus story, and is restored. Naomi, through the development of the narrative, is being restored from emptiness to fullness through the selfless acts of Ruth and Boaz. This restoration and redemption is motivated by a foreigner and alien, Ruth, who has embraced the God and covenant of Israel (Romans 11:11). Ruth’s faith is demonstrated in the words “Your God will be my God, and your people my people,” her version of the covenantal mantra: “I will be their God and they will be my people”. Even though Naomi has re-entered the land of promise, she (and Ruth) is need of a redeemer that is outside of herself and the rest of the book is dedicated to the question as to how her “Exodus” from Moab will climax in her redemption. The book ends with Naomi, the redeemed Madonna figure, holding “her” son that will spread Boaz’s name throughout Bethlehem (Ruth 4:11) and will propagate his people throughout the world (Ruth 11:12), both of which come to fruition in Christ (Matthew 1:1-6). By the end of the book, Ruth is no longer known as a Moabite (1:22, 2:2,21, 4:5,10) but as a full fledged participant with God’s people in the covenant (Ruth 4:13 where “the Moabite” is no longer describing Ruth).

Outline:

Scene 1: The desire for rest - vs. 1-5
Naomi’s 2 questions, 6 instructions, and 1 expression of confidence
Ruth’s response
Scene 2: The quest for rest - vs. 6-15
Ruth carries out Naomi’s request
Boaz’s question – Ruth’s response
Boaz’s expression of blessing
Boaz’s promise
Boaz’s instructions
Ruth carries out Boaz’s instructions with his blessing
Scene 3: Rest anticipated - vs. 16-18
Naomi’s question, instruction, and expression of confidence

Workshop: The Vindication of God's Anointed

This was my presentation for the workshop on 1 Samuel 26.

SIMEON TRUST WORKSHOP PREPARATION WORKSHEET for May 5, 2006

Text: 1 Samuel 26:1-25

Title: The Vindication of God's Anointed

Theme: David, the anointed and chosen son, passed the test in the wilderness and is vindicated as a righteous and faithful one. David has confidence in God’s promise of a kingdom and casts his gaze to the future.

Aim for the hearers: Christ, the Anointed and Chosen Son and God’s presence incarnate, passed His tests in the wilderness and was vindicated as the Righteous and Faithful One in looking to the joy that was set before Him. Therefore, when tempted to take matters into our own hands we, in the Anointed One, must trust God’s promises of a new garden, a city whose builder and maker is God, and cast our gaze to the future.

Immediate Context: This is the third of three parallel tests in the wilderness: David and Saul (chapter 24), David and Nabal (chapter 25), and David and Saul (again – chapter 26). This passage serves two chiasm. The first is in parallel with 1 Samuel 24, in which the story of Nabal is the point of 1 Samuel’s chiasm. The second is in chiastic parallel with 2 Sam. 3:1 where there is war between the house of Saul and the house of David with the death of Saul being the point of the chiasm for the book of Samuel (1 & 2 Samuel).

In 1 Samuel 26, there is “war” between Saul and David in which the offspring of the serpent is attempting to hunt down the Sethite offspring of the woman as the offspring wanders in the wilderness. David notes that Saul, the individual representation of God’s presence in the encampment (Saul is at the center of the encampment in 1 Samuel 26:5,7, just as the tabernacle was at the center of Israel’s encampment as they wandered the wilderness), has driven him from Canaan, Israel’s garden of God ("driven...away from the presence of the Lord", in 26:19,20, is a reference back to Adam & Eve’s being driven from the garden), and away from the tabernacle and God’s presence as if he is a pagan foreigner. This is reinforced by 1 Samuel 27:1, where David clearly is concerned about the location of his flight from Saul. In this way, David casts Saul’s pursuit of him as a violation of God’s covenant in which obedience is displayed in the occupation of the land. This dilemma for David has already been noted by the prophet Gad in 1 Samuel 22:5. In pursuing David through the wilderness, Saul has set himself up as an artificial barrier between God’s dwelling presence in Israel and David AND in doing so, has promoted pagan idolatry. The pursuit of David through the wilderness is no longer merely about a king and his rival, but on a grander scale, is about the worship of true God and his covenantal promises to His people.

This narrative reinforces Samuel’s prophetic judgment that Saul would be stripped of his kingdom and it would be given to David. Further, in being stripped of the kingdom, Saul will be cut off from the presence of the Lord in his dwelling with Israel in the land. Saul is in decline. David, his “son”, is on the rise. David has been chosen and is acting as the anointed one. Saul has been rejected. David’s actions, especially in the granting of life and mercy, point forward to his eventual enthronement. Saul’s actions spiral downward, pointing toward his eventual doom and dethronement. Saul is dependent on David, his rival, for his life. David the old body guard, contra Abner the new body guard, guards Saul’s life and anointing, even as Saul “failed to guard the commandment” (ch. 13). Saul, instead of Nabal, is the fool (1 Sam. 26:21). While the parallel story in 1 Samuel 24 is a test of whether or not David will be the righteous and faithful one, there is no longer any question in chapter 26. David no longer calls Saul “my father”, but “my lord and king”, a significant shift from endearing to formal terms. David is vindicated as God’s anointed and chosen one who will guard the true worship of Israel. David *is* the anointed one and Saul has been relegated to being the lame duck “anointed”.

Context of Book: The theme of this book is the establishment of the Davidic monarchy and covenant in fulfillment of what was promised in Deuteronomy. The question David asks of Saul is anticipated in his question to Jonathan in chapter 20 when he says “what have I done?” In fact, David asks this question 4 times throughout the book of Samuel, as one who is being unfairly persecuted and eventually exonerated/vindicated.

Outline:

Act 1: Saul Pursues David in the wilderness (1 Samuel 26:1-3b).

Act 2: David Seeks Out Saul (1 Samuel 26:3c-5).

Act 3: David and Abishai visit “the encampment” (1 Samuel 26:6-12)

Act 4: The old body guard rebukes the new body guard (1 Samuel 26:13-16)

Act 5: The chosen and the rejected converse: Saul-David-Saul-David-Saul (1 Samuel 26:17-25)