6 The type-antitype relationships like those between Adam and Christ, Moses and Christ, David and Christ, and Solomon and Christ are difficult to challenge given the preponderance of biblical evidence to substantiate them. The road between archetype and antitype passes through ectypes along the way. The historical correspondence has to do with the way that real people, events, or institutions match each other … The escalation has to do with the way that as we move from the initial instance, which we might call the archetype, through the installments in the pattern that reinforce the significance of the archetype, we gather steam in the uphill climb until the type finds fulfillment in its ultimate expression.
Repeatedly the literature consistently calls for the presence of historical correspondences and escalation between the type and antitype. Studies on typology are fruitful and multiplying. Fourth, we will draw conclusions from our observations. Third, we will note the correspondences and escalation between Boaz and Jesus. Second, we will address whether Christological types can be identified in the OT even if the New Testament (NT) authors did not identify them. To defend this claim, we will first define a Christological type. Put simply, Boaz is a type of Christ, and Jesus is a true and greater Boaz. While the genealogy at the end of Ruth 4 looks beyond the days of Boaz and Ruth, and while Boaz is an ancestor not only of David but also of Jesus, this article will contend that the relationship between Boaz and Jesus is typological. From their line will come David and, in the fullness of time, David’s greater Son. The coming together of Boaz and Ruth is a result of God’s providence, and God’s providence plays the long game. But the book is about more than immediate relief for the main family. It narrates how a Moabite named Ruth met an Israelite named Boaz and how their marriage ensured the continuation of her mother-in-law Naomi’s family line and inheritance (4:3-5, 9-10, 14-15). The Book of Ruth tells a story that resolves in chapter four yet is still heading somewhere. The events therein were not reported for their own sake by a narrator who was impartial to grander purposes.
Since the story in the Book of Ruth took place during the pre-Davidic period of the judges when there was no king in Israel (1:1), the appearance of David’s name at the very end is noteworthy. 2 The last word of the final verse is “David” (Ruth 4:22). 1 In fact, the content of the genealogy may be the whole reason the Book of Ruth was written. The Book of Ruth is not the only Old Testament (OT) book with a genealogy, but it is the only one with a genealogy in its closing verses.
0 kommentar(er)
