Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Ruth 3:1
Then Naomi her mother-in-law said unto her, My daughter, shall I not seek rest for thee, that it may be well with thee?
Ch. 3. Ruth appeals to Boaz to do the kinsman’s part
1 . seek rest ] a resting place marg.; see on Rth 1:9. All arrangements for a marriage were made by the parents (cf. Jdg 14:2 f.); hence it was Naomi’s duty to provide for Ruth’s future. How this was done is told with fine simplicity.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Rth 3:1
Shall I not seek rest for thee?
Rest for Ruth
I. the object of Naomis solicitude. Poor Ruth: a destitute, forlorn, bereaved, homeless, portionless widow. Think of the destitute circumstances of a bereaved sinner, when awakened to find out how deplorably he is ruined and utterly undone under the fall. She was between the two countries. Just the position of a soul awakened. Yet further, see the character of Ruth portraying thy condition yet more strongly. You remark, that she had escaped from Moab and refused to go back again. There was a decision of character, there was a distinction, there was the plain mark of belonging to God. Do mark, I beseech you, here, the importance of steadfast perseverance in the Christian character.
II. the nature of Naomis solicitude. It was rest she wanted for her daughter-in-law: Shall I not seek rest for thee? I wish to give some description of this rest.
1. And the first idea is tranquillity; a sacred calm, a blessed believing satisfaction. For when the poor soul is first awakened by the Spirit of God there is anything but tranquillity; it is tossed to and fro in a state of uncertainty, a state of perplexity, a state of wretchedness. Shall I not seek rest for thee? Shall I not tell thee where it is to be had? Shall I not point out the fact that it is to be found only in Ruths determination–Thy God shall be my God, a covenant God–Father, Son, and Holy Ghost? Get to know Him, get to serve Him with decision, and thou shalt have tranquillity.
2. But I pass on to mark, in addition to the tranquillity sought, it was desired that she should have an inheritance, and an inheritance of great value too. Now what says the apostle to this? Blessed be God,we have got an inheritance.
III. the end of this solicitude. And a very blessed one it was. (J. Irons.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
CHAPTER III
Naomi’s advice to Ruth, how to procure herself a marriage with
Boaz, 1-5.
She acts according to her mother-in-law’s direction, and is
kindly received by Boaz, who promises to marry her, should
her nearer kinsman refuse, 6-13.
He gives her six measures of barley, and sends her away
privately to her mother-in-law, who augurs favourably of
the issue of the plan she had laid, 14-18.
NOTES ON CHAP. III
Verse 1. Shall I not seek rest for thee] That is, Shall I not endeavour to procure thee a proper husband? See Ru 1:9, and the observations at the end of that chapter.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Rest, i.e. a life of rest, and comfort, and safety, under the care of a good husband. The question supposeth an affirmative answer: I will seek it, as my duty binds me.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
Then Naomi her mother in law said unto her,…. After the harvests were over, and so gleaning likewise; when Naomi and Ruth were together alone in their apartment, the mother addressed the daughter after this manner:
my daughter, shall I not seek for thee, that it may be well with thee? that is, in the house of an husband, as in Ru 1:9 her meaning is, to seek out for an husband for her, that she might have an house of her own to rest in, and an husband to provide her; that so she might be free from such toil and labour she had been lately exercised in, and enjoy much ease and comfort, and all outward happiness and prosperity in a marriage state with a good husband. This interrogation carries in it the force of a strong affirmation, may suggest that she judged it to be her duty, and that she was determined to seek out such a rest for her; and the Targum makes her way of speaking stronger still, for that is,
“by an oath I will not rest, until the time that I have sought a rest for thee.”
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Rth 3:1-2 As Naomi conjectured, from the favour which Boaz had shown to Ruth, that he might not be disinclined to marry her as gol, she said to her daughter-in-law, “ My daughter, I must seek rest for thee, that it may be well with thee.” In the question , the word is here, as usual, an expression of general admission or of undoubted certainty, in the sense of “Is it not true, I seek for thee? it is my duty to seek for thee.” = (Rth 1:9) signifies the condition of a peaceful life, a peaceful and well-secured condition, “a secure life under the guardian care of a husband” ( Rosenmller). “ And now is not Boaz our relation, with whose maidens thou wast? Behold, he is winnowing the barley floor (barley on the threshing-floor) to-night, ” i.e., till late in the night, to avail himself of the cool wind, which rises towards evening (Gen 3:8), for the purpose of cleansing the corn. The threshing-floors of the Israelites were, and are still in Palestine, made under the open heaven, and were nothing more than level places in the field stamped quite hard.
(Note: “A level spot is selected for the threshing-floors, which are then constructed near each other, of a circular form, perhaps fifty feet in diameter, merely by beating down the earth hard.” – Robinson, Pal. ii. p. 277.)
Rth 3:3-4 “ Wash and anoint thyself ( , from = ), and put on thy clothes (thy best clothes), and go down (from Bethlehem, which stood upon the ridge of a hill) to the threshing-floor; let not thyself be noticed by the man (Boaz) till he has finished eating and drinking. And when he lies down, mark the place where he will sleep, and go (when he has fallen asleep) and uncover the place of his feet, and lay thyself down; and he will tell thee what thou shalt do. ”
Rth 3:5 Ruth promised to do this. The , which the Masorites have added to the text as Keri non scriptum , is quite unnecessary. From the account which follows of the carrying out of the advice given to her, we learn that Naomi had instructed Ruth to ask Boaz to marry her as her redeemer (cf. Rth 3:9).
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| Ruth’s Visit to Boaz. | B. C. 1312. |
1 Then Naomi her mother in law said unto her, My daughter, shall I not seek rest for thee, that it may be well with thee? 2 And now is not Boaz of our kindred, with whose maidens thou wast? Behold, he winnoweth barley to night in the threshingfloor. 3 Wash thyself therefore, and anoint thee, and put thy raiment upon thee, and get thee down to the floor: but make not thyself known unto the man, until he shall have done eating and drinking. 4 And it shall be, when he lieth down, that thou shalt mark the place where he shall lie, and thou shalt go in, and uncover his feet, and lay thee down; and he will tell thee what thou shalt do. 5 And she said unto her, All that thou sayest unto me I will do.
Here is, I. Naomi’s care for her daughter’s comfort is without doubt very commendable, and is recorded for imitation. She had no thoughts of marrying herself, ch. i. 12. But, though she that was old had resolved upon a perpetual widowhood, yet she was far from the thoughts of confining her daughter-in-law to it, that was young. Age must not make itself a standard to youth. On the contrary, she is full of contrivance how to get her well married. Her wisdom projected that for her daughter which her daughter’s modesty forbade her to project for herself, v. 1. This she did 1. In justice to the dead, to raise up seed to those that were gone, and so to preserve the family from being extinct. 2. In kindness and gratitude to her daughter-in-law, who had conducted herself very dutifully and respectfully to her. “My daughter” (said she, looking upon her in all respects as her own), “shall I not seek rest for thee,” that is, a settlement in the married state; “shall I not get thee a good husband, that it may be well with thee,” that is, “that thou mayest live plentifully and pleasantly, and not spend all thy days in the mean and melancholy condition we now live in?” Note, (1.) A married state is, or should be, a state of rest to young people. Wandering affections are then fixed, and the heart must be at rest. It is at rest in the house of a husband, and in his heart, ch. i. 9. Those are giddy indeed that marriage does not compose. (2.) That which should be desired and designed by those that enter into the married state is that it may be well with them, in order to which it is necessary that they choose well; otherwise, instead of being a rest to them, it may prove the greatest uneasiness. Parents, in disposing of their children, must have this in their eye, that it may be well with them. And be it always remembered that is best for us which is best for our souls. (3.) It is the duty of parents to seek this rest for their children, and to do all that is fit for them to do, in due time, in order to it. And the more dutiful and respectful they are to them, though they can the worse spare them, yet they should the rather prefer them, and the better.
II. The course she took in order to her daughter’s preferment was very extraordinary and looks suspicious. If there was any thing improper in it, the fault must lie upon Naomi, who put her daughter upon it, and who knew, or should know, the laws and usages of Israel better than Ruth. 1. It was true that Boaz, being near of kin to the deceased, and (for aught that Naomi knew to the contrary) the nearest of all now alive, was obliged by the divine law to marry the widow of Mahlon, who was the eldest son of Elimelech, and was dead without issue (v. 2): “Is not Boaz of our kindred, and therefore bound in conscience to take care of our affairs?” This may encourage us to lay ourselves by faith at the feet of Christ, that he is our near kinsman; having taken our nature upon him, he is bone of our bone and flesh of our flesh. 2. It was a convenient time to remind him of it, now that he had got so much acquaintance with Ruth by her constant attendance on his reapers during the whole harvest, which was now ended; and he also, by the kindness he had shown to Ruth in smaller matters, had encouraged Naomi to hope that he would not be unkind, much less unjust, in this greater. And she thought it was a good opportunity to apply to him when he made a winnowing-feast at his threshing-floor (v. 2), then and there completing the joy of the harvest, and treating his workmen like a kind master: He winnoweth barley to-night, that is, he makes his entertainment to-night. As Nabal and Absalom had feasts at their sheep-shearing, so Boaz at his winnowing. 3. Naomi thought Ruth the most proper person to do it herself; and perhaps it was the usage in that country that in this case the woman should make the demand; so much is intimated by the law, Deut. xxv. 7-9. Naomi therefore orders her daughter-in-law to make herself clean and neat, not to make herself fine (v. 3): “Wash thyself and anoint thee, not paint thee (as Jezebel), put on thy raiment, but not the attire of a harlot, and go down to the floor,” whither, it is probable, she was invited to the supper there made; but she must not make herself known, that it, not make her errand known (she herself could not but be very well known among Boaz’s reapers) till the company had dispersed and Boaz had retired. And upon this occasion she would have an easier access to him in private than she could have at his own house. And thus far was well enough. But, 4. Her coming to lie down at his feet, when he was asleep in his bed, had such an appearance of evil, was such an approach towards it, and might have been such an occasion of it, that we know not well how to justify it. Many expositors think it unjustifiable, particularly the excellent Mr. Poole. We must not to evil that good may come. It is dangerous to bring the spark and the tinder together; for how great a matter may a little fire kindle! All agree that it is not to be drawn into a precedent; neither our laws nor our times are the same that were then; yet I am willing to make the best of it. If Boaz was, as they presumed, the next kinsman, she was his wife before God (as we say), and there needed but little ceremony to complete the nuptials; and Naomi did not intend that Ruth should approach to him any otherwise than as his wife. She knew Boaz to be not only an old man (she would not have trusted to that alone in venturing her daughter-in-law so near him), but a grave sober man, a virtuous and religious man, and one that feared God. She knew Ruth to be a modest woman, chaste, and a keeper at home, Tit. ii. 5. The Israelites had indeed been once debauched by the daughters of Moab (Num. xxv. 1), but this Moabitess was none of those daughters. Naomi herself designed nothing but what was honest and honourable, and her charity (which believeth all things and hopeth all things) banished and forbade all suspicion that either Boaz or Ruth would attempt any thing but what was likewise honest and honourable. If what she advised had been then as indecent and immodest (according to the usage of the country) as it seems now to us, we cannot think that if Naomi had had so little virtue (which yet we have no reason to suspect) she would also have had so little wisdom as to put her daughter upon it, since that alone might have marred the match, and have alienated the affections of so grave and good a man as Boaz from her. We must therefore think that the thing did not look so ill then as it does now. Naomi referred her daughter-in-law to Boaz for further directions. When she had thus made her claim, Boaz, who was more learned in the laws, would tell her what she must do. Thus must we lay ourselves at the feet of our Redeemer, to receive from him our doom. Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? Acts ix. 6. We may be sure, if Ruth had apprehended any evil in that which her mother advised her to, she was a woman of too much virtue and too much sense to promise as she did (v. 5): All that thou sayest unto me I will do. Thus must the younger submit to the elder, and to their grave and prudent counsels, when they have nothing worth speaking of to object against it.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Ruth – Chapter 3
Naomi Advising, vs. 1-5
It seems apparent that Naomi had designs relative to a match-up between Boaz and Ruth from the very first day of Ruth’s gleaning. The relationship having survived all through the harvest, and Boaz having not made any move himself, she decided to take the initiative. Perhaps Boaz was timid; it is hard to feel, from his display of feeling for Ruth’s welfare, that he did not have tender thoughts of her. Naomi made clear to Ruth that she wished to effect marriage between them.
The custom Naomi adopted for Ruth to apprise Boaz of her desire to marry him is quite strange to modern thought. There is no further enlightenment concerning it in the Scriptures, and to the Christian mind it might even seem immoral. There was certainly no immoral intent on the part of Naomi and Ruth, nor was there any immorality involved, as shall be seen.
Ruth was to prepare herself by bathing and anointing herself and dressing in her best raiment. She was to go secretly to the threshing floor that evening while Boaz was winnowing the barley. Winnowing was the manner in which the chaff was removed from the grain. In the late evening, as the land cooled off from the day’s heat, the breezes would blow in from the Mediterranean Sea. So the men picked this time to winnow the grain. It would be tossed into the breeze, which would blow out the chaff while the heavier grain would fall on to the winnowing sheet again.
Ruth was to see where Boaz lay down to sleep when the winnowing was over, but not to discover herself until he had finished his evening meal and gone to sleep. Then she was to go quietly and uncover his feet and lie down there. Here she would remain until he became aware of her presence, at which time he would inform her what she should do. Ruth agreed to follow her mother in law’s instructions.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
In the opening of the study we are impressed with
NAOMIS SOJOURN AND SADNESS
It is a moving story. There was a famine in the land. This sentence holds a special similitude. It is in perfect keeping with what we know to be repeated experiences in that section of the world; scorching sun and long continued draught, often produced the direst hardships. And a certain man of Bethlehem-judah went to sojourn in the country of Moab, he, and his wife, and his two sons.
A grievous famine necessitated this sojourn. Every student of the Bible is impressed with the fact that famine, in that region, commonly sent its people southward to Egypt. It was a famine in the land that sent Abraham and Sarah, his wife, into Egypt (Gen 12:10-11). It was a famine in the land that sent the sons of Jacob, and finally brought Jacob himself, into Egypt (Genesis 42-46). And yet, who will claim that either was accidentally driven there, in view of the history that grew out of the sojourn of each? In the course of time Jesus will be carried into Egypt, and though it may appear that His parents are fleeing from the face of the murderous foe, it will eventually be proven that this also was in the Divine plan and unto the fulfilment of prophecy. Necessity is the mother of invention, and it is often much more; it is the highway of prophecy. Opposition and hardships often seem wholly from the adversary, but in the end, serve to illustrate the truth that God makes all things work together for good. This is a fact that weaklings seldom feel. They cannot see any profit in pain or hardship of any sort; they imagine that Divine blessing must take the form of health, happiness, prosperity. They reason that pampering is the only proof of parental love. History, however, is replete with illustrations to the contrary. Earthly fathers and mothers who pet and spoil children, may congratulate themselves that they are affectionate parents, but time will simply prove that they were affectionate fools; and while attempting to pamper, they have succeeded in spoiling.
There is at this present moment a desperate effort to have legislation against having children, under certain ages, work. It is a piece of legislation with which we have been in little sympathy. We believe that for an average youngster, brought up in a city where idleness is a daily occupation, particularly in the non-school session, that a few years in the workhouse would be more conducive to character than the idling custom. Our hearts go out in natural sympathy to those families, often big in proportion to their poverty, who must subsist upon the plainest and coarsest of food in order to continue existence at all; and yet we are firmly convinced that semi-famine is still working good to more people than men imagine; and that sojourns in Egypt represent a dual truth, human search for physical food and a Divine plan for producing character.
Continued sickness saddened this sojourn.
The name of the man was Elimelech, and the name of his wife Naomi, and the name of his two sons Mahlon and Chilion, Ephrathites of Bethlehem-judah. And they came into the country of Moab, and continued there.
And Elimelech, Naomis husband, died; and she was left, and her two sons. (Rth 1:2-3).
This verse holds more of sadness than at first seems. On the surface it would appear that the death of Elimelech was the big bereavement of this Egyptian sojourn; but not so. The name Mahlon means weakness, and Chilion means wasting, and there is here a plain suggestion that the father went to his death in an unequal battle against hardship and poverty, since the four members of the family must look to him for sustenance, the sons being sickly and thereby incapacitated. The change of country and of climate, while but slight, and the greater ease of securing a living in a land enriched by the annual overflow of the Nile, doubtless improved the health of the boys so much so that they married women of Moab. Mahlon married Orpah and Chilion married Ruth, and they dwelt there about ten years. But when once tuberculosis has laid its insidious, spoiling hand upon the human frame, recovery is both difficult and improbable. And the house that held one widow shortly came to contain three, and the single bereavement was tripled.
These would seem to be almost unbearable experiences. A stout ship can brave the single wave, it matters little how high it runs; but the sailors say that when the waves come in threes, disaster is a common result. However, there are ships so constructed that they can ride almost any storm and come safely into port; and there are peopleGod be thanked for their couragewho can meet the winds and waves of adversity, even when the first is cyclonic and the second deluging. Hardship and suffering commonly have one of two effects, they either destroy or inspire; either kill or make alive. Upon some they work utter defeat; and upon others, they result in refinement and effectiveness. George Lorimer, in his volume, Isms Old and New, says, I do not recall any great production or any sublime endeavor that was not preceded by suffering of some kind. Pascal sorrowed deeply before he thought sweetly; and he thought painfully before he wrote sympathetically. Milton had tasted of misfortunes cup and had braved the storms of four and fifty years before he could sing of Paradise and of mans woeful fall. Poor Jean Paul but expresses his own experience when he says that the bird sings sweeter whose cage has been darkened, for his song broke not on human ear until he had struggled long with the thick, chill shadows of poverty. Carlyle was a dreary dyspeptic before he accomplished anything great in literature; and but for Robert Halls spinal malady the world might never have been thrilled by his matchless eloquence.
These successive deaths terminated this sojourn.
Then she rose with her daughters in law, that she might return from the country of Moab; for she had heard in the country of Moab how that the Lord had visited His people in giving them bread.
Wherefore she went forth out of the place where she was, and her two daughters in law with her; and they went on their way to return unto the land of Judah (Rth 1:6-7).
It is not difficult to imagine that when Elimelech died the two sons and their wives comforted and encouraged the mother, and said, Dont grieve, we will yet get on. When Mahlon went, the case became more discouraging; and when Chilion followed, the words of comfort were few indeed, for the stricken souls were dumb. And yet, who can doubt that this common sorrow knit these three women together as nothing else known to life could do; and for Naomi the thought of giving them up, Moabites though they were, to return to her people whom God had visited with bread, was heartbreaking.
How often that conflict of emotions has surged in the widows heart. Shall I stay with the people I have come to know and love, or return to those who are mine through blood relationship? It has ever been, and will forever abide, a debatable, baffling question. Doubtless one thing settled it, namely, that back in Judea God was worshipped, and in Moab He was not acknowledged.
One who truly believes can give up anything and anybody rather than lose God. We confess ourselves amazed, astounded, yea, even stunned, when we see men sojourning in the Egypt of the modernist University, surrender their God and accept an imaginary protoplasm instead, or cast away their Christ in favor of the uncaused cause. Our interest, therefore, and our admiration for Naomi grows as we see her turning herself from the women she had learned to love, who had become to her daughters indeed, and daughters doubly dear, to go back to the fellowship of the people who believed in God. Many a mother on the Western plains of America, far remote from any church, privileged not even a Sunday School to which she could send her children, has grown sick of the godless estate and the reckless society around her, and has said to her husband, Property or no property, I am weary of this; I want to go back to the eastern home where the church bell rings and the children assemble for instruction, and children and parents gather to worship God.
We may argue as we like, but Israels advantage over the other nations will never find other explanation than this, that she knew God; and Israels present scattered and suffering estate needs no other interpretation than that she had rejected her Messiah and so largely ceased from the worship of her God.
RUTHS DECISION ENDS SORROW
Her decision to go to Bethlehem-Judah gladdened Naomis heart. The entreaty of the mother-in-law,
Go, return each to her mothers house: the Lord deal kindly with you, as ye have dealt with the dead, and with me.
The Lord grant you that ye may find rest, each of you in the house of her husband (Rth 1:8-9),
and her kisses and tears, as she bade them good-bye, is sufficient proof of Naomis sincerity; while their replies, Surely we will return with thee unto thy people, was a proof of their appreciation and must have strongly moved the mother heart.
It is not at all the unknown thing for in-laws to become dearer than ones own; and that these were to her daughters indeed, there seems no doubt. It was on that very account that her motherly spirit further expressed itself,
Turn again, my daughters; why will ye go with me? are there any more sons in my womb, that they may be your husbands?
Turn again, my daughters, go your way; for I am too old to have an husband. If I should say, I have hope, if I should have an husband also to night, and should also bear sons,
Would ye tarry for them till they were grown? would ye stay for them from having husbands? nay, my daughters; for it grieveth me much for your sakes, that the hand of the Lord is gone out against me.
And they lifted up their voice, and wept again: and Orpah kissed her mother in law; but Ruth clave unto her (Rth 1:11-14).
Joseph Parker, commenting upon this incident, says, It is hard to fix upon a point where one mans quality exceeds another. For a long time they seem to be equal, but a critical juncture occurs, and at that point the quality of the man is determined. Still, let us not forget that the distinction is between loving and loving more, not between hatred and love, not between aversion and attachment, but between love and love. Orpah loved Naomi, and indeed wanted to go with her, with a constancy, however, that was open to reasoning; Ruth loved her and shut out all reasoning, because of the passion of her affection.
I am constant as the northern star,
Of whose true, fixed, and resting quality
There is no fellow in the firmament.
It is this fixed quality in loves affection that both gave proof of her character and Divine appointment to her place in history; and it is this same subtle something in the lives of men and women that makes one more loyal than another, and that gives him greater favor with men and makes possible even the bestowment of more of the Divine blessing. In the parable of the talents we are told that while they were ten and five and one, the Master bestowed upon each according to his several ability. There is, then, a unit of mercy in character itself.
Her decision to go to Bethlehem terminated her own sorrows. Weeping ended when the resolution became unalterable; and from that moment neither sorrow nor crying are recorded; the former things had passed away, the old pains are forgotten in the new plans and the mind that had dwelt upon its disasters now becomes occupied and animated with anticipations. True, it was only a journey of a few miles, fifty to a hundred, but made as it was, it involved more than a journey to Europe does in our day, and brought to her a new civilization, for the people of Judah were more removed from Egypt than the people of China are removed from America.
Then again, decision itself is exhilarating. It is always attended with a rising strength. The reason more people never know inspiration is that they never reach great decisions. The air-man who looks from the azure sky upon all the landscape of beauty below, is only privileged that vision when once he has made his decision to undertake the risk of a rise.
Decisive characters are seldom the subjects of despair. Before we finish this chapter we shall find Naomi naming herself Mara; or changing her name, that had been associated with youth and joy and bounding pulse, to one that expressed bitterness, as one who had gone out full, but had returned empty. In this lament Ruth joins not. Youth was hers. The new land and the new people were of interest; and the natural hope of human nature was asserting itself. And even without her knowledge, but doubtless in accord with her expectations and hopes, she was approaching an experience that would bring her joy, make her name immortal, and attach the same to thousands upon thousands of girls yet to be born.
Here she was to be married to Boaz. The second chapter opens with the introduction of this man.
And Naomi had a kinsman of her husbands, a mighty man of wealth, of the family of Elimelech, and his name was Boaz (Rth 2:1).
It was evidently a case of love at first sight, for no sooner was Ruth introduced than she said to Naomi, Let me now go to the field, and glean ears of corn after him in whose sight I shall find grace. Who will say that a woman is to be sought only, and is never to show concern or interest in the man who is goodly in her sight; and who will claim that such was ever the custom, all philosophizing to that end, notwithstanding?
This step of Ruths was characteristic of her sex. She could not speak her love, but she could act it; and while the text says, her hap was to light on a part of the field belonging unto Boaz, who doubts that she maneuvered in that direction? And who blames her? According to the text over which we have passed already, the first husband was a weakling in strength; according to this text, Boaz was a mighty man of strength. According to the text, her first husband was the subject of poverty; this, a man of wealth. All the world is interested when wealth and beauty meet, and still more gratified when kinship of high character is involved; and the whole text makes clear this combination. The language of Boaz to his reapers, The Lord be with thee, shows that he was a man of God; and their answer, The Lord bless thee, reveals his favor among his fellows. His question to his servant who was set over the reapers concerning this damsel was a revelation of his interest (Rth 2:2-5), while his counsel to the girl as to the place and ground of her work, and his treatment of her, when at the close of the day she slept at his feet, is a proof that boasted modernism is without occasion. It is very easy, and with certain of the intelligentsia, very popular, to refer to this period as one of primitive life and undeveloped ideals, and speak of the ancient man as a bit of improvement upon the beast supposed to have been his ancestor; but the fact remains that this four thousand year old story is nothing short of a reproof of modern morals. After all our boasted progress, this man Boaz still stands as a needed ensample of moral righteousness. The present-day critic takes pleasure in pointing out any place in the Bible where any man has immorality recorded against him; but he passes over the Book of Ruth because its high ideals and record of holy conduct gives him no ground of criticism.
RUTHS MARRIAGE AND THE MASTERS ANCESTRY
In this marriage we find essential links in Christs ancestral chain. The fourth chapter records this marriage, and prophetically effects this relationship. We will not enter into the habits of marriage that made it incumbent upon the nearest kinsman to redeem both the estate and raise up children to his brother, for to students of the Scripture that law of Israelitish life is well-known (Deu 25:5-10).
There is introduced, here, another fact which has played so conspicuous a part in all human history as to demand attention. This woman was not of Israel. She was a Moabitess instead. In the judgment of Israel, therefore, she was a social nobody, but by her marriage to Chilion had been elevated to recognized equality. Surely the paper walls that partition society are thin. By mere ceremony the Gentile could then have been made as a Jew, and mans method have not changed.
America has been much interested in a recent marriage that brought together the daughter of the Canadian woodsan uncultured beautyand the son of immense wealtha graduate of Princeton; and society has been about debate over a subject in which God has never been deeply concerned, since He is no respecter of persons, and was, even then, moving to make this Moabitess, this Gentile, an ancestress of His Only Begotten Son.
Ruth contributed a new strain to the Saviours blood. If one would take the pains to trace the Christ, he will find that Rahab, the harlot, is in His line, and now this girl that would have been denominated by bigoted Jews as a dog of a Gentile, becomes the great-grandmother of David. Shall we say it is strange that such elements should enter his ancestral chain? Nay, verily! God elected that it should even be so, for Christ was not the Saviour of the Jews only, but of all men; nor was He the descendant of the Jew only; He was the Son of Man! Into His veins the blood of all men from Adams day came, and through His arteries it coursed, for He was to be the High Priest, touched with the feeling of our infirmitiesa Saviour of sinners, a God to the despised, a Redeemer to the distressed, the poor, the brokenhearted, the helpless, the social outcast! There is no man nor woman who need fear to approach Him, or be alarmed lest He should not prove a brother.
Christ knew all things! He, therefore, knew who His forebears were, and when they brought the harlot to Him to be condemned, He might have thought of His unfortunate ancestress Rahab, and with all the compassion of a close relative, said, Neither do I condemn thee. There would have been little or no meaning in the human birth of Christ, had He come only of the holy and of the high, and there would have been no hope for a world full of sinners, had He not been touched with the feeling of our infirmitiesToday, we can invite the vilest sinner to Him whose ancestor was such, and ask the Jew and Gentile alike to become one in Him, since through His veins flowed the blood of both.
Finally, let us remember that we have here a type of our eternal redemption.
Now these are the generations of Pharez: Phares begat Hesron,
And Hezron begat Ram, and Ram begat Amminadab, And Amminadab begat Nahshon, and Nahshon begat Salmon,
And Salmon begat Boaz, and Boas begat Obed,
And Obed begat Jesse, and Jesse begat David (Rth 4:18-22).
As Boaz became Ruths redeemer, and the redeemer of her whole estate, so Christ, Davids Greater Son, her descendant, redeems us. As her bereavement gave place to joy, and her labors were changed into rest, and her loneliness was met by love, so Christ comes to the Christian and to His Bridethe Church.
Jesus is coming to earth again, What if it were today?
Coming in power and love to reign, What if it were today?
Coming to claim His chosen Bride, All the redeemed and purified,
Over this whole earth scattered wide, What if it were today?
Satans dominion will then be oer, O that it were today!
Sorrow and sighing shall be no more, O that it were today!
Then shall the dead in Christ arise, Caught up to meet Him in the skies,
When shall these glories meet our eyes? What if it were today?
Faithful and true would He find us here, If He should come today?
Watching in gladness and not in fear, If He should come today?
Signs of His coming multiply, Morning light breaks in eastern sky,
Watch, for the time is drawing nigh, What if it were today?
Chorus:
Glory, glory! Joy to my heart twill bring;
Glory glory! When we shall crown Him king;
Glory, glory! Haste to prepare the way;
Glory, glory! Jesus will come some day.
Fuente: The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist by Riley
CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL NOTES.Then [and] Naomi said. The plan had matured itself slowly in her mind during the harvest season, now comes the proposal. Boaz, by his kindness and attention to Ruth, has evidently removed whatever difficulties she has felt heretofore [cf. on Rth. 1:11-13 : p. 47]. Shall I not seek? I must seek rest for thee. as usual an expression of general admission or of undoubted certainty, in the sense of Is it not true I seek for thee? It is my duty to seek for thee (Keil). The obligation to enforce the claims of a Levirate marriage lay on the side of Naomi and Ruth. In accordance with ancient usage to leave the assertion of a right with its possessor (Lange), the widow could demand her rights of the nearest relative, and if refused, put him openly to shame (Ibid). Rest [a resting place, Num. 10:33] for thee. A secure life, under the guardian care of a husband (Rossenmuller) Cf. on Rth. 1:9 as to this rest in the house of a husband; with the respect and protection it implied. That which made the fate of the daughter of Jephthah so sad was, that she never found a resting place in the house of a husband (Lange). That it may be well with thee. Which shall be good for thee (Carpzov Rosen.) That marriage may be to thee a merry-age (Trapp). She assumed that every true rest was good (Morison.)
Rth. 3:2. And now is not Boaz of our kindred? Our relation (Keil). Our acquaintance, i.e., relative (Lange). Hence the justness of the claim. Is he not therefore thy husband according to the law (Wordsworth). Cannot reasonably suppose that a pious woman would counsel against the law of God or the moral sense of good men, such as Boaz. To do so, would have alienated and repelled him, and so have frustrated her own purpose (Ibid). With whose maidens thou wast. A delicate reminder that Boaz has himself placed her on a level with his own Israelitish people [cf. on Rth. 3:13-14]. Behold he winnoweth barley to-night. Naomi must have come into closer connection with her relative. She is minutely informed of what he does, and where he is (Lange). The claim which Ruth had to make, could hardly be urged by her publicly in the harvest field, in the light of day (Wordsworth). He winnoweth barley. Literally, he is winnowing the threshing-floor of barley. He is winnowing the barley floor (barley on the threshing-floor) (Keil). Performed by tossing up the grain against the wind with a fork (Jer. 4:11-12). Shows the simple manners of the times. This mighty man of wealth assisted personally (Speakerss Com.). It is not unusual for the husband, wife, and all the family, to encamp at the baiders, or threshing-floors, until the harvest is over (Dr. Thomson). o night. Chosen for the advantage of the breeze which blew then (Gen. 3:8). In the night wind (Targum). Much agricultural labour of various kinds performed on bright nights (Kitto). In the threshing-floor. Nothing more than a level place in the field, under the open heavens (Keil). Constructed of a circular form, perhaps 50 feet in diameter, merely by beating down the earth hard (Robinson) [cf. Thomson 2:314]. Both the threshing and winnowing are done in the open air, rain in harvest time being almost unknown (Wordsworth) [cf. Jdg. 6:37; 2Sa. 6:6.]
Rth. 3:3. Wash thyself therefore and anoint thee. Not done in order to win Boaz by external beauty; for she is especially cautioned against allowing him to see her by day (Lange). Yet she is to go as a bride adorned for her husband, appropriately and symbolically dressed. And put thy [best] raiment upon thee. And ornament thyself with thy garments (Syr. Arab). Use all lawful means to ingratiate (Trapp). And get thee down to the floor. Bethlehem situated on a hill (Stanley), cf. on Rth. 2:4; p. 101. Serve Gods providence by demanding marriage of him, which in those days, and in Ruths case, was neither unlawful nor immodest (Trapp). Consilium hoc est re legitimum specie inhonestum (Junius). Nothing in these directions which was considered improper under the special and peculiar circumstances of the case (Kitto). This was a bold expedient, but it must be remembered that it was undertaken at the instigation of an aged and pious woman, and simply to remind Boaz of the relative positions in which they stood to each other. Make not thyself known unto. Suffer not thyself to be perceived by (Lange). The grain heaps probably surrounded the threshing floor, and would offer a chance for concealment, even though the place itself was under the open heavens. Until he shall have done eating and drinking. Until the moment of leisure and ease. Men more disposed to listen attentively then.
Rth. 3:4. Thou shalt mark. For the sake of finding it in the darkness coming on. And uncover his feet. Rather the place of his feet, the foot of his bed, as we should say (Sp. Com.). Sleep at his feet (Syr. Arab). Boaz probably slept under a rug, sheep skin, or thick quilt, and was covered with another, or by his cloak (Kitto). In Palestine men lay down with their clothes on, but are careful to cover their feet with a long mantle now called the Chudda, a wrapper of coarse cloth (Postans). All that thou sayest. Her consent that of faith and obedience, the conduct of one conscious of her own purity of purpose, and willing to encounter suspicion in the exercise of duty (Wordsworth). Unto me. Omit (Cassel, Bertheau, Bellamy, &c.) I will do. Evident that inclination, judgment, and all that she had seen of Boaz came in to enforce Namois advice. His age and his character probably shrinking and diffident, yet pious and honourable, encouraged her in obedience.
Rth. 3:6. And she went down unto the floor. Probably while it was yet light.
Rth. 3:1
ThemeONE SEEKING REST FOR ANOTHER
As if with marriage came the end,
The entrance into settled rest,
The calm to which loves tossings tend,
The quiet rest.Jean Ingelow.
Whatever hypocrites austerely talk
Of purity, and place, and innocence,
Defaming as impure what God declares
Pure, and commands to some, leaves free to all,
Our Maker bids increase.Milton.
Shall I not seek rest for thee, that it may be well with thee?
All Scripture given by inspiration of God and profitable (2Ti. 3:10). That is when rightly understood and intrepreted. Some passages however peculiarly liable to misunderstanding (Thomson). Divine ways often strange at first sight, and seemingly unsatisfactory to first judgments. We have to look at them as a whole before we can see them aright. So with the Divine Word. Parts which a false delicacy would expunge and which would never have appeared had the Bible been a merely human book. To understand them aright you must look (a) at their scope, (b) at the motive (c) at the underlying principle. Theend aimed at right, the spirit which prompts the aim right, rest assured that the means employed will fall under the same great law. This true
(1) of the Divine doings however mysterious,
(2) of the doings of all who are truly led of Him.
See how this is illustrated here.
I. Naomis motive is right.
(1) Justice to the dead. The law of Israel was that no branch of the family tree should be allowed to become extinct. The dead Mahlon had claims upon Boaz, and only the fact that Ruth was of Moab, had prevented these claims being enforced earlier. At first the claim seemed a hopeless one (Rth. 1:11-13). Now thanks to the kindness of Boaz, Naomi sees light beginning to break in upon their gloomy prospects;
(2) Justice to the living. Not merely kindness to Ruth and not merely gratitude, although these motives must have moved Naomi powerfully, but a deeper feelingthat instinctive sense of right, which overleaps such petty boundaries as nationalities. Her feelings as an Israelite, exclusive, conservative, unyielding may find expression i:914; now comes out the deeper feelings of a woman and a mother. Hence her wisdom projected for her daughter, that which her daughters modesty forbade her to project for herself.
Anxiety, solicitude for the settlement of a daughter pardonable, even commendable, so that modesty be not overstepped. Naomi of the same opinion as Paul as to the true sphere of woman: I desire therefore that the younger widows marry, &c. (1Ti. 5:14). Too old to marry herself, she by no means placed the same restriction upon those younger than herself. Such prudery is often only disguised selfishness and callousness of heart. Note. Age must not make itself a standard for youth. Naomis care without doubt commendable and recorded for imitation (M. Henry). Analagous to the conduct of a gospel church. Jerusalem always tender towards her daughters (Macgowan).
II. Naomis principle is right. That one may seek rest for anotherthat one may, and ought to forward the well-being of others the essential principle of the gospel itself (Luk. 19:10). So Christ sought not his own (Joh. 5:30; Joh. 8:28; Joh. 8:50). So charity seeketh not her own (1Co. 13:5). So Paul not seeking mine own profit, he says, but the profit of many (1Co. 10:33). Note. Bearing one anothers burdens we fulfil the law of Christ (Gal. 6:2; 1Co. 10:24; Php. 2:20-21).
Again, could Naomi do otherwise for one so near and dear as Ruth. She fulfils not only a religious but a natural duty. The young have claims upon the aged, upon their experience, foresight, judgment, &c. As wrong to withhold these, as to withhold more natural and apparent benefits. Eli doubtless gave his children bread, but seems to have withheld instruction, direction, reproof, restraint, and so came under the anger of God (Jas. 3:12-13). Note. Few greater responsibilities in life than this of providing for the future well-being of children. Shall I not seek rest for thee, that it may be well with theethe burden of many a parents heart and prayers.
Once more mark the kind of rest Naomi sought for Ruthhome rest, household well-being, that which is the purest of earths pleasures and the foretaste of heavens joys. Note. The inspired idea of marriage is, that it is and ought to be a rest. Not good for man to be alone (Gen. 2:18), much less woman, naturally weaker and more defenceless than man: still less a stranger like Ruth. [cf. on Rth. 1:9; p. 36.] With regard to woman marriage was viewed as the natural fulfilment of her calling, without which her life was helpless and defenceless as that of a people without a God (Lange).
The principle true to-day. Where love, patience, unselfishness, &c. are found; married life as much like rest as can be discovered in this world (Braden). Of course, cares, anxieties, difficulties are to be expected. As it is said of Egypt no country hath more venomous creatures, none more antidotes; so marriage hath many troubles, but withal many keeps against trouble (Trapp). Note. Those are giddy indeed that marriage does not compose (M. Henry).
Naomis plan is rightjudged by the time and circumstances. Involved no impropriety (Binney). The face, the worst piece of it, the heart was sound (Bishop Hall.) Certainly it was a bold expedient but not necessarily the worse because of that. She knew the piety and chastity of Boaz and Ruth (Trapp). The customs of the age and country were simpler, freer, but not less pure than the more formal customs of our own land and age (Braden).
Dr. Thomson and others however only vindicate the intentions, while they censure the measures, acquit of designing evil, but blame Naomi for not abstaining from all appearance of evil. Too much cuuning and stratagem, and forcing of Providence about the whole transaction (Thomson). Ran the hazard of sacrificing a good name in the use of a too bold and perilous artifice (Ibid). Note. Every action that is reported is not straightway allowed (Bishop Hall). If every act of a holy person should be our rule, we should have crooked lives (Ibid).
IMPROVEMENT.
(1) Rest a natural desire of all men. David would flee away into the wilderness, leave the city and camp far behind, and be at rest (Psa. 55:6). Take the broad sense of the word and this is what all men are seeking. Recognised by Christ as a necessity. Come ye yourselves apart into a desert place and rest awhile (Mar. 6:31). This desire satisfied in Christ (Mat. 11:28-29; Heb. 4:3. We which have believed, &c). Note. Rest is a thing to be sought.
(2) Thoughtful love a common thing in human history. We cannot always be with those who are dear to uswe may provide for their welfare, however, in that future when we are with them no longer. Bernard on this:
Shall I not seek. It is the parents duty to provide matches for their children. So did God, the general Father, for His son Adam, Abraham for Isaac, Isaac for Jacob. Samson entreated his father and mother to get him a wife (Jdg. 14:1-2).
Rest for thee. So she called the married estate. The word is a place of rest to settle in. Note. The married estate is an estate of rest.
That it may be well with thee. Marriage is for the well-being of such as enter into the holy estate. Doth not God say, It is not good for man to be alone? It is the estate in which the holiest have lived, and in which Christ Himself would be born. St. Paul indeed commended single life, but not simply but with respect unto the then present times, full of troubles and persecutions.
While the women are in distress it is Ruth who takes the initiative [Rth. 2:2.]; now, when hope grows large, it is Naomi. When hardship was to be endured, the mother submitted her will to the daughterfor Ruth was not sent to glean, she went of her own accord; now, when the endeavour is to secure the joy and happiness held out in prospect, the daughter yields in all things to the direction of the mother. The thought of labour for the mother originates with the daughter; but it is the mother who forms plans of happiness for the daughter.Lange.
Luck is ever waiting for something to turn up. Labour, with keen eyes and strong will, will turn up something. Luck lies in bed, and wishes the postman would bring him the news of a legacy. Labour turns out at six oclock, and, with busy pen or ringing hammer, lays the foundation of a competence. Luck whines. Labour whistles. Luck relies on chance. Labour on character.Cobden.
This word menuchah is used in many weighty sentences in the Old Testament Scriptures. It is used to designate the asylum of honour and freedom which a Hebrew found in the home of her husband, her secure refuge from servitude, insolence, and neglect. It is also used to denote the asylum of freedom and repose on which the Hebrew race entered when it gained full possession of the promised land, when in the days of Solomon, every man might sit under his vine or his fig tree, none daring to make him afraid, It was used by the Prophets in a still higher sense; with them God was the true menuchah or rest of His people, nay, of the whole world; to them it was revealed that only when the Immanuel came, the God-with-us, would the golden days of Paradise return; and the world enter into its final and glorious rest. So that those who first listened to our Saviours gracious invitation (Mat. 11:28-30), those on whose weary and fevered spirits His promise of rest first fell, would understand that He was offering them an asylum of repose, honour, and freedom, such as the Hebrew wife found in her husbands house, such as the Hebrew race found in the sacred land when it was wholly their own, such as the Hebrew Prophets had found in God in the moments of their loftiest aspirations.Cox.
This is Naomis conception of wedded life. Very beautiful, but how many realise it in their experience? Have we not heard multitudes of people declare that marriage was the real beginning of their troubles? Then anxiety about providing and regulating a household has commenced; then business and domestic cares have taken away all expected pleasure; then tempers are tried as never before; then disputes and bickerings arise that destroy all peace; then the beautiful illusions of youth have given place to thehard and stern practicalities of maturing life.Braden.
The estate of holy matrimony is well called a state of rest, for the natural affections and propensities instinctively yearn for it, and in it alone find their lawful gratification. The Rabbins say: The man is restless while he misses the rib that was taken out of his side; and the woman is restless till she gets under the mans arm, from whence she was taken.Steele and Terry.
I, as a Protestant have been accustomed to assert the purity and dignity of the offices of husband, wife, and parent. Have I ever examined the grounds of my own assertion? Do I believe them to be as callings from God, spiritual, sacramental, divine, eternal? Or am I at heart regarding and using them, like the Papist, merely as heavens indulgences to the infirmities of fallen man?. Those miserable dilettanti, who in books and sermons are whimpering meagre secondhand praise of celibacy, depreciating as carnal and degrading those family ties to which they owe their own existences, and in the enjoyment of which they themselves all the while unblushingly indulgeinsulting thus their own wives and mothersnibbling ignorantly at the very root of that household purity which constitutes the distinctive superiority of Protestant over Popish nations.Kingsley.
Christianity, be it remembered, proposes not to extinguish our natural desires, but to bring them under just control and direct them to their true objects.Wilberforce.
Rth. 3:2-4
ThemeAN IMPORTANT REMINDER
The grey old man was honoured there,
The matrons words were cherished,
And honesty in youthful hearts
By ages word was nourished.Nichol.
(2) Is not Boaz of our kindred, with whose maidens thou wast? Naomi has laid hold of the fact that they are entitled to use a certain amount of freedom in the affair
(1) because of kinship;
(2) because of the kindness Boaz has already shown to Ruth. The allowing Ruth to glean under especially favourable circumstance [see on Rth. 2:8; Rth. 2:13-16] not without a meaning. Note. We more readily ask favours from those who have already shown us kindness. In the nature of such to grow and become the foundation of our future actions.
I. An encouraging reminder. We need to put each other in mind, as well as recall to our own memories the thought of our claims and privileges. Naturally
(1) apt to forget;
(2) apt to delay action even when remembering;
(3) apt to re member and yet not realize. I will not be negligent to put you always in remembrance of these things, says the Apostle Peter, though ye know them. This a favourite idea of the Apostles in his old age [cf. 2Pe. 1:12-13; 2Pe. 1:15; 2Pe. 3:1, &c.]. So Paul writing to Timothy [1Ti. 4:6; 2Ti. 1:3; 2Ti. 1:6; 2Ti. 2:14].
II. An implied argument, viz., that he is bound in conscience to take care of our affairs (M. Henry). Is he not our kinsman? How much a kindred question implies to the believer in Christs proper humanity.
(1) Can we fear to approach?
(2) Can we do other than expect a welcome? [On the Kinsman Redeemer, see Rth. 4:9-10; Rth. 2:20-21].
III. A duty beginning to unfold itself. Why not bring the claim to the notice of Boaz? The obligation lay upon them to take initiative [see Crit. and Exeg. Notes]. Time and place, both opportune now that the harvest is ending. Note. A well-chosen season is one of the best advantages of any action (Trapp).
So in spiritual things we must seek, knock, ask, &c. In one sense Christ woos, in another He waits to be wooed. No presumption in seeking his feet.
From labour health, from health contentment springs,
Contentment opes the source of every joy.Beattie.
Rth. 3:2. Behold he winnoweth, &c.
Not ashamed to do this himselflived in the days of ancient simplicity (Lawson). Not too idle to deny himself of sleep that it might be done properlya model farmer [cf. on Rth. 2:2; Rth. 2:4, p. 93, 100].
See here,
I. Work associated with the character and position of a gentleman. Boaz was this, yet he labours with his own hands. Modern refinements and etiquette give no more pleasure to the fashionable gentleman than honest industry gave to this grandson of a famous prince (Lawson). Camillus, Fabricius, and other famous Roman consuls held the plough. Edmund Burke, in the very height of his fame, farmed his own lands near Beaconsfield. Note, (a) Labour the law of God (Gen. 2:15; Gen. 3:19). All are to work, some with hand, some with brain. (b) A false pride that dislikes handwork (Radford Thomson).
II. Work associated with the character and position of a man of God. The claims of the higher life do not exempt us from the calls and cares of the lower. Christ Himself doubtless laboured in the carpenters shop at Nazareth. And it was while doing so that it was written of Him that He increased in wisdom and stature and in favour with God and man.
Rth. 3:3. Wash thyself therefore, and anoint thee. Ruth must seek to make herself attractive; even though the coming interview is to be in the darka duty always. Preparation necessary even for a duty like this. Note. Cleanliness enforced in the Scriptures as well as godliness; comes down to the lowest duties of life. Much that inspiration takes notice of, which men count mean and unworthy of attention. These trifling details, however correct from an artistic point of view, heighten the effect of the whole picture, suggest the truthfulness of the narrative, &c.
IMPROVEMENT.
(1) The Bride of Christ is pleasing to her Bridegroom only when anointed with the Spirit and clothed in the garments of salvation (Starke).
(2) We may use all lawful means to ingratiate, &c., if our purpose be right. If decency of apparel is not a virtue, slovenliness is at least an approach to vice (Lawson).
Bernard on this (condensed):
A true friend is not in show only, or in well wishes, but in devising how to bring to pass what they desire. So Jonathan with David (1Sa. 19:2-3; 1Sa. 20:12-13), Abraham with Lot (Genesis 14) Note. Godly parents seek to match their children where God alloweth. Naomis ground was the law of God, as she thought.
Behold he winnoweth barley to-night. See and consider the providence of God! It is as one would wish, it falleth out opportunely. Warrant from God, experience of the love of man, and fit occasion to effect a matter, are strong inducements to attempt the same. So Esther going in unto Ahasuerus (Est. 5:1-8). Note. It is no unseemliness for men of birth, of place, of wealth, sometime to follow in their own person mean labours of their calling.
Rth. 3:3. Wash thyself, therefore. Outward cleanliness is praiseworthy. Our Christian profession is pure and holy, which outward cleanliness well befitteth. And seeing it is of good report, we are to observe it. And anoint thee. Christians may lawfully use Gods creatures for outward comeliness, and to preserve that seemliness which is Gods own work in us (Psa. 114:5). And put thy raiment upon thee. Touching this necessity of wearing apparel, nature teacheth it, and need enforceth it.
Get thee down to the floor. The widow woman allowed by the law of Moses to claim marriage of the next kinsman. No more immodest for women to claim that right then, than now for one betrothed to challenge the man for her husband. Where God alloweth the thing it taketh away the scandal and the offence. But make not thyself known to the man until he shall have done eating and drinking. Men are more apt to speak freely then and to promise their goodwill than at other times. Note. Her mind must be showed in private, and to him alone. The night and in private make modest persons utter more freely their thoughts than otherwise they would in the light and before company.
When he lieth down. Rest follows after labour, and the night is appointed for the same. So the Psalmist teaches (Psa. 104:13), and Jacob practised (Gen. 18:2). This the right use of time.
Thou shalt mark the place. Careful observation prevents error. Shows also that in those times they had no set place to lie down.
Uncover his feet. Aims at making Ruth his yokefellow, yet teaches her to proceed in humility, to go to his feet. Note. Humility not any hindrance, but the way to advancement.
Let us look into providences; surely they mean somewhat. They hang so together; have been so constant, so clear, so unclouded.Cromwell.
Perhaps the assurance, which long trial has given her of the good government and firm chastity of her daughter-in-law, together with her persuasion of the religions gravity of Boaz, made her think that design safe, which to others had been perilous, if not desperate. But besides that, holding Boaz next of blood to Elimelech, she made account of him as the lawful husband of Ruth; so as there wanted nothing but a challenge of a consummation, nothing was abated but some outward solemnities, which though expedient for the satisfaction of others, yet were not essential to marriage; and if there were not these colours for a project so suspicious, it would not follow that the action were warrantable because Naomis. Why should her example be more safe in this than in matching her sons with infidels, than in sending back Orpah to her fathers gods.Bishop Hall.
Labour is the law of mans life, in contrast to the creatures Because man became a sinner and God cursed him with it, says a large school of theologians. Because man was a child of God, and the Father worketh hitherto, and the Son also worketh, say others, and, I think, wiser and more far-sighted men. These daily tasks are the dignity and glory of our nature, as sons under discipline.Baldwin Brown.
Naomis solicitude for her devoted daughter-in-law is beautiful and motherly. But the form into which it ran and took shape can never recur in the midst of the culture and customs of European society. Even the method of winnowing the golden grains of the harvest field is antique and obsolete. So, too, is the method which Boaz adopted to watch over his cereal treasures. He constituted himself his own watchman and policeman.Pulpit Com.
Ruth was directed to pay special attention to the adornments of her person, to which, to this extent at least, she had been a stranger since the death of her husband. She is to lay aside the weeds of mourning and the garments of toil, and, after bathing and anointing, don the festive garb, for the expedicion on which she goes is of a joyous, bridal nature. All this, however, is not done in order to win Boaz by external beauty, for she is specially cautioned against allowing him to see her by day. But why this caution? Boaz was a believing Israelite, and therefore also a man of strict morals. It would have perplexed and displeased him to think that anybody else had seen Ruth, and might suspect both her and himself of an illicit meeting on the solitary threshing-floor. He would have scarcely listened to her, but removed her at once. The purpose for which she came had also an appropriate symbolism which any previous meeting would have disturbed.Lange.
The church must put on her best attire when she comes to Christ. She is brought to the King in raiments of needlework, in the Psalms (Psa. 45:14); she puts on her beautiful garments, in Isaiah (Isa. 52:1); she is adorned as a bride for her husband in raiment pure and white, in the Apocalypse (Rev. 21:2).Wordsworth.
She was to discover nothing of her intention to Boaz when she went to the feast, but rather to avoid any particular notice, that he might entertain no suspicion of what was to follow. Concealment of intentions may be very proper and very consistent with uprightness in some cases. But we must beware of doing anything that will not bear the light, or using those arts of concealment in transacting lawful affairs that may be attended with bad effects upon our character. It was perfectly consistent with uprightness in Samuel to conceal his chief intention when he came to Bethlehem to anoint David; and in Solomon, when he commanded a sword to be brought and his guards to slay the living child about which the two harlots contended.Lawson.
Seek him in private when no eye but that of heaven is upon thee; come secretly to his feet, and lay thy helpless, desolate state open before his seat of mercy; freely confess the baseness of thine original; he will not despise thee on account of the hole of the pit from whence thou wast digged.Macgowan.
Rth. 3:5-6
ThemeOBEDIENCE IN INNOCENCE
Age, by long experience well informed,
As time improves the grapes authentic juice
Mellows and makes the speech more fit for use,
And claims a reverence in its shortening day,
That Tis an honour and a joy to pay.
All that thou sayest unto me I will do. And she went, etc.
Ruth once more a model of filial obedience, and that when called upon to discharge a difficult and delicate mission, one which must have been trying to her modesty as a woman. She errs, if at all, by excess of complaisance. The errors of young people are commonly of an opposite kind (Lawson).
If anyone is to be blamed it must be Naomi. Her acquaintance with the laws and customs of Israel are her defence. Ruth, as a foreigner, was dependent upon her for instruction in these things. She obeys, although she might very naturally shrink from the task. Gratitude, respect for Naomi, as well as reason led her. Goes freely and without fear. Hesitates not, doubts not.
Three things exemplified and enforced here
I. Humble trustfulness on the part of the young.
(1) On the lowest ground a duty.
(2) On higher ground to be cultivated as a virtue.
(3) On highest, as its own reward, a pleasure. The sequel proves that this obedience of Ruth was not tempting Providencerather it was acting upon faith. The trust that has brought her so far sustains her now. Goes with unshrinking confidence.
II. Deference to the opinions and judgment of the aged. An important lesson. Note. These more likely to be correct than those of the young. More experienced.
III. That cheerful compliance which adds grace to obedience. The way we obey is something as well as the act itself [cf. on Rth. 1:10, p. 44, Macgowan].
Note, (a) Ruth not only promised but performed. Contrasts with many who say, and do not; or who will not say, and yet do. More, (b) she carries out her obedience to the slightest details of the project. All that thou sayest I will do. How important is this that obedience should be thorough [through out]. The fortune of things of the greatest importance often hangs upon the doing or leaving undone a thing which seems very small (Guicciardiani).
That the conduct of Ruth was in accordance with the law under which she lived cannot be doubted. See Deu. 25:5-10, where no option seems left to the woman. The demand was a duty which she owed to the memory of her dead husband, whose name she was to continue; to that husbands mother, who was more than a parent to her, and whom she might rescue from indigence and misery; to the nation whose tribes and law of inheritance were thus appointed to be preserved; and to God, whose mandates were thus obeyed, and who held out to her the propect that Messiah possibly might, as we find he actually did, spring from this union.Macartney.
Abraham equivocated; David doubly sinned; Peter denied his Lord; Paul was not faultless; Aaron enticed to idolatry; Moses spoke unadvisedly with his lips; in fact every vessel in the sanctuary has been flawed; only one has been pure, perfect, spotless, unimpeachable; that we may all feel how true is that word, If we say that we have no sin we deceive ourselves, and by the contrast how magnificent is that character which was holy, harmless, and undefiled, and separate from sinners. Suppose, then, Naomis advice does not commend itself to you as proper even in these circumstances; let it be regarded as wrong; yet the record of what an individual does in the inspired page, is not, therefore, the justification of his conduct.Cumming.
Tempting God ordinarily is either by acting presumptuously in carnal confidence, or in unbelief through diffidence. Not the encountering difficulties therefore makes us to tempt God; but the acting before and without faith. If the Lord has in any measure persuaded His people, as generally He hath, of the lawfulness, nay, of the duty, this persuasion prevailing upon the heart is faith; and acting thereupon is acting in faith, and the more the difficulties are, the more the faith.Cromwell.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Naomi Instructs Rth. 3:1-5
Then Naomi her mother-in-law said unto her, My daughter, shall I not seek rest for thee, that it may be well with thee?
2 And now is not Boaz of our kindred, with whose maidens thou wast? Behold, he winnoweth barley tonight in the threshing floor,
3 Wash thyself therefore, and anoint thee, and put thy raiment upon thee, and get thee down to the floor: but make not thyself known unto the man, until he shall have done eating and drinking.
4 And it shall be, when he lieth down, that thou shalt mark the place where he shall lie, and thou shalt go in, and uncover his feet, and lay thee down; and he will tell thee what thou shalt do.
5 And she said unto her, All that thou sayest unto me I will do.
1.
What was Naomis purpose in giving instructions to ?Rth. 3:1; ?Rth. 3:2
Naomi wanted Ruth to act properly. Furthermore, she wanted Ruth to enjoy a peaceful life in a well secured condition. Such would be her life under the loving care of a considerate husband. Normally it was the responsibility of the father to arrange for a marriage of his daughters. Laban was anxious to see his daughters provided for in this way, and excused himself for deceiving Jacob in giving him Leah instead of Rachel by saying it was not customary for the younger daughter to be given in marriage before the older daughter was married (Gen. 29:26). When the father was dead, the responsibility for arranging these marriages fell to the oldest son who received the fathers birthright and blessing. Since both Mahlon and Chilion were dead, no one was left to care for the welfare of the widows except Naomi. She had counseled both Orpah and Ruth to return to their parents homes, but Ruths love for Naomi had prompted her to accompany Naomi back to Judah. Consequently, Naomi was still primarily concerned for Ruths future welfare and instructed her accordingly.
2.
How was the winnowing done? Rth. 3:2
Grain was thrown into the air with winnowing fans. Threshing floors were nothing more than level places in the field which had been trodden smooth. The surface was generally quite hard. A level spot was selected, and the threshing floors were generally close together. They were circular in form, sometimes fifty feet in diameter. Grain was thrown onto the ground. Animals walked over it and crushed out the grains from the head of the stalks. A wooden fork was used to throw this mixture of chaff and grain into the air. As the wind blew away the chaff, the grain settled to the ground. Sometimes a carpet was placed under the threshers feet so the grain fell onto it whence it could be easily placed in bags.
3.
Why was the grain still on the ground? Rth. 3:3
The grain was left on the ground until it was put in the granary. As the threshing season continued, the piles of grain mounted higher and higher. These piles might be covered with cloth to protect them from the dew, but the final removal would await the completion of the threshing season. Like the rich farmer in the parable of Jesus described in Luke 12, all landowners took some bit of pride in seeing the large amounts of grain accruing to them as the harvest season continued. Boaz celebrated the conclusion of a plentiful harvest by holding a feast on the threshing floor, and Ruth went to him there.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(1) Rest.Although Naomi had already (Rth. 1:12) repudiated any thought of marriage for herself, still she felt it her duty to do what she could to provide a home for the daughter-in-law who had so loyally followed her, lest her own death should leave her young companion specially unprotected and friendless. But there is clearly a second thought. The marriage of Boaz and Ruth will not only ensure rest for the latter, but will also raise up the seed of her dead son and preserve the family name.
That it may be well with thee.The object of the marriage is for Ruths good, and thus should it be with every marriage; it must be for the good, and comfort, and abiding peace, not of the body only, but of the soul.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
1. Naomi said All through that memorable barley harvest, from the evening when Ruth showed her the results of her first day’s gleaning in the field of Boaz until the time of this utterance, had the now hopeful Naomi been planning that to which she here advises her daughter in law.
Seek rest See note on Rth 1:9.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘ And Naomi her mother-in-law said to her, “My daughter, shall I not seek rest for you, that it may be well with you?”
Harvest being over Naomi now decided that it was time to act. She had no doubt observed with interest Boaz’s continued generosity towards Ruth, and it had encouraged her to think that he might not be averse to marrying her. So she approached Ruth informing her that her intention was to ‘seek rest’ for her so that her future might be secure. She then gave instructions to Ruth about what she ought to do.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Predestined for Rest: God’s Glorification (Naomi and Ruth Find Rest) The fourth phase of Naomi’s and Ruth’s redemption is the rest that they find when Ruth marries Boaz. Rth 3:1 to Rth 4:22 focuses upon Ruth’s marriage to her redeemer Boaz, and the ultimate fruit of birth of King David, Israel’s redeemer.
Communal Sleep in Ancient Times In the ancient world, families generally sleep together in the home (Luk 11:7), unlike modern times where each individual enjoys a private bedroom. [14] Smaller homes probably had no bedrooms, and any room could accommodate sleeping. [15] Thus, Ruth’s approach to Boaz while he was sleeping on the threshing floor was not an entrance into his privacy, but rather, an approach closer to him in a communal sleeping arrangement (Rth 3:1-18).
[14] Charles Warren, “Bed,” in A Dictionary of the Bible Dealing with its Language, Literature, and Contents Including the Biblical Theology, vol. 1, ed. James Hastings (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1908), 262.
[15] Charles Warren, “House,” in A Dictionary of the Bible Dealing with its Language, Literature, and Contents Including the Biblical Theology, vol. 2, ed. James Hastings (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1909), 434.
Luk 11:7, “And he from within shall answer and say, Trouble me not: the door is now shut, and my children are with me in bed; I cannot rise and give thee.”
Rth 3:7 And when Boaz had eaten and drunk, and his heart was merry, he went to lie down at the end of the heap of corn: and she came softly, and uncovered his feet, and laid her down.
Rth 3:7
Rth 3:9 And he said, Who art thou? And she answered, I am Ruth thine handmaid: spread therefore thy skirt over thine handmaid; for thou art a near kinsman.
Rth 3:9
Eze 16:8, “Now when I passed by thee, and looked upon thee, behold, thy time was the time of love; and I spread my skirt over thee , and covered thy nakedness: yea, I sware unto thee, and entered into a covenant with thee, saith the Lord GOD, and thou becamest mine.”
Rth 4:3-4 Comments The Law of Redemption – The act of redeeming a piece of land in behalf of a near kinsman was given in the Law of Moses (Lev 25:25; Lev 25:47-55).
Lev 25:25, “If thy brother be waxen poor, and hath sold away some of his possession, and if any of his kin come to redeem it, then shall he redeem that which his brother sold.”
Lev 25:47-55.
Rth 4:7 Now this was the manner in former time in Israel concerning redeeming and concerning changing, for to confirm all things; a man plucked off his shoe, and gave it to his neighbour: and this was a testimony in Israel.
Rth 4:7
Deu 25:9, “Then shall his brother’s wife come unto him in the presence of the elders, and loose his shoe from off his foot, and spit in his face, and shall answer and say, So shall it be done unto that man that will not build up his brother’s house.”
Rth 4:10 Moreover Ruth the Moabitess, the wife of Mahlon, have I purchased to be my wife, to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance, that the name of the dead be not cut off from among his brethren, and from the gate of his place: ye are witnesses this day.
Rth 4:10
Rth 4:13 So Boaz took Ruth, and she was his wife: and when he went in unto her, the LORD gave her conception, and she bare a son.
Rth 4:13
Rth 4:17 And the women her neighbours gave it a name, saying, There is a son born to Naomi; and they called his name Obed: he is the father of Jesse, the father of David.
Rth 4:17
Rth 4:21 And Salmon begat Boaz, and Boaz begat Obed,
Rth 4:21
Mat 1:5, “And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse;”
Jos 6:25, “And Joshua saved Rahab the harlot alive, and her father’s household, and all that she had; and she dwelleth in Israel even unto this day; because she hid the messengers, which Joshua sent to spy out Jericho.”
Rth 4:22 And Obed begat Jesse, and Jesse begat David.
Rth 4:22
[16] Alethia Fellowship Church, Panama City, Florida, mid-1980’s
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Ruth Lays the Matter of Redemption Before Boaz
v. 1. Then Naomi, her mother-in-law, said unto her. My daughter, shall I not seek rest for thee, v. 2. And now, v. 3. Wash thyself, therefore, and anoint thee, and put thy raiment upon thee, v. 4. And it shall be when he lieth down, v. 5. And she said unto her, v. 6. And she went down unto the floor, and did according to all that her mother-in-law bade her, v. 7. And when Boaz had eaten and drunk, and his heart was merry, v. 8. And it came to pass at midnight, v. 9. And he said, Who art thou? And she answered, I am Ruth, thine handmaid; spread, therefore, thy skirt over thine handmaid,
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
EXPOSITION
Rth 3:1
And Naomi, her mother-in-law, said to her, My daughter, shall not I seek out for thee a rest, that it may be well with thee? When Ruth had nothing more to do on the harvest-fields, where Boaz appeared daily, and was unremittingly gracious to her, she may have fallen into a pensive mood. Naomi was quick to note the varying ‘nuances‘ of feeling, and said “My daughter, shall I not seek out for thee a rest?” The expression rest, or resting-place, though in itself of generic import, was, when used in such circumstances as environed Ruth, quite specific in application, and would be at once understood. It was a home to which Naomi pointed, a home for her daughter’s heart. In such a home, if warm and pure, there would be repose for the affections. “That it may be well with thee,” or, “which shall be good for thee.” Either translation is warrantable and excellent. The latter is the most simple, and is given by Carpzov and Rosenmller; but the former is in accordance with a frequent idiomatic use of the expression, in which there is a change from the relative in result to the relative in aim, so that is equivalent to (see Deu 4:40; Deu 6:3, Deu 6:18; Deu 10:11, 25, 28). Naomi did not distinguish between rests that would be ‘good, ‘ and other rests which would not be ‘good.’ Nor did she moralize on the idea of a rest, and affirm that it would be ‘good’ for her widowed daughter-in-law. She assumed that every true rest was ‘good,’ and, on the basis of that assumption, she sought out one for her devoted Ruth. Hence the superiority of the rendering that expresses aim to that which expresses the mere prediction of result.
Rth 3:2
And now is not Boaz, with whose young women thou wast, our relatives. Naomi opens her case. She had been studying Boaz all through the harvest season. She had been studying Ruth too. She saw unmistakable evidence of mutual responsiveness and attachment. And now she had a matured scheme in her head. Hence she brings up Boaz’s name at once, and says, “Is he not our relative?” , an abstract term used concretely, meaning literally” acquaintance,” but here “relative,” or “kinsman” (see Rth 2:1). Lo, he is winnowing barley on the threshing-floor tonight. Literally, “Lo, he is winnowing the threshing-floor of barley.” The Hebrews could idiomatically speak of “the threshing-floor of barley,” meaning “the threshing-floor-full of barley.” The barley lay heaped up in Boaz’s threshing-floor, and he was changed in winnowing it. He threw up against the wind the mingled mass that was on his floor, after the stalks had been carefully trodden or beaten. “Not far,” says Dr. Horatio Hackett, “from the site of ancient Corinth, I passed a heap of grain, which some laborers were employed in winnowing. They used for throwing up the mingled wheat and chaff a three-pronged wooden fork, having a handle three or four feet long”. “The winnowing,” says Dr. Kitto, “was performed by throwing up the grain with a fork against the wind, by which the chaff and broken straw were dispersed, and the grain fell to the ground. The grain was afterwards passed through a sieve to separate the morsels of earth and other impurities, and it then underwent a final purification by being tossed up with wooden scoops, or shorthanded shovels, such as we see sculptured on the monuments of Egypt”. In some of the Egyptian sculptures the winnowers are represented as having scoops in both hands. , tonight (Scottic, “the nicht”). The agriculturist in Palestine and the surrounding districts would often carry on his winnowing operations after sunset, taking advantage of the evening breeze that then blows. The Chaldee Targumist makes express reference to this breeze, explaining the word tonight as meaning in the wind which blows by night.
Rth 3:3
So then wash thyself, and anoint thyself, and dress thyself? This latter phrase is in the original, “and put thy garments on thee.” The verb with its final yod, was the archaic form of the second person feminine, though still much cut down and contracted from its oldest form. See Raabe’s ‘Zuruckfuhring,’ and note the conduct of the verb, in its relation to the pronominal suffixes, when these are affixed. And go down to the threshing-floor. The town of Bethlehem lay on the summit of “the narrow ridge of a long gray hill”, while the corn-fields, that gave the fortified place its name of Bread-town, stretched out expandingly in the valleys below. Dr. Robinson says, “We ascended gradually toward Bethlehem around the broad head of a valley running N.E. to join that under Mar Elyas The town lies on the E. and N.E. slope of a long ridge; another deep valley, Wady Ta’amirah, being on the south side, which passes down north of the Frank Mountain toward the Dead Sea, receiving the valley under Mar Elyas not far below. Toward the west the hill is higher than the village, and then sinks down very gradually toward Wady Ahmed. Let not your presence be known to the man before he has finished eating and drinking. It would have been imprudent and impolite to have discovered her presence while his servants and himself were busied in operations which required to be actively prosecuted while the breeze was favorable, and the light of the moon serviceable. Ruth was to wait till the servants, having finished their work and their repast, had retired to their respective homes. The master, as Naomi knew, would remain gratefully and joyfully on the spot, to keep watch in the midst of his cereal treasures, and under the still magnificence of the broad canopy of heaven. Speaking of Hebron, Dr. Robinson says, “Here we needed no guard around our tent. The owners of the crops came every night and slept upon their threshing-floors to guard them, and this we had found to be universal in all the region of Gaza. We were in the midst of scenes precisely like those of the Book of Ruth, when Boaz winnowed barley in his threshing-floor, and laid himself down at night to guard the heap of corn”. Boaz’s heart, when all was quiet around him, would be full of calm and comfort. He would pace about his well-heaped threshing-floor contentedly, contemplatively; and, as he paced, and thought, and adored, the figure of the beautiful and industrious gleaner might persist in coming in within the field of meditation. It might linger there, and be gladly allowed to linger.
Rth 3:4
And let it be, when he lies down, that thou take note of the place where he lies; and go, and uncover the parts about his feet, and lay thee down; and he shall declare to thee what thou shalt do. The denominative word freely rendered in King James’s version “his feet”we have rendered “the parts about his feet.” It is the exact opposite of , which never means “his head,” but is always translated correctly either “his pillows” or “his bolster.” It denotes “the supports on which the head was laid in lying;” and , having reference to members of the body which do not need such supports as the head, simply means “the places occupied by the feet.” Naomi ventured, on a bold expedient to bring speedy rest to her daughter-in-law. But we assume that, with unmistaking feminine intuition, she saw, on the one hand, that Boaz was already deeply attached to Ruth, and, on the other, that Ruth reciprocated his attachment with pure intensity. Most probably we should also assume that she detected in Boaz a peculiar diffidence that caused him to shrink from making decisive advances in the way of declaring his affection. He had, however, unconsciously revealed himself, and made it clear to Naomi that he wished to divulge in words the depth of his honorable feelings. But again and again, as we may suppose, his sensitiveness overcame his resolutions. Hence Naomi’s scheme to bring him to the point of declaration. It would have been reprehensible in the extreme had she not been absolutely certain of his wishes, on the one hand, and of his perfect honor and un-contaminable purity on the other. And even with that qualification, the scheme would have been imprudent and improper, and utterly unfeminine, had it not been the case that, in virtue of an ancient and much-prized Hebrew law, Ruth was entitled to call upon her nearest of kin to fulfill the various duties of a responsible kinsman. Still, notwithstanding the existence of this law, we may rest assured that the sensitive gleaner would never have summoned up courage to ask Boaz to discharge to her the duties of kinship, unless she had been sure that the thrills that vibrated within her own heart were responsive to subtle touches, on his part, of spirit with spirit.
Rth 3:5
And she said, All that thou sayest I will do. There is no need for adopting into the text the K’ri “to me,” after the expression, All that thou sayest.” It is a mere “tittle,” indeed, whether we omit or insert the pronoun; yet it was not found in the manuscripts that lay before the Septuagint and Vulgate translators.
Rth 3:6, Rth 3:7
And she went down to the threshing-floor, and did according to all that her mother-in-law had enjoined. And Boaz ate and drank, and his heart was comfortable; and he went to lie down at the end of the heap; and she came softly, and uncovered the parts about his feet, and laid herself down. The translation in King James’s version, “and his heart was merry,” is perhaps stronger than there is any occasion for. The word rendered “was merry,”viz; is literally “was good.” The Septuagint word is . After the labors of the evening, Boaz had a relish for his simple repast. It was good to him. Hence he ate and drank to his heart’s content, enjoying with grateful spirit the bounties of a gracious Providence. By and by he retired to rest, amid visions perchance of a brightened home, which just helped to reflect on his consciousness a stronger resolution than he had ever formed before to make known his affection At length he slept. The Syriac translate adds interpretatively, “in a sweet sleep or the floor.” Ruth then stepped cautiously forth to play her delicate part. She stole softly to the sheltered spot where he lay. She gently uncovered the margin of the cloak, which lay over the place where his feet were laid. She laid herself down noiselessly. The Arabic translator adds, “and slept beside him”a most unhappy interpretation. Nothing but sin would be so far away as sleep from the eyes, and mind, and heart of the anxious suitor.
Rth 3:8
And it came to pass at midnight that the man started in a fright; and he bent himself over, and lo, a woman was lying at his feet. He had awaked, and, feeling something soft and warm at his feet, he was startled and affrighted. What could it be? In a moment or two he recovered his self-possession, and bending himself up and over, or “crooking himself, to see and to feel, lo, a woman was lying at his feet. The Chaldee Targumist tumbles into a ludicrous bathos of taste when endeavoring to emphasize the startle and shiver which Boaz experienced. He says, “He trembled, and his flesh, became soft as a turnip from the agitation. How could the most peddling and paltering of Rabbis succeed in betraying himself into such a laughable puerility and absurdity? The explanation, though of course it is not the least atom of justification, lies in the fact that the Chaldee word for “turnip” is while the verb that de notes “he bent himself” is the niphal of . The use of the expression “the man,” in this and several of the adjoining verses, is apt to grate a little upon English ears. Let us explain and vindicate the term as we may, the grating is still felt. No matter though we know that “the rank is but the guinea stamp,” the grating is felt inevitably. It is a result of that peculiar growth in living language that splits generic terms into such as are specific or semi-specific. We have gentleman as well as man, and embarrassment is not infrequently the result of our linguistic wealth. In the verse before us, and in some of those that go before, we should be disposed, in our English idiom, to employ the proper name: “And it came to pass at midnight that ‘ Boaz’ started in a fright.”
Rth 3:9
And he said, Who art thou? And she said, I am Ruth, thy handmaid; and thou hast spread thy wings over thy handmaid, for thou art kinsman. The Syriac translator spoils the question of Boaz by metamorphosing it from “Who art thou?” into “What is thy message?” Tremulous would be the voice of Ruth as she replied, “I am Ruth, thy handmaid.” What she said in continuance has been very generally, and by Driver, among others, misapprehended. Not by Raabe, however. It has been regarded as a petition presented to Boaz”Spread thy wings (or, thy wing) over thy handmaid, for thou art kinsman.” The literal translation, however, and far the more delicate idea, as also far the more effective representation, is, “And thou hast spread thy wings over thy handmaid, for thou art kinsman.” Ruth explains her position under Boaz’s coverlet as if it were his own deliberate act. Such is her felicitous way of putting the ease. It is as if she had said, “The position in which thy handmaid actually is exhibits the true relation in which thou standest to thy handmaid. She is under thy wings. Thou hast benignantly spread them over her, for thou art kinsman.” The Masorites have correctly regarded as a scriptio defectiva for the dual of the noun, and hence have punctuated it , “thy wings.” The majority of interpreters, however, have assumed that the word is singular, and have hence translated it as if it had been punctuated . The dual reading is to be preferred. Boaz himself had represented Ruth as having come trustfully under the wings of Yahveh (see Rth 2:12). She accepted the representation. It was beautifully true. But, as she was well aware that God often works through human agency, she now recognized the Divine hand in the kindness of Boaz. “Thou hast spread thy wings over thine handmaid.” She was under his wings because she had come under the wings of Yahveh. She felt like a little timid chicken; but she had found a refuge. It is the wings of tender, gentle, sheltering care that are referred to. There is only indirect allusion to the typical coverlet under which she lay. For thou art kinsman (see Rth 2:20). The native modesty of Ruth led her to account for her position by a reference to the law of kinship. She had rights, and she stood upon them. She conceived that Boaz had correlative duties to discharge; but we may be sure that she would never have made the least reference to her rights, or to the correlative duties which she regarded as devolving on Boaz, had she not known that his heart was already hers.
Rth 3:10
And he said, Blessed be thou of Yahveh, my daughter; thou hast made thy latter kindness better than the former, in not going after any young man, whether poor or rich. This verse is full of satisfactory evidence that Naomi was perfectly right in conjecturing that Boas, deep in love, was restrained only by diffidence from formally declaring himself. It shows us too that the chief ground of his diffidence was his age. He had been an acquaintance, and the equal in years, of Ruth’s father-in-law, Elimelech, and the impression had got hold on him that the handsome young widow might feel repugnance to his suit. Hence, instead of being in the least degree offended by the steps she had taken, he was relieved, and felt full of gratification on the one hand, and of gratitude on the other. Blessed be thou by Yahveh. Literally, “to Yahveh,” i.e. “in relation to Yahveh” (see Rth 2:20). My daughter. His relative elderliness was in his mind. Thou hast made thy latter kindness better than the former. Michaelis has seized the true meaning of these words: “The kindness which thou art showing to thy husband, now that he is gone, is still greater than what thou didst show to him while he lived.” Her employment of the word “kinsman,” or goel, was evidence to Boas that she was thinking of the respect which she owed to her husband’s memory. Her concern in discharging that duty of ‘piety’ struck the heart of Boaz; and all the more as, in his opinion, she might easily have found open doors, had she wished for them, in quarters where there was no connection of kinship with her deceased husband. “She did not go after any young man, whether poor or rich.” She preferred, above all such, her first husband’s elderly “kinsman.” In the original the construction is peculiar”in not going after the young men, whether a poor one or a rich one.” He does not simply mean that she was free from vagrant courses and desires. Her character lay, to his eye, on a far higher level His meaning is that she deliberately refrained from “thinking of any young man. The plural “young men” is to be accounted for on the principle that when an alternate is assumed or postulated, there is, in actual contemplation, a plurality of individuals.
Rth 3:11
And now, my daughter, fear not: all that thou sayest I shall do to thee, for it is on all hands known in the gate of my people that thou art a truly capable woman. The word in the expression is of many-sided import, and has no synonym in English, German, Latin, or Greek. But every side of its import brings into view one or other or more of such affiliated ideas as strength, force, forces, capabilitywhether mental and moral only, or also financial; competency, substantiality, ability, bravery. All who had taken notice of Ruth perceived that she was mentally and morally, as well as physically, a substantial and capable woman. She was possessed of force, both of mind and character. She was, in the New England sense, of the expression, a woman of “faculty. She was full of resources, and thus adequate to the position which, as Boaz’s wife, she would be required to fill. There was no levity about her, “no nonsense.” She was earnest, industrious, virtuous, strenuous, brave. There was much of the heroine in her character, and thus the expression connects itself with the masculine application of the distinctive and many-sided word, “a mighty man of valor.” The expression occurs in Pro 12:4, where, in King James’s version, it is, as here and in Pro 31:10, translated ‘Ca virtuous woman””a virtuous woman is a crown to her husband.” But it is not so much to moral virtue that there is a reference as to that general capacity which consists in “large discourse, looking before and after” (‘Hamlet, ‘ Pro 4:4). Compare the masculine expression in Exo 18:21, Exo 18:25, rendered, in King-James’s version, “able men,” and meaning capable or substantial men, who, however, as we learn from the additional characteristics that are specified, were to be likewise conspicuous for high moral worth. In Pro 31:10 there is the same reference to general capacity, as is evidenced by the graphic representation that followsa representation that by no means exhausts itself in the idea of moral virtue. Ibn Ezra takes the whole soul out of the expression when he interprets it, both here and in Proverbs, as meaning “a woman possessed of riches.” When Boaz says, “All that thou sayest I will do to thee,” he means, “All that thou hast so winsomely and yet so modestly referred to in what thou didst say, I am prepared to do to thee. There was only one obstacle in the way, and that of a somewhat technical description. If that should be honorably surmounted, nothing would be more agreeable to Boaz s heart than to get nearer to Ruth “For,” said he, “it is on all hands known in the gate of my people that,” etc. Literally the phrase is, “for all the gate of my people know,” a strange inverted but picturesque mode of expression. It was not “the gate of the people,” but the people of the gate,” that knew.
Rth 3:12
And now it is the case of a truth that while I am a kinsman, there is yet a kinsman nearer than I. Or the rendering might with greater brevity be given thus: And now of a truth I am a kinsman; and yet there is a kinsman nearer than I. The survivals of a very ancient style of elaborately-detailed composition are here preserved. The archaism, however, was not quite appreciated by the Mazorites, who, in accordance with the spirit of the age in which they flourished, took but little note of the philological development, historical and prehistorical, of the language they were handling. Hence they suppressed the in K’ri, though faithfully preserving it in C’tib. The particles, standing up and semi-isolated, palaeolithic-wise, might be accounted for in some such way as is shown in the following paraphrase: “And now ‘that’ of a truth (it is the case) ‘that if‘ I (am) a kinsman, and also there is a kinsman nearer than I.” Boas was of that strictly honorable cast of mind that he could not for a moment entertain any project that might amount to a disregard of the rights of others, even although these rights should fly violently in the teeth own personal desires.
Rth 3:13
Abide here tonight; and it shall come to pass in the morning, if he will act to thee the part of a kinsman, well; he shall act the kinsman’s part: and if it please him not to act to thee the kinsman’s part, then sure as Yahveh is alive, I will act to thee the kinsman’s part. Lie still till the morning. Love is quick-witted. Boaz’s plan of operations would formulate itself on the spur of the moment; but the remainder of the night would doubtless be spent in maturing the details of procedure. The aim would be to secure, as far as honor would permit, the much-wished-for prize. There would be, moreover, we need not doubt, much conversation between them, and mutual consultation, and arrangement. A large letter, a majuscula, occurs in the first word of the versewhich the smaller Masora ascribes to the Oriental or Babylonian textualists. It had, no doubt, been at first either a merely accidental, or a finically capricious, enlargement; but, being found, mysteries had to be excogitated to account for it;all mere rubbish. “Tonight” is a perfect translation of , for the to is simply the common definite article in one of its peculiar forms, perhaps peculiarly crushed and defaced (see note on Rth 3:2).
Rth 3:14
And she lay at the place of his feet until morning: and she arose ere yet a man could distinguish his neighbor. In the original it is “the places of his feet” (see Rth 3:4). Time would rapidly fly past. Sleep there would be none to either the one or the other. In mutual modesty they guarded each other’s honor. Thoughts and feelings, narratives and projects, would be freely interchanged. Their mutual understanding would become complete. At length there began to be the first faint tinge of paleness streaking into the dark. Ruth arose, and prepared to depart. It is added, For he had said,or, more literally, “And he had said,”Let it not be known that ‘the’ woman came to the threshing-floor. This has been to critics a puzzling clause. The conjunction in the foreground, a mere copulative, has occasioned difficulty. It is thoroughly Hebraistic. But of course it does not here introduce to notice something merely added to what goes before, of the nature of a parting injunction or request addressed to Ruth. The articulated phrase “the woman,” as distinguished from “a woman,” the expression in King James’s version, renders such an interpretation impossible. The Targumist explains thus: “and he said to his young men.” But the whole tenor of the preceding narrative proceeds on the assumption that there were no servants on the premises or at hand. Other Rabbis, and after them Luther and Cover-dale, interpret thus: “and he said in his heart,” or, “and he thought.” Unnatural. The difficulty is to be credited, or debited, to simplicity of composition, and the habit of just adding thing to thing aggregatively, instead of interweaving them into a complex unity. In the course of their many interchanges of thought and feeling, Boaz had expressed a desire, both for Ruth s sake and for his own, that it should not be known that she had come by night to the threshing-floor. The narrator, instead of introducing this expression of desire in the way in which it would directly fall from the lips of Boaz, “Let it not be known that thou didst come,” gives it in the indirect form of speech, the oratio obliqua, as his own statement of the ease. It is as if he had introduced a parenthesis or added a note in the margin. The instead of was most probably not a later form, as Berthean supposes, but an older Hebrew form that had died out of use long before the days of the Masorites.
Rth 3:15
And he said, Allow me the wrapper which is upon thee, and hold on by it; and she held on by it; and he measured six measures of barley; and he put it on her, and went to the city. The expression “Allow me,” literally, “Give (me),” was a current phrase of courtesy. The verb employedwas common Semitic property, ere yet the mother-tongue was subdivided into Hebrew, Syriac, Chaldee, Arabic. The wrapper which is upon thee. The word for wrapper occurs nowhere else except in Isa 3:22, where it is translated, in King James’s version, “wimple.” Here it is rendered “vail,” and, in the margin, “sheet or apron,”all of them unhappy translations. So is the rendering of the Targumist, , i.e. sudarium, or “napkin.” N.G. Schroder discusses the word at great length in his masterly ‘Commentarius Philologico-Criticus de Vestitu Mulierum Hebraearum,’ pp. 247-277. He would render it pallium or palla In consequence of national peculiarities in articles of dress, especially in ancient times, it is best to avoid a specific, and to employ a generic translation. When Boaz said, “Give me the wrapper,” he did not ask that it should be handed to him. He had already put his hand upon it, and was engaged in hollowing out a scoop or cavity. Hence he said, on the one hand, “Allow me,” and, on the other, “Hold on by it.” And he measured six measures of barley. The particular measure referred to is unspecified. It is not only mere dream on the part of the Targumist, but it is dream involving almost sheer impossibility, that the measures were seahs, i.e. two ephahs. The Targumist had to bolster up his dream by adding another, viz; that Ruth got miraculously strength to carry the load. Load, indeed, there undoubtedly was; and no doubt it would be as great as she could conveniently carry. And likewise, in accordance with the primitive simplicity of manners, the magnitude of the burden would be demonstration to Naomi of Boaz’s satisfaction with the “measures” which, in full motherliness of spirit, she had planned. And he went to the city. The Vulgate and Syriac versions, as also Castellio, Coverdale, and various other translators, but not Luther, have assumed that we should read , “and she went,” instead of , “and he went.” So too Wright. But there seems to be no good reason for making the change. If there had been no division into verses, then the departure of both Boaz and Ruth on their respective routes, or in their respective order of sequence, would have been recorded close together: “and ‘he’ went to the city, and ‘she’ went to her mother-in-law”each, let us bear in mind, with the heart elate.
Rth 3:16
And she went to her mother-in-law. And she said, Who art thou, my daughter? And she narrated to her all that the man had done to her. The question, “Who art thou, my daughter?” is not put by Naomi, as Drusius supposes, because it was still so dusk that she could not properly distinguish Ruth. The address, “My daughter,” shows that she had no difficulty in determining who the visitor was. But there is something arch intended. “Art thou Boaz’s betrothed?” Michaelis translates, “What art thou?” Unwarrantably as regards the letter, but correctly as regards the spirit of the interrogatory.
Rth 3:17
And she said, These six measures of barley he gave to me; for he said, Thou must not go empty to thy mother-in-law. The C’tib omission of “to me” after “for he said” is most likely to be the original reading. A fastidious Rabbi would rather originate this insertion than the omission.
Rth 3:18
And she said, Sit still, my daughter, till that thou know how the affair will fall out, for the man will not rest unless he complete the affair today. In saying, Sit still, my daughter, it is as if Naomi had said, “There is no occasion for restless anxiety. Let your heart be at ease till that thou know how the affair will fall out.” In the Hebrew the noun is without the article. But in English it must be supplied, unless a plural be employed”how ‘things’ will fall out.’ , thing, i.e. think. Compare the corresponding relation between the German sache and sagen.
HOMILETICS
Rth 3:1-18
Naomi’s maternal solicitude.
This is one of those paragraphs of Scripture which require delicate handling, but which, for that very reason, are full of suggestiveness that comes home to the bosom. Under strange, old-fashioned forms of things there was often much real virtue and true nobility of character.
1. It may be regarded as certain that while the harvest lasted Boaz and Ruth would be coming daily into contact with each other.
2. It may likewise be assumed as certain that their minds would from day to day grow into one another, in interest and esteem. As intimacy increased, it would reveal, on either side, points of character that were fitted to evoke admiration and sincere respect.
3. It is reasonable to suppose that Naomi’s humble home in Bethlehem would be again and again visited by Boaz. There would be various attractions. Naomi herself, as an old and now a far-traveled friend, would be able to tell much that would be interesting to the kinsman of Elimelech.
4. The Palestinian harvest season would that year, as well as on other years, be a lively time. The harvest-home, in particular, would be a joy and a rural triumph. It may well be so in all countries. The golden grain is more precious by far than grains of gold. It is emphatically the “staff” on which terrestrial life has to lean. One of the chief uses of gold is to buy from the agriculturist, directly or Circuitously, for the use of those who live in towns and cities, the superfluity of cereals raised in the harvest-fields. Harvesting operations are thus always interesting and stirring. Ruth would feel an interest; and, in consequence of the hearty Sympathy and favor of Boaz, her whole nature would be stirred.
5. But it is far from being improbable that when the gleaning season was ended, so that Ruth had to exchange out-of-door for indoor activities, she may have acquired, to the eye of her solicitous mother-in-law, an unusually pensive appearance.
6. Naomi would no doubt make Ruth a constant study. Every mother, every father, should make every individual child in the family circle an individual study. It is not every child, it is not every young man, or young woman, whose whole heart can be read off at a sitting. Many a mind is many-volumed. Naomi did her best day by day to understand her devoted and deeply affectionate daughter-in-law, and seems to have felt increasingly solicitous as she noticed her unwonted thoughtfulness and reticence.
7. Then we must bear in mind that in such a state of, society as then prevailed in Bethlehem and Judah, there must have been extremely little scope for female energy and industry in business directions. Happily in our time there is, so far as Great Britain is concerned, considerable interest taken by philanthropic minds in the subject of female education, literary and technical. There are, moreover, even already many spheres in which females, not otherwise provided for, can find, in affairs congenial to their tastes and idiosyncrasies, remuneration and employment. In many government offices, and in other spheres of activity, females now occupy important positions. Not only do they excel in works of taste: whatever requires careful attention, combined with delicate manipulation, can be entrusted to their hands. There is still, it is true, much to be done to promote the employment and independence of single females; but a beginning has been made, and a point or two beyond that beginning have been reached. In the time and sphere of Naomi, however, there were no open doors of this kind. And hence, when she was looking out for the settlement of her daughter-in-law, she naturally thought only of a ‘rest’ for her in a home of her own. In reference to such a ‘rest,’ it is the duty of all mothers and mothers-in-law to be solicitous, though never obtrusive, in behalf of their children. Advice may be tendered, caution may be suggested; but there must be true sympathy on the one hand, and true delicacy of feeling on the other.
To turn now more particularly to Boaz
1. It is reasonable to suppose that Naomi had noticed that he looked on Ruth with longing eyes.
2. It is also reasonable to suppose that, fro n some cause or other, Boaz felt himself under an unconquerable spell of reticence. The cause seems to be revealed in his use again and again of the fatherly expression, My daughter, as applied to Ruth. He was evidently well advanced in years. This seems to have been the soil on which his insuperable diffidence grew. How to get this diffidence plucked up by the roots was the problem which the solicitous Naomi set herself to solve.
3. There was only one way, as it appeared to her, in which Boaz’s mind could be set free from the spell which put a seal on his lips. That was to bring Ruth into such relationship to him that he would learn her true sentiments on the one hand, and feel put upon his honor on the other. Naomi, to effect this consummation, took advantage of a time-honored custom, which had come down from very remote and primitive times, and was still in full force among the Hebrews. She thought of the Levitate law. This was a law that gave a widow, if an heiress, the right to claim, from the nearest of kin to her deceased husband, conjugal assistance in the management of her estate. The nearest of kin, if thus appealed to for the purpose indicated, had a right to refuse the widow’s claim, provided he was willing to submit to certain indignities and unpleasant formalities, such as being stripped of one of his shoes, and then twitted and hooted as Barefoot (Deu 25:5-10). But if it should happen to be the case that his feelings were the reverse of repugnance, then the act of compliance would be at once the highest mead of respect which could be paid to the memory of the deceased, and the greatest gratification that could be enjoyed by the living. In the case of Ruth and Boaz, two just conclusions had been arrived at by Naomi. One had reference to Ruth, and was to the effect that, while it would be impossible for her to initiate action that might be regarded as terminating on herself, it would yet be both possible for and becoming in her to undertake the initiation of action that had for its aim what was due to the name and honor of her deceased husband. The other had reference to Boaz, and was to the effect that his diffidence, otherwise unconquerable, would be conquered if he were put upon his honor, and saw his way clear to discharge a duty to a deceased kinsman.
4. We must, in addition, suppose that Naomi, in making arrangement for the midnight interview, had unfaltering confidence in the incorruptible innocence of Ruth, and in the incontaminable purity of Boaz.
5. We are likewise entitled to assume that the method of claiming a kinsman’s interposition, which she laid down for her daughter-in-law’s guidance, was no gratuitous invention of her own. It is natural to regard it as having been the normal and accredited formula of procedure that was in use in “society,” for the initiation of such measures as were requisite in the application of the Levirate law.
6. It is on this assumption alone that we can account for the fact that no apology was made by Ruth, and that no surprise was expressed by Boaz. Instead of surprise, there was only devout admiration of Ruth’s entire demeanor in relation to her deceased husband. He said, “Blessed be thou of the Lord, my daughter; thou hast made thy latter kindness better than the former, in not going after any young man, whether poor or rich.” It is her kindness to the deceased, not her kindness to himself, of which he speaks. The kindness she was showing after her husband’s decease was, in Boaz’s estimation, still greater than the kindness she had showed him, or had been able to show him, during his life. A woman, so attractive and so capable as she, might have readily found among the young men many open doors to rest, and ease, and affluence. But she did not for one moment wish to avail herself of any of these openings. She wished to do honor to the name and memory of her lamented Machlon, more especially in her capacity as the prospective heiress of his property.
7. We may be sure, however, that Naomi would never have availed herself of the customs that had got fixed by “use and wont” in relation to the Levirate law, unless she had been certain that it would be in accordance with the deepest desires of both her friends that they should get together in life. In the light of these remarks we may now re-read the entire chapter, interposing, as we go along the successive verses, whatever expository or practical remark may seem to he called for.
Rth 3:1
There is something radically wrong in every home which is not a “rest” to its inmates; and life without a home is emphatically a life of unrest.
Rth 3:2-4
Naomi’s solicitude for her devoted daughter-in-law is beautiful and motherly. But the form into which it ran and took shape can never recur in the midst of the culture and customs of European society. Even the method of winnowing the golden grain of the harvest-field, as referred to in Rth 3:2, is antique and obsolete. So, too, is the method which Boaz adopted to watch over his cereal treasures. He constituted himself his own watchman and policeman.
Rth 3:5
Ruth’s confidence in Naomi’s kindness and wisdom is noteworthy. It was no upstart prepossession and blindfold feeling. Naomi had earned it by a long-continued course of prudence and sympathy. Boaz too had earned a corresponding confidence, and hence she did not hesitate to entrust herself to his honor. She felt that she was safe.
Rth 3:6, Rth 3:7
The expression “his heart was merry” just means that he felt physically comfortable, and ready for quiet and sound repose.
Rth 3:8
When it is said that “the man was afraid, and turned himself,” the meaning of the latter clause, as it stands in King James’s version, would require some modification. The idea is not that Boaz turned from one side to another. It is that, having started in a fright, in consequence of the presence, to his indistinct consciousness, of something unusual about his feet, he raised himself up and bent forward to feel what it was.
Rth 3:9
His touch had satisfied him that it was a woman who was at his feet. Who was she? Ruth at once declared herself, no doubt in accents of sweet modesty. The statement with which she follows up the declaration of herself is variously interpreted. In King James’s version there are two departures from literality.
1. The word skirt is not a literal rendering of the Hebrew term. Wings is the proper translation.
2. The entreaty Spread therefore is also a departure from literality. The verb is not in the imperative, but in the affirmativeAnd thou hast spread. It is Ruth’s own interpretation of the position of affairs. She had come to Judaea to take shelter under the wings of Jehovah; and Boaz had, on his part, in harmony with the heavenly kindness of Jehovah, spread over her his wings of terrestrial kindness. She thus does not speak at all of Boaz’s skirt, or skirts. There was beautiful delicacy in her representation. She did not need to enter into particular details. Her position, viewed in the light of custom, explained the whole case.
Rth 3:10, Rth 3:11
“And now, my daughter, fear not”give not thyself any anxious concern in reference to the result. “All the people in the gate of my city know that thou art a virtuous woman.” Yes, she was virtuous; and yet she was much more. She was endowed with all the capabilities which fitted her for the position she was willing to occupy (see the Exposition).
Rth 3:12
Note the highly honorable character of Boaz. There was one nearer in kinship to Ruth than himself. This person, therefore, must receive the first offer. Had the case come before Boaz as simply one of personal affection, he would in all probability have made no reference to the nearer kinsman. But as it had come before him in its relation to the deceased, and connected itself with Ruth because of her relation to the deceased, he felt that he must act in strictest honor. There were rights of property at stake, as well as affections of the heart, and Boaz could be no party to deprive any one of such rights. Still we need not doubt that his heart thrilled at the thought that the rights involved would not prove an insurmountable barrier between himself and Ruth.
Rth 3:13
Boaz’s mind still runs on the lines of a kinsman’s duty. There was hence something that might be thrust in between the desires of his heart and the object toward whom they trembled.
Rth 3:14
Boaz was desirous to guard the fair name and fame of Ruth, as well as to keep untarnished his own unsullied reputation.
Rth 3:15
He wished that Naomi might have some tangible evidence of his satisfaction.
Rth 3:16
The question Who art thou? sprang from Naomi’s hope that the entire scheme would issue in success.
Rth 3:17
The present was, in one point of view, inconsiderable; but, in another point of view, it was a most suitable gift from one who desired indeed to show sympathy, gratitude, and kindness, but who did not wish, at that stage of the affair, to raise unconditioned expectation which might never be realized.
Rth 3:18
Naomi, as it were, said to Ruth and to her own heart, Peace, peace. All will be well. All is well. The hand of the Almighty is dealing “sweetly,” not “bitterly,” with all the parties concerned.
HOMILIES BY J.R. THOMSON
Rth 3:1
Marriage, a woman’s rest.
If Ruth was unselfish, so also was Naomi. The mother-in-law acted towards the young Moabitess as if she had been her own daughter. In seeking a husband for her daughter-in-law Naomi followed the customs of her country and her age. (Our English custom is intermediate between the French custom, according to which the husband is provided by the negotiations of the parents, and the American custom, which leaves daughters to select for themselves.) The case before us was not an ordinary one. For whilst marriage was almost universally looked forward to by Hebrew youths and maidens, there were very special reasons why Naomi should seek a husband for Ruth. As is implied in the text, Naomi desired that her daughter-in-law might find in marriage with Boaz
I. A HOME, which should be a rest from her wanderings.
II. A PROVISION, which should deliver her from the misery and the temptations of poverty.
III. HAPPINESS, which should compensate her for the sorrows of her widowhood.
IV. PIOUS COMPANIONSHIP, which should be a relief from long friendlessness. Lessons:
1. Parents should take thought for their children, and not leave them to choose companions and friends and life-associates by chance. Nothing could be more disastrous than such neglect and thoughtlessness.
2. Marriage should be thought of with deliberation and prayer, both by the young, and by their parents or natural guardians.
3. Those who have found rest and prosperity in marriage should not omit the duty of gratitude and praise for the care and direction of Divine providence.T.
Rth 3:2
Diligence in business.
Boaz is an example of a thorough man of business. He was wont himself to see to it that the land was well tilled and well reaped. He was personally acquainted with the laborers. He even noticed the gleaners. He watched the reaping. He superintended the winnowing. He slept on the winnowing-floor, to protect his corn from the designs of robbers.
I. A RELIGIOUS MAN IS BOUND TO ATTEND TO THE CALLING HE EXERCISES. Whether a landowner, a farmer, a merchant, a tradesman, or a professional man, he ought to give his attention to his occupation, and not to neglect his own business to be a meddler in that of others. His business is thus more likely to prosper, and his example to younger men will be influential and beneficial.
II. AN EMPLOYER OF LABOR IS BOUND TO STUDY THE WELFARE OF HIS SERVANTS. The present state of society is very different from that in the time of Boaz. Society is less patriarchal, and more democratic. But there is still room, both in the household and in commercial and agricultural and manufacturing life, for the exercise of wise and kindly supervision over those who are employed to labor.
III. DILIGENCE IN BUSINESS PROCURES A MAN MANY ADVANTAGES. It is foolish to despise wealth, though it is easy to over-estimate it. From the narrative it is clear that the wealth of Boaz enabled him to secure a charming and virtuous wife, gave him great consideration amongst his neighbors and fellow-townsmen. If a man neglects the opportunity of acquiring property in order to pursue learning, or to do good, he deserves respect; but if from sloth and heedlessness, he is despised. Wealth is good if it be used for good purposes- for the education of children, for the encouragement of learning and virtue, for the well-being of the people at large.T.
Rth 3:5, Rth 3:6
Filial obedience.
Ruth was not Naomi’s daughter, yet she acted, and with good reason and great propriety, as though she had been such. What holds good, therefore, of the relationship described in this book holds good, a fortiori, of the relation between parents and children. In modern society the bonds of parental discipline are, especially among the working class, lamentably relaxed. Christian people should, in the interests alike of patriotism and religion, do all they can to strengthen these bonds. The text affords us a beautiful example of filial obedience.
I. MOTIVES to filial obedience. Gratitude should lead the child to obey the parent, to whom he owes so very much. The constraint should be the sweet constraint of love. Reason should lead to the reflectionThe parent has experience of human life, in which I am necessarily lacking; is not a parent’s judgment far more likely to be sound than is a child’s, or even a youth’s? Divine legislation commands children to obey their parents. E.g. the fifth commandment, under the old covenant; apostolical admonitions, under the new. The example of the Holy Child, Jesus!
II. The ADVANTAGES of filial obedience. Usually, obvious temporal advantages ensue upon such a course. This is proverbial and unquestionable. The satisfaction of a good conscience is a compensation not to be despised for any sacrifice of personal feeling in this matter. The approval of God is most emphatically pronounced upon those who honor and obey their parents. And this is usually followed by the confidence and admiration of fellow-men.
Lessons:
1. Expostulate with the disobedient.
2. Encourage the obedient.T.
Rth 3:7
The joy of harvest.
There is brightness and pleasantness in the view this passage gives us of a harvest-time in the vale of Bethlehem. Poets and painters have interpreted the heart of humanity in the pictures and the songs in which they have represented “the joy of harvest.” Boaz, the mighty man of wealth, was not only rich and prosperoushe was happy, and free from the moroseness which sometimes accompanies riches; he was generous, and free from the miserliness and penuriousness which often grows with prosperity; he was considerate, and observed and recognized individual cases of need.
I. IT IS RIGHT TO PARTAKE OF THE BOUNTIES OF GOD‘S PROVIDENCE. Gluttony and drunkenness meet with no encouragement from this, or from any other portion of Scripture. But no countenance is given to asceticism God “daily loadeth us with benefits;” he giveth not only seed to the sower, but “bread to the eater.” We should eat, drink, and give thanks to him who “openeth his hand and satisfieth the wants of every living thing.” Sincerity and thoughtfulness should accompany the daily blessing and breaking of bread. Christ “came eating and drinking.”
II. IT IS RIGHT TO BE HARPY AND MIRTHFUL WHEN GOD HAS DEALT BOUNTIFULLY WITH US. There is mirth of a kind attending the carousals and the debaucheries of sinners. This mirth is hollow, and will soon be succeeded by regrets. But when God’s children sit at their Father’s table and partake of his bounty, what more natural and just than that they should rejoice and sing aloud of his goodness? These gifts and “all things” are theirs!
III. IT IS RIGHT TO REST WHEN DUTY HAS BEEN FULFILLED AND TASKS ACHIEVED. Some zealous Christians seem to think all repose is sinful, as manifesting indifference to the magnitude of the work to be done. But God has made the body so that it needs rest, the mind so that it needs relaxation. The quality of the work will not suffer, but will gain, by timely and moderate repose.T.
Rth 3:10
Benediction.
A blessing comes appropriately from a senior; a father blesses his son, a venerable patriarch his youthful colleague. Boaz was an elderly man, and it seems appropriate that, addressing Ruth, the young widow of his kinsman, he should use language of benediction: “Blessed be thou of the Lord, my daughter!”
I. BENEDICTION PROCEEDS FROM A BENEVOLENT DISPOSITION. It is the opposite of cursing. Sometimes language of benediction is used when there is no spiritual reality behind it. In such cases it is a mockery, a counterfeit of benevolence and piety.
II. BENEDICTION IMPLIES PIETY. Belief in God, and in God’s willingness to bless. There is a looking up to God on behalf of him who is to be blessed. Without this the language of blessing is meaningless.
III. BENEDICTION IS THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT FROM GOD ALL GOOD MUST COME, COMBINED WITH THE DESIRE AND PRAYER THAT HE WILL BE GRACIOUS. It is the hallowing of our best affections; it is the making real and personal of our most solemn religious beliefs.
IV. BENEDICTION, IF HARMONIOUS WITH GOD‘S WILL, SECURES GOD‘S FAVOR. It is a wish, but a wish realized; a prayer, but a prayer heard and answered in heaven.T.
Rth 3:11
A virtuous woman.
The circumstances of the narrative read strangely to us. But one nation and one age cannot fairly apply its standards to another. Nothing is more certain than that the conduct of Naomi, of Ruth, and of Boaz was perfectly correct, and probably Ruth’s proceeding was wise and justifiable. Upon her character no breath of suspicion rested; she was, in the language of the text, “a virtuous woman.”
I. RUTH‘S VIRTUE WAS MANIFESTED BY HER CIRCUMSPECT CONDUCT WITH REFERENCE TO YOUNG MEN. “Thou followedst not young men, whether rich or poor.”
II. HER VIRTUE WAS APPARENT IN HER OBEDIENCE TO HER MOTHER–IN–LAW. Instead of taking counsel of her own comparative inexperience, she listened to the advice of the sage and prudent Naomi.
III. HER VIRTUE WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BY ALL HER ACQUAINTANCE. “All the city of my people doth know.” If there had been anything in the conduct of the poor, friendless young foreigner inconsistent with virtue, it would not have been hid. She escaped calumny.
IV. HER VIRTUE LED TO AN HONORABLE MARRIAGE AND POSITION IN ISRAEL. “A virtuous woman is a crown to her husband.” We can believe that Ruth verified the beautiful description given in Pro 31:1-31.T.
Rth 3:12, Rth 3:13
Respect for others’ rights.
The situation in which Boaz found himself was very singular. All that he had heard and all that he had observed of this young Moabitess had impressed him favorably. His language and his conduct show that Ruth had made an impression upon his heart. And it was honorable to him that it was so. Her youth, her beauty, her misfortunes, her industry, her cheerfulness, her filial devotedness, her virtue, her piety, all commended her to the judgment and the affections of the upright and conscientious Boaz. And now, with the most perfect modesty, and in the presentation of an undoubted claim upon him, Ruth offered herself to him as his lawful, rightful wife. What hindered him from immediately complying with her request, and taking her to his heart and his home? There was one impediment. Another had, if he chose to exercise it, a prior claim. Another had the first right to redeem the field of Elimelech, and to espouse the heiress, and raise up seed to the departed. And until this personthe nameless onehad exercised his option, Boaz did not feel at liberty to act upon the suggestion of his heart.
I. PERSONAL FEELINGS ALWAYS INCREASE THE URGENCY OF THE CLAIMS OF SELFISHNESS. “By nature and by practice” men seek their own interest. But experience shows us that strong emotion increases the danger of our yielding to such impulses.
II. WHERE PERSONAL FEELINGS ARE CONCERNED THERE IS NEED OF WATCHFULNESS AND PRAYER. It is so easy to wrong others for the sake of our own gratification, that it is well to question the arguments and pleas by which our interests are commended. Boaz must have been tempted, in the circumstances, to say nothing about the nearer kinsman, but quietly to accept the proposal of Ruth.
III. TRUE PRINCIPLE, AIDED BY THE POWER OF RELIGION, WILL ENABLE A MAN TO DO THE RIGHT, EVEN THOUGH HIS OWN INTERESTS AND HIS OWN FEELINGS ARE OPPOSED TO SUCH A COURSE. Boaz gained the victory over himself, and consented to abide the issue of an appeal to the nearer kinsman, although he risked thereby the loss of Ruth. Many of the highest illustrations of the nobility possible to man turn upon some such situation, and the course which honor and virtue prescribe is the course in which true and lasting happiness will be found.T.
Rth 3:15-17
Generosity.
Boaz was “a mighty man of wealth,” and Naomi and Ruth were poor, widowed, friendless, and comparatively strangers. All through the narrative Boaz appears as thoughtful, liberal, unselfish, honorable, munificent. He is an example to those whom Providence has endowed with wealth.
I. WEALTH IS GIVEN TO THE RICH not for their own sake only, but FOR THE SAKE OF OTHERS. Men are not the owners, but the stewards, of their possessions. How imperfectly this truth is recognized! The only way in which we can give to Christ is by giving to his people.
II. GENEROSITY SHOULD BE PROPORTIONATE TO THE MEANS OF THE GIVER. Both his means absolutely and his means relatively, i.e. considering the claims upon him by virtue of his family, his position, &c.
III. GENEROSITY SHOULD BE PROPORTIONATE TO THE NEEDS OF THE RECIPIENT. Those should have the preference who are old, crippled, and helpless; the widow and the orphan.
IV. GENEROSITY SHOULD BE UNOSTENTATIOUS AND SYMPATHETIC in its spirit; Let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth.” Hardness of manner may spoil beneficence. “Rich gifts wax poor when givers prove unkind.”T.
Rth 3:18
Sit still!
Naomi showed in her whole conduct not only tender feeling and sympathy, and sincere piety, but much shrewdness, foresight, tact, and knowledge of human nature. When there was anything for Ruth to do she was forward in urging her to action. But she knew that there is always a time to wait, as well as a time to work; and she reminded Ruth that now events must be left to othersindeed, must be left to God!
I. The OCCASION for sitting still. According to some, the belief that God works is inconsistent with the obligation to work ourselves. The whole idea of the religious life, as apprehended by some mistaken minds, is to do nothing, and to leave God to do everything. And some, who do not go so far as this, still are blind to the privilege of being “workers together with God.” When we have done our part, then is the time to sit still. The workman has first to labor, then to rest. The day of toil comes first, and the night of repose follows. When we can do no more, then is the time to sit still. Ask yourself whether you have or have not this reason for refraining from effort. We sometimes come to the end of our ability; we have done our part, and for us nothing now remains to do.
II. MOTIVES which should induce thus to sit still. We have to consider that in certain cases to do otherwise would be utterly useless. In these cases it is a waste of power to make further effort, and a waste of feeling to allow anxiety to distress the heart. Thus any other course would be injurious, would destroy or disturb our peace of mind. And there are occasions when to be quiet is to trust in the providential rule and care of God. So it was with Ruth at this conjuncture. The example of Christ should not be overlooked. There came a time when he was silent before his foes.
III. The BLESSING which follows sitting still.
1. Peace of heart. “Rest in the Lord.”
2. Strength. “Your strength is to sit still.” “In quietness and confidence shall be your strength.”
3. If God will, prosperity. “He shall give thee thy heart’s desire.”
4. In any case the glory of God, who desires that his people should do his will, and leave results to him.T.
HOMILIES BY W.M. STATHAM
Rth 3:1
Thoughtful love.
“Shall not I seek rest for thee?” How natural. We cannot ever be with those we love. Marriage is God’s own ideal, and it is the happiest estate if his fear dwells in our hearts.
I. THERE IS NO EARTHLY REST LIKE THE REST OF HOME. Judges, warriors, statesmen enjoy the honors of life, and are conscious of pleasure in promotion and distinction, but their biographies tell us how they turn to home as the highest joy of all. Yes! Nothing can compensate for the loss of a happy home, and we should seek in every way to make it a refreshment and a delight by doing our best to promote its peace and purity.
II. THE EARTHLY HOME IS A PARABLE OF HEAVEN. Our Savior touches our hearts at once when he says, “My Father’s house,” and when he speaks the exquisite parable of the prodigal son. No analogies of city or temple are so powerful in their influence over us as the analogy of home.W.M.S.
Rth 3:2
The work of winnowing.
“Behold, he winnoweth barley tonight.” A world-old process this, the winnowing of the chaff from the wheat. Customs change, and commercial life increases and creates ever new demands; but the agricultural life is still the basis of all. You may make new threshing-machines, but you must still have bread. It may be winnowed by steam or hand, but it must be winnowed. A pleasant Eastern sight: work done in the cool of the evening”tonight.”
I. WORK IS EVER ASSOCIATED BY GOD WITH HIS BLESSINGS TO MAN. We must plant and dig and reap. God sends the sunshine, the sweet air, and the shower. If a man will not work, neither shall he eat. A paradise of idlers would soon be a Gehenna indeed. No curse can come to a nation so sad as this: “Abundance of idleness was in her sons and her daughters.”
II. WORK IS NEVER UNDIGNIFIED OR TO BE DISDAINED. A gentleman is gentle in his worknot because he does no work. It is a false pride that dislikes handiwork. Many of the diseases which darken the brain come from the unwise neglect of physical exercise. What is sweeter than the fragrance of the upturned soil? What is more beneficent than the law of labor, which calls forth the exercise of body, mind, and spirit?
III. WORK OF WINNOWING IS A DIVINE WORK ALSO. God uses his tribulum in our history, and the tribulation-work produces experience, patience, hope. When we are mourning over some sorrow or loss, it is the bruising flail of God’s correction. And this comes at all seasons of life, even in the evening of the day. For we shall need chastisement even unto the end. What a doom is that “without chastisement.”W.M.S.
Rth 3:11
Above rubies.
“A virtuous woman.” Here is the crown of all beauty. What a renown is this of Ruth’s. No jeweled necklet, no Eastern retinue, can give such attraction as this. We may have women of genius, and we admire genius; we may have women of scientific attainment, and God has given no lack of intellectual endowments to women, but we must have virtue. Let the history of later Rome tell us what the loss of this is.
I. NO LIFE IS HIDDEN. “All the city of my people doth know that thou art a virtuous woman.” Every history stands revealed. Concerning Nehemiah, we read of the testimony given in time of national trouble: “There is a man in thy kingdom in whose heart is the fear of the holy God.” And so this simple-hearted Ruth, who had not tried to make herself attractive to the young men, poor or rich, who had been modest in manner and heroic in conduct, left the impress of her character on the city.
II. NO LIFE CAN BE RELIGIOUS THAT IS NOT VIRTUOUS. We may, indeed, have virtue of a kind, a morality of respectability, without religion; but we cannot be religious without morality, for religion does not consist in ceremonies however impressive, or days however sacred, or opinions however sound; but in a life of consecration to God, and of obedience to all the sanctities of the moral law. There may be a religion of emotionalism merely; but blessed as it is to feel the true, we must live it out as well in common life.
III. NO POWER IS SO PERMANENT AS THAT OF HOLY LIFE. Character lives in others. We do not die when we pass from earth. Ruth lives today. It would be interesting to know how many have been led even in this age to devoutness and decision by the remembrance of her conduct and the exquisite pathos of her words. The little “city” of which our text speaks has passed away, but wherever the word of God is known and read, there Ruth reproduces herself in the history of others. The very name has become a family name, and is honored by constant use in every generation.W.M.S.
Rth 3:12
A woman’s influence.
In all history woman has held a place of regal influence. Not by intruding on the sphere of man, not by acting as if there were no Divine providence in the more delicate physical constitution of woman which incapacitates her for the strain of hardest toil; but in the ideal of “home,” in which she is to be the “abiding” one, filling it with the charm of quiet influence and the sacredness of self-sacrificing love.
I. HERE IS A STRANGE CONJUNCTION OF TERMS. “Virtuous” comes from the Latin vir, which means a man. What then? Is a woman to be like a man? Does it mean a manly woman? In one sense it does. For “the man” is taken in the Scripture as the type of humanity in its best estate. “Show thyself a man,” says David to Solomon. It means all that is pure, and brave, and true, and good. Thus “abominable” means something ab homo, to be designated as “away from a man;” something altogether alien to his nature. A virtuous woman is a woman who has strength of resistance to evil, strength of devotion to God, strength of patience and endurance in the path of obedience.
II. HERE IS THE POWER OF INFLUENCE. “All the people of my city (or, at the gate) doth know that thou art a virtuous woman.” Certainly. “They that be otherwise cannot be hid.” What a lesson that is! Character tells everywhere. You may not note the current running, but place your boat upon it, and you soon see it. So it is with a good lifeit bears others in its current. We are all known. Men and women are judged at their true worth even in this world, and even the wicked respect the upright and the just. It was said of Nehemiah to the king in a time of trouble, “There is a man in thy kingdom in whose heart is the fear of the holy God.”
III. HERE IS THE SECRET OF NATIONAL GLORY. It was so in Rome when they could speak with pride of the Roman matron, and it has been so in every nation under heaven. A Divine judgment was needed to purify this nation after the days of Charles II. Had it not been a time of judgment, the nation, as Charles Kingsley says, would have perished. Let the young be taught modesty even in dress and demeanor. Let all that is “fast” be frowned upon and made unfashionable. The grace that Christ gives is humility with the fear of the Lord.W.M.S.
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary
Rth 3:1. My daughter, shall I not seek rest for thee This, according to the eastern mode of expression, is a strong affirmative. As Ruth had shewn so much piety and affection to her mother, Naomi thought it her duty to do all in her power to provide for her; and, as Providence had in so remarkable a manner directed her to Boaz, she devised the following method of calling upon him to perform that duty which the law required from him. A circumstance which must be kept in mind, to preserve both Naomi and Ruth from any imputation of immodesty: nor, indeed, ought we to judge too hastily of a history like this, without a due attention, not only to the peculiar laws, but to the striking simplicity of the manners of those times, with a pleasing picture whereof every trait in this history presents us.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
CHAPTER THIRD
Rth 3:1-6
Obedience in Innocence
1Then [And] Naomi her mother-in-law said unto her, My daughter, shall I not seek 2rest [a resting-place] for thee, that it may be well with thee? And now is not Boaz of our kindred [lit. our acquaintance, i.e. relative], with whose maidens thou wast? Behold, he winnoweth barley to-night in the threshing floor. 3Wash thyself therefore, and anoint thee, and put1 thy [best] raiment upon thee, and get thee down to the floor: but make not thyself known unto [suffer not thyself to be perceived by] the man, until he shall have done eating and drinking. 4And it shall be when he lieth down, that thou shalt mark the place where he shall lie, and thou shalt go in, and uncover [the place at] his feet, and lay thee down; and he will tell thee what thou shalt do. 5And she said unto her, All that thou sayest unto me2 I will do. 6And she went down unto the floor, and did according to all that her mother-in-law bade her.
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL
[1 Rth 3:7.: not secretly (Keil), which would be superfluous here; but as in Jdg 4:21, quietly, softly, so as not to wake the sleeperin a muffled manner, cf. Lex. s. v. .Tr.]
[2 Rth 3:9. must be regarded as dual, with the suffix defect, written (Ges. 91, 2, Rem. 1); for as the word does not stand in pause, the seghol cannot be a mere lengthened sheva (Ges. 29, 4, b). The Masoretic tradition, therefore, understands wings here, and not skirt, or coverlet, in which sense the word is always used in the singular. The covering wing is a favorite emblem of protection in the psalms and elsewhere, and is here far more beautiful and suggestive than skirt or coverlet, even though the translation of the metaphor into the language of action did carry with it an actual spreading of the skirt over one, cf. the commentary. The rendering wings is also adopted by Bertheau, Keil, Wright, etc.Tr.]
EXEGETICAL AND DOCTRINAL
Rth 3:1. Shall I not seek a resting-place for thee? The peculiar proceeding which these words introduce, may appear somewhat surprising when viewed from the standpoint of modern social life and relations. At all events, this explains why its psychological significance has not yet been properly appreciated. But the narrative of the fortunes of Ruth is so deeply embedded in the characteristic life of Israel, that in order to appreciate its full beauty, it is indispensable to enter thoroughly into the spirit of that life. Perhaps no history teaches more clearly than this, that when love and trust, in their childlike and therefore divine strength, first suffer and then conquer, there is a presentation in actual history of that which the highest works of the imagination present only in idea.
That which made the fate of the daughter of Jephthah so sad, was that she never found a resting-place in the house of a husband. With regard to woman, marriage was viewed as the natural fulfillment of her calling, without which her life was helpless and defenseless, as that of a people without a God. Hence the prayer of Naomi, when about to part from her daughters-in-law, that they may find rest in the house of a husband. Orpah returns because she fears never to find it in Israel. Ruth goes with her, because she places her love for Naomi above all other considerations. Then, indeed, the hearts of them all were filled with sorrow. But since then Gods mercy has again become manifest. New hope has dawned upon their tears. What a beautiful and happy contrast presents itself now! The same mother-in-law who formerly, in her self-forgetfulness, bade her daughters-in-law return to Moab and find resting-places for themselves, is now in a position, self-forgetful as ever, to seek for Ruth the Moabitess a place in Israel, where it may be well with her. And what was the force that brought about this beautiful revolution? The love of Ruth which seeks not her own, the faithfulness of Naomi which deserved such love.
The understanding of what chap. 3 relates will be chiefly facilitated by a comparison with the beginning of chap. 2. While the women are in distress, it is Ruth who takes the initiative; now, when hope grows large, it is Naomi. When hardship was to be endured, the mother submitted her will to the daughter,for Ruth was not sent to glean, she went of her own accord; now, when the endeavor is to secure the joy and happiness held out in prospect, the daughter yields in all things to the direction of the mother. The thought of labor for the mother originates with the daughter; but it is the mother who forms plans of happiness for the daughter. On both occasions, Ruth undertakes a mission. The first time she sets out, a stranger, without a definite place in view, and dressed in the garb of toil and mourning; the second time, with a definite plan, encouraged by the former success, and decked in holiday attire. And yet the second undertaking was not less hard than the first. Humiliation which she had to fear on the first, might also befall her on the second. Indeed, anything that might have befallen her on her first expedition, had not God ordered her goings, would have been far less wounding to her, the foreign and needy woman, than that which on this second expedition might pierce her sensitive heart. The first undertaking was more sorrowful, the second more delicate. At the first she could act openly, at the second only secretly. Then the worst risk she ran was to suffer hunger, now her honor is at stake. The faithfulness to Naomi which she then showed was not greater than the obedience which she now manifests.
And yet Naomi is as little to be reproached for sending Ruth on this second mission, as she was for accepting her proposal to go on the first. On the contrary, her course rather shows that she did not bear her name, or had won such love among strangers, for nothing.
Neither journey of Ruth, taken with the approbation of Naomi, can be measured by modern measuring-rules. They are not attempts at speculative adventure. In both cases, what was done was in accordance with unimpeachable rights afforded by Israelitish law and custom.
When Ruth went to the field to glean, she only asked a right guaranteed to the widowed and the poor. To deny her the privilege of gleaning would have been to deprive her of her right; to injure or put her to shame in the exercise of it, would have been to diminish it. True, the liberal treatment she received from Boaz was no longer a right to be claimed, but the expression of good-will and kindness. Naomi recognized in this the providential arrangement of God. And it is precisely this also that gives courage to Ruth to claim for herself and for Naomi the second right to which she is entitled.
It was an ancient law in Israel, sanctioned by the Mosaic legislation (Deu 25:5), that when a man died without issue, his brother was bound to marry his widow. This is a right of the woman. She can demand it of him, and if he refuses, put him openly to shame. How early and deeply this usage was rooted in Israel, may be seen from Genesis 38, where the death of Onan is ascribed to his refusal to marry the widow Tamar. The significance of this usage is clear. It is also found among other nations, although distorted and rendered impure. It rests on the historical feeling of the nations, which leads them to attach importance to the preservation not only of the national spirit, but also of the national body, by propagation. In the first psalm, the pious man is compared with a tree whose leaf never withers. And the tree is, in fact, the image best adapted to explain the reason of the usage in question. It is not without reason that the founder of a people is called its stammvater [stem-father, trunk-father, cf. the Heb. terms and shoot, sprout, branch, used for tribe.Tr.]. United about this common trunk, the ancient peoples distinguished themselves nationally (from nasci) very sharply from those who were not his offshoots.3 The different families are the branches of this tree. But the head of a family is in his turn a stem, putting forth boughs, as a tree puts forth branches.
The withering of the tree is the image of death. As no branch in the tree, so no member in the family, should perish. Now, the nation lives in its families. Hence, if a man dies without children, it is as if a branch withered in the tree. To remedy this, a new branch is, as it were, engrafted on the tree. This is done when the brother marries the widow, and regards the son she bears as heir to the name and possessions of the deceased husband. But what if there be no brother? Is the name then to be after all extinguished and the branch to be forever wanting? The law, as given in Deu 25:5 ff., does not indeed declare it, but it is an inference in accordance with its spirit, that in that case the obligation passes over to the nearest relatives of the deceased. Every familysuch is manifestly the idea of the usagemust take care that no member in it dies out. What the brother is to the brother, that, when he has no brother, his more distant blood-relatives must be. The letter of the law, it is true, did not command this; but, as the narrative of our Book shows, the spirit of that usage which the law sanctioned, required it. Naomi, by way of explaining to her daughter-in-law her joy over the way in which God had ordered her steps, says, Boaz is related (, like propinquus) to us, he belongs to our goelim (). The word gaal (), to which goel belongs, is philologically and in its original signification one and the same with the Greek , to loose.4 It is not to be ascribed to the same root with the similarly sounding , although it is true that, owing to the well-known interchange of and , it sometimes occurs instead of it.5 The latter word means, to pollute; and is related to the former as the Latin luo, pollute (cf. lutum, pol-luo), to the Greek , to loose. The correspondence of the ideas to redeem and to loose, in their external relationship, testifies, both in Hebrew and in Indo-germanic, to their internal mutual connection. The idea currently attached in Israel to the term gaal, to loose, is everywhere definitely determined by the conception of the people as an historical organism. By this it was defined mainly as a redeeming [einlsen, inloosing, from ein, in, and lsen, to loose; i.e. a loosing of that which has been bound, by means of which it is brought back into its original position (e.g. a captive into his home, a slave into his freedom) or ownership (e.g. a piece of land, a promissory note, etc.).Tr.].6 According to the social philosophy of the Mosaic law, no member of the national organism was to perish, no branch of the tree was to wither. Whatever had been dislocated by natural events was to be re-set; whatever had been alienated must be redeemed. This applied, as an example in our Book itself teaches, to lands as well as to persons; and the duty of redemption rested, as within the nation, so within the families into which the nation branched out. No one could redeem anything for a family, who did not belong to it by blood-relationship. Hence also the transition of the idea of goel into that of blood-relative was perfectly natural. Properly speaking, there could be no redeemer who was not a blood-relative. The meaning of the word is profoundly set forth in the various grand historical unfoldings of its idea. For every redemption [einlsung, inloosing,] has always been a setting free [lsung, loosing], albeit not always without security. The Greek also passes over into the idea of setting free, releasing. Dionysos, in his character as god of the spring-season, is called Lysios, the Liberator. The Liberator of Israel is God. He frees out of and from servitude. For that reason, the Messiah who delivers Israel is especially called Goel. When he appears, he will come as Israels blood-relation and brother, as Christ was. The dismal counterpart of the goel as redeemer and deliverer, is the goel as blood-avenger. He owes his origin to the opinion, which slowly and painfully disappeared in Israel,7 but which is still partially prevalent in the East, and inspires many current superstitions, that the blood of the slain cannot be put to rest and liberated, until his murderer has been killed. The duty of this blood-revenge rests upon the blood-relatives, not only on the brother, strictly so called, but on the nearest relative, whoever he may be. So far this terrible usage becomes instructive with reference to the beneficent national custom which made it the duty of the blood-relative not to let the house of his kinsman die out; for this also was a blood-redemption, not unto death, however, but unto happiness and peace. The goel was no judgeas also the greatest Goel came not to judge the worldbut a comforter, a dispenser of life and love.
Rth 3:2. Is not Boaz of our kindred? By these words Naomi explains to Ruth the right she has to engage in the undertaking she is about to recommend. His relationship gives her a right to apply to him for a performance of its duties. It is not to be thought singular that, if Ruth had this right of marriage, the first motion toward its fulfillment did not come from Boaz. In the first place, it was in accordance with ancient usage to leave the assertion of a right with its possesson. It was not the duty of a landowner, for example, to go after the poor, and make them glean; but it was his duty not to forbid them, when they came. In the next place, however, we learn farther on that Boaz was not the nearest relative. The objection which Ruth in her humility might find in her Moabitish nationality, or which she might entertain even without reference to that fact, is met by Naomi in the words: with whose maidens thou wast. She thus reminds Ruth that Boaz, so far from slighting her on account of her nationality, has distinguished her, and put her on perfect equality with his Israelitish work-people.
Behold, he winnoweth barley to-night in the threshing-floor.8 This remark shows that since Ruths participation in the harvest of Boaz, Naomi must have come into closer connection with her relative. She is minutely informed of what he does and where he is. We must also suppose that it had not escaped her how much kindness Boaz had shown to Ruth. She could not but feel sure that the claim which Ruth was to prefer, would not be addressed to a hard and unsympathetic heart. On the other hand, it was natural to think that although Boaz was an elderly man, Ruth must be heartily attached to him. It was he, whose kindliness fell like a first beam of light on her sadness. Such an impression, after scenes and moods like those through which Ruth had passed, is never lost. She went forth on her first undertaking at the beginning of barley-harvest; she enters on the second, when the barley is winnowed on the threshing-floor. Between the two there lies an interval of time sufficient to explain how Naomi could have the courage and the information necessary to send her daughter on such an errand.
Rth 3:3 ff. But let not thyself be perceived by the man. Ruth was directed to pay special attention to the adornment of her person, to which, to this extent at least, she had since the death of her husband been a stranger. She is to lay aside the weeds of mourning and the garments of toil, and after bathing and anointing, don the festive garb; for the expedition on which she goes is of a joyous, bridal nature. All this, however, is not done in order to win Boaz by external beauty; for she is specially cautioned against allowing him to see her by day. But why this caution? Boaz was a believing Israelite, and therefore also a man of strict morals. It would have perplexed and displeased him to think that anybody else had seen Ruth, and might suspect both her and himself of an illicit meeting on the solitary threshing-floor. He would have scarcely listened to her, but removed her at once. The purpose for which she came had also an appropriate symbolism, which any previous meeting would have disturbed. By whatever means, Naomi knew that this nightfor it was in the night that Ruth was to present her petitionBoaz was to be alone on the threshing-floor. The floor, albeit not entirely closed in, may have been partially surrounded by some sort of fencing, by means of which Ruth could conceal herself until the proper time, and within which Boaz ate and drank. Most probably the grain-heaps themselves formed the natural boundaries, between which, accordingly, Boaz also betook himself to repose.
Rth 3:6. And did according to all that her mother-in-law bade her. Ruth was to do something a little beyond what the prudence and delicacy of a woman ordinarily permitted. For that reason, it is expressly repeated that she did as her mother-in-law directed her. She was justly confident that the latter would order nothing that could injure her. True love, such as Ruth cherished for Naomi, always includes perfect obedience. It was not in Ruth that the thought of a new marriage had originated. Her heart had no other thought than to serve Naomi like a dutiful child. But Naomi, equally self-forgetful, busied herself with plans for a resting-place for her child. She, too, thought not of herself only, but of Ruth. She had undoubtedly done all that was in her power by way of preparation, before she directed Ruth to take the decisive step. From that step she could not save her, for custom devolved it on her. It is the beauty of the present instance, that this custom compelled Ruth to nothing that was against her will. For although she acted in a matter regulated by law, it was not settled in this case that Boaz was the right man. So much the more essential was it that, by Ruths personal action, the perfect freedom and inclination of the woman should be manifested. The greater the stress that was laid on this by the whole symbolical proceeding, the more significant is the remark that Ruth did everything, as her mother-in-law commanded her.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
Go down to the threshing-floor. Love speaks only of duties, not of rights. Ruth offered to go to the field and glean; but of the right of redemption which she had, she said nothing. She thought of the duties that devolve on the poor, but not of her right to marriage. In going to Boaz, she manifested the obedience of love, the most difficult of all loves performances. It is much to toil for a loved one, to humble ones self, to give up everything, and to forget the past; but the hardest thing for a woman is to conquer the fears of feminine delicacy, to quiet the apprehensions of the heart, and that not by boldly transgressing moral law, but by virtue. Ruths visit to Boaz in the night was harder for her, than it is for a young girl to leave home and enter service. Her obedience in this matter was the utmost sacrifice she could make. She risked her womanly feelings; and that to a virtuous woman is more than to risk life. She claimed a right, to claim which was more painful than the heaviest duties. But her self-forgetful love pours an auroral glow of divine purity over everything. Her love was not the sensual love of romances. She loved Naomi, her mother; and in order to procure honor and love in Israel for this mother, and to save the name of her deceased husband from extinction, she does what only a chaste woman, inspired by the obedience of love dare do, and what the polluted eyes of impure souls never understand. Vanity and self-interest had found but a slight trial in her undertaking. To virtue and ancient patriarchal manners, the visit of Ruth to Boaz was the utmost of womanly endurance. It was harder for Ruth to don her best attire for this purpose, than to go about in her working clothes. For virtue would rather put on sackcloth and ashes, than the garments of a joy which may easily be misconceived. It is more of a martyrdom to face the possibility of appearing as a sinner, than to suffer punishment for the sake of virtue. But the chaste love of obedience succeeds in everything. Ruth conquers, and is neither seen nor misapprehended. She receives the crown of love and faith.
Sailer: Galleries of beautiful pictures are precious; but virtuous young men and maidens are more precious than all the picture-galleries of the world.
Starke: The bride of Christ is pleasing to her Bridegroom only when anointed with the Spirit and clothed in the garments of salvation.
Footnotes:
[1][Rth 3:3.On and , cf. Ges. 59, 1, c. They are older forms of the second per. fem., and there is no occasion to substitute the keri for them. Another instance occurs in Rth 3:4.Tr.]
[2][Rth 3:5., supplied by the Masorites, is unnecessary, cf. Rth 3:11 (where, however, Wright also inserts it on the authority of versions and some MSS.). The same remark is applicable to the case in Rth 3:17. So Bertheau and Keil. Dr. Cassel omits it here, but retains it in Rth 3:17.Tr.]
[3]The sensual abuse into which the practice of levirate marriage is said to have fallen among the Nairs of Malabar, has extinguished the family proper among them. All are blood-relatives. They are a tree without branches. The correction of many of the views of Bohlen, altes Indien, ii. 142, however much they need it, cannot here be undertaken.
[4]Frst (Concordanti, s. v. ) has truly remarked that was lengthened from , as from . This , originally related to both and luo, has retained its g, which in the ancient languages has been frequently thrown off. The copious discussion of Benfey, Gr. Gram. ii. 119124, should be compared.
[5]The few instances, Isa 59:3; Isa 63:3, Zep 3:1, Mal 1:7; Mal 1:12, Lam 4:14, in which i. q. written with an occurs in the sense to pollute, should not have been placed under , to loose, in the concordance [cf. Frst]. No one would identify luo (polluo) with in that way.
[6]Our lsen, to loose, also, has in M. H. Germ. the sense of einlsen, to redeem, to ransom, sc. a pledge, land, etc. It occurs in this sense in poets and documents, especially Low German, cf. Riedel, Cod. Brand, i. 2, Ruth 207: van den droszten dat land losete. In another document Herr Heinrich von Mecklenburg is to ledegen und losen (einlsen) alle hus und stede und de land; cf. Krcher, Urkundenbuch zur Gesch. des Geschlechts, i. 172; also, i.
[7]My observations in my treatise on den armen Heinrich, will hereafter, D. V., be further elaborated. Cf. the article of J. G. Hoffmann on Blutrache, in the Hallischen Encykl.
[8][Winnowing is done by tossing the mingled grain and chaff up into the air, when the chaff is blown away to a distance, while the heavier grain falls straight down. Hence, the evening and early night when a cool wind frequently arises after hot, sultry days (cf. Gen 3:8), was taken advantage of by Boaz for this work. For to-night, the Targum has, in the night wind. On threshing and threshing-floors, cf. Reb. i. 550; Thomson, ii. 314Tr.]
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
CONTENTS
The history is prosecuted through this chapter, and of consequence in its progress and drawing nearer to a close, becomes more and more interesting. Naomi gives instructions to Ruth how to conduct herself in her deportment towards Boaz. According to the laws of Israel, Ruth had a claim upon Boaz to do the kinsman’s part and marry her. Naomi directs hen’ towards the attainment of this great end. This chapter relates also Ruth’s obedience to Naomi’s direction, and the noble behaviour of Boaz towards her.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Then Naomi her mother in law said unto her, My daughter, shall I not seek rest for thee, that it may be well with thee? (2) And now is not Boaz of our kindred, with whose maidens thou wast? Behold, he winnoweth barley to night in the threshingfloor. (3) Wash thy self therefore, and anoint thee, and put thy raiment upon thee, and get thee down to the floor: but make not thyself known unto the man, until he shall have done eating and drinking. (4) And it shall be, when he lieth down, that thou shalt mark the place where he shall lie, and thou shalt go in, and uncover his feet, and lay thee down; and he will tell thee what thou shalt do. (5) And she said unto her, All that thou sayest unto me I will do.
If there were no other evidences in the whole history of the Book of Ruth, to lead to the conviction that the grand scope of it is of a spiritual signification; the circumstance here related, together with what follows in consequence thereof, would incline me to this opinion. To persons not conversant with Jewish customs, and especially if ignorant of the Jewish laws, in reference to that grand point, the expectation of the Messiah, Naomi’s advice to Ruth, and the deportment of Ruth in obedience to that advice, must appear highly reprehensible and indecent. But if the Reader, before he prosecutes this chapter any further, would pause, and consider what the Lord appointed Israel concerning the marriage of widows in relationship; neither the conduct of Naomi nor Ruth will be found indecorous or improper, but agreeable to the written law. Let the Reader first, therefore, be told, that with an eye to what God had promised concerning the redemption of our fallen nature, that the seed of the woman should bruise the serpent’s head: e very Jew, unconscious from what womb this child should be born, became extremely solicitous to have a numerous offspring: and the going childless was considered as one of the most awful punishments of heaven. Write ye this man childless, (saith the Lord) a man that shall not prosper in the earth. See Jer 22:30 . Hence the distress of Jephthah: Jdg 11:34-35 . I would desire the Reader, when he hath made his own remarks on this part of the subject, to go on and consider yet further, how the Lord himself, as if to encourage this laudable desire of children among his people, with an eye to the Messiah, appointed certain laws to keep up the stock of families. Thus the precept ran, If brethren dwell together, and one of them die and have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger: her husband’s brother shall go in unto her and take her to him to wife, and perform the duty of an husband’s brother unto her. And observe what follows: And it shall be that the first-born which she beareth, shall succeed in the name of his brother which is dead, that his name be not put out of Israel. See Deu 25:5-10 . And if the Reader will consult the whole passage, he will see that the object was considered so important, that the refusal subjected the man which objected to do the brother’s part to an opprobrious name in Israel. I do not detain the Reader in this place, with adding the sweet spiritual truths which arise out of it, in reference to our blessed brother, the Lord Jesus Christ, these will meet us in their proper place, before we close our observations on this chapter. But what I am chiefly desirous of at this time, in opening the view of Ruth’s conduct and Naomi’s advice, is to remove from the mind of the Christian Reader every idea of indelicacy and improper behaviour in Naomi’s counsel to Ruth. It is worthy remark, that this law was considered so universally binding and so sacredly attended to, that it was not lost sight of in the days of our blessed Lord. See Mat 22:23-24 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
The Message of the Book of Ruth
Rth 3:9
In speaking of the message which this little book has for us, we shall treat it as conveying to us a message of redemption. Looked at in this light the book has, I think, these things to tell us:
I. It tells us that the range of God’s grace is ever wider than our conception of it. The book of Ruth shows us how one who was a member of an idolatrous people, one who was a Gentile, an alien from the commonwealth of Israel, a stranger from the covenant of promise, having no hope and without God in the world, was actually brought into the number of the chosen people, and became one of the direct line of which the Messiah came.
In the old time, as in the new, God’s salvation, though reaching men through channels of His own appointing, was open to all who cared to avail themselves of it.
II. The second thing about redemption which this book tells us is, that although God’s grace is so free and open to all, it can save us only when we make it ours by an act of deliberate choice. God does not force His salvation on any. Ruth chose Israel and Israel’s God. Had that choice not been made, Ruth would never have gained her position as the wife of Boaz. And even after this decisive choice was made her position was not secured until she had claimed all that was hers. Ruth had to make herself and her claims known to Boaz. She had to possess herself of her rights by a holy violence. And this she did.
With like decision and like determination must we act if we would win the heavenly city. It is true ‘whosoever will may come’. It is true ‘him that cometh unto Me I will in no wise cast out’. But if these blessed promises are to avail us, we must will and we must come.
III. The third lesson about redemption which this book teaches us is this that redemption is achieved by and only by a Kinsman-Redeemer. Ruth owed her position in no sense to herself. She owed it entirely to Boaz. Her knowledge of her claim, her presentation of her claim, would have availed her nothing had Boaz refused to act. And Boaz’ power of acting depended on his being a kinsman.
God’s grace is indeed wide, wide as the universe, great as God Himself, but God’s grace reaches sinners only through the Redeemer. And our Lord’s power to redeem us lies in the fact that He is our near kinsman. Our Saviour is God. But our Saviour is man as truly God as if He were not man, as truly man as if He were not God. Man alone could be the Lamb of God to take away the sins of the world. In Jesus therefore we have a Kinsman-Redeemer.
And as Boaz, the kinsman-redeemer of this little book, completed his work of redemption by uniting Ruth to himself and making her a sharer in all his glory and power, so is it with our Redeemer. He saves us by union to Himself.
G. H. C. Macgregor, Messages of the Old Testament, p. 101.
Rth 3:10
This text, in its Latin form, ‘Priorem misericordiam posteriore superasti,’ has been placed on a tablet in the porch of the ancient church of Guingamp in Brittany, to commemorate the blessings received during a recent mission.
Reference. IV. 1-22. S. Cox, The Book of Ruth, p. 123.
Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson
Rth 3
1. Then Naomi her mother in law said unto her, My daughter, shall I not seek rest for thee, that it may be well with thee?
2. And now is not Boaz of our kindred, with whose maidens thou wast? Behold, he winnoweth barley [though a mighty man of wealth, still a workman] to night [for the sake of the breeze] in the threshingfloor.
3. Wash thyself therefore, and anoint thee, and put thy raiment upon thee, and get thee down to the floor; but make not thyself known unto the man, until he shall have done eating and drinking.
4. And it shall be, when he lieth down, that thou shalt mark the place where he shall lie, and thou shalt go in, and uncover his feet, and lay thee down; and he will tell thee what thou shalt do.
5. And she said unto her, All that thou sayest unto me I will do.
6. And she went down unto the floor, and did according to all that her mother in law bade her.
7. And when Boaz had eaten and drunk, and his heart was merry [not necessarily implying any excess: see Jdg 19:6 , Jdg 19:9 ], he went to lie down at the end of the heap of corn: and she came softly, and uncovered his feet, and laid her down.
8. And it came to pass at midnight, that the man was afraid [ Gen 27:33 ], and turned himself [bent himself]: and, behold, a woman lay at his feet.
9. And he said, Who art thou? And she answered, I am Ruth thine handmaid: spread therefore thy skirt [“wing”] over thine handmaid; for thou art a near kinsman.
10. And he said, Blessed be thou of the Lord, my daughter [Origen compares Ruth to the Gentile church, the engrafted olive tree]: for thou hast shewed more kindness in the latter end than at the beginning, inasmuch as thou followest not young men, whether poor or rich.
11. And now, my daughter, fear not; I will do to thee all that thou requirest: for all the city of my people doth know that thou art a virtuous woman.
12. And now it is true that I am thy near kinsman [“Goel”]: howbeit there is a kinsman [Goel] nearer than I.
13. Tarry this night, and it shall be in the morning, that if he will perform unto thee the part of a kinsman, well; let him do the kinsman’s part: but if he will not do the part of a kinsman to thee, then will I do the part of a kinsman to thee, as the Lord liveth: lie down until the morning.
14. And she lay at his feet until the morning: and she rose up before one could know another. And he said, Let it not be known that a woman came into the floor [this is the narrator’s paraphrase].
15. Also he said, Bring the vail [“mantle:” Isa 3:22 ] that thou hast upon thee, and hold it. And when she held it, he measured six measures of barley [twice as much as she gleaned], and laid it on her: and she went into the city.
16. And when she came to her mother in law, she said, Who art thou, my daughter? [Rather, How hast thou fared?] And she told her all that the man had done to her.
17. And she said, These six measures of barley gave he me; for he said to me, Go not empty unto thy mother in law.
18. Then said she, Sit still, my daughter, until thou know how the matter will fall: for the man will not be in rest [will not keep quiet], until he have finished the thing this day.
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker
THE BOOK OF RUTH
XXXII
A CATECHISM
To what time in the history of Israel does the story of Ruth belong?
Ans. 1:1, to the period of the Judges.
2. What the relations of this book to the book of Judges, and its place in the Old Testament canon?
Ans. (1) It is an appendix to the book of Judges and the two were counted as one book in the early Jewish enumeration. It is an episode of the general story of the judges like the migration of the DANAIDES and the war with Benjamin in the latter part of that book.
(2) Its natural place of order is just after Judges, and it so appears in the Septuagint, Vulgate, and English Versions.
3. What its place in the Hebrew Bible, and why?
Ans. All the known Hebrew manuscripts are modern. The later Jews, for liturgical purposes, arranged their scripture into three grand divisions, to wit: The Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms, or other writings. In the synagogues on their various sabbaths and on their great days appointed sections from these grand divisions were read, so that every Jew would know beforehand the scriptural lesson. Now, in this Hebrew Bible so arranged, Ruth was the fifth book of the third division, coming between the Song of Songs and Lamentations. (See Isaac Leeser’s English Version.) The date of this arrangement was after the Septuagint version was made but before the coming of our Lord, as there appear to be references to it in Luk 4:16-17 ; Luk 24:44 , and Act 15:21 .
4. What passages in the book itself bear on the date of the composition?
Ans. The most important are Rth 1:1 ; Rth 4:7-8 , and Rth 4:18-22 . The first passage in verse I seems to imply that the period of the judges had passed before the book was written. In Rth 4:7-8 , it seems that the custom of taking off a shoe as a token of relinquishing a kinsman’s right to redeem had passed away when the book was written, and in Rth 4:18-22 , the last paragraph of the book, the genealogy is carried to David’s time and stops with David, which seems to imply that the book was written in the time of David, but not later than David’s time.
5. On what grounds do the radical critics place the date of the composition to the time of the Exile, after the downfall of the Monarchy and even later?
Ans. Their principal argument, as usual, is based on philology, that is, the use of certain expressions or words that they claim must belong to a later date. It is enough for me to say that their argument is so very feeble and inconclusive it is hardly worth a dignified reply.
6. Who probably was the author?
Ans. The book itself does not say, only we know that every Old Testament book was written by some prophet. The probable author of the whole book was Samuel, who lived to anoint David as king.
7. The scene of the story?
Ans. There are two scenes, the Land of Moab and Bethlehem of Judah.
8. What the purpose of the book?
Ans. On the face of it the body of the book is to give a picture of domestic life in the period of the judges, and to show how faith and piety are rewarded even in this life and to trace the line of the coming Messiah.
9. What the literary characteristics of the book?
Ans. It is a true story of domestic life, both historical and biographical. The principal personages in the story were the ancestors of David, showing the Moabitish link not only in David’s genealogy but in the genealogy of our Lord. On account of this relation to the fields it is sometimes called a pastoral and is certainly a gem of literature.
10. Analyze the story.
Ans. This story is dramatic and consists of three acts and several scenes, thus:
ACT I At Bethlehem.
Scene 1 A Happy Family
Scene 2 A Sore Famine
Scene 3 A Fortunate Transition
ACT II In Moab
Scene 1 Arrival and Settlement
Scene 2 Marriage and death of sons
Scene 3 Departure for Judah
ACT III At Bethlehem Again
Scene 1 Visit of all Bethlehem to Naomi
Scene 2 Gleaning in the Field
Scene 3 Naomi the Matchmaker
Scene 4 Ruth and Boaz at the Threshing-floor
Scene 5 A Court in the Gate
Scene 6 A Man-Child is Born
EPILOGUE: The Messianic Line.
11. What the more important contrasts of the story?
Ans. (1) With wars and deeds of violence to which the book of Judges is mostly given. A writer has said, “Blessed is the nation which has no history,” because history mostly is made of wars and commotions. One would get from the repetition of the bloody wars in the book of Judges that the whole life of the nation was violent, but this book on domestic life shows us the contrast in the home with the exceptional phases of national strife.
(2) The second contrast is between Ruth and Orpah, the two daughters-in-law of Naomi, both of whom have the opportunity to become incorporated with God’s people and remain in connection with them, but Orpah when put to the test returns to her own people and their worship of idols. Ruth, through faith, clings to Jehovah and his worship and becomes the ancestress of the Messiah.
(3) The third contrast is between Boaz and the other kinsman mentioned, who stood nearer in blood ties to Naomi than Boaz did. The one for fear of endangering his own inheritance surrendered the privilege of the kinsman, the other availed himself of the surrendered privilege and becomes known throughout the world as the ancestor of the Messiah.
12. What are the special lessons of this book?
Ans. (1) The lesson on the levirate marriage, that is where a man after marriage dies without children the closest male kin under the Mosaic law takes the widow as his wife with the view to raise up seed in the name of the dead husband and who inherited his part of the land.
(2) The second lesson is the messianic picture. All through the history of Israel is an ever increasing prophetic light pointing to the coming of Christ and especially showing that among the ancestors of Christ were Gentile women, as Rahab the harlot and Ruth the Moabitess.
(3) The third lesson is to note how famine and pestilence cause shifting of population. It was a famine that took Abraham to Egypt and the whole family of Jacob.
(4) The fourth special lesson is the exquisite gem of Ruth’s reply to Naomi. It is poetic, pathetic, manifesting a high order of faith and steadfastness. I will give it in its poetic form: Insist not on me forsaking thee, To return from following after thee; For whither thou goest, I will go, And wheresoever thou lodgest, I will lodge, Thy people is my people, And thy God my God. Wheresoever thou diest, I will die And there will I be buried. So may Jehovah do to me, And still more, If aught but death part me and thee.
(5) The fifth special lesson is the significance of names. “Elimelech” means, God is King, “Naomi” means, God is sweetness; and these names were bestowed as expressions of faith of their parents. You will see in the book that Naomi refers to the meaning of her name, on her return from Moab, when she says, “Call me no more Naomi, meaning sweetness, but Marah, meaning bitterness.” meaning the opposite of sweetness, which shows how pessimistic she had become; that instead of God being sweet to her he had become bitterness to her. It is like the pessimistic passage in the book of Job in the culmination of his affliction and in one of the Psalms.
13. What the probable bearing of this story on David’s exile in Moab as described in 1Sa 22:3-4 ?
Ans. David’s ancestors on one side were Moabites and this may account for his carrying his father and mother to Moab for a time during his outlaw life.
SPECIAL QUESTIONS FOR RESEARCH
1. Point out an oath in this book.
2. Point out a benediction.
3. Point out at least three names of God in this book.
4. Mention at least three texts from which good sermons could be preached.
5. Where do you find the Mosaic law allowing the privileges of gleaning after reapers in the harvest fields?
6. In Rth 2:12 , Boaz says to Ruth, “Jehovah recompense thy work, and a full reward be given thee of Jehovah, the God of Israel, under whose wings thou art come to take refuge.” Cite a passage in the Psalms about sheltering under the wings of God, and our Lord’s reference in Mat 23 to sheltering under wings, and the hymn of which this appears as a part: All my trust on Thee is stayed, All my help from Thee I bring; Cover my defenseless head With the shadow of Thy wing.
7. Was the marriage of the Jew and Moabite lawful? Compare Deuteronomy and Nehemiah and then answer.
8. Cite a passage from Thomson’s Land and the Book, p. 647, bearing on Rth 2:17 .
9. In Rth 1:22 , Naomi says, “I went out full and Jehovah hath brought me home again empty”; did she refer to property or husband and sons?
10. See Josephus on the handing over of the shoe.
11. Read carefully Rth 4:3-5 , and answer whether Naomi still possessed landed property. If she sold this property allowing the nearest kinsman the option of purchase, would the sale be absolute or would it be merely a lease until the Year of Jubilee?
12. Meaning of Ephrathite?
I
GENERAL INTRODUCTION HEBREW POETRY
As we are to deal with poetry, in the main, in the following discussions, it becomes necessary that we should here give attention briefly to some important matters relating to the poetry of the Bible. This is essential as the principles of interpretation are so different from the principles of the interpretation of prose.
Hebrew poetry, rich and multifarious as it is, appears to be only a remnant of a still wider and fuller sphere of Semitic literature. There are references to this poetic literature in several places in the Old Testament, viz: Jos 10:13 ; 2Sa 1:18 , where it is expressly said that they were written in the book of Jashar which was most probably a collection of national songs written at various times.
The character of the poetry of the Hebrews is both deeply truthful and earnestly religious. Much of the contents of the Scriptures has all the ordinary characteristics of poetry. Though prosaic in form, it rises, by force of the noble sentiment which it enunciates and the striking imagery with which these sentiments are adorned, into the sphere of real poetry. Example, Rth 1:16-17 :
“And Ruth said, Entreat me not to leave thee, and to return from following after thee; for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge; thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God; where thou diest, will I die, and there will I be buried; Jehovah do so to me, and more also, if aught but death part thee and me.” This passage arranged in poetic form would appear as follows: Entreat me not to leave thee, And to return from following thee; For whither thou goest I will go, And where thou lodgest I will lodge; Thy people shall be my people, And thy God shall be my God; Where thou diest I will die, And there will I be buried; Jehovah do so to me and more also, If aught but death part thee and me.
We find the first poetry in our Bible in Gen 4:23-24 , the Song of Lamech, a little elegiac poem (See the American Standard Version), reciting a lamentation about a domestic tragedy, thus: And Lamech said unto his wives: Adah and Zillah, hear my voice; Ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech: For I have slain a man for wounding me, And a young man for bruising me: If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, Truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold.
For an interpretation of this passage, see Carroll’s Interpretation, Vol. 1.
We now note all poetry found in the Pentateuch, as follows:
Gen 4:23 , the Song of Lamech, already referred to;
Gen 9:25-27 , a little poem reciting Noah’s curse and blessing on his sons;
Gen 25:23 , a single verse, forecasting the fortunes of Jacob and Esau;
Gen 27:27-29 , a beautiful gem, reciting Isaac’s blessing on Jacob;
Gen 27:39-40 , another gem recording Isaac’s blessing on Esau;
Gen 49:2-27 , Jacob’s blessings on his sons;
Exo 15:1-18 , Moses’ song of triumph over Pharaoh;
Num 6:24-26 , the high priest’s benediction;
Num 21:14-15 , a war song of Amon;
Num 21:17-18 , a song at the well of Be-er;
Num 21:27-30 , a song of victory over “Sihon, king of the Amorites”;
Num 23:7-10 , Balaam’s first prophecy;
Num 23:18-24 , Balaam’s second prophecy;
Num 24:3-9 , Balaam’s third prophecy;
Num 24:15-24 , Balaam’s fourth prophecy;
Deu 32:1-43 , Moses’ song;
Deu 33:2-29 , Moses’ blessing on Israel.
The poetry found in the historical books (Josh.-Esther) is as follows:
Jos 10:12-13 , Joshua’s little song of victory;
Jdg 5:1-31 , Deborah’s song;
Jdg 14:14 , Samson’s riddle;
Jdg 14:18 , Samson’s proverb;
Jdg 15:16 , Samson’s song of the jawbone;
1Sa 2:1-10 , Hannah’s song of exultation;
1Sa 21:11 , the song of the women about Saul and David;
2Sa 1:19-21 , David’s lamentation over Saul and Jonathan;
2Sa 3:33-34 , David’s lamentation over Abner;
2Sa 22:2-51 , David’s song of triumph over his enemies;
2Sa 23:1-7 , David’s last words;
1Ch 16:8-36 , David’s song of thanksgiving.
A great deal of the writings of the prophets is highly poetic, and many quotations from them in the New Testament are given in poetic form in the American Standard Version, but only a few passages appear in poetic form in the books of the Old Testament. These are as follows:
Isa 38:9-20 , Hezekiah’s song;
Lamentations;
Jon 2:2-9 , Jonah’s prayer;
Hab 3:1-19 , the prayer of Habakkuk.
Besides these passages, the great bulk of Hebrew poetry found in the Old Testament is in the poetical books Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Solomon practically all of which is poetical in form, except Ecclesiastes which is poetic prose. These books constitute the basis of our present study.
There is quite a lot of poetry in the New Testament, consisting of original poems and many quotations from the Old Testament and some other writings, for the citations of which I refer the reader to the American Standard Version of the New Testament. These passages are in poetic form wherever they occur. This will give the reader some idea of the mass of poetical literature found in our Bible and it should impress him with the importance of understanding the principles by which it may be rightly interpreted.
On the distinguishing characteristics of Hebrew poetry, I commend to the reader most heartily Dr. John R. Sampey’s Syllabus of the Old Testament. Dr. Sampey was a great Hebrew scholar and his discussion on any point touching the Hebrew language must be considered authoritative. Since there is no better statement on these matters to be found anywhere, I give you in the following paragraphs a brief summary of his discussion on the forms and kinds of Hebrew poetry, noting especially what he says about parallelism, the grouping of lines, the stanza, the meter, and the kinds of Hebrew poetry. The general characteristics of Hebrew poetry are: (1) verbal rhythm, (2) correspondence of words, (3) inversion, (4) archaic expression and (5) parallelism.
Recent research goes to show that the Hebrew poets had some regard for the number of accented syllables in a line. They were guided by accentual beats rather than by the number of words or syllables. The most common form called for three accents to each line. The difficulty in getting an appreciation of the verbal rhythm in Hebrew lies in the fact that there is almost a complete loss of the true pronunciation of the Hebrew.
By correspondence of words is meant that the words in one verge, or member; answer to the words in another, the sense in the one echoing the sense in the other, the form corresponding with form and word with word. Some examples, as follows: Why art thou cast down, O my soul? And why art thou disquieted within me? Psa 43:5 He turneth rivers into a wilderness, And watersprings into a thirsty ground. Psa 107:33 The memory of the righteous is blessed; But the name of the wicked shall rot. Pro 10:7
By inversion is meant to invert the grammatical order or parts in a sentence for the purpose of emphasis or for adjustment. Though inversion holds a distinguished place in the structure of Hebrew poetry, it is only a modified inversion that prevails and by no means does it compare favorably with that of the Greeks and Romans in boldness, decision, and prevalence. Examples: In thoughts from the visions of the night, When deep sleep falleth on men. Job 4:13 Unto me men gave ear, and waited, And kept silence for my counsel. Job 29:21 And they made his grave with the wicked, And with a rich man in his death; Although he had done no violence, Neither was any deceit in his mouth. Isa 53:9
The archaical character of Hebrew poetry refers to the antiquity of the poetical elements as found in the Hebrew poetry, to the license, poetic hue and coloring, which cannot be confounded with simple, low, and unrhythmical diction of prose. Two elements, a poetical temperament and a poetical history, which are necessary to the development of a poetic diction, the Hebrews had as perhaps few people have ever possessed. Theirs was eminently a poetic temperament; their earliest history was heroic while the loftiest of all truths circulated in their souls and glowed on their lips. Hence their language, in its earliest stages, is surpassingly poetic, striking examples of which may be found in Genesis and Job.
By parallelism in Hebrew poetry is meant that one line corresponds in thought to another line. The three most common varieties of parallelism are: (1) synonymous, (2) antithetic, (3) synthetic. We will now define and illustrate each variety, thus:
(1) By synonymous parallelism is meant that in which a second line simply repeats in slightly altered phraseology the thought of the first line. Examples: He that sitteth in the heavens will laugh: The Lord will have them in derision.
Psa 2:4 And these lay wait for their own blood; They lurk privily for their own lives. Pro 1:18
Is it any pleasure to the Almighty, that thou art righteous? Or is it gain to him that thou makest thy ways perfect?
Job 22:3 For thou hast taken pledges of thy brother for naught, And stripped the naked for their clothing. Job 22:6 But as for the mighty man, he had the earth; And the honorable man, he dwelt in it. Job 22:8 Therefore snares are round about thee, And sudden fear troubleth thee. Job 22:10
(2) By antithetic parallelism is meant that in which the second line is in contrast with the first. Examples: A wise son maketh a glad father; But a foolish son is the heaviness of his mother; Pro 10:1 He that gathereth in summer is a wise son; But he that sleepeth in harvest is a son that causeth shame; Pro 10:5 The memory of the righteous is blessed; But the name of the wicked shall rot. Pro 10:7
Most of the 376 couplets in Pro 10:1-22:16 are antithetic.
(3) By synthetic parallelism is meant that in which the second line supplements the first, both together giving a complete thought. Examples: My son, if sinners entice thee, Consent thou not. Pro 1:10 Withhold not good from them to whom it is due, When it is in the power of thy hand to do it. Pro 3:27 Say not unto thy neighbor. Go, and come again, And to-morrow I will give: When thou hast it by thee. Pro 3:28 Devise not evil against thy neighbor; Seeing he dwelleth securely by thee. Pro 3:29 Strive not with a man without cause, If he hath done thee no harm. Pro 3:30
The less common varieties of parallelism found in Hebrew poetry are: (1) climactic, (2) introverted, and (3) emblematic. These are defined and illustrated as follows:
(1) In the climactic parallelism the second line takes up words from the first and completes them. Example: Ascribe unto Jehovah, O ye sons of the mighty, Ascribe unto Jehovah glory and strength. Psa 28:1 The rulers ceased in Israel, they ceased, Until that I Deborah arose, That I arose a mother in Israel. Jdg 5:7
(2) In the introverted parallelism the first line corresponds with the fourth, and the second with the third. Example: My son, if thy heart be wise, My heart will be glad, even mine; Yea, my heart will rejoice, When thy lips speak right things. Pro 23:15
3) In the emblematic parallelism the second line brings forward something similar to the first, but in a higher realm. Take away the dross from the silver, And there cometh forth a vessel for the refiner; Take away the wicked from before the king, And his throne shall be established in righteousness. Pro 25:4 A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in network of silver. As an ear-ring of gold and an ornament of fine gold, So is a wise reprover upon an obedient ear. As the cold snow is the time of harvest, So is a faithful messenger to them that send him; For he refresheth the soul of his masters. Pro 25:11-13 As clouds and wind without rain, So is he that boasteth himself of his gifts falsely. Pro 25:14 Confidence in an unfaithful man in time of trouble Is like a broken tooth, and a foot out of joint. Pro 25:19 As one that taketh off a garment in cold weather, and as vinegar upon soda, So is he that singeth songs to a heavy heart. Pro 25:20 For lack of wood the fire goeth out; And where there is no whisperer, contention ceaseth. As coals are to hot embers, and wood to fire, So is a contentious man to inflame strife. Pro 26:20-21
The lines in Hebrew poetry are grouped as follows:
(1) Monostichs (Psa 16:1 ; Psa 18:1 );
(2) Distichs (Psa 34:1 ; Pro 13:20 ) ;
(3) Tristichs (Psa 2:2 ; Psa 3:7 );
(4) Tetrastichs (Gen 49:7 ; Psa 55:21 ; Pro 23:15 f);
(5) Pentastichs (Pro 25:6 f);
(6) Hexastichs (Gen 48:15 f);
(7) Heptastichs(Pro 23:6-8 );
(8) Octostichs (Pro 30:7-9 ),
A stanza in Hebrew poetry consists of a group of lines or verses upon the same subject or developing the same thought. There are four kinds of these stanzas, viz: the couplet, or a group of two lines; the tristich, or a group of three lines; the tetrastich, or a group of four lines; and the hexastich, or a group of six lines. In Psa 119 we have the strophe consisting of eight verses, each verse in this strophe beginning with the same letter.
There are four kinds of Hebrew poetry, viz: (1) lyric, (2) gnomic, (3) dramatic, (4) elegiac. These are defined and illustrated thus:
(1) Lyric is derived from the word, “lyre,” a musical instrument to accompany singing. There are many snatches of song in the historical books from Genesis to Esther. The Psalms are an imperishable collection of religious lyrics.
(2) By “gnomic” is meant proverbial. Proverbs, part of Ecclesiastes, and many detached aphorisms in other books of the Old Testament are examples.
(3) By “dramatic” is meant that form of literature that gives idealized representations of human experience. Job is a splendid example of this kind of literature.
(4) By “elegiac” is meant that form of poetry which partakes of the nature of the elegy, or lamentation. Lamentations is a fine example of this kind of poetry. There are other dirges in the historical books and in the prophets. 2Sa 1:19-27 and Amo 5:1-3 are examples. Much of Isaiah’s writing is poetic in spirit and some of it in form. So of the early prophetic writers, especially the early prophets. Now, according to this classification of Hebrew poetry, it should be an easy and profitable work for the reader to classify all the poetry of the Bible. This can be readily done with the American Standard Revised Version in hand. All the poetry of the Bible is written in poetic form in this version, and every student of the Bible should have it.
QUESTIONS
1. What can you say, in general, of the Hebrew poetry as we have it in the Bible?
2. What of the character of the poetry of the Hebrews?
3. Where do we find the first poetry in our Bible and what ia the nature of this little poem?
4. Locate all the poetry found in the Pentateuch.
5. Locate all the poetry found in the historical books (Josh.; Esther).
6. Locate the poetic passages in the prophets.
7. Where do we find the great bulk of Hebrew poetry in the Bible?
8. What of the poetry of the New Testament and how may it be located?
9. What book commended by the author on the forms and kinds of Hebrew poetry?
10. What the general characteristics of Hebrew poetry?
11. What is meant by rhythm and what renders an appreciation of verbal rhythm in the Hebrew now so difficult?
12. What is meant by correspondence of words? Illustrate.
13. What is meant by inversion? Illustrate.
14. What is meant by the archaical character of Hebrew poetry?
15. What is meant by parallelism and what the three most common varieties? Define and illustrate each.
16. What the less common varieties of parallelism? Define and illustrate each.
17. How are the lines in Hebrew poetry grouped? Give example of each.
18. What is a stanza in Hebrew poetry? How many and what kinds are found?
19. How many kinds of Hebrew poetry? Name, define, and illustrate each.
20. What suggestion by the author relative to classifying all the poetry of the Bible?
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
Rth 3:1 Then Naomi her mother in law said unto her, My daughter, shall I not seek rest for thee, that it may be well with thee?
Ver. 1. Shall I not seek rest for thee? ] There is in most a propension to the nuptial conjunction. Requirit vir costam suam, requirit faemina sedem suam, say the Rabbis. The man misseth his rib; the woman would be in her old place again, under the man’s arm or wing. Non est requies mulieri donec nupserit, saith Aben Ezra. The unmarried life is trouble and disquietment. Hence marriage is called Portus iuventutis, the haven of young folk, who are usually tossed by lustful lingerings, as a ship is with waves; hence the Greeks call young men of to burn, and of to boil. Hence they are called upon to put away evil from their flesh, Ecc 11:10 that is, to mortify fleshly lusts: and admonished by the apostle, that “it is better for them to marry than to burn.” 1Co 7:9 Marriage being God’s medicine, which, if rightly applied, will cool and heal unruly lusts that war against the soul.
That it may be well with thee.
“ , .”
I have changed a worse estate for a better. It was as it proved; for of some it may be said as it was of Sulla, that they had been happy, if they had never married: but this is from man’s corrupt heart, that like a toad, turneth all it taketh into rank poison. “It is not good for man to be alone.” Indeed, those that will marry shall be sure of “trouble,” and that “in the flesh” too: 1Co 7:28 but as it is said of Egypt, that as no country hath more venemous creatures, none more antidotes; so marriage hath many troubles, but with it many helps against trouble.
“Coniugium humanae divina Academia vitae.”
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Chapter 3
Then Naomi her mother in law said unto her, My daughter, shall I not seek rest for thee, that it may be well with thee? And now is not Boaz of our family, with whose maidens you have been working? Behold, he winnows the barley tonight in the threshingfloor. So wash yourself, put on your perfume, and your beautiful gown, and get down to the threshingfloor: but don’t let them see you, until they have finished eating and drinking. And it shall be when he lies down to sleep, that you mark carefully where he’s lying, and you go in, and uncover his feet, and lay down there; and he will tell you what you’re to do. And she said unto her, All that you say to me I will do. So she went down to the floor, and she did according to all that her mother in law had instructed her. And when Boaz had eaten and drunk, his heart was merry, and he went to lie down at the end of the heap of corn: she came very quietly, and uncovered his feet, and laid down. Now about midnight, he woke up, and was afraid; as he was rolling over he became aware of the fact that a woman was lying there at his feet. And he said, Who are you? And she answered, I am Ruth your handmaid: spread therefore thy blanket or covering over thine handmaid; for thou art a near kinsman ( Rth 3:1-9 ).
Now under the law because God sought to preserve families, if a man married a wife, and died before they had any children, then it was his brother’s obligation to take that woman as his wife, so that the first son that was born would be named after the dead brother, so that the family’s name would continue in Israel.
In the book of Genesis, about the thirty-eighth chapter or so, we find that Judah had a son who took a gal as his wife, and he died without having any children. Tamar was the name of the wife. So the second son took her and he died without having any children. Judah was afraid to give the third son. So he said, “Well, he’s too young to get married. Wait for him.” Then long after the guy was old enough to get married, Judah hadn’t really come through with the third son. So Tamar took things into her own hands. But it’s a case where this law was being enacted, and Judah was in the wrong for withholding this son. It was just the law to keep the family name alive.
Now because Elimelech had died, and his two sons had died, the family name was about to die out. So she was actually asking Boaz to take the part of the goel, the kinsman redeemer, and to have a son by her that could be named after the family of Elimelech so that that name would not die as a family in Israel. Actually, what she was asking, “Cover me with this covering of the family, because you are a goel, you are the kinsman redeemer.”
And he said to Ruth, Blessed be thou of the Lord, my daughter: for you have showed more kindness at the latter end than at the beginning, inasmuch as you followed not the young men, whether they were poor or rich ( Rth 3:10 ).
Now Boaz was probably an older man. He was very flattered that this younger girl, rather than following after these young guys would ask him to fulfill this kinsman relationship, this goel kinsman redeemer relationship. Again notice his, “Blessed be thou of the Lord,” he shows all the way through good, godly characteristics.
And he said,
Now my daughter, fear not; for I will do unto you all that you require: for all the city of my people know that you are a virtuous woman ( Rth 3:11 ).
Ruth’s reputation had gotten around. She was a virtuous girl. Her taking care of her mother-in-law, her whole attitude of really worshiping and serving God, word had gotten around concerning Ruth, “She’s a virtuous girl.” He said, “I will do all that the law requires and what you’re requiring. Don’t be afraid, I’m gonna do it.
But it is true that I am a near kinsman: [“I’m a close family relative.”] however there is a kinsman that is closer than I am. Now you tarry tonight, and in the morning, [if he will not perform unto thee or,] if he will perform to you the part of a kinsman, fine; let him perform unto thee: but if he will not do the part of a kinsman to thee, then will I do the part of a kinsman to thee, as the Lord liveth: lie down until morning ( Rth 3:12-13 ).
Now not always would they fulfill this part. Sometimes they didn’t like the gal. Their brother married sort of-all right, you. And he died and he didn’t have any children, and you say, “Hey no way I don’t want her.”
So you take off your shoe and hand it to her like “Hey you’re a dirty shoe as far as I’m concerned.” You’re giving up your right. “I don’t want to marry you. I don’t want to have anything to do with you.” She then would spit in your face, and you would be called “The man from whom the shoe was loosed in Israel.” You were considered sort of a dirty dog kind of a guy because you didn’t fulfill the family obligations, no family loyalty. So that was the little ritual and that oftentimes happened. The fellow didn’t want to carry through. “I don’t want to marry her. I don’t want the obligations of her, not interested.” So he’d take off his shoe and hand it to her.
So he said, “Ruth, don’t worry I will do it.” But the hitch is there’s another fellow who is actually closer of kin and he has the right first to be the kinsman. “If he is, fine, but if he doesn’t then I will be the kinsman unto thee. I will raise up a child, and I will take you as my wife, and I will fulfill this obligation. So don’t worry one way or the other it’s gonna be taken care of.”
So he said, “Lie down until morning.”
And so she lay at his feet until morning: and she rose up before any one could know each other. [In other words it was still so dark you couldn’t recognize anybody.] And he said, Don’t let it be known that a woman was on the threshingfloor tonight. And so he said, Bring me the veil that you had on you, and she held it. And when she held it, he measured out six measures of barley, and laid it on her: and she went into the city. And when she came to her mother in law, [It was still dark, and so, Naomi said, “Who is it?”] and she said, Who art thou, my daughter? And so Ruth told her all that Boaz had said and done. And she said, These six measures of barley he gave to me; for he said, Don’t go empty to your mother in law. Then Naomi said, [She’s a wise old gal, she’s been around. She said,] Sit still, my daughter, until you know how the matter will fall: for this man will not rest, until he’s gotten everything taken care of ( Rth 3:14-18 ). “
Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary
Necessarily, gleaning as a means of livelihood can last only through harvest time. Consequently, Naomi was anxious about the future, especially Ruth’s future.
As the outcome of this anxiety we have the story of her advice to interest Boaz more fully and to bring about a marriage between him and Ruth. Necessarily, the expedient to which she resorted must be judged, as we have so constantly to remember, in the light of her own age. Notwithstanding this, however, it can hardly be characterized as other than doubtful, and on the basis of faith it is difficult to justify it. Yet here again Naomi is seen as acting as the result of an error of judgment rather .than in willful disobedience, and fie overruling love of God moved on to beneficent issue.
One element, and that perhaps the strongest which this venture reveals, is the confidence which Naomi evidently had in Boaz. In order to provide for the future, her appeal should have been made to one nearer of kin, but the whole attitude of Boaz toward Ruth had inspired such confidence in him that it was through him she hoped for succor. On the whole the story of her venture is rather to the credit of Boaz than to that of Naomi and Ruth.
Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible
the Part of a Kinsman
Rth 3:1-18
According to the old Hebrew law, Ruth was already married to Boaz, on the supposition that he was next of kin. Naomi apparently had no knowledge of a nearer kinsman than he. Compare Rth 2:20, R.V., 3:12; Deu 25:5-10. There was therefore no immodesty in Naomis proposals, though they are foreign to our modern practice. But clearly Boaz acted with admirable self-restraint. His earnest concern was for the good name of the young girl who had thrown herself on his protection, Rth 2:11; Rth 2:14. Next to Gods grace, the one thought which helps us in the hour of testing is to put the interests of another before our own. Love to our neighbor is ultimately love to ourselves.
What confidence these two helpless women reposed in Boaz! The words with which Naomi closed their conversation suggest a character of absolute reliableness. His word was his bond. He was prompt, decisive and instant in carrying out any measure to which he felt himself pledged. Dilatoriness will wear out the heart of those who trust us. Let us finish promptly what we undertake! Diligent in business, fervent in spirit! Remember that when you trust Christ with anything, He also will not rest till He has finished it.
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
CHAPTER 3 At the Feet of Boaz
1. Naomi instructs Ruth (Rth 3:1-5)
2. At his feet (Rth 3:6-7)
3. The discovery (Rth 3:8-13)
4. The six measures of barley (Rth 3:14-17)
5. He will not rest until he have finished the thing (Rth 3:18)
What follows in the realization of redemption must be connected with Leviticus 25, the law concerning the redemption of an inheritance and the other law about the marriage of a brother-in-law as given in Deu 25:5-12. See the annotations on that passage. Naomi gives instructions to Ruth which are based upon that law. But notice it is the question of the rest. My daughter, shall not I seek rest for thee, that it may be well with thee? She then is seen resting at his feet. Blessed truth indeed which even Naomi realizes, rest can only be found at the feet of the redeemer. This truth is known to all His beloved people. He promises rest and He giveth rest. Like Mary it is the good part for us to be at His feet.
But what is Boazs occupation when Ruth seeks him to claim her full blessing? Behold he winnoweth barley tonight in the threshing floor. The winnowing is a sifting process by which the wheat is separated from the chaff. Read Mat 3:12. The threshing floor is Israel. The dark night of tribulation is coming for them, when the mighty One will do the work of separating among His people. His fan is in His hand. In that coming night the believing remnant will seek, like Ruth, the place at His feet and claim Him as their own redeemer. Critics and unbelievers have often sneered at this scene and suggested evil motives. They do the same with other portions of the Word of God. Only an evil mind can read evil into this beautiful scene. It was at midnight when Boaz became conscious of her presence and asked, Who art thou? She answered, I am Ruth. She owns all she is and prays that he may cover her, for thou art a redeemer. Notice the steps. His question–her answer and prayer because she believed in him as the kinsman redeemer.
She tarried there during the night. And she lay at his feet till the morning. Then she left not empty handed!
Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)
Chapter 15
Ruth Comes To Boaz
Rth 3:1-18
The Word of God is a declaration of redemption and grace in Christ. Not only does the Bible declare and explain Gods great purpose and mighty operations of grace, it gives us numerous types, pictures, and examples of it to which believers can relate.
David And Mephibosheth (2Sa 9:1-13)
Ezekiels Deserted Infant (Eze 16:1-8)
The Valley Of Dry Bones (Eze 37:1-14)
Hosea And Gomer (Hosea 1-3)
Lazarus Resurrection (Joh 11:1-46)
Zachaeus Conversion (Luk 19:1-10)
The Prodigal Son (Luk 15:11-24)
The Good Samaritan (Luk 10:23-37)
Onesimus Conversion (Phm 1:1)
Certainly, one of the most detailed and most beautifully instructive pictures of redemption and grace is the love story of Boaz and Ruth. Everyone likes a love story with a happy ending. The story begins with the declaration revealed in Elimelechs name – My God is King! This story has two great themes, one hidden, the other revealed. The hidden theme is divine providence. The revealed theme is redemption (The Kinsman Redeemer). This story of redemption and grace is a story about a great fall. Naomi went out full and came back empty (Rth 1:19-21). Her circumstances give a sad, sad portrait of the sin and fall of all the human race in our father Adam (Rom 5:12). Ruth and Naomi came to Bethlehem at the beginning of the barley harvest, which was (as we have seen) a picture of this present gospel age. Ruth gleaned in the field of Boaz, portraying the way sinners find bread for their souls in the Word of God, through the ministry of the Word in Gods house, the church.
Boaz took special notice of Ruth, just as the Lord Jesus Christ took special notice of chosen sinners before the world began. As Boaz commanded his young men not to touch Ruth, so Christ has command all things to touch not his chosen. Gods elect are under his special protection (Hos 2:18; Rom 8:28). As Boaz provided handfuls on purpose, specifically for Ruth, so the Lord Jesus rules and commands all things specifically for his chosen (Joh 17:2). Boaz was Ruths near kinsman, the one who had the right to redeem. As such, he portrays our great, incarnate God and Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ (Heb 2:9-18).
Here is a delightful point in this story of love, grace and redemption which is often overlooked. Boaz knew what his intentions were toward Ruth, just as Christ knew his intentions of love toward his people from eternity. He knew what he could and would do for Ruth, just as the Son of God knew what he could and would do for his church before the world began (Eph 1:3-7; Eph 5:25-27; 2Ti 1:9). Naomi also knew what Boaz could do if he would. The only one in the dark was Ruth; but she had seen Boaz. He had gotten her attention.
In this third chapter, we see Ruth coming to Boaz. Here we have a beautiful, instructive picture of the way sinners come to Christ to obtain mercy and grace. Yet, the story is as much for the benefit of those who have long been wed to Christ as it is for those who have just begun to seek him. All who follow Ruths example shall find everlasting blessedness for their souls in Christ. As ye have received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him.
NAOMIS WISE COUNSEL (Rth 3:1-4)
In Rth 3:1-4, Naomi, Ruths mother-in-law, typically represents the church of God. The motherly characteristics of Gods church are set before us throughout the Scriptures. She is a mother to all who are born of God. (Isaiah 49). Like a good mother, Naomi gave wise and godly counsel to Ruth. Do not fail to see that her counsel was indeed both wise, godly counsel. It was exactly according to the Word of God. It was designed of God to be a picture of grace.
“Then Naomi her mother in law said unto her, My daughter, shall I not seek rest for thee, that it may be well with thee? And now is not Boaz of our kindred, with whose maidens thou wast? Behold, he winnoweth barley tonight in the threshingfloor. Wash thy self therefore, and anoint thee, and put thy raiment upon thee, and get thee down to the floor: but make not thyself known unto the man, until he shall have done eating and drinking. And it shall be, when he lieth down, that thou shalt mark the place where he shall lie, and thou shalt go in, and uncover his feet, and lay thee down; and he will tell thee what thou shalt do.”
Naomi sought Ruths welfare, just as Gods church in this world seeks the welfare of chosen sinners (Rth 3:1). She knew their Kinsman-Redeemer and had great confidence in him (Rth 3:2; Rth 3:18). Naomi knew who Boaz was, where he was, and what he was able to do. These are the things she told Ruth. That is good witnessing! A good witness simply tells from personal experience and the testimony of Holy Scripture, who Christ is, where he is to be found, and what he is able to do for needy sinners.
Next, Naomi told Ruth exactly what she must do (Rth 3:3-4). If Ruth would be wed to Boaz, that was altogether up to Boaz; but she must let him know that she was interested. She must use every means at her disposal to obtain his favor. She must seek him. Yet, she must seek him as one unworthy of his notice, as one totally dependent upon him. Naomi told Ruth to wash herself, go down to the threshing floor, mark the place where Boaz would lie, and lay herself at his feet. Those who seek the Lord must seek him earnestly, with all their hearts (Jer 29:11-13). As Ruth washed herself, so we must come to Christ in repentance, separating ourselves unto him. If we would find Christ, we must put ourselves in the place where he is to be found, in the house of God (the public assembly of his saints), under the preaching of the gospel (Mat 18:20; 1Co 1:21).
Marking the place where he shall lie, marking the promises of God in the gospel to believing sinners, let us come to Christ, putting God in remembrance of them, as he commands us to do (Isa 43:25-26). Like Ruth, we must lay ourselves down at the feet of our great Boaz, if we would obtain that mercy and grace which only he can give. This is the place of humility, worship, reverence, faith, and hope; and this is the place of blessing (Luk 7:36-50; Luk 10:38-42). Just wait there! – Make not thyself known unto the man. He will tell thee what thou shalt do!
RUTHS CHILDLIKE OBEDIENCE (Rth 3:5-7).
“And she said unto her, All that thou sayest unto me I will do. And she went down unto the floor, and did according to all that her mother in law bade her. And when Boaz had eaten and drunk, and his heart was merry, he went to lie down at the end of the heap of corn: and she came softly, and uncovered his feet, and laid her down.”
Remember, Ruth was a grown woman. She had already been married once. She was probably between 20-30 years old. Yet, she responded to godly instruction like a little child. All that thou sayest unto me, I will do! She did not know Boaz or the law of God, but Naomi did; so she listened to Naomi. She wanted Boaz. So she came to Boaz, softly. She ventured everything on his goodness. Imagine what could have happened to her. She came to him in the darkest hour of the night, at midnight.
RUTHS HUMBLE, BUT BOLD REQUEST (Rth 3:8-9).
“And it came to pass at midnight, that the man was afraid, and turned himself: and, behold, a woman lay at his feet. And he said, Who art thou? And she answered, I am Ruth thine handmaid: spread therefore thy skirt over thine handmaid; for thou art a near kinsman.”
Ruth had before offered a request to Boaz – I pray you, let me glean (Rth 2:7). Here she offers herself. She made a plain confession of herself, her need, and her utter dependence upon him. She said, I am Ruth, a stranger, without claim or merit before you. I am Thy Handmaid, your servant, at your disposal.
Then, Ruth made a humble request. She said, Spread thy skirt over thine handmaid. That is to say, take me to be yours. This was a private, personal matter, between Ruth and Boaz alone. Not even Naomi could be involved in this. Faith in Christ is an intimate, personal thing.
Having spread herself, her condition, and her needs before Boaz, Ruth then made one claim upon him She said, Thou art a near kinsman. With that claim, she was saying, You have the right and the power to redeem me. With the claim, came the plea of her soul – Will you redeem me? This is the way sinners in need of mercy come to the Savior; and all who come to him obtain the mercy they seek (Mat 8:2-3).
BOAZS GRACIOUS PROMISE (Rth 3:10-13).
“And he said, Blessed be thou of the LORD, my daughter: for thou hast showed more kindness in the latter end than at the beginning, inasmuch as thou followedst not young men, whether poor or rich. And now, my daughter, fear not; I will do to thee all that thou requirest: for all the city of my people doth know that thou art a virtuous woman. And now it is true that I am thy near kinsman: howbeit there is a kinsman nearer than I. Tarry this night, and it shall be in the morning, that if he will perform unto thee the part of a kinsman, well; let him do the kinsman’s part: but if he will not do the part of a kinsman to thee, then will I do the part of a kinsman to thee, as the LORD liveth: lie down until the morning.”
There was no reluctance at all on Boazs part to perform the part of a kinsman. He commended the wisdom of Ruths choice. He promised to do all that she wanted. And he declares her to be a virtuous woman. She was not such by nature. She was by nature exactly the same as her sister-in-law, Orpah, a Moabite. But grace had wrought a wonderful change in her. It always does (1Co 6:9-11; 2Co 5:17).
Boaz was a willing redeemer; but something was more important to him than Ruth. Boaz would not act the redeemers part, if he could not do so in a way that honored God. Redemption must honor Gods holy law and righteous character (Rom 3:24-26). Grace is never exercised at the expense of righteousness, justice, and truth (Pro 16:6).
RUTHS CONFIDENCE IN BOAZ (Rth 3:14-18).
“And she lay at his feet until the morning: and she rose up before one could know another. And he said, Let it not be known that a woman came into the floor. Also he said, Bring the veil that thou hast upon thee, and hold it. And when she held it, he measured six measures of barley, and laid it on her: and she went into the city. And when she came to her mother in law, she said, Who art thou, my daughter? And she told her all that the man had done to her. And she said, These six measures of barley gave he me; for he said to me, Go not empty unto thy mother in law. Then said she, Sit still, my daughter, until thou know how the matter will fall: for the man will not be in rest, until he have finished the thing this day.”
Notice the two I wills in this chapter. Ruth said to Naomi, concerning Boaz, I will do all that you say (Rth 3:5). She was willing to follow the instruction of one who knew what was best for her soul. Then, Boaz said to Ruth, I will do all that you say. (Rth 3:11). What a blessing! The Son of God is willing to grant believing sinners everything we need as a matter of free grace, and always does.
There are also two rests in the chapter, two blessed portrayals of true sabbath keeping.. There was a rest for Ruth (Rth 3:1). This is the rest of faith. Sinners coming to Christ cease from their own works and rest in him (Mat 11:28-29). There is also a rest for Boaz (Rth 3:18). The Lord Jesus Christ, once he finished the work of redemption for us, entered into his rest; and his rest is glorious (Heb 4:10; Isa 11:10).
Ruth stayed at Boazs feet all night. Boaz took great care to protect her. And he provided her with all she needed. She had his heart. She got his name. She had his corn. And she had him! When Ruth returned home she told Naomi all about Boaz. And Naomi assured Ruth of Boazs faithfulness (Rth 3:18; Php 1:6; 1Th 5:24).
The Lord Jesus Christ is to his people all that Boaz was to Ruth. He has done for us all that was pictured in Boazs works of redemption for Ruth. We have obtained in him spiritually all that Ruth obtained in Boaz. Let us therefore give ourselves to him, as Ruth gave herself to Boaz, and live altogether for the honor of him who is our kinsman Redeemer (Rom 12:1-2;1Co 6:19-20; Tit 2:10).
Fuente: Discovering Christ In Selected Books of the Bible
shall I not: Rth 1:9, 1Co 7:36, 1Ti 5:8, 1Ti 5:14
may be: Gen 40:14, Deu 4:40, Psa 128:2, Jer 22:15, Jer 22:16
Reciprocal: Gen 2:18 – good Deu 5:29 – that it might Eph 6:3 – General
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Section 3. (Rth 3:1-18; Rth 4:1-22.)
Redemption realized.
All is now to be changed for Ruth; and thus, also, for Naomi. What follows is based upon two laws in Israel: the law as to the redemption of an inheritance (Lev 25:25), and that of raising up a brother’s name on his inheritance (Deu 25:5-12), -things which are here brought together, and which in application to Israel belong clearly together. Heir and inheritance, in their case, need alike to be redeemed; yea, and the name of the dead raised up, which is accomplished for Israel by a true spiritual resurrection, the breath of a new life breathed into them, as in Ezekiel’s vision of dry bones (Eze 37:1-28). In Ruth the story is, indeed, differently told, but it is essentially the same, and here has a tenderness and beauty all its own.
(1) In this section we find Ruth no longer a gleaner. She is putting forth new claims and cherishing high aspirations. And here her mother-in-law is her instructor once more. She has already pointed out Boaz as a kinsman of Elimelech, and one of their redeemers, but for some time this seems to have no practical significance for either of them. Now she is full of a new interest. Ruth must have a resting-place for herself, and to find it she must seek it. Very simply and naturally her mind turns to Boaz: ignorantly, indeed, and yet with a knowledge such as the heart teaches, and which in the end proves right. Ruth is bidden by her to put forth a personal claim upon Boaz, according to the law of Deuteronomy, and this she does, -to find in the first place that she has made an apparent mistake, but which in the end proves none. It is only upon the failure of a nearer kinsman than himself that Boaz can act. Naomi herself has called him one of their redeemers. It must be proved satisfactorily if there is more than one.
The remnant (whom Ruth represents) learns, first of all, from the nation (which is Naomi) certain lessons as to redemption, which personal experience, however, alone can interpret, and get right. The only religion that avails anything is that of experiment: in making which both heart and conscience get searched out, their needs thoroughly explored, and then met. The believing that avails for us is one that shows itself in coming to Him; yet the soul coming may find at first disappointment. The power of the “nearer kinsman” must be thoroughly and practically understood before Christ can show His power.
“Rest” can only come from a Redeemer. Naomi makes no mistake there. When Christ says, Come unto Me, and I will give you rest,” He is declaring Himself this; and it is as such -the only and all-sufficient One -that He will or can give it to us. This we must learn aright. Thank God, He has proved His power to fulfill this word of His, all the centuries down.
Boaz is winnowing barley at night in the threshing-floor. And Israel is such a floor, which the Lord is going to purge, according to the Baptist’s testimony. (Mat 3:12.) A night of affliction is coming for them, in which He will winnow the chaff from the grain, that He may gather to Himself that which has value for Him. “The fan is in His hand.” Judgment, alas, must come; but He means by it to take forth the precious from the vile. And this is the very time when the remnant, therefore, in the darkness of as black a night as the earth has ever seen, shall creep to His feet, and claim Him as their own. Assuredly it will be a bold act then, if even Ruth’s seems so; yet this grace has been dawning upon them, and His voice has seemed to speak amid the voices of the prophetic promises, yet but beginning to be intelligible. At midnight, suddenly, just at the darkest, comes His voice with a question -how necessary a one, when it is redemption that is to be realized -“Who art thou?” How blessed to know that the right answer is but to own, “I am Ruth, thy handmaid,” for this is the name of the barren woman whose natural hopes are dead. To such an one it is that the law applies and pledges itself: no other has any claim. “Spread, then, thy wing over thy handmaid,” -this soul with its need of shelter, -“for thou art a redeemer.”
But not yet can the prayer be answered fully. Always is there, indeed, encouragement for the needy from these lips that speak here. Still she must await the morning. She is to be answered; some way redemption will surely come: so much she knows, but is he -will he be -the redeemer? This question, is it not answered for the remnant also only fully in the “morning,” -a morning which He makes by His own coming, the glory of His presence. Ministered to they are, sustained by His hand, still sent back, as Ruth to her mother-in-law, to await the morning!
Ah, but His heart will not have its rest till the matter is finished, and redemption is found for Ruth, -“shepherd-tended” Ruth!
(2) Now we are to be introduced to the other kinsman: there is but one other in the story; and strange it is, when we know our Boaz, that he should have the prior claim! Is there, then, another redeemer? Does the word of God give any ground for such a supposition? Yes, as a supposition. Hypothetically, there is a mode of salvation other than by Christ: test it, and you find by experience (once more the teacher) that there is, and can be, only one.
“When the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive.” This is the voice of God by the prophet Ezekiel (18: 27), and every word of God shall stand. It is a way of salvation, too, that is declared, -not simply of a righteousness that needs none. It is the wicked man who is spoken of, -the man who can already be called that, and who as that needs salvation. Forgiveness of sins is announced for him: “All his transgressions that he has committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he path done he shall live” (v. 22). Thus the mercy of God is pledged to a returning soul: and, of course, one must say, in all sincerity and truth, or it could not be from Him.
Yet this is not the salvation which we find in Christ. Its condition is not of faith in Him but of works: to obtain it one must have a righteousness which is of works. And these two principles -of faith and of works -are principles that cannot be united together, so that it will not do to say that although faith in Christ is not here formally made mention of, it must in fact be found. On the contrary, it is most certain that the principle here declared excludes faith in Christ in any evangelic sense. “For if it be of grace,” says the apostle, “it is no more of work, otherwise grace is no more grace.” (Rom 11:6.) As surely, then, as the principle here is that of righteousness by work, so surely is it not a righteousness by faith: it is contrastive and contradictory to faith.
It is the principle of the law as given the second time, after the people had sinned and made a golden calf. It is not pure law, but law modified and tempered by mercy, so as to give man as failed the means of self-recovery, if self-recovery were possible. But it was not possible for them, and is not possible for any. Of this law the mediator was Moses, and not Christ; and so entirely unavailing was it, that the very mediator of the law becomes of necessity the accuser of the people: “there is one that accuseth you,” says the Lord to Israel, “even Moses, in whom ye trust.” (Joh 5:45.)
Thus we see the redeemer who is not Boaz, but the redeemer who cannot redeem. The law is, indeed, the nearest kinsman that man has, and the one to which, apart from the teaching of divine grace, man naturally turns. One of the reasons of the delay in Christ’s coming was that the law should first of all be tried; for this is but the trial of man’s righteousness. And so in the history of a saved soul, the law’s claim must first be set aside, that Christ may not be to it as “one of our redeemers,” but the only Redeemer possible, the Boaz “in whom is strength.”
It is a matter for judgment, and therefore Boaz goes up to the gate, where causes were habitually tried. Presently, behold, the redeemer of whom he had spoken passes by. Notice, the man is quite indifferent: he has none of the loving interest that we find in the heart of Boaz: he would pass by, as the priest and Levite did the man on the road to Jericho. And such is the heartlessness of the legal method. Law has no personal interest, and cannot have. It speaks in the third person: if one comes under the rule, be it so; this is its impartiality, its indifference. But thus it cannot represent the heart of God.
Boaz calls the man, and he sits down; then ten men of the elders of the city are called, and they sit down; the ten commandments are our Boaz’s witnesses that the law is incompetent to do aught for a sinner’s salvation. How soon and simply could the case be settled, if always the ten and no others were witnesses! But people make this great mistake, that, because, in fact, God is merciful, He will not require the righteousness which the law requires, which the ten commandments specify, but something, they know not how much, under this. Whereas, though He may be patient and give time, and give repeated opportunities, He never lowers His demand, never can accept less than what is lawful and right.” Above all, He has never proposed Christ as a makeweight for our deficiencies. “If righteousness come by the law,” says the apostle, “then Christ is dead in vain.”
Boaz begins with the question of inheritance: “Naomi, who is returned from the country of Moab, has sold the allotment of the field that was our brother Elimelech’s. . . . If thou wilt redeem it, redeem it. . . . And he said, I will redeem it.” We see here the connection between the land and the people of Israel. In fact, how carefully has the land been guarded for them, keeping sabbath while the heirs are exiled! God has given it by absolute promise to the seed of Abraham, and that according to the flesh. But here is the difficulty: “And Boaz said, What day thou buyest the field of the hand of Naomi, thou buyest it also of Ruth, the Moabitess, the wife of the dead, to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance. And the redeemer said, I cannot redeem it for myself, lest I mar mine own inheritance.”
Elimelech is dead, that is Israel looked at as identified with the faith of God as King; yet Israel, in fact, remains, though as Naomi, widowed and destitute. But there is a young life, a new generation, through whom the name of the dead may be raised up. Yet these are as the Moabitess’ whom the law cannot bring in, but must keep out: for it is written that “a Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of Jehovah forever.” Well may the kinsman fear, therefore, lest in taking Ruth he should mar his own inheritance.
Throughout the story this is the title that everywhere comes into prominence. Despite all Ruth’s attractiveness and piety, she is always spoken of, emphatically, as Ruth, the Moabitess. And the law, in presence of this conceded truth, can make no exception in her favor. The law is against her wholly, -accuses, convicts, and cannot justify. So hopeless is Israel’s case in the hands of Moses.
If we look at the genealogy of the Lord Jesus Christ in the gospel of Matthew, we shall find there, without the stigma of her origin, the name of Ruth. She is the third of four women only who stand exceptionally in the record there. At a first glance, we might think, uselessly. also: for of what use are they in establishing His title to be David’s Son? None, clearly; and so they must have another purpose: for everything has purpose in the word of God; yet what purpose in a genealogy?
But the genealogy is not merely His as Son of David; the title of it adds to this that it is Christ’s as Son of Abraham. And the three names that end with Ruth are in this part, as we see: can they have part, then, in showing that Christ is Son of Abraham?
Now here light breaks in at once: for the Seed of Abraham is He in whom all families of the earth are to be blessed, -Gentile as well as Jew; while these three names are Gentile. How vain, then, to think of denying the Gentiles their part in Christ!
But more: in each of these names we may discern what might be easily taken as a blot upon the genealogy. What was Tamar? what Rahab? what even Ruth, the Moabitess? But does not this, then, show us all the more the Seed of Abraham, the blesser of the nations? Yes, and each name tells out, and in perfect order, the reality of grace. Tamar, whose sin alone brings her into the list, begins the story; for sin is the fundamental fact for the gospel; and our sin owned gives us title to the Saviour of sinners. But then Rahab (no less the sinner) shows us faith, a faith that separates from judgment and brings into blessing: that is as clearly the second foundation.
What, then, does the name of Ruth emphasize in this series? Can it be anything but this, that the law therefore is not the way of blessing, does not furnish the redeemer, but grace only does? -for Ruth the Moabitess is debtor to the grace of Boaz! Here, surely, all is consistent, all is harmony. And how Ruth’s character, so different from that of those who precede her in this list, assures us that not those whom men would class as sinners, but those also whom they might class as saints, are all together by the law convicted and condemned, and that for all who receive salvation grace must reign!
No, assuredly the law cannot raise up the name of the dead on his inheritance. The power of God in grace can alone meet the need that is here symbolized. The kinsman passes his shoe the sign of entering upon possession -to him in whom power is. The law testifies and yields its rights to Christ, and He is declared the only possible Redeemer. Such will the remnant find Him in the day that comes.
(3) Boaz proclaims his title and his grace. The inheritance becomes his by purchase; and Ruth also, once more and for the last time spoken of as the Moabitess, he acquires for himself. Israel’s land is yet to be known as Immanuel’s, for indeed He has bought it at its full value. The people, also, are the purchased of His love. In Ruth’s case the figure falls necessarily short, and the word used does not positively convey the idea of purchase. All types must, indeed, fall short, whether as picturing our need or the way that He has met it. This we are prepared for. The outline may be slight, but is sufficient. When it is followed up in the day to come, how it will be seen that here is One who has strength in Ephratah, and His name in Bethlehem; and how will the remnant “break forth” like the house of Pharez, “breaker forth,” as it is written, “For thou shalt break forth on the right hand and on the left; and thy seed shalt inherit the Gentiles, and make the desolate cities to be inhabited, . . . for thou shalt forget the shame of thy youth, and shalt not remember the reproach of thy widowhood any more.” And how Ruth’s story is transfigured here! “For thy Maker is thy husband, Jehovah of hosts is His name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel: the God of the whole earth shall He be called.” (Isa 54:3-5.)
Naomi, therefore, is built up by Ruth, and her son becomes (in another sense, of course,) her redeemer, the restorer of her life, and the support of her old age. For the son’s name is Obed, the “servant,” and the sweet adoring service of the new generation of Israel will be in those days the restoring of life indeed. Fit it is that the “women, her neighbors,” should give the name to this new seed; as the nations round (then neighborly!) will speak the praise of the new nation. For then for the first time shall they completely fulfill the word: “But thou, Israel, art my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham my friend. Thou whom I have taken from the ends of the earth, and called thee from the chief men thereof, and said unto thee, Thou art my servant, I have chosen thee, and not cast thee away.” (Isa 41:8-9.)
This is indeed a sign of perfect redemption, whatever the dispensation: “O Lord, truly I am thy servant; I am thy servant, and the son of thy handmaid: thou hast loosed my bonds.” (Psa 116:16.) Redemption is thus the spring of service, and gives character to it; and if we are indeed in the nearer and more wonderful place of sons of God, the service of sons is only the fullest, the most joyful service. Yea, the only-begotten Son, to the wonder and delight of heaven, has come forth and served; yea, and still serves; and in that day will serve; as He has Himself said:
“Blessed are those servants whom the Lord when He cometh shall find watching: verily I say unto you, that He shall gird Himself, and make them sit down to meat, and will come forth, and serve them.” (Luk 12:37.)
Fuente: Grant’s Numerical Bible Notes and Commentary
A BLESSED BRIDE
Rth 3:1-1
The rest Naomi would secure for Ruth is that of a husband and a home. Threshing-floors were commonly on the field where the grain was reaped, the process consisting in throwing it against the evening wind, the farmer remaining all night on the field for that purpose as well as to protect his property.
Rth 3:3-6
The indelicacy of these verses is removed by the fact that it was the custom thus to remind a kinsman of his duty in such a case. The openness of the location is also to be kept in mind, together with the circumstance that Orientals sleep by night in the clothing worn during the day, reclining simply upon a cloak or rug. Servants frequently sleep in the same tent with their master, lying crosswise at his feet, and if a covering be needed are allowed to draw the skirt of his covering over them.
Rth 3:7-18
Spreading the skirt over one is in the East a symbol of protection, and in the case of a mans doing it for a woman equivalent to a marriage contract.
Rising while it was still dark, Ruth could without immodesty remove the veil from her face to receive in it the generous gift of barley for her and her mother-in-law. The word veil might be rendered apron or sheet, which in the case of poorer women, was linen or cotton and wrapped around the head so as almost entirely to conceal the face.
Note Boaz testimony to Ruths character from one point of view (Rth 3:11), and Naomis testimony to his from another (Rth 3:18).
Rth 4:1-8
The gate was something like the town hall with us, where all the legal business was transacted. It was a building with a cover but without walls, and a place which everybody passed by. It was easy to find a jury of ten men there any time; and as soon as the kinsman came in sight whose duty it was first to redeem before Boaz, calling him to wait, the case was entered upon with simplicity and informality (Rth 4:1-4). (For the law governing this matter, see Lev 25:25.) The kinsman was disposed to take the land until he learned that he must take Ruth with it when he changed his mind (Rth 4:4-6). (For the law, see Deu 25:5.) How it would have marred his inheritance to have married Ruth is not clear (Rth 4:6), except it be that a son born to him by
her could not have carried his name but that of his brother, or possibly her Moabitish nationality alarmed him because of its contrariness to the Mosaic law. Boaz believes that the law is suspended in Ruths case, who has become a proselyte to the Jewish faith, but the other kinsman does not.
The shoe symbolized a possession which one had, and could tread with his feet at pleasure. Hence when the kinsman pulled off his shoe and gave it to Boaz, he surrendered to him all claims to the possession which would have been his under other circumstances.
Rth 4:9-17
Rth 4:11-12 seem to be a bridal benediction. Rachel and Leah had been greatly blessed with offspring and Pharez was honored as an ancestor of the Bethlehemites (Rth 4:18).
The blessing of Ruth is regarded as that of Naomi as well (Rth 4:14), for in the formers child her house will be raised up again. This is set forth in the name, Obed, which means one that serves, i.e., one that serves Naomi.
In the conclusion of this verse we have the words in which the whole book reaches its culmination, the completion of the blessing pronounced on Ruth by Boaz (Rth 2:18). Thus the coming of the King is prepared for, on whom the Lord had determined to confirm the dominion over His people for evermore. And the converted Moabites, who entered as worthy members into the commonwealth of Gods people, became the mother of David and of Christ.
There is an interval of 380 years between Solomon and David (Rth 4:20-22). Whole generations are omitted and only leading characters are named.
QUESTIONS
1. Describe an Eastern threshing floor, and the process of threshing.
2. How would you explain the indelicacy in Rth 4:3-6?
3. How did Boaz testify to Ruths character?
4. With what may the gate of an oriental city be compared?
5. For what reasons may the nearer kinsman have declined to purchase this land?
6. What did the shoe symbolize?
Fuente: James Gray’s Concise Bible Commentary
Rth 3:1-2. Shall I not seek rest for thee? A settlement in a house of thy own, and thereby rest in comfort and safety, under the care of a good husband. He winnoweth barley to-night This, it is probable, was commonly done in the evening, when the heat of the day was over, and cool breezes began to rise; in the thrashing-floor Which was in a place covered at the top, but open elsewhere, whither Ruth might easily come. And this work of winnowing corn was usually ended with a feast.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Rth 3:3. Anoint thee. Oil was used on many occasions because it gave a lustre to the countenance. Psa 104:15. Mat 6:10.
Rth 3:4. Mark the place. The Hebrews were what we now call gentlemen farmers; yet they would aid their servants in watching the corn. Boaz gave them rest at night, that they might work by day.
Rth 3:9. I am Ruth thine handmaid; spread thy skirt; take me for thy wife, because thou art the near kinsman of my late husband. Clandestine marriages were never sanctioned by any nation. They might surprise a man into a covenant which his more sober judgment would endeavour to revoke; and however solemn the oath might be in secret, if the man should prove unfaithful after the consummation of marriage, the ruined woman would want evidence to assert her right in her husband, and in his property. Every woman who surrenders her virtue to the promises of a pretended lover, whatever pity may plead in her behalf, must be regarded as the victim of her seducer. And sad experience has evinced how little regard a wicked man pays to an oath, though made in the name of the Lord.Now, on the singular case of Ruth, commentators are not agreed. But, first, Naomis motives were pure. She sought a family establishment for the best of daughters. Secondly, the law authorized her so to do; and the law which required the next of kin to raise up issue to a man who had died childless was an ancient law. Genesis 34. It had probably existed from the beginning of the world. It was founded on prudence and humanity: for the firstborn of every patriarchal branch was a prince, and a priest in his family; and consequently to be childless was considered as a great calamity, being attended with the loss of name and of inheritance. Hence the good and wise Naomi advised the fair stranger to ask her rights conformably to law, and she was emboldened to do it in the way she did from the particular notice which Boaz had shown towards her daughter. But Boaz being now between eighty and ninety years of age, and exceedingly rich; she did not think it prudent to apply to him in the regular way, lest his family, which would undoubtedly be opposed to the marriage, should frustrate all her hopes. Therefore she advised Ruth to make her just and legal claims in person, and in secret. Ruth acted solely by the advice of her mother, and was impelled by a sort of imperious necessity to approach by night: and as she obtained a blessing, not a rebuke from Boaz, followed by a secret promise and oath of marriage, her character is exempted from blame. She prostrated at the feet of her patron and near kinsman; and though he said, let no one know that a woman came into the floor, it might merely be a caution to avoid giving umbrage to the man who was nearer of kin than himself.
Rth 3:13. Tarry this night. She could not get into the city till the gates were opened. In warm countries they often lodge in sheltered places abroad. The manner of betrothing was by an oath of the Lord, and by the acceptance of presents. Ruth obtained this favour because of her virtues, in not following young men; her virtues make her more known than can be done by a bold exposure of her person in public places.
Rth 3:18. The man will not be at rest until he have finished the thing this day. So it is with the Lord Christ, our near kinsman; he will not be at rest till he has performed his faithful word, and saved the soul from sin and death.
REFLECTIONS.
From the private interview of Boaz and Ruth, we learn the great prudence and moral lustre of his character. He was cautious to avoid public scandal and reproach. Revering the law of the Lord, he conditionally gave Ruth an oath and promise of marriage. His love to this damsel of Moab was pure and disinterested; he loved her for her piety, and piety was the principal consideration in his affections. Towards the nearer kinsman, though he wished him not to marry, he behaved with legal fairness, firmly resolved to support the interests of the fair and virtuous stranger. Marriages thus preseded with virtue, distinguished by prudent counsel and disinterestedness, shall assuredly be blessed of the Lord.
Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Ruth 3. Boaz as a Gol.Elimelech and his two sons were dead. Would any member of the family have enough right and proper feeling to save his name from extinction? The nearest relative was in this case silent and inactive. But, with the originality of love, Naomi devised a plan not merely for the redemption of her late husbands estate and the continuation of the family succession, but for the happy settlement of Ruth in a Judan home. Ignorant of the customs of Bethlehem, Ruth follows her mother-in-laws instructions to the letter. According to the sentiment of the time there was nothing immodest or unwomanly in their bold and unusual line of action. Rightly understood, it was only a gentle and delicate way of appealing to a kinsmans chivalry; and Ruth did not appeal in vain.
Rth 3:1. Better a resting-place (mg.); the beautiful Heb. word (mn) has much the same associations as our home (Psa 132:14).
Rth 3:3. The time of the threshing was from four oclock in the afternoon till half an hour after sunset, during which time a cool wind blows up from the sea.
Rth 3:4. The peasants of Palestine still sleep in the open air at the threshing time (Robinson, ii. 720).
Rth 3:7. The merriness of Boazs heart seems as natural as its unaffected piety. The charm of this idyll lies in its perfect humanity.
Rth 3:8-10. The hero of a western song is represented as saying, O wert thou in the cauld blast . . . my plaidie to the angry airt, Id shelter thee; here it is the unsheltered woman who, greatly daring, takes the initiative with the prayer, Spread thy skirt over thine handmaiden. This act had a symbolic, indeed a sacred, meaning, being a kinsmans mode of signifying that, in loyalty to the dead, he was ready to act the part of a redeemer, wedding and protecting one who would otherwise be homeless and friendless.
Rth 3:11. By this time all the city, lit. the gate, knew Ruths character. Just inside the gate of the city was the broad place (the Rhb), where all business was transacted and the news of the day discussed (Rth 4:1). Ruth was a virtuous woman in the sense of Pro 31:10.
Rth 3:16. Naomis question, Who art thou? can only mean How is it with thee? How hast thou fared? (mg.).
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
RUTH CLAIMING THE PROTECTION OFBOAZ
(vv. 1-18)
The time had now come for Naomi to give pertinent advice to Ruth.She seeks security (or “rest”) for her daughter-in-law, reminding her that Boaz is their relative (vv. 1-2).She knew that Boaz was winnowing barley in his threshing floor, and would be sleeping that night at the floor.Therefore she told Ruth to wash and anoint herself, be clothed in her best garment and go down to the threshing floor, but wait until Boaz had laid down to sleep before uncovering his feet and lying down at his feet(vv.3-4). These instructions may seem strange to us.
However, Naomi knew of two laws in Israel on which she based her advice to Ruth.Lev 25:25 is explicit that an inheritance might be redeemed by the nearest relative who was able to redeem it.The property had belonged to Elimelech, but through his poverty it had been sold.If Naomi had the money for it, she could redeem it, otherwise a near relative could redeem it.
The other law pertained to a man of Israel who had died without children (Deu 25:5-12).His brother was to marry the wife of the deceased to raise up children for him.The word “brother” was used for any close male relative. Since Ruth’s husband (an Israelite) had died, then Ruth, though a Gentile, could be brought into the congregation through a relative who had the right of redemption.Ruth did as Naomi told her, thus lying down at the feet of Boaz (vv.6-7). This is a picture of the godly remnant of Israel in the latter days virtually creeping to the feet of the Lord Jesus, in total submission to Him, yet to boldly claim His protection.
The time of harvest was a wonderful time in Israel when the crop was good, and the harvest is often spoken of in scripture as the gathering in of people by the grace of God, whether the wheat gathered into the barn, which speaks of heaven (Mat 13:30) or whether (in the tribulation period) the bringing of Gentiles into earthly blessing by way of great suffering (Rev 14:14-16).Usually the harvest emphasizes the blessing of Gentiles, and the vintage the blessing of Israel (Rev 14:17-20).
At midnight Boaz was awakened and startled to find a woman lying at his feet (v. 8).When he questioned her, Ruth responded, “I am Ruth, your maidservant.Take your maid servant under your wing, for you are a close relative.”The wing speaks of protection, which Israel had for centuries ignored, that is, the protection of their true Messiah, who wept over Jerusalem, saying, “How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing!” (Mat 23:37).All that was necessary was for Ruth to be willing, in order that she would have the protection of Boaz.
How it must have moved the heart of Ruth to hear the response of Boaz, “Blessed are you of the Lord, my daughter! For you have shown more kindness at the end than at the beginning, in that you did not go after young men, whether poor or rich” (v. 10).The Lord Jesus deeply values the faith and love of those who have a single eye for Him.Boaz was evidently a wise man who, though he loved Ruth, did not press his love upon her, but waited to find out if she loved him.Now the answer was plainly before his eyes.Ruth did not go after young men, whether poor or rich.There are popular, new movements that attract many people who fail to see in Christ the real answer to their needs. Some of these movements favor the “poor,”Out of sympathy for the poor, because of their poverty, they champion a cause that seems praiseworthy, but leaves out the Lord Jesus.Other movements are “rich,” promising wealth and ease to those who will follow, but again do not recognize Christ. In fact, the antichrist will be such a leader, claiming even to be “God” (2Th 2:3-4). But the godly remnant of Israel will not be deceived by him, for their hearts have been drawn to the true Messiah of Israel.
Boaz gave Ruth every encouragement, telling her not to fear, for he would do all that she requested, for all the people of his town knew that Ruth was a virtuous woman (v. 11). However, he told her that though he was a close relative, there was a closer relative than he, who therefore should have the opportunity of redeeming the property of Naomi.Boaz would give him the opportunity the next morning, and promised Ruth that if the other relative would not perform the duty of a close relative, then Boaz would do it (v. 13).
At the word of Boaz, Ruth laid down till early morning, rising before it was light.Then Boaz told her not to let it be known that a woman had come in to the threshing floor (v. 14).Why not? Because the matter was to be thoroughly personal between Boaz and Ruth.Others who did not know the facts might be inclined to interpret Ruth’s presence in the threshing floor with suspicion of wrong doing in spite of the words of Boaz that all the people knew that Ruth was a virtuous woman.
The grace of Boaz was further seen toward both Ruth and Naomi in his giving Ruth six measures of barley (already threshed), which she carried in her shawl (v. 15). This would not be a light load, but with her heart so affected, it would not seem heavy to her.
When she came to her mother-in-law, Naomi did not ask the same question as in chapter 2:19, “What have you gleaned today,” but rather, “Who art thou, my daughter?” (KJV). Some translators have changed this because it did not sound right to them, but Naomi wanted to know if there was any change in Ruth’s relationship to Boaz.In other words, was Ruth to have a change of name? Ruth then told Naomi all that had taken place, and also of the kindness of Boaz toward both her and her mother-in-law in giving them food.
The faith of Naomi in Boaz had been so long awakened that she was confident that Boaz would not rest until he had made a complete settlement of this matter. Ruth then could “sit still” and depend fully on the faithfulness of Boaz. Believers today also need such advice in reference to many problems which can never be ironed out by their own wisdom or work.”Be still” (Psa 46:10); “Stand still” (Exo 14:1); and “Sit still” (v. 18) are words to often keep in mind.When Ruth had put her affairs in the hand of Boaz, then in faith she could leave them there, and depend on him to do the very best for her.Let us have such confidence in our Lord.
Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible
RUTH THE BRIDE
Ruth 3 & Ruth 4
“The LORD thy God in the midst of thee is mighty; He will save, He will rejoice over thee with joy; He will rest in His love, He will joy over thee with singing” (Zep 3:17).
Gleaning, as we have seen, is the great subject of the second chapter. Rest is the theme of the last two chapters. In the opening verse of chapter 3, the word is used in connection with Ruth, “My daughter shall I not seek rest for thee.” In the closing verse it is used in connection with Boaz, “The man will not be in rest, until he have finished the thing this day.”
There is doubtless an orderly progress in the truths presented in the four chapters of the Book of Ruth.
In Ruth 1, Ruth sets forth the faith, love and devoted energy. of a newly converted soul.
In Ruth 2, Ruth presents a picture of the growth in grace by which the believer makes spiritual progress.
In Ruth 3, Ruth is seeking the rest of heart that will alone bring satisfaction to the believer.
In chapter 4, the story of Ruth closes with the rest secured, setting forth the way that God’s rest is reached for Christ and the believer.
1.
Gleaning in the fields of Boaz, and receiving blessings from the hand of Boaz, however happy and right, will not give full rest and satisfaction to the heart either of Boaz or Ruth. Nothing will give rest to the heart but the possession of the one that is loved. Hence, in chapter 3, Ruth is seeking to gain Boaz, and Boaz is working to possess Ruth. Love can never be satisfied with gifts, however precious; it must have the giver.
In his former dealings Boaz had shewn marvellous grace to Ruth. He had put at her disposal his fields, his corn, his maidens, and his young men. He had given her water from his well, parched corn from his table, and handfuls let fall of purpose. All these blessings, however, had not satisfied her heart. They had indeed won her confidence, and drawn out her affections. But once the affections have been won nothing but the possession of the Person who has won them will satisfy the heart. This is equally true whether in Divine or human relationships. The grace and gifts by which Boaz kindled the affections of Ruth would not in themselves satisfy these affections. It is the possession of the Blesser not the blessings that gives satisfaction to the heart.
Thus it is in the Lord’s ways with believers. He so deals with us that we are brought to see that He is greater than all the blessings He bestows. Happy for us when we learn that blessings in themselves cannot satisfy. Christ alone can satisfy the heart.
Was not this the great lesson that Peter had to learn in Luke 5? The Lord bestowed a great temporal blessing upon Peter. He gave him the biggest catch of fish he had ever had. It was a blessing beyond the capacity of nets and boats to contain, and yet in that very gift the Lord so revealed Himself to Peter that He became greater in Peter’s estimation than the blessings He had given; for immediately afterwards we read, he “forsook all and followed Him.” What! left the fish that the Lord had given? Yes, he left all – nets, boats, and fish – and followed Him. If ever there was a catch of fish that Peter had a right to keep, it was the catch of fish the Lord had given. But he forsook the blessings to follow the Blesser.
So with another humble believer, Mary Magdalene. She had been completely under the power of the devil, for the Lord had cast out of her seven demons. She had been greatly blessed but her heart had been won to the Blesser. Thus at the empty tomb, when the disciples went away to “their own home,” Mary stood without at the sepulchre weeping. Blessings were not enough for Mary; she could find no rest in this world without Christ. With Him she was happy, without Him she was desolate.
In like manner the Lord dealt with the man who was once a blasphemer of Christ and a persecutor of the saints. Grace reached and blessed him in such manner that Christ became greater to him than all the blessings that Christ could give. His desire is expressed in the words, “that I may know I Him,” and again, “that I may win Christ.” He is not content to know all the blessings to which Christ has given Him a title; he must know the Giver of the blessings. He is not content to win heaven at last, but he must win the One who has made his heaven secure.
Alas! how slow we are to learn that Christ, and only Christ, can satisfy our heart’s desire. At times we seek rest in our spiritual blessings. Our efforts are directed to keeping bright in our souls the joy of conversion, and the sense of the blessings we have received. But right as it is to be in the joy of salvation, all such efforts are doomed to failure. We cannot (and God never intended that we should) enjoy the blessings apart from the Blesser. Every blessing that we have received is set forth in Christ, and can only be enjoyed in company with Christ.
Others seek satisfaction in a busy round of service. Would that we were all busy in the Lord’s service; but if pursued with the object of finding rest, we shall only find, like Martha. that we get distracted rather than find rest. Service is good but it will not satisfy the heart.
Others again seek some passing satisfaction in the vain things of this passing world, only to find that the more we surround ourselves with the things of earth the more we increase our cares, rather than find rest of heart. The prophet truly says. “Arise ye and depart; for this is not your rest; because it is polluted” (Mic 2:10). Again we say, Christ alone can Satisfy the heart.
Thus from one cause or another we are compelled to admit that as Christians we know little true satisfaction of heart. Saved indeed every true Christian is, but it is one thing to be saved and quite another to be satisfied. Saved by the work of Christ we can only find satisfaction in the Person of Christ. The measure in which we are enjoying the company of Christ is the measure of our rest and satisfaction. Full and complete satisfaction will only be known when that great day dawns of which it is said, “The marriage of the Lamb is come, and His wife hath made herself ready.” In a mystery this great truth passes before us in the closing portion of the beautiful story of Ruth. The first two chapters have told us in picture how love for Christ is awakened. The last two chapters will tell us how love is satisfied.
2.
First let us note the instruction that Ruth receives from Naomi (vv. 1-5). Ruth learns the secret of rest in order that it may be well with her. First Naomi engages her thoughts with Boaz, telling her who he is, and what he is doing. She says, “he is of our kindred.” She says as it were, “He is ours and we have a claim upon him.” And we can say that Christ is ours, for has He not become flesh and dwelt among us, and died for us, and as risen He calls us His brethren? He can say to Mary, “Go to my brethren, and say unto them I ascend unto my Father and your Father; and to my God and to your God.”
Further, Naomi tells Ruth what he is doing: “Behold he winnoweth barley tonight in the threshing floor.” And, if we may so say, all through the long dark night, our Kinsman, our Boaz, has been winnowing barley. The Lord Jesus is not occupied with the chaff today. He will deal in judgment with the chaff in a coming day? but at this moment He is occupied with His own, “He is winnowing barley.” In other words He is sanctifying the Church, in view of presenting the Church to Himself not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing. The Lord on high is engaged with His own in view of the coming day.
Having reminded Ruth of her claim upon Boaz, Naomi proceeds to instruct her as to the suited condition for the company of Boaz. Realising that we are of Christ’s kindred that we belong to Him and He is for us we shall surely desire His company. The conscious sense of His presence, however, calls for a suited condition of soul set forth in picture by Naomi’s instructions to Ruth, when she says, “Wash thyself therefore, and anoint thee, and put thy raiment upon thee.”
The first necessity to “wash thyself” – carries our thoughts to the feet washing of John 13. John must first have his feet washed before he can lean on Jesus’ bosom. Feet washing must come before heart resting. The Lord had to say to Peter, “It I wash thee not thou hast no part with Me.” Part in Him we have through His work, but to have part with Him to enjoy communion with Him in the home to which He has gone we must have our feet washed, and in this alas, we are so often careless. We allow the defiling influences of the world to creep in and drag our affections down to the things of the earth. Neglecting feet washing the defilements increase until our minds are so clogged, and our affections so dulled that communion with Christ becomes a rare or unknown thing. Let us heed the Lord’s warning words, “If ye know these things happy are ye if ye do them. ” It would not have been enough for Ruth to accept the instruction to wash; she must carry it out. So too, the good of John 13 does not lie in the knowledge of the truth but in its practice.
But more is needed: having washed, Ruth is to anoint herself. It is not enough to cleanse the mind from defiling influences, but we need to remember the Apostle’s exhortation, “Whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are noble, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there by any praise, think on these things.” Washing is negative; it removes defilement. Anointing is positive, it leaves a sweet odour. Not only do we need to have our minds and affections cleansed from defiling influences, but to have them occupied with the things of Christ that there may be about us an odour of Christ that is suited to the company of Christ.
Following the anointing, Naomi says, “Put thy raiment upon thee.” Does not this speak of the fine linen which is the practical righteousness of the saints? If the eighth verse of Philippians 4 speaks of the anointing, does not the following verse give us the answer to the raiment – the practical righteousness? There the Apostle says, “Those things which ye have both learned and received, and heard and seen in me do.” The keyword in Php 4:8 is “think”; the keyword of verse 9 is “do”. Had we a deeper sense of the loveliness of Christ should we not covet with more earnest desire His company and the conscious sense of His presence? And such desires would lead to more exercise that our thoughts and affections, our words and ways, might be kept from all defiling influences, and engaged with that which is suited to Christ.
Having become suited to the presence of Boaz, Ruth’s course is plain. She is to lie down at the feet of Boaz and listen to his words, as Naomi says, “He will tell thee what thou shalt do.” Does this not carry us in thought to that lovely scene at Bethany described in Luke 10, where we read of Mary, that she “sat at Jesus’ feet and heard His word.” Is not this the great lack today! In the hurry and bustle of life there is little time for being alone with the Lord to hear His word. Nevertheless the Lord says it is the “one thing needful”. May we hear the voice of the Lord through Naomi, and like Ruth answer, “All that thou sayest unto me I will do.” Thus “washed”, “anointed”, and clothed may we sit in His presence and hear His word.
3.
Having reached the moment when Ruth is found at the feet of Boaz the story is naturally more concerned with what Boaz does. He works to satisfy the desires that his love and grace have raised, but he will also work for the satisfaction of his own heart. All this brings before us the far deeper mystery of Christ and His desires for His Church. Nothing will satisfy His heart but having His saints with Him and like Him. His love must have the company of His loved ones. We are going to heaven because love wants us there. It did not satisfy the heart of the father to remove the rags from the prodigal son and meet his needs: he must have him in his own company suited to his presence, with the best robe, the shoes on his feet, and the ring on his hand. Nor does it satisfy the heart of Christ to deliver us from judgment and clear us from our sins, but He must have us with Him and like Him.
It was with this end He gathered souls around Him as He passed through this world, for when He called the twelve it was first of all that they should be “with Him” (Mar 3:14).
It was for this He prayed when He said, “Father I will that they also whom Thou hast given Me be with Me where I am.”
It was for this He died, that “whether we wake or sleep we should live together with Him” (1Th 5:10).
It is with this end that He serves His people today, washing our feet that we might have part with Him. It is this end that He has in view when He puts one of His saints to sleep, to depart and be “with Christ.”
And when at last the Lord comes into the clouds to call us home, it is to receive us unto Himself that where He is we might be also, “for ever with the Lord.”
This then is the blessed truth that we learn at His feet. Not only that we want Him, but that He wants us. Small wonder that we should want Him, but an everlasting wonder that He should want us. Mary learnt at His feet that He can dispense with all our service but He cannot do without ourselves. “I am my Beloved’s and His desire is toward me,” is the great and glorious truth that we learn at His feet. And so Ruth tells us of this same truth for at the feet of Boaz she learnt not only that she longed for Boaz but that Boaz longed for her. And having learnt this she can “sit still” and wait for Boaz to finish the thing (v. 18).
4.
Deeply significant is the way that Boaz takes to secure rest and satisfaction for his own heart and the heart of Ruth. There is what he does with Ruth, followed by the work He does for Ruth. In chapter 2 he wins her affection; in chapter 3 he gives her holy boldness to gratify the affection he has won.
First, having refused all others and followed Boaz, she is assured of blessing, “Blessed be thou” (v. 10). Second, he removes every trace of fear from her heart, saying, “Fear not” (v. 11). Then she is assured that every hindrance to the fulfilment of all his purpose will be overcome (vv. 12, 13). In the meantime he richly supplies all her need. He gives her six measures of barley. When she sought her own blessing she obtained one measure of barley (2: 17); when she sought Boaz himself she gets “six measures of barley.” But still it is only “six,” not seven, the complete number. No amount of barley can give complete satisfaction.
Thus it is that the Lord acts with His own today. Is there not a special blessing for those who have learnt the great secret that the Lord wants us for Himself? Does not this remove all fear, give us holy boldness, and assure our hearts that no hindrance can stand in the way of the fulfilment of His purpose for us? In the meantime He meets our every need and thus enables us, like Ruth to “sit still” in the knowledge that He will not be in rest until He has finished that which He has begun. “He which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ” (Php 1:6).
Fuente: Smith’s Writings on 24 Books of the Bible
3:1 Then Naomi her mother in law said unto her, My daughter, shall I not seek {a} rest for thee, that it may be well with thee?
(a) Meaning that she would provide her with a husband, with whom she might live peacefully.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
1. Naomi’s plan to secure rest for Ruth 3:1-5
Naomi had expressed a desire back in Moab that each of her daughters-in-law might find "rest" (Rth 1:9). The Hebrew word reads "security" in the NASB and "a home" in the NIV, but its meaning in other parts of the Old Testament is a place or condition of rest. [Note: See my note on 1:9.] Naomi’s concern for Ruth extended beyond her physical needs of food and safety to Ruth’s deeper need for a husband and, hopefully, a son. God had promised to bless His people with many descendants (Gen 12:1-3), and the hope of every Jewish woman was that God would so bless her. If Ruth was able to marry Boaz and have a son, Naomi likewise would enjoy blessing since Ruth’s son would perpetuate Elimelech’s branch of the family. Yet Naomi’s concern appears to have been primarily for Ruth’s welfare in marriage because Ruth had proved to be such a blessing to her.
Bush argued repeatedly that there is no indication in the text that part of the hope of Naomi and Ruth was that Ruth would bear a child who would perpetuate the line of her first husband. [Note: Bush, p. 147, et al.] But it seems likely that children played a part in the hope that these women entertained in view of how ancient Near Easterners regarded children, even though the writer made no mention of this hope. It was common for Hebrew parents to arrange marriages for their children (cf. Jdg 14:1-10). [Note: Reed, p. 424.] One writer suggested that Naomi was telling Ruth to act like a bride preparing for her wedding (cf. Eze 16:9-12). [Note: Wiersbe, p. 191.]
"A significant theological point emerges here. Earlier Naomi had wished for these same things (Rth 1:8-9). Here human means (i.e., Naomi’s plan) carry out something previously understood to be in Yahweh’s province. In response to providentially given opportunity, Naomi began to answer her own prayer! Thus she models one way in which divine and human actions work together: believers are not to wait passively for events to happen; rather, they must seize the initiative when an opportunity presents itself. They assume that God presents the opportunity." [Note: Hubbard, p. 199.]
The plan Naomi proposed was in harmony with Israel’s laws and social conventions. She was not suggesting anything improper much less immoral. [Note: See Allen P. Ross, "The Daughters of Lot and the Daughter-In-Law of Judah: Hubris or Faith in the Struggle for Women’s Rights," Exegesis and Exposition 2:1 (Summer 1987):79; and Block, pp. 685-86.] While it is true that in the phrase "uncover his feet" (Rth 3:4) the "feet" may be a euphemism for the sexual organs, Naomi was not suggesting that Ruth should remove Boaz’s trousers. [Note: For an advocate of the sexual view, see P. Trible, God and the Rhetoric of Sexuality, pp. 182, 198, n. 23. For a feminist interpretation of the Book of Ruth that sees quite a bit of self-interest and sexual preoccupation in the main characters, see Danna Nolan Fewell and David Miller Gunn, Compromising Redemption.] She was probably telling Ruth to remove the blanket or cloak (Rth 3:15) that would be covering Boaz’s legs and feet as he slept at the threshing floor. She would then ask him to cover her with it (Rth 3:10). This was a symbolic way of requesting Boaz’s protection as her husband (cf. Deu 22:30; Deu 27:20; Eze 16:8; Mal 2:16). [Note: P. A. Kruger, "The Hem of the Garment in Marriage: The Meaning of the Symbolic Gesture in Ruth 3:9 and Ezekiel 16:8," Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 12 (1984):86. See also John Gray, Joshua, Judges and Ruth, p. 395; and Block, p. 691.] It was an encouragement to pursue the possibility of marriage.
Why did Naomi suggest this method of encouraging Boaz? Evidently other methods were not possible or preferable.
"But why it should be done in this way we do not know. Nor do we know whether this was a widely practiced custom or not. It is not attested other than here." [Note: Morris, p. 287.]
Ruth again submitted to the counsel of her mother-in-law under whose authority she had placed herself (Rth 3:5; cf. Rth 2:2). Throughout the Book of Ruth the heroine is submissive to the authority of the Israelites. This reflects her commitment to following Yahweh and His chosen people.
It may appear that Ruth was inappropriately aggressive. However, Boaz had previously indicated his strong affection for her (Rth 2:11-17). She was only encouraging him to pursue his interest in her.
"Here is a servant demanding that the boss marry her, a Moabite making the demand of an Israelite, a woman making the demand of a man, a poor person making the demand of a rich man. Was this an act of foreigner naïveté, or a daughter-in-law’s devotion to her mother-in-law, or another sign of the hidden hand of God? From a natural perspective the scheme was doomed from the beginning as a hopeless gamble, and the responsibility Naomi placed on Ruth was quite unreasonable. But it worked!" [Note: Block, p. 692.]
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
THE HAZARDOUS PLAN
Rth 3:1-18
HOPE came to Naomi when Ruth returned with the ephah of barley and her story of the rich mans hearty greeting. God was remembering His handmaiden; He had not shut up His tender mercies. Through His favour Boaz had been moved to kindness, and the house of Elimelech would yet be raised from the dust. The womans heart, clinging to its last hope, was encouraged. Naomi was loud in her praises of Jehovah and of the man who had with such pious readiness befriended Ruth. And the young woman had due encouragement. She heard no fault finding, no complaint that she had made too little of her chance. The young sometimes find it difficult to serve the old, and those who have come down in the world are very apt to be discontented and querulous; what is done for them is never rightly done, never enough. It was not so here. The elder woman seems to have had nothing but gratitude for the gentle effort of the other. And so the weeks of barley harvest and of wheat harvest went by, Ruth busy in the fields of Boaz, gleaning behind his maidens, helped by their kindness-for they knew better than to thwart their master-and cheered at home by the pleasure of her mother-in-law. An idyl? Yes, one that might be enacted, with varying circumstances, in a thousand. homes where at present distrust and impatience keep souls from the peace God would give them.
But, one may ask, why did Boaz, so well inclined to be generous, knowing these women to be deserving of help, leave them week after week without further notice and aid? Could he reckon his duty done when he allowed Ruth to glean in his fields, gave her a share of the refreshment provided for the reapers, and ordered them to pull some ears from the bundles that she might the more easily fill her arms? For friendships sake even, should he not have done more?
We keep in mind, for one thing, that Boaz, though a kinsman, was not the nearest relation Naomi had in Bethlehem. Another was of closer kin to Elimelech, and it was his duty to take up the widows case in accordance with the custom of the time. The old law that no Hebrew family should be allowed to lapse had deep root and justification. How could Israel maintain itself in the land of promise and become the testifying people of God if families were suffered to die out and homesteads to be lost? One war after another drained away many active men of the tribes. Upon those who survived lay the serious duty of protecting widows, upholding claims to farm and dwelling, and raising up to those who had died a name in Israel. The stress of the time gave sanction to the law; without it Israel would have decayed, losing ground. and power in the face of the enemy. Now this custom bound the nearest kinsman of Naomi to befriend her and, at least, to establish her claim to a certain “parcel of land” near Bethlehem. As for Boaz, he had to stand aside and give the goal his opportunity.
And another reason is easily seen for his not hastening to supply the two widows with every comfort and remove from their hearts every fear, a reason which touches the great difficulty of the philanthropic, -how to do good and yet do no harm. To give is easy; but to help without tarnishing the fine independence and noble thrift of poorer persons is not easy. It is, in truth, a very serious matter to use wealth wisely, for against the absolute duty of help hangs the serious mischief that may result from lavish or careless charity. Boaz appears a true friend and wise benefactor in leaving Ruth to enjoy the sweetness of securing the daily portion of corn by her own exertion. He might have relieved her from toiling like one of the poorest and least cared for of women. He might have sent her home the first day and one of his young men after her with store of corn and oil. But if he had done so he would have made the great mistake so often made nowadays by the bountiful. An industrious patient generous life would have been spoiled. To protect Ruth from any kind or degree of insolence, to show her, for his own part, the most delicate respect-this Boaz could well do. In what he refrained from doing he is an example, and in the kind and measure of attention he paid to Ruth. Corresponding acts of Christian courtesy and justice due from the rich and influential of our time to persons in straitened circumstances are far too often unrendered. A thousand opportunities of paying this real debt of man to man are allowed to pass. Those concerned do not see any obligation, and the reason is that they want the proper state of mind. That is indispensable. Where it exists true neighbourliness will follow; the best help will he given naturally with perfect taste, in proper degree and without self-sufficiency or pride.
A great hazard goes with much of the spiritual work of our time. The Ruth gleaning for herself in the field of Christian thought, finding here and there an ear of heavenly corn which, as she has gathered it gives true nourishment to the soul-is met not by one but by many eager to save her all the trouble of searching the Scriptures and thinking out the problems of life and faith. Is it wrong to deprive a brave self-helper of the need to toil for daily bread? How much greater is the wrong done to minds capable of spiritual endeavour when they are taught to renounce personal effort and are loaded with sheaves of corn which they have neither sowed nor reaped. The fashion of our time is to save people trouble in religion, to remove all resistance from the way of mind and soul, and as a result the spiritual life never attains strength or even consciousness. Better the scanty meal won by personal search in the great harvest field than the surfeit of dainties on which some are fed, spiritual paupers though they know it not. The wisdom of the Divine Book is marvellously shown in that it gives largely without destroying the need for effort, that it requires examination and research, comparison of scripture with scripture, earnest thought in many a field. Bible study, therefore, makes strong Christians, strong faith.
As time went by and harvest drew to a close, Naomi grew impatient. Anxious about Ruths future she wished to see something done towards establishing her in safety and honour. “My daughter-in-law,” we hear her say, “shall I not seek rest-a menuchah or asylum for thee, that it may be well with thee?” No goal or redeemer has appeared to befriend Naomi and reinstate her, or Ruth as representing her dead son, in the rights of Elimelech. If those rights are not to lapse, something must be done speedily; and Naomis plot is a bold one. She sets Ruth to claim Boaz as the kinsman whose duty it is to marry her and become her protector. Ruth is to go to the threshing floor on the night of the harvest festival, wait until Boaz lies down to sleep beside the mass of winnowed grain, and place herself at his feet, so reminding him that if no other will it is his part to be a husband to her for the sake of Elimelech and his sons. The plan is daring and appears to us indelicate at least. It is impossible to say whether any custom of the time sanctioned it; but even in that case we cannot acquit Naomi of resorting to a stratagem with the view of bringing about what seemed most desirable for Ruth and herself.
Now let us remember the position of the two widows, lonely, with no prospect before them but hard toil that would by and by fail, unable to undertake anything on their own account, and still regarded with indifference, if not suspicion, by the people of Bethlehem. There is no asylum for Ruth except in the house of a husband. If Naomi dies she will be worse than destitute, morally under a cloud. To live by herself will be to lead a life of constant peril. It is, we may say, a desperate resource on which Naomi falls. Boaz is probably already married, has perhaps more wives than one. True, he has room in his house for Ruth; he can easily provide for her; and though the customs of the age are strained somewhat we must partly admit excuse. Still the venture is almost entirely suggested and urged by worldly considerations, and for the sake of them great risk is run. Instead of gaining a husband Ruth may completely forfeit respect. Boaz, so far from entertaining her appeal to his kinship and generosity, may drive her from the threshing floor. It is one of those cases in which, notwithstanding some possible defence in custom, poverty and anxiety lead into dubious ways.
We ask why Naomi did not first approach the proper goel, the kinsman nearer than Boaz, on whom she had an undeniable claim. And the answer occurs that he did not seem in respect of disposition or means so good a match as Boaz. Or why did she not go directly to Boaz and state her desire? She was apparently not averse from grasping at the result, compromising him, or running the risk of doing so in order to gain her end. We cannot pass the point without observing that, despite the happy issue of this plot, it is a warning not an example. These secret, underhand schemes are not to our liking; they should in no circumstances be resorted to. It was well for Ruth that she had a man to deal with who was generous, not irascible, a man of character who had fully appreciated her goodness. The scheme would otherwise have had a pitiful result. The story is one creditable in many respects to human nature, and the Moabite, acting under Naomis direction, appears almost blameless; yet the sense of having lowered herself must have cast its shadow. A risk was run too great by far for modesty and honour.
To compromise ourselves by doing that which savours of presumption, which goes too far even by a hairs breadth in urging a claim, is a bad thing. Better remain without what we reckon our rights than lower our moral dignity in pressing them. Independence of character, perfect honour and uprightness are too precious by far to be imperilled even in a time of serious difficulty. Today we can hardly turn in any direction without seeing instances of risky compromise often ending in disaster. To obtain preferment one will offer some mean bribe of flattery to the person who can give it. To gain a fortune men will condescend to pitiful self-humiliation. In the literary world the upward ways open easily to talent that does not refuse compromises; a writer may have success at the price of astute silence or careful caressing of prejudice. The candidate for office commits himself and has afterwards to wriggle as best he can out of the straits in which he is involved. And what is the meaning of the light judgment of drunkenness and impurity by men and women of all ranks who associate with those known to be guilty and make no protest against their wrong doing?
It would be shirking one of the plain applications of the incidents before us if we passed over the compromises so many women make with self-respect and purity. Ruth, under the advice of one whom she knew to be a good woman, risked something: with us now are many who against the entreaty of all true friends adventure into dangerous ways, put themselves into the power of men they have no reason to trust. And women in high place, who should set an example of fidelity to the divine order and understand the honour of womanhood, are rather leading the dance of freedom and risk. To keep a position or win a position in the crowd called society some will yield to any fashion, go all lengths in the license of amusement, sit unblushing at plays that serve only one end, give themselves and their daughters to embraces that degrade. The struggle to live is spoken of sometimes as an excuse for women. But is it the very poor only who compromise themselves? Something else is going on beside the struggle to find work and bread. People are forgetting God, thrusting aside the ideas of the soul and of sin; they want keen delight and are ready to venture all if only in triumphant ambition or on the perilous edge of infamy they can satisfy desire for an hour. The cry of today, spreading down through all ranks, is the old one, Why should we be righteous over much and destroy ourselves? It is the expression of a base and despicable atheism. To deny the higher light which shows the way of personal duty and nobleness, to prefer instead the miserable rushlight of desire is the fatal choice against which all wisdom of sage and seer testifies. Yet the thing is done daily, done by brilliant women who go on as if nothing was wrong and laugh back to those who follow them. The Divine Friend of women protests, but His words are unheard, drowned by the fascinating music and quick pulsation of the dance of death.
To compromise ourselves is bad: close beside lies the danger of compromising others; and this too is illustrated by the narrative. Boaz acted in generosity and honour, told Ruth plainly that a kinsman nearer than himself stood between them, made her a most favourable promise. But he sent her away in the early morning “before one could recognise another.” The risk to which she had exposed him was one he did not care to face. While he made all possible excuses for her and was in a sense proud of the trust she had reposed in him, still he was somewhat alarmed and anxious. The narrative is generous to Ruth; but this is not concealed. We see very distinctly a touch of something caught in heathen Moab.
On the more satisfactory side of the picture is the confidence so unreservedly exercised, justified so thoroughly. It is good to be among people who deserve trust and never fail in the time of trial. Take them at any hour, in any way, they are the same. Incapable of baseness they bear every test. On the firm conviction that Boaz was a man of this kind Naomi depended, upon this and an assurance equally firm that Ruth would behave herself discreetly. Happy indeed are those who have the honour of friendship with the honourable and true, with men who would rather lose a right hand than do anything base, with women who would die for honours sake. To have acquaintance with faithful men is to have a way prepared for faith in God.
Let us not fail, however, to observe where honour like this may be found, where alone it is to be found. Common is the belief that absolute fidelity may exist in soil cleared of all religious principle. You meet people who declare that religion is of no use. They have been brought up in religion, but they are tired of it. They have given up churches and prayers and are going to be honourable without thought of God, on the basis of their own steadfast virtue. We shall not say it is impossible, or that women like Ruth may not rely upon men who so speak. But a single word of scorn cast on religion reveals so faulty a character that it is better not to confide in the man who utters it. He is in the real sense an atheist, one to whom nothing is sacred. About some duties he may have a sentiment; but what is sentiment or taste to build upon? For one to trust where reputation is concerned, where moral well being is involved, a soul must be found whose life is rooted in the faith of God. True enough, we are under the necessity of trusting persons for whom we have no such guarantee. Fortunately, however, it is only in matters of business, or municipal affairs, or parliamentary votes, things extraneous to our proper life. Unrighteous laws may be made, we may be defrauded and oppressed, but that does not affect our spiritual position. When it comes to the soul and the souls life, when one is in search of a wife, a husband, a friend, trust should be placed elsewhere, hope built on a sure foundation.
May we depend upon love in the absence of religious faith? Some would fain conjure with that word; but love is a divine gift when it is pure and true; the rest is mere desire and passion. Do you suppose because an insincere worldly man has a selfish passion for you that you can be safe with him? Do you think because a worldly woman loves you in a worldly way that your soul and your future will be safe with her? Find a fearer of God, one whose virtues are rooted where alone they can grow, in faith, or live without a wife, a husband. It is presupposed that you yourself are a fearer of God, a servant of Christ. For, unless you are, the rule operates on the other side and you are one who should be shunned. Besides, if you are a materialist living in time and sense and yet look for spiritual graces and superhuman fidelity, your expectation is amazing, your hope a thing to wonder at.
True, hypocrites exist, and we may be deceived just because of our certainty that religion is the only root of faithfulness. A man may simulate religion and deceive for a time. The young may be sadly deluded, a whole community betrayed by one who makes the divinest facts of human nature serves his own wickedness awhile.
He disappears and leaves behind him broken hearts, shattered hopes, darkened lives. Has religion, then, nothing to do with morality? The very ruin we lament shows that the human heart in its depth testifies to an intimate and eternal connection with the absolute of fidelity. Not otherwise could that hypocrite have deceived. And in the strength of faith there are men and women of unflinching honour, who, when they find each other out, form rare and beautiful alliances. Step for step they go on, married or unmarried, each cheering the other in trial, sustaining the other in every high and generous task. Together they enter more deeply into the purpose of life, that is the will of God, and fill with strong and healthy religion the circle of their influence.
Of the people of ordinary virtue what shall be said-those who are neither perfectly faithful nor disgracefully unfaithful, neither certain to be staunch and true nor ready to betray and cast aside those who trust them. Large is the class of men whose individuality is not of a moral kind, affable and easy, brisk and clever but not resolute in truth and right. Are we to leave these where they are? If we belong to their number are we to stay among them? Must they get on as best they can with each other, neither blessed nor condemned? For them the gospel is provided in its depth and urgency. Theirs is the state it cannot tolerate nor leave untouched, unaffected. If earth is good enough for you, so runs the divine message to them, cling to it, enjoy its dainties, laugh in its sunlight-and die with it. But if you see the excellence of truth, be true; if you hear the voice of the eternal Christ, arise and follow Him, born again by the word of God which liveth and abideth forever.