Thread by @DrPJWilliams

THREAD: The book of Ruth

Begins as if it's going to be a story about a man:

'In the days when the judges judged there was a famine in the land, and a MAN of Bethlehem in Judah went to sojourn in the country of Moab, HE and HIS wife and HIS two sons.'

Immediately *famine* & *sojourn* co-occur

as they do in Genesis 12:10--the 1st time either term occurs in the Bible.

So we're in an Abraham-like situation.

A man is on the move, with his family, away from famine, to sojourn in another country.

Strangely enough he's leaving Bethlehem, which means 'house of bread' (beth = house; lehem = bread).

We have 2 reasons to think names in this book bear significant meanings:

1) Naomi (meaning 'sweetness') herself says that the meaning of her name is inappropriate & that she should be called Mara 'bitterness' (1:20)

2) All 7 major characters (arguably) have names fitting their role:

This is an argument from quantitative confirmation.

Elimelech 'my God is king' (story about God's control)
Naomi 'sweetness'
Mahlon 'sickness' (dies)
Chilion 'consumption' (dies)
Orpah 'back of neck' (turns away)
Ruth 'friendship' (probably)
Boaz 'in him is strength'

The etymology of Ruth (רוּת) as 'friendship' or 'female companion' (רְעוּת) is confirmed by the Syriac translation of the OT & Syriac translations of Matthew 1:5 (shown below).

1:2 tells us the names & that they're Ephrathites from Bethlehem.

Remember whenever you see the word 'Ephrathite' (from Ephrath) that it's the same Hebrew form as 'Ephraimite' (from Ephraim).

Latin distinguishes Ephratheus (Ruth 1:2) from Ephrateus (Judges 12:5)

So both the last story of Judges and the book of Ruth share both Bethlehem & Ephra*.

They link deeply in other ways.

https://twitter.com/DrPJWilliams/status/1180465021345816579?s=20

And of course this story will provide a pleasant contrast to the Bible's most gory story:

https://twitter.com/DrPJWilliams/status/1163595483195092993

by telling of Boaz's more noble treatment of a woman alone at night.

#notallmen

V. 1 introduces story about a MAN
V. 2 tells us his name
V. 3 tells us he's dead

So this will be a different story.

From 1:3 Naomi is the focus & she is bereaved.

The family goes from 4 down to 3.

1:4 the men Mahlon & Chilion take wives: Orpah & Ruth.

The narrator deliberately avoids telling us who married whom.

Based on order we might think M + O & C + R were pairs.

We go through the whole story not knowing.

At the end (4:10) this assumption is shown to be wrong.

Why not say earlier?

Because the men (for once) are not the focus.

The family goes up from 3 to 5.

And they stay in Moab for 10 years.

'10 years' is another piece of language reminiscent of the Abraham story.

Here as in Genesis 16:3 10 years of sojourning is connected with the taking of out-group wives (Moabites here, Egyptian Hagar in Genesis).

1:5 Mahlon & Chilion die.

Family goes down from 5 to 3.

Also, these 3 have no connection now except through the deceased.

The narrative doesn't comment on the bereavement of the two daughters-in-law, but on Naomi's bereavement.

"the woman was left without her two sons and her husband."

She's lost the 3 people she had a blood-connection with

& is left with 2 unconnected, foreign daughters-in-law.

Her situation looks bad

(SPOILER: only if you underestimate God, or what he's going to do through Ruth)

1:6 Naomi rises to return home, because she's heard that God has 'visited' his people to give them food.

The 1st time the term 'visit' (פקד) occurs is also in the Abraham narrative: God visiting Sarah (Genesis 21:1).

There are parallels between the situation of Sarah and Naomi, since both look like they're too old for progeny.

1:7 All three women set off to go to Judah.

1:8 Naomi tries persuading her daughters-in-law to go to their mother's house (NB not father's house, the usual expression).

Naomi wishes that God may show 'kindness' (hesed חֶסֶד), the 1st occurrence of an important theme word for this book.

May they find 'rest' & a husband.

She kisses.

They cry.

1:10 Naomi's initial persuasion has not yet worked.

The 2 insist they will still come with her to Judah.

Now she mounts her arguments.

1) she's got no more sons in her womb
2) she's too old to marry
3) even (in the unlikely situation) she were to decide there was hope & find a husband that night & bear sons, it would be a long wait before they'd be available.

A final argument is that God has made Naomi's life bitter.

Given past record of God's dealing with her, any ground for optimism is cut off.

1:14 reverses the order of 'kiss' and 'lifting up voice & weeping' from 1:9.

1st weeping.

Then Orpah initiates goodbye kiss.

But, astonishingly, Ruth 'clings to' Naomi.

The phrase word 'cling to' is a verb + following preposition דבק ב.

It's famous, of course, from Genesis 2:24: the paradigm of a man 'cleaving to' (older English) his wife.

Ruth sticks to Naomi in a way which is partially analogous to the close tie of marriage.

1:15 Naomi seeks to dissuade Ruth.

She uses Orpah as an example.

“See, your sister-in-law has gone back to her people and to her gods; return after your sister-in-law.”

Ruth responds:

“Where you go I will go, and where you lodge I will lodge. Your people shall be my people, and your God my God.

Where you die I will die, and there will I be buried. May the Lord do so to me and more also if anything but death parts me from you.”

Now that's friendship.

TBC

Ruth’s words have perfect rhythm until the point of death, where ‘and there I will be buried’ cuts the rhythm short, like an untimely burial.

But it also stresses her inseparability from Naomi:

Nothing but death will separate them & even then her body will join Naomi’s.

1:18 Naomi does not verbally assent.

She just ceases verbally to dissent.

There’s not much more to say.

1:19 traces their journey back to Bethlehem as if it were in silence.

Which provides a contrast with the hubbub when they arrive in Bethlehem.

When they return the noun ‘women’ does not occur, but in 1:19 the verb in ‘they said, “Is this Naomi?”’ is feminine plural.

Naomi’s address ‘Don’t call me Naomi’ (1:20) is again feminine plural.

Men are absent. Naomi asks women to rename her Mara (bitter) because of what Shaddai (a term stressing God’s power) has done.

From her perspective

she went out ‘full’ (during famine!)

she came back ‘empty’ (at harvest!)

Quantity of food around is inverse to her perspective.

She complains that God has made her life bitter.

But the chapter ends noting that barley harvest is just beginning.

The harvest of her suffering is yet to come.

Psalm 126:5 ‘Those who sow in tears shall reap with shouts of joy!’

Chapter 2 begins.

Chapter division is in a good place.

The grammar of the opening marks a disjunction with what precedes & we have a new major character:

Boaz

2:1 describes him as a ‘man of valour/strength/virtue’: gibbōr hayil

In 3:11 Boaz will use the equivalent female expression for Ruth: ēsheth hayil

These 2 noble characters (under God) turn around Naomi’s plight.

Without either one’s virtue, the story would not end happily.

2:2 Ruth, not Naomi, takes initiative to go gleaning (gathering harvest scraps), after any in whose eyes she might find favour.

2:3 a rare ‘chance’-type phrase in the Bible: ‘she happened to come to the division of field belonging to Boaz’. A similar phrase occurs in Luke 10:31.

2:3 tells us that Boaz was from the clan of Elimelech—meaning ‘my God is king’, & rather suggestive that more than mere chance is at play here.

2:4 tells of the mutual greetings between Boaz & the reapers:

‘Yhwh be with you’

‘May Yhwh bless you’

Which, of course, happens in this story.

2:5 Boaz inquires with his foreman about Ruth in a way which was natural when an unattached female was unimaginable:

‘Whose is this young girl?’

The foreman identifies her as a Moabite who has returned with Naomi, but (unusually) doesn’t socially belong to her or anyone else.

He notes her request to glean & gather ‘among the bundles’.

This may be a bit more than she’d indicated to Naomi in 2:2. We’ll see in 3:9 how Ruth pushes boundaries (to good effect).

The difficulty is the meaning of the words translated ‘bundle’ or ‘sheaf’.

Here is a matter where I would appreciate comments from learned colleagues.

עמר ‘ōmer in 2:7
צבת tseveth in 2:16
אלמה alummāh in Genesis 37:7

All get translated ‘bundle’ or ‘sheaf’

Is there a difference?

NB most western Bible translators are ‘townies’ & may miss such things.

It seems to me that Ruth does more in 2:7 than she indicated to Naomi in 2:2, but also that Boaz allows her to do yet more in 2:16.

So I’m wanting someone to clarify the semantics of bundles.

2:8 Boaz’s 1st word to Ruth in Hebrew sounds like ‘hello’.

Literally he says ‘Have you not heard, my daughter? Don’t go to glean in another field.’

He urges her to stick ‘with’ (same verb as but different preposition from 1:14) his young girls.

Boaz also offers drink supplies.

2:9 Boaz’s words are striking:

‘Have I not commanded the young men not to touch you?’

The narrative is aware of Ruth’s physical vulnerability, esp as an unattached female.

When read after Judges 19-21 we’re esp aware of this.

These narratives have much to say about #vawg.

2:10 Ruth is overwhelmed by Boaz’s offer & prostrates herself.

‘Why have I found favour in your eyes, that you should take notice of me, given that I am a foreign woman?’

‘Foreign woman’ is nokhriyyāh (נכריה).

Here I want again to develop @rhamage’s insight that Ruth fits well after Proverbs.

Ruth describes herself as a ‘foreign woman’ in 2:10–the same word which occurs regularly in Proverbs for the woman to avoid, often translated ‘adulteress’—Proverbs 2:16; 5:20; 6:24; 7:5.

But while Ruth sees herself as the undesirable woman, Boaz describes her as ēsheth hayil ‘woman of virtue’ in 3:11, the exact phrase which is so famous for the hard-to-find virtuous wife of Proverbs 31:10.

Ruth’s self perception is at the opposite pole from Boaz’s esteem of her.

2:11 Boaz observes what he’s learned of Ruth.

Like Abraham she’s left the ‘land of her birth’ & gone to a land she didn’t know before.

2:12 he wishes that Yhwh will repay what she’s done (which he will) as she’s come to take refuge under his wings (look for this phrase again).

2:13 Ruth thanks Boaz for his favour to her as his ‘maidservant’, though she insists she’s actually not even that.

The final phrase ‘though I am not one of your maidservants’ grammatically allows a re-reading with hindsight & against Ruth’s intent as ‘and I will not be as one of your maidservants’.

Perhaps this is a narrator’s hint of future events.

TBC another day.

2:14 Boaz gives Ruth an abundant lunch.

‘she was full & had some left over’

The verbs ‘be full’ & ‘have left over’ recur in 2:18:

Ruth gave Naomi ‘what she had left over after being full.’

Naomi said she’d come back ‘empty’ (1:21) but now the harvest abundance theme begins.

2:15-16 Boaz issues more orders:

1. Ruth can glean right among the sheaves;

2. they should help her by drawing out (probably) handfuls of stalks & ‘leaving’ (עזב) them.

The word ‘leave/abandon’ (עזב) is a theme word in Ruth—always in dialogue:

1:16 Ruth to Naomi ‘don’t urge me to *leave* you’

2:11 Boaz to Ruth ‘It’s been told me ... how you *left* your father, your mother, & the land of your birth’

The climactic occurrence is in 2:20.

Naomi to Ruth ‘Blessed be Yhwh who has not *abandoned* his lovingkindness with the living and the dead.’

Boaz also gives 2 negative commands interlaced with his positive ones:

‘Don’t reproach her’ (2:15)

‘Don’t rebuke her’ (2:16)

The former term focuses more on shame.

2:17 at the day’s end Ruth has a whole ephah of barley (estimates of an ephah vary).

2:18 She shares it with Naomi who blesses Boaz 2x (2:19-20): before & after she knows his identity.

1st time she says ‘May the one who took note of you be blessed’, using Ruth’s verb from 2:10.

Funnily enough this is also a story of *God* taking note of Ruth, a foreigner.

After Boaz has been pronounced blessed 3x (2:4, 19, 20)

After Boaz has blessed Ruth (3:10)

The final & climactic blessing of the book is for the Lord (4:14).

Naomi is pleased that Boaz is a relative-redeemer.

Ruth (2:21) gladly shares that Boaz has said she can work closely with the young MEN till the end of harvest.

Cautious Naomi (2:22) thinks it’s a great idea she should stay with his young WOMEN & avoid being assaulted elsewhere

The theme of female vulnerability to male violence (#vawg) is rarely observed in Ruth, but we see it in:

—Boaz’s command in 2:9

—explicit mention of assault in 2:21

—the variation between young men & young women in 2:21-22.

It highlights the *risk* in Ruth’s actions in ch. 3.

If we didn’t know the end of the story we might expect that something will happen between Ruth & one of the many young men she is around.

As Boaz observes in 3:10: Ruth would have had opportunity for marriage with others.

We’ll see she doesn’t go to him in romantic desperation.

Ch. 3 — again a chapter division in the right place. We’re now at the end of harvest, & Naomi wants to seek ‘rest’ for Ruth.

This is a change of plan, since Naomi had previously urged Ruth to find ‘rest’ in her homeland (1:9).

Some suppose a year has passed since after the wheat harvest is mentioned in 2:23, we’re back round at the winnowing of barley again in 3:1.

3:1 She addresses Ruth as ‘my daughter’—something both Naomi & Boaz do repeatedly.

3:2 She knows that Boaz is going down to the threshing floor, which might be this one (photo from around 1933).

This will involve some celebration & a night out in the open (he may be guarding his grain heap).

3:3 Ruth is to optimise her attractiveness (wash, oil, clothes), & optimise the timing of the approach (after he’s full & merry).

Ruth is to ‘uncover his feet’, lie down & await his instructions.

We don’t have a lot of cultural background material to shed light on this odd approach.

There’s no reason to think she’s doing anything usual.

After all, this is a story about unusual events.

However, the approach is clearly bold & romantically suggestive.

But 1st I want to argue against those who see this approach as involving a sexual act.

There are many reasons to reject this, but I need to explain how it arises.

The word translated ‘place of his feet’ in 3:4, 7, 14 is not common, occurring only here & Daniel 10:6.

There it seems to mean ‘legs’ as it’s contrasted with arms.

Anyway, it’s related to Hebrew regel (רגל) ‘foot’ & interpreters often see the dual form of ‘foot’ as able to be a euphemism for the male pubic region.

NB none of the texts referenced below *demands* this meaning.

And there are some objections to this interpretation, eg contrast with ‘head’ in Is. 7:20 & climactic position of ‘beard’, which would be surprising if pubic shaving were mentioned.

Anyway, granting the existence of this euphemism, it doesn’t work in this passage where Ruth’s activity before Boaz awakes & after he lies down again is described in identical terms & where the verb šākab (שכב) repeatedly demands the plain meaning of ‘lie down’ (3:4, 7a).

This most dramatic scene of the book is the NONSEX scene.

Of course, man & woman in dark after man has drunk well, at a time of celebration, within a book which stresses female vulnerability to men, leads us to *expect* a sexual advance.

Instead we get a more interesting story.

3:8 Boaz wakes ‘startled’. The word חרד refers to physical trembling, which could be from fear, but more probably here refers to the spasm of chill, which is inevitable as the Springtime (April?) temperature drops & your feet are uncovered.

Here are temperatures for Bethlehem.

He asks ‘who are you?’, the same question (though often translated otherwise) Naomi asks in 3:16.

Here Ruth goes beyond her instructions from Naomi, & doesn’t initially wait for Boaz’s instructions.

Rather she quotes Boaz back to himself.

Boaz in 2:12: ‘The Lord repay you for what you have done, & a full reward be given you by the Lord, the God of Israel, *under whose wings* you have come to take refuge.’

Ruth in 3:9: ‘I am Ruth, your servant. Spread *your wings* over your servant, for you are a redeemer.’

She invites Boaz to become the answer to his own prayer.

How will he respond...?

Tbc

Boaz declares her ‘kindness’ (חסד) in approaching him greater than the previous one (commitment to Naomi): “you have not gone after young men, whether rich or poor” (3:10)

This reinforces the impression given by his use of “my daughter” in 2:8 of a generational difference.

This book centres a good intergenerational & interethnic marriage between Boaz & Ruth.

But first some thought experiments raised by Boaz’s words:

According to Boaz, Ruth could have “gone after” (Hebrew & English idioms seem to align!) a man her age.

He seems to rate her chances of success highly.

Though she’s Moabite & a widow (negatives for eligibility) she’s also young & hardworking.

In this culture where every man must find a wife she’s eligible for a poor man & possibly even a rich one.

Except for one problem: Naomi.

Simple marriage options leave Naomi stranded.

A new husband can hardly be expected to take a non-related older female dependant.

Which is why Ruth’s approach to Boaz is different:

She’s not just approaching him as a potential husband, but specifically as ‘kin-redeemer’.

She’s insisting that the deal involves Naomi, just as Boaz will insist to the other redeemer that the deal involves Ruth.

Sometimes in life you have to give up one relationship to have another (Luke 14:26).

But here Ruth has chosen the course of keeping with Naomi, whatever & it works out well.

Boaz replies “All that you say I will do for you” (3:11) — yet again an echo within the book as Ruth said to Naomi a few verses earlier “All that you say (to me) I will do” (3:5).

Unusually, the man says he’ll do exactly what the woman says.

More on this role reversal later.

Boaz continues that all the gate of his people (that’s where older men sit) knows that she’s a ‘virtuous woman’ — the same phrase as for the ‘virtuous wife’ in Proverbs 31:10.

But there is a closer kin-redeemer.

Here we see a good condition for intergenerational marriage.

Boaz is flattered by Ruth’s approach, but above all he’s seeking what is best for Ruth.

Predatory older males like younger females for their own advantage, but Boaz is considering Ruth’s situation more than his own. Only when that happens can intergenerational marriage work.

3:13 Boaz tells her to rest the remainder of the night, undertaking a solemn oath of action in the morning. If the other won’t redeem, he will.

She gets up again while it was dark.

Boaz orders a hush up, & loads Ruth with barley.

Six measures (prob not ephas bc too heavy) to add to the 1 ephah earlier: total 7 units. Fullness.

He gets physically close as he “sets” the weight of barley on her.

Ruth gets back to Naomi’s paradoxical question “Who are you, my daughter?” (3:16), paralleling 3:9.

English translations prefer to go for “how are you?” But I also think that Naomi may expect Ruth to have changed social status overnight.

Ruth adds kind words from Boaz about her mother-in-law. (3:17); Naomi assures Ruth that he’ll settle the matter today (3:18).

Boaz goes to the gate, where the other redeemer was bound to pass.

We are not given his name. He’s just called ‘so and so’

ESV ‘friend’
Hebrew pelōnî almōnî

The Hebrew pelōnî is related to the Spanish fulano (& fulana!) via Arabic.

This man is nameless having (like Onan!) opted out of history, passing up on the opportunity to be ancestor of the royal line leading to David (& Jesus!).

He was too worried about risking his own inheritance (4:6).

Boaz’s proposal at first seems simple: So-and-so is to pay to unmortgage land from Elimelech’s estate. Once Naomi died it would be added to his own estate.

So-and-so agrees (4:4).

Boaz then says that he would also get Ruth as wife & the duty to raise up a separate line to Elimelech, so the land would not be added to his estate.

So-and-so refuses.

Then, not for the 1st time in the book feet are uncovered (4:7).

Thankfully there’s no spitting (Deut 25:9).

But interestingly the narrator has explained that this is a custom of a much earlier period.

The narrator is claiming the story is true, but not claiming to come from the same period as the story.

Finally, before all the witnesses, Boaz gets title of everything (4:9-10) but note his emphasis is on perpetuating the name of the dead. He names all 3 dead men, Naomi, Ruth, specifies the relationship of Mahlon to Ruth & 2x mentions the word ‘name’ relative to the dead.

The witnesses agree & wish that Ruth may be like the matriarchs Rachel & Leah, the ‘builders’ of the house of Israel.

They wish that Boaz’s name fame (4:11).

It turns out that Boaz in wishing to perpetuate Elimelech’s name has been rewarded with more fame than he.

They also wish his house to be like their ancestor Perez.

We’re reminded of the story of Genesis 38 where Judah mistook his daughter-in-law Tamar for a prostitute & she bore twins Perez & Zerah.

It looked like Zerah would be the 1st twin, but Perez won out.

A lesson:

Zerah had a descendant called Achan who, though an Israelite, took what was forbidden & he & his whole family were destroyed like Canaanites (Joshua 7).

Meanwhile the Canaanite prostitute Rahab & her family were all saved.

It looks like Zerah’s line went nowhere.

Perez’s line through Ruth to David to Jesus is the opposite of Zerah’s line. It’s super-fruitful.

Tamar, Rahab, and Ruth are outsiders, who come inside.

Perez & Boaz start in 2nd place.

Onan, Zerah, Achan, & So-and-so, by contrast, all start out in front and fall back.

Boaz marries Ruth (4:13) & God grants her to conceive.

The women bless God for his kindness to Naomi observing that Ruth is worth more than 7 sons.

Astoundingly Naomi gets to nurse a child.

The book ends with a 10 generation genealogy from Perez to David, reminding us of the 10 generation genealogies of Genesis 5 & 11.

The last word of the book is David.

The situation had looked helpless for Naomi, but in fact led to the greatest dynasty ever.

What do we conclude?

Ruth is described by Naomi & Boaz as *daughter*.

She’s better to Naomi than 7 *sons* (4:15).

She sticks to Naomi, with vocabulary reminiscent of a *husband* (1:14).

She is Boaz’s wife (4:10), but in 1 scene takes the initiative & he promises to obey.

Her name means ‘friend’ or ‘friendship’ & that, under God, can make up for any lack in human relationships.

God is faithful & shows his faithfulness through inspiring humans to show that fidelity.

He even used the faithful friendship of a sociality marginalised poor foreign widow to bring about the line that led to Jesus.

If you’re feeling weak, just think what God could do through you!

END

RT if appreciated.