Ruth wrap up

The book of Ruth has no known author and no definitely known date. It must have been written after the establishment of the Davidic monarchy because one of its purposes seems to be to establish David's lineage from Judah. Another purpose could be to show that Yahweh can approve of marriages with women from other nations, and even bless them and the Israelites through them, in spite of his previous adamant commands against them. Plus, descendants of Moabites are not supposed to be allowed to enter the assembly of  Yahweh for 10 generations. (Deuteronomy 23:3) Jewish commentaries get around that by saying the nationality of the father is what mattered, not the mother.

 The book does not claim to be the word of Yahweh or to be inspired by Yahweh or his Holy Spirit. There is no mention of angels, demons, or other supernatural beings besides Yahweh. There is no heaven, hell, or messaiah mentioned. There are no descriptions of religious rituals or commands, in spite of the fact that the story must have taken place from the time of passover to Pentecost, because those dates are tied to the harvesting of grain. The only hint of religion is the kinsman-redeemer tradition depicted, and that is more cultural. There is no mention of the ark of the covenant, Shiloh, priests, or sacrifices.

There is a conspicuous lack of violence and  prejudice against other people groups. Ruth, a Moabite, is given the highest praise. She is said to be better than seven sons to Naomi, high praise indeed. Everyone else behaves admirably as well. I have an atheist friend who says this is her favorite story in the bible.

A hint that the story may have been fabricated is found in the names of people in the story. Naomi means "pleasant" but she asks to be called Mara which means "bitter." Ruth means "friendship." Ruth's dead husband Mahlon's name means "weakling" and Boaz's name means "strength." Coincidence?

Job will be our next book, because its events also seem to take place before there was a monarchy. Then we will continue on to 1 Samuel. 

Ruth chapter 4

After reading chapter 4:

*That was fast! We are already on the last chapter of Ruth. Now we see Boaz arranging for his marriage to Ruth. He finds the kinsman-redeemer who has a closer claim than he does. In the presence of ten elders, he explains that Naomi is selling the land of their "brother" Elimelech. Does this mean Boaz and the other man are actually younger brothers of Elimelech, Boaz being the youngest? The other man is willing to redeem the land until Boaz explains that there is another piece of property that goes along with it, the dead man's widow, which technically is Naomi, not Ruth. But I suppose Ruth would be part of the package, since it appears that once a family owned a woman, she was theirs to do with what they wanted. Boaz also told the other man that if he took on all this "property," he would be responsible for maintaining the name of the dead. This would mean he was obligated to produce  children for a dead man with the dead man's widow, as in the story of Tamar back in Genesis.

*The other man was unwilling to take this on because of legal implications regarding the property he already owned,  probably his current wife and children. So, he took off his sandle and handed it to Boaz, which is said to have been a way of concluding legal transactions in those days. Boaz was told he could buy the "property" himself. Then Boaz reminds the ten elders that they are witnesses and that he now owns the dead men's property, including Ruth. He owns Naomi too, even though the text doesn't say so, which gives her the security of a good home for the rest of her life. The elders  agreed to be witnesses of the transaction and gave Boaz a blessing saying may his offspring be famous in Bethlehem and may his family be blessed like that of Perez whom Tamar bore to Judah. Judah was also much older than Tamar (He was her father-in-law and a kind of kinsman redeemer, even if reluctantly.) Of course the author of this story already knew that Boaz's descendant was claimed to be King David. That increases the likelihood that he put these words into the mouths of the witnesses. See, another prophecy conveniently came true! Funny how that works.

*Ruth and Boaz became husband and wife, and Yahweh "enabled"  Ruth to concieve. She had a son, because Israelite women seem to disproportionately bear sons. The local women praised Yahweh and blessed Naomi, again prophesying Ruth's son would become famous. Naomi took care of her grandchild like she was its mother. The other women even said, "Naomi has a son."  Hopefully Ruth was okay with that. The boy was named Obed, and became the father of Jesse, the father of David.

*Lastly, we are given a geneology from Perez, the Tamar connection, to David. Ten generations from Judah, a son of Israel (Jacob), in Genesis, to David, forefather of the Judahite monarchy. This appears to be problematic. A generation is approximately 22-32 years. We have been told the Israelites were in Egypt for 430 years. (Exodus 12:41) David's ancestors from that era would have been Perez, Hezron, Ram, and Aminidab. That is an average generation  of 107 years. The time of the judges supposedly lasted at least 350years from scriptures we have read so far. We may find out more later. David's ancestors from that period would have been from Nashon (also mentioned in Numbers 7), Salmon, Boaz, Obed, and Jesse.  That is an average generation of 70 years. 780 years altogether, at normal human reproduction rate, would have produced at least 25 generations, unless they all took after Abraham and produced children at a very advanced age. What is the likelihood of that?

Ruth chapter 3

After reading chapter 3:

*One day, Naomi decides to take matters into her own hands and find Ruth a permanent home. She thinks Boaz is a good prospect because he is a relative of her husband's. Lots of sources assume this has to do with Levirate marriage, where a brother of a widow's deceased husband is obligated to marry the widow and produce heirs for his older brother. But it doesn't seem to fit the circumstances of this story. Naomi does call him a kinsman, which suggests that the kinsman-redeemer tradition may have included more than land. Women were property as well, after all.

*Anyway, Naomi tells Ruth to wash her self, put on perfume, and dress in her best clothes. Then she is to go to the threshing floor, where Boaz is, and secretly watch him eating and drinking until he goes to sleep. Then she is to creep up to him, uncover his feet, and lie down. This is obviously a proposal of some kind. There are lots of opinions about this floating around. Some people have suggested that "feet" is a euphamism for genitals. Others say that it just means Ruth got under the covers with him, which is risky/risqué enough. There is the natural tendency to think this could have gone very wrong. A jewish perspective is found here.

*Ruth did what Nomi told her. In the middle of the night, Boaz was startle and discovered Ruth. He naturally wanted to know who she was. She told him and them requested that he spread the corner of his garment over her, because he qualified as a kinsman redeemer. It seems to imply that she is proposing that he take her as a wife and possibly may imply that she is offering to give him the right to redeem the family lands in exchange for her body. I don't know how else to put it.  This would be in Boaz's benefit as well. He would become richer in fact, if not in verbal technicality. Traditional semantics would say any children or profits would be in Ruth's dead husband's name. It seems Boaz was willing to live with that, and with Ruth. Boaz was flattered that she chose him, an obviously older man. Plus, she has a very good reputation as a hard worker.

*However, Boaz tells Ruth that someone else has a closer family relationship, with the right of first refusal. He will go see if that man wants Ruth. If he doesn't, then Boaz will take her. Ruth has become a commodity. Meanwhile, she is to remain sleeping near him. Early in the morning, she got up to go and Boaz told her not to let anyone know she had been there. I can see why. It certainly looks like something was going on. I'm sure neither one of them wanted to be stoned to death. Then Boaz sent Ruth home to Naomi with a shawl full of barley. Down payment on a bride price? Next Naomi assured Ruth that she just needed to wait, Boaz would not rest until the matter was settled that day. Boaz wanted Ruth.

Ruth chapter 2

After reading chapter 2:

*Now we are introduced to Boaz. He is a relative of Naomi's dead husband Elimelech, but we are not told how close a relative. Boaz is also a well respected and affluent man in the community. He owns barley fields and has hired hands.

*Ruth has told Naomi that she is going into the fields to glean barley behind the harvesters.  This would have been a necessity to provide food for Ruth and Naomi, who had little or no economic support. Ruth was gathering grain in one of Boaz's fields when Boaz came home from a trip to Bethlehem. He greeted his workers then asked them who Ruth was. They explained where she came from and said she was a hard worker. Boaz went to Ruth and told her she was welcome to keep working in his fields. Not only that, he told his hired hands not to bother her, and she was free to get water from their water jars. But first he called her "daughter," which is a little creepy if you know what will be happening next. Does it mean he is significantly older than her?

*Ruth is overwhelmed with gratitude and bows down to Boaz, asking why she has found favor with him. He tells her that he has heard about the story of her and Naomi and he is impressed. Then he "blesses" her in Yahweh's name with pretty phrases. She says she wishes to continue to have favor in his eyes. I don't think she needs to worry about that. At lunch, Boaz invites her to join him and the rest of the harvesters. Afterwards, he gives special instructions to his workers to treat her with respect and generously leave grain for her.

*Ruth worked until evening, then threshed the barley she had gathered. She brought the threshed grain to Naomi, along with leftovers from lunch. Naomi asked her where she had worked. When Ruth told Naomi it was in Boaz's fields,  she was glad and said he was one of their "kinsman-redeemers," a close relative.  This does not have to do with marriage rights, but property/land rights, according to Leviticus 25:25. Naomi is probably wanting back the land that her husband sold when they left during the famine. Because she is poor, and Boaz is a relative, he has the "right" to buy back Elimelech's property for her, from whomever Elimelech had sold it.

*When Ruth tells Naomi how well Boaz treated her, Naomi sees opportunity knocking. She tells Ruth to keep working in Boaz's fields. Ruth does so until the barley and wheat harvests are over. This was traditionally seven weeks, after which would be a celebration called The Feast of Weeks, Shavuot, or Pentecost today. Ruth continued to live with Naomi.

*In modern times, the book of Ruth is read during the celebration of Shavuot.

Ruth chapter 1

After reading chapter 1:

*The story starts off in a once-upon-a-time way: "In the days when the judges ruled, there was a famine in the land." Right away, this tells us the story was not written when the judges ruled, which would mean it was written  some time after the institution of the monarchy. Then we are told about a family of Ephrathites from Bethlehem in Judah. There was Elimelek the father, Naomi the mother, and their sons, Mahlon and Kilion. The family was living in Moab, presumably to escape the famine. The father died there, and the sons married Moabite women, Orpah and Ruth. After10 years, the sons both died, leaving the three women alone, which probably was not a good thing in those days. They had no children.

*Deuteronomy 23:3-6 forbids alliances with Moabites and their descendants. In the book of Ruth, Yahweh seems to have no problem with the marriage of an Israelite to a Moabite. I've seen suggestions that that is really the whole point of the story. Now, I wonder if some contradictions in the various bible books are done on purpose, like a duel of different Israelite ideologies.

*An interesting feature of this story, and many of the Old Testament stories is that the names of the main characters have Hebrew meanings that give the story added dimension. According to my study bible, Elimelek means "God (El) is king." Naomi is "pleasant." Mahlon may mean "weakling." Ruth is similar to the Hebrew word for "friendship." Kilion and Orpah are not defined, and other sources seem doubtful about definite meanings.

*Because her husband and sons were dead, and she had heard that Yahweh was finally providing food for his people,Naomi decided to go back to Judah. She told her daughters-in-law to go back to their families of origin and get new husbands. She said a tearful goodbye, but they said they would go with her. She wondered why they would do that when she didn't have any more sons to give them as husbands. (See Levirate marriage) Then she says her lot is a bitter one and Yahweh is against her. Orpah kissed her and left, but Ruth clung to her. Naomi urge Ruth to return to her family. Then Ruth said those famous lines, "Where you will go I will go, and where you stay I will stay. Your people will be my people and your God my god." Then Ruth made an oath that Yahweh could punish her if she should ever leave Naomi. So Naomi stopped telling her to leave.

*They traveled on to Bethlehem. When they got there, they caused quite a stir. Naomi told her old friends to call her "Mara" (meaning bitter) because her life was so bitter. She also told them Yahweh brought misfortune upon her. No fake praise in the face of disaster for her.

*When Ruth and Naomi arrived in Bethlehem, the barley harvest was just beginning. This would make it early spring, around the time of Passover.

Introduction to Ruth

I was not sure whether I should comment on Ruth or Job next, because the story of Job must take place during the time of the Judges, if it takes place in history at all. I decided on Ruth because the thought of spending my summer immersed in Job was giving me a headache.

First I recommend reading the Wikipedia article on the book of Ruth. Notice that the author is unknown, just like all the other books I have covered so far. It is traditionally ascribed to Samuel, a priest who we will meet later. The date of the writing is also unknown but it probably was originally written sometime between the 6th and 4th centuries B.C.E., at least 500 years after the events supposedly happened.

The oldest manuscripts of Ruth are  fragments found in the Dead Sea Scrolls. They were written sometime in the first century B.C.E., at least 800 years after the events described.

The Jewish Encyclopedia on Ruth.

As is my usual custom, I will comment on a plain reading in English, from the NIV, with links to Wikipedia articles and a few other sources. This is because of the modern protestant Christian claim that the Bible is understandable to everyday people, without specialized knowledge. You are free to expand your personal research.

Exodus chapter 6 part 3

*In the clan section we see that:

-Each of Moses's direct ancestors supposedly lived well past 100 years

-Moses and Aaron were from the tribe of Levi. Their mother was their paternal grandfather's sister, therefore also from the tribe of Levi. Levi was the father of Kohath, Moses's grandfather, and Jochebed, Moses's mother. Kohath was the father of Amram, Moses's father. In other words, Moses's father married his own aunt.

-Aaron's wife Elisheba was the daughter of Aminidab and the sister of Nashon. This is very interesting because, if we look ahead to the book of Ruth 4:18-22, which supposedly would have been written hundreds of years later, we see that Aminidab was the great grandson of Perez, the son of Judah by Tamar back in Genesis chapter 38. Nashon was supposedly the great, great, great grandfather of David. The text is anticipating David, surely not a coincidence.

-In 400 years of captivity, there were only four or five generations born, from the children of Jacob to the children of Moses and Aaron.

-My study bible's footnotes say that the ages and generations don't quite work in real time, so there must be an explanation for the discrepancy. Maybe the text doesn't mean what it says and the word father needs to be interpreted loosely. Maybe it really means "ancestor." Except that doesn't quite work either.