Dan Olinger

Part 1: Background | Part 2: Loyal Love | Part 3: Chance | Part 4: Abundance | Part 5: A Plan | Part 6: Approach | Part 7: Proposal | Part 8: Affirmation

True to his word—and to Naomi’s prediction—the next day Boaz sets out to clear up the ambiguity of the situation. “The town gate [Ru 4.1] was the center for social and economic life in ancient Israel. This was where news was first heard, where local and traveling merchants sold their wares in the cool shade of the town walls, where soldiers were stationed, and where legal disputes were handled” (WBH). Essentially, Boaz drops by City Hall to get the business taken care of.

“The word … ‘Behold,’ which begins the second sentence of v. 1 …, serves two functions: expressing Boaz’s surprise at [the nearer relative’s] appearance and turning the reader’s attention to a new character in the drama” (NAC). As Boaz is waiting to conduct his business, here comes the very man who is more nearly related to Naomi. What are the odds?

About the same, I guess, as the odds that Ruth’s “chance chanced” on the field that Boaz owned (Ru 2.3).

Boaz calls to him. Our modern versions give his address term as “friend,” but the word in the Hebrew (peloni ‘almoni, for you Hebrew nerds) is much richer than that. The KJV renders it “such an one,” which hints at this deeper significance; you don’t call somebody “such an one,” even in 1611. The author has edited Boaz’s words so as to protect the identity of this man. “Rabbinic writings used the designation for an unknown ‘John Doe’ ” (BKC). “The rendering ‘Mr. So-and-so,’ found in the NJPS, certainly captures the sense better than the NIV’s ‘my friend,’ but our ‘Hey you’ also works in the present context” (NAC).

Why would the author of the narrative want to disguise his identity? We’ll see in a moment.

Focused on his purpose, Boaz calls a meeting of the city council—“ten men of the elders of the city” (Ru 4.2).

“Private ownership of land was a jealously guarded privilege in ancient Israel, a right which was proudly handed down within the family. Women were normally excluded from inheritance rights, however, and in no known circumstances were women allowed to inherit their husband’s estates. Naomi may have received income from the sale of Elimelech’s estate, but she probably was not allowed to retain title to the land. The nearest surviving male member of the family would inherit the first option of purchase (Num. 27:7–11)” (TBC).

The unnamed man is initially open to redeeming Elimelech’s land. But then Boaz tells him “the rest of the story” (Ru 4.5). Did he initially withhold this part intentionally? We’re not told, but we do know that Boaz is pretty sharp as a businessman.

“Boaz argued that the nearest kinsman had a moral obligation to keep Elimelech’s line alive. This would involve marrying Ruth and raising a family under his name. In such a case title to the land would eventually revert to Ruth’s children. Under such circumstances, the kinsman hastily renounced his rights as next of kin” (TBC).

“Redeeming the land by itself would have been a good investment because the land would be inherited by the redeemer’s own children. But redeeming Ruth with the land would result in its being left to Ruth’s offspring (for the line of Elimelech). Any resources spent on redeeming the land and raising the offspring would damage his own children’s inheritance since it would benefit the line of Elimelech” (FSB).

 “Mr. So-and-so” steps back from his legal obligation. Hence the absence of his name. And now “the generosity of Boaz in accepting these financial losses becomes the more apparent” (NBC).

They conduct a legal ceremony involving an exchange of So-and-so’s sandal (Ru 4.8). “Footwear often symbolized ownership in Bible times. Note … God’s directive to Abraham, Moses, and Joshua to claim ownership of Canaan by walking on it (Gen. 13:17; Deut. 11:24; Josh. 1:3)” (WBH).

Boaz calls the bystanders to bear record (Ru 4.9). (And here we learn that Mahlon was the brother who had been married to Ruth [Ru 4.10].)

Why was Boaz so persistent in showing covenant loyalty to this Moabite woman? He might have had a family reason. “According to Matthew 1:5, Boaz’s mother was Rahab, the Canaanite harlot from Jericho. However, Rahab lived in Joshua’s time, about 250–300 years earlier. Probably, then, Rahab was Boaz’s ‘mother’ in the sense that she was his ancestress (cf. ‘our father Abraham,’ Rom. 4:12)” (BKC).

Next time, the end of the story—and the beginning.

Photo by Paz Arando on Unsplash

Part 1: Background | Part 2: Loyal Love | Part 3: Chance | Part 4: Abundance | Part 5: A Plan | Part 6: Approach

And now comes what appears to us to be the riskiest part of the whole story. But as we’ve noted, Naomi has a strong foundation for her plan, plenty of evidence that it’s going to turn out well for the widows.

Ruth follows Naomi’s instructions to the letter. She waits until after Boaz has eaten—that will make him contented and sleepy—and after dark, so that their conversation will be private. Without waking him, she lies down at his feet and covers herself with a portion of his covering, perhaps a blanket or a robe (Ru 3.7). All this makes it likely that he will wake up at some point during the night.

And so he does (Ru 3.8).

Of course, in the dark, he doesn’t know who she is, so he asks.

This is the crucial moment. Ruth must phrase her reply precisely as Naomi has instructed her to.

“I am Ruth, your maid. So spread your covering over your maid, for you are a close relative” (Ru 3.9).

Did Ruth know the cultural significance of what she was saying? Probably, but we’re not told. But Naomi certainly does. This is a claim of redemption. It is a legal claim for Boaz to be to Ruth as the law provides, following the example of God himself, who dwells under the wings of the cherubim in the Tabernacle. It’s an assertion of her right, under Naomi, to have their property redeemed, their debts paid, and their line secured through the birth of a male heir. It’s a proposal of marriage.

She is asking him to be the refuge that she has sought from Yahweh (Ru 2.12).

These days we would say that that’s a Big Ask.

Boaz indicates immediately that Naomi’s expectations are well founded. First, he expresses openness to the relationship. In an endearing response, he says that marrying Ruth would be a step up for him—that she is the kind of woman who could have any man she wanted, specifically younger men (Ru 3.10)—another indication that Boaz is getting, as we would say, long in the tooth. “The delicate interplay here suggests that Boaz was significantly older, and that Ruth was not only an admirable but a desirable younger woman” (BRC).

He calls her action “kindness”—and there’s that word hesed again. Seeking relief from a near relative, though he is older, he sees as loyalty to Israel’s Law and Israel’s God. Boaz is surprised—and pleased.

“Ruth’s former act of devotion [‘better than the first’] was her decision to remain and help Naomi. The latter act of devotion is her decision to marry Boaz to provide a child to carry on her deceased husband’s (and Elimelech’s) line and to provide for Naomi in her old age” (NET).

Boaz adds that Ruth is reputed among “the people of the gate”—probably the town’s leaders— as “a woman of excellence” (Ru 3.11).

In calling Ruth this, the same word used of Boaz [Ru 2.1]), Boaz “uses a term translated ‘mighty’ when describing a warrior, or ‘wealthy’ when describing an ordinary person. It suggests special attainment in the area of endeavor being discussed. Used of Ruth, it affirms that the whole community sees her as an ‘ideal bride’ or a ‘bride worth winning’ ” (BRC).

They will make quite a pair.

But there’s a hitch (pun absolutely intended).

Apparently unbeknownst to Naomi, there’s a closer relative, and he has, as we say in contractual language, “right of first refusal.” “The responsibility of redemption [Ru 3.12] would go first to the deceased person’s brother, then uncle, then cousin, then another ‘close relative’ (Lev 25:48–49). The exact relationship between Boaz, the other relative, and Elimelech is unclear” (FSB). Boaz says he’ll look into that in the morning. By saying that, he’s confirming his interest.

He’ll confirm it in two more ways before morning.

To be continued.

Photo by Paz Arando on Unsplash

Part 1: Background | Part 2: Loyal Love | Part 3: Chance | Part 4: Abundance | Part 5: A Plan

After harvest comes threshing, and then winnowing. Threshing is the torturing of the harvested stalks so that the kernels, which are the whole point, are physically separated from their husks and from the cut stalks; winnowing involves tossing the kernels into the air so that the wind will blow away the lighter husks, allowing the weightier, unmixed kernels to fall to the ground. “A threshing floor was a stone surface in the fields where the harvest husks were crushed and the grain sifted from the chaff” (HCBC). Winnowing would take place at the nearest point to the field where a stiff breeze was available, typically at a high point.

With the harvest over, and threshing in progress, Naomi, the mother, recognizes her responsibility to find a husband (“rest”) for Ruth (Ru 3.1-2). She knows that Boaz is aware of their plight, is a near relative, and is of means. This can’t all be just a coincidence, can it?

But the harvest has taken a few weeks, and Boaz hasn’t indicated any inclination to do anything more than be generous with his grain. Naomi thinks he needs a nudge.

This was not culturally inappropriate, nor was it meddlesome. Israelites in financial peril from widowhood were entitled to claim a kinsman redeemer (Dt 25.5-6). We call this “levirate marriage” (from the Latin levir, brother-in-law), and the nearest relative was obligated if able. Other responsibilities included avenging a clan member’s murder (Nu 35), redeeming clan land (Le 25.23-28), and redeeming a clan relative from debt slavery (Le 25.35-55) through an interest-free loan (Le 25.35ff) or provision of labor (Le 25.39ff) (AYBD).

All of this legal provision is to remind Israel that God is the ultimate kinsman-redeemer of Israel (Is 63.16; 54.5), based on chesed, loyal covenant love. (The word has appeared in Ru 2.20 and will appear again in Ru 3.10.)

With all this in mind, and knowing that a feast was commonly held when the harvest work was finished, Naomi decides that now is the time. So she shares her plan with her daughter-in-law.

Ruth is going to make herself presentable, as they say, and go to the threshing floor. There she’ll be able to watch the men eat and then settle in for the night, sleeping by the threshed grain to protect it from thieves and from scavenging animals. After Boaz settles in, when it’s dark, she will go and lie down at his feet.

And then, Naomi is reasonably certain, good Boaz will continue to do the right thing, even if it’s more of a commitment than has been required of him so far.

Some interpreters have suggested that something sexual was occurring here. That idea directly contradicts the characters of Ruth and Boaz and the direction of the plot. First, Naomi sends Ruth into that risky situation precisely because she knows that Boaz will protect her; he has already demonstrated that out in the field (Ru 2.9, 22). And Ruth has demonstrated her noble character as well in following Naomi to Bethlehem and in laboring in the field; Boaz will shortly say that she is “a woman of excellence” (Ru 3.11).

Further, the direction of the plot argues against premature sexual behavior. We’ve noticed a recurring theme in the story:

• It begins with Ruth placing herself in the care of not only Naomi, but Naomi’s God (Ru 1.16).
• Boaz notices and comments on what she has done: “under whose wings you have come to trust” (Ru 2.12).
• Boaz is using here an image from his culture and history. In giving Moses detailed instructions for the construction of the Tabernacle, he has required that above the gold covering of the Ark of the Covenant—the “mercy seat”—are two angelic creatures, cherubim, under whose wings God will meet his people in the person of their high priest on the Day of Atonement. As Moses delivers his farewell address to the people of Israel, he refers to this image:
  • As an eagle stirreth up her nest, fluttereth over her young, spreadeth abroad her wings, taketh them, beareth them on her wings: So the Lord alone did lead [Jacob and the people of Israel], and there was no strange god with him (Dt 32.11-12).
• In a few minutes, when Ruth repeats to Boaz what Naomi has instructed her to say, she will reference this image: “Spread your wings over your handmaid” (Ru 3.9).

Against all this background, hanky-panky? Ridiculous. I don’t think so.

Ruth trusts Naomi’s judgment and obeys explicitly.

The outcome next time.

Photo by Paz Arando on Unsplash

Part 1: Background | Part 2: Loyal Love | Part 3: Chance | Part 4: Abundance

Ruth arrives home with an astonishing amount of barley. Naomi, of course, has questions.

How did she know that “a man … took notice of” Ruth (Ru 2.19)? Well, there’s no way Ruth harvested all that without help. So Naomi asks. And just one word in Ruth’s answer sets the world on fire.

Boaz. Naomi knows about this man.

“Boaz was both a wealthy landowner and a close relative of Naomi. As such he could be expected to buy for the family its rightful land (Lev 25:25) and look after the helpless members of the family” (WBC).

Naomi’s statement here appears ambiguous:

Blessed be he of the Lord, who hath not left off his kindness to the living and to the dead (Ru 2.20).

Who “has not left off his kindness”? Boaz? or the Lord? Contextually either one would make sense; Boaz has been kind, and God has been kind as well. But in the Hebrew as in English the Lord’s name immediately precedes the relative pronoun who, and there are other grammatical considerations that favor the Lord as the subject as well. If that’s the case, then this moment is a major development in the character of Naomi.

Remember the bitter old woman who arrived a few days ago? What has happened to her now? This Yahweh, who was great but not good, she recognizes as one who is after all loyal to his covenant promises. Of a handful of men who could serve as a redeemer—maybe just two, as far as the rest of the story tells us—Ruth has found an eminently eligible one on her first day in the fields.

In leading Ruth to the field of Boaz, God has exhibited kindness “to the living and to the dead” (Ru 2.20). Both of those adjectives are plural. The living ones, of course, are Ruth and Naomi. The dead ones? That would be Ruth’s late husband—we don’t know (yet) whether that’s Mahlon or Chilion—and Naomi’s late husband Elimelech. By looking after their widows, God is treating them with kindness, taking care of those that the dead no longer can.

So what now? Naomi advises Ruth to heed Boaz’s admonition (Ru 2.21) that she work only in his field and stay close to his workers, who will protect her (Ru 2.22). She, too, is aware of the danger to a young woman working alone out in the fields in the days of the judges.

Barley and wheat harvests together (Ru 2.23) would last about 6 weeks. “Barley was harvested from late March through late April, wheat from late April to late May” (NET), “a period of intense labor for about two months. This generally coincided with the seven weeks between Passover and … Pentecost” (MSB).

During this time, and with the cooperation and help of Boaz’s workers, Ruth would bring home far more grain than the two women would need for their own food. With the surplus they could trade for their other needs, most obviously meat, dairy, oil, and vegetables that would be available in the little village. Ruth has placed herself into the family of the aging widow and under the protecting wings of Israel’s God, and he has supplied the two with all that they need.

God is gracious; he gives good things to the undeserving.

But in the end, this is more than a story of sufficient caloric intake for two people in a faraway corner of the world. God is going to use Boaz to provide far more than food to them. And in doing that he’s going to change the world—the world of that day, and our world as well, in every place and in every time.

We’re just halfway through the story. The best—by far—is yet to come.

Photo by Paz Arando on Unsplash

Part 1: Background | Part 2: Loyal Love | Part 3: Chance

Boaz admires Ruth for seeking refuge under the wings of Israel’s God (Ru 2.12; cf Ps 17.8; 91.4; Mt 23.37). This image is going to show up again in our story.

Boaz blesses Ruth in the name of Yahweh. “The Gentile had sought refuge under the ‘wings’ of Yahweh, and therefore was entitled to his blessing” (OTSS).

It’s lunchtime. Ruth could be expected to have brought food for lunch, or to eat from what she had been able to gather herself. Boaz will have none of it. He invites her to join him and his reapers for their employee meal, prepared at his expense (Ru 2.14). It’s a meal common in the ancient Near East: roasted kernels of the harvested barley and what we would call a vinaigrette—wine vinegar mixed with olive oil. As the account makes clear by the fact that he hands her the grain himself, he had opened a seat for her next to him, or at least within arm’s reach.

Is Boaz setting up a romantic relationship? It’s tempting to (literally) romanticize this account in the interest of making it a “better story” to Western ears, but that kind of interest is unlikely at this point. One commentator says, “The text offers no hint of any romantic attraction between Boaz and Ruth. Given the racial and social barriers that separated them, the thought would not have crossed Ruth’s mind, and she could not have known that he was a kinsman of her deceased husband. As for Boaz, he was simply a good man, ‘sent’ by God to show favor to this woman. The wings of God are not only comforting to Israelites; they offer protection even for despised Moabites” (Block, NAC).

After lunch, Boaz increases his care for her by ordering his workers to actually help her harvest (Ru 2.15, 16). She’s picking in the tall cotton, so to speak, and the workers are actually dropping some of their own gleanings in her path—and doing so at the command of the owner. Boaz is not the stereotypical greedy rich businessman.

It’s likely that these professional harvesters were using a sickle in their right hand to cut a bundle of plants gathered by their left hand. This would be, I suppose, about a cup of kernels once it had been threshed and winnowed. They are keeping her in good supply.

This is astonishing generosity. The Mosaic Law allowed her what the reapers accidentally left behind. But these workers, with the approval—no, the insistence—of the owner, were lavishing product right at her feet. All she had to do was pick it up.

By the end of the day she had “about an ephah” of barley grains (Ru 2.17). Measures of volume in those days were inexact by our standards, and since the text adds “about,” we should expect that the commentators will be all over the place in their estimates. One says it was a bushel (TCBC); another says “nearly three-fifths of a bushel” (ECB); yet another says “approximately three pecks, dry measure” (WBC). Our problem is compounded by the fact that unless you’ve picked apples, you probably have no idea what a bushel or a peck is. Another commentator goes with “about 4 gallons” (Bible Guide), and we all know the size of those 5-gallon plastic buckets you get at the home improvement stores. So that helps.

If you were to fill one of those buckets to 80% full of grain, how much would it weigh? Probably 30 or 35 pounds. That’s a lot of product for a single gleaner in one day. “It testifies both to Ruth’s industry and to Boaz’s generosity” (NET).

How is Ruth going to get that home? She doesn’t have any plastic buckets. Does she perhaps have a woven basket? Or a shawl of some sort in which she could wrap it up?

That’s likely.

But wouldn’t that be cumbersome?

In my African travels, I’ve seen women routinely carrying such packages on their heads. Word on the street is that these women can carry up to 70% of their body weight up there. Makes my neck hurt just thinking about it.

As we’ll see next time, this one day’s work will set in motion the providential outcome of this story.

Photo by Paz Arando on Unsplash

Part 1: Background | Part 2: Loyal Love

A woman seeking food for her family has lost her family. Her husband and both of her sons are gone forever, and she is in a strange land. She accepts the obvious conclusion: the God of Israel may be great, but He is not good. He has not been great for her. He has not kept His covenant promises. She went out full, and God has brought her back empty (Ru 1.21).

 Is she right?

 Will the covenant God let her continue in her dismay?

 The plot has begun; now it thickens.

Boaz is “a man of great wealth” (Ru 2.1). This can refer to military prowess (Gideon, Judg 6.12) or to social standing (2K 15.20). This context probably points to the latter. So Boaz is wealthy.

The Mosaic Law provides that a childless widow can expect a near relative of her late husband to “redeem” her (Dt 25.5-10). This may involve buying back property, paying off debts, or even fathering a legal heir to the late husband. Boaz is not only biologically qualified to be the redeemer, but he is logistically qualified as well.

Ruth’s “chance chanced” (“she happened to come”) to bring her to the fields of Boaz (Ru 2.3). The writer means it to be ironic. “The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the Lord” (Pr 16:33).

“That Boaz was a godly man is stressed from the moment he is introduced in the account. When he came out from Bethlehem to inspect the harvest he greeted his reapers in the name of Yahweh. They responded in kind” (OTSS).

And the first thing this godly man does after greeting his workers is ask about the woman he doesn’t recognize. Bethlehem is a small town, and he would know its faces.

“In the ancient Near East life outside a family was impossible, and since Boaz does not recognize Ruth he is sufficiently concerned to inquire about her background. The foreman furnishes the required details, along with the fact that Ruth has requested permission to glean. The foreman himself has been keeping her under observation, and has noted the quality of her work. Even under the hot sun she takes only a brief rest interval” (ECB).

The fact that he has heard of her already signifies God’s kind providence in bringing word of her character to Boaz, and God’s preparation of Boaz’s heart to be interested in helping her. In the small village of Bethlehem, the return of Naomi, and the arrival of Ruth, would be the talk of the town; as soon as his foreman says this woman is “the Moabite woman with Naomi,” Boaz knows the backstory.

At this point Boaz knows that she is a relative, but she doesn’t.

Boaz calls Ruth “my daughter” (Ru 2.8). This implies two things. First, he is considerably older than she is; and second, he is taking responsibility for her—at least for her safety and provision while she is on his property.

The Law required landowners to allow the poor to glean the corners of their fields (Lv 19.9-10; 23.22). Apparently, charity could not be assumed; gleaners were in the practice of asking for permission (Ru 2.7). Boaz extends permission but also urges her to work alongside his female workers (Ru 2.8; apparently those binding the sheaves). This would give her access to more grain and would provide physical protection. The fields were not a safe place for impoverished women seeking food (Ru 2.22). Not in the days of the judges.

Boaz orders the male workers not to molest her. That amounts to an order that they protect her from other workers as well; it would be so understood. “Boaz is hereby instituting the first anti–sexual-harassment policy in the workplace recorded in the Bible” (Block, NAC).

So now Ruth has a place to gather food in safety. This is a huge step forward for the two impoverished women.

Could Boaz be even more helpful than this?

Stay tuned.

Photo by Paz Arando on Unsplash