Boaz, a wealthy landowner in Bethlehem, and Ruth, a woman who was forty years old at the time of their marriage, were married. However, their marriage did not remain childless, as Boaz died the day after his wedding. This tradition may result from the desire to absolve their marriage of any hint of personal benefit for the couple.
Boaz was one of the patriarchs in the line of Judah that would become the lineage of David. One day, Ruth’s mother-in-law Naomi asked her to find a home for her, and Boaz invited her to join him. The midrash describes Ruth as beautiful, modest, and virtuous, giving her a very favorable impression. However, Boaz passed away the night of his wedding, leaving Naomi and Ruth both widowed.
The Bible does not explicitly state that Boaz died the day after his wedding with Ruth. However, there is a tradition mentioned in Jewish Midrash and other sources that suggest he died on his wedding night, immediately after impregnating Ruth.
Naoma was not married to Boaz, but she was the mother-in-law of Ruth, who got married to Boaz. Boaz slept with her and by God’s gracious gift, she conceived and had a son. The town women said to Naomi, ” Blessed.”
In conclusion, Boaz and Ruth’s marriage was not childless, but their marriage was not without its challenges.
📹 Controversial Passage: Did RUTH Do Something INAPPROPRIATE to BOAZ?
FREE BOOK download: “10 Words that Will Change the Way You Read the Bible!” www.brandonrobbinsministry.com/. Did Ruth …
When did Boas die?
Franz Boas, the founder of modern American anthropology, died 70 years ago. He used the same research methods as scientists to study anthropology. Boas believed that culture is learned behavior and that cultural diversity is good. Boas opposed prejudice and racism. He helped scientists fleeing Nazi Germany during WWII. On December 21, 1942, Boas collapsed and died in the arms of Claude Lévi-Strauss. Franz Boas reenacts the Kwakiutl hamatsa ritual dance for an exhibit at the United States National Museum. Join us in 2013 for the National WWII Museum Robotics Challenge!
Were Ruth and Boaz in love?
In Bethlehem, Ruth was alone, just trying to survive. She spent her days looking for food in harvested barley fields. One day, she met Boaz, who was kind to her. Boaz learned about Ruth’s situation and offered her food and safety in his fields. In the middle of their struggles, they fell in love. Boaz was a relative of Ruth’s late husband. According to Jewish law, he had the right to care for the foreign widow. Boaz promised the town leaders he would marry Ruth. Boaz and Ruth married and had a son named Obed. Misfortune turned to joy. This story is about more than just love. In the midst of struggle, God was planning something amazing that would affect all of humanity.
How many husbands did Ruth have?
Ruth is a Moabite who moved to Judea because of her first and second marriages. She struggles to fit in. She respects Naomi and is often subservient to her second husband, Boaz. Rachel Adelman. Weaving the Messianic Light: “Law and Narrative in the Making of the Messianic Dynasty.” In The Female Ruse: Women’s Deception and Divine Sanction in the Hebrew Bible, 90-121. Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2015. Brenner, Athalya, ed. A Feminist Companion to Ruth. Sheffield, England: 1993.
Davis, Andrew R. Gender discord in the book of Ruth. Journal of Biblical Literature: 495-513.
How many children did Boaz and Ruth have?
In the morning, Boaz sat by the town gates and talked to a relative when he arrived. He told him Naomi was selling Elimelech’s land. He said he would buy it. Boaz told him that he would also get Ruth to keep the dead man’s name alive. The man refused, fearing it would hurt his own inheritance. Boaz bought the land and Ruth. Ruth married Boaz and had a son, Obed, who became the father of Jesse, the father of King David. Boaz of Judah praised Ruth for her kindness to Naomi and the Judean people (Ruth 3:10). Boaz said, “May the Lord bless you, my daughter. Your latest act of kindness is greater than the first. You didn’t follow the young men, whether poor or rich.” Rashi (c. 1040–1105) says that your first act of kindness was with your mother-in-law. Ruth’s kindness in the Book of Ruth is seen as rare in contrast to the people of Moab and Amon, who were noted for their lack of kindness. Deut. 23:5: They didn’t greet you with bread and water on the way out of Egypt. The Moabites hired Balaam to curse you. Rashi says that when Israel was very tired, they left Egypt.
Who dies at the end of Fauda 4?
Doron and Adel fought again, and the special forces officer killed the terrorist. In the last episode of season four, Doron was badly hurt in his fight with Adel. He was on the ground with his friends as they waited for help.
They were all badly hurt and didn’t know how the ambush happened or if someone set them up. This season, Gabi was almost killed after being kidnapped and interrogated.
The fifth season hasn’t been ordered yet, but fans hope it will be renewed so they can find out what happened.
Did Boaz die in Queen of the South?
After Teresa dies, Boaz takes over her NOLA operation and sends killers after Pote. Devon works with Boaz for four years, but he’s unhappy with how Boaz manages things. Devon tells Boaz to stop and not touch Pote in prison. After Pote is released, he challenges Boaz to a knife fight in a bar in NOLA. Pote kills Boaz.
How does Boaz get killed?
After Teresa dies, Boaz takes over her NOLA operation and sends killers after Pote. Devon works with Boaz for four years, but he’s unhappy with how Boaz manages things. Devon tells Boaz to stop and not touch Pote in prison. After Pote is released, he challenges Boaz to a knife fight in a bar in NOLA. Pote kills Boaz.
What happened when Ruth married Boaz?
After they married, Ruth gave birth to Obed, the future father of Jesse, who would become the father of King David. Ruth was David’s great-grandmother. This is written in the Book of Ruth and the Gospels of Luke and Matthew. (Follow the love triangle between Leah, Rachel, and Jacob.)
How did Boaz die in Fauda?
Doron wants Boaz to stay out of the field while he recovers. Moreno says Boaz should go back out. Boaz gets captured on his first mission back. Boaz says his name is Mohammad Abu Snina from Surda. He works for the Intelligence Agency. He has documents to prove it.1. Boaz convinces Taufiq that his story is true, but Taufiq later discovers his tattoo and realizes he’s the man who shot Bashir. 1. Taufiq tells Boaz he took his kidney to give it to Ali Karmis’ daughter, but they implanted a bomb instead. 4. Doron tries to stop Taufiq from detonating the bomb, but Taufiq kills Boaz. Portrayed by Tzachi Halevy. Naor is in Doron’s unit. He has been having an affair with Doron’s wife for over a year. When Gali says she’s leaving Doron for him, he tells her to wait because it’s complicated with Doron back in the unit. Following the issues that followed Boaz’s capture, Moreno wanted to make Naor team leader, but then he was told the unit would be disbanded. Nurit is the only female member of Doron’s unit. She is romantically involved with Moreno. She rarely smiles. She starts as a staff member but becomes an active member of the team.
📹 MAKEUP STORY TIME | Did you know that boaz died the night he married Ruth? | New youtuber #storytime
Makeup story time. In this video I tell you a story about Ruth and boaz . while also doing some amazing make up tricks. stories …
Also, everyone involved was faithful to the tenets of the law. Gleaning, how property was preserved across generations and kept within the tribe, the responsibility of kinsman to carry on the line of a dead male relative, all specific elements of the law. They (particularly Boaz) observed the law. All were blessed. Boaz got a good wife and Ruth a good husband. Naomi and Ruth were saved from a pretty hard life, Naomi saw her grandson and became his nurse, Israel got their best king and we got a savior.
Nothing illicit happened between Ruth and Boaz on the threshing floor! 1. Boaz, knowing that there is another ‘kinsman redeemer’ in front of him by having illicit relation with Ruth would bring disgrace upon himself and Ruth. 2. There were also other people present and sleeping at the threshing floor after the ending season party. Any ‘commotion’ on part of Boaz and Ruth would wake them up and such situation would get exposed, thus disqualifying Ruth for Levirate Marriage. 3. the Bible is a book written under the Holy Spirit’s inspiration and Boaz and Ruth would not be called ‘honorable individuals’ if they behaved dishonorably.
I believe it was Chuck Missler who said the Hebrews embroidered their family identity and status along the hems of their robes. Telling Boaz to spread his skirt over his handmaid wasn’t asking for anything “scandalous” but rather asking for Boaz to treat her as part of his family. And yes, to fulfill the Levirate marriage.
This was such a blessing for me! I knew about the Leverite Marriage (please excuse the spelling) but I had no idea that this was a total miracle for Ruth, Naomi, Israel, and the rest of the entire world! Today, I will reread the Book Of RUTH and know the importance of it. I will reread it with so much joy in my heart! I have always loved this Story. Thank you very much! You have inspired me today! I am very excited about everything that you said! I have prayed for the Holy Spirit to give me a thirst for the knowledge of the Bible, and he has definetly not let me down! I am so honored to be a Christian and desire to learn about my Faith! You have helped me discover new stories and facts that are in the Bible! I Love My LORD so very much! Thank you again for the information that has truely inspired me today!
Found your website today, and can’t get enough of The Bible. It was never really taught to me or actually never heard it either. I have subscribed and got your 10 words of the Bible I believe you called it. perusal the Chosen and just feeling the Holy spirit so much more real to me. Oh how I need Jesus. Thank you and BLESSINGS.
Dear dear Ruth, Naomi, Esther, Mary. Brave women of long ago. God’s wondrous story slowly but surely takes shape thru some of these women. Thank you so much for sharing Ruth’s story. Maybe sometime a bible study on the great women of the Bible!! Blessings to you and your family. Hope you are well. You have a big trip approaching fast. I do wish I could join the tour, but even a short flight to Houston and dealing with Airports showed me how difficult that type of trip would be for me. I’ll be there in spirit! J.
I know someone who says that they had sex. And the Jewish symbolism embedded in the passage seems to allow that to be true, and might even hint at it. But there are several strong reasons against this. First, if caught in the act, Ruth would be killed. Second, if pregnancy resulted, Ruth would be killed. Third, Naomi, knowing those things, would not have instructed her to do that. Fourth, Ruth would not have exceeded Naomi’s instructions. Fifth, just as Boaz knew he was not the nearest kinsman redeemer, Naomi would have known that as well. There are other good reasons to think sex did not occur here. Those are simply the strongest ones. Each one, by itself, precludes such a possibility.
Brother Brandon, thank you so much for your teachings! I get so excited and find such joy in learning from you. I was going to read and Study Ruth again, with a new set of eyes. Just as you taught me in the online James study. I’m so thankful that this came up before I start tomorrow on Ruth. God bless you and keep you and yours!
Thanks for that brother. I am not a qualified preacher or teacher or theoligian but I have occasionally been given the privilege of addressing my own congregation on certain topics. Like you, I have had to try and prarphrase a complete book of the bible and bring out the bigger picture. Twice, I have tackled the book of Esther and have focused 1st on Esther being in the right place at the right time in order to bring about Fathers will for his people ( Gods Timing ) and 2nd on the roll of prayer in bringing that about, mainly the repatriation of his people back to Israel. However, the question I get asked most is,”What did Esther get up to in that kings chamber?” The 2nd question is usually, ” Why such a bloodthirsty ending?” At the end of the day mt short answer is that Fathers Love for his people trumps everything. So thank you for your presentation and the courage it has given me to persevere. MARANATHA.
The uncovering of the feet and the passing of the sandal from the closer relative are interesting. If a brother refused leverite marriage, after the elders pressed him on it and he still refused, the widow would publically shame him by spitting in his face and taking off his sandal. The law says he would get a specific bad name: “The house of him that hath his shoe loosed.” Ruth wasn’t close enough to demand; but the way she proposed and the way Boaz and the relative settled the matter seem to reference this association.
Thank you for sharing about that not gleaning on the sides to give to fatherless and widows! Have always loved Ruth’s dedication to Naomi and how noble she stayed even and amidst her situation. It’s quite noting as well that Boaz didn’t jump right away to the offer, instead, looked for the next of kin, first. They were great examples. Beautiful story and promises indeed!
Wow thank you. I really appreciate your website and your articles. You have a first for piecing scripture together and presenting it completely. I am reading the Bible front to back for the first time and I just read RUTH a few days ago and although it seemed interesting it didn’t hit me the same way as after you explained it. I did think it was a little odd the way Ruth approaches Boaz almost seductively in the night but it makes so much more sense now. I forgot about Deuteronomy when God speaks of leaving the leftover grain for foreigners and widows and I remember the rule of the brother of the dead taking his wife and than the second brother and so on to keep their line going but I did not put two and two together when reading Ruth. Thank you. God bless you
Thank you very much, Brandon, for this great teaching moment here, teaching about Ruth with Naomi and Boaz, etc., etc.!! I love how you teach/present things from the Bible! You get so excited & are so full of the spirit!!! Thank you for all of your service, teaching us here!!!! Thank you for your testimony!!! ❤😊
This is great. A couple of years ago I taught a sermon series called “We Belong Together” highlighting the Union between Ruth and Naomi and how Naomi’s walk with God influenced Ruth to stay and changed her life and how Ruth blessed Naomi by working the fields and having a child and how their Union led to Christ and the visual of generational relationships and community for us all! This article confirms my study. I love the Book of Ruth! 🙌🏾 Thanks for this overview
Makes me think of her setting the scene for when Jesus washes and anoints the feet of his followers to show he is a servant King and Redeemer and when Mary anoints him with oil. She uncovered Boaz’s feet to wake him and then was to wait to see what he would do. Would he serve as the replacement for Naomi’s son and thus provide Naomi with a grandchild/ new child to replace her lost son’s and she could change her name or would he refuse them and treat them like they were not worthy? Boaz took on the mantle and she did not uncover his nakedness in the bad way like Noah’s son and how it explains in Leviticus. Plus it has always been read and translated by most I know as she lay at his feet, his uncovered feet as a sign of her servant heart toward him and that she would be a submissive and obedient wife. She lay on the threshing floor has its own set of symbolism and meaning because that may have significance related to harvest and tribulum and Jesus second coming. 2 women there but only one is taken as an acceptable companion and the other put away or left…it was important the Truth was accepted and not put away so Jesus could come as a baby but we are to be prepared and have a servants loyal heart to be an accepted Bride before the second coming so we might also be married to a husband as honorable and loving as Boaz was, aka his great great …grandson Jesus Christ the Messiah. It is very poignant.
The fact that it’s intimate symbolism makes it useful as a symbolic act declaring intentions. Ruth was proposing to Boaz. Laying at his feet, she became as a covering for his feet, and she asked him to then be her covering, a picture of the containment within containment in the union of marriage. Also the leverite marriage gives the first right to the nearest-of-kin, so Boaz had to go give him the right of refusal. If the man refuses, the kinsman redeemer then take one of his shoes as the symbol of the duty that was left unfulfilled and turned over to another. Could that be related to removing Boaz’s shoes and declaring her need for a redeemer?
Thank for this, great teaching. The Levirate marriages are very common in many African cultures. It is practiced even though it is not popular today. It is mostly between brothers. I think most Bantu tribes in Southern Africa practices this including the Vha-Venda tribe in South Africa. This is one of the reasons some men ended up with multiple wives.
How does the advertiser lie like this? A “perpetual” non-wasting heating system? If anyone buys this sytem they will find out that it doesn’t work. Brandon, do you have any control over these ads? If you do, you should ban the one for the heating system that will heat a whole room in seconds for practically no energy cost, because it doesn’t do that.
I have always loved the book of Ruth! And one of the main reasons why is because their relationship was absolutely pure and honorable! One ” Christian ” author said that Ruth ” put on a knockout dress ” and that her approach to Boaz that night was ” pure seduction ” such a person has no spiritual discernment whatsoever, and his statement was nigh unto blasphemy! Such a statement that he made only reveals his own carnal earthly mind!
WHY are we messing around with this? In the old KJV, the English consistently uses “knew her/him” as a euphemism for sexual congress. Yet we are explicitly told in Ruth 3:14 that she made sure to get up BEFORE “one could know the other.” YES, this late-night meeting is everything you describe in terms of a Levirate marriage, but there shouldn’t be any suggestion of sin or scandal. At all. Not only was it NOT a scandal, it was God’s way of “folding back in” and redeeming Lot’s messy bloodline. It’s one of at least three places I can think of where the LORD makes sure everyone is connected how they should be for the making of the crimson thread. After all, if you go back and look, you will find that Boaz’s ancestor was none other than Rehab….of Jerico…the same Rehab that hid and aided the spies….and before that you will find Tamar, a woman betrayed twice by men who tried to do a tricky run around the Leverite obligation….and she ended up being the acknowledged partner of Judah (son of Jacob, founder of the tribe of Judah which leads us to Christ) himself!
A couple of thoughts: “Uncovering” and “feet” are indeed both common Hebrew euphemisms for physically intimate acts and male genitals, respectively. Whether those words apply in the euphemistic senses in this context is not clear, however. It is possible that the the most innocent reading is correct, in which case Ruth “merely” pulled Boaz’s cloak off of him, and “merely” lay down next to him (no doubt scandalous behavior enough under most circumstances). Then, Boaz awakened at midnight in the cool night air and was surprised to find Ruth beside him, realizing the obvious implications which the circumstances entailed (remembering that he was supposed to be on watch so that no one stole the just-threshed harvest or the shocks which remained to be threshed). The least charitable reading of the text would suggest that Boaz awakened “in flagrante delicto”, but I don’t see that as a necessary interpretation of the text. That there is some scheming and subterfuge on the part of Naomi (and likely, to some lesser extent Ruth, as well), there can be no doubt, though Boaz appears to be a willing enough “mark”. Whether Naomi’s plan was as overtly Machiavellian as Bathsheba’s hypergamous scheming to seduce David (and to subsequently assure that her descendants would inherit the kingdom) is less than certain. The mention of washing in both cases could imply ceremonial cleansing after completion of the monthly cycle, and thus ovulation impending, perhaps making the parallels a bit more pointed.
Yes, also the story of Hosea, it’s symbolic of our adulterous nature against the Lord, and yet still at the end He pays the highest price to win us back. That is love. Loved this, the stories do lead and connect to Christ, hence the genealogy all throughout, I’d like to finally connect it all. There’s probably a book, well the Bible, but a family tree of some sorts drawn out, in the meantime, I’ll make my own.
You seem to think uncovering his feet and laying with him meant taking out his penis and having sex with him. However, while feet can be a euphemism, it seems literal here due to the characters of the 2 involved and Boaz’s actions afterwards, where he says he’d take her as his bride only if the man who’s ahead of him in line lets him (Ruth 3:12-13). I don’t think he’d then have sex with her, or continue having sex with her, as would be the case in verse 14 if this was a euphemism.
fantastic article, and explanation. First article I ever saw of this guy. I learned! And also my silly and pointless quibble is that I am not a huge fan of his weird head shakes and side glances. Lol, he is doing it to try to add emphasis to his speaking style, lots of people do it. I myself am an animated talker sometimes. Just his looks a bit silly to me and simultaneously, it was a very interesting article about Ruth.
Thank you Brandon. I enjoy your explanations as they help tremendously in understanding the Word. I have a question though. This reading shows that Joseph’s, Mary’s husband, came from the line of David, however, with Immaculate conception and the Virgin birth, is Jesus considered adopted in to King David’s line?
Ruth was a widow from a previous jewish man, despite not being jewish herself, the jewish custom was to marry another man being a blood relative of the jewish family. remember there was no social security net, except for the jewish laws prescribing certain things to allow for hospitality. But because she dedicated her life before Boaz.
According to Michael Heiser, a relatively conservative Bible scholar, what she did was extremely forward but not inherently sinful in this context there was no fornication/sex-acts going on, she basically exposed his crotch to send the message. The following is from his podcast… Naomi tells Ruth, “When Boaz lies down, observe the place where he lies. Then go and uncover his feet and lie down. And he will tell you what to do.” This is when Ruth wants to (and she gets the message across pretty well)… She uncovers his genital area. They’re wearing these long skirt things. She just flips it open. They don’t have underwear, folks, in the Bible days. (That’ll probably become a meme now.) They don’t have underwear. So she exposes him. Why does Ruth do this to Boaz? It’s a marriage proposal. “I want you to marry me. I want to have your children. You need to redeem me. We’re related. It’s the law of the kinsman redeemer.” She wants him to take her in and she wants to become his wife. And we get the whole thing about, “Well, there’s somebody that’s in line ahead of me. Got to take care of that kinsman thing according to the laws of Deuteronomy. There’s nothing sexual as far as intercourse that happens in the Ruth scene, because that would have been a violation of the kinsman law and Boaz doesn’t do that. They go through the legal procedure before he can marry her. But she makes her intent—her wish— very obvious. She exposes him and then lays down. And it’s like, “Okay, message understood.
You have a gross misunderstanding of the word in Hebrew for lying at the feet. In the Hebrew it’s closer to the word for headboard only the word foot or feet is used instead, thus feet board. No euphemism there. I’ve heard this case being brought forth elsewhere, I don’t think you treated any better. It isn’t correct. This was also done on the threshing floor with other men nearby. There was no hanky panky.
Who wrote the story about Ruth? What did you learn the important lesson from it? She absolutely abandoned her own heritage, culture, religion, preferences, possessions, family and friends for her mother-in-law’s sake. Who can do that like she did? She did achieve the impossible task. Her great sacrifice for her mother-in-law and her willingness to follow and obey her was recognized by others as a true greatness and powerful love no matter her blood is different. Ruth recognized that Boaz is very respectful and caring about women and foreigners no matter he is very wealthy, powerful and influential because he does have a fear of God. Also, he recognized her as a noblest woman with a lot of values. Many Israelite people accepted to welcome her as a true family as a part of Jewish culture and history no matter she is a foreigner.
So often we focus on Jesus’ ancestors from his fore-father’s side that we forget of his ancestry from his fore-mother’s side. We often think of Shem as Jesus’ ancestor, yet we forget that Ham and his son Canaan were his ancestors through Tamar and Rahab. And while we often focus on his ancestry being through Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, we must remember that Lot was also his ancestor through Ruth.
Good article BUT you, like most commentators, fail to address the elephant in the room: According to Deut. 23.3-6, no Moabite could ever enter the assembly of the Lord “not even in the tenth generation.” So technically Ruth and even David should never have been allowed to worship in the tabernacle or temple. How do we get around this prohibition? Are we to assume that exceptions were made for proselytes? I couldn’t find any Christian commentators who addressed this, but I found some Jewish ones. Evidently the Talmud got around this by saying that the prohibition only applied to male Moabites, not female, but modern commentators don’t necessarily agree with that interpretation, and I don’t either. Thanks for your thoughtful comments. Jennifer
18:10 Can you tell me if when tracing lineage, is it through the mother’s or the father’s? I had a rabbi teach that the reason Jessie did not have young David come and join his brothers, when Samuel came to them, that it was because he was not sure of David’s bloodline. Being that Ruth was possibly(in Jessie’s mind) not of a pure bloodline due to Ruth. This Rabbi also taught, that David was treated poorly and left out with the flocks because of this. He said David was left out of many things with his family as a young man. @ Brandon Robinson, have you studied on this?
The Bible clearly states that Ruth and Boas engaged in horizontal gymnastics. You cannot ignore the obvious inferences. And why so? We are not privy today of all the nuances of a society 3500 years ago. It is not for us to judge past ages by our current laws and morality. Ruth, a widow, went to the fields to follow the reapers, collecting the ears they had missed as permitted by the law (this one we do know existed). Boaz, a handsome, wealthy land owner saw Ruth, he liked what he saw and she was impressed with him. Ruth did nothing TO Boaz, they together, each equally, decided to couple up – to KNOW each other. Boaz went on to marry Ruth and their offspring led us directly to David and through him to Jesus.
The book of Ruth and Judges are set in the same time period. In the book of Judges it is mentioned “everyone did as they pleased” — just as in today’s world….. Two dating scenarios are presented in these books – Ruth/Boaz and Samson/Philistine women….. Ruth’s methods were successful while Samson’s methods were a failure…..Sadly most Christian women today refuse to adopt Ruth’s methods and embrace the Philistine women methods.
Am I missing something here? I don’t see anyone mentioning that the King James Bible does not say that Ruth used the word “redeemer.” What is it I’m not seeing, please? (LOVE your articles by the way – I’ve been feeling kind of stagnant for awhile, feeling like, “Yeah, I’ve read that before” or “I don’t get that” when I would read the Bible. You’re helping me get interested again!)
I always believed that Ruth went with Naomi because (and I may have gotten this from movies), Moabites worshipped idols. Ruth lived in a house that worshipped God. So when she says Naomi’s God will be her God, she’s already accepted the Hebrew God & is not worshipping idols. But if she remained in Moab, she would not be able to worship the Hebrew God.
In Ruth we have a clever little love story, accompanied by some few mishaps, but followed by the usual consummation — wedlock. \r Elimelech (El is my king) = Aries during summer), a man of Beth-lehem-Judah (spring), having wed Naomi (summer) and got two sons by her, sets out with his family for Moab (winter). Elimelech (summer) soon died, and his sons Mahlon cave-Sun = summer) and Chilion (pining-away = winter) took them wives of the daughters of Moab. Orpah (fawn = Virgo in winter) and Ruth (female friend — Virgo in summer). The two sons died in turn, and without issue. The poor widow Naomi, finding hard fare in Moab, and hearing that the Lord had given his people bread (harvest of spring), set out on her return to the land of Judah (spring) with her two daughters- in-law (vs. 7). As they proceeded on their way, Naomi requested her daughters-in-law to return each to her mother’s house, hoping that by so doing each might ” rest in the house of her husband ” (vs. 9). However, they continued to follow the old lady, as if they thought she would yet furnish them with other husbands; at least: the mother-in-law seemed to think that was their object. However, at the last moment (i.e., at the spring equinox), Orpah yielded to the request of Naomi, but Ruth (Virgo in summer) stuck by her, saying: “Where thou diest, will I die” (vs. 17), i.e., at the end of summer. So, the two came to Beth-lehem (spring harvest), when the people inquired: “Is this Naomi?” She replied: ” Call me not Naomi (summer), but Mara (bitter = winter); for I went out (of summer) full, but the Lord hath brought me back empty ” (vs.
So true about the fate of widowed or separated women at that time. It’s why it’s so absurd that people think Jesus was prohibiting divorce and remarriage. First, he was talking about sending away, which is no more the same as being divorced as two people who get separated today. The reason Moses COMMANDED them to issue a certificate of divorce(as opposed to JUST sending them away) was so that they COULD remarry. Otherwise, a woman’s only choice to survive being sent away was to prostitute herself or shack up with some man thereby committing adultery. Which is why Jesus said, sending her away would force her to commit adultery. The idea that God or Jesus would set up a system where if a woman, through no fault of her own, got sent away from her husband and was therefore condemned to either starve to death or prostitute herself is beyond absurd. Now there is a whole movement out there telling people who have remarried to get divorced or they are going to hell. Here’s a hint that you MIGHT have misinterpreted some scripture or joined a cult – you threaten people with hell if they don’t divorce and break up their family.
A bit off the main topic, but whenever I come across someone claiming “the original Hebrew Text”… The Masoretic text is not the original Hebrew – pse do your homework. The Alexandrian Septuagint was translated from the original texts, and agrees verbatim with the Old Testament quotes of Jesus and the apostles. The Masoretic text was formulated many centuries after Christ (by Jewish sages and scribes who reject Jesus), and does not agree with all the New Testament references. Go figure why the original Hebrew “dissappeared” and a new version thereof was concocted by the Christ rejecting scribes… the same reason their fathers bribed the soldiers to deny the resurrection and instead say that His disciples came by night and stole His body.
I’d guess that the kinsman redeemer was expected to have relations from the get go with person he was redeeming and marriage came later. The initial relations were on behalf of dead relative not himself. I suspect the husband died and kinsman redeemer was expected to immediately step in so to speak. If you read dt 25 5_5 that seems to be the pattern. The kinsman redeemer was expected to give a child to be raised as dead man’s offspring. So I suppose Ruth’s behaviour is consistent with asking someone to be kinsman redeemer expectation of relations was part of that role. If brethren dwell together, and one of them die, and have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry outside the family unto a stranger; her husband’s brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him as his wife, and perform the duty of an husband’s brother to her. And it shall be, that the first-born whom she beareth shall succeed in the name of his brother who is dead, that his name be not put out of Israel (Dt. 25:5–6). That said I think. Boaz and Ruth did not have relations on that night because boaz pointed out there was a nearer male relative to whom kinsman redeemer privilege belonged. Had boaz been the nearer male relative perhaps the story would have been different.
@BrandonRobbins Thank you. I often wondered what it meant by Ruth uncovering Boaz’s feet, but you gave such details, insight and depth in your explanation that I am blessed. I do have one question for you regarding the genealogy of Christ. We see the two genealogies in the New Testament gospels of Matthew and Luke. I was always under the assumption that Matthew showed the genealogy of Jesus through Joseph and Luke showed it through Mary. Recently, I read an article that suggested that both gospels showed the genealogy of Joseph. In my mind, since God is Jesus’ true father, then the genealogy in Luke really portrays his lineage through Mary. Luke 3:23 – And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli, Matthew 1:16 – And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. Am I incorrect in thinking that Luke portrays Mary’s family line while Matthew portrays Joseph’s family line or are they both Joseph’s family tree since Israel in that time was a patriarchal family system? Your insight on this would be greatly appreciated. Thank you and God bless.
I’m thinking Naomi is Mother and Ruth is possibly us or Daughter Sophia, The obdah is probably Jesus or us, . It’s a story but the charters are of another story, usually a story is for 2 types, history, but scripture also. The scripture side is what’s to be known and understood and you’ll find connections later but this is why,it’s so difficult to understand, it’s 2 stories and only few know this
Get it? The FEET is often used euphemistically to refer to something other than the actual feet. To “uncover one’s FEET”, for instance, was another way of referring to the act of using the bathroom. Which meant that they uncovered their uncomely parts in the act of doing so, like that time when King Saul relieved himself in the cave and David cut off a piece of his robe (1Sam. 24:3). Scandalous, i know. But as controversial as that may be to our 21st century Western minds, her actions clearly meant something else in her cultural context. It did not seem to diminish her honor nor that of Boaz because it was clearly understood for what it was.
But why would Boaz warn Ruth to watch out for the other men early in the story, if at the end of it he was gonna end up doing said thing himself. Besides if he ended up engaging in sexual relationships with her then by law he was to have her as his wife, since it would eventually be discovered they had relations. Also the bible never uses “euphemism when relating to sex, it always says it clearly. So it be strange for it to only be done here. The story is obviously symbolic of the relationship one would have with God, but that is just a second interpretation of it as an allegory. At face value reading the texts as they are is a pretty clear telling of the story that played out, with no need for flowery poetic language or euphemisms to explain what is plainly put in pages. Edit: One time you could say euphemism was used was when king David after committing adultery told Uriah to go sleep with his wife, “wash his feet” so it would be presumed the child is his. In this instance the act is said covertly by David not the narrator, since he is trying to hide the shame from the sin he committed.
According to me the approach was wrong. The idea gave by naomi was the only mistake. Let me picturise better, for example you gonna write exam and you have two options. One is to study well and score good marks and another option is to cheat the exam and scoring the marks. So the result is same but the approach is different .
I think it was not quite so nice… well, he already liked her, but … he did not propose, even though he was family with Elimelech. Now – guess Boas had slept longer. What would people have thought about him? A man and a woman under one planket, after a party with lots of wine… not what happened, but everybidy would think so. Well, the law was not only against women, as most of the nations see it. The law said marriage or stones for both… According what Noemi told Ruth, Ruth literally forced Boas to marry her. One might think: Poor Boas, but it seems he already was in love. So: he awoke first, got upset, sent her away but at the same time finally promised that he’d do everything necessary to marry her and gave her words of love. And I guess, Ruth also already liked him – which woman could resist to so.much kindness that he showed her in the field? These were tricky women fighting for life and love.
Your presentation was really great up to the point of Jewish culture. This was Israelite culture not Jewish, Jews are Edomites in the line of Esau. John Hyrcanus converted all the Edomites approx 140BC and henceforth they adapted the ways and religion of the Judeans (Tribe of Judah). The Romans didn’t distinguish between Jews (Esau) and Judah, they called them all Jews, however, Jesus did distinguish and told them they were not his sheep. Ruth was most likely an Israelite living in Moab, something similar to an Irishman moving to the USA back in the 60’s and his children are known today as Americans. Ruth’s family most likely ended up living in Moab for the same reason as Naomi’s. Most of the Moabites at this time are race mixed the same way that Esau mixed his seed which was a great distress to Rebekah, that is why she sent Jacob/Israel away to take a wife from their own kinsmen/race. Ruth would not have been accepted by the elders of Israel if she were of a different race. Marriage between a man and woman in The Eyes of God happens when the have intercourse. That is why a true marriage can only be between a man and woman. Really great presentation apart from the Jewish mistake.
The question now is that why was Boaz still a bachelor? Isn’t that sketchy that in his age, perhaps a middle aged man still has no wife? I guess Matthew 1:5 may help (Boaz is the son of Salmon to Rahab the former prostitute – perhaps Salmon is one of the spies sent to scout Jericho and Rahab took shelter of them). Boaz had a terrible life growing up. He is the son of his father to a woman from Jericho which is technically not an Israelite and was also a former prostitute. Just expect how bad his life was and how infamous he was to the ladies back then. That may explain why he might put up all of his strength and days building up his wealth instead of finding a wife for himself. But here comes a widow foreigner who will also rescue him from being a forever bachelor and they will go on being the great grandparents of the future king David and so the future messiah Jesus Christ. As we can see, there were I guess four sketchy women in Jesus’ genealogy (i.e., Tamar, Rahab, Ruth and Bathsheba – the latter was not mentioned by name) all of which are mentioned by Matthew due to their infamous backstories.
Brandon, Be careful how you see. Ruth was at Boaz’s feet. That puts Ruth the length of his body away from himself, in dim light. The simplest explaination is that the uncovering of Boaz’s feet was both a gentle but assertive way to awaken a sleeper. Boaz full of food and wine would be very relaxed. Being awakened gently to the stirring of a female figure at his feet you see the affirmation of integrity this son of Abraham, this son of Judah has. Boaz, is made to be mildly suspect of his own actions, Naomi did stage Ruth to position herself before Boaz in a place that he perceived she was compromised. Boaz, being a man of compassion and amirable righteous character, knew what it would take to redeem Ruth from her distress. This is significant because as you mentioned Ruth was a Moabite born of incest between Lot and his daughter after he drank and fell asleep drunk. Boaz, like Abraham was generous, like Judah humbled himself to publicly admit to his affair with Tamar and provide for her and his sons Perez and Zerah; sacrificial of his position for the sake of one relative other than himself in distress. ———– I want to add that disparity between races is manifested differently in gender-to-gender relationships. Many times males of a minority race are perceived by males in the dominant patriarchal society as an eminent threat, and treated as such. Whereas females of that same minority group are perceived as physically desirable and not in anyway a social threat or status inhibitor.
While Ruth did nothing scandalous, she was completely within the Law of Moses, there are many in our society today who want her to be scandalous. I often find it amusing how ‘scandalous’ Americans find certain parts of the Bible considering our sexual practices are more like the Woman At The Well than Ruth. Maybe we want or need Ruth to be like us.
Lmao comment section doesn’t understand that people didn’t always equate sexuality with morality and that biblical text isn’t a solid thing but a really fascinating thousands-year-old project that doesn’t fit into anyone’s box. How do you square Song of Solomon into the Bible if you can’t accept that someone has premarital sex now and again?
Extremely interesting, the narrative of Ruth which Jews regard as fictional. If the narrative is true then David was the 3rd and Solomon the 4th generation of Mamzer (Mamzerim (plural)), “bastards” or later referred to as Samaritans and prohibited from entering into the congregation of YHWH for 10 generations, which Jews interpret as a perpetual prohibition. Yet David, Solomon and Jesus came from this “forbidden” line? Contradictory or showing something more? The oldest extant manuscripts of Deut 32:8-9 as presented by the 4th century BC Septuagint in Greek and the 4th century BC Dead Sea Scrolls say, paraphrasing, that the Most High divided the nations and territories of the earth between His son’s and YHWH’s portion was Jacob. YHWH was clearly less than the Most High being a recipient, not the Allocator, a son. This shows the fact that ancient Israel was probably henotheistic, not monotheistic and YHWH a minor or lesser god together with his brothers, even sharing a wife with (his brother?) Baal, from archeological evidence. Then read Ex 6 where YHWH says to Moses he was known to all before him as God Almighty (Most High by necessary implication) but his name is actually YHWH! Looks like identity theft, an imposter or a mythological, pagan “battle of the gods”? Hence the only one True God, the Most High, God Almighty had and has no problem with Mamzerim/bastards becoming kings or His Son being associated with their bloodline? Yet a Biblical legal prohibition does have a problem with such a bloodline?
this was pretty good and for the most par accurate !! Two things that are about right lies that should not have been spoken !! one there is no letter ( W ) in Hebrew so the name yaweh is not the name of the Hebrew GOD !!!! There is no letter ( J ) in their Hebrew alphabet either !! the one name that should and can be used in referring to the Hebrew GOD is the only name that is in the scripture ( YAHUAH OR SHORT FORM YAHU !!!! TO MISLEAD AND WORSE PERVERT THE ON TRUE HOLY NAME OF THE HOLY SPIRIT THE HEBREWS CALL THEIR GOD YAHUAH !! There is no excuse for it !! this person only teaches the false perverted catholic names of the Hebrew GOD !! TO TAKE THE ONE TRUE HOLY NAME YAHU OF THE HEBREW GOD IN VAIN !! YAHU THE HOLY SPIRIT WILL HOLD THE PERSON GUILTY !! \tExo 20:7 Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain. Deu 5:11 Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain: for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
Why do we always try and fit things and people from historiy into our worldview from today? Salomon all his brothers killed, we alwasy try and put these nice dignified point of view to actors of the past, and the truth is back then things were pretty raw, they didn’t human rights laws, or equality laws, or child abuse laws.
There is absolutely NO reason to assume and presume that something inappropriate happened between Ruth and Boaz on the threshing floor…! You are reading far too much into the Biblical text….; the “suggestive language” you allude to in in your mind only (and in the minds of similar minded people as you)! The words “uncover”, “feet” and “lying down” means axactly what they mean, not some suggestive other meaning. The lying down at his feet under his covers had a SYMBOLIC meaning, not a suggestive meaning. She was communicating a message to him which he understood in the correct way. Boaz’s praised Ruth for being “virtuous” and called her “blessed of God” saying that “all the city of my people know that though art a virtuous women”. Boaz RESPECTED Ruth and wasn’t going to do any thing to disrespect her or take advantage of her. He even protected her honor and told her “Let it not be known that a women came into the floor (which in itself would be a taboo in Hebrew culture). Boaz protected her from being taken advantage of by the young men harvesting and preserved her honor in the process. So why would he then himself dishonor her by taking advantage of her in the night….?! He told her to lie down to the morning and the Bible clearly said ” she lay AT HIS FEET until the morning” (Ruth 3:14), NOT NEXT to him…! Besides, Boaz showed great RESTRAINT (apart from RESPECT for Ruth as well as the Lord, Yahwe) and didn’t jump to the opportunity…; he stood back and told Ruth that there was a relative closer to him that could (and should) “redeem” her.
Sorry, but I don’t understand something: Joseph is not Jesus bio-dad, to put it in modern words. So what is the point of creating this bloodline when it doesn’t lead to Mary, but to a man who wasn’t involved in the “creation” of Jesus Christ? I don’t want to be offensive, I do believe in our Lord Jesus Christ, but I have been struggling to understand this for some time..
Have to say I’m saddened by your handling of this one, obscure enough for some to be laughing that we all missed the euphemism that doesn’t exist here. Everything done was lawful as their coversation proves. Naomi pushed a situation so that it would be resolved that day; “he will not rest, we’ll know today”, she tells Ruth. Boaz didn’t misunderstand but said she was of noble character so why was she there, and she explains he is a kinsman-redeemer. His response is to bless her, not to fornicate with her. This is not a repeat of the story of Lot’s daughrers but a redemption from that story, for Ruth also had no likelihood of a husband but followed God’s plan, albeit by accelerating it via Naomi’s scheming. I think you missed this one Brandon, unless you can show that uncovering the feet means what you implied without any backing from anywhere. “At midnight, Boaz was startled, turned over, and there lying at his feet was a woman!” Such a visit had to be kept from gossip, but nowhere implies law-breaking by any of them.
Sorry my friend but you got all this wrong… or to better say you interpreted it on your own way. In any passage of the Bible that mentions anything related to “intimacy” it clearly uses the word consummation or to be one in another as God intended. In these passage of Ruth she literally went to Boaz bed, uncovered his feet and laid there. When Boaz noticed that there was someone at his feet, then he asked who was there and her answer was very logical, because only servants or kids were the ones that will lay at the feet of the bed, “It is me Ruth your humble servant. Cover me under your robe because you are my redeemer”. She was telling him that she was at her service and was asking him to protect her because he was the only one who could redeem her. She was following God’s will to ask Boaz to marry her by showing that she was a humble woman. Remember that Moabites had a reputation of being very proud people, specially the women, so she had to show that she was a valuable woman to this man.
Christians that disregard the authenticity of the Bible are none other than the theologians themselves. She was called noble and virtuous by the towns people. The Bible says she laid by his feet and removed his sandal. God has warned not to remove or add anything to what’s already written since it has been inspired by the holy spirit. Thank you.
Over 2 thousand years and people still talk about this.. in 2 thousand years people will still be talking about this.. and in 6 thousand years in a galaxy far far away this will be made into a star wars type story.. if humans survive for 8 more thousand years, people will laugh at this crap cause by then we will be making while universes.. we will be gods. Lol
God does not call the qualified, he qualifies the called. All of the the major figures in the Bible (save Jesus) were sinners. Jacob stole his brother’s legacy. Abraham took a concubine to preserve his seed after God told him he would provide a son from Sarah. David and Moses committed murder. Thomas was a doubter, Peter asked Jesus to depart from him because he was a sinful man. Paul (Saul) persecuted believers.
Brandon, sometimes inserting artwork breaks up your presentation with interest and adds clarity, but in this article you selected a very poor representation that seems like click bait and greatly misleads the listener/viewer. Your image choice, and an incomplete analysis made “racey” or suggestive what was an invitation of readiness to marry as a redeemer and redeemed, but NOT a prostitution style play of entrapment or loose gal trying to get the guy with the goods. Also, as Boaz comments on Ruth’s character and reputation within the community, he also demonstrates his own character something you gloss over. He acts with Joseph like self control. He speaks, and they talk. He acts with honor toward someone whose character he admires. He follows the process of clearing the way for a proper union by going to the other man ahead of him in line BEFORE, not after, being intimate with Ruth. She made him aware her mourning was over. He made her aware he valued her. He did not rape her, have easy sex, take anything before the right time. This article message and art needs a rework so as to not mislead those who are seeking, or new believers as it is not a complete rendering of the story of any left this 18 minutes with the idea Boaz had sex with her that first night he awoke to find her laying at his feet. Much happened between that night, and the conception of Obed that was not made clear.
Sorry but I do not like how you represented this story at all. These moments are intimate, but not sexual. Ruth represents us (the church, the bride of Christ), willing to give up our old lives, Boaz represents Christ the Redeemer, the nearer kinsman that could not redeem her represents the Law of God. This whole story not only represents God’s plan of redemption, but created the bloodline of Jesus. No more smearing Ruth for views please.
I like your teachings but you imply by your title and some of your message that there was indeed something inappropriate between Ruth and Boaz, and yet you never actually back that point up. Removing the covering from his feet and lying next to Boaz was not in itself sinful. So your title seems a little bit like click bait, because that’s why I clicked on it – see? And if you have to stoop to those kinds of tactics, and step into the gray area of deception and besmirching the honor of Ruth and Boaz just to get more views and likes, well, be careful and watch the motivations of your heart.
Hey seminary dude. Dont take the bible too seriously. Certain text in the bible were never meant to be taken literally, the are foundational stories, like where did David come from, yada, yada, yada. So lets get down in the dirty of this whole thing. 1175 BC, late bronze age collapse begins, the writing system from the 18th century to this time was akkadian cuneiform. Protosiniatic was a vulgate script of little importance. c 1100 BC, Egypt is in full retreat, society as the people have kniwn it is in full collapse. A few temple towns spread around Israel are sending out authorities to essentially run things. Yahu worship is around beth lahmu (bethlehem, lahmu is the guardian of Ea/Enki/Yahu). Canaanites have fled to the hills. The important thing here in 1075 BC is keeping the trade routes open. People are moving as such would happen, men who had women in the region would find their captains retreating back to the Nile. About 1050 the process is nearly complete and Egypt is below the Cataract of the Nile. What does this mean. . .No scribes. A few traders are using Early Linear, which as Egypt retracts becomes Phonecian. Noone in Israel knows how to write and paleohebrew is not yet a thing. That is the background of Ruth. So lets talk about ethics. King David is the hero at the End of Judges. How is this so true. He chops off the genetalia of 200 men (A violent act, presumbably dead, therefore descersting their bodies) He trades those parts for a woman, who he absndons on the night of their bonding.
I think the comments I’ve read are super interesting. Interesting because it shows how far modern Christianity is from its biblical roots and culture. Their culture was not our culture. Ruth approached Boaz exactly in a way that both Ruth and Naomi knew would have the highest probability of success. Boaz could have refused her petition, and he also could have done more than just cover her symbolically if he chose too. And for the swooners and prudes in the bunch, that’s exactly what Ruth was offering. He could have consummated the marriage she was asking for and informed the men at the gate the following day and there would have been nothing that anyone could or would have done about it. Boaz didn’t refuse Ruth in that moment because of propriety or righteousness, far from it. He put the matter on pause to gain the most leverage from the situation with the nearer kinsman, and so that in the event that the other kinsman chose to redeem the inheritance for himself, that Boaz couldn’t be accused of sleeping with his neighbors wife or “rhea ishah” (a charge that he could have easily beaten considering how she approached him.) I’m constantly amazed at how this story is romanticized and how Ruth is used as an example for single believing women today, but we’d never advise our single ladies to crawl into bed with a marriage proposal to a man! Much less an older man that Jewish history claims had mannnnnny children. 60 or so sons if I’m recalling correctly!
Well done kidddooo preacher, it’s not a very very big revelation just that Ruth got intimate with Boaz…common milking christians…good on you, but why I am concerned is your title image…which is highly antisemitic inappropriate and absolutely not out of Holy Ghost. Kindly change your title, I came to your article while searching chosen…you are disgracing a woman of faith, any holy spirit beleiver will easily discern this article content and an Israelite will feel offended.