The Book of Ruth

**Queen** · 06-30-2003, 06:30 PM

Re: The Book of Ruth

Well, I had my input and Jedi hers. It's still an open thread so if anyone (namely CEW) [img]/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] wants to make a contribution feel free.

However Abigail's story is short, so it wouldn't take long.

Besides, in her very last sentence, Jedi made mention to you and your brother Matthew Henry [img]/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

**Diplomat** · 06-30-2003, 06:39 PM

Re: The Book of Ruth

Originally posted by Queen:
[qb] Well, I had my input and Jedi hers. It's still an open thread so if anyone (namely CEW) [img]/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] wants to make a contribution feel free.

However Abigail's story is short, so it wouldn't take long.

Besides, in her very last sentence, Jedi made mention to you and your brother Matthew Henry [img]/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [/qb]

OK. It is a holiday here tomorrow but I will post the thread on one of the other women I admire, from the Bible that is [img]/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] .

**Queen** · 06-30-2003, 06:43 PM

Re: The Book of Ruth

Let's see, it must either be Esther, Mary or Priscilla.

**Diplomat** · 06-30-2003, 06:57 PM

Re: The Book of Ruth

Originally posted by Queen:
[qb] Let's see, it must either be Esther, Mary or Priscilla. [/qb]

None of those three.

**jedi** · 06-30-2003, 08:38 PM

Re: The Book of Ruth

y posted by CEW:

Originally posted by Jedi:
BTW, I did not say he was concerned about his integrity, but rather that being a godly man, his first concern was that of propriety, meaning for them both.
(((CEW))) According to what you said I got the strong impression that it was your opinion that he was a noble man with his image to protect I may have been wrong. [img]/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Your "strong impression" was very wrong and though I can see how you would have come to that conclusion, that was not what I had in mind [img]/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Jedi: My observation was made soley on your previous response to Queen, and nothing else. Your statement namely this one: “ Maybe, but bear in mind that Boaz was a man of God, and as such his first concern would be one of propriety. How would it appear to others if it was found out that Ruth slept in his bedroom?” . You said nothing futher therefore it could have been taken both ways.

On the subject itself, I was doing some reading on the weekend about the spin we sometimes put on the scriptures and I can see how tempting it is to see Ruth's story solely as a really romantic thing with Boaz as Prince Charming and every single woman's dream man [img]/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

I however was looking at a deeper understanding and as such, what I tried to do was to apply some of the basic rules of exegesis; 1) Every scripture must be understood in its immediate context; and 2) Any interpretation of scripture must be understood in the context of all other scriptures.

Jedi: And could you kindly show me where anything that I said previously was taken out of the immediate context of scripture. You see I believe we are saying pretty much the same things however I stated this: “This is not so simple a story when you look at it from all angles, and though the appeal may be for women to take action one must still take these things into consideration. Don't overlook the facilitator in this story either which I believe is Gods Holy Spirit, moving on the hearts of the people involved.” Which is to say that this is not simply an act of men but of the spirit at work bringing about Gods plan of salvation for his people as we see that Christ would come out of this union. I said that very plainly here: “So obviously there is another force at play here. We see this come to fruition later on as Christ would be the decendant of this union.”

I do not dispute your perspective, however we need to understand a couple of things, including the role of the kinsman, to understand Boaz's actions. Bear in mind that Boaz was related to the family of Elimelech and this formed the basis of his kinsmanship to Naomi through her marriage. It was also this relationship that placed him at the front of the line - so to speak - as it related to Ruth. Boaz would have known of his relationship to Naomi, and would have been very aware of the kinsman-redeemer responsibilities.

Jedi: I see no reason why you find it necessary to expound on this further as I have pointed this out time and again. He may however have been on the front line but he was no first on the front line as he himself admitted. My point is that there was something else at work here to have Naomi select him as the man for Ruth.

During the time of the judges, the role of the kinsman "was primarily one of care and protection of the childless widow and the possibility of voluntary exercise of a Levirate". In effect, he was "acting as an agent of Yahweh by demonstrating his covenant loyalty to the purpose of God among his people." As one commentator pointed out, "in the actions of Boaz as Kinsman, we see foreshadowed the saving work of Jesus Christ, his later descendant.

Jedi: Understood, and I believe we are all aware of this and have agreed earlier up that this is the case.

Boaz had the right of redemption and yet was under no obligation to intervene on Ruth's behalf, so it is with Christ." While you are right that there was no obligation to redeem Ruth, what I find fascinating is what God intended through this story. A clear picture of the church's redemption.

Jedi: And I believe that all are in agreement on this point also

Boaz - being a type of Christ - was a godly man whose desire first and foremost was to please God. He would not have taken disadvantage of Ruth as the Spirit of God would not have allowed that to happen, moreso in the context of what was being demonstrated.

Jedi: And as I said this much here: “However Naomi knew (I asked this before BTW couple of posts up) that first of all Boaz did not have first rights to Ruth, but she selected Boaz for her because of all that we have already discussed and mostly because she was confident that he was a man of Godly character and integrity and he would not compromise her in anyway. “ In order to have Godly character I believe it is understood that one must have the Spirit of God working within.

As for Ruth being a foreigner, this is a significant part of the story. To the Jews, she was a Gentile. She however was a gentile of much character - sticking by Naomi, a hard worker - and most importantly, had accepted the God of Naomi. The fact that she offered to glean - an activity guaranteed to the poorest of people who would follow reapers in the fields and pick up remaining scraps (Lev. 19:9)- in a field owned by a landowner with whom she hoped to find grace (favor), led her - by divine appointment I think - to the field of Boaz.

Jedi: This was my response to Queen on the question of whether she would not cause eyes to raise seeing as how she a newcomer would be married off so soon to Boaz:

“Well we understand that there was actually another relative that had legal rights to first dibs on Ruth before Boaz. See here it says:
Ruth 3:12 Although it is true that I am near of kin, there is a kinsman-redeemer nearer than I. 13 Stay here for the night, and in the morning if he wants to redeem, good; let him redeem. But if he is not willing, as surely as the LORD lives I will do it. Lie here until morning."
So we see that in actual fact Ruth was eligible to marry one of the men of honor among the tribe of Judah, so that it should have come as not surprise to anyone if she did. She was no ordinary servant girl in other words just a victim of hard times

According to the commentators, when Boaz enquired: "Whose damsel is this?", it was not a question of attraction, but one similar to 1 Sam 17:55, meaning he was enquiring of her legal right to be there in relation to which family she was from. The response of the servant suggests that the only reason he allowed her was because she worked hard, noting she tarried only a little time in the house (Ruth 2:4-7).

Jedi: While I respect the commentaries please understand that the writers are as much humans as we are, and while I am in total agreement with the comparison of this story to Christ and His bride the church, please understand also that my point is simply this : In order for divine appointment to run its full course the man would have had to SEE her.
Much the same as “faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word.” Now you and I may disagree as to the power of SIGHT but certainly the senses do play a significant role in swaying human emotion, and I do not believe that anyone can deny that.. On the surface all that you are saying is true, and it would be expected that her presence would be cause for concern, hence the supervisors comment etc. On the other hand it is nothing out of the order for the poor to glean in the fields of the rich for if you look in the book of Leviticus you will see that it is commanded of the haves to allow the have nots to glean in the fields at harvest. So what was out of the ordinary here apart from the fact that she was a foreigner? We see the Spirit at work here drawing his attention to the woman’s PRESENCE, her presence had a twofold purpose, as much to draw his attention to her on the natural as to draw his attention to her on the spiritual. He had already heard of the woman and admired her virtue and courage in dealing kindly with his clanswoman. Naomi could not have proceed to the next phase of sending her to lie at her feet had he not SEEN her and had she not met with his approval.

On the natural, this seems like starry-eyed love at first sight [img]/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Jedi: That all depends on how you interpret love at first sight. The sight which I speak of goes deeper than love at first sight.

, however in the divine scheme of things the rest of the story unfolds showing Boaz as a type of Christ, the bridegroom from Bethlehem, and Ruth as a type of the Church with nothing with which to commend her to her master.

Jedi: Except that he loved her. If you are looking at this as a type of the relationship between Christ and His church don’t omit the LOVE factor involved. See here it says:
1 John 4: 10In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.” My point being that this was not a cut an dry case of man marries woman out of mere duty.

Once Boaz was told Ruth was Naomi's daughter-in-law, he knew she was also a part of family (clan), and that could also explain his favored treatment towards her.

Jedi: And it could also be that he also liked what he had seen, albeit divine intervention.

Boaz indicated that he was willing to show every kindness to Ruth because of the kindness that she had shown to her mother-in-law, the widowed and now childless relative of Boaz. Remember, being a gentile she had no reason to expect kindness from a Jew! The Hebrew word translated kindness (chesed) indicates the personal expression of godliness on the part of one servant of the Lord to another, yet in the natural, I would agree with you on the possibility that Boaz allowed her to remain in his field so he might keep an eye on her not only for the purpose of protection - which is why he warned the other guys to back off - but also because he knew that by becoming a believer in God, she was a partaker in the blessings of the covenant community, and as such he was now able to see her as an object of his affection.

Jedi: Let me draw your focus to this passage of scripture because I find that your statement in bold above is somewhat contradictory and gives meaning to the old phrase "putting the cart before the horse," namely this: Romans 5:8"But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us." No prior requirements needed which is important to know if you are using this story as a type of Christ and His Church in the strictest sense. But whereas God is omniscient and has seen us and loved us beforehand, Boaz on the other hand was not omnicient, and inspite of all her commendations he would still have to have SEEN her and she would still have had to find FAVOR in his EYES. Remember he still did not have to marry her, he could just as easily had gone on admiring her and being kind to her and allowing her to continue gleaning in his fields. BUT GOD.

This is a bit of a dual story; one of love and romance, yet my fascination with it lies not so much in that aspect of it, but just how God demonstrated His redeemer's rights, to bring us Gentiles into His family. There is nothing wrong with the way you are looking at it. I just took it one step further

Jedi: No I believe you are on point with how a man would view this story from a natural physical perspective but if anything I took it a bit futher to show you (hopefully) that LOVE is not a matter of x+y=MC2. The senses do play a significant roll in how we percieve others, and this is where the Spirit of God works on men, at the level of the heart.

**Diplomat** · 07-01-2003, 12:27 AM

Re: The Book of Ruth

Jedi: <chuckle> As customary, we simply agree to disagree in the areas we do [img]/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] .

**jedi** · 07-01-2003, 02:36 AM

Re: The Book of Ruth

Arite, arite you are very much in the right but in my mind you seem to downplay the obvious all the time, that's all. Do you underestimate the power of LOVE in this story. C'mon can't you see it? I am not talking about puppy, teenage love here I am talking about the kind that Christ has for His church embellished with selflessness and complete self-sacrifice. Did Boaz have to marry her? answer that, and so why did he do it, be honest.

**Diplomat** · 07-01-2003, 06:42 PM

Re: The Book of Ruth

Jedi: From the very onset I made it clear that I was fascinated with the story - after studying it - not so much because of the love thing, but because of how God allowed it to be a part of His Word, demonstrating what was to come in the person of Jesus Christ and the gentile Church. I also made it clear that I was not taking issue with the way how you were looking at it. This is a dual story and anyone of us can choose to focus on either side and not be wrong. I really do not see an issue at all.

**Queen** · 07-01-2003, 09:35 PM

Re: The Book of Ruth

O.k. So can we go on to the next lady?

tapping fingers

**jedi** · 07-01-2003, 09:38 PM

Re: The Book of Ruth

Originally posted by CEW:
[qb] Jedi: From the very onset I made it clear that I was fascinated with the story - after studying it - not so much because of the love thing, but because of how God allowed it to be a part of His Word, demonstrating what was to come in the person of Jesus Christ and the gentile Church. I also made it clear that I was not taking issue with the way how you were looking at it. This is a dual story and anyone of us can choose to focus on either side and not be wrong. I really do not see an issue at all. [/qb]

Point well taken (((CEW))) but I believe to over look the LOVE STORY aspect of it is to overlook the love story between God and His church, for everywhere it is alluded to including Songs of Solomon it is a TYPE of love story. That is all that I am saying. [img]/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

**gracie** · 07-02-2003, 04:23 AM

Re: The Book of Ruth

The month of May at our church was designated Women's month. My husband preached one sabbath and he preached about Ruth. The most fascinating and interesting thing I learned was that Rahab, the harlot who hid Joshua and Caleb,was Boaz's grandmother. God had already forbade the Isrealites to exclude themselves from the Moabites because Balak had hired Baalam to curse the Isrealites and the Isrealites were God's chosen people. Ruth been Moabites was then considered an exclusion. But thanks be to God for showing us He can engaf anyone into His righteousness irrespective of status, past or present situation so long as that person says to God like Ruth "Entreat me not to leave you or return from following after you....." Of a truth God is good and favorable to us. Thank you Lord.

**Diplomat** · 07-02-2003, 10:15 AM

Re: The Book of Ruth

Originally posted by Queen:
[qb] O.k. So can we go on to the next lady?

tapping fingers [/qb]

I agree as we have exhausted this one. The next WOTB (Woman of the Bible) will *not* involve a love story. The kind of stuff that went on in this thread is enough to give me a headache.

Reaching for two Advils and a glass of water.

**Diplomat** · 07-02-2003, 10:16 AM

Re: The Book of Ruth

Originally posted by gracie:
[qb] The month of May at our church was designated Women's month. My husband preached one sabbath and he preached about Ruth. The most fascinating and interesting thing I learned was that Rahab, the harlot who hid Joshua and Caleb,was Boaz's grandmother. God had already forbade the Isrealites to exclude themselves from the Moabites because Balak had hired Baalam to curse the Isrealites and the Isrealites were God's chosen people. Ruth been Moabites was then considered an exclusion. But thanks be to God for showing us He can engaf anyone into His righteousness irrespective of status, past or present situation so long as that person says to God like Ruth "Entreat me not to leave you or return from following after you....." Of a truth God is good and favorable to us. Thank you Lord. [/qb]

Bless your heart. That's how I was looking at it originally.

The Book of Ruth

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

ads