Ruth 4:5
Ruth 4:5 Then In Strength (Boaz) said, “On the day you acquire the field from the hand of My Pleasant One (Naomi), you also acquire Companion (Ruth) the Moabitess, the widow of the deceased, in order to raise up the name of the deceased on his inheritance.”
Introduction
Our text this morning continues our study of the book of Ruth.
Now remember the story thus far: Boaz is at the city gate (the official courtroom of the community) to see if the closer family relative is willing to redeem Ruth by marrying her. Remember, as the closest relative of Elimelech’s family, this other fellow has the first right of refusal in the matter. Boaz is next in line.
However to our surprise, Boaz opens the proceeding (not with the marriage of Ruth but) by telling the closer relative about some piece of land that Naomi is having to sell because of her impoverishment. Why? Boaz expects this closer relative’s true motives to betray him.
However, to our shock, this other relative agrees to act as the family’s redeemer. Boaz is out and the whole plan seems shot.
In our text this morning we have an utter mess on our hands. Everything seems to be going horribly wrong with the proceeding. However, the proceeding is not over yet and Boaz and YHWH are not done working.
Verse 4:5
Notice at once, just as we think the whole plan has fallen apart, Boaz (the strength and deliverance of YHWH) calmly continues his legal address. Boaz tells the other relative, on the day you acquire the field from the hand of Naomi, you also acquire Ruth FN#1. In other words, Boaz reminds his relative in the hearing of all that redemption, in this case is, is not merely a real estate venture. Instead, it is a package deal. As such, the very moment/day he exercises his right as the closest kinsman and redeems the land, he must also fulfill his full responsibility as redeemer by redeeming Ruth as well. The two go together. In fact, in a book that is all about names, notice that as Boaz mentions Ruth, the very nature of this transaction is reflected in her Hebrew name. Simply put, by exercising his right as kinsman redeemer, Ruth will become this relative’s Companion and wife. Not only that, notice that the author’s strategic use of these Hebrew names highlights the gravity of the proceeding FN#2. Notice then, it is the very Strength and instrument of YHWH (Boaz), who is presenting this other relative with the full weight of his obligation. In turn, this relative’s obligation is to a family member who is Pleasant to YHWH (Naomi). Simply put, the author is once again playing off the Hebrew names to show us the deeper spiritual factors at work here. How? He is preparing us to see that the decisions this other relative will make directly reflect his heart for God and the people of God.
Next, notice the surprise: notice how Boaz describes Ruth: he calls her the Moabitess. However, this is a grossly inadequate/incomplete description of Ruth and a deliberate maneuver by Boaz. Think about it: if all that can be said about Ruth is that she is a Moabite, then the whole proceeding shuts down right then and there. Why? God expressly forbade His people to marry pagans FN#3. Not only that, if Ruth were a Moabitess, this would give the other relative a perfect out. It would allow him to acquire the land without having to bother with Ruth. So what is Boaz doing here? First, Boaz’s description of Ruth publically demonstrates the validity of Ruth’s conversion. How? The very fact that the proceeding continues, demonstrates that her conversion is known and accepted by all (the elders, the town folk, and even this other relative who does not try to use her foreign birth as a means to get just the land). Importance: in a book that is building the case for the Davidic line, the public validation of Ruth provided by these proceedings is vital. It shows that there is nothing amiss in the line of David FN#4.
Second, by drawing attention to Ruth’s Moabite birth, Boaz is skillfully playing on the other relative’s prejudice (remember Boaz knows this guy and his character). How? Boaz points out that what is at stake here for this other relative is not just land, or marriage, but bringing foreign pagan blood into his pristine family line. As such, he will be the husband of a despicable Moabite hussy and his kids will forever be half breeds FN#5. Notice the result: Boaz’s strategic description of Ruth exposes the heart of this other relative publically (and probably without this other relative even noticing it since he likely assumes that there is nothing wrong with his views and that everyone holds them). How? This other relative’s response shows us that he sees and assesses as the world does, not as YHWH does. Thus, to him Ruth is not a child of God, accepted by YHWH, and to be cared for by His people. Instead, she is nothing more than a noxious foreigner and an unwanted financial burden. Importance: notice what is happening here: again we see that Boaz is quietly but very intentionally trying to influence how this other relative will respond. In other words, the skillful way that Boaz presents his case (he started with the property, he drew the court’s focus squarely on this redeemer’s moral responsibility, and now he drops this Moabite bomb), tips us off that Boaz is not just trying to settle this matter one way or the other. Instead, he wants to be Ruth’s redeemer. Therefore, he is intentionally steering the entire proceeding in that direction. Why? Either Boaz realizes that this other relative will never care for Ruth and Naomi properly or he has come to genuinely like/admire/respect Ruth (my bet is both)FN#6. Importance: these proceedings not only show us Boaz’s skill and faithfulness as God’s instrument, they also show us his heart. In other words, Boaz is a real person who has a real personal interest in this matter. Regardless, this is still not the Hallmark Movie book of the Bible (it is not a book that is motivated or carried along by romance but by kesed– committed love FN#7).
Next, notice Boaz goes on to describe Ruth as the widow of the deceased. In other words, Ruth is described as Elimelech’s wife. Why? First, everyone knows that Naomi is Elimelech’s wife. However, it is through Ruth that Elimelech’s line and the testimony of his abiding part in the future of God’s people will continue. Why? Naomi is beyond child bearing age. As such, the continuation of the family’s name/line goes to Ruth, the widow of Elimelech’s son FN#8.
Next, Boaz says that this relative will acquire Ruth along with the land in order that the name of the deceased may be raised up on that land FN#9. Importance: notice the reason that the redemption of the land and marriage to Ruth are inseparably bound: Boaz publically reminds the proceeding that according to the law, this is not a mere matter of land redemption (of keeping land within the family- Lev 25:25). Instead, this is a matter of the full redemption of a deceased kinsman’s house and line. In other words, because Elimelech has no surviving children, the redemption of his land and the redemption of his widow go together. Why? They do so in order that an heir for the dead man can be born through his widow and this close relative. In other words, the first born of this union will be counted as the dead man’s son, not the son of the relative/redeemer. As such, the son will inherit the deceased man’s estate/land and carry forward the dead man’s name on the portion of the land that God gave to his family. Importance: remember in the Old Testament, God’s covenant with His people directly involved the perpetual/everlasting possession of the land He had given them (Gen 17:8). Thus, to be God’s child meant to abide on God’s land. As such, in the Old Testament (and especially in a book that is all about the future), to have your name persist on the land and continue in the role of God’s people was an outward testimony of your ongoing place in the promises, life, and future that God has given His people. In other words, it was a tangible witness that the deceased person remains a part of God’s unbreakable promises. In turn, it was also the concrete assurance that the believer will personally share the fullness of these promises with the rest of God’s people FN#10. Simply put, the person is not lost or forgotten. Instead, they remain counted among the members of God’s household.
Notice then what just happened: Boaz’s legal reminder means that this redemption can no longer simply be approached as a money making land grab. Instead, by law, it is to be an act of kesed (committed love, self-sacrifice, and service), whereby the fortunes of another’s house are promoted. Simply put, whatever plans this other relative had, have just been drastically altered. He will be contributing to the gain of someone else’s house, not his own.
Bottom line: in one breath Boaz has completely changed the nature of the proceeding from a mere land grab to that of a family’s redemption. Thus, a proceeding that only moments ago seemed completely derailed, has been skillfully returned to the tracks. However, as we ponder all that we witnessed so far, it begins to dawn on us, things were never really derailed in the first place. Instead, this is where Boaz (the strength and instrument of YHWH) has been directing this case all along.
Footnotes
1] Importance: notice Boaz does not merely say when you purchase the field. Instead, he says when you acquire it from the hand of Naomi. In other words, Boaz’s careful wording underscores that what is involved here is a legal transfer from the house, care, and authority of Naomi to that of the other relative (it goes from her hand and charge to his). In turn, the nature that defines this transfer of land (redemption), necessitates and defines the entire transaction that Boaz is placing before this closer relative.
2] The author’s strategic use of these proper Hebrew names is highlighted when we remember that earlier in the account (chapter 3) the author deliberately avoided using anyone’s proper Hebrew name for an extended period of time. Instead, he used pronouns or generic descriptions like mother-in-law to identify them. Why? At that point in the account no one knew who they were going forward. No one knew who’s companion Ruth would be, if Naomi’s plan was indeed pleasing to God, or if Boaz was the strength and deliverance that God had provided. However, by chapter 4 things are becoming clearer. We see God’s hand backing Naomi’s plan; we see Boaz acting in strength to deliver; and it won’t be long until we know whose companion Ruth will be. Thus, the author’s strategic return to the use of proper Hebrew names is employed to underscore the significance of what is unfolding.
3] For example:
Deuteronomy 7:3 “Furthermore, you shall not intermarry with them; you shall not give your daughters to their sons, nor shall you take their daughters for your sons. 4 “For they will turn your sons away from following Me to serve other gods; then the anger of the LORD will be kindled against you, and He will quickly destroy you.
In fact, pagan intermarriage and the unfaithfulness it brings serve as the backdrop of the entire book of Judges during which time the Book of Ruth takes place.
Judges 3:5 And the sons of Israel lived among the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; 6 and they took their daughters for themselves as wives, and gave their own daughters to their sons, and served their gods. 7 And the sons of Israel did what was evil in the sight of the LORD, and forgot the LORD their God, and served the Baals and the Asheroth. 8 Then the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel,
Remember the book of Ruth opens during a severe famine which the author directly locates within the time and unfaithfulness of the book of Judges.
Ruth 1:1 Now it came about in the days when the judges governed, that there was a famine in the land. And a certain man of Bethlehem in Judah went to sojourn in the land of Moab with his wife and his two sons.
Thus, God’s people in Bethlehem, who are involved with Boaz’s proceeding (elders and town folk alike), would be keenly aware of how serious God is about pagan intermarriage. The result is that on the face of it, describing Ruth as a Moabitess seems like the dumbest thing that Boaz could have done, especially since he is trying to see her married and Naomi provided for. In turn, it also seems completely unnecessary to bring up since everyone already knows where Ruth came from (1:19). So either Boaz is an idiot or there is something more, something deliberate going on here.
4] Please note: despite the importance of Ruth’s validation for the Davidic kingship, this is not Boaz’s motive. Boaz has no idea about David or the dynasty that will result from all of this. However, the fact that Ruth’s conversion is known by all allows Boaz to use this Moabite description to accomplish his main objective. In other words, because Boaz is certain that everyone knows of Ruth’s genuine conversion, he is able to describe Ruth as a Moabitess in order to expose the other relative’s prejudice (which is our second point in the sermon and Boaz’s main objective). That said, Ruth’s conversion remains an essential factor in why the proceeding continues at all. Not only that, God in His providence, will use this validation (central to the proceeding itself) to underscore for future generation that His hand has been at work in David’s line every step of the way.
5] First, right off the bat, Moab is pagan and they worship detestable idols. However, in addition to this, the following verses might give an indication of Israel’s attitude regarding the Moabites. In turn, it will give us a bit of insight into the views shared by this other relative
Genesis 19:36 Thus both the daughters of Lot were with child by their father. 37 And the first-born bore a son, and called his name Moab; he is the father of the Moabites to this day.
Numbers. 22:4 And Moab said to the elders of Midian, “Now this horde (i.e. Israel) will lick up all that is around us, as the ox licks up the grass of the field.” And Balak the son of Zippor was king of Moab at that time. 5 So he sent messengers to Balaam the son of Beor….6 “Now, therefore, please come, curse this people for me
Judges 3:12 Now the sons of Israel again did evil in the sight of the LORD. So the LORD strengthened Eglon the king of Moab against Israel, 13 And he gathered to himself the sons of Ammon and Amalek; and he went and defeated Israel. 14 And the sons of Israel served Eglon the king of Moab eighteen years.
Remember, it was prevalent for everyone in the ancient world to think that everyone else was a barbarian. However, while God’s people were to remain distinct, it was not out of arrogance. Rather, it was for faithfulness to God and that they might serve as a witness to the nations (c.f. Num 15:15). However, we often don’t quite do as God expects. As such, public opinion often viewed Moab with disdain throughout Israel’s history
6] If Boaz has come to like Ruth, why didn’t he just ask her out? Why did Ruth have to make the first move? The answer is that the other relative had the first dibs on Ruth. Therefore, Boaz couldn’t cut in line or subvert this other’s right as the family redeemer. However, when Naomi (who also understands the restrictions of this propriety) sends Ruth to initiate the relationship, Boaz now has the leeway to press the matter with the other relative. In other words, Boaz is not overstepping his boundaries or seeking his own interest. Instead, he has been asked to help.
7] Case in point: remember Boaz’s lavish kindness to Ruth began on the first day that they met and was solely based on her conversion and his commitment to help his family. In other words, it is not passion or romance that drives the book. Rather, it is committed love and faithfulness that undergird these events. That said, Kesed (committed love- love that is genuine enough to commit and commitment that is based on and an expression of love) is not sterile or indifferent. Quite the opposite. Instead, by beginning with the other’s value before God and a commitment to treat them in a manner pleasing to God, Kesed provides the very context in which a healthy/right relationship can grow and flourish. In other words, kesed is not the goal or ideal of our relationships. Instead, it is the foundation which shapes and determines everything that is built upon it. Thus, from beginning to end, from mere acquaintance to marital intimacy, kesed is to define every single stage, level, and degree of human relations. Why? Because it defines every aspect of God’s relationship to us. Notice then, we saw Boaz’s kesed in his initial kindness to Ruth and Naomi. Now in chapter 4 we see genuine character development and growth in Boaz as this kesed of familial kindness has developed into what now seems to be a genuine affection/ admiration for Ruth.
8] It is significant that in a book that is all about names and future Elimelech’s two sons are completely bypassed in the line of succession and go unmentioned at this point of the proceeding. Now normally, Elimelech’s line and the care for Naomi, his widow, would have been the duty of his son. Thus, the house of Elimelech would have continued by the redemption of his son’s widow. As such, we would expect to hear Boaz say “on the day you acquire the land, you also acquire Ruth, Sickly’s (that is Mahlon’s) widow. However, the sons are forgotten and Ruth is tied directly to Elimelech. Importance: remember, the two apostate sons have already had their genealogical names deleted from the book and thus from role/remembrance of God’s people. In fact, we only know them by pejorative nicknames (the nickname Mahlon in Hebrew means Sickly and Chilion means Diseased). Thus, the exclusive focus here on Elimelech and the complete disregard for his sons is a direct result/confirmation of this ominous point: the two apostate sons are no longer factors in YHWH’s people or their future.
9] Notice at once the imagery behind this notion of raising up the kinsman’s name. The verb here translated “raise up” can also mean to cause to stand (up). Thus, verse 5 could easily be translated to read, “you will also acquire Ruth in order to cause the name of the deceased to stand up on his land/inheritance”. The result is that there is a very intentional visual image here that by redeeming Ruth, the kinsmen will cause the name of the dead man to stand up on his land. That is, he will cause it to persist or continue with notions of life, resurrection, and future all accompanying the image. Importance: the outward lesson of redemption points to the deeper spiritual promise of eternal life and resurrection that God has given to His people. Ironically, the very promise behind the whole Old Testament notion of kinsman redeemer will be fulfilled by the very Messiah brought about through the redeemed relationship established here between Boaz and Ruth.
10] The connection between land and future in the Old Testament– remember the notion of land and the notion of God’s covenant with His people are irrevocably tied together. God says to Abraham:
Genesis 17:8 “And I will give to you and to your descendants after you, the land of your sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.”
When God took His people to be His own, He settled them in His land. Thus, living in the land was a direct result of being God’s people. Conversely, to be kicked out of the land (as happens later in the Exile) was to be rejected as God’s people. Furthermore, a fact that is often overlooked by Christians is that this centrality of land continues today in the New Covenant. However, we often miss it due to the lavish nature of the fulfillment to which the Old Testament promise was pointing.
Matthew 5:5 “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.
2 Peter 3:13 But according to His promise we are looking for new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness dwells.
Matthew 6:10 ‘Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, On earth as it is in heaven.
Thus, to the Old Testament mindset, to live on God’s land was to be God’s child. In turn, to have your name persist on the land and in the line of God’s people was an outward testimony of your ongoing place in the promises, life, and future that God has given his people. For as Jesus said
Mark 12:27 “He is not the God of the dead, but of the living; you are greatly mistaken.”
Notice then: the notion of inheritance serves as a concrete demonstration of God’s faithfulness and kesed. For example, in Ruth 4:5 we look back to the past, to the deceased, to Elimelech. At the same time, we look ahead to the future and the continuation of Elimelech’s name on the land and in the role of God’s people. Inheritance then is fundamentally eschatological. It is not just today’s version of getting stuff left to you by one who has passed away and is no more. Instead, it is a living testimony that the deceased person remains a part of God’s unbreakable promises as they unfold across real time. In turn, it is the concrete assurance that he will personally share the fullness of these promises with the rest of God’s people.