Part One: Ruth’s Ethnicity
by
Damien F. Mackey
“From sun up to sun down, Ruth was in the field, working
tirelessly to gather anything she could for her and Naomi to eat. She didn’t
waste time because she lovingly took care of her family, just like the ishah hayil (noble woman) in Proverbs 31”.
Who was the biblical Ruth? From whence did she come?
And when did she live?
According
to the Book of Ruth, she was a “Moabite” woman, or a “Moabitess”, who lived
during the period of “the judges” (Ruth 1:1-5):
In the days when the judges ruled, there was a famine in the land.
So a man from Bethlehem in Judah, together with his wife and two sons, went to
live for a while in the country of Moab. The man’s name
was Elimelek, his wife’s name was Naomi, and the names of his two sons were
Mahlon and Kilion. They were Ephrathites from Bethlehem, Judah. And they went
to Moab and lived there. Now Elimelek, Naomi’s husband, died, and she was left
with her two sons. They married Moabite women, one
named Orpah and the other Ruth. After they had lived there about ten years,
both Mahlon and Kilion also died, and Naomi was left without
her two sons and her husband.
But
firstly it is necessary to clarify that Ruth could only have been a “Moabite”
geographically speaking.
Ethnically,
Ruth must have been an Israelite – presumably a Transjordanian one.
Bible Critics Can Overstate Idea of 'Enlightened Pagan'
The Story of Ruth the Israelite!?
Have you been taught that the
Moabitess Ruth, the daughter-in-law of Naomi, was a Moabite? Yes, that is the
question, it is neither intended as jocular nor facetious, although it may well
be rhetorical.
Ruth 1:4 And they took them wives of
the women of Moab; the name of the one was Orpah, and the name of the other
Ruth: and they dwelled there about ten years.
In the first chapter of the book of Ruth it
appears to be quite clear that Ruth and her sister Orpah were Moabite by
descent or lineage.
Ruth 1:1 ¶ Now it came to pass in the days
when the judges ruled, that there was a famine in the land. And a certain man
of Bethlehemjudah went to sojourn in the country of Moab, he, and his
wife, and his two sons.
Further, as we can see in the above verse, Naomi,
with her husband and sons, went to sojourn “in the country of Moab.”
Now, if we stop here, we got about as far into this matter as the traditional
scholars, theologians, biblical historians, and the vast masses of people who
look to the bible as the word of God. By stopping here we are doing what so
many do with the bible and in bible study, we take what appears to be “obvious”
and indisputable as fact, then either ignore or find it imperative to “explain
away” the contradictions within scripture created by our newly created “fact.”
What contradictions are we referring to? Glad you
asked. For just one (there are several):
Deut. 23:3 An Ammonite or Moabite
shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to their tenth
generation shall they not enter into the congregation of the LORD for ever:
While “forever” in the Hebrew does not mean for
the rest of eternity, it does mean so far into the future as to be impossible
to “see” (or foresee from that vantage point). Thus, the expression, “even
to their tenth generation” is not literally specific, but an idiom meaning
that they can forget it, it won’t happen. So, the difficulty in justifying the
two positions- (1) that Ruth was a Moabite by lineage, and (2) Naomi’s sons, as
well as Boaz, would marry a Moabite and not only bring her into the “camp,” but
in turn bring her into the line of David and Jesus (Yeshua), is in stark
contrast with Deut. 23:3 and what a God-fearing Israelite would possibly
do, especially when we consider what God had to say about such actions, not
just in this time frame, but even in the time of Ezra. It then makes God look
incompetent or extremely forgetful in His old age, or maybe God is just
double-minded? Not to mention that this all transpires little more than a
century after God declared His stand concerning this very matter to Israel in
Deut. 23 above.
Or, is it possible, just asking mind you, is it
possible that we may not yet have enough information to determine whether our
“understanding” of Ruth’s heritage is biblically sound or correct? Should we
not presume that in a circumstance wherein we find either, (1) our
understanding is contradictory to some or all scripture, or (2) that it
“appears” that the bible is contradicting itself, that we are the ones who are
missing information necessary to eliminate such apparent contradictions? Let’s
see if we can find out what is what- biblically.
You can do your own in-depth study, but
just to present the minimum necessary to unravel this apparent
contradiction let’s first begin by retracing the trail of Israel on their way
out of the wilderness and into the Promised Land. We pick up the travels in
Numbers 21.
Numbers 21:13 From thence they (Israel) removed, and pitched on the other side (north of) of Arnon (an
east-west river), which is in the wilderness that cometh out of the
coasts of the Amorites: for Arnon is the border of Moab, between Moab
and the Amorites.
OK, note that Israel crossed the Arnon and left
the nation of Moab behind them, thus now entering into the land of the Amorites.
By the way, the Amorites are not Ammonites. Ammon and Moab are brother tribes
or nations and related to Abraham, and thus Israel, through Lot, but Amorites
were, at least generally speaking, Canaanite.
What happened next?
Numbers 21:21 ¶ And Israel sent messengers
unto Sihon king of the Amorites, saying,
22 Let me pass through thy land: we will not turn
into the fields, or into the vineyards; we will not drink of the waters of the
well: but we will go along by the king’s high way, until we be past thy
borders.
23 And Sihon would not suffer Israel to pass
through his border: but Sihon gathered all his people together, and went out
against Israel into the wilderness: and he came to Jahaz, and fought against
Israel.
24 And Israel smote him with the edge of
the sword, and possessed his land from Arnon unto Jabbok, even unto the
children of Ammon (Ammonites were to the east of
Amorites): for the border of the children of Ammon was strong.
25 And Israel took all these cities: and Israel
dwelt in all the cities of the Amorites, in Heshbon, and in all the villages
thereof.
26 For Heshbon was the city of Sihon the king of
the Amorites, who had fought against the former king of Moab, and taken all his
land out of his hand, even unto Arnon.
Now we see that Israel conquered and occupied the
Amorite land from the river Jabbok (an east to west tributary of the Jordan and
is north of the Dead Sea) and fully eastward to the border of the Ammonites,
again, related to Moab.
So, for the land between the river Jordan and the
Dead Sea on the west and the border of Ammon on the east, plus the land north
of Arnon all the way to the river Jabbok, was now owned and operated by Israel
and their to do with as they pleased.
Side note: It is vital to make notice that this
describes the borders and nations at the time being discussed. Earlier in
history the nation of Moab did “occupy” or possess land north of the Arnon- all
the way to Jabbok, but they lost possession of that territory prior to the
Israelites appearance and as such, Moab’s northern border was the Arnon when
God told Israel to “by-pass” them (Moab). To further clarify what we have just
covered we can read from Deut 2 below.
Deut. 2:34 And we took all his cities at
that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones,
of every city, we left none to remain:
35 Only the cattle we took for a prey unto
ourselves, and the spoil of the cities which we took.
36 From Aroer, which is by the brink of the river
of Arnon, and from the city that is by the river, even unto Gilead, there was
not one city too strong for us: the LORD our God delivered all unto us:
37 Only unto the land of the children of Ammon
thou camest not, nor unto any place of the river Jabbok, nor unto the cities in
the mountains, nor unto whatsoever the LORD our God forbad us.
Just what did some Israelites think of this newly
possessed land that was “east” of Jordan?
Numbers 32:1 ¶ Now the children of Reuben
and the children of Gad had a very great multitude of cattle: and when they saw
the land of Jazer, and the land of Gilead, that, behold, the place was a place
for cattle;
2 The children of Gad and the children of Reuben
came and spake unto Moses, and to Eleazar the priest, and unto the princes of
the congregation, saying,
3 Ataroth, and Dibon, and Jazer, and Nimrah, and
Heshbon, and Elealeh, and Shebam, and Nebo, and Beon,
4 Even the country which the LORD smote before
the congregation of Israel, is a land for cattle, and thy servants have cattle:
5 Wherefore, said they, if we have found grace in
thy sight, let this land be given unto thy servants for a possession, and bring
us not over Jordan.
The short story is that Moses and God agreed to
let Reuben and Gad and half of Manasseh possess the newly possessed lands east
of Jordan so long as they helped the rest of Israel conquer the lands west of
Jordan.
Joshua 13 also confirms for us that Reuben, Gad
and the half tribe of Manasseh received for their inheritance this land east of
Jordan. The half tribe of Manasseh possessed the land of Bashan, to the north
of the land of the formerly Amorite land. This area also included the eastern
shore of the Sea of Galilee and the east bank of the Jordan river northward to
(at that time) the land of the Hittites.
But, where again did Israel cross the Jordan and
enter into the land west? We all know the story of Jericho, but who recalls
where it was, or what the area was called where Israel camped immediately prior
to their siege of Jericho?
Numbers 33:48 And they departed from the
mountains of Abarim, and pitched in the plains of Moab by Jordan near
Jericho.
49 And they pitched by Jordan, from Bethjesimoth
even unto Abelshittim in the plains of Moab.
50 ¶ And the LORD spake unto Moses in the
plains of Moab by Jordan near Jericho, saying,
51 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say
unto them, When ye are passed over Jordan into the land of Canaan;
From this we can note that the “plains of Moab”
are not in Moab! They may certainly have once been “in” Moab, but at the time
of the entrance into the Promised land, the Moabites all lived well to the
south, and their northern national border was the river Arnon, which the
Israelites had already passed over to eventually arrive at the embarkation
point in the “plains of Moab” for their march forward to Jericho.
We should also note that as a matter of course
and history, 1 Chronicles 5 shows that this conquered and possessed land stayed
in Reuben’s, Gad’s, and the half tribe of Manasseh’s control until Assyria took
them away captive some 700 years later, Manasseh being in Bashan to the north
of the Plains of Moab.
One might now ask, “So, what’s the big deal? This
still does not prove Ruth was not a Moabite by race.” Well, not
in itself, and not yet, but we do have more to consider as previously stated.
There is still more to the story. Remember this?
Deut. 23:3 An Ammonite or Moabite shall
not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to their tenth generation
shall they not enter into the congregation of the LORD for ever:
The Problems
1. How
could a law abiding Israelite, whether Mahlon or Boaz, legally marry a Moabite?
2. How
can we circumvent Deut 23:3 in order to accept the actions of Mahlon,
Elimelech, Naomi, and later Boaz to let Ruth become a part of their family by
law and bring her into Israel?
3. The
women of Israel welcomed Ruth into the “family” in Ruth 4:11 … The LORD make
the woman that is come into thine house like Rachel and like Leah, which two
did build the house of Israel: and do thou worthily in Ephratah, and be famous
in Bethlehem:
4. If
Ruth was a Moabite by race, why would there be such attention to detail
concerning the law of redemption by Naomi, Boaz, and the “near-kinsman” more
near than Boaz? It would all have been performed in complete opposition to
the very law being invoked to settle the issue being settled!
5. Judah’s
eldest two sons were slain by God, Er for his wickedness and Onan for his
disrespect for the very law Boaz invokes to accomplish his goal to marry Ruth.
Now Er and Onan were both from a Canaanite mother, the first wife of Judah.
Point being, God slew Onan for not obeying a part of the very law that Mehlon
and Boaz would likewise have been guilty of breaking had Ruth really been
Moabite.
The Solutions
We should closely take notice
that in Numbers 25 we see the direct result of breaking the law. Are we to
believe that later on this law is “suspended” for Mahlon and then Boaz, which
would also mean it was suspended for Naomi, her husband, and all who welcomed
Ruth into Judah? Considering the death of 23,000 Israelites that resulted from
their law breaking, might it be somewhat still in the memory and history of
Naomi, her husband, her sons, and Boaz and even his near kin?
Therefore, let’s look a little
closer at what is really stated in the book of Ruth.
Ruth 1:1 ¶ Now it came
to pass in the days when the judges ruled, that there was a famine in
the land. And a certain man of Bethlehemjudah went to sojourn in the
country of Moab, he, and his wife, and his two sons.
First of all, the use of the
word “country” must be understood both by definition and also by
context. The Hebrew word translated to “country” here is one that simply
means or refers to “the country” as in a rural area or field, not a
“nation.” For one example we can look at:
1Sa 27:5 And David said
unto Achish, If I have now found grace in thine eyes, let them give me a place
in some town in the country , that I may dwell there: for why should thy
servant dwell in the royal city with thee?
Notice that the “town” is “in”
the country, as opposed to a major city in a metropolitan area.
As a result of this we now have absolutely no reason to assume that “the
country of Moab” was “the nation of Moab.” Nor do we have any reason to claim
that the “plains of Moab” were “in” the nation of Moab, the location of which
we previously addressed.
Next, we can note that the
time period is one where-in Israel’s tribes were not yet unified into a
Federalist single nation or kingship, but were independently ruled by judges,
each with jurisdiction in their own tribe and not beyond or overlapping into
other tribes.
Continuing, we see that
Naomi’s husband was from Judah, and a town called Bethlehem. You may have heard
of this town before? Thus, Naomi, her husband and her sons, were Israelites of
the tribe of Judah, and in the land of Judah.
Putting this all together,
with what we have so far, leaves us with Naomi and her family
escaping the famine by traveling to a place identified as “the fields of Moab,”
which then equates better to “the plains of Moab,” which were in Reubenite and
Gadite possession and inheritance. Thus, Ruth, in the land of her nativity
(Ruth 2:11), was either Reubenite or Gadite. ….
“Ruth gratefully worked to get whatever she could to provide for her and Naomi, just like the Proverbs 31 woman makes sure there are provisions for everyone in her household”.
In Part One, I had concluded (following others) that the biblical Ruth could not have been ethnically a Moabite, but that she was an Israelite who dwelt in “the country of Moab”, in Transjordania.
https://www.academia.edu/31551008/Eglons_Jericho
Various
authors have suggested a connection between the Book of Ruth and Proverbs 31.
https://www.academia.edu/16293130/Did_Lemuels_Mother_know_Ruth_Allusions_and_Literary_Borrowing_between_Ruth_and_Proverbs_31_10-31
Posted on December 2, 2011by Diane Montgomery
Christ in the Story of Ruth
The most important symbolic manifestation of Christ in
the story of Ruth is in Boaz’s role as guardian redeemer. In Boaz, we see
Christ who has purchased the Church to be His bride. In Ruth 4:4-10 alone, the
word “redeem” occurs a total of six times. In verse 10, Boaz explains that if
one is to redeem the property, one must also wed the widow.
Part Two: Ruth’s
Noble Character
“Ruth gratefully worked to get whatever she could to provide for her and Naomi, just like the Proverbs 31 woman makes sure there are provisions for everyone in her household”.
In Part One, I had concluded (following others) that the biblical Ruth could not have been ethnically a Moabite, but that she was an Israelite who dwelt in “the country of Moab”, in Transjordania.
Consequently, I would not be able to
accept the view - at least in the case of Ruth - that the sons of Naomi must “have
lost their faith” due to the fact that they married Moabite women:
…
in the
story Ruth where the family of Naomi and Elimelech have lost their faith, leave
their land in Bethlehem, move to the very nation that is oppressing Israel,
marry their sons off to Moabite wives. We know that the events in the book of
Ruth happened at precisely this same period. Elimelech dies at the hand of God
for not joining the war against Benjamin (Jabesh-Gilead were annihilated for
this) and their two sons were killed by Ehud's army as they fought for Eglon,
King of Moab.
The
chronological consideration as expressed here, that the story of Ruth belongs
to the time of the judge Ehud, may be worth further consideration.
For
some more on this particular period, and its archaeology, see my:
Eglon's Jericho
https://www.academia.edu/31551008/Eglons_Jericho
The
Book of Ruth simply informs us that (1:1): “In the days when
the judges ruled, there was a famine in the land …”, without specifying to
which phase of the Judges period this belongs.
For
instance, there is this academic one:
Did Lemuel's Mother know Ruth?:
Allusions and Literary Borrowing between Ruth and
Proverbs 31:10-31
https://www.academia.edu/16293130/Did_Lemuels_Mother_know_Ruth_Allusions_and_Literary_Borrowing_between_Ruth_and_Proverbs_31_10-31
A less complex example is this one:
Ruth Is Her Name and Proverbs 31 Is Her Game.
Posted on December 2, 2011by Diane Montgomery
There’s a tiny little book in your Bible,
only about 4 pages but those 4 pages tell the powerful story of a woman
who impacts the genealogy of Christ. Ruth is her name and Proverbs 31 is her
game. As a Moabitess, Ruth came from a distant country, filled with false
idols and child sacrifice to their god Chemosh. But through God’s mercy,
forgiveness, and transformation, Ruth becomes a woman of immense faith,
strength, and devotion to her family and the Lord. She becomes what
Proverbs 31 describes as an
ishah hayil, a “noble woman.”
Ishah Hayil (woman
of noble or virtuous character) is only found in Proverbs 12:4; 31:10, 29 and Ruth 3:11. In Ruth 3:11, the same words, ishah hayil, are
used by Boaz to describe Ruth as a “virtuous woman.” Interestingly enough, in
the Tanakh (Jewish Bible), Ruth is immediately after Proverbs 31 making her the
Bible’s real life example of what a “woman of noble character” really
looks like.
Ruth’s
Character Was Noticed By All
Ruth hadn’t been in town long but
her reputation already preceded her. Everyone knew how she had left her
own home, was taking care of her mother-in-law, and believed in Yahweh. She had
sought refuge under the Lord’s wings and it showed to the whole world! The
Proverbs 31 woman seeks after the Lord and walks in His ways all the days of
her life, making everyone take notice her character built by the Lord. If a
woman is seeking the Lord and living for His glory then everyone who comes in
contact with her will notice because the Holy Spirit’s work in a person’s heart
cannot be hidden. God’s glory will shine through!
Is He shining through you?
Ruth
Surpassed Them All
In a culture where sons were
highly esteemed and desired, Ruth received the greatest of praise! The women
who knew Ruth said she was better than seven sons, SEVEN! They knew Naomi and
Boaz were the most blessed people for having Ruth in their lives. She was
blessing, beyond blessings! Ruth surpassed all other women because of her faith
in the Lord and His transformation of her heart and life which completely
reflected the character of Christ!
Ruth Chose
a Wise, Godly Man
Ruth didn’t choose Boaz just
because he could be her Kinsman Redeemer, there was another man who should have
been the first in line for that (Lev. 25;Ruth.3:13). Ruth chose to ask
Boaz to be her kinsman redeemer because she and Naomi knew he was a godly man,
a man that treated her with respect and kindness. Boaz was even an elder in the
city and it was clear he was highly respected by all. The Proverbs 31 woman did
the same in marrying a man that treated her respectfully and was respected in
the town too. Godly women should be careful about who they choose to marry and
choose men who love them and fear God above all.
Ruth Spoke
With Wisdom and Kindness
In the first chapter of Ruth, Naomi continually
talked about how God’s hand had stricken her, how He dealt bitterly with her.
She even changed her name to Mara, meaning “bitterness.” This was a woman who’s
soul and personality had changed so much that her old friends didn’t even
recognize her. You could even call her a “negative Nelly,” who blamed God for
all the bad things in her life. Most people would find it hard to deal kindly
with a woman like this, including me, but Ruth always spoke to her with such
gentleness, such kindness and respect, as a Proverbs 31 woman does.
This seemed to have a great
impact on Naomi because soon after Naomi is praising the Lord and thanking Him
for His kindness, it’s like she’s a completely different woman! No doubt,
Ruth’s kindness and love had something to do with this change! The words that
come from a woman’s mouth can have the power of life or death in a person’s
life (Prov.18:21). Do the words you speak offer life, joy,
and encouragement to those around you? Or, do they speak negativity, death, and
discouragement? To be like Ruth and the Proverbs 31 woman, we must be women
whose words are healing, gentle, bringing forth life. Our tongues must be a
reflection of Christ’s love to everyone around us. (Prov.10:31; 12:18;15:4)
Ruth Took
Care of Her Family
As widows without family to take
care of them, Ruth and Naomi were both very poor and needed a way to provide
for themselves. Not waiting for others to provide for them, Ruth takes the
initiative to take care of her and Naomi. She made a vow to Naomi and she
intended on keeping it. With utmost humility, Ruth asks if she can glean from
Boaz’s field to get what would have been like the crumbs of the field. She
didn’t demand it or act as though she was entitled to these provisions
because she was a widow. Ruth gratefully worked to get whatever she could to
provide for her and Naomi, just like the Proverbs 31 woman makes sure there are
provisions for everyone in her household.
A Proverbs 31 woman works to
provide food for her home and she works hard, never leaving an idle moment. She
is resourceful, intentional, and productive. She knows the value of time when
taking care of a family and she doesn’t waste it, making sure her family doesn’t
suffer because of her laziness. Idleness doesn’t produce fruit but physical and
spiritual diligence produces the fruits of the Spirit.
Ruth
Worked Hard
From sun up to sun down, Ruth was
in the field, working tirelessly to gather anything she could for her and Naomi
to eat. She didn’t waste time because she lovingly took care of her family,
just like the ishah
hayil (noble woman) in Proverbs 31. Ruth lived her life serving
others which is exactly what a godly woman is supposed to do (Ti.2:3-5). We’re to work hard to serve those around us so
they experience the grace and love God shows us every day. Women of godly
character make God’s word attractive which means there isn’t much time to waste
because too much is at stake. Is being the Proverbs 31 woman tiring sometimes?
Yes. Does it make the Gospel more attractive to a lost and dying world? YES!
Being tired is worth it if God is glorified through hard work for His glory!
Ruth Was a
Woman of Strength
The basic meaning of the word
“noble” (hayil)
is “strength” and “power” and can be applied to a variety of people, including
warriors (powerful), functionaries (able), and landowners (wealthy). This word
embodies all the characteristics listed in Proverbs 31:10-31. Ruth embodies all these things as well.
She worked in the fields from dusk until dawn, being the sole provider for her
family, and made herself very strong! She “dressed herself with strength and
made her arms strong” just like the woman in Prov. 31:17! Girl must have been IN SHAPE!
Ruth
Feared the Lord and Walked in Faith
But more important than being
physically strong, she was spiritually and emotionally strong! Can you imagine
the strength, the faith in God, it must have taken to leave her family, her
home, giving up the prospect of marrying again and having children, to go to a
foreign land, in order to serve your mother-in-law and follow a God who was
once your enemy? Ruth did all this without complaint or waiver. When she
trusted in Yahweh, she became a woman who was faithful and strong. She sought
refuge in the Lord’s arms to give her strength because she knew He was the only
way she was going to make it! She trusted Him to provide for her, to give her
hope, and to give her joy! She could laugh at the days to come because she
feared the Lord God and trusted Him to give her strength! (Prov.31:25)
She didn’t let her past as
former enemy of God, her status as a poor, Moabitess widow, imprison her and
keep her from doing the work the Lord had called her to do. The Lord was her
greatest Redeemer and she lived her life in worship to Him because He had
forgotten her past and instead given her a future, one that would impact the
world FOREVER! (Matt.1) Ruth feared the Lord completely, believed in
God’s grace and forgiveness and followed Him in all ways. She was a Proverbs 31
woman to be praised! (Prov.31:30)
Ruth is an incredible example and
encouragement to all Christian women. Not only is she an example of Christ’s
redeeming love and power to transform any heart, she’s an example that, through
the Lord’s power, any woman can be a Proverbs 31 woman.God can take any woman, no matter her
background or her past sins, and use her to for His glory. If we trust the Lord
and walk in all His ways then He is faithful to change us to become more like
the godly women He designed us to be!
Ruth
was, of course, an ancestor of King David, and of Jesus Christ (Matthew 1:5-6):
….
Salmon the father of Boaz, whose mother was
Rahab,
Boaz the father of Obed, whose mother was
Ruth,
Obed the father of Jesse,
and Jesse the father
of King David.
According
to the following piece, Ruth’s husband Boaz was a type of Jesus Christ himself:
Christ in the Story of Ruth
In order to have the right to redeem, our Lord Jesus
had to become united with humanity, thereby becoming our fellow man. The name
Boaz means ‘ability’. Our kinsman redeemer has the ability to save men to the
uttermost. A kinsman redeemer must also be free of debt himself – likewise,
Christ our kinsman redeemer was Himself free of sin.
As if that wasn’t enough, Ruth 2:14 refers to Ruth and
Boaz at mealtime together, and refers to them dipping their bread in wine
vinegar. The meal should remind us of our communion with Christ where the bread
is symbolic of Christ’s flesh and the wine symbolic of His blood which is
poured out for us (see Luke 22).
It is also of significance that the narrative unfolds
in the town of Bethlehem, the city where Christ was to be born many hundreds of
years later. Bethlehem, significantly, literally means “house of bread.” Jesus
declares Himself to be “the bread of life” (John 6:48). Micah 5:2 famously
foretells the birth of Jesus in the town of Bethlehem:
“But you,
Bethlehem Ephrathah,
though you are small among the clans of Judah,
out of you will come for me
one who will be ruler over Israel,
whose origins are from of old,
from ancient times.”
though you are small among the clans of Judah,
out of you will come for me
one who will be ruler over Israel,
whose origins are from of old,
from ancient times.”
What’s more, at the end of the story Ruth and Boaz
give birth to a son named Obed. Obed became the father of Jesse. And Jesse
became the father of King David. Jesus traces his ancestry directly to David,
thus making Ruth and Boaz a part of the lineage of Jesus himself!
In previous blog posts (here,
here,
here),
I have drawn attention to several other foreshadows and prototypes of Christ.
The astonishing parallelism in all of these instances — and there are many
others — with the gospel of Christ is striking, and assuredly is only
explicable by the typical design of the inspiring Spirit. ….
