Thoughts on Ruth 2
If it be true that OT Salvation shows people coming into Israel embracing their God, speaking in a God-like manner, and behaving in a God-like way (per Colin Smith and Ed Kuhar), then it appears that Ruth was an OT believer. She speaks of One God, reflects the faith of Abraham – “the friend of God,” (James 2:23) and demonstrates “loyal love” (Strong’s lexicon) to Naomi much like the God whom she had chosen to serve. Note that in her “testimony” in chapter 1, she chooses the covenant name of God (Yahweh), not the generic form (El), further demonstrating that she was a “true Israelite” of the heart. Boaz further corroborates the veracity of her testimony, by saying of her that she had come to take refuge under the wings of the LORD God of Israel. True faith is evident to those around it.
The dealings of Boaz with Ruth demonstrate two things. He not only adhered to the law, but it was his guide for righteous living (NSB). Secondly, he gave to Ruth, at times in secret, or so it would seem. According to the Nelson Study Bible, this action was so not to shame her. In reaching out to people and working with people, we need to be careful to preserve their dignity, remembering that they are image-bearers of God as are we.
Romans 2 states that the goodness of God leads man to repentance; certainly, the goodness of God changed Naomi’s perception of Him. We serve a God who wants to be known, and He ever seeks to reveal Himself to His people through His mercy. Naomi saw the source of their blessing as the LORD, note the use of God’s covenant name. Is it a tell-tale sign of the heart when you consider how these OT individuals referred to God? Maybe the OT concept of salvation is tied up in that, or is at least revealed therein – their passionate relationship with and for Him.

Thoughts on Ruth 1

The story of Ruth took place during the days of the judges, a time of great moral and spiritual degeneracy. I’m certain the remnant was demoralized, and yet it is a bright spot that God is not finished with His people. God always has His remnant and His cause will persevere. This may be an example of eisogesis, but it seems ironic that they left the house of bread (Bethlehem) for Moab (God’s Washpot). Yet, even while dwelling in Bethlehem, they named their sons Mahlon (sickly) and Chilion (pining, failing). Is that indicative of their spiritual state even while there in the house of bread? The man whose name means “God is my King” further backslid when he allowed his sons to take wives from the daughters of the Moabites, a practice expressly forbidden by Jehovah, Himself and with good reason for the Moabites had adopted the abominable practice of sacrificing their children to the idol, Chemosh. Could it be an act of God that took the lives of these three men, leaving their wives widows? Regardless, it serves as a stark reminder that our actions never occur in a vacuum; they always have impact on others, as is seen in the lives of these individuals. Naomi’s husband and sons were all dead. But then one day news arrived from home. It was that food was available once again.
The visitation of the LORD in bringing bread to His people is the first direct mention of His name in this book. It is interesting that even in a pagan land and in her bitterness that Naomi ascribes this provision to the God of Israel. As she prepared to leave for home, she gathered her daughters-in-law to her to give them some parting words. She blessed them by wishing on them God’s mercy (deal kindly, a.k.a. loyal love). The concept of mercy here is fascinating. It is far deeper than I was ever taught. On one hand, it does refer to withholding justly deserved punishment, but there is so much more. Here it refers to the loyal love of God. God’s loyal love persists with me throughout my life and can never be exhausted regardless of my behavior. Naomi decided the same for her daughters in law – for God’s love to persist with them. Note how He persisted with this family.
Why was Ruth willing to serve the God of the Israelites when Naomi had testified that He was against her? Note that in vs. 20, Naomi does not use the covenant name for God; yet she does in vs. 21 and continues to use them interchangeably throughout the chapter. What is the significance Perhaps, Naomi, herself, is pining for a relationship she presumptively or presumably left in Israel. Ruth and Naomi arrived back home in Israel at the beginning of barley season. The famine for food was over. Was the spiritual famine in the life of Naomi over? Naomi is received by her people, but what about Ruth? Did she see even in Naomi’s faltering relationship with her God something that was lacking as she went through the motions of service to Chemosh. How was God once again moving in the lives of His people, particularly Ruth and Naomi? One thing to note: Naomi’s remarks about reflect a faulty view of His character (“He brought me back empty”). God would reach into her famine-stricken-soul in throughout the rest of the story to restore her to Himself and to restore her trust in that covenant relationship, while painting a lovely picture that is a foreshadowing of Christ and His church. Until next time, consider these things.