ONE DAY NAOMI her mother-in-law said to her, “My daughter, should I not try to find a home for you, where you will be well provided for? 2Is not Boaz, with whose servant girls you have been, a kinsman of ours? Tonight he will be winnowing barley on the threshing floor. 3Wash and perfume yourself, and put on your best clothes. Then go down to the threshing floor, but don’t let him know you are there until he has finished eating and drinking. 4When he lies down, note the place where he is lying. Then go and uncover his feet and lie down. He will tell you what to do.”
5“I will do whatever you say,” Ruth answered. 6So she went down to the threshing floor and did everything her mother-in-law told her to do.
7When Boaz had finished eating and drinking and was in good spirits, he went over to lie down at the far end of the grain pile. Ruth approached quietly, uncovered his feet and lay down. 8In the middle of the night something startled the man, and he turned and discovered a woman lying at his feet.
9“Who are you?” he asked.
“I am your servant Ruth,” she said. “Spread the corner of your garment over me, since you are a kinsman-redeemer.”
10“The LORD bless you, my daughter,” he replied. “This kindness is greater than that which you showed earlier: You have not run after the younger men, whether rich or poor. 11And now, my daughter, don’t be afraid. I will do for you all you ask. All my fellow townsmen know that you are a woman of noble character. 12Although it is true that I am near of kin, there is a kinsman-redeemer nearer than I. 13stay 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.”
14So she lay at his feet until morning, but got up before anyone could be recognized; and he said, “Don’t let it be known that a woman came to the threshing floor.”
15He also said, “Bring me the shawl you are wearing and hold it out.” When she did so, he poured into it six measures of barley and put it on her. Then he went back to town.
16When Ruth came to her mother-in-law, Naomi asked, “How did it go, my daughter?”
Then she told her everything Boaz had done for her 17and added, “He gave me these six measures of barley, saying, ‘Don’t go back to your mother-in-law empty-handed.’ ”
18Then Naomi said, “Wait, my daughter, until you find out what happens. For the man will not rest until the matter is settled today.”
Original Meaning
ACT 3 CONSISTS of three scenes. Scene 1 (3:1–5) is a short introductory scene that takes place at the home of Naomi during the day, with Naomi disclosing her plan for Ruth and Boaz. Scene 2 (3:6–15) is a lengthy scene that takes place at the threshing floor that evening, midnight, and dawn, with Ruth executing Naomi’s plan and Boaz offering to be the kinsman-redeemer. Scene 3 (3:16–18) is a short concluding scene that takes place at the home of Naomi at dawn, in which Naomi evaluates the encounter (i.e., Boaz will act).
This Act evinces many similarities to Act 2: (1) Both contain three scenes of generally the same structure (see discussion in the introduction, pp. 397–99); (2) there is a focus on the characters of Ruth and Boaz—in particular, she is an ʾēšet ḥayil (3:11, “woman of noble character”); (3) the opening scene presents Naomi and Ruth, and Ruth sets out; (4) there is an encounter between Ruth and Boaz; (5) Boaz inquires about the girl’s identity (3:9); (6) the opening line intimates its development (3:1—finding a home for Ruth); and (7) the closing sentence (3:18) acts as transition to what follows.
Scene 1. Naomi Discloses Her Plan for Ruth and Boaz (3:1–5)
SCENE 1 IS clearly enclosed by the statements: “One day Naomi . . . said to her” (3:1) and “Ruth answered” (3:5). It takes place at the home of Naomi during the day. With the setting established (3:1a), Naomi’s proposal (3:1b–2a) is given in the form of a pair of negative questions that actually constitute strong affirmations. The first question states the problem, the second the solution. “My daughter, should I not try to find a home [mānôaḥ] for you, where you will be well provided for?” The word mānôaḥ here means “a place of tranquility and repose” and refers to the condition of security and rest afforded a woman in Israelite society by marriage (cf. 1:9).1
Commentators are split as to what is implied in this initial question of Naomi.2 Is she concerned with providing an heir for the family line of Elimelech, or is she simply concerned (in a narrow sense) with Ruth’s welfare? In other words, is she proposing here a levirate marriage that will possibly provide an heir or simply a marriage that will relieve Ruth of her destitute widowhood and provide security for her? The latter seems to be the primary focus of Naomi. Hubbard observes:
Besides seeing Ruth happily settled, Naomi probably also wanted to provide for Ruth’s uncertain fate after Naomi’s death. It would be one thing for Ruth to endure widowhood in a strange land during Naomi’s lifetime, quite another to do so after she was gone.3
Naomi’s second question (3:2a) proposes that Boaz may be the answer to Ruth’s need for a home (mānôaḥ): “Is not Boaz, with whose servant girls you have been, a kinsman of ours?”4 It is worth noting that Naomi does not ground her presentation of Boaz as the answer to Ruth’s problem of security on the fact that he is a kinsman-redeemer (gōʾēl), but only on his position as a relative.5
The fact that Boaz is a clan relative is here used to imply degree of success. In other words, since Boaz is a clan relative, the chances are increased that he will be receptive to a marriage proposal (as opposed to someone outside the clan). He already knows Ruth, and there is a reasonably good chance that he will respond positively to marriage overtures. Moreover, the opportunity is right: “Tonight6 he will be winnowing barley on the threshing floor.” In other words, he will be alone, and the circumstances will be perfect for a marriage proposal.
Winnowing barley consisted of throwing the mixture of straw, chaff, and grain up into the wind by means of a fork with large teeth. The chaff was blown away farthest from the winnower, the straw less far, while the heavier kernels of grain fell back onto the threshing floor.7
Naomi formulates a risky and fragile scheme. She instructs Ruth to do three things: bathe, put on perfumed oil, and put on her “dress” (śimlâ). The NIV translates śimlâ as “best clothes.” However, as Bush and others have rightly observed, the śimlâ was simply a generic piece of clothing worn by both men and women (although there were apparently differences between the two, Deut. 22:5).8
A number of commentators understand Naomi’s instructions to be a bride’s preparations for marriage, so that Ruth comes to Boaz as a bride. But this is not borne out by comparison with other bridal contexts in the Old Testament. This is not to say that Ruth is not “making herself more presentable,” but she is not “decking herself out” either (e.g., note that no jewelry or dress of fine linen is mentioned). The most likely explanation of Naomi’s instructions is that they mean that Ruth should end her period of mourning and so signal her return to the normal activities and desires of life, which, of course, would include marriage. This change in her appearance, with its symbolic meaning, will indicate to Boaz both her availability and the seriousness of her intentions.9 Naomi also gives Ruth further instructions on what to do at the threshing floor. (1) “Don’t let him know you are there until he has finished eating and drinking.” Naomi’s intention here is probably to make sure that the mood is the best for receptivity as possible.
(2) When he lies down, Ruth is to note that place and then go and uncover his feet (or legs)10 and lie down close beside him (probably not simply “at his feet,” as is often understood),11 so that “both lie beside one another as husband and wife.”12 That sexual overtones are present in the action of a woman uncovering a man’s legs in the dark of the night and lying down, there can be no doubt. But that our author intends the explicitly sexual sense of “uncover his genitals and lie down” is in my opinion utterly improbable.13
(3) Thus, Ruth’s action of uncovering Boaz’s legs and lying down is a nonverbal, apparently customary means of requesting marriage. That this is the case is reinforced by Naomi’s final instruction: “He will tell you what to do.”
Ruth’s response demonstrates her willingness to engage in this risky endeavor: “I will do whatever you say” (3:5). It should be remembered that things could go wrong in the plan. For example, Boaz could mock her request for marriage to him—a wealthy and powerful Israelite landowner—as a vain attempt at social climbing for a poor widowed “Moabitess.” Or, since Ruth has not secured a new marriage contract and is technically still the wife of Mahlon (cf. 4:5, 10), Boaz could charge her with failing in her family responsibilities, branding her an adulteress. Or even worse, Boaz could use the night’s opportunity for his sexual pleasure, bringing on her great humiliation, and then malign her (charging her with entrapment) or even charge her with prostitution. Yet Ruth responds, “I will do whatever you say,” which demonstrates her radical commitment to and trust in Naomi. Fortunately, there is the possibility that Boaz will wake up and recognize immediately the true meaning of Ruth’s actions and respond favorably to her.
Scene 2. Ruth Executes Naomi’s Plan and Boaz Offers to Be Kinsman-Redeemer (3:6–15)
SCENE 2 IS enclosed by two statements: “So she went down to the threshing floor” (3:6), and “then he went back to town” (3:15). It takes place at the threshing floor during the evening, midnight, and dawn, with Ruth executing Naomi’s plan and Boaz offering to be the kinsman-redeemer. The scene divides basically into two parts: Ruth’s implementation of Naomi’s plan (3:6–9) and Boaz’s response to the plan (3:10–15). It is chiastically arranged:14
A Ruth’s symbolic actions of petition (narrative) (3:6–7)
B Ruth’s words of petition (dialogue) (3:8–9)
B′ Boaz’s words of consent (dialogue) (3:10–13)
A′ Boaz’s symbolic actions of commitment (narrative) (3:14–15)
In section A, verse 6 forms a transition between Scenes 1 and 2. Moreover, it summarizes and previews the entire Scene 2 by emphasizing that Ruth “went down to the threshing floor and did everything her mother-in-law told her to do.” Verse 7 narrates that Boaz is in good spirits (lit., “his heart was good”). Thus, he will be receptive to the request communicated by Ruth’s symbolic actions. In addition, the verse mentions that Boaz lies down to sleep “at the far end of the grain pile.” This “minor detail” is suggestive. Earlier Ruth “happened” to come to the field of Boaz (2:3); now it is Boaz who “happens” to lie down at the opportunistic corner of the threshing floor where the symbolic actions can transpire without interruption or misinterpretation. Hence, stealthily Ruth approaches, uncovers his legs, and lies down. The narrator has built the suspense to a peak.
The next section of the scene (B, 3:8–9) records a dialogue between Boaz and Ruth in which Ruth verbalizes her petition for marriage. But the writer introduces this dialogue from Boaz’s perspective: In the middle of the night he is startled,15 and he turns over and discovers that someone—a woman—is lying beside him!
The utter surprise of Boaz is captured in the narration. Quite naturally he probingly exclaims: “Who are you?” Ruth’s words are carefully chosen. She begins by identifying herself: “I am your servant [ʾāmâ] Ruth.” Earlier in 2:13, Ruth referred to herself as Boaz’s šipḥâ, although she does not really have even this status (she is officially a nokrîyâ, “foreign woman”; see comments on 2:13). Now she uses ʾāmâ; the choice of the socially higher term is doubtless Ruth’s attempt to suggest that she is within the class of women who might be married. This word seems to emphasize a slave’s feminine qualities (need for protection, weakness, sexual attractiveness, etc.), while šipḥâ seems to be used when the female is viewed as a possession and a laborer.16
Both terms can be used as self-designations. When used this way, ʾāmâ suggests a female petitioner’s weakness and need for help or protection when presenting a request before a more powerful male, never before another female. When šipḥâ is used as a self-designation, it signifies the woman’s subservience and readiness to serve or obey instructions.17 The word ʾāmâ does show respect to a superior to be sure, but even a woman of high rank, married to a man of wealth, might use this word to put herself in a subordinate position (cf. Abigail in 1 Sam. 25:41).18 Thus, in her nocturnal visit Ruth’s reference to herself as an ʾāmâ is appropriate in the context of a request of marriage19 to a gibbôr ḥayil like Boaz.
Next, Ruth invokes Boaz to “spread the corner of your garment [kānāp] over me, since you are a kinsman-redeemer [gōʾēl].” The choice of the term kānāp is purposeful as it carries a number of nuances. (1) It can be construed as a general plea for protection. Thus, Ruth is invoking Boaz’s usage of the term kānāp (“wings”) in 2:12.20 Like the “wings” in 2:12, this gesture probably also symbolizes protection of the woman (and perhaps sexual readiness as well). By repeating the key word from his own lips, Ruth essentially asks Boaz to answer his own prayer!21
(2) The term kānāp may also refer to the “corner of his garment” and hence be a more specific reference to the symbolic investment connected with marriage. The term marriage is not spoken, but the intentions of Boaz are clear. The next morning he officially redeems the land and acquires Ruth as his wife (4:9–10). The “spreading of the hem” of one’s garment over a woman appears to be a variant of the ceremonial covering of the head of the bride by the husband.22
An obvious correspondence between the two acts is the symbolical use of clothes. The idea behind each of the rites seems to be that clothes are a symbol of appurtenance, while nakedness is a symbol of social ejection. The public investiture, whether with a veil or another garment, established the new family situation of the woman.23
Hubbard concludes that the repetition of kānāp in 2:12 and 3:9 implies a relationship between the two.
Thus, by covering Ruth with his kānāp—that is, to marry her—Boaz implements Yahweh’s kānāp—that is, his protection of Ruth. Or to weave a thread dropped earlier, the ḥesed of Boaz toward Ruth is the form in which Yahweh conveys his ḥesed to her.24
In addition, Ruth’s choice of the term “kinsman-redeemer” (gōʾēl) is not fortuitous. Contrary to some interpreters, Ruth is not going beyond Naomi’s instructions in appealing to Boaz’s gōʾēl status. Naomi herself revealed that Boaz is among the gōʾēls for herself and Ruth (2:20). The possibility of the success of the marriage invitation is dependent on the clan relative/gōʾēl status25 of Boaz (cf. again 2:20; 3:2). There are other clan relatives/gōʾēls, but Ruth is invoking this status of Boaz as a basis for his response.
Ruth’s actions and words seem to achieve the desired effect. In section B′ (3:10–13), Boaz issues his words of consent. Clearly he understands her actions and words to mean something other than “Sleep with me!” He takes them to be an invitation to marriage. Instead of cursing her and shooing her off as some immoral whore, he blesses her.26
There is no doubt that this scene on the threshing floor is sexually provocative. But the narrator constantly and consistently depicts both Ruth and Boaz as individuals of unmatched integrity (ʾēšet ḥayil and gibbôr ḥayil), whose lives exhibit that faithful loyalty to relationships described by the Hebrew word ḥesed. It is evident that his silence means to imply here that they meet this moment of choice with the same integrity. The sexual connotations of the scene are used by the narrator to convey the sexual and emotional tension felt by the characters.27
Boaz’s first words are a blessing: “The LORD bless you, my daughter” (3:10). He then states: “This kindness [ḥesed] is greater than that which you showed earlier: You have not run after the younger men, whether rich or poor.” Literally the Hebrew reads, “You have made your last ḥesed better than the first.” Ruth’s first act of ḥesed obviously refers to her compassionate loyalty and kindness to Naomi, which Boaz has already noted (2:11). Ruth’s latest ḥesed, in this context, seems to refer to her proposal of marriage to Boaz. This is evident from the second clause where Boaz asserts, “You have not run after the younger men, whether rich or poor.
“That Ruth could have sought marriage with any of the men of the town means that she is under no legal obligation to become the wife of Mahlon’s closest relative in order to raise up an heir for her dead husband (i.e., carry out the levirate as prescribed in Deut. 25:5–10). And vice versa, the closest relative of Mahlon is not obligated to perform a levirate marriage—and apparently none of the relatives (close or otherwise) has given any thought to implementing a marriage to Ruth.28
Boaz goes on to assure Ruth, “And now, my daughter, don’t be afraid. I will do for you all you ask.” While the last clause may be formulaic, it nevertheless stresses Boaz’s commitment to Ruth. He then adds: “All my fellow townsmen know that you are a woman of noble character [ʾēšet ḥayil].” This phrase clearly emphasizes “the quality of Ruth’s person.”29 Boaz’s attribution of this quality to Ruth matches the narrator’s attribution of this quality to him in 2:1 (see comments). Block sums it up this way:
Boaz could have treated her as Moabite trash, scavenging in the garbage cans of Israel, and then corrupting the people with her whorish behavior; but with the true ḥesed of his own, he sees her as a woman equal in status and character to himself.30
Boaz’s next statements provide additional support for the narrator’s earlier assessment of his quality as a gibbôr ḥayil: “Although it is true that I am near of kin [lit., kinsman-redeemer, gōʾēl], there is a kinsman-redeemer [gōʾēl] nearer [or more closely related] than I.” Boaz acknowledges his responsibility, but he also recognizes the fact of hierarchy within the clan structure. He will not misappropriate that hierarchy but will give opportunity to the nearer kinsman to act first. On this, Campbell aptly remarks:
From a story-telling point of view, this has the marvelous effect of creating one more suspenseful moment, in which Boaz is given his opportunity to show his worthiness; for it is one feature of Boaz’s valor that he will not even usurp another man’s right to act responsibly!31
Boaz concludes his response to Ruth’s marriage invitation with some instructions to her. “Stay here for the night, and in the morning if he [this nearer gōʾēl] wants to redeem, good; let him redeem. But if he is not willing, I vow that, as surely as the LORD lives, I will do it. Lie here until morning.”
The final section of Scene 2 (A′, 3:14–15) takes place the next morning, when Boaz engages in a symbolic action that signifies the genuineness of his promise (in parallel to Ruth’s symbolic actions that previous evening). After remaining the night, Ruth arises early before anyone else, after which Boaz expresses the thought: “Don’t let it be known that a woman came to the threshing floor.” The writer is communicating the idea that both Boaz and Ruth now take the initiative in the progress toward resolution of what has become their common cause.
Boaz’s symbolic action of promise (3:15) is parallel to his first act of generosity in 2:14–17. Asking Ruth for her shawl,32 he measures out six measures of barley and gives it to her (3:15). The exact amount of his gift of barley is unknown since there is uncertainty concerning what measure is involved (certainly not an ephah since no shawl could support such a volume and weight). It is clear from the gift, however, that this is meant as a symbol of his commitment to the relationship. He will do what is right. As though the symbol were not enough, the narrator adds, “Then he went back to town,” which notes his immediate attention to the matter at hand (i.e., no delay in fulfilling his commitment to Ruth).33
Scene 3. Naomi Evaluates the Encounter (3:16–18)
THIS BRIEF SCENE contains Naomi’s question, Ruth’s reply, and Naomi’s conclusion. It takes place at Naomi’s home at dawn (with a reference to an expected conclusion the next day, 3:18). Naomi evaluates the encounter of the previous night (i.e., Boaz will act).
Scene 3 begins with the statement, “Ruth [lit., she] came to her mother-in-law.” This contrasts with the concluding statement of the previous scene, “He went to the city.” Then Naomi’s question begins the dialogue, “How did it go, my daughter?” (lit., “Who are you, my daughter?”).34
The narrator telescopes all of the events from the previous night into one statement, “Then she told her everything Boaz had done for her.” This allows the narrator to focus attention on only one of the things that Boaz said—in fact, something attributed to Boaz only through a quote by Ruth in her response to Naomi’s question: “He gave me these six measures of barley, saying, ‘Don’t go back to your mother-in-law empty-handed’ ” (3:17).
There can be little doubt that the writer’s use of the word “empty” is meant to reflect the reversal of Naomi’s “emptiness” expressed in 1:21: “I went away full, but the LORD has brought me back empty.” By putting it on the lips of Ruth (rather than on the lips of Boaz in the previous scene), there is a rich irony since it was Ruth who heard the word used for the first time by Naomi as an expression of her deep despair, even though Ruth was present and already foreshadowed Naomi’s relief. Campbell reasons: “With a single word the resolution of one part of Naomi’s plight is accomplished.”35 Moreover, the narrator is able to throw all the stress on the gift and, in particular, on the reason for it.
This stress is intended to communicate to us (and to Naomi!) the seriousness of Boaz’s intentions. Surely, then, he intends to imply that this really is Boaz’s purpose in giving the gift of grain and not just Ruth’s impression of the same.36
Naomi’s response to Ruth reveals that she fully understands the meaning of Boaz’s symbolic gift. She counsels Ruth to sit tight. Her confidence in Boaz’s integrity is undiminished, even greater than when she sent Ruth to the threshing floor. But there is another gōʾēl (kinsman-redeemer), and there is some uncertainty on how things will transpire. Thus it is best for Ruth to patiently wait and see.
This dialogue between Ruth and Naomi comprises the last words that either of them utter in the story. Poised on the threshold of fulfillment, they both step aside with Boaz taking center stage. His action will now dominate the story’s resolution.
Bridging Contexts
DIVINE AND HUMAN ACTIONS. Enlivened by the amazing amount of grain that Ruth was able to glean in a day at the field of Boaz, Naomi is restored to life. This is the beginning of resolution of Naomi’s emptiness (it had been hinted at in 1:22b, namely, that they were arriving as the barley harvest was beginning). It is marvelous the way in which Yahweh restores his people. Naomi’s outlook changes radically from self-absorption to concern for her daughter-in-law’s well-being. Naomi’s response here is extraordinary because she is under no obligation to do anything of this sort for Ruth. God is truly gracious in his restoration of his people.
In this chapter it is Naomi who takes the initiative to do ḥesed. She clearly wants to see a new marriage for Ruth and the attendant security, permanence, and belonging it will provide Ruth. In fact, before leaving Moab Naomi had voiced that desire for Ruth (1:8–9). At that point, Naomi expressed this as something that Yahweh would carry out. Now, however, she seizes upon a providentially given opportunity. God has provided the possibility for her prayer to be answered.
Thus Naomi “models one way in which divine and human actions work together: believers are not to wait passively for events to happen; rather, they must seize the initiative when an opportunity presents itself,” knowing that God presents the opportunity. “In Naomi’s case, any success presumably would be part of Yahweh’s ‘full payment’ of Ruth (cf. 2:12). If so, then, theologically Yahweh acts in Naomi’s acts. That is, what Naomi does constitutes at the same time God’s acts. Her acts execute God’s plans.”37
The plan is risky, but Ruth is willing to take the risk in order to see the relief of Naomi. Any number of things could go wrong (see the possibilities at the end of the discussion of Scene 1). But Ruth is radically committed to Naomi. Such commitment goes beyond what is usually found.
Acting honorably. Ruth’s deeds and words at the threshing floor are honorable. Her motives are pure. She simply follows Naomi’s instructions in what was apparently a customary way of making a marriage proposal. Why does Ruth take the initiative in this matter? Boaz himself comprehends one reason: age. Boaz is older vis-à-vis Ruth, and so Boaz has assumed that she will not be interested in marriage to him. Another reason is tied to the change of clothing that Naomi orders; that is, Ruth needs to put away the signals of widowhood and demonstrate that she is available. In any case, Boaz’s reaction to Ruth’s deeds and words shows that he interprets them as nothing but honorable.
Boaz too is pictured in this scene as acting honorably. To be awakened by the presence of a woman may cause a weaker man to succumb to temptation. But not Boaz. At this point, the contrast of Boaz on the threshing floor with Ruth and Samson with all of his sexual escapades could not be more pronounced. Both Boaz and Ruth are individuals of ḥayil (strength of character). In fact, Boaz attributes to Ruth the highest of compliments by calling her an ʾēšet ḥayil (a real, substantial woman of character). It is interesting to note that Boaz is willing to take on the “risk” of marrying Ruth when the nearer kinsman later does not.
Sexual issues. Obviously the point of this part of the story is not to give us a model on how marriage proposals should be made. In our culture the threshing floor is not the paragon of romantic settings. Rather, the point is to emphasize how God works circumstances providing the private context in which Ruth can approach Boaz concerning this matter of marriage. The setting also provides the context in which the motives of both Ruth and Boaz become clear so that they are beyond question.
In the midst of a sexually charged setting where the potential for sin and abuse is high, this couple demonstrate their honor and integrity in their words and actions. Neither takes advantage of the other for personal gain or gratification. In a world obsessed with taking advantage of every opportunity for personal gratification—rare indeed is the movie that shows characters in sexually charged circumstances not fulfilling their self-interest—we need encouragement that to act with integrity is not only possible but preferable.
Both Boaz and Ruth take the initiative after the threshing-floor incident to accomplish the marriage; it is now their common cause. But because of the legal context, it will be Boaz who assumes the major role in bringing about its fulfillment.
Boaz’s gift and words are significant. The keyword is the word “empty.” It signals the next stage in the removal of Naomi’s emptiness. If Ruth’s first day of gleaning is the beginning of the resolution of Naomi’s emptiness, the gift and word from Boaz are one more step toward its complete resolution—and one more way that God demonstrates his ḥesed to the widows.
Contemporary Significance
INTEGRITY. Act 3 of the book of Ruth displays three individuals acting on behalf of others, even when there is no obligation to do so. Naomi has no obligation or duty to find Ruth a husband. The easy route for her is to enjoy her final years knowing that Boaz will let Ruth glean enough for them to live. There is a real risk in sending Ruth on such a mission. She might jeopardize the whole situation. Boaz might become irritated or offended by Ruth’s symbolic actions and cut the two widows off. True, because he is a man of integrity, the risk is lessened, but any small mistake or misrepresentation could destroy even the relatively good, though still impoverished, situation that the two women enjoy now by ruining the relationship to Boaz.
Ruth is also not obligated to follow Naomi’s plan. She runs a number of risks in this plan. Again, one misrepresentation, one misplaced word could undo all the good that has been developed over the last two months.
Finally, Boaz is not obligated to respond the way he does. There are risks for him too. But in all three individuals we see models of decisive action in doing what is right. Each one acts honorably and with integrity, even in (or especially in) difficult or tempting contexts. For Ruth and Boaz, integrity is on the line on the threshing floor. But because their motives are pure, they respond in accordance with God’s standards.
All of this speaks volumes in a world where integrity seems to be a forgotten character quality. Whether one is looking at the political scene or at the world of business, there seems to be a great shortage of integrity. People seem to be more concerned with whether they are liable than whether they are doing the right thing. They are concerned more with not suffering personal loss than with living by godly, biblical principles.
In many ways Ruth and Boaz demonstrate their pure motives in this chapter. And it is the issue of purity in motives that is the very heart of the issue of integrity. Human beings, whether believers or unbelievers, have difficulty with pure motives. James makes it clear to his readers that many of them were trying to deal with God in their prayers with improper motives (James 4:3). And naturally, if they were dealing with God with impure motives, it isn’t hard to imagine that they weren’t dealing with their fellow Christians or others in their community any differently.
One of the important ways in which the Scriptures attempt to encourage and stimulate us to proper motives is the reality of a future judgment that will consider this issue. Thus, for example, Proverbs 16:2 points out that “all a man’s ways seem innocent to him, but motives are weighed by the LORD.” Lest Christians forget this important stimulus, Paul reminds believers that when the Lord Jesus Christ returns, “he will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men’s hearts.” And at that time “each will receive his praise from God” (1 Cor. 4:5).
Another important teaching that encourages proper motives is the One whom we as Christians serve. Once again Paul explains:
For the appeal we make does not spring from error or impure motives, nor are we trying to trick you. On the contrary, we speak as men approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel. We are not trying to please men but God, who tests our hearts. (1 Thess. 2:3–4)
As Christians, ultimately we are called to serve the Lord and therefore ought to speak and act out of pure motives that will bring honor and glory to his name. Honesty with God and honesty with ourselves as we reflect on what we are doing and why we are doing it goes a long way in helping us to evaluate our motives and to act with integrity with others.
Ḥesed. Ruth is characterized by Boaz as an ʾēšet ḥayil (a real, substantial woman of character). And the character that she (and Boaz) displays is nothing short of the standard of ḥesed. Loyalty and love are at the root of their actions. The character that they manifest and that we are called to imitate is summed up in the following: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control (i.e., the fruit of the Spirit, Gal. 5:22–23). The apostle Paul outlines this ḥesed quality in 1 Corinthians 13:4–7:
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
What Ruth and Boaz manifest is what Jesus puts in the form of a command: “My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you” (John 15:12). He then models this for us: “Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends” (15:13).
True covenant faith is expressed by concern for the welfare of others. In our story this concern is expressed by loving actions of ḥesed that promote the other person’s well-being and by verbal expressions of prayer for the other person. How many Christians expect the pastor to minister to them without once considering that God expects Christians to be ministering to one another? Through this story about these long-ago folk from Bethlehem, the narrator is able to flesh out for the modern reader what the life of faith should look like. The measure of a person’s faith is not found in the miracles that he or she can wrest from the hand of God nor in his or her personal health and prosperity, but in demonstrating ethical character. As James points out, “faith without deeds is dead” (James 2:26), and this book, especially in the acts of ḥesed in chapters 2–4, paints a vivid picture of a virtuous theology and a powerfully vibrant faith. In this, it has a timeless message to readers of every age.