Preface: In Job 19:25, we briefly covered the Doctrine of Kinsman-Redeemer; however, we did not draw careful parallels between the Kinsman-Redeemer and Boaz of the Book of Ruth. Few people ever fully appreciate exactly what Boaz does and what Boaz accomplishes in the Book of Ruth because they lack the background understanding of the Law. In this doctrine, we will examine both functions of Boaz in the light of the requirements of the Law.

1. In the Bible, we have many men and many sets of circumstances which foreshadow the coming of our Lord and His work on the cross. There was Abraham offering as a sacrifice his own son; there was Moses, the great deliverer; there was David, a man after God’s own heart. However, no incident and no man has ever portrayed our Lord as the kinsman-redeemer except for Boaz. The person who reads through their Bible once a year might skim through this Book of Ruth and think that it is such a nice and romantic book, but never have a real clue as to why this book found its way into the canon of Scripture, inspired by the Holy Spirit. However, the key is Boaz—when you fully understand who Boaz is, the kinsman-redeemer of Ruth, then you realize how absolutely essential this book is to the Old Testament canon.

2. It is actually amazing as to how many theologians who have taught the Doctrine of Redemption actually by pass the Book of Ruth, as though it has nothing to offer by way of illustration. Jonathan Edwards traced the history of redemption from Moses to David, yet, although he mentions Jephthah, Gideon and Samson, left out Boaz altogether. Dr. James Strong, of Strong’s Concordance, also wrote Systematic Theology, and, although he covers the redemption of Christ under the chapter heading “Christology,” he does not give mention to Boaz. John Calvin, in Institutes, covers redemption, but leaves out Boaz.

It is sad an unfortunate, as Boaz, as the kinsman redeemer of Ruth, brings love to the forefront of this doctrine.

3. Boaz is the example of the kinsman-redeemer from Scripture, a picture of our Lord Jesus. Initially, we should look at some of the vocabulary which is applied to him. Return to Topics

a. Boaz, in Ruth 2:1, is first called môwda׳ (ע-דמ) [pronounced moh-DAH or moh-DAHG], which is generally translated kinsman or relative; however, it means a near acquaintance or a close friend. Strong’s #4129 BDB #396. A very similar word is used of Boaz in Ruth 3:2. Christ Jesus acts as our close friend. Furthermore, Jesus is fully man. In this respect, He is our kinsman. Had somehow Jesus been not fully human, but even a mixture of, say, divine and angelic natures, we would not believe that He has endured what we have endured on this earth. Even more importantly, His death for our sins would hold less meaning for us, as we would expect Him to be able to endure great pain and suffering, as an Angel-God. However, Jesus took upon Himself our sins and the punishment for our sins in His body on the cross. He received, while on the cross, the equivalent of our deserved cumulative suffering in His human body. Understand that for those few hours on the cross, what Jesus endured was an eternity of hell for every man, woman and child who has ever lived and will ever live.

He endured this in His humanity. It was because He lived on this earth in His humanity and endured the punishment for our sins in His humanity, that we have been redeemed.

b. Boaz is then called a man of, gibbôwr (ר ̣) [pronounced gib-BOAR], which means strong, mighty, valiant. Strong’s #1368 BDB #150. This is followed by the chayil (ל ̣י ַח) [pronounced CHAH-yil ] and it means efficiency, army, strength, valour, power, might; as well as that which is gotten through military strength—wealth, substance. Strong’s #2428 BDB #298. This word is used of Boaz in Ruth 2:1 4:11 and of Ruth in Ruth 3:11. As the Son of God, Jesus is a Man of strength and a Man of great wealth. By association, we also share His wealth and His strength.

c. One of the most important nouns applied to Boaz is mishpâchâh (ה ָח ָ ׃ש ̣מ) [pronounced mish-paw-KHAWH], which means family, clan, sub-tribe. Strong's #4940 BDB #1046. Boaz was both a friend and a relative to Elimelech (Ruth 2:1, 3). Our Lord is related to us by blood. He is a man as well as God, as He is born of Mary. Just as Naomi was not close enough to Boaz to plop herself on his front steps when she returned from Moab, we are not close enough to Christ Jesus to have an immediate relationship with Him. At birth, we have Adam’s imputed sin and we are born with a functioning old sin nature. At our first opportunity, we sin against God. So, from birth on, we are separate from God, and therefore, separate from Christ Jesus.

d. Finally, Boaz is called the Qal participle of gâal (ל ַאָ) [pronounced gaw-AHL], which means redeem, purchase. Even though it is variously translated in the Qal participle as avenger, revenger, kinsman, kinsman-redeemer; it should properly be rendered redeemer, purchaser, redeeming, purchasing. Because the nearest relative has the right of redemption, this word is also translated kinsman. Strong's #1350 BDB #145. We find the verb used in Ruth 3:13 4:4, 6 (actually several times in each verse) and the participle used in Ruth 2:20 3:9, 12 4:1, 3, 6, 8, 14 (yes, I realize that the participle is a form of the verb; however, the participle is primarily used as a noun). Boaz, through his purchase of the property, revived the name of the dead; so Christ, with the purchase of His blood, caused us, as those who deserve death, to live.

4. There are two Old Testament laws which need to be examined here: Return to Topics

a. The Law of the Right of Redemption: Every 50 years, Israel was to celebrate the Year of Jubilee. This might be looked upon as a super-Sabbath year. “On this Year of Jubilee, each of you will return to his own property. If, furthermore, you have sold your land to your friend, or you have purchased land from your friend’s hand, you will not do wrong to one another. Corresponding to the number of years after the Jubilee, you will buy from your friend; he is to sell to you according to the number of years of crops. In proportion to the number of years, you will increase its price, and in proportion to the fewness of the years, you will diminish its price; for it is actually the number of crops that he is selling to you. So you will not wrong one another, but you will fear your God, for I am Jehovah your God...Furthermore, the land will not be sold permanently, for the land is Mine; you are aliens and temporary residents with Me. Thus, for every portion of land, you are to provide for the redemption of the land. If a brother of yours becomes so poor he has to sell part of his property, then his nearest kinsman is to come and buy back what his relative has sold. Or, in case a man has no redeemer, but so recovers his means as to find sufficient for its redemption, then he will calculate the years since it sale and refund the balance to the man to whom he sold it, and so return to his property. But if he has not found sufficient means to get it back for himself, then what he has sold will remain in the hands of its purchaser until the Year of Jubilee; and at the Year of Jubilee, it will go back, that he may return to his property.” (Lev. 25:15–17, 23–28). What this recognizes is the people will buy and sell the inheritance which God has given them. God had given the land as a permanent inheritance, but, people being what they are and life being what it is, they occasionally are forced to sell what God has given them. No matter what you have to sell, for some price, there is a buyer. However, God makes is clear in this passage that the purchase of a piece of land that is not your original inheritance is temporary. The price for the land is in part determined by the number of years since the previous Year of Jubilee. A person who sells his inheritance soon after a Year of Jubilee was to get the most for it and the person who sold it long after a Year of Jubilee would get the least for it. At any time, a relative or that person could come back and buy back his land. What he would pay would be proportional to the number of years that the land had been owned by another. Today, if I became poor and sold a house, and then, if I became successful and was able to buy the house back, then I would generally end up paying much more for the house than I sold it for, due to inflation and the rising value of the property. Not so under the Mosaic Law. Let’s say there were 20 years remaining until the next Year of Jubilee and I have a piece of property that, the day after the Year of Jubilee, was worth $100,000. I could sell that property for $40,000. Now, obviously I would end up selling the property, under the dispensation of Israel, because I had become poor and could not afford to live and could not afford to cultivate the property. Now, let’s say, 10 years go by and either I, or a close relative of mine, can afford to purchase the property back. I am allowed to purchase the property back, under the Mosaic Law, at any time, with financial recognition given to the number of years which have gone by. I may therefore purchase the land back for $20,000, if there are ten years remaining until the next Year of Jubilee. In any case, at the Year of Jubilee, the land reverts back to me and my family, even if I cannot afford to purchase it back. Now, there is no talk of land until the 4^th chapter of Ruth and what we have is a similar, but not identical situation. Naomi apparently still owns the land which belonged to Elimelech, but cannot afford to work the land and must sell it. She could sell the land under the provisions of the Year of Jubilee given above or she could sell it to a near relative who would raise up a child in her son’s name who would inherit this land by birth. This leads us to the second, and generally more recognized function of Boaz:

b. There was a rather strange clause in the Mosaic Law which was given by Moses in the light of what was apparently a custom of the ancient world. “When brothers live together and one of them dies and has no son, the wife of the deceased will not go outside the family to a strange man. Her husband’s brother will go in to her and take her to himself as a wife and he will perform the duty of a husband’s brother to her. It will come about that the firstborn will take the name of the dead brother, that his name not be blotted out from Israel. However, if the man does not desire to take his brother’s wife, then his brother’s wife will go up to the gate to the elders and say, ‘My husband’s brother refuses to establish a name for his brother in Israel; he is not willing to perform the duty of a husband’s brother to me.” The elders of the city will then summon him and speak to him. If he persists and says, ‘I do not desire to take her,’ then his brother’s wife will come to him in the sight of the elders, pull his sandal off his foot, and spit in his face; and she will say, ‘Thus it is done to the man who does not build up his brother’s house.’ ” (Deut. 25:5–9). The deceased man has a wife and has a land inheritance. One way of keeping that land inheritance was for the deceased man’s brother to marry his wife and to raise up one child in the name of the late husband. This child would retain the rights to the deceased brother’s portion of land.

c. There is a third law which also should be mentioned. Not only could a person sell his land when he became poor, but he could sell himself as well. Now if the means of a stranger or of a visitor with you becomes sufficient, and a brother of yours becomes so poor as to sell himself to the stranger who is visiting with you [in the land] or to the descendants of a stranger’s family, then he will have the right of redemption after he has been sold. One of his brothers many redeem him, or his uncle, or his uncle’s son may redeem him, or one of his blood relatives from his family may redeem him; or, if he prospers, he may redeem himself...he will still go out in the Year of Jubilee, he and his sons with him (Lev. 25:47–49, 54b).

What this law states is that if a non-Israelite became prosperous in the land and an Israelite became destitute, the Israelite could sell himself into slavery. He could be purchased out from his slavery by a relative (the verses I left out simply go over the calculation of price which is prorated as per the number of years remaining until the Year of Jubilee). I mention this third law because Boaz is a picture of Jesus Christ paying for our sins. We have gone into debt to God—in fact, the moment we committed one sin, we were in debt to God by our actions. By Adam’s imputed sin and the inheritance of the old sin nature by birth, we were born into slavery to sin. Christ purchases us out from this slavery to sin and slavery because of sin.

d. These two sets of laws, in and of themselves, are rather unusual. It is even more unusual for them to come together at the same time.

5. Boaz has two functions as Ruth’s kinsman-redeemer (we may feel better calling him her late husband’s close relative with cash).

a. Elimelech, when he took his family to Moab, leaving, but not selling his share of land, given him by God. The Law recognized, as we have seen, that men would become poor and sell their land, and there was provision made for it. This aspect of Boaz’s responsibility is often ignored, even though he is called a redeemer or a purchaser more often than anything else (see 1d above). What we are looking at here is the purchase of the land by a relative in order to keep the land in the family. Now, Elimelech had not sold off his property when he took his family to Moab. He managed to hold onto it. However, since Naomi had returned, she had no choice but to sell the property. She had not the cash flow to work the property herself—she had no money whatsoever—this would be her only source of money. So what has happened is something which the Law implies but does not explicitly state. Rather than sell the land to an Israelite and later have it bought back by a close relative, Naomi looks to sell the land to a close relative. This does not circumvent the Law—it simply fulfills it in a way which was unexpected. So Boaz, when he buys the property, does not circumvent the Law—he simply fulfills it in a way that is unexpected.

b. The second, and most recognized responsibility of Boaz was to marry Ruth and to take care of her and her mother-in-law, and to raise up one child to carry on the name of her late husband.

c. Now you will note that Boaz and Naomi are doing something which is a bit unusual. Elimelech did not sell his land when he left Israel; Naomi has not sold this land since she returned, although she cannot afford to cultivate the land. What will transpire is something which is not altogether a part of the Law. Boaz will both purchase the land, but then he will come back and marry Ruth as well, and raise their first child as the inheritor of the land that he purchases. They are not circumventing the Law, as there is no law which prevents them from doing what they do. They are fulfilling the Law in a way that we would not have originally thought. Boaz is at once redeeming or purchasing the land of Elimelech, and yet, by his marriage to Ruth, keeping the land in the family. What Boaz does fulfills the Law and it is permanent. That is, there is no reason for this land to revert back to the family of Elimelech because it remains in the family of Elimelech. Boaz paid the redemption price of the land, and yet, Naomi and Ruth do not lose the land, not even temporarily.

6. McGee: Not only is man confined to salvation by grace...but also God is confined to a redemption wrought by himself and made available to man only through the avenue of grace. Two alternatives confronted God Either he could let man bear the penalty for his own sin and be eternally lost, or he could redeem man by himself, paying the penalty. Apparently there was no middle ground on which he could stand. Any other alternative would violate God’s perfect righteousness. The “kinsman-redeemer” is the only figure in the Bible that gives an adequate understanding of God as the redeemer.

7. Now let’s look at two Biblical words which are often confused: redemption and atonement.

a. Atonement: Unfortunately, atonement is not a good English translation anymore. We think of it too much like paying for something. The original Hebrew verb was kâphar (ר ַפ ָ) [pronounced kaw-FAHR], which means to cover, to placate, to pacify. These meanings are made clear by the first two times kâphar is used. We first find kâphar in the Qal stem in Gen 6:14 where the verb cleanly means to cover [with pitch]. It is used of the building of the ark and making it water-tight by covering it with pitch. Next, kâphar is found in the Piel in Gen. 32:20 where Jacob sends a present to Esau to appease or placate Esau. Recall that the Bible was written by God the Holy Spirit and when dealing with words of great spiritual import, the Holy Spirit reveals their meaning early on in the Bible, cognizant through omniscience, that certain words, like kâphar, come to take on a meaning of their own. These first two uses of kâphar allow us to keep from getting too complex or from obscuring its meaning. There are two sides to this verb; when man kâphars for himself, he appeases Yahweh because the man's sins have been covered over. When God kâphar’s sin or iniquity, He covers over the sin or iniquity. In the Old Testament, forgive could be too strong of a word, as Jesus Christ had not entered into history yet. Therefore, the temporary covering over of a sin allowed for a future permanent disposition of sin. There is the corresponding masculine noun kôpher (ר∵פֹ) [pronounced KOH-fer] (Strong's #3724 BDB #497) which is also first found in Gen. 6:14 for the pitch that was used (BDB #498). It was a type of covering. We also find the noun used in Ex. 21:30 where a man's ox had previously killed, it had not been put to death, and it killed again. The ox would be killed, the man would be executed or he kill the ox and would have to pay an amount of money which was the value of a life, which a limitations being set on that amount which could be demanded for the goring of a slave (Ex. 21:32). The clear indication here is that his life is spared if they can come up with an amount of money to cover what had been done and to appease the family of the person who was killed. Therefore, kâphar (and its corresponding noun kôpher) could be translated cover if only the sin of the transgressor was the context, but it could be translated appease if God was the direct object of the verb. Strong's #3722 BDB #497.

b. We do not find the word atonement in the New Testament.

God no longer simply covers over sin. What we find in the New Testament is payment for sin. The Old Testament looked forward to what would be done in the New, and God, for a time, simply covered over sin. However, in the New Testament, with the advent of our Lord, the price of our sin was paid for in full. McGee: The kinsman is a picture of the Lord Jesus Christ. He is our Kinsman Redeemer. And that’s the reason the word redemption is used in the New Testament rather than atonement. Atonement covered up sins, that’s all. But redemption, friend, means to pay a price so that the one who is redeemed may go scot free. Now Christ not only died to redeem our persons, He died also to redeem this earth. You and I live on an earth that someday is going to be delivered from the bondage of corruption, and there’ll be a new heaven and a new earth.

8. McGee, who has the ability to take the most complex doctrine and explain it so that anyone can understand, breaks down the qualifications of the kinsman redeemer.

Return to Topics

a. He must be a near kinsman. That is, he must be related to the person who is being redeemed (Deut. 25:5, 7–10 John 1:14 Rom. 1:3 Gal. 4:4–5 Philip. 2:5–8 Heb. 2:14–17). Boaz was related to Elimelech, and Jesus, our redeemer, is related to us, in that He is flesh. Heb. 2:14–15, 17 reads: Since then the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same, that through death, Me might render powerless him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, and might deliver those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives...Therefore, He had to be made like His brothers in all things, that He might become a merciful and faithful high priest in thing pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. Gal. 4:4–5: But when the fulness of time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law, in order that He might redeem those who were under Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons. McGee comments: That, my friend, is one of the greatest encouragements that I could have today...because 1900 years ago He came down and took upon Himself my humanity. And He suffered down here; He bled and died. He is able to help me today because He knows me and He knows you. He knows you better than your fiends know you, than your relatives know you, than your wife or husband knows you. He knows you better than you know yourself. He knows you today and he can help you today because of that. Because God became man and took my humanity upon Himself, then, although there are many experiences in this life I cannot explain, and do not know why certain things happen today, I accept them. Since He became a man and He found it necessary to come down to this earth to suffer and to bleed and to die for the sins of the world—which is the plan and program of God—I know that life has some high and holy purpose.

b. The redeemer must be willing to redeem (Ruth 3:11 Matt. 20:28 John 10:15, 18 Heb. 10:7 I John 3:16). We saw the example of Bob the redeemer who was unwilling to redeem the land, when Ruth was mentioned. Boaz was willing to redeem the land of Naomi and marry Ruth our of love for Ruth. Jesus, for reasons unknown to us, loves us and is willing to redeem us from His love. McGee: It has been suggested by some, and wrongly so, that because Jesus was a willing sacrifice, He was a suicide like Socrates. That’s a blasphemous statement, but some of the liberals have made it, as they have made other blasphemous statements. Although His death was not a suicide, He certainly was willing to die—you see, He loved us! Many years ago down in Houston, Texas, when a boarding house caught on fire, a woman broke through the lines and went into that house. It collapsed, and she was burned to death. The headlines read: “Poor Wretch Dies: Suicide.” Later the newspaper corrected it, and printed an apology...when workmen were digging around in the rubble, they found in a back room, a little iron bed, and in that little iron bed was a baby, her baby. She entered that burning building to save her baby. She wasn’t a suicide. She loved that baby and wanted to save it. The Lord Jesus was a willing Redeemer, friend, very willing, and it was because He loved us.

c. The redeemer must be willing to pay the price of redemption (Ruth 2:1 I Peter 1:18–19)

d. Thirdly, the redeemer must be able to redeem (I Cor. 6:20 I Peter 1:18–19). Had Boaz sold himself into slavery or had he been a Moabite, he could not have redeemed Ruth. A simple illustration is that a drowning man cannot save another drowning man.

Furthermore, Boaz had the financial resources required to purchase the land which belonged to Naomi. McGee: I am sure that Naomi had some poor kinfolk there in Bethlehem—we all have poor kinfolk, haven’t we? It might have been that one night after Naomi had come back from Moab that these poor kinfolk came over, they all got out their handkerchiefs and they wept. They said, “Naomi, we feel sorry for you, but we can’t help you. In fact, we’re in pretty bad shape ourselves. We can’t even help ourselves.” It’s nice to have folk sympathize with you, but it’s wonderful to have a kinsman who is able to write a check that doesn’t bounce, and to have that kinsman come along and say, “I’ll redeem you.”

Our Perfect Redeemer is able to redeem us. He is able to save forever those who draw near to God through Him because He always lives to make intercession for them (Heb. 7:25).

e. The kinsman redeemer must be free himself. He cannot be under slavery; he must be outside of or above the circumstances of the person he is redeeming. Our Lord was not under slavery to an old sin nature.

f. The redeemer must have the price of the redemption. Our Lord paid the price of our redemption, which involved the taking of the punishment for our sins upon Himself.

9. The Law did not force the kinsman to redeem the land of a close relative. The Law did not force the close relative to marry his brother’s wife. In either case, the relative could choose not to participate. Boaz chose to do these things out of love. So the motivation of God. “For God so loved the world that He gave His uniquely-born Son, that whoever believes in Him would not perish, but will have eternal life.” (John 3:16).

10. Ruth is encouraged to seek rest in Boaz, just as we have rest in our Lord (Ruth 3:1 Matt. 11:28–29 Heb. 4:6).

11. One of the things which is often overlooked in Scripture is how closely Boaz and Ruth foreshadow Christ and the Church. The Book of Ruth as a part of Scripture is often presented as little more than a nice story which happens to include a part of the bloodline of David. In fact, apart from the fulfillment of this book in Christ in the New Testament, we find few compelling reasons to include it with the Old Testament canon of Scripture. However, when we view this book as both a piece of Israel’s history, and also as a picture of Christ’s love for us in redemption, then it clearly has a place in our Bible. McGee comments on this: Redemption [to some theologians] has come to mean a cold business transaction, devoid of the personal element. God did not buy man in the slave market of sin as a chattel is bought and sold. Redemption is not the story of a sharp trader who made a profitable investment in the marts of trade...Redemption is the love story of a kinsman who did not count the cost nor figure up the profit and loss but for joy paid an exorbitant price for one that he loved. The Book of Ruth declares that redemption is not a business transaction but a love affair. The personal element must not be withdrawn from the doctrine of redemption, or the most vital part will be sacrificed.

Return to Topics

12. There is only one example in all of Scripture of the kinsman-redeemer, and that is Boaz in the book of Ruth. His love for Ruth and what he was willing to do on her behalf helps us to understand why Jesus would die on our behalf, and so pay for our sins.

How the Relationship Between Boaz and Ruth Foreshadows and Parallels the Relationship Between our Lord and the Church
Boaz	Christ Jesus
Ruth was a Gentile, outside the Law and outside the provision of Jehovah God.	We are born at enmity with God, in rebellion against Him, possessing an old sin nature; carrying with us Adam’s imputed sin; and committing personal sins prior to and following the possession of a conscience.
Boaz both provided for Ruth in ways that she could see, by leaving the corners of the field unharvested, for instance; however, he also provided for Ruth in ways that she did not see (his personal instructions to his work crew).	God provides for us in many ways that we see, but also in many ways that we do not. We find ourselves in the middle of an unseen conflict from which we are shielded and protected.
Boaz fulfilled the Law, insofar as providing grain for Ruth as per the Law. That is, he did not instruct his crew to go back and pick up whatever grain they dropped and he did not harvest the corners of his field (Ruth 2:15).	Christ fulfilled the Law in all that He did. In Him was no sin.
Boaz went beyond the simple requirements of the Law and required his workers to actually take grain from the bundles which they had and to leave them for Ruth (Ruth 2:16). Boaz also provided meals for Ruth (we only know of one, but it is not unreasonable to suppose that Boaz provided for Ruth daily—Ruth 2:14).	Christ went beyond the Law and not only fulfilled the requirements of the Law, but He also imputed His fulfillment of the Law to us—He imputed His perfect righteousness to us.
Boaz gives Ruth water to drink and food to eat (Ruth 2:9, 14).	Christ tells those who thirst to come to Him and those who are hungry to come to Him (John 4:13–14 6:35).
Boaz provided Ruth was an overabundance of food and provisions (Ruth 2:9, 14, 17–18).	Jesus provides us with an overabundance of provisions as well (Matt. 6:25–26 John 10:10 Philip. 4:18–19).
Ruth is encouraged to seek rest and refuge in Boaz (Ruth 3:1).	We are encouraged to seek rest and refuge in Christ Jesus (Matt. 11:28–29 Heb. 4:6).
We’ve already discussed what Naomi told Ruth to do, and how it is analogous to salvation. She was to wash herself, anoint herself, put on new clothing, and go to Boaz (Ruth 3:3).	In salvation, we go to Christ in faith, as Ruth went to Boaz. We are cleansed of our sins, we are anointed with the Holy Spirit, and we put on Christ (see the exegesis of Ruth 3:3).
Boaz is much older than Ruth.	Christ Jesus is from eternity past.
Boaz will act as a protector and provider for Ruth, a gentile who is outside the Law and promises of God; and for Naomi, who was heir to the promise.	Our Lord is the cornerstone of the Church and Israel, and is the protector of and provider for both.
Naomi suggests to Ruth that she go to Boaz for rest. Boaz will do all of the work and Ruth will be the recipient of his work (Ruth 3:1).	Jesus similarly calls us to enter into His rest: “Come to me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.” (Matt. 11:28; see also Heb. 4:7–11).
Boaz acts out of love for Ruth.	While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us (Rom. 5:8). I live by faith in the Son of God, Who loved me and delivered Himself up for me (Gal. 2:20b).
The Law prevented Ruth from becoming a part of the family of Israel (Deut. 23:3). It is Boaz’s desire to act as her redeemer as well as his ability to do so which brought her into the family of Israel.	The Law bars us from fellowship with God, as we stand cursed if we do not abide by everything in the Law (Deut. 27:26 Gal. 3:10). It is only through Jesus’ ability and willingness to bring us into the family of God that we are redeemed from the curse of the Law (Gal. 3:22–26).
Prior to her redemption by marriage, Boaz looked out for Ruth and took care of her needs.	Prior to our salvation, God looks out for us and takes care of our needs.
Ruth did not have to do anything but express her positive volition toward Boaz. Boaz did all of the work (Ruth 3:18).	We only need believe in Christ—He has done all the work for our salvation.
Boaz does not circumvent the Law, but fulfills it in a way which is unexpected. The land of Elimelech is not sold to a stranger and then redeemed by Boaz; it is sold directly to Boaz.	Jesus did not circumvent the Law, but He fulfilled it in a way that was unexpected. He would obey the Law of God completely and then He took upon Himself our sins and wrongdoings and paid the penalty for them.
For awhile, it appears as though Naomi has been forgotten, as the book of Ruth concentrates upon Boaz and Ruth. However, at the very end, it is clear that Naomi, and Israelite woman, is provided for by Boaz.	For awhile, it appears as though God has completely forsaken Israel and that His only dealings are with the Church. However, that is only temporary and He will return to Israel and provide for Israel as well.

13. So that there is no confusion as to who is the personal Redeemer for us all, David calls Jehovah his Rock and his Redeemer in Psalm 19:14.

14. Asaph also called Jehovah his Redeemer: And they remembered that God was their Rock, and the Most High God their Redeemer (Psalm 78:35).

<<Return to Top of Page>>	<<Return to the Doctrinal Index>>
<<Site Map>>	<<Return to the Ruth Homepage>>