Ecclesiastes Chapter 3

Summarrium

The preacher begins chapter 3 with poetic parallelism a common feature of Hebrew poetry used to emphasise the thematic idea of there being a time for all things. This involves a rhythmic repetition of ideas and concepts through pairs of contrasting or complimentary statements. There is an emphasis on the inevitability and appropriateness of each season and activity.

The preacher then points out that Gods gift to the worker is the opportunity to eat, drink and take pleasure in his toil. What God has made is, and cannot be changed. This is the case so that others might recognise his sovereignty. Furthermore there is equality under heaven; what happens to Man happens to beast alike and we have no advantage over beast returning to the dust just as beast do. This is God 'testing' that man might see the kind of animal that he is.

Meditatio

This chapter is beautiful. The first eight verses providing a poetic introduction to the reality that man does not control the Universe. Instead there is 'a time for all things under heaven'. This introduces the theme of this chapter which seems to be one of the sovereignty of God. With all things having an ordained time (v1-8), and Gods will being enacted as pleases him (v14). It is even made clear that the benefits to man are decided by the lord (work, we are told, is it's own reward).

In this way our understanding shifts from a focus of wisdom being the mechanism by which we control the universe, to recognition that wisdom is something like expertise in the fundamental pragmatics of life¹. There is a reason proverbs begins that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge. Then further develops this to point to point out that this knowledge of the Lord is both wisdom and insight².

If we recognise the position that the Lord occupies and our position in relation to this, we have a greater understanding of our relationship to the world. The Lord has established a time for all things. We might therefore conclude that we can be entirely fatalistic; there is a time for all things so I needn't act or participate.

Yet the reader addresses this in the same passage. The work itself is a 'gift of God'; satisfaction in labour is a gift and not something to be taken lightly. Work is it's own reward it means that we can continue to subsist and grow in knowledge, wisdom and insight. It really struck me just how often these contrasts between points of tension are drawn.

For example in verse 11 we are told that the lord 'has put eternity into man's heart' suggesting a recognition that there is more than just the immediate present. There is a recognition in man of something eternal that exists beyond himself. This causes individuals to seek meaning, purpose and understanding beyond the immediate. Yet this is immediately followed by the point that 'he cannot find out what God has done from the beginning to the end'. Man exists in context and has a limited understanding. We don't see the big picture and whilst we have a desire to see and understand the full scope of life and the purposes of God we cannot. It is beyond human understanding.

Once again we find the preacher realigning our thought processes to reflect the reality that we are not divine. We do not have all of the answers, we are prone to error, we cannot see the unrelenting march of history. As one post-liberal said; our narratives are full of the grubby fingerprints of ideological ways of thinking. These are the narrow framings we come to rely on rather than accepting the difficult reality that we simply do not know.

Ecclesiastes Chapter 2

Summarrium

The 'preacher' continues his monologue and explores three specific forms of vanity respectively including Self-indulgence, living wisely and toil. The first he claims is vanity and there is nothing to be gained under the sun; where pleasure is only ever it's own reward.

The second he recognises the value of wisdom. He points out that there is advantage in doing what is right but later comes to realise that no one will remember this and the individual gains no such advantage. Thirdly we have the vanity of toil. That we a busy with gathering and collecting only to give what we have to whom it pleases God.

Meditatio

The 'preacher' points out that hedonism is not sufficient to give life meaning. I think it's really interest how he highlights the pursuit of pleasure is it's own reward where in verse 10 it states '..for my heart found pleasure in all my toil, and this was my reward for all my toil'. The pursuit of pleasures is something our heart can legitimately find pleasing, but it ammounts to nothing. Only in the continued pursuit is it pleasurable and once we have exhausted possibilities the sobring light of day reveals that there is nothing to be gained in this.

We might then consider ethical living; in which we pursue wise living and avoid self-deceptive, self-destructive patterns of thought. Yet what we come to realise in our pursuit is that even our best attempts to avoid trouble 'What happens to the fool will happen to me also. Why then have I been so very wise?'. If the rain shines on the just and unjust alike why bother pursing knowledge and wisdom?

Worse still we should recognise that we frequently do not reap what we sow; that we may gather and collect much only to see this be given to someone else. Why not then despair of work given much of what we put our hand to will either not last or be given to someone else. Indeed many of our working days are hard, costly, and in it we do not find peace.

So what is the resolution here? The 'preacher' recognises that finding contentment within the work is a gift from God. Most who acquire want more, but to find satisfaction in what is is something unique. This is expressed in verse 24 'There is nothing better for a person than that he should eat and drink and find enjoyment in his toil.' This isn't a call to unbridled hedonism, nor a call to wise living for the sake of wisdom. But there is a need to seek satisfaction in providence.

Ecclesiastes Chapter 1

Summarrium

We are introduced to the words of Solomon who is referred to as 'the preacher' and the son of David. We are advised all things are vanties and much of human effort is toil under the sun and chasing after the wind. Solomon highlights that with humans very little changes and very few things are novel because we do not remember former things.

Solomon explains that he has applied his heart to seek out wisdom under heaven and referrs to this unhappy business as what God has given man to be busy with. Solomon again highlights the futility of mans attempt to effect change. Pointing out even increasing in knowledge and wisdom does not make a human being happy.

Meditatio

To begin its worth understanding something of the book of Ecclesiastes. This book is traditionally attributed to King Solomon; with Driscoll claiming Solomon wrote song of songs when young and in love, collecting Proverbs throughout his life and the book of Ecclesiastes towards the end as a bitter old man. Nevertheless whilst this is not an unreasonable guess, as with many biblical texts, the authorship of Ecclesiastes remains a topic of scholarly debate. The book is part of the Wisdom Literature, which includes the book of Proverbs and Job.

Ecclesiastes is renown for its introspective and philosophical explorations and indeed it's almost pessimistic proclamations have often seen hopeful individuals give it a wide berth.

The 'Preacher' Solomon to whom we are introduced is recorded as being the son of David and King in Jerusalem. He introduces, in an almost lamenting tone, the central concepts of the book here which include 'vanity' or 'meaninglessness'. This central theme seems to me to be an almost be radical attempt to reframe human understanding. So often we are caught up in what we perceive to be meaningful to proclaim it all as meaningless in light of the bigger picture is not a frame we often pick up.

Yet this chapter reminds us that before we came nature was and after we came nature will be; the wheel weaves as the wheel wills and the cycle repeats throughout the ages. There is a sense of monotony and futility in this which is reflected in the perceived futility of human effort. At the end of the day the 'preacher' tells us that the acquisition of wisdom and knowledge, which seems to be what we have been set to busy ourselves with, is not in and of itself satisfying. It merely produces much vexation and sorrow.

Some reading the text will undoubtedly struggle to be confronted by such stark and honest expressions of human lived experience. Ecclesiastes is written in a reflective, contemplative introspective style. It is seemingly a deeply personal exploration of one man confronting the stark realities of life including its apparent transitory, absurd and paradoxical nature. It is my favorite book for a reason it offers the knower an entry point into wisdom.

Galatians Chapter 6

Summarrium

Paul points out how to address transgression amongst believers; with gentleness and caution not to get caught up into this transgression also. Brothers in Christ are to bear each others burdens although the test is not of your neighbours ability to bear your burden but your own ability.

Paul points out the sowing and reaping principle indicating that sowing to the flesh reaps corruption but sowing to the spirit reaps eternal life. We are encouraged to not give up doing good to everyone and especially those who are of the household of faith.

Paul points out that the Galatians have been mislead by those who would like to boast in the flesh of others. Paul points out the only thing we may boast in is the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ. Through which crucifixion to the world is possible.

Meditatio

To begin with, I want to return to a point made in Chapter 1. The central message of Jesus is outlined in Mark 1:14-15 'The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.'. The arrival of the Kingdom is more than a call to personal salvation. It is the realisation that tomorrow does not have to be like today; because of promise there is both hope and the power for tomorrow to be different.

The significance of Chapter 6 is how life eternal in this new kingdom is not possible except in community with others.

It is interesting that Paul points out the possibility we may grow weary in doing good. If this wasn't a possibility then verse 9 makes little sense. Indeed, such a view is consistent with my lived experience. The most harm done to me and my family has not been at the hand of some kind of demonic force that has a rotating head and spews pea soup.

Instead much of the harm done to me as a believer has been at the hand of ideas that have 'possessed' or taken a hold of someone who has been part of the Church. Where blind obedience to religious principles is preferred over gentleness and love for each other. To be clear I don't consider myself a 'victim' of the church, I'm sure I've given as good as I have got. This is just a natural part of relationship with others.

Nevertheless I have found myself growing weary of participation within a community that refuses to think critically and is more concerned with the moralization of preference than becoming like Jesus. Indeed on many occasions finding myself wishing I could just leave. But the reality is that it is not possible to be a disciple of Jesus without being in community with believers. See how easy it is to fall into the same trap? The relevance of the latter part of verse 1 is not lost on me here.

Who is there to aid carrying the burden? Who is there to gently course correct when we have transgressed and missed the mark? Who is our protection against self-deceptive / self-destructive patterns of thought and behaviour? It is not for the sake of the community that we bear each others burdens and seek to avoid growing weary of doing good. It is for our selves. We cannot do discipleship independently.

Galatians Chapter 5

Summarrium

Paul warns the Galatians to stand firm not submitting to a yoke of slavery. Pointing out that Christ is of no advantage if we strive to be justified through law keeping. We miss the point that only faith through love counts for anything. Paul implores the Galatians not to use this freedom to gratify the flesh but to love and serve each other.

Paul points out that walking by the spirit is how we do not gratify the desires of the flesh. Being led by the spirit we are not under law. Paul warns against conceding and gratifying the desires of the flesh pointing out that such individuals will not inherit the Kingdom of God. Those who belong to Christ crucify the flesh with it's passions and desires.

Meditatio

Paul is highlighting here the potential risks of being free in Christ. Namely that given we are no longer children of slaves but children of promise we could use this freedom to gratify base instincts and principles. Paul points out that this keeps us from 'doing the things you want to do' (verse 17).

Paul points out that a pursuit of the things of the flesh will prevent inheritance of the Kingdom of God. My current understanding of the Kingdom is more than soteriological. We might simplify it to the promise that tomorrow doesn't have to be like today. Tomorrow can be different through Christ. It is more than just our eternal destination (albeit some Christians would like to reduce the gospel to this).

To reject this and return to a meritocratic, behaviourist approach that the law offers is to reject the incredible freedom in Christ (not only to live badly but) to live well. For me this is the big takeaway from this passage. Paul is highlighting the extent of what the Galatians are throwing away. He is incredulous like a father frustrated by the unwise decisions of his son and this is expressed beautifully in verse 12.

This is not a particularly 'godly' attitude but it is an honest expression of frustration something that is possible only through freedom in Christ. The way out of this conundrum is difficult. It requires crucifixion of the flesh. Something which is painful but necessary. We must put to death that within us which corrupts us to remain in step with the spirit.

Galatians Chapter 4

Summarrium

Paul continues the point raised in Chapter 3 that the law was our custodian until the time at which we had come of age. In the same was as children we were enslaved to elementary principles of the world but when the time arrives Jesus was sent that we might receive adoption; sonship and an heir through God. Paul highlights his concern that the Galatians have abandoned this and rejected Pauls teaching. He confronts them on this point and positions himself as their spiritual mother.

Paul points to the patterns in scripture. Abraham the source of the promise had two sons the first born through the flesh and human effort and the latter through promise. These women represent the two covenants; one bearing children for slavery the other bearing children that are free. Yet just as Isaac was mocked by Ishmael so those who live in accordance with the promise of Christ shall be mocked by those born of the flesh. Paul points out we are not children of the slave but of the free woman.

Meditatio

I found the symbolic significance of Isaac and Ishmael's relationship really quite interesting. For whilst both are of the same lineage there are profound differences. Ishmael is produced through human effort; Abraham and Sarah's attempt to produce an heir in fulfilment of the promise. Yet this is ultimately unsuccessful, and instead produces those who are slaves to the 'elementary principles' of the world.

Indeed if we consider the symbolic significance of their lives we see initial conflict and separation before resolution and restoration at the burial of their father in Genesis 25:9. This somewhat echo's the realisation of the shared ancestry and the recognition that everything that has breath must praise the Lord in the end. Every knee will bow and every tongue confess.

However there is another idea I want to play with here around the possibility of sentient ideas, so let's take a look...

In our current passage¹ we see Paul reference enslavement to the 'elementary principles of the world'. This offers a vivid picture of these principles holding us captive as though they were almost alive. Also found in the analogy is the contrast between life under the law (associated with enslavement to these principles and a behaviourist approach to addressing them), and the freedom found in Christ (associate with the freedom of the promise; today does not have to be like yesterday)

Paul writes elsewhere, that 'We do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.'². There is something in this which resonates with Galatians verse 3 and 9. Perhaps one way then of interpreting Paul is that the Christian life is a struggle against the deceptive and destructive principles that underpin and pervade society and individual minds.

For me this makes absolute sense. My lived experience of Christianity has been it remains a deep philosophical and psychological struggle against destructive ideologies and mindsets. Indeed I have seen ideology, hatred of other and self deception do far more harm to the Church through believers than any 'demonic' sentient being. I entirely accept the possible existence of the demonic but I can only speak for my experience; the scariest monsters I have met have all been human beings.

For me the possibility that ancient references to possession and demonic influence might be symbolic of the overwhelming power of negative emotions and destructive ideas is compelling. Jealousy, lust, and the thirst for power can indeed possess an individual, leading to self-deceptive and self-destructive behavior (as well as destructive behaviours towards others).

Ancient cultures often personified abstract concepts; Aphrodite, Athena, Zeus being good examples. By framing these negative traits as demonic forces, they highlight the struggle against these powerful and often uncontrollable impulses that human beings must war against.

For me passages like this highlight the timeless relevance of scripture and of Paul. The battle is not fought with crusaders, or personalities. It is fought within the hearts and minds of ordinary people who become aware of the need for personal transformation to overcome self-destructive and self-deceptive patterns of being and societal pressures.

Galatians Chapter 3

Summarrium

Paul rebukes the 'foolish' Galatians for abandoning the principles upon which the faith has been established. Specifically that it is by Faith and not by works that men are justified. Paul goes on to point out that the law brings a curse given no one can keep it and that the righteous live by Faith not through adherence to rigid principles.

Paul points out the Law was given as a custodian until such a time that faith in Christ might be realised. Paul points out that justification by faith pre-dates the Law by 430 years given Abraham himself was justified by faith. Prior to the arrival of faith in Christ we were held captive but we have now 'put on Christ' to remove all distinction and become one new man in Christ

Meditatio

There is a nuanced argument that is laid out here in Galatians that needs unpacking. Firstly like any good theologian he demonstrates that justification by faith is not a new idea. Indeed Paul points out that Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness¹. So after the covenant promise is made and before the law is given justification by faith was a thing.

Now it's easy to get confused here. Paul talks about faith pre-dating law then later claims that the purpose of the law was to act as a guardian or custodian until such a time as faith came (verse 19)...hang on a minute, we have faith already surely? Faith arrived with Abraham not Christ?

The Greek word used for "guardian" (paidagogos) refers to a tutor or custodian responsible for a child’s moral and practical education until they come of age. In this analogy, the Law was meant to guide and protect the people, making them aware of sin and their need for a savior, until faith came (Galatians 3:24-25). So the faith that Abraham exhibited was a foretaste of the faith that would be fully realized in Christ.

With Christ's arrival, believers are no longer under the guardianship of the Law but are justified by faith, just as Abraham was, and now in its fullest expression through Christ. Pauls argument is further supported with OT references in which he highlights that the 'righteous person will live by his faithfulness'². No longer is this custodian necessary nor exclusive to particular lineage but through faith we have put on Christ and are Abraham's offspring and heirs according to promise.

Galatians Chapter 2

Summarrium

Paul recalls his, Barnabas and Titus acceptance at Jerusalem to explain the gospel with which they have been entrusted. Despite elements of the Church that sought to oppose them, they were perceived to have been trusted with apostolic ministry to the Gentiles. Paul is only asked to remember the poor the very thing he was eager to do.

Paul opposes Peter to his face for his fear of the circumcision party and his failure to accept and accommodate the gentiles. Paul points out the hypocrisy in Pauls actions. Paul points out that we are justified not by works of the law by through faith in Jesus.

Meditatio

Paul is such an interesting character for many reasons. Firstly wherever he goes trouble follows, secondly he is just an absolute firebrand. One minute persecuting the church to the death, next responsible for riots and the dismantling of economic systems. Verse 11 is a clear indication of how ballsy this guy really is. He opposes the Peter to his face. He calls him out because he fails to honour the Gentiles.

There are perhaps less confrontational means by which to address the issue. Paul returns in this passage to the centrality of Grace. Dalas Willard has often indicated that when it comes to spiritual formation Grace might be allergic to merit but not effort. Paul makes an important point about justification in verses 17-21. Let's summarise this to ensure we are clear on what he means. The argument seems to go something like this:

1. If believers in Christ are still considered sinners, because they do not follow the Law of Moses, then it would seem as though Christ promotes sin.
2. However in reality it was the realisation of the futility of justification by his own efforts that led Paul to die to the law. By this he means to stop seeking justification through it.
3. Even though Paul continues to live a human life, it is now characterised by Faith in Jesus.
4. If it were possible to achieve righteousness (a right standing with God) through observing the Law, then Christ's death would be unnecessary and pointless.

Galatians Chapter 1

Summarrium

Paul outlines his apostolic credentials, how he has been sent by God to the Gentiles, begining with a blessing of grace and peace. Paul proceeds to outline his astonishment at the abandonment of Christ and the adoption of a distinct Gospel. Paul expresses strong disapproval of those who seek the approval of man rather than God and therefore are not servants of Christ.

Paul outlines how he received the Gospel of Christ through a revelation of Jesus Christ. Paul explains how he was formerly intent on destroying the Church of Christ but through this revelation revealed Christ that he might preach among the Gentiles. Paul points out there was a learning journey involved; indeed for three years he was essentially a nobody until it was recognised by those in Judea that Paul who used to persecute now glorifies God.

Meditatio

Firstly let's begin with a little context. Galatia was a region in what is now central Turkey. Pauls letter was likely addressed to a group of churches established within this region. It is probable that Paul had previously founded or certainly aided in the establishment of these churches on his missionary journeys and as such has some personal stake in the dialogue.

The words used are strong. 'Astonishment' stuck out for me as a particularly strong emphatic word that highlights Pauls sense of disequilibrium. It suggests the actions of the Galatians comes right out of left field. Contextually the letter is written to address influence of Jewish converts who claimed that Gentile converts to Christianity must adhere to Jewish laws and customs, particularly circumcision, to be a disciple of Jesus. Paul specifically writes Galatians to contest these teachings.

Interestingly 'approval' used in verse 10 would seem an odd way to conceptualise this given Pauls definition of the concept of grace elsewhere. For grace would seem allergic to the notion of merit; unable to coexist in the same room. If this Gospel of grace is a 'gift' not of our own effort why would the Gospel require we seek Gods approval which we already have?

We might in response seek to live a life that bears fruit in keeping with repentance¹ but this is not about seeking the approval of God which is unearned. But it would be odd to consider that we would receive the Gospel by grace and then seek the approval of God for receipt of the Gospel. Perhaps I'm overthinking, or under thinking this; nonetheless it struck me as peculiar.

To return to the topic at hand it would seem that Pauls reason to write it is to call attention to the abandonment of the Gospel of Christ. But what is this Gospel? Jesus own proclamation of the Gospel during his ministry is more comprehensive than the over-simplified contemporary focus on personal salvation. Indeed Jesus never preached to the crowds (as far as we know) that he was about to die so that individuals could say the magic words and go to heaven.

The central message of Jesus is outlined in Mark 1:14-15 'The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.'. This is a very different message. One in which there is a call to repentance², messianic fulfillment³,and a call to live in the realisation of the eschaton⁴.

Again I think it's time to revisit our definitions of the 'Gospel' and build a case for a more robust view. One that does not prioritise personal salvation at the expense of the realisation of the Kingdom.

Ruth Chapter 4

Summarrium

Boaz meets with the nearest relative and enquires if he intends to redeem the land that belonged to Elimelech. Boaz points out that this transaction would also include marriage to Ruth the Moabite. The nearest relative declines and Boaz agrees in the presence of witnesses to take on the responsibility of the kinsman redeemer.

The witnesses at the gate and the elders bless Boaz for taking on the responsibility imploring him to act worthily and be renowned being fruitful and blesses like the house of Perez. Boaz follows tradition and custom and takes on his responsibility. Boaz marries Ruth and she gives birth to a son Obed who is the father of Jesse the father of David.

Meditatio

On particular thing that struct me about this chapter was the obscure reference to Tamar and Perez in verse 12. Let's first set the scene to get a sense of what this obscure reference¹ is pointing to.

Tamar first marries Er, Judah's firstborn son. However, Er is described as wicked in the eyes of the Lord, and he dies without leaving any children. Tamar first marries Er, Judah's firstborn son. However, Er is described as wicked in the eyes of the Lord, and he dies without leaving any children. Judah then promises Tamar that she will marry his third son, Shelah, when he grows up. However, Judah delays fulfilling this promise out of fear that Shelah might also die like his brothers.

Realizing that Judah does not intend to give her Shelah as a husband, Tamar takes matters into her own hands. She disguises herself as a prostitute and positions herself where Judah will encounter her. Judah, not recognizing her, solicits her and promises her a young goat as payment, leaving his signet, cord, and staff as a pledge. Tamar becomes pregnant from this encounter and when Judah learns that Tamar is pregnant, he initially orders her to be burned for immorality. However, Tamar presents Judah's items, proving that he is the father.

Judah acknowledges his failure to provide for her according to the custom and declares that Tamar is more righteous than he is. Tamar gives birth to twin sons, Perez and Zerah. Perez, in particular, becomes an important ancestor in the lineage of King David and, according to the New Testament, in the genealogy of Jesus Christ².

We might ask then why mention Tamar's story? Tamar's story is mentioned in the blessing to Boaz and Ruth in Ruth 4:12. It would seem this is for the purpose of highlighting the parallels between these accounts. Both Tamar and Ruth are 'foreign women' with Ruth a Moabite and Tamar believed to be a Canaanite. Levirate-like marriages and the continuation of family lines were evidently a common practice and an established welfare system to provide for widows and children. Indeed both Tamar and Ruth ensure the preservation and continuation of their husbands' family lines through unconventional means.

Apologia

I appreciate posts have become staccato of late. Yesterday we celebrated 1 year since my son was born and tomorrow will be two years since his initial admission into Kettering General with Congenital Hyperinsulinism (CHI). Currently he is stable although this is punctuated by periods of instability and hospital admission. A number of recent admissions has interrupted my thinking process.

Life as always finds ways to complicate itself and unpicking and simplifying has becoming an ever increasing challenge. I appear to be conspiring against myself. I have decided to undertake post-graduate research in the form of a PhD and to my surprise have recently been awarded funding for the course. As such the priority is on establishing the rule of life before the September start.

Ruth Chapter 3

Summarrium

Naomi formulates a plan to ensure Ruth's security by appealing to the law and Boaz's responsibility as a Kinsman-redeemer. Naomi gives clear instructions for Ruth to sleep at Boaz's feet after he has fallen asleep at he threshing floor. Ruth does precisely as Naomi commands her and attends Boaz in the middle of the night.

Boaz wakes in the night and is startled by Ruth's presence who appeals to him to spread his wings over her as a redeemer. Boaz makes a point that Ruth has shown great character and there is a nearer redeemer and if he is not willing Boaz will act. In the morning Boaz covers Ruth's presence and gives Ruth six measures of Barley. Naomi is updated as to events and points out Boaz will settle the matter today.

Meditatio

This is an interesting passage. To modern audiences (and probably also ancient audiences) a women approaching a man in the night has particular connotations. Perhaps to make matters worse Boaz is merry after a night of eating and drinking. It is perhaps understandable then that in the morning he makes it clear that no one should know that Ruth has approached him.

Boaz praises Ruth's character pointing out that she could have had her pick of the young men to try to resolve the situation but instead has committed herself to Naomi. This includes Naomi's customs and the ways in which the Jewish people resolve destitution through the Kinsman redeemer. So to avoid the raising of eyebrows locally Boaz moves to protect her name and public image.

Boaz highlights a potential complication in the matter pointing out there is actually a nearer relative who has first dibs on Ruth. But providing he can resolve the matter today either one of them will take Ruth as their wife.

This kind of narrative seems transactional to use. Ruth is commodifying herself for the benefit of someone she loves. Is this therefore not a form or state sanctioned prostitution or oppression? I find such a view too cynical. Ruth clearly has options, indeed Boaz highlights this in verse 10. He perceives something in Ruth that surprises him. There is faith.

There is something noble in an individual committing themselves to a particular course and riding this commitment through to it's logical conclusion. It's admirable that Ruth is so single-minded in her commitment to Naomi that she is willing to not only adopt the life of destitution but also to commit herself to the method of resolution offered by this culture. Even Boaz indicates surprise that she has not weaponized her allure to resolve the issue.

This is what noble character looks like.

Ruth Chapter 2

Summarrium

Ruth attends the field of Boaz (a relative of Naomi's husband) to glean amongst the ears of grain. Boaz attends the reapers and enquires after Ruth being told she is the Moabite woman that returned with Naomi and has gleaned from early morning. Boaz attends Ruth and advises her not to attend another field explaining that she is safe in his field. He giver her permission to drink from the vessels. She honours him enquiring why he has paid attention to her given she is a foreigner.

Boaz points out that her kindness towards Naomi is his primary motivation given she has taken refuge under the people of God. He invites her to eat with the reapers and he passed her food which she ate and was satisfied having some left over. Boaz advises the reapers to leave some for Ruth and she gleans and threshes all that she has collected and finding she has an ephah in total. Naomi praises the Lord for not forgetting them and Ruth continues to return to Boaz's fields.

Meditatio

In ancient Israel, the family was the fundamental social unit. Maintaining family property within the clan was crucial. The kinsman-redeemer was responsible for ensuring that a family's land and inheritance remained within the family, which was a key aspect of their socio-economic structure¹. Boaz then not only represents the sovereignty of God as we saw in Ruth 1, but also the provision of the Lord and the means of Naomi and Ruth's deliverance.

Interestingly we should note that an ephah of Barley is a considerable amount of grain, and ChatGPT suggests is roughly equivalent to around 22 liters or 5.8 gallons of barley. That is a significant amount for a days work. Ruth is no slacker. What is fascinating here is this is perhaps one of the prime examples of how the Lord graciously deals with sin.

As discussed in Ruth 1 it was expressly forbidden for Jews to intermarry with gentiles. So Elimelech had forsaken his people by moving to Moab and then married his sons to foreign women. Indeed this is likely the reason that Ruth is like WTF Boaz in verse 10. She is a destitute foreign woman and as such a social out case. She is physical evidence of his relatives sin. Yet Boaz treats her with courtesy and respect.

Yet he is clear about why he does this. It is not because of who she is, but is because of what she has done as outlined in verses 11-12. She has by faith committed herself to one she loves and has enacted this in the world. It is not simply an ideal, it is something she lives out, and Boaz recognises this. Boaz therefore recognises that Ruth has sacrificed much for the sake of Naomi a relative of his, and honours her accordingly.

Eventually Boaz and Ruths son Obed will be born; the grandfather of King David. David is often associated with the pinnacle of the Kingdom and an exemplar of what a King after the Lords own heart might look like. But this raises a fascinating question of lineage; why is a gentile, least of all a Moabite², part of the lineage of the greatest King of Israel?

For me this is a foreshadowing of the call to the Gentiles through Paul that, as Boaz so elegantly puts it, 'under whose wings [they] may come to take refuge'. The plan was a people not defined by their own blood but by the blood of Jesus.

Ruth Chapter 1

Summarrium

In the day of the judges Elimelech, his wife Naomi and their two sons Mahlon and Chilion move to live in Moab. Mahlon and Chilion take wives amongst the moabites including Orpah and Ruth. Elimelech dies and over the years Mahlon and Chilion soon follow leaving Naomi, Orpah and Ruth destitute. Noami urgest that her daughters in law return to their families and Orpah leaves Naomi, but Ruth remains with her. Naomi then returns to Israel at the beginning of barley harvest, where the whole town is stirred because of them. Naomi takes the name Mara to highlight the depth of her sorrow and loss.

Meditatio

This short narrative is significantly compressed. Firstly we need to acknowledge that it was expressly forbidden for Jews to intermarry with gentiles¹, this was a principle that had been long established in particular concerned with the potential allure of strange women². No doubt this was a further cause for shame given there is a clear assurance that the Lords anger will burn against those who do permit intermarrying.

We must remember at this point that marriage often had social, political and even economic purposes. So it is most likely that this isn't simply just an early case of Romeo and Juliet; star crossed lovers who seek to combat the odds. Rather this is more likely a case of securing bonds between families, building lasting trading relationships, and even consolidating power. As such the Jews often needed reminding that this was forbidden and contravened the laws of God³.

No doubt this did nothing to alleviate Naomi's shame. She has abandoned her people during the famine, given her sons to foreign women and suffered their loss returning with only a foreign woman to show for it. We can only wonder how many Jews perceived Naomi as a cautionary tale of faithlessness to the Lord. Naomi indeed changes her name from "pleasant" or "sweet" to Mara meaning bitter, reflecting her own perception of how the Lord has dealt with her 'bitterly'

Indeed each of the names of those present holds significance that adds a real richness to the narrative.

• Elimelech (אֱלִימֶלֶךְ): Naomi's husband. His name means "My God is King" or "God is King," foreshadowing theme of the sovereignty of God that permeates this book
• Mahlon (מַחְלוֹן): One of Naomi's sons. His name means "sickness" or "illness," which likely foreshadow "pleasant" or "sweet."his untimely death.
• Chilion (כִּלְיוֹן): Naomi's other son. His name means "destruction" or "wasting away," also hinting at his untimely demise
• Orpah (עָרְפָּה): One of Naomi's daughters-in-law. Her name is derived from the Hebrew word for "nape" or "back of the neck," which some interpret as indicating her decision to turn back to her people rather than staying with Naomi.
• Ruth (רוּת): The other daughter-in-law. Her name likely means "friend" or "companion," which is fitting given her loyalty and dedication to Naomi.

This is what I mean about this story being compressed. Much of the narrative foreshadows events that will take place. There is an emptying out of Naomi so there is space for the grace of God to work in her life.