As always, here’s my fairly literal translation of these verses:
1And
Boaz went up [to] the gate and he sat there and behold the kinsman-redeemer
passing by Boaz had spoken [about]. And he said, “Turn aside. Sit down here,
Peloni Almoni.” And he turned aside and he sat down. 2And he took
ten men of the elders of the city and he said, “Sit down here,” and they sat
down.
I have been having fun studying these two verses. There is a
lot going on that’s worth pondering.
First of all, I want to record again some Jewish tradition
that I find interesting although it of course is only that – tradition. The
writer of Ruth never discloses the name of this “other” kinsman-redeemer, only
that he is also a relative of Elimelech and somehow closer than Boaz.
Obviously, the Lord didn’t think it of value for us to know the man’s name or
exactly how he was related. As I noted in my post on 3:12, according to the
genealogy of Matt 1, Boaz’s father’s name was Salmon (the man who married Rahab
of Jericho), the son of Nahshon:
“…Nahshon
the father of Salmon, Salmon the father of Boaz, whose mother was Rahab, Boaz
the father of Obed, whose mother was Ruth …”
And according to Gill (ca. 1760), Jewish tradition holds
that Elimelech and Boaz were first cousins, the sons of two brothers and that the
“nearer kinsman” was another of Salmon’s brothers. I have since learned that
Jewish tradition also holds that the “other” kinsman-redeemer’s name was Tob (probably
short for Tobiah).
So, if tradition is correct, Elimemech would have been the
son of Salmon’s brother, who was also a son of Nahshon. Then Tob, the “nearer
kinsman,” would have been another of Salmon’s brothers, so another of Nahshon’s
sons, which would make him Boaz and Elimelech’s uncle.
If this is all true, a family tree would look like:
Nahshon
/
| \
Salmon x Tob
| | |
Boaz Elimelech x
As I also related earlier, it is very possible Tob would
have been about the same age as Elimelech and Boaz, even though their uncle. In
large families it is of course common for the oldest son or daughter to be
having their first babies while the mother is having her last. In that setting,
“uncles” can even be younger than their nephews and nieces. Apparently Tob,
being an uncle, would have been considered a nearer relative than Boaz, perhaps
being an actual brother to Elimelech’s father.
None of that, of course, is important to our story; I just
like to note Jewish traditions where they’re available. They are not as
reliable as Scripture itself, of course, but often provide interesting insights
that do make sense and perhaps usually have some basis in fact.
Beyond that, the next thing I want to say is that, having
studied these verses and having read a number of commentaries, I am
particularly reminded how cautious we need to be when reading about the customs
and culture of a people who lived half way around the globe and 3,000 years
ago. Different commentators made a lot of observations and drew conclusions
based on what is written but I would suggest it dangerous to be too dogmatic about
it all.
What do I mean? Basically, what we have here is an ancient
legal proceeding. All of this, the gate, the ten elders, and even what Boaz
calls the kinsman-redeemer, “Peloni Almoni,” all of this is wrapped up in their
culture – which we may or may not understand. And I think that particularly
true of a legal proceeding.
First of all, Jamieson says the “gate” of the city was “a
roofed building, unenclosed by walls; the place where, in ancient times, and in
many Eastern towns still, all business transactions are made, and where,
therefore, the kinsman was most likely to be found. No preliminaries were
necessary in summoning one before the public assemblage; no writings and no
delay were required. In a short conversation the matter was stated and arranged
- probably in the morning as people went out, or at noon when they returned
from the field.”
Obviously, from our text and many other
Biblical references, a “court” was convened by drawing together a group of
elders. In relation to our “ten elders,” Jamieson also claimed that, “in
ordinary circumstances, two or three were sufficient to attest a bargain; but
in cases of importance, such as matrimony, divorce, conveyancing of property,
it was the Jewish practice to have ten (1 Kings 21:8).”
So what is going on is, in a sense, a very important legal
transaction which called for very specific and deliberate legal proceedings, all
according to the customs of their day.
And that brings me to the name Boaz calls him, “Peloni
Almoni.” The old KJV translated it “such a one,” others “such and such,” while
the NIV chose “my friend.” The name itself is, in fact, difficult to translate
and “such a one” isn’t bad. In Hebrew, “Peloni Almoni” does express an element
of uncertainty or anonymity. Based on this, it is possible that Boaz is being
demeaning and calling him something like “Hey, you –” It is also possible the
writer of the book is using a term of anonymity, that the man is in a sense the
“villain” of the story and so the author deems him unworthy of having his name
recorded. Further, it is possible that the writer was expressing his
displeasure that the man refused to fulfill his duty to marry Ruth and to raise
up an heir for Elimelech. In such a case, Deut 25:8-9 instructed, “Then the
elders of his town shall summon him and talk to him. If he persists in saying, ‘I
do not want to marry her,’ his brother's widow shall go up to him in the
presence of the elders, take off one of his sandals, spit in his face and say, ‘This
is what is done to the man who will not build up his brother's family line.’”
All of this is possible and even reasonable. However, and
this is, I suppose my big point, it is also possible that “Peloni Almoni” was a
legal term. Once again, Boaz is, in a sense, convening a court here. It is
possible that when Boaz refers to him as “Peloni Almoni” he is setting up the
context of this court. And this could mean a lot of things. By calling him this
name, perhaps Boaz is establishing that this will be a “friendly” proceeding as
opposed to say a criminal accusation. Then again, maybe a defendant was always
referred to as “Peloni Almoni” sort of the same way we use “John Doe.”
My bottom line is that we simply don’t know. It is
interesting to me that, looking ahead to verse 7, the writer has to explain: “Now
in earlier times in Israel, for the redemption and transfer of property to
become final, one party took off his sandal and gave it to the other. This was
the method of legalizing transactions in Israel.” Here is this author writing
some time before Jesus (over 2000 years ago) and having to explain to his
readers something that went on “in earlier times.” Even back then, “earlier”
customs had to be explained. And here we sit in our chairs over 3,000 years
later and half way around the world. That being the case, I think it dangerous
to assume much, or, for instance, to assume either that Boaz is being demeaning
or that the author was deprecating the kinsman. All we know was that a court
was convened according to their customs.
And that brings me to the only application I can confidently
make from the passage. It impresses me how Boaz simply “takes charge.” Notice
how deliberate he is:
And
Boaz went up [to] the gate and he sat there and behold the kinsman-redeemer
passing by Boaz had spoken [about]. And he said, “Turn aside. Sit down here,
Peloni Almoni.” And he turned aside and he sat down. And he took ten men of the
elders of the city and he said, “Sit down here,” and they sat down
I think it notable that there is nothing timid about Boaz.
He tells Ruth back in chapter 3 that he will take care of it. Then he goes to
the gate and sits down. When the kinsman comes by, he tells him, “Sit down.” As
ten elders pass by he tells them, “Sit down." It is interesting to me that, in
the Hebrew, in both cases, it is clearly stated, “And he turned aside and he
sat down … and they sat down.” Even in the Hebrew, you get the impression that
Boaz is clearly in command. Of course that is not surprising, being that he is
a land-owner and a “man of standing” (2:1), but I still think it worth noting.
It is so easy to be timid in this world. I try to be
reasonable and not demanding. Most of us try our best not to “make waves.” And yet
there is a time when we need to simply be like Boaz and “take charge” and get
the job done. For me there is often a very specific point where I need to
muster up my courage, risk “making waves,” and “just do it.” At those times I
am very thankful for the verse, “God has not given us a spirit of fear but of
power and of love and of a well-ordered mind” (II Tim 1:7). I need very much at
those times to let my spirit be His Spirit
of “power, love, and a well-ordered mind.” That helps me a lot because, in a
sense, I’m not “being brave.” It’s actually Him that is brave working through
me. I don’t have it “in” me, but I have Him in me and I have the hope that when
I do “move ahead” and like Boaz, “take charge” that I won’t be just domineering
or pushy, but actually come across like he does in this passage, just “taking
charge” and doing a good job of it.
As always in this book, I come away from these two verses
having had a lot of fun and, once again seeing in Boaz a man I can respect and
someone I want to be more like.
