What’s the deal with the kinsman redeemer?

His words in verse 4 indicate how important he regards the matter to be. The literal translation, “I thought I should uncover your ear,” indicates something of almost revelatory significance about to be communicated. Working strictly to the letter of the law, Boaz presents the challenge to the nearer kinsman, recognizing his prior claim but also asserting his own readiness to act if the nearer kinsman declines.

We hold our breath, only to be amazed by the man’s reply, “I will redeem it.” What has gone wrong? All that we have been led to expect since chapter 2 seems about to be blown to smithereens! But verse 5 reveals Boaz’s master stroke. The responsibility of the goºel (the redeemer) is also at the same time the responsibility of the “levir.” Probably the kinsman has dismissed the second idea, recognizing that Naomi’s age made it impossible for her to raise up another heir for Elimelech were he to marry her. The property would therefore have reverted to him alone, there being no heir, and this may well explain his eagerness to buy it. But Boaz now introduces the fact that Elimelech’s property, having technically passed to Mahlon and Chilion with his death, is somewhat entangled. The redeemer’s duty involves not only the mother of the two sons but their widows, of whom only one, Ruth, is present in Bethlehem. So, it is not just a straight case of buying the land, but of contracting the levitate marriage with Ruth to raise up a grandson to Elimelech. The one cannot be divorced from the other. The privilege entails the responsibility (v. 5).

The kinsman’s previous enthusiasm is stopped in its tracks (v. 6) and the reason he gives is that he would incur heavy financial obligations. David Atkinson comments, “Had he just been required to redeem the land, he would have been financially poorer, but at least the land would be his. The only way he could lose it would be if … a levirate son was born to Naomi, to whom the property would revert as legal heir of Elimelech … But if he were to marry Ruth and give her a levirate son, the property would revert to the son, and the kinsman would lose both his money and eventually the land.”

 

 

Jackman, D., & Ogilvie, L. J. (1991). Vol. 7: The Preacher’s Commentary Series, Volume 7 : Judges, Ruth. The Preacher’s Commentary series (344–345). Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson Inc.

What is a kinsman redeemer?

The second concept that the Book of Ruth emphasizes is redemption. God’s providential hand in redeeming Ruth and Naomi from poverty is evident. He controlled circumstances so that Ruth and Boaz would meet, and He prompted Boaz to fulfill the responsibilities of the “close relative” or the kinsmanredeemer (3:9). The kinsman-redeemer was “the defender of family rights.” This individual was a close relative who had the financial resources to rescue a poverty-stricken family member, stepping in to save that relative from slavery or from having to sell the family’s ancestral land. In the story of Ruth, Boaz redeemed the land that Naomi was about to sell. He also took on another of the kinsman-redeemer’s responsibilities—the obligation of providing an heir for Ruth’s deceased husband, Mahlon. Dying without an heir was considered a tragedy in the ancient Middle East. To rectify this situation, the brother of a deceased man was expected to marry the widow in order to produce a child, who would be considered the heir of the deceased. This was called a levirate marriage. Boaz willingly took on this duty, even though he was not the nearest relative (3:12, 13). He bought the land from Naomi, married Ruth, and carried on the family name through the birth of their son. Through all these actions, Boaz exemplified the compassion and love of a redeemer. His life is an illustration for us of the compassion of Jesus, who is our Redeemer (Gal. 3:13).

 

Radmacher, E. D., Allen, R. B., & House, H. W. (1997). The Nelson study Bible : New King James Version. Nashville: T. Nelson Publishers.

Reputation

A young man employed by our Sunday school board told the following searching story. He was invited at the last minute to preach at a church in Nashville. On sudden impulse he used as his text, “Thou shalt not steal.” The next morning he stepped on the bus and handed the driver a dollar bill. The driver handed him back his change. He stood in the rear of the bus and counted the change. There was a dime too much. His first thought was, “The bus company will never miss this dime.”

Then quickly came the realization that he could not keep money that did not belong to him. He made his way to the front and said to the driver, “You gave me too much change.” Imagine his surprise when the driver replied, “Yes, a dime too much. I gave it to you purposely. You see, I heard your sermon yesterday, and I watched in my mirror as you counted your change. Had you kept the dime I would never again have had any confidence in preaching.” What a tragedy if he had done the wrong thing! Remember our influence, our shadow-selves, may fall where we can never be. (Cf: Exodus 20:15)

—Sunday School Builder

Encyclopedia of 15,000 Illustrations: Signs of the Times.

What is gleaning?

Gleaning, described in Lev. 19:9-10, 23:22; Dt. 24:19-22, and illustrated in the life of Ruth, was probably the most important means of providing for the poor in the Old Testament. In Bringing in the Sheaves: Transforming Poverty into Productivity, George Grant describes three principles of charity that these laws, in light of their application in Ruth, teach.

First, “recipients of biblical charity must be diligent workers, unless entirely disabled (Ruth 2:2-7)” Gleaners had to look for and harvest only what was left behind by the main reapers, so their work was difficult, but it preserved their dignity as bearers of God’s image, for part of that image is to work (Gen. 1:26, 2:15).

Discipleship Journal

Why not get your group together and watch this movie on Ruth?

Kelly Minter on Ruth

Ruth, part 3