Boaz marries Ruth redeeming the property that would have belonged to her deceased husband

Old Testament Commentary - Ruth 4

by Don R. Hender

By Ruth's appeal as instructed by her mother-in-law Naomi, Boaz had been given 'power of attorney' and represented Ruth's and Naomi's interest in the Hebrew legal process. As their representative, Boaz carried out the requirements of the Law of Moses concerning both Levirate marriage and redeeming kinsman as set out in Deuteronomy 25:5-10 and Leviticus 25:25. He went to the gate of the city, the legally considered 'town square or hall' before the elders of the church and city and confronted the most closely related next of kin of Elimelech, Mahlon, Naomi and Ruth, Ploni Almoni perhaps also of the tribe of Ephraim (Ephrathite) with the proposition of fulfilling the responsibiltiy of the nearest related 'brother-kinsman' to the family of Elimelech and Mahlon who had no male heirs left of that house. Clearly Boaz was not the nearest of kin as he was related but by maternal marriage and actually not even of the same tribal affiliation.
Perhaps since Ruth was a Moabitess or unknown to the closely related kinsman of the same house of Elimelech, she was not considered as part of the bargin until Boaz brought the issue up before the elders of the city. Ploni Almoni was willing to act as the 'redeeming kinsman' in rightfully accuiring the lands of Elimelech, Mahlon and Chilion per Leviticus 25:25-30, considering that those 'family possessions' would fall to himself, but when the matter of Levirate marriage to Ruth was added to the deal, meaning that the lands would eventuate to Ruth's first born and essentially revert back to the House of Elimelech and Mahlon in Obed, then Ploni Almoni determined he could not or would not undertake such a venture and he deferred to Boaz to so perform the full duty of the matter.
Boaz must have known somewhat of the circumstance and nature of whom he was dealing with for he stepped his way through the process from the legal matter of property being addressed first to the leaving of the matter of Ruth until the end to present before the nearest next-of-kin Ploni Almoni. In fearness to Ploni Almoni, he may have considered that it was not fair to his own heir to spend that heir's funds in securring properties that would be deducted from the immediate family pool. Boaz either was wealthy enough, magnanamous enough or without such an heir consideration to so commit his own funds to such a charitable undertaking of redeeming a 'distant' kinsman both in property and in raising up an hier to the dead who would inherit that spent property amount.

Content Summary

Boaz takes Ruth's closest kinsman before the elders 1
The man suggests that Boaz redeem her 6
Boaz announces redemption and the elders respond 9
Children born to the couple; genealogy leads to David 13

.

Scriptural Text [& Editorial] Commentary & Explanation Footnotes ~ References ~ JST

             CHAPTER 4
Next kinsman declining, Boaz takes Ruth to wife--Ruth bears Obed, through whom came David the king.
Nearest kinsman, Peloni(Ploni) Almoni, declines to perform as 'brother' kinsman to House of Elimelech. Boaz performs duty and takes Ruth to wife. Ruth's first born son is Obed, raised up to the dead house of Mahlon and Elimelech, Ethrathites, through whom came David the king and Jesus Christ. Boaz performs as surrogate parent to Obed (Obediah ~ God's Servant) in raising up seed to the dead. Though the Jewish prepared record emphasizes the line of Boaz, Obed is in truth the legal seed and offspring of Mahlon and the house of Elimelech, Ephrathites, under the Law of God.

1 ś THEN went Boaz up to the ^agate^a, and sat him down there: and, behold, the ^bkinsman^b of whom Boaz spake came by; unto whom he said, ^cHo, such a one!^c turn aside, sit down here. And he turned aside, and sat down.
2 And he took ten men of the ^aelders of the city^a, and said, Sit ye down here. And they sat down.
3 And he said unto the kinsman, Naomi, that is come again out of the country of Moab^a, selleth a parcel of land, which was our brother Elimelech^b ’s:
4 And I thought to advertise thee, saying, ^aBuy it before the inhabitants, and before the elders of my people^a. If thou wilt ^bredeem it^b, redeem it: but if thou wilt not redeem it, then tell me, that I may know: for there is none to redeem it beside thee^c; and I am after thee. And he said, I will redeem it.
5 Then said Boaz, What day thou buyest the field of the hand of Naomi, thou must buy it also of Ruth the Moabitess, the ^awife of the dead, to raise up the ^bname of the dead upon his inheritance^a.

Degrees of Relationship In the process of the story of Ruth, there comes the surrogate performance of a 'redeeming kinsman' in two respects which reveals degrees of family relationship. Boaz was a kinsman of Elimelech but he was not the nearest living kinsman. Boaz was kin by way of a maternal marriage and was not of the same tribe of Elimelech and his sons Mahlon and Chilion. Because of the laws of propriety, Boaz knew the law would require the nearest kinsman of the same tribal affiliation to perform before he, Boaz, could be considered as the redeeming kinsman. (Note; It is not uncommon for kinsmen or kinswomen to be of differing tribes. Mary and Elisabeth were 'cousins' (kinswomen), and Mary was of the house of David while Elisabeth was of Levi. They would have been related by a 'maternal' marriage relationship.)
Because the law of redeeming property of a kinsman involved the right to keep the land in the same family clan or tribe, Boaz had to first made this option known to the 'only' kinsman of Elimelech who was of the same tribe of Elimelech. It was the right of Peloni Almoni to buy that land and keep it in the same clan. Peloni Almoni was agreeable to doing that, as he thought it would be himself who would keep the land for his own house.
But when Boaz further explained that in performing the redeeming of the land Peloni Almoni also had a marriage obligation to marry the dead Mahlon's wife to raise up that inheritance to the dead house of Elimelech, then Peloni Almoni would reconsider. The lands of Elimelech's house would not remain the right of the house of Peloni Almoni. They would revert back to the house of Elimelech and Mahlon because the first born son of Ruth would became the legal seed of Mahlon and have the right of heirship to the lands of the house of Elimelech.
The only way that Boaz, not being of the same tribe as his kinsman Elimelech, could act as the redeeming kinsman would be if Peloni Almoni first rejected the responsibiltiy and turned it over to Boaz as being of a differing tribe. This Peloni Almoni did. He renounced his right to 'redeem' the land in the name of the family clan and even invited Boaz to purchase it if he desired to do so.
Boaz understood fully that he was purchasing the land of Elimelech, Mahlon and Chilion not to the benefit of his own house, but that it would be the right of inheritance of the dead. The firstborn son of Ruth would be the legal and rightful son of the dead, Mahlon. And that first born son would be heir to the lands of the house of Elimelech, Mahlon and Chilion. Boaz's whole intent was a 'selfless' one. The first born son of Ruth, who was Obed, was to be the son of the house of Elimelech and Mahlon. And the lands which Boaz bought and redeemed of the house of Elimelech would go to that son of the house of Elimelech and Mahlon, and they would not stay in the house of Boaz.
The Jewish compilers of the Bible have muddled the water. Boaz's intent was to preserve the ancestral lines of the house of Elimelech and Mahlon by his selfless act. The Jewish compilers and editors have not preserved the ancestral line of Mahlon and Elimelech at all. They have presented Boaz's ancentry and not Mahlon's Ephrathite ancestry.
1^a gate The 'gate' is the gate or entrance to the city and in terms of western culture it was the equivilent of 'City Hall', 'Court House' or the 'Town Square' where such legal matters were settled. Thus it was a matter of settling legal matters before the witness of the people when making such declarations to the elders of that city at the gate, which was the Law of Moses and Hebrew custom, it made it witnessed and a matter of law. (Gen. 23:10, Deut. 25:7, Josh. 20:4)
1^b kinsman one of near kin in the extended family is refered to as 'brother' or 'sister' as is the custom since before the day of Abraham and when the Law of Moses states 'brother' it did include such extended family members.
1^c Ho, such a one! ~ Peloni Almoni Peloni Almoni is the Hebrew name used in this verse and is supposedly an anonymous 'John Doe' type of reference to the nearest of kin who rejected the responsiblity of performing the 'brother kinsman's' responsibility to the wife of the dead who had no seed. The translation of 'Ho, such a one!' is a poor translation. There are two reasons to keep the name of the rejecting kinsman anonymous. One is either out of respect to that kinsman or out of scorn for that kinsman's rejection. Another possible reason why the Jewish record to keep his name unknown might be to hide him and his 'nearer kinsman' ancestry from being a part of the record as it would be the same Ethrathite ancestry as Mahlon and Elimelech, whose ancestral line is also ignored by the Jewish compiled record (see 1 Chronicles 5:1-2), though it was supposedly the very reason why Boaz married Ruth, so that the names of the house of Mahlon (the dead) and Elimelech might not be put out of Israel.
2^a elders of the city The 'elders' or 'sarim' were the governing body which included the elders of honor of the Hebrew Religion of a local area from the various families of the area or city.
3^a Moab Country of the descendents of Lot, the son of Haran, the son of Terah, which Terah was the father of Abraham.
3^b our brother Elimelech This 'brother' did not mean an immediate actual brother of Elimelech, its meaning was in reference to being a member of the extended family such as in the relationship of Laban and Jacob where they were also called 'brothers' (Gen. 29:15) though we would say uncle, nephew or cousins today.
4^a before the elders of my people Though a minor detail, in speaking to Peloni Almoni, Boaz refers to the elders of the city of Bethlehem-Judah as the 'elders of my people.' This would indirectly imply that the elders of the city were of Boaz's tribe and not of the tribe of the more closely related kinsman Peloni Almoni of Elimelech and Naomi. Therefore it also implies that Elimelech was not of the same tribe of the people and elders of Boaz, being of Judah. What other tribe would inhabit land about the tomb of mother Rachel?
4^b redeem it There are two Law of Moses at work here. There is the law of redeeming land and keeping in within a family's clan as referenced in Leveticus 25:25. This property redeemtion Peloni Almoni was willing to do as he thought it meant that the property would be his own property and had not considered that it was tied to Ruth, the wife of the dead and would have to be 'inherited' back to Ruth's first born son in the name of Mahlon, the dead, and the house of Elimelech.
4^c there is none to redeem it beside thee This statement divides the level of relationship between Peloni Almoni and Boaz and confirms the fact that they are not of the same 'clan' or tribal affilliation. The closer of kin, Peloni Almoni was the only one who could rightfully redeem the land of the house of Elimelech and still keep that land of inheritence within the same clan or tribal affiliation. That is why Boaz states that 'there is none to redeem it beside thee'. True, Boaz was also a 'kinsman' but his relationship was not of the same tribal affiliation as was Peloni Almoni. Boaz had to await Peloni Almoni's refusal of the claim and could not cross the tribal clan right of purchase unless Peloni Almoni would reject it. And at first Peloni Almoni accepts the right to purchase the land and keep it in the tribe of Ephrathites (Ephraimites), that is until he finds out that the land he purchases will not be officially a part of his immediate family's land because Ruth comes attached to it and he must raise up seed to the dead of her and restore the land back to the first born male son of Ruth. It is then that Peloni Almoni does refuse to right of redeeming purchase.
5^a thou must buy it also of Ruth the Moabitess, the wife of the dead, to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance Peloni Almoni was ready and willing to buy the land of Elimelech, Chilion and Mahlon for himself and his own immediate family, but he was not willing to spend his 'immediate house's wealth' in order to pass the land on to the rightful offspring of the dead, the firstborn son of Ruth. He would legally and rightfully be of the house of Elimelech and Mahlon and not of the house of Peloni Almoni. 1^a Gen. 20:10; Josh. 20:4;
   ^b Ruth 2:20
   ^c In Heb. a manner of address
      to a certain unnamed person
      as "Mr. So & So."
2^a Josh. 20:4
4^a Lev. 25:25
   ^b TG Redemption
5^a TG Widows
   ^b Deut. 25:5 (5-6); Gen. 38:8-9;
      TG Name

A Matter of Two Laws There are two Laws of Moses at work in the case of the house of Elimelech and Mahlon and the 'redeeming kinsman'. The first law was that the 'land of inheritance' of a family could be kept within that family's clan even though they might at some point be sold to another. That part of the law is found in Leviticus chapter 25 beginning in verse 25. It is likely that Elimelech sold his lands of family inheritance when he decided to move his family from those lands near the tomb of mother Rachel. There was famine in the land and Elimelech sought to preserve his family by moving to Moab.
While in Moab, Elimelech's two sons had come to the age of marriage and had married. The eldest son Mahlon married Ruth and Chilion married Orpah. Elimelech, Mahlon and Chilion all died in Moab and Mahlon and Chilion did not have any child of their marriages. Naomi, left alone with only two daughters-in-laws had heard that the famine was over and decided to return to her family's lands near the tomb of Rachel. Ruth was the only daughter-in-law who remained with her.
The second Law of Moses, which was the Law of God concerning marriage and the legal and rightful law of family and family inheritance was set out in Deuteronomy chapter 25 verses 5-10. There it states that if there is no inheriting decendants in a family the wife of the dead 'brother kinsman' is to be married to a 'redeeming brother kinsman' who will raise up seed to the dead that the line of the dead not end but continue on in the seed of the first born son of that surrogate performing marriage. The 'kinsman brother' would by God's Law yield up the firstborn male of that marriage to be the son and heir of the dead.
Boaz plainly and clearly sets these facts of the matter out in his communication to Peloni Almoni, the nearer kinsman and rightful family clan member who first and only had the right to claim the land of the house of Elimelech, Mahlon and Chilion in redeeming it from whom it had been sold to. This Boaz explained to Peloni Almoni, that there was none other but he, Peloni Almoni, who could redeem that land of inheritance and keep it in the rightful 'family clan' or tribal distinction. Peloni Almoni recognizing this as an opportunity to add the lands of the house of Elimelech to his own family's inheritance initially agreed to do so.
When Peloni Almoni found out his immediate family would not rightfully keep the land in his own 'house' because Ruth, the widow of the dead, had to be brought into the deal. Peloni Almoni rejected his right and responsibility to buy the lands. This was because the lands would not stay within his own house, but would have to be passed on to the firstborn son of Ruth in the name of the house of Mahlon and Elimelech. When Boaz made that second part of known, which dealt with the law of marriage of a 'widow of the dead', Peloni Almoni refused to do such as it would 'mar' his own immediate family's inheritance.
Peloni Almoni was willing to buy the land for himself as the law in Leveitcus 25:25 had stipulated his right to be. But he was not willing to marry Ruth and raise up seed to the dead, as Ruth's first born son would be the heir of the lands of the house of Elimelech and Peloni Almoni would have to pass those lands on down to that son who would legally and rightful be the seed of the dead, or the seed of the house of Mahlon and Elimelech and not of the house of Peloni Almoni.
Whether Peloni Almoni or Boaz was the richer, it is not determined. Certainly Boaz was the more 'selfless' in his performance of the duty of the surrogate husband in producing seed to the dead house of Mahlon and Elimelech and providing that seed, Obed, the right of inheritance to his legal and rightful family lands of inheritance.

6 ś And the kinsman said, I cannot ^aredeem it for myself^a, lest I ^bmar mine own inheritance^b: redeem thou my right to thyself; for I cannot redeem it.
7 Now this was the manner in former time in Israel concerning redeeming and concerning ^achanging, for to confirm all things; a man plucked off his ^bshoe, and gave it to his neighbour: and this was a testimony in Israel.
8 Therefore the kinsman said unto Boaz, Buy it for thee. So he drew off his shoe^a. 6^a I cannot redeem it for myself This meant that Peloni Almoni could not redeem it for his own house, for the land would pass on to the first born male of Ruth and revert right back to the house of Elimelech and Mahlon. This because the firstborn male of Ruth would be the seed of the dead under the Law of Moses and would not be considered to be of the house of Peloni Almoni.
6^b mar mine own inheritance The wealth spent for the land of Elimelech, Mahlon and Chilion would reduce the wealth of the house of Peloni Almoni. It would reduce the inheritance of Peloni Almoni's own house and his sons. Peloni Almoni was not welling to 'mar' and reduce his own son's inheritance in his own house just to raise up seed to the dead and and 'to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance', which the land of Elimelech, Mahlon and Chilion would have been. To Peloni Almoni this was taking away from his 'house' and giving it away to the 'house of Elimelech and Mahlon'.
6^a So he drew off his shoe Perhaps more of a token jesture in fulfilling the law (see Deuteronomy 25:9), it was still the custom to seal the deal with this 'ritual' performance. It seems it was performed more politely than what the law origanlly stated. 6^a TG Selfishness
   ^b Deut. 25:6 (5-6)
7^a OR exchanging, doing business
   ^b Deut. 25:9 (5-10)

A Relative Matter What parent would not think more upon his own immediate sons and daughters than upon those of his brothers or sisters? If Peloni Almoni has a failing this be it. Even though the Law of God sets forth the obligation of seeing to the posterity of one's 'brother kinsman' in providing him continued seed in Israel, Peloni Almoni sought only for the benefit of his own immediate house. When he thought the land of Elimelech could become a part of his own house, Peloni Almoni was willing to 'redeem it' and buy it for his family's benefit. But when he learned it would just go to benefit another, he was not willing to sacrifice the wealth of his own house to benefit another's house. We are caught in such dilimas today. We are called on to sacrifice for the benefit of others and often our excuse is that we 'can't' or 'won't' because it would mean our own immediate family would have to go without.

9 ś And Boaz said unto the elders, and unto all the people, Ye are witnesses this day, that I have bought all that was Elimelech’s, and all that was Chilion’s and Mahlon’s, of the hand of Naomi.
10 Moreover Ruth the Moabitess, the wife of Mahlon, have I purchased to be my wife, to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance, that the ^aname of the dead be not cut off from among his brethren, and from the gate of his place: ye are witnesses this day.
11 And all the people that were in the gate, and the elders, said, We are witnesses. The LORD make the woman that is come into thine house like Rachel and like Leah, which two did build the house of Israel: and ^ado thou worthily in Ephratah, and be famous in Bethlehem:
12 And let thy house be like the house of Pharez, whom Tamar bare unto Judah, of the seed which the LORD shall give thee of this young woman. 9 - I have bought Insight into the redemption process.
10 - I have purchased to be my wife This marriage is more formal than others in the Bible. 10^a Deut. 25:6
11^a OR may you do well

13 ś So Boaz took Ruth, and she was his wife: and when he went in unto her, the LORD gave her conception^a, and she bare a son.
14 And the women said unto Naomi, Blessed be the LORD, which hath not left thee this day without a kinsman^a, that his name may be famous in Israel.
15 And he shall be unto thee a restorer of thy life^a, and a nourisher of thine ^aold age: for thy daughter in law, which loveth thee, which is better to thee than seven sons, hath born him.
16 And Naomi took the child, and laid it in her bosom, and became nurse unto it.
17 And the women her neighbours gave it a name, saying, There is a son born to Naomi; and they called his name Obed^a: he is the father of Jesse, the father of David^b.
13^a the LORD gave her conception The recognition of the true original source of the gift of that temporal organization or 'creation' by which this life came from the Lord God Jehovah from the beginning is common among those who see and understand that this breath of life of the second estate was so ordered and performed by the hand of God. Especially in those women whose conception was limited to very specific purposes such as Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, Hannah and so on, was the actual power of conception rightfully so associated with that which is given by the hand of God. And then also for those left widowed without seed, that they might give birth of the "breast and of the womb" though not barren but in need of husband, the surrogate kinsman is to restore that life to the house from which it was taken such as the case of Mahlon and Ruth. Those of the world today have removed from their consideration that it is God who is the author of life. They who but tinker with the structure and organization of reproduction do but belittle he whose intelligence did form the order of it in every detail. They who merely color in a coloring book of ready drawn forms fail to appreciate the art of the artist whose creation is from beginning to end.James 1:17, Acts 14:17, Gen. 49:25.
14^a kinsman Or "redeemer." See on Ruth 2:20, Deut. 25:5-10.
15^a life That is, the life of the family line of Mahlon and Elimelech.
17^a Obed A short form of "Obadiah" meaning "servant of God." And though it merely gives the descendants of Obed of Jesse and David; certainly the ancestors ought to also so be names as being Obed son of Mahlon son of Elimelech son of Joshua son of Nun the of Ephraim son of Joseph the son of Jacob.
17^b Father of David And David was an important ancestor of Christ Matt. 1:1. The book was obviously written during or after the time of David.
The later Jewish people who dispised anyone not of their lineage tended to overlook the fact that Ruth came from Moab. Also see for surrogate blood lineage Matt. 1:5 and see Messiah ben David ~ Messiah ben Joseph for the birthright lineage after the patriarchal order of Joseph of Egypt. 15^a TG Old Age

The Jewish Perspective of Birthright and Genealogy
Over the centuries the Bible and its books have gone through editorial clarifications, added notes, alterations and commentary by its transcribing abridgers, scribes and compiliers. That is what we have today is a metamorphosis work that is changes from what it was as first written by the pen of the original authors.
One example in the five books of Moses is when Moses writes, "And Rachel died, and was buried in the way to Ephrath." That could will have been Moses' writing. But when it further clarifies that Ephrath was that "which is Bethlehem," that could have only been such as commentary added as in fact Bethlehem was a much later name given to that location near to or in the way to Ephrath. Many such added clarifiying notices that even further stipulate such as 'unto this day' and then make a further commentary that could have only been so added later as of that later day.
In the case of the book of Ruth chapter 4, verses 18 through 22 are easily recognized as that which would have been later added by a Biblical compiling author and not of the original record when it stood as a part of the book of Judges. The events of the chapters of Ruth have been highly cut and edited. When it fit properly into its place as a part of the record of the Judges the further postion of the family of Elimelech would have been additionally set forth. That is, was Elimelech one of the Judges in order to have been included in Samuel's record of the Judges? Or was it enough just to persent him as being of the tribe of Ephraim as that Ephrathite of Bethlehem? If Elimelech was not a Judge then he must have been a fairly significant leading figure of the house of Ephraim in order to be so included in the book of Judges and to have his family's genealogy so presented therein. You see the four chapters that today are by many merely considered as being a woman's story of Ruth and her mother-in-law Naomi, is not just such as that. It is a part of the descendancy from Joshua of the lineage of Ephraim who held the birthright to the ancestry of the blessed Messiah to come.
Now if the main purpose was to so establish that ancestry of birthright from Joseph to Joshua and from Joshua to Obed being the heir raised up to the dead that the house of Elimelech not be left without heir in the house of Israel, then much must have been taken and is missing from the original writing of the text now just contained in a separate little book under the name of a woman named Ruth. In fact, a scriptural statement reserved to a later place seems much more readily to be applied to the notion of that genealogy that is attached here at the end of the book of Ruth:

"NOW the sons of Reuben the firstborn of Israel, (for he was the firstborn; but, forasmuch as he defiled his father's bed, his birthright was given unto the sons of Joseph the son of Israel: and the genealogy is not to be reckoned after the birthright. For Judah prevailed above his brethren, and of him came the chief ruler; but the birthright was Joseph's:)" ~ Old Testament | 1 Chronicles 5:1-2

That explanation seems to fit well as to why Obed's surrogate Jewish ancestry is given at the end of the book of Ruth rather than that of whose son Obed truly was raised up to be as heir of Mahlon and Elimelech of the tribe of Ephraim.
In summary, when first put together the text of what is now the book of Ruth was a part of and attached to the end of the book of Judges. It is here that one must consider that the Bible has been compiled and edited with such commentary spun in favor of the Jewish perspective, having been so produced at the hands of the Jews. First, Boaz acted as the near kinsman-brother and did take it upon himself to raise up seed to the dead as he so stated in verses 5 and 10. That means the the legal and rightful ancestry of the first born son of Ruth by Boaz would be the legal and rightful son of Mahlon and of the House of Elimelech and of Naomi as so stated by Naomi's neighbors in verse 17, 'a son born to Naomi', that is to the house of Naomi and Elimelech and NOT unto Ruth and Boaz. Now then, why is it that the genealogy of Boaz is given in verses 18-21 and not the proper genealogy of Mahlon and the house of Elimelch as so stated it was in verse 17. The only logical reason is that it was the Jews who kept the record and they preferred from their very Jewish held perspective to only give the ancestory of the performing kinsman as it was Boaz who was the Jew and NOT Mahlon and Elimelech who were in fact Ephrathites or Ephraimites and not Jews at all.

18 ś Now these are the generations of ^aPharez: Pharez begat Hezron,
19 And Hezron begat Ram, and Ram begat Amminadab,
20 And Amminadab begat Nahshon, and Nahshon begat Salmon,
21 And Salmon begat ^aBoaz, and Boaz begat Obed,
22 And Obed begat Jesse, and Jesse begat David. 18^a Gen. 38:29 (1-30);
        1 Chr. 2:4 (4-15);
        1 Chr. 5:1-2;
        Matt. 1:3 (3-6);
        Luke 3:33 (23-38)
21^a Matt. 1:5

Not According to Birthright As 1 Chronicles 5:1-2 states, 'the genealogy is not being recockoned after the birthright'. Thus here it is given after the linage of Boaz of Judah, the Levirate marriage surogate redeemer, rather than after the birthright of Joseph and Ephraim in Elimelech and Mahlon as the birthright of the covenant ought to have been rightly reckoned according to the laws of God (Deuteronomy 25:5-10, Ruth 4:5, 10, 16-17).

Restoring An Ephraimite Perspective
As it is the perspective of the Jews which is presented in the Bible, it needs be here that a corresponding perspective of Ephraim, who is Israel and the Kingdom of Israel, which is Ephraim and his companions, that ought to also be given here. Whether one merely replaces the Jewish genealogy of Boaz with the Ephrathite genealogy of Mahlon and Elimelech, or whether both genealogies ought to be presented seems imaterial as the one has already found its was into the Bible and the other is not there by way of preference of the Jews. Even then, rather than placing the 'legal and rightful' genealogy of Mahlon, 'the dead', and Elimelech in, the Jews have actually tipped their perspective off, that the ancestory of Elimelech is not Jewish, else they would have properly followed the letter of the Law of Moses and placed the rightful heirship linage through Elimelech into their Jewish perspective Bible rather than supplying only the 'kinsman redeemer' genealogy into their compiled record. That later Rabbi insertions will imagine themselves a contrived and inovated statement that Elimelech's ancestry did also follow that of Boaz's ancestry and therefore imaterial, the fact is that in the original Torah the Jews had already surplanted Boaz in the stead of the rightful dead Mahlon and the house of Elimelech which ought to have taken presidence by the very Law of Moses (Deuteronomy 25:5-10 & Ruth 4:5 & 10). Now therefore the following is the legal and rightful linage of Mahlon and his father Elimelech from a very Ephraimite perspective.

18 ¶ Now these are the generations of Joseph of Egypt who begat Ephraim his second son who was ^aordained by the hand of Jacob to be the rightful heir of the covenant, the Firstborn of Israel, by whom the promises of the fathers should ^bremain^c.
19 And Ephraim begat sons on down to the rightful heir of Ephraim who was Nun the Ephrathite born in Egypt, and Nun the Ephrathite, meaning he was of the tribe of Ephraim, begat Oshea, who Moses renamed Jehoshua [JESUS] in similitude of the name of the Messiah to come of the linage of Rachel, Joseph and Ephraim, and thus in honorium of the promises of the covenant which would come by the lawful heir, the seed of covenant descent.
20 And Joshua begat sons on down to the rightful heir of the covenant who was Elimelech, meaning the Lord my God. And Elimelech begat Mahlon.
21 And Mahlon married Ruth the moabitess but died without seed. Thus Boaz, a near cousin kinsman by a maternal marriage of the daughter of Rahab of Joshua, stepped forward and took upon himself the obligation to act as the surrogate vicarious kinsman to raise up seed unto the dead Mahlon and to the Ephrathite house of Elimelech according to the Law of Moses, which is the Law of God.
22 And the firstborn son of Ruth was named Obed or Obediah, meaning God's Servant or Servant of God, he being that promised seed of the Covenant according to the Law of God unto the house of Naomi, Elimelech and their son Mahlon, the heir to the promises of the covenant, becoming according to the Law of Moses, which is the Law of God, the literal seed and heir of the house of Mahlon and Elimelech.
23 And Obed grew and obtained the inheritance of the house of Elimelech, both of its lands and of the birthright of the covenant. And Obed begat Jesse who was so noted to be 'that Ephraphite of Bethlehem', signifying that Jesse was the seed and heir of that family of Ephrathites of Mahlon and Elimelech, an heir of the promised covenant of the Firstborn. And Jesse begat sons of whom was chosen David to be the rightful heir of Ephraim and of the covenant of the firstborn of Israel, even the promises of the fathers, the Covenant which the Lord made unto Abraham back until Adam before him.
24 And thus it was that the descendants of Jesse, whether BRANCH, rod, Stem or root, were of Jesse ^aas well of Ephraim and of Joseph, being of the house of Joseph^a. 18^c by whom the promises of the fathers should remain (See D&C 27:10) Judah was never the son of the covenant though he would aspire to such and eventually claim to have prevailed in Israel after the scattering of the Kingdom of Israel. It was always Joseph through whom the covenant blessings of the fathers would remain and thence to and through his son Ephraim. Thus as Joseph had seen in his third unrecorded dream of the rotted fruit (Isaiah and the Prohets, p.28 & Ginzberg, The Legends of the Jews vol. 2:7), he was to be the ancestor of the Messiah as so stated in his patriarchal blessing under the hand of Jacob (Genesis 49:24 (22-26)), which was also according to the prophecy given by the first prophetesses Rachel (Yersushalmi Berachot 9:3) that 'the Messiah would arise from her' (BhM Volume 6:81 & Messiah Texts, page 165) Rachel, the mother of Joseph. This is why Rachel is honored as the mother of Israel and who according to Matthew it was Rachel, not Leah, who did weep for her destroyed sons at the hand of King Herod (Matthew 2:18).
24^a descendants of Jesse, whether BRANCH, rod, Stem or root, were of Jesse as well of Ephraim and of Joseph, being of the house of Joseph This is explained in D&C 113 but due to the awkwardness of the order of the questions set forth there, the Lord's answers have been variously interpreted. The just of the whole of the matter is that Jesus Christ as well as Joseph Smith were descendants of Jesse and from thence linially descendants from Ephraim and Joseph, as Jesse was in fact of that linage of Ephraim being that Ephrathite of Bethlehem who was the legal and rightful heir of Obed who was raised up to be the seed of the dead Mahlon and to be the heir of the house of Elimelech. Obed was raised as a son of Naomi and NOT as a son of Boaz. Boaz had vicariously performed the responsibility of the redeeming kinsman and the first born son of Ruth was understood by Boaz (Ruth 4:5 & 10) and by the neighbors of Naomi (Ruth 4:17) to be the heir son of the house of Elimelech, being the seed of the dead Mahlon according to the Law of Moses (Deuteronomy 25:5-10), which is the Law of God. 18^a Gen. 48:14 (14-20);
     ^b D&C 27:10
24^a D&C 113:1-6;
        Gen. 49:24 (22-26);
        Matt. 1:3 (3-6);
        Luke 3:33 (23-38)
21^a Matt. 1:5

__________________________________

Previous More Ruth Commentary home Family Home