By James M. Rochford

Authorship

Later Jewish tradition states that Samuel was the author (Baba Bathra, 14b). However, this has been questioned because Samuel died before David became king (1 Sam. 28:3). At the same time, Ruth never states that David was the king (Ruth 4:22), so Samuel’s authorship cannot be ruled out. Like Judges (see “Introduction to Judges”), Ruth was probably written around the time of Samuel—perhaps by one of his disciples.

The book of Ruth carries many similarities with the final chapters of the book of Judges (chs.17-21).^[1] Only in Ruth, the tables are turned: Instead of a young woman being brutalized, she is cared for and married; instead of the nation falling apart because of the brutalization of a young man, the nation is brought together in the person of David (Ruth 4:17, 22). Therefore, whoever wrote Ruth seems to be showing a literary and historical connection between the despair under the judges and the hope under the new king.

Date

Ruth mentions David by name in the final verse of the book (Ruth 4:17, 22). Since this is a genealogy, the book must be dated to during or after the time of David (~1,000 BC).

Critics date the book to as late as the 6^th century BC. This late date is largely influenced by the JEDP theory (see “Authorship of the Pentateuch”). Boaz marries a foreign woman which is precluded by Deuteronomy 25. Since critics date Deuteronomy late, they feel it necessary to date Ruth late as well—perhaps just before the time of Josiah’s reform.^[2] However, several elements of the book fit quite well with a much earlier dating:

• Levirate marriage was common in the ancient Near East, which have been verified from the Nuzi tablets. One account is of a father who was arranging a marriage for his son, and he specifies that if his son dies, then the woman would marry one of his other sons.^[3]
• The passing of a “sandal” to verify a contract (Ruth 4:7) is attested in the Nuzi tablets.^[4]

Furthermore, the fact that David’s great-grand mother was a Moabitess is implicit evidence that the story is not fictional—namely, why would a Hebrew storyteller invent such an outrageous concept?^[5] The historical principle of embarrassment would apply to this detail, which is the crescendo of the book.

Critics were once confident that Ruth’s use of Aramaisms must imply a late-dating of the book. However, more recently, scholars have recognized that Aramaic dates to far earlier than was once thought.^[6] Moreover, the language of Ruth doesn’t match the Hebrew used in Esther, Ezra, Nehemiah, or Chronicles,^[7] which implies an early date.

Is Boaz a type of Christ?

Boaz shows many similarities with Jesus. Based on this, many interpreters see him as a “type” or foreshadowing of Christ.

However, we feel that we should show hermeneutical restraint on this point. Since the NT authors never make this connection, we are reticent to come to this conclusion.

Key themes in Ruth

(1) God is sovereign over history—even when we cannot see it. Like the biblical figures of Esther and Joseph, Ruth just so happens to be at the right place, at the right time. During the time of the Judges, it appears that God is relatively inactive. One might wonder what he was doing. On one level, this book is a short story about a romance between Ruth and Boaz. However, at the end of the book, we discover that their marriage brings about the most important king in Israel’s history: King David. David pulls Israel out of this time of chaos and anarchy. Therefore, even though it doesn’t appear that God is doing a whole lot during this time, we find that his attention to this half Moabite woman becomes incredibly important for her well-being and for the nation of Israel. Michael S. Moore writes, “The book of Ruth is a bright light in a dark world.”^[9]

(2) God helps and heals the least likely people. Ruth was a Moabitess, who would’ve ordinarily been despised by the people of Israel. But God saw her faith and blessed her despite these cultural barriers. As Leviticus states, “The stranger who resides with you shall be to you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt” (Lev. 19:34).

(3) God uses the least likely people to fulfill his purposes. Without Ruth, we wouldn’t have King David. Without David, the nation of Israel would have stayed in moral anarchy.

Ruth 1 (Naomi and Ruth Come to Israel)

Summary: The story begins during the period of the Judges (v.1). Elimelech and Naomi move to Moab and have two sons—Mahlon and Chilion. These two sons married Orpah and Ruth (v.4). The Moabites were mortal enemies with the Jews during the time of the Judges (Judges 3:12-30). But the book of Ruth takes place during a time of peace between the Moabites and the Jews.

Within a decade, all three men die (e.g. Elimelech, Mahlon, Chilion), and they leave behind three widows (Naomi, Orpah, Ruth). Moab enters into famine, but Judah begins to do well. This leaves the woman stranded in Moab—widowed and poor. Widows during this time would have been extremely destitute (e.g. Ex. 22:22-24; Deut. 10:18; Jas. 1:27). Naomi and Ruth decide to make the trek back to Judah in search of food (v.6). Naomi told the girls that they didn’t need to come with her. Instead, they should try to stay in Moab and find a husband (v.9). But the girls wanted to stay with her (v.10). Eventually, Orpah bailed out and went home, but Ruth stayed with Naomi loyally (v.14). This wasn’t just personal loyalty to Naomi; it was spiritual loyalty to God (v.16).

(1:1) The famine could’ve been caused by the horrible disobedience occurring “when the judges governed” Israel. God promised to judge the nation for breaking his covenant with them (Deut. 28:15, 23-24, 38-40). The famine could also be caused by enemy invasion (Judg. 6:3-6).

Elimelech probably justified his decision to leave Israel, so that he could provide for his wife. He might’ve said, “I’m going to this other city for work for the sake of my wife.” But this plan wasn’t justified from Scripture.

Elimelech didn’t plan on staying in Moab forever. The word “sojourn” (gûr) means “the status of a resident alien that usually included protection under the laws of the host land.”^[10] He didn’t plan on staying, but no one really plans on the consequences that result from breaking God’s will.

(1:2) Elimelech means “God is king.”^[11]

Naomi means “pleasant” or “lovely.”^[12]

Instead of just visiting the land as sojourners (v.1), they “remained there.”

(1:3-5) After a decade, all three husbands died, leaving behind three widows. Their plans were immediately shown to be foolish.

(1:6) They should have stayed in Israel. God ended up bringing food there, rather than in Moab. Their decision to leave was foolish.

(1:7-8) Naomi wanted to release these two Moabite widows from any loyalty to her. After all, she herself was a widow, and she couldn’t provide for them. Instead, she wanted to entrust these two women to the “loyal love” (hesed) of God.

(1:9) She wanted them to get remarried.

(1:10-12) Naomi didn’t rebuke them harshly. After all, she calls them “my daughters.” She was looking out for their welfare—not her own. However, Naomi seems to be reasoning from material blessings (e.g. food, marriage, etc.), rather than the spiritual blessings of being back in Judah under God’s leadership. She focuses on the fact that she can’t produce sons that could become their future wives.

(1:13) Naomi knows that it will be hard for her to make it as an older widow (“it is harder for me than for you”), but she releases them from any loyalty anyhow. At this time, Naomi must have harbored guilt for leaving Judah and fleeing to Moab, because she says, “The Lord has gone for against me.” Little does she know, God was going to richly provide for her.

Ruth’s choice

(1:14) Orpah chose to go back to Moab, but Ruth stayed with Naomi. She “clung” (dāḇaq) to her. We don’t know whatever happened to Orpah, but we do know what happened to Ruth.

(1:15) Naomi points out that the door is open for her to leave. After all, Orpah left.

(1:16) Ruth not only wanted to turn from her country, but more importantly, from their spiritual worldview. She not only wanted to be loyal to Naomi, but to be loyal to God.

(1:17) Ruth makes a covenant with Naomi to stay with her until death.

(1:18) Naomi passively consented to this.

Return to Bethlehem

(1:19) Why was the town “stirred” by the return of Naomi? Did she look haggard after a decade in Moab?^[13] Were they wondering why she came home without a husband and with a Moabitess? Did the people judge her for coming back with her tail between her legs?

(1:20) “Mara” means “bitter.”^[14] Naomi went from “pleasant” and “lovely” to “bitter” (cf. Job 27:2).

(1:21-22) She could have left “full” in the sense of having a husband and sons—not in the sense of being wealthy.^[15] Naomi is in a very low place in her life. Instead of coming home with a family, she comes home with a widowed Moabitess. Instead of coming home with wealth from Moab, she comes home poorer and more destitute than when she left. Worst of all, she believes that God was punishing her with all of this. In reality, God may have just been turning her over, rather than actively judging her.

Application

The Jews were never commanded to leave Israel in search of food—especially travelling to Pagan nations like Moab (v.1). The risk of losing their spiritual allegiance to God was too high. Instead, the needed to stay put in the Promised Land and let God provide for them. God promised to do this if they kept to his covenant. For a believer today, this would be similar to moving town for a job or career advancement, rather than investing in God’s people (Jas. 4:13-17).

Naomi believed that God had given her a rotten deal (v.13). She had become “Mara” (or bitter, v.20). This often happens when he don’t follow God’s will. We make an unwise choice, then we blame God for it (v.21)! Solomon writes, “A man’s own folly ruins his life, yet his heart rages against the Lord” (Prov. 19:3 NIV).

Ruth 2 (Enter Boaz)

Summary: Boaz is wealthy and influential in Bethlehem (v.1). Ruth 3:10 implies that he is an older man (“You have shown your last kindness… not going after young men”). He was also a relative of Elimelech—Naomi’s husband Ruth’s father-in-law.

The Jews had a rule that they should leave extra crops for the poor (Lev. 19:9-10). So Ruth went out to pick up the leftovers to feed herself (v.2). While she was in Boaz’s field, he saw her (v.6). Boaz shows that he isn’t a creep; instead, he tells Ruth that he’s going to watch out for her and protect her (v.9). Boaz tells her that he had heard of her good deeds (e.g. following Naomi, pledging commitment to Yahweh, etc.). Ruth’s good reputation preceded her (v.11). Boaz cared more about Ruth’s love for God, than he cared about her race. Boaz prays that God would take care of Ruth (v.12). Little does he know, God used Boaz to fulfill that prayer! Ruth took an entire basket of food home to Naomi (v.18). Naomi encouraged Ruth to keep going back to work in his fields.

(2:1) Boaz enters the picture. His name could mean “in him is strength.”^[16] He is a wealthy and powerful man, who just so happens to be a relative of Elimelech.

(2:2) The Jewish law allowed for this (Lev 19:9-10; 23:22; Deut. 24:19-21). However, land owners weren’t always following the law (Isa. 17:5-6). Ruth held out hope that she—a foreigner—would be able to “find favor” in the fields.

(2:3) From her perspective, she just “she happened to come” to Boaz’s field. We see God’s providence and sovereign guiding behind all of this.

(2:4) Boaz just so happened to check on his workers that day (and see Ruth). Boaz’s greeting would’ve been rare in the days of the Judges, and this gives us insight into his character.

(2:5) Boaz hadn’t seen Ruth before, so he asks about her. Was he interested in her? Was he merely trying to figure out who she was?

(2:6-7) The foreman gives the backstory on Ruth and Naomi.

(2:8-9) Remember, this was a dangerous time—the time of the Judges. Boaz offers her sanctuary in his fields, rather than allowing her to be sent out to other fields. He told his men not to “touch” her (nāg̱aʿ, “to reach to,” “to strike”; NEB, “molest”).^[17] He also gave her the added privilege—not mentioned in the Law—to drink as much water as she needed.

(2:10) Ruth is exceptionally grateful. There is a play on words in the text: “The word for ‘foreigner’ (noḵrî) comes from a word that means ‘to recognize’ (i.e., be conspicuous).”^[18]

(2:11) Perhaps Boaz heard about her character between verse 7 and 8. Or perhaps in a city the size of Bethlehem, word got around.

(2:12) Boaz prays over her, but little does he know that God would use him to be the covering for Ruth (Ruth 3:9).

(2:13) Ruth expresses gratitude and humility (“though I am not like one of your maidservants”).

(2:14) Later, in NT times, Jews and Gentiles wouldn’t eat together (Acts 10:28), but Boaz ignored this social convention, because it wasn’t in the Law.

(2:15) Boaz wanted to provide for her materially (“glean even among the sheaves”) and emotionally (“do not insult her”).

(2:16) He went above and beyond what the Law called for.

(2:17) An “ephah” is anywhere from 29 to 50 pounds of barley.^[19] She had more than enough for one day’s work. Huey writes, “Since the ration of a male worker in ancient Mari was about one to two pounds of grain per day, Ruth probably gathered enough to last Naomi and her for several weeks.”^[20]

(2:18) Ruth shared this with Naomi, rather than keeping it for herself.

(2:19) Naomi pours on the questions in rapid succession. It’s clear that she sees Boaz as a possible husband.

(2:20) Naomi starts to see that it wasn’t just the kindness of Boaz, but the kindness of God that made this divine appointment. Huey writes, “As a kinsman-redeemer (gōʾēl the first occurrence of this word in Ruth), under the levirate law Boaz could fulfill the duty of preserving the name of the dead by marrying Ruth. The root of gōʾēl means ‘to redeem, buy back.’ The responsibilities of the gōʾēl included avenging the death of a murdered relative (Num 35:19), marrying a childless widow of a deceased brother (Deut 25:5–10), buying back family land that had been sold (Lev 25:25), buying a family member who had been sold as a slave (Lev 25:47–49), and looking after needy and helpless members of the family (Lev 25:35).”^[21]

(Ruth 2:20) In what way was Boaz a “redeemer” of Ruth?

(2:21-23) These were dangerous times. It would be better to fall in with a man of character like Boaz, rather than risk being “fallen upon” by another man (v.22). The verb pāg̱a can mean to “‘strike down’ or ‘attack violently,’ e.g., Exod 5:3; 1 Sam 22:17–18; 1 Kings 2:25, 29).”^[22]

Ruth stayed with Boaz throughout the whole harvest season. Did they build a friendship during this time?

Application

Verse 3 explains, “She happened to come to the portion of the field belonging to Boaz.” There are two ways to look at this: God’s providence or random chance. We can trust in the sovereignty of God. If we are seeking God, he will set up circumstances to provide for us and use us. While atheists get lucky, Christians are blessed.

Ruth’s reputation was attractive to Boaz—not her appearance. She must have looked pretty scruffy as a poor beggar. Likewise, Ruth fell in love with Boaz because of his good deeds—not just his money or good looks. In fact, Boaz was an older man—not a young, good looking man.

Ruth 3 (Naomi Pursues Boaz)

Summary: Naomi gives Ruth advice on how to win Boaz. Even though her advice is carnal, her plan works. Ruth lays down at the feet of Boaz, and she tells him that he is her kinsman-redeemer. Boaz tells her that another man is closer in line to be the kinsman-redeemer. So Boaz wants to give the other man the opportunity to fulfill this role, before he makes a move on Ruth.

(3:1) It was custom for parents to arrange marriages during this time (Gen. 24:3-4; 34:4; Judg. 14:2). As her mother-in-law, Naomi felt this responsibility to take care of Ruth.

(3:2-4) Naomi tells Ruth to look and smell nice, wait for Boaz to finish eating and drinking, and then lay down at his feet when he falls asleep.

(Ruth 3:3-4) Is this good dating advice?

(3:5-6) Ruth agrees to listen to Naomi’s advice.

(Ruth 3:6-12) Did Ruth have sex with Boaz?

(3:7) Why did Boaz choose to lay down on his threshing floor? Was he protecting his “heap of grain”? Was it just a nice view of the night sky?

(3:8) He couldn’t see very well in “the middle of the night,” so this must have been startling for him to see Ruth lying at his feet.

(3:9) She asks Boaz to become her go’el (kinsman-redeemer). She wants to marry him.

(3:10) He is surprised that she would want to choose him, because there were younger men around.

Her “last kindness” is related to her loyalty to Naomi (Ruth 2:11).

(3:11) Boaz speaks tenderly to her. Ruth was really putting herself out there with her desire for marriage. Boaz tells her not to be afraid for doing so. He admires her character.

(3:12-13) Boaz really loved Ruth and wanted to marry her, but he really loved the Law more and wanted to do things God’s way.

(3:14) Boaz wanted to protect Ruth’s reputation from the town gossips.

(3:15) Boaz further provided for Ruth and Naomi’s needs.

(3:16-17) Ruth shows Naomi how kind Boaz was to her.

(3:18) Naomi recognizes that Boaz is a good man, and he won’t wait to marry her. Ruth did her part, but now, Boaz would do his.

Application

Even though Naomi’s advice was carnal, God still brought something good out of it. This does not license foolish or carnal decision-making. But it does show us that we should trust in the sovereignty of God. If he wants something to happen, he will work through lousy people (Naomi) to make it happen.

Boaz becomes the answer to his own prayer (Ruth 2:12). He becomes the “covering” for Ruth.

Ruth 4 (Boaz Pursues Ruth)

Summary: Boaz works a deal with the rightful (unnamed) kinsman-redeemer. Boaz tells him that the man has the right to redeem the land (v.4), but if he wants the land, then he’ll need to marry Ruth and have another mother-in-law, Naomi (v.5). He could’ve added a bitter mother-in-law! The man declines the offer, and gives it over to Boaz. They marry, and they give birth to Obed, who is the father of Jesse, who is the father of David. Naomi becomes less bitter because of the baby (vv.16-17).

(4:1) The city “gate” was “a kind of outdoor court, the place where judicial matters were resolved by the elders and those who had earned the confidence and respect of the people (Deut 22:15; 2 Sam 15:2; Prov 22:22; Jer 38:7; Amos 5:10).”^[23]

The author doesn’t mention the man by name. Boaz calls him “friend.” This is likely because it was shameful to not fulfill the kinsman-redeemer role.^[24]

(4:2) Boaz wanted reputable witnesses to see this legal agreement.

(4:3-4) Boaz explains the situation about buying up the land, and the man quickly states that he will purchase it. Huey writes, “His reply uses the emphatic pronoun ‘I’; translated literally the phrase would read: ‘I, I will redeem.’”^[25]

This would be a crushing blow to Boaz’s desire to marry Ruth! What will he do?

(4:5) Boaz now includes that the man would need to marry Ruth—a Moabitess.

(4:6) The man changes his mind. Huey writes that the language is just as emphatic: “Redeem for you, you, my right of redemption.”^[26]

(4:7-8) As noted above, the exchanging of a sandal was a way of signing a contract in ancient times. It is attested in the Nuzi documents.^[27]

(4:9-10) Boaz openly and proudly takes this Moabitess to be his wife in the presence of many witnesses. While this would’ve been embarrassing given the cultural hatred toward Moab, Boaz proudly identifies with his new bride.

(4:11-12) The witnesses welcomed Ruth into the community and gave this new couple their blessing.

(4:13) At least nine months pass… This couple didn’t waste any time in trying for kids. God himself was behind this marriage, because he “enabled” Ruth to give birth.

(4:14-15) The women knew of Naomi’s dire situation when she had returned to Israel. Now, they crowd around her with joy, lifting up her situation.

(4:16) Huey writes, “Nothing more is intended in this verse than a description of a grandmother delighting in her first grandchild.”^[28]

(4:17) In this culture, a son and a grandson were considered similar. It was the line or lineage that was important.

“Obed” means “servant.”^[29]

(4:18) Perez was the son of Tamar (Gen. 38:29). Perez fathered Hezron (Gen. 46:12).

(4:19) Perez “grandfathered” Ram (1 Chron. 2:25, 27).

Ram fathered Amminadab (1 Chron. 2:10). Amminadab was a contemporary of Moses and the father in law of Aaron (Ex. 6:23).

Amminadab fathered Nashon (1 Chron. 2:10), who was a prince in Moses’ day (Num. 1:7; 2:3; 7:12, 17; 10:14).

(4:20) Salmon can also be spelled Salma (1 Chron. 2:11). He married Rahab (Mt. 1:4-5). Rahab was Boaz’s mother! No wonder Boaz had such a sympathetic eye toward Ruth—a Moabitess!

(4:21-22) The rest of the history of this genealogy is found in Ruth.

Application

Why was Boaz so kind to Ruth—despite the ethnic hatred of the Moabites in his day? Matthew tells us that Boaz’s mother was Rahab—the Canaanite prostitute (Mt. 1:4-5). Apparently, Boaz could see through the cultural baggage to the character of this woman who sincerely believed in God—just like his mother Rahab.

This chapter shows the importance of being a shrewd business man, when it comes to protecting people. We shouldn’t be shrewd for selfish advantage, but this was different. Boaz was being shrewd so that he could take care of Ruth.

David had a pagan (Moabitess) for a great-great grandmother! Remember that the Moabites were evil people. Likewise, Jesus had prostitutes, adulterers, and pagans in his genealogy (e.g. Rahab, Ruth, Bathsheba). This adds to the credibility of this historical narrative. F.B. Huey writes, “No Israelite would have created such a detested family connection. Apparently David’s ancestry was too well known to hide, even if he had desired to do so.”^[30]

God brought this woman, Ruth, out of that culture in order to rescue her. This story is a good lesson for the fact that God will work with anyone—even a detested Moabite widow—if we seek him. As Jesus said, “Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened” (Mt. 7:7-8).

^[1] Moore, M. S. (2012). Ruth. In W. W. Gasque, R. L. Hubbard Jr., & R. K. Johnston (Eds.), Joshua, Judges, Ruth (p. 293-299). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.

^[2] See Archer for a fuller explanation and refutation of this thesis. Archer, G., Jr. (1994). A survey of Old Testament introduction (3rd. ed., p. 307). Chicago: Moody Press.

^[3] See footnote. Archer, G., Jr. (1994). A survey of Old Testament introduction (3rd. ed., p. 308). Chicago: Moody Press.

^[4] See footnote. Archer, G., Jr. (1994). A survey of Old Testament introduction (3rd. ed., p. 308). Chicago: Moody Press.

^[5] Archer, G., Jr. (1994). A survey of Old Testament introduction (3rd. ed., p. 308). Chicago: Moody Press.

[6] Mark Rooker writes, “Scholars early in the twentieth century tended to view alleged Aramaisms as evidence of late writing. This line of argument has weakened considerably because of the fact that the Aramaic language and influence was operative earlier in the biblical period than was once assumed.” Merrill, Eugene H., Mark F. Rooker, and Michael A. Grisanti, The World and the Word: An Introduction to the Old Testament (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2011), 300.

[7] Merrill, Eugene H., Mark F. Rooker, and Michael A. Grisanti, The World and the Word: An Introduction to the Old Testament (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2011), 303.

^[8] Archer, G., Jr. (1994). A survey of Old Testament introduction (3rd. ed., p. 308). Chicago: Moody Press.

^[9] Moore, M. S. (2012). Ruth. In W. W. Gasque, R. L. Hubbard Jr., & R. K. Johnston (Eds.), Joshua, Judges, Ruth (p. 293). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.

^[10] Huey, F. B., Jr. (1992). Ruth. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel (Vol. 3, p. 519). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[11] Huey, F. B., Jr. (1992). Ruth. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel (Vol. 3, p. 519). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[12] Huey, F. B., Jr. (1992). Ruth. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel (Vol. 3, p. 519). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[13] Huey, F. B., Jr. (1992). Ruth. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel (Vol. 3, p. 525). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[14] Huey, F. B., Jr. (1992). Ruth. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel (Vol. 3, p. 525). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[15] Huey, F. B., Jr. (1992). Ruth. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel (Vol. 3, p. 525). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[16] Huey, F. B., Jr. (1992). Ruth. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel (Vol. 3, p. 526). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

NEB The New English Bible

^[17] Huey, F. B., Jr. (1992). Ruth. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel (Vol. 3, p. 530). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[18] Huey, F. B., Jr. (1992). Ruth. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel (Vol. 3, p. 530). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[19] Huey, F. B., Jr. (1992). Ruth. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel (Vol. 3, p. 532). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[20] Huey, F. B., Jr. (1992). Ruth. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel (Vol. 3, p. 532). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[21] Huey, F. B., Jr. (1992). Ruth. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel (Vol. 3, p. 533). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[22] Huey, F. B., Jr. (1992). Ruth. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel (Vol. 3, p. 533). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[23] Huey, F. B., Jr. (1992). Ruth. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel (Vol. 3, p. 541). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[24] Huey, F. B., Jr. (1992). Ruth. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel (Vol. 3, p. 541). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[25] Huey, F. B., Jr. (1992). Ruth. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel (Vol. 3, p. 542). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[26] Huey, F. B., Jr. (1992). Ruth. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel (Vol. 3, p. 542). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[27] Cundall, A. E., & Morris, L. (1968). Judges and Ruth: an introduction and commentary (Vol. 7, p. 297). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press. Hubbard, R. L. (1988). The Book of Ruth (p. 251). Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

^[28] Huey, F. B., Jr. (1992). Ruth. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel (Vol. 3, p. 547). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[29] Huey, F. B., Jr. (1992). Ruth. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel (Vol. 3, p. 547). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[30] Huey, F. B. Ruth. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel (Vol. 3). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House. 1992. 510.