genealogy and references to Rachel, Leah, and Tamar, who had Perez by Judah, link David's ancestry to honoured people of the time of the Patriarchs.
- Later in the period of monarchy.
Either in the time of Hezekiah or Josiah who in their reforms tried to incorporate the northern tribes: it is seen as evidence of favour to foreigners.
- Post-exilic period in the time of Ezra/Nehemiah.
It was written to combat the exclusive policies of these two people based on evidence that the story has within it, "language gauged as late".
I think it could easily have an early oral form, which later has been crafted into a literary story with its important theological message. Like many books in the Old Testament, we cannot be certain about their origin and at what time they became a written form.
Purpose for the Book
Appears to have been used for two major purposes:
- to support the claim of David to the throne with the addition of the genealogy of David (vv18-22). Ruth is accepted because she is worthy and her loyalty is acclaimed.
- to show the inclusive nature of Israel's God, Yahweh - it rests on God's grace and simple faith of people.
Both these things are important at a number of places in Israel's history. 4:18-22 only major addition, which is supported by number of scholars.
Laws/ Social/ Traditions
Although the Book of Ruth fails to give us precise historical dates and doesn't name any leader of the period, it does give us some clues about social conditions. In spite of the prohibition against the people of Moab (Deuteronomy 23:3-6), there was obviously free movement between the countries otherwise Elimelech could not’t have taken his wife and sons to live there.
The law about the right to glean (Deuteronomy 24:19-22) is seen to be in operation (Ruth 2:2). There is a suggestion that permission of the landowner had to be sought "behind anyone in whose eyes I find favour". Knowledge of Leverite marriage by which a brother had to fulfil the marriage obligations of his dead brother if the widow was left without children (Ruth 4:5). Except in the case of Ruth, Boaz is not obliged to marry her at all.
We become aware that the laws related to the redemption of property by which next of has the first refusal is practised in Israel (Ruth 4). Furthermore, legal business is conducted at the city gates (Ruth 4). We have in Ruth some aspects of ordinary people going about life
We cannot say for certain whether Ruth was an 'historical figure'?
The story would appear to establish Ruth as a person in Israel's history. Would the story have been sustained if Ruth were not the mother of Obed (Matthew 1:5)? Whatever the answer, Ruth is an important person in the history of Israel and her part in the lineage of David.
Context of Ruth 3 & 4 (What's Happening in the Literature around Ruth 3 & 4)
The story is a successive building up of life experiences: the famine in Bethlehem (House of Bread) drives Naomi and Elimelech out to Moab, Naomi's subsequent loss of husband and two sons (husbands of Orpah and Ruth), the news that there was food now in Judah (Bethlehem), the return of Naomi and Ruth, the need to find food and so Ruth goes out into the fields to get the gleanings, introduction of the wealthy relative, protection and favour from Boaz with the quite intimate scene of Boaz's invitation to dip her bread in wine, he then instructed his young men to pull out bundles of corn for her to glean, she beat out the corn and returned to Naomi with it. Naomi blessed Boaz for his kindness and said that he was one of ours: Ruth is included in the relationship. Ruth continued with this job until the end of the harvest.
And after Chapter 3 we have Boaz challenging the next of kin at the gate (place of justice) to take up redemption of Naomi's field. Initially, the kinsman says yes and then backs off when he was told it had to include Ruth in the bargain. Boaz did not give him all the details at the one time, and basically set the guy up, especially with the elders called in as witnesses. Boaz indicates the need to restore the name of the dead, but neither the 