R4-7: There’s No Book That Raises The Dignity And Value Of Women More Than The Bible

We’re now attempting to discern what was really going on among the Jewish Israelites who were bargaining at the city gates about what to do with Naomi’s land.

I remind you if we’re gonna have any hope this side of heaven of being able to correctly understand these passages, we’ve gotta COMPLETELY divorce ourselves from all modern and gentile ideas of how society works.

So let’s get on with it.

The first thing I want you to notice is look who’s the central character of the heated discussion between Boaz and the other redeemer.

It ain’t Ruth.

It’s Naomi.

And the reason is because she was the widow of Elimelech who was the rightful owner of the land.

Since Naomi was the only remaining survivor, she represented her husband’s clan and family.

However, this led to a thorny problem.

Since the legal heirs (Naomi’s husband and her sons) to the property had died…

And the Torah has ZERO provision for a widow to inherit land…

Honestly, can we really say Naomi was the rightful owner of the land?

If we’re going strictly by the letter of the law, the answer must be a firm NO.

Now let me be clear here.

I’m not saying the Torah doesn’t have any provision at all for women to inherit land.

Remember the daughters of Zelophehad who pled their case to Moses.

Zelophed was a man who never had any sons.

He only had five daughters.

And these five daughters were worried about what was gonna happen to their father’s land inheritance since there were no male heirs.

They went up to Moses and said:

“Our father died in the wilderness. He was not among Korah’s followers, who banded together against the Lord, but he died for his own sin and left no sons. Why should our father’s name disappear from his clan because he had no son? Give us property among our father’s relatives.”-Numbers 27:3-4

Well, this one had Moses scratching his head.

So he took the matter to the Lord and this was the official decree that was handed down:

“Say to the Israelites, ‘If a man dies and leaves no son, give his inheritance to his daughter. If he has no daughter, give his inheritance to his brothers. If he has no brothers, give his inheritance to his father’s brothers. If his father had no brothers, give his inheritance to the nearest relative in his clan, that he may possess it. This is to have the force of law for the Israelites, as the Lord commanded Moses.’”-Numbers 27:8-11

However, again notice there ain’t no provision for widows.

Because the land in question didn’t belong to Naomi’s dad.

It belonged to her husband.

So the land had never been in Naomi’s name.

Therefore, what do we make of all the verses that refer to Naomi as the owner of the land?

The answer is it’s just a figure of speech man.

Since Naomi was the only remaining survivor of the family, it just made sense to identify her as the sole representative of this piece of real estate.

Got it?

But having said all that, there’s an interesting takeaway I’m getting from all of this.

There is no book that uplifts and upholds the dignity and value of women more than the Bible.

In this sense, the Bible is and always has been revolutionary for its time.

We have the story of Zelophehad’s daughters and how their rights to their father’s property was made an eternal decree in the Torah.

We have Devorah being anointed by God as one of the Judges.

We have 2 books in the Bible named after women.

One is Ruth, the other Esther.

And finally, we have not just one female, but two gentile women being immortalized in the official line of the Messiah’s genealogy.

The Moabite Ruth and the prostitute Rahab.

Like WOW!

Things can’t get more revolutionary than that.

See ya all next time.

CONNECTING THIS TEACHING TO THE NEW TESTAMENT

“Salmon the father of Boaz,
whose mother was Rahab,
Boaz the father of Obed,
whose mother was Ruth,
Obed the father of Jesse, and
Jesse the father of King David”
-Matthew 1:5-6