[wildandblue]

In the book of Ruth, Boaz decides he wants to marry Naomi's widowed daughter in law Ruth, but he says there is a relative in line ahead of him that is more closely related to Naomi's family. Then he meets this person at the gate of the city and asks him whether he will marry her or not. At first the man says yes, then decides his own family property is more important to him and so declines. Not much in scripture about him, but does anyone know any more about who this person was? Ruth's child goes on to be the ancestor of both David and Jesus. In effect this person was choosing his earthly riches over the kingdom of God. Wondering if anyone knows anything else about who he was?

[jakester]

wildandblue -

A unique question that we don't find too often on this site because most Christian posts tend to be focused on the New Testament. The Old Testament is very interesting.

At any rate, I don't think there is any additional information given concerning Naomi's relative mentioned. The Jews observed the line of ancestry in families and so there were privileges and rights bestowed to the rightful heirs of property (i.e. first born, etc.) and to marriage, etc. If a family were to have several children and the parents were to die, the property or estate would go to the first born... to deny this right would be a violation of these birth right customs and would be highly offensable. Boaz, seeking to honor this ancestral practice, seeks out the rightful heir of the privilege to marry Ruth. If Boaz had presumed to take Ruth as his wife unlawfully, or against this custom, there would have been serious consequences. Being a just man, he does the right thing and seeks out the relative to see what his intention was. Then we find that this man's character is weak and as you pointed out, prefers his riches over Ruth.

It's my feeling, that the issue in view is not whether the man was a child of God or not. He may not have been based upon our observation of his character and through his decision to not marry Ruth... but these things are not really enough to go on to get a clear picture of this man's whole life. I don't know whether it would be accurate to say this man was choosing riches over the Kingdom of God. At that time, he had no idea that through Ruth would come the Messiah... how could he have known? He certainly was not choosing riches over the Kingdom of God, if we mean that not marrying Ruth was on par with rejecting the Kingdom of God. It would be a huge stretch to even consider such a possibility. Ultimately, we are only given certain clues as to this man's character and I'll readily admit that at least in this instance, he doesn't seem to be a man who really had much concern regarding birth-right entitlements and cultural norms. I think the overarching idea we are to take from that story is how God sovereignly worked out the course of history to bring His Messiah through not only one from His chosen people (Israel) but how He also included the Gentiles is bringing about the future King of Kings.

That is my take.

[wildandblue]

Jakester, thank you for answering my question. A lot of the people on this site know stuff I don't! I was wondering if anyone knew more than what is in the book of Ruth, something apocryphal, like some one who was going around saying, our family was almost King instead of David's! Or something like that. But I appreciated your insight!

[cogs]

These sound like a prophecy of jesus (from the same chapter):

Rth 4:11 And all the people that were in the gate, and the elders, said, We are witnesses. Jehovah make the woman that is come into thy house like Rachel and like Leah, which two did build the house of Israel: and do thou worthily in Ephrathah, and be famous in Bethlehem:

Rth 4:14 And the women said unto Naomi, Blessed be Jehovah, who hath not left thee this day without a near kinsman; and let his name be famous in Israel.
Rth 4:15 And he shall be unto thee a restorer of life, and a nourisher of thine old age, for thy daughter-in-law, who loveth thee, who is better to thee than seven sons, hath borne him.

[jakester]

wildandblue -

Yeah, cogs is right on... the story of Ruth is unquestionably messianic in nature. And I believe as I said earlier that God had sovereignly connected the people of Israel with the Gentiles to bring about the future ruler of all nations, not just the ruler of the Jews.

With respect to apocryphal ideas, I really do not see any such speculations as relevant because it was God's plan to create history the way that He did. So some family down the street complaining about not being "the family" to bring about the King, is really not altogether comfortable with how God did things. Secondly, as we know from the Old Testament and New Testament, not everyone who was a Jew believed; so even if another family carried the Davidic line leading to Christ, it's irrelevant because not everyone in that line were committed followers of God. Basically, to quote John the Baptist "God is able to raise up children of Abraham from the rocks on the ground"... so He need not a lineage of any specific sort to carry out His will.

That's my opinion anyway.