Transcription downloaded from https://yetanothersermon.host/_/bbcsylmar/sermons/50223/ruth-part-10/.

Disclaimer: this is an automatically generated machine transcription - there may be small errors or mistranscriptions.
Please refer to the original audio if you are in any doubt.


[0:00] Ruth, please find the book of Ruth in chapter number four, and we're coming to the end now. Ruth chapter four.

[0:20] And last Sunday we spent the majority of our Sunday school time looking at what the deal was with this loosing of the shoe, of this meeting at the gate, and why the whole situation here with Boaz, with this kinsman that's a nearer kinsman than Boaz to Naomi and Elimelech, and tried to make some sense of that before we really got into this chapter, into the fourth chapter, so that you have the background, so you have the knowledge from the scriptures of what's transpiring in front of you.

[0:59] And so we covered the bases as best we could with that, and understand the situation for when a man passes away, whether, not necessarily in old age, but in unusual, abnormal circumstances, and if he has a wife, if he doesn't have an heir, a son, or even a daughter, as Moses had to clarify, if he doesn't have any seed, then his brother has got the responsibility to raise up his name, to take his wife, to raise up a child by her, and therefore the name carries forward in the land of Israel.

[1:42] His name is not to be wiped off the face of the earth. And God, as I said last week, he's a personal God like that. He cares about you. Our society doesn't do that.

[1:54] We don't have laws of our land that says we're going to protect and make sure that your name stays on and that property is yours. And, you know, you die without that stuff, the state will take it quickly and be happy to do it.

[2:06] Now, we went in through all those texts, ran those references last week. It was a good bit of the time. And so then we even, we kind of just trickled into chapter 4 and studied why they're going to the gate and why that's a popular place in the cities, a public place of business transactions and a place even of judgment from what Moses told them to do was to get elders and to meet at the gate and judgment was to be passed there.

[2:35] And that was a common thing of its day, even common before Moses. We saw that in a couple places in Genesis, I mentioned with Lot sitting in the gate and with Hamar and Shechem in Genesis 34, getting the men to come to the gate to meet.

[2:49] So let's pick it up again now in verse number 1 of chapter 4. Then went Boaz up to the gate and sat him down there and behold, the kinsmen of whom Boaz spake came by, unto whom he said, O such a one, turn aside, sit down here.

[3:05] And he turned aside and sat down. Now, before we are ever even going to get into this story, there's just some things that we're going to cover and take the advantage of when they show up.

[3:17] I mentioned it last Sunday in closing that there's some, just a grammatical oddity here that maybe you didn't pick up and maybe it just doesn't even bother you, but it always bothers me when I see it.

[3:31] And there's something about it and I want to point it out to you not to get you all keyed up on grammar and focused on that and finding typos and mistakes, but rather to make a stronger point that is necessary to understand about your King James Bible.

[3:50] And believe me, it's there and it's there. So, what we saw in verse number one where he spake to that one as he came by, he said, O such a one.

[4:01] Now, we say something similar to that. We say, hey, so and so. And really, we're not, we don't ever say so and so. We say their name. And no doubt, Boaz said the man's name.

[4:15] And I have to mention, it's interesting that the man's name is not recorded here. Matter of fact, it's not recorded anywhere. Matter of fact, never. And I'm not sure why.

[4:25] I feel like there might be something maybe in the type or I can't figure it out. But he's just an unnamed man, a nearer kinsman than Boaz and can't locate him in the genealogies as to who exactly he is.

[4:39] But nevertheless, he says, hey, so and so and chooses not to give his name. But there's no reason to believe that Boaz didn't call him by name. It's just never recorded.

[4:50] Something similar we say is such and such. Don't we say that? Such and such a place. And you know, we get that from our Bible whether you realize it or not. That's a kind of a weird one.

[5:01] If you think about it, such and such. It's so generic. It's so weird of a word put together, a construction.

[5:12] But it's one that we say. And here's a Bible reference to it in 2 Kings 6 verse 8. The king of Syria warred against Israel and took counsel with his servants saying, in such and such a place shall be my camp.

[5:24] Now, the king named the location. But the detail in the giving of what the king said is just, it doesn't matter. And so they just, just in such and such a place. But he didn't say that.

[5:35] He said the name of the place. Same thing here. Boaz didn't say such a one. He said the man's name. No doubt. But so here he's indicating a person, not a place. He says such a one.

[5:46] Now here comes the grammatical oddity. Because in that phrase, such a one, by rule, by grammar rule, by English rules, if the letter, if the indefinite pronoun precedes a word that starts with a vowel, you don't say a one.

[6:07] You say an one. If it precedes a word with a consonant, you'd say a. Take a look at verse number three. Look toward the end of verse three. And where it says, the country of Moab selleth a parcel of land.

[6:22] Why does it say a and not an? Because the next word starts with a consonant, a P. If you know this, it's ingrained in you. You don't even think about it. You just say it or you write it. And it's kind of natural.

[6:35] And the reason is because it flows off the tongue the right way with a parcel versus an parcel. Now come back and look at chapter two. I'll just show you the opposite case at verse 17.

[6:47] Ruth 2, 17. And you can look at the very end of verse 17 where it's talking about what she gleaned. It says it was about an ephah of barley.

[6:57] An ephah. Not a ephah because that just sounds awkward. But then the next word starts with a vowel so it's a-n, an. Now that's the rule of grammar.

[7:10] That's just what it is. That's how most if not all things are worded and translated and what have you. Now here comes the oddity is that in chapter four verse one it says such a one and we would expect by rule it to say such an one.

[7:26] Now I haven't proven or built really a big case so far except to say the rule is this and it doesn't say that. It doesn't match. So what? Well here's what's weird to me is in the King James Bible this phrase such a one or such and one shows up 13 times in this Bible.

[7:45] Three times it says such a one. Ten times it says such and one. What in the world? There's no rule? Why is it translated this way or why is it written this way one time and this way another time?

[7:59] I looked at the places I can't make sense of it and maybe maybe there is a reason I don't know what it is. It's something odd to me in a perfect Bible that it has some and not I wouldn't say discrepancies it just has some differences and I can't pinpoint why.

[8:17] Maybe somebody else can I'd love to know I really really would. the only sense I can make of it is this is the case here and I can point to another one in Leviticus 27 a similar situation where the only sense I can make is that the translators had flexibility with their translation because of readability and sound were the priority in the translation.

[8:46] So they took liberty to ensure a clear and a crisp and a flow to the passage. They took very much care that that was priority to them was the readability of the passage and the text.

[9:03] Other than that I have no clue and to me it remains a mystery but it's one of those things personally I enjoy because it forces me to study it and to just to dig into the text and try to resolve or understand it.

[9:16] Now I'm saying this for a reason. I'm not trying to teach you English grammar at all and if it doesn't do anything for you so be it. I could care less about that portion of it but there's a greater point.

[9:30] There's a real real point. The value of pointing this out is to for you to realize that the King James Bible this this holy text that we claim is the pure words of God the only collection of perfection on the planet of the holy bible the holy text the sacred text this book cannot be placed in a box it can't be put inside a box and said okay that's that's the reason it is the way it is is because of this and so I already showed you this in chapter 3 remember we were in verse 15 with that last phrase she went into the city but the Hebrew Masoretic text from which everybody loves and puts their faith in that this Old Testament was translated from for the most part doesn't say she it says he and so

[10:32] I already pointed out to you that the King James Bible doesn't match the Hebrew Masoretic text to the letter nor I mentioned I didn't really you know give you the details of it but there are multiple editions of the New Testament in Greek that this has been translated from and the New Testament that we have here does not match any one edition to the letter so you can't say well this is the pure words of God in Greek and this is the pure words of God in Hebrew and we have them and now we have it in English you can't say that you can't trace it to the Hebrew 100% to the letter you can't trace it to any Greek manuscript or edition 100% to the letter these things may not really be somewhere that you study or care to really consider in your life but this is a big deal when it comes to the Bible not only does it not agree with every word in Hebrew or every word in any edition of Greek textus receptus but it also as I pointed out does not conform to every rule of English grammar the way you were taught in middle school or the way you were taught in high school or even in college it contains readings this book contains readings that do not have the backing from any one source so you can't put it in that box and say it came from that source and therefore that source is the pure source and we follow that no this stands by itself that's what I'm getting at this book stands alone there is no perfect evidence source that it's derived from there's none you can't make it it didn't vanish or I mean appear out of thin air but you can't link it to any one single source and so the King James Bible does not and will not conform to any man-made system of translation or any documents that precede it and this might just make you confused but where I'm getting at is the book is untamed and uncontrolled and man is left to debate and to argue over a reading whether it's accurate or inaccurate but he can never resolve every single word even the King James

[13:10] Bible defenders can never resolve every single word with a source that has them all together the only thing we can do and what we do is accept it by faith we believe it we don't have the proof there's evidence there's a strong case but it's never never ever 100% and you'll never get 100% you could take it into a court of law you could set this on trial and you could defend it with all of these manuscripts and all of this proof and all of these thoughts and these intellectual minds and the stature of these great men and it's only going to get you 99.9% of the way there there still will be a reasonable doubt if this is perfect if this is the holy words of God you will not be able to prove it but faith is the substance of things hoped for the evidence the missing evidence of things not seen that's what's missing in people's arguments and debates about whether the King James Bible is right or wrong or whether they follow it or don't many of them take a stand that it's the best but they don't believe its words are pure many of them take a stand on the documents it was translated from but they don't know how to handle it when you confront them to say well that word says this here it doesn't say it here which is right then they're just they're lost and so whether that edifies you or not

[14:46] I hope it at least strengthens your position of a position of faith and that's all God's going to give you he is not going to prove anything to you he's never going to do that he's going to let you believe him and when you believe him it pleases him that's what he said without faith it's just intellect what does he need that for without faith it's impossible to please him so even in these minor little tiny details where there's an oddity where it doesn't match the rules of English grammar you're left to say is it right is it wrong should it be changed is it a mistake why does it say it here and not here why is it there and not there what's you're just left to take it by faith it doesn't it won't let you put it in a box it stands all by itself that's the whole deal all right now back in verse number one it says that he at the end he turned aside and sat down verse two and he took ten men of the elders of the city and said sit ye down here and they sat down and he said unto the kinsmen

[15:56] Naomi that is come again out of the country of Moab selleth a parcel of land which was our brother Elimelech's and I thought to advertise thee saying buy it before the inhabitants before the elders of my people if thou wilt redeem it 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 and I am after thee and he said the kinsman said I will redeem it I don't know if I mentioned this last week I think I did that word advertise I always thought it said advise thee but he's not advising him when you think about it he's advertising he's making him aware of something he's not counseling him to buy it he's proclaiming the situation so he is the word advertise is the right word it's just used in a way we don't technically or commonly say today but it's the right idea for sure so he says

[16:57] I will redeem it and Boaz then I guess in his knowledge of this situation is obligated to inform the nearest kinsman one nearer than he although his intentions are to purchase the land of Naomi he's obligated to tell him and so the nearer kinsman says yeah I'm going to do it but hold on there's a catch here comes the catch verse number five then said Boaz what day thou buyest the field of the hand of Naomi 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 and the kinsman said I cannot redeem it for myself lest I mar mine own inheritance redeem thou my right to thyself for I cannot redeem it he didn't say I will not redeem it now we're going to try to make sense of this because back in Deuteronomy 25 when we studied that last week there was the brother was supposed to do it and if he didn't he was getting spit in his face and he was removing his shoe and they called him a name he got a title he inherited a derogatory title a reproach upon himself that doesn't seem to be the case here with this kinsman he doesn't say no I like not to take her like what was said back in

[18:17] Deuteronomy but here he says I cannot do it I can't if I do it it's going to mess up mine I mar my own inheritance so I cannot my hands are tied and so that was fine that it moved on to the next man now there's much that we don't understand about some of this stuff and I don't I've read probably six or seven different commentators on this passage and some of them are very very similar most of it's just very generic and thoughts of things some say well he owned this and he'd have to mortgage his property to purchase that and that wouldn't pan out if he ended up having a son that it would go to him and then he wouldn't get it back and then he wouldn't have any he'd be down he'd be out he wouldn't even own his own property by raising up it just and that's possible the way this is overlapping in families and it doesn't benefit the kinsmen to do it the bit of information about Ruth and about raising up the name of the dead changed something for him initially he said yeah

[19:26] I'll buy it I'll redeem it he was interested in the property but when there came a person with it then it changed some things for him and raising up seed upon that land that he then himself probably would not inherit but rather it would go to the son that changed everything he was interested in the resource but couldn't be tied down to the relationship now likely he's going to be adding property to his own estate but not hanging on to it since the son would inherit it the son that's raised in the name of the dead and though he's the closest kinsman here the deal doesn't make sense for him financially now Boaz is a mighty man of wealth as we saw in chapter 2 and it seems like he could handle the expense easily if that was the problem now currently the property is in the hands of Naomi married to Elimelech it's his under his name but it falls into her possession after he dies the sons are dead it's in her it's her estate so to speak now Ruth because she came back with her and she was married to one of her sons she has a share of it coming to her

[20:44] Orpah who walked away from this opportunity she would have also had a share coming to her and to whoever she would have married and so consider what Orpah walked away from back way back when she stayed in Moab Naomi has the option to sell the land whoever purchases it must be aware that Ruth is part of the deal because of the share that's coming to her and then the duty of raising up the Malon's seed which in turn I believe with both of them dead turns out to be Elimelech's seed in the long term it looks to me like the buyer only gets half the property and Ruth and the son would get the other half but then it looks like the buyer gets the whole property if he takes Ruth and therefore it's a little confusing like I said I don't get the whole deal but let's move on from there verse number seven says now this was the manner in former time in Israel so as it's being written it's not the manner anymore did the law of

[21:56] Moses go out no so what's taking place here is not what we read in Deuteronomy 25 it's the manner in former time in Israel concerning redeeming and concerning changing for to confirm all things a man plucked off his shoe and gave it to his neighbor and notice this was past tense this was a testimony in Israel therefore the kinsman said unto Boaz buy it for thee so he drew off his shoe so I think that what's happening here is kind of a situation a bit removed from what Moses prescribed in the law and he's plucking his shoe off the scene doesn't match Deuteronomy 25 I'm not going to take you back there but we read that last week and it was she was supposed to spit in his face if he said I'm not going to take her as a wife and then they were going to reproach that man because he's going to inherit the title the house of him that hath his shoe loosed and he had this reputation now that he was going to carry with him the rest of his life but why is that not the case here why does it seem to be easy come that duty or that expectation to take her as well as that reproach if you don't was reserved for the immediate family the brother it said it in

[23:33] Deuteronomy if you have a brother then he's supposed to perform the duty of a brother to his brother's wife when there's no brother to me it looks like well that whole reproach thing of refusing to keep your brother's name alive on his own inheritance that's a despicable act of a brother so it seems like if there is nobody like that then it's going to go out and we saw that we ran the passages where it would go to them if there's none of them it would go to the uncle and so forth I don't think the reproach falls on them because in this case I cannot it seems to be something illegal something connected to his or whatever the case that it's just not suitable if it was a brother he's already there he's already on the property of the same father he could absolutely and chose not to so that's my opinion of why this is now what we're reading is just the manner the shoe loosing

[24:34] I believe is definitely connected to of what the law said but it's not obligatory for the you know as it gets down the line into kinsmen versus the very brother himself if that makes sense to you that's what I think is going on here why it's kind of they're not they're lenient on what you'd expect them to be all you know cursing this kinsman that would not redeem it for himself when he passes on the deal so what's happening is probably a derivative and probably an existence of Moses' law in the culture I'm sure if he was a brother they would have done it that way one commentator described the shoe loosing as quote it being a natural signification or sign that the man resigned his interest in the land by giving to the redeemer his shoe wherewith he used to walk in it to the end that he might not enter and take possession of the land himself so maybe there is some signification to that

[25:44] I'm not going to set foot on that land I don't know about that but it's some kind of a pledge a ceremonious shoe loosing a pledge of this transaction being final and it's a business transaction remember I told you it's not a love story here but it's rather an obligation prescribed by God through Moses alright so coming ahead now to chapter 4 in verse number 9 and Boaz said unto the elders and unto all the people ye are witnesses this day that I have bought all that was Elimelech and all that was Chileans and Malons of the hand of Naomi moreover Ruth the Moabitess the wife of Malon have I purchased to be my wife to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance that the name of the dead be not cut off from among his brethren and from the gate of his place ye are witnesses this day and so the transaction is finalized in the gate of the city in front of the elders the shoe is loose that that other nearer redeemer is off the hook and he goes back to his life and now

[26:57] Boaz takes her now remember the typology that we've been seeing that's been just glaring at us through much of this the typology of Ruth being a picture of the church and Boaz being a type of Christ as a type Ruth pictures the church that Jesus Christ bought when he bought the field when he paid for the sins of the world and in paying for the field which is the world in the Bible he got the Gentile too it wasn't just paying for the lost sheep of the house of Israel but in paying for the field he got the Gentile that was there too and when Ruth decided to follow Naomi back to the land she became an heir in that land through marriage to Malon remember Orpah passed on that opportunity so when Boaz purchases verse 10

[27:58] Ruth have I purchased to be my wife you can't miss that if you study your Bible and read Pauline epistles you can't miss that somebody purchased someone else to be their wife the picture comes out let's run a few references first go to 1 Corinthians chapter 6 when Boaz paid redemption's price for the land and for the woman Ruth's right became her own it wasn't just out there in the future currently in Naomi's hand but now it became hers Naomi is out of the picture as far as the land and a right to it goes she sold it Ruth is now connected directly to the owner to Boaz look at 1 Corinthians 6 and before this here's the here's the breakdown if you missed it the

[29:10] Jew that brought the Gentile to God is out of the picture for the time being and the Gentile is connected to Jesus Christ through the payment that he made for her look at 1 Corinthians chapter 6 and verse 19 what know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you which ye have of God and ye are not your own why not for ye are bought with a price somebody paid for you therefore it's presumed that he owns you therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit which are gods and in the context there's a joining a joining unto the Lord you're not to be joined to strange flesh or to a harlot but to the Lord he that's joined to the Lord is one spirit in verse 17 you're bought with a price look at

[30:14] Ephesians chapter 5 Ephesians 5 and here's the picture of a husband and a wife picturing Jesus Christ and his church and verse well just verse 25 is good enough husbands love your wives even as Christ also loved the church and gave himself for it there's a price that he paid the giving of himself for the church look at this one more 1st Peter this is a good one 1st Peter chapter 1 this is going to bring redemption into it and the price of redemption was not money it was not corruptible things like gold and silver but it was blood 1st

[31:25] Peter chapter 1 look at verses 18 and 19 for as much as you know that you were not redeemed with corruptible things as silver and gold from the vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers which that's a reference to the Old Testament you weren't bought with those kind of principles but verse 19 you were redeemed with the precious blood of Christ as of a lamb without blemish and without spot so that Jew gets out of the picture for the time being because the redeemer came and shed his blood and allows the Gentile to have an inheritance to be on it to be owner in it and as a matter of fact while we're back here look around look at Galatians 4 so Boaz makes the purchase and becomes the owner with nobody else in the picture as far as ownership goes

[32:34] Elimelech Naomi Malon Chilion all them that had right to it are now out of it it's his he purchased it and he brings this Gentile because of her connection the Jew brought her in he gets her their son takes ownership of it all what I believe at least was Elimelech now Ruth who is now the wife to Boaz it says back in Ruth 4 13 that Boaz took Ruth and she was his wife Ruth now wife to Boaz joins in on what he owns look at Galatians chapter 4 and look at verses 6 and 7 we could do really there's a lot in Galatians 3 and 4 on this but just 6 and 7 says and because ye are sons God hath sent forth the spirit of his son into your hearts crying Abba father wherefore thou art no more a servant but a son and if a son then an heir of

[33:40] God through Christ notice the wording you're an heir of God it doesn't say you're an heir of heaven you're an heir of God come back to Romans chapter 8 and let's add to that you're an heir of God through Christ and what I'm trying to indicate is you're not going to stand before the Lord and wait in line for your little slice of heaven what's going to be my inheritance what's my little part here you inherit what the son has coming to him

[34:52] I'll show you this look at Romans 8 and verses 16 and 17 the spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit that we are the children of God and if children then heirs heirs of God there it is again but notice this joint heirs this is important joint heirs you know how you file your taxes if you're married you can file them single separately but you can file them as if you're one together couple you can file jointly you can file together both incomes come together to be one number the same is true as being an heir of God you're in Christ Christ is going to inherit all things given to him of the father prepared for him he's declared him to be above all things and by all things and by all things consist he's before all things and on and on and on and we are now in him jointly an heir of God it's not like Christ gets half and all of us get the other half to divide up amongst ourselves we're not separate children we're joint heirs with

[36:11] Christ is the point come to 1st Corinthians chapter 3 1st Corinthians 3 and we'll wrap it up here and in the passage I think this is a confused passage by a lot about rewards from verse 14 he shall receive a reward and I think some people mistake some thought there and take it to a direction it's not intended to go because the chapter closes in verse 21 therefore let no man glory in men for all things are yours whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or things present or things to come all are yours why and ye are

[37:24] Christ's and Christ is God's the whole thing is God's and he's giving it to Christ and ye are Christ you're in him you're jointly connected to him so all things are yours now this isn't to play on your greed or to turn something on in that manner it's to help you understand that the inheritance that we have is we're joint heirs with Christ whatever he has coming to him is ours to share in in Christ with Christ it's all through Christ it's not about I'm going to be a good Mormon and eventually become a god and take over my own little galaxy and start my own world everything is connected to Jesus Christ it's not going to go above him or beyond him you're not going to go beyond him and so we because you got in

[38:29]  Christ the best thing you ever did and ever will do because you're in Christ because you've taken him as your savior and he's accepted you're accepted in the beloved he is the beloved you're accepted you're accepted in him as a foolish filthy gentile with no right to anything and then you get in he took you in and made him part of himself bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh and a joint heir with him and we saw those words all things there there's a whole chain of references that Paul writes about all things and that's a fun study if you've never done it it's a real fun study one thing I pointed out well never mind it'll go too far so we'll stop there and then Lord willing next week we'll come back we'll finish the book and just close with that thought that everything you have