Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Robert Vining <rvining AT log.on.ca>]

On 11/8/00, Charles Isbell writes,

Yours is a passionate exposition.  But I think you have failed to
address a very significant point highlighting the difference between
Ruth theMoabitess and the Moabite women in Numbers.  These latter had
not only become involved with Israelite men sexually, but had "invited
[them] to the sacrifices of their gods," leading to a flagrant and open
worship of these gods by the Israelite men, even to the point that
"Israel yoked themselves to Baal of Peor" (Num 25:1-3).
By very sharp contrast, Ruth is willing to leave her own people (much
like Abraham in Gen 12!), and pointedly declares that the God of her
mother-in-law Naomi will now be her God as well (1:16).  Jewish
tradition has always viewed this as a statement of conversion.  So the
difference in the two texts is not that God has changed but that the
worshipers of a false god in one instance not only retain their belief
in that false god but lure Israelites away from the worship of the true
[only] God to it.  In the second instance, Ruth's willing and forceful
acceptance of the true God
makes her fully acceptable as a wife for Boaz.
Of course, I am using the biblical view of gods false and true.  But the
contrast is not between YHWH "A" and YHWH "B" but between idolaters and
converts to the true faith.
Do you feel that this concept requires any adjustment of your
exposition?
Regards,
Charles David Isbell

RV: It is the heart of the Book of Ruth that Ruth the Moabite be
different from the Moabite women of Numbers. It is,  I think,  the
intent of the author to rehabilitate all Moabites, but especially
Moabite women, who desperately  need rehabilitation.  Based on the old
stories they were bad, bad, bad.. So, the author will tell another story
which counters the old stories. In the new story, the Moabites
(particularly one specific Moabite woman)  are different, and God has
dramatically changed. YHWH nevers changes, but perceptions of him sure
do. Perception "B" (Ruth) is very different from Perception "A"
(Numbers).

Although leery of dating and situating, and mindful of it's pitfalls ;
and also mindful of Steve Oren's warning as to the uncertainty of these
matters,  let me be so bold as to venture both a time and a place of
writing. The time is sometime later than the Judges era, and the place
is where Jews and Moabites  are neighbors, some of whom would like to
get along, even to have congenial relations.  Hanging over and deterring
this noble intention are those dreadful stories of the awful wickedness
of the Moabites, especially the women who are lewd, debauched and
debauching  seductresses,  prostitutes, who are not only pagan
worshipers, but even worse are beguiling the Israelite men into
paganism.  So cunning and seductive are they that they can beguile even
the wisest of men, not only into sexual relations but causing them to
turn away from the true god to pagan gods.  The Ruthian author creates
another story, and deliberately casts  it back in time so that nominally
the story is about that time "long ago,  in the days before Israel had
a king"*. To do this is much more powerful and conducive to  mutual
respect,  and supportive relationships, than to merely affirm that
modern (time of writing) Moabites  have improved over the years and are
better now than they used to be.  No, this counter-story suggests that
even back then,  the Moabite women were not as the old stories
characterized them. For , here is a Moabite woman who smashes the
stereotype;  who is so good that she winds up in the Israelite Women's
Hall of Fame, and is blessed by God.. And, she was a Moabite woman
living back in the days before Israel had a king.

Re: Ruth's conversion. Charles points out the importance of this idea in
Jewish tradition. This tradition has a right,  which it frequently
exercises,  to recast and reinterpret. In the midrash,** Ruth becomes
quite pious and a devout Jew. She keeps Jewish Law; observes Sabbaths
and Feast Days; dwells in a home which has a mezuzah, and becomes Torah
observant. None of which is in the Book of Ruth. There is a lot of
blessing by God in the Book. It is  done by Naomi, Boaz, even the
field-hands, but, not by Ruth. She never prays, is not Torah observant,
nor does she engage in any religious practice. This is not to say there
is no intimation of conversion. Verse 1:16 is made to carry a lot of
freight to uphold the conversion idea. This verse clearly emphasizes the
love and absolute devotion of Ruth to Naomi, not to God, "Don't ask me
to leave YOU! Let me go with YOU. Wherever YOU go, I will go; wherever
YOU live,  I will live.  YOUR people will be my people, and YOUR God,
will be  my God.  Wherever YOU die, I will die, and that is where I will
be buried. May the Lord's worst punishment come upon me if I let
anything, even death,  separate me from YOU".  How immeasurable the love
of this Moabite woman for this  Israelite woman.  As a corollary to this
great love is the idea that I will adopt your God, too.  Yes, a
conversion of sorts. Reminds me of this morning's headline, "Bush wins,
Sort of "  .  Why does the author not develop, or elaborate on the
conversion of Ruth into a pious Jew, as the later sages did?*** I think
it had to do with the author's   intent. The author is audacious enough
to hope, that his/her Jewish**** contemporaries  would have amicable
even supportive relationship with all Moabites, including the
unconverted.  So he downplays the necessity of conversion as a
precondition to mutual respect and congeniality. I avoid mere
tolerance,  for I think this renaissance writer hopes for more than
that, and skillfully crafts the story to that end.



*Ruth 1:1a

**  "Legends of the Jews", p32;  Sefer Ha-aggadah 112:47; Ruth Rabbah
2.22,23


***Similarly, the sages will have secular Esther become pious and
devout. See, Additions to Esther,  also,  Josephus, "Antiq." 11.6

****Some scholars posit a Moabite author, in which case it's the other
way around.

Robert Vining, Owen Sound, Ontario    rvining AT log.on.ca



.