Subject or Verb?

So Naomi returned, and with her Ruth the Moabitess, her daughter-in-law, who returned from the land of Moab. And they came to Bethlehem at the beginning of barley harvest. Ruth 1:22 NASB

Who returned – What are we to make of the unusual Hebrew construction in this verse? What usually happens in translation is a “smoothing out” of the rough spots. In this case, the Hebrew reads, hashshavah (from the verb shuv—to return), literally translated, the returned, as a Qal, perfect, third person, feminine singular. With this in mind, the verse would read, “and with her Ruth the Moabitess, her daughter-in-law, the returned from the land of Moab.” As you can see, the presence of the definite article (ha) attached to the verb creates a problem; a problem that generates treating ha as if it were a pronoun, “who.” There are some rare grammatical constructions where ha acts as a relative pronoun (as noted in some lexicons) and perhaps we might read it that way here, but it just might be that something more subtle and more important is happening here. In order to see this as more than a rare occurrence of ha as a pronoun, we need to ask ourselves a much bigger question. “What is the story of Ruth really about?”

The answer to this question is startling. First, the story of Ruth is not really about Ruth. It is really about Naomi, as the end of the story makes quite clear. Ruth is just the vehicle God uses to restore Naomi’s faith and hope. Yes, Ruth is a central figure in the story and it is Ruth’s hesed that alters the lives of the other actors, but the purpose of the story of Ruth is the restoration of Naomi.

Secondly, and even more importantly, the story of Ruth is not really about the people in the story. Yes, Naomi is restored, but as a whole, the story of Ruth is not even about her. It is about YHVH’s power to redeem even when life seems hopeless. In other words, the story of Ruth is the story of a verb, not a collection of nouns. It is the story of the verb shuv and what it means to “return.” In the story of Ruth, shuv (used many times) is connected to hesed. We learn from this story that God’s hesed is always focused on shuv, even when we don’t see the result until after all the trauma and risk is over. In this sense, Ruth the Moabitess does not return. Actually, it is quite impossible that Ruth the Moabitess could return since she never left Bethlehem in the first place. It isn’t Ruth who returns. It is shuv encapsulated in the Moabitess. The verb returns to the life of Bethlehem in the person of Ruth. Ruth brings Bethlehem back to God.

Yael Ziegler suggests that Ruth is placed after the book of Judges because the story of Ruth redeems Israel from a period of civil war, moral collapse and human degradation. Ruth’s story resets the social and religious fabric of the nation so that the kings come in the name of the Lord and order is restored. Without Ruth, Israel itself loses its divine calling. This larger view of the story fits the odd construction of verse 22. It isn’t Ruth who “returns” to Bethlehem. It’s “returning” itself that comes back. Ruth is simply the carrier of the verb. How about you? Are you a carrier of one of God’s verbs?

Topical Index: ha, definite article, shuv, return, restore, Yael Ziegler, Ruth 1:22

Subscribe
Notify of
10 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Laurita Hayes

Pieter Jooste got me to thinking yesterday (thank you, Pieter) about what Skip calls the cycloidal nature of reality. “Spiraling with direction” he calls it, instead of just circling its own drain. The entire existence of Israel was to plant within the rebellious earth a direction, or focus, that the rest of the planet could use to “return” to its Maker. Israel was told that it was designed to piggyback the rest of the crippled planet. Israel was a true theocracy, but that theocracy did not start with an earthly king; instead it was set up so that the people could self govern under the direct Kingship of heaven. In the deliberate vacuum of power created by a lack of a leader (else Joshua would have anointed a king, which he was not, either) they could have demonstrated how a true democratic system (based on the submission to their heavenly King) is supposed to work, and included all the other people around them, like they were commissioned to do, but they could not resist the infighting! Our true return on this planet is a return to the voluntary service of our heavenly King.

The planet did not get to see how that worked until the peculiar conditions of a people who had had a bellyful of kings that got in the way of their worship of God had finally caused them to petition Him for a place where they could have the freedom FROM kings they saw they had to have to worship Him. Not in Athens, Greece, which appreciated the idea, but in America, which started out knowing their true King, was democracy to flourish. However, it took Toqueville to observe that the only reason it worked was because the populace voluntarily subscribed to a collective fear of a Higher Power that kept them straight with each other, and that ‘other’ included the entire human race. America learned what Israel didn’t get: that none of us can truly have the blessings of God – which includes that freedom to worship – until we all have it. (Is anybody here, in America, seriously considering a return to an earthly king to solve the problem we now face because we have denied the kingship of our heavenly King? Will that really fix it?)

Well, Adam, Noah, Moses and Abraham didn’t have any king but King YHVH either, now did they? Israel was called to be an entire “kingdom of priests” (wonder Who that nation of priests’ King was supposed to be?), and again in the New Testament, we are called to the same commission, under our King, Who has promised to come back as soon as we have subjected ourselves. A few hundred years ago a certain people who heard that call and who had finally tired of the curse of earthly kings decided to take YHVH up on the offer of returning to His Kingdom; subject by subject, and came here to America (can you tell that I am proud of my ancestors?).

In this time of corrupt leaders, I have thought perhaps it may be time for us, once again, to hear that call to return – out of the corrupt kingdoms of Babylon – to our called priesthood under that direct Kingship. Just my two cents’ worth.

Gayle

Laurita,

I couldn’t agree more. How is it we believers cannot understand that blessings follow obedience? Not only that, our nation is of a particularly unique form, where we have the ability (“Right”?) to obey the Father’s instructions, even when man’s are in opposition to them.

In my circle(s) of friends and acquaintances, I am often pleasantly surprised that someone who I thought was an acquaintance through our common political activity, is actually a friend, because they look to our King. The numbers of Torah followers are growing within this circle. I am amazed (and grateful) at what is happening.

Michael Stanley

I, too, am in the process of tushuva-returning the human to my being. I am grateful for this process; though slowed by my obstinacy, it was never in doubt (to Him). I am becoming a being who is full of shalom, shelem (wholeness), purpose and joy. Thank you Skip the (big) part you have played in this metamorphosis. Michael

Brett Weiner B.B.( brother Brett)

Absolute I’m responding to the post that starts these comments I was often criticized Buy piggybacking off of another word of the Lord little did I know that that was my god-given task I am looking for ways to speak into that pastors life using his own words this is God’s work it was just yesterday that I heard him speak again praise God PS please forgive me for punctuation I’m new at this thank you shalom

Seeker

Skip

This sounds a lot like Laurita’s explanation of lover versus servant. And I add For YHVH we are servants but in Yeshua we are lovers. Caring not because we feel obliged to but caring because of a passion towards the receiver… (Laurita I trust I understood your comment on the earlier blog correct)

Laurita Hayes

Hey, Seeker, I forget what my understanding was at the time, but it you don’t mind scooting over a little, I like yours!

carl roberts

Return to Me

~ He Himself bore our sins in His body on the tree, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. “By His stripes you are healed.” For you were like sheep going astray, but now YOU have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls ~ (1 Peter 2.24,25)

Who is [the subject] “you?” Love is a verb, and “to whom much is given, much shall be required!” Those who have been forgiven much, love much.

Seeker

Carl
Would it not be easier to read this message as a motivation for the non believers of the time, rather than a confirmation for us today?
Today the Spirit keeps us aligned towards the only mediator. Or rather active members of the mediator’s resurrected body…
Ask not what Jesus can do for us, but ask what part we play in God’s redemption plan…

Suzanne Bennett

“It isn’t Ruth who ‘returns’ to Bethlehem. It’s ‘returning’ itself that comes back.”
Profound — it greatly affects the reading of Torah when we make that connection. And to think it all starts with a little definite article. We blithely interpret Hebrew Scripture and then we stand with arrogance and claim to “know the Word.” There are no shortcuts in this walk. I do not lightly dismiss thousands of years of Rabbinic commentary as nit-picking over single words. In Hebrew, single words make a world of difference. Thank you, Skip (and to your muse) for this study.