THE ASSEMBLY (10)
THE ASSEMBLY (10)
Ruth 1: 1 - 22; Ruth 4: 1 - 22
JT It is in mind to look at Ruth as a type of the assembly, but it may be well to first clarify certain points which, I think, should be mentioned. First, I would say that she is viewed as a person who has love for the one who, for the moment, is the vessel of testimony. Naomi represents the people of God. Whatever may be said about her going to Moab, she is seen here as returning to the position of the people of God, and being honoured as coming back to that position. Chapter 1 shows that whilst Ruth’s sister-in-law, Orpah, went back. Ruth clave to Naomi, clearly viewing her as lovable. And according to all the facts that come out as to Naomi, she had a clear understanding of the people of God, knowing what belonged to them, what was suitable to them, and what was seemly in them. Ruth valued all that, and in her committal said, among other things, that where Naomi died she would die and be buried there. She committed herself wholly to Naomi, and I believe in that sense she becomes a type of the assembly, that is to say, of the saints who love those who are of the testimony, regarding them in their seemliness. In result, as moving on those lines she became the wife of Boaz, a near relative of Elimelech, who had the right of redemption, and therefore is a type of Christ; Ruth herself, as has been remarked, being a type of the assembly. It is for us to ponder these things to see if Scripture bears out what is being said.
ABP The Scripture says, “We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love the brethren”, 1 John 3: 14. That would support what has been said.
JT And so it says of the centurion in Luke 7, “he loves our nation”, verse 5. He was undoubtedly one who came into the assembly. He said that he was a [p. 690] man under authority, and he had an impression of Christ’s position here; and he loved the nation.
CAM In Ephesians 1: 14 it says, in regard to the Spirit, “who is the earnest of our inheritance to the redemption of the acquired possession to the praise of his glory”. Does that apply to this line of thought?
JT It does. Boaz is a type of Christ, the One who has the right to redeem. And then there is the idea of raising up the name of the dead; that is another point which comes out in this book.
ANW A further idea is that of purchase; the word purchase is a potent one, it seems to me, pointing in the direction you are suggesting: “the assembly of God, which he has purchased with the blood of his own”, Acts 20: 28. Boaz says, in chapter 4: 10, “Ruth ... have I purchased to be my wife”.
JT That word, “... purchased with the blood of his own”, seems to refer to what God has done. “His own” would refer to Christ, I would think.
WAT The name of Ruth is mentioned in the genealogy in Matthew, which is the assembly gospel. Would that not indicate the link that she has with the assembly?
JT The facts that establish what we are looking into are found in this very book; that is to say, Ruth was one who loved Naomi. That is asserted; not only that she clave to Naomi, but in the last chapter she is said to have loved her, verse 15.
JAP Is there any type of the Holy Spirit in this book? The Holy Spirit has come into several of our other inquiries as to the assembly; particularly in Genesis 24, and elsewhere, and I was wondering if that is so in this book. I cannot see that it is, but I was wondering if it is so.
JT Well, if any one has a suggestion it may be helpful.
ABP Is there not a suggestion in chapter 2: 6?
Reference is made there to “the servant that was set over the reapers”. Would there not be some intimation of the service of the Spirit in that?
JT Well, that is the one thing that was on my mind. There may be a reference there. In certain instances, when you get distinguished unnamed persons, the likelihood is that there is an allusion to the Spirit, and I would fully go with the thought that the servant here would be such a type. He is a nameless servant, but a man of distinction, a man of business, a man of action, in that sense. He was particularly in my mind, but one does not like to say too much, because there is so much that points to the Spirit, and we do not need to force anything. But I would quite go with the suggestion that the servant of Boaz may be an allusion to the Spirit.
ABP I have wondered also, if Naomi does not rise, in certain parts of the book, to a type of the Spirit in His subjective work in us. There is a kinship link with Boaz, and she knows perfectly well what Boaz will do: “the man will not rest until he have completed the matter this day”, chapter 3: 18. Would it be going too far to see the Spirit’s activity in that?
JT Well, as I was remarking, it is well to be a little restrained as to this; there is so much that can be said on that point that we do not need to force anything; the Lord is assuring us and comforting us as to it, especially as to such persons as ‘the master of the house’, in the gospels. These illustrations are quite sufficient to bring out the truth of the Holy Spirit, so that we do not need to force anything.
JTJr The servant’s accurate knowledge of what Ruth did would show that he would be a very forceful type. It says, “And she came, and has continued from the morning until now: her sitting in the house has been little as yet”, chapter 2: 7. He had accurate knowledge of Ruth’s [p. 692] movements.
JT Just so. Well now, I think we should proceed with the typical teaching, first of Naomi, then of Ruth, and then Boaz, and how the thought as to the right of redemption in Boaz is brought in.
CAM You were stressing the thought of love; that seems to be her only link, would you not say, inasmuch as her setting was really reproachful?
JT Yes; love overcomes it, everything she does is seemly. And all that Boaz does is seemly, too, so that the enemy is shut out. Take, for example, Boaz’s suggestions to her to remain till the morning, and then to let it not be known that a woman was in the threshing floor; all was seemly, it was according to what is right, which is a great matter in these things. It is a question of seemliness, and, of course, it ultimately brings us to what came out in Christ, because it must be so when we deal with a matter fully. We must see the thing working out in Christ in the gospels. And the book of Ruth can be seen worked out in the gospels. Of that I am certain. And this would show the importance of studying the Scriptures. The apostle says, “Think of what I say, for the Lord will give thee understanding in all things”, 2 Timothy 2: 7. And what we need in these meetings is to get understanding from the Lord, but the ministry is the basis of it: “Think of what I say”.
CAM That allusion to the life of the Lord is a very beautiful suggestion, because the assembly must derive every feature of beauty and all else from Christ.
JT She derives it from Christ.
CAM As far as what is legal was concerned, she had no right to anything.
FHL Every other man has to disappear but Christ.
TNW In John 4 it speaks of the disciples coming and wondering that the Lord spoke with a woman. Does that not have a link with this?
JT Well, quite so; it was perfectly right, infinitely [p. 693] right, and yet there might be a question about it with some. And so it is in the case of Ruth, but questions are groundless when we look into the facts. So that it says of God: “that he should be just, and justify him that is of the faith of Jesus”, Romans 3: 26.
ANW Matthew 1 plainly brings her in line, for the bringing in of Christ.
JT And so, in Matthew 1 there may have been certain questions about the Lord’s own birth, but it is infinitely right. “The holy thing also which shall be born shall be called Son of God”, Luke 1: 35. It is infinitely right.
CFE Do we see a subjective state in Ruth as linking on with Naomi, and finally with Boaz, becoming the wife of Boaz?
JT Well, quite so; she is, you might say, of Naomi. Luke’s gospel traces the genealogy of Christ back through Adam to God. In each case the word of is used, whereas Matthew begins with Abraham and says they “begat”. Ruth, you might say, is of Naomi. She has a daughterly link with Naomi, and Naomi has a motherly link with her.
JTJr There is no actual remaining natural link, therefore there is something mysterious.
JT The centurion, in Luke 7, had a link in that he loved the nation “and himself has built the synagogue for us”. And the Lord marvelled at him and the understanding he had.
AR And it says of the woman in Luke 7 that she “loved much”.
JT Well, there it is; it is well linked with the centurion who loved the nation. The Lord says that she loved much. Hence these facts show that the book of Ruth can be worked out in the gospels.
VCL Ruth was attached, in love, to the vessel of the testimony before the matter of redemption was completed. Would that link with the gospels and those [p. 694] that were attached to Christ before the actual matter of redemption was worked out by Him?
JT Well; the foundation was there; that is, John 3 brings in the idea of being born anew: “Except any one be born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God”. And that idea is seen in Ruth. What she saw in Naomi formed a link with her. All that works out in relation to the truth of the assembly.
CAM Would you say that the claim that any one of us has with regard to kinship is because there is a God-given love in our souls? There is that evidence of the work of God which marks us off as material for the assembly.
JT Yes; John 3 is the great basis — the new birth. Ruth was altogether outside of Moabitish connection. She left Moab; she severed herself entirely from Moab, and God has caused that.
JHH Would Ruth help us to love the brethren in a right way? She loved Naomi, even though Naomi spoke of being in bitterness. But Ruth could go beyond that and see the work of God in her.
JT John’s epistle would work that out. The groundwork of everything is in the new birth, and John’s ministry brings that out.
EAL What would be learned from the fact that the masculine side is taken away, leaving only the women?
JT Well, the word dead is used as to them. And the point is that there is life from among the dead. That is the idea in the book. In the millennium the Jewish remnant will come into life, but, of course, this matter comes into our own dispensation.
JTJr So that the thought of life out of death is a principle in Romans, is it not? Death having come in, it is a question of life now, and the apostle makes a great deal of love, too, does he not? Love is the whole law.
JT And so the redeemer must bring in life. [p. 695] The inheritance is secured; Boaz purchases it; he secures it; he redeems the inheritance, and then he brings in life.
ABP Do we see deliverance from the social world here? Moab is different to the Egyptian world, is it not?
JT Moab is very proud; it is the world in that sense. The whole world lies in the wicked one.
ABP If we are to be good assembly material, we have to overcome the social side of things.
JT Quite so; Isaac had to overcome the social side with respect to the Philistines in Genesis 26. The social side was a great difficulty, but he overcame it.
ABP In doing so he brought in the feminine side in the ewe lambs.
VCL Is there faith with Ruth in that she speaks of death and of burial?
JT Just so; “there will I be buried”. She went that length. Orpah went back to her country and to her gods, but Ruth clave to Naomi. And she spoke to Naomi, saying, “... where thou diest will I die, and there will I be buried”. That is to say, death and burial were in her thoughts. It is said of Christ that He was buried: “... that Christ died for our sins, according to the scriptures; and that he was buried”, 1 Corinthians 15: 3.
RFD Is there a suggestion in Ephesians that the assembly existed before Christ was delivered up? It says, “as the Christ also loved the assembly, and has delivered himself up for it”, chapter 5: 25.
JT Well; it is the perfect divine knowledge that the Lord had of everything. Divine thoughts were there, but anticipating redemption, and therefore the Lord gave Himself for it. That is the price He paid; He gave Himself for it; it was on that basis.
DP Should persons coming from Moab be challenged in regard to their attachment to what is of the assembly?
JT [p. 696] What need is there of any challenge if the link is there? The link was of God. If a person has a link with God, you do not challenge that. That is to say, the work of God must underlie everything, and that is what we have in John 3: “Except any one be born anew he cannot see the kingdom of God”, and then, “Except any one be born of water and of Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God”. The work of God is evident if he sees the kingdom and enters into it.
JTJr Ruth went the whole way; and that would be evident if there is a true link. The person would go the whole way. Death and burial is the whole way.
ANW It is repeatedly said in this book that Ruth is the Moabitess. Is that to show the excellence of grace?
JT We get many instances of that in persons getting their names from what they were before they were converted. Take, for instance, Simon Peter; at certain times the Lord reverted to the name of Simon. And there are many other instances.
ANW Is Mary Magdalene another?
JT Yes, quite so.
SW Would Ruth’s link with what was of God be recognised by the elders and those in the gate when they were willing to link Ruth on with Rachel and Leah?
JT Well, nothing could be clearer than the position as it is stated in the last chapter, which we should come to now. It says, “Boaz went up to the gate, and sat down there ... And he said, ... If thou wilt redeem it, redeem; but if thou wilt not redeem, tell me, that I may know; for there is none to redeem besides thee; and I am after thee. And he said, I will redeem it. And Boaz said, On the day thou buyest the field of the hand of Naomi, thou must buy it also of Ruth the Moabitess, the wife [p. 699] of the dead, to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance. And he that [p. 697] had the right of redemption said, I cannot redeem it for myself, lest I mar mine own inheritance. Redeem thou for thyself what I should redeem, for I cannot redeem it”. The thing is clearly settled; it is a public matter in the city.
EAL Would the beginning of chapter 2 show that there was a link with Boaz through Elimelech? “And Naomi had a relation of her husband’s, a mighty man of wealth, of the family of Elimelech”.
JT Well, that is the point in the last chapter; the relationship is there. But Naomi spoke to Ruth of that at once; she apprised her of it. And Boaz acted in the most seemly manner, giving to Ruth the evidence of his liberality and love and kindness to his relative in the food that he sent by Ruth’s hand to her mother-in-law. So the whole position is clear as the matter is concluded. And that is the point we are on now; it is a question of marriage, and Ruth is a type of the assembly by the facts here.
JAP In Romans 7 we have, “So that, my brethren, ye also have been made dead to the law by the body of the Christ, to be to another”. Is that the position?
JT That is right; the epistle to the Romans helps us on those points. It is a great matter to see how these things work out in the New Testament; that the things that are being ministered at the present time, in the power of the Spirit, are worked out in the New Testament.
RHS Is there a distinction between the idea of redemption and being purchased? The assembly has been purchased, but it has been suggested that the assembly has not been redeemed.
JT Well, both things are true. In Acts 20 it speaks of the assembly of God, which He has purchased with the blood of His own. That is the same as redemption; it is the purchase money. Every Israelite had to [p. 698] be purchased.
ETP It would seem that when Boaz purchased this allotment the great thought in his mind was Ruth. Would that link with Matthew 13 where the man purchases the field because of the treasure in it?
JT Well, just so. All these things are important because much has been said that things must be supported in the New Testament. Well, must they be in the New Testament? Is that a right statement? I do not think it is, because every scripture is inspired of God — every scripture — and it is profitable. But at the same time, if they are in the New Testament we are on right ground in bringing them forward for confirmation.
AR Would the place the gentiles have in Paul’s mind as brought into the assembly be seen in Ephesians? He says that they were “aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: but now in Christ Jesus ... become nigh by the blood of the Christ”, chapter 2: 12.
JT Yes; quite so. The book of Acts says, “this salvation of God has been sent to the nations; they also will hear it”, chapter 28: 28. Ephesians brings in Jew and gentile, “that he might form the two in himself into one new man”. It is “the Jew first” in the epistle to the Romans.
RDG The one who had the right to purchase said he would redeem, but when he heard the name of the Moabitess mentioned he said he could not.
JT Well, I would say he is the type of a legal believer; just a legal person; he was not ready to go the full length and take the place of a brother, to raise up seed to a brother. That comes in in Deuteronomy 25. The dead brother is to have seed raised up to him, which is a great matter to understand; and that is what comes out in this chapter. So that Boaz says, “On the 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 he that had the right of redemption said, I cannot redeem it for myself, lest I mar mine own inheritance. Redeem thou for thyself what I should redeem, for I cannot redeem it”, chapter 4: 5. That is to say, he came short, he was not a mighty man of wealth, whereas Boaz had plenty of means, and therefore he was prepared to raise up a name for the dead. He not only secures the inheritance, but he is prepared to raise up the name of the dead.
ABP Is this seen in the Acts in the hesitation of the believing Jews to take on the heavenly side of the truth?
JT It would be something like that, I would say. You would see this in persons that are not real in their profession; there is a shortage, they do not have the full thought of purchase.
ABP I have been struck with the statement of James to Paul in Jerusalem, “Thou seest, brother, how many myriads there are of the Jews who have believed, and all are zealous of the law”, Acts 21: 20. The vessel of the heavenly ministry was amongst them, and apparently the truth as to the assembly was not being received; they were zealous of the law.
JT All that would go with what we are saying.
DP Did Boaz establish in the presence of the elders the right and legality of Ruth to the position?
JT Exactly; that is the point; the chapter will show that, and that is now what we are coming to, how the marital transaction takes place.
JTJr Matthew’s gospel establishes the position legally. The first chapter legally establishes the whole position as to Christ.
JT That is the idea, exactly; the position is established legally. And what can anyone say? Let anyone who wishes to challenge it do so, but what can he say? The thing [p. 700] is established legally.
JAP And it is established from the Old Testament.
JT Quite so. There were no other scriptures then, of course, except the Old Testament. I think it is helpful to go back in history, as we have done, to get things established; if they are established historically, legally, then we can be firm in them.
ANW The legal atmosphere is emphasised strongly in our chapter. The matter is all legally carried through; there can be no dispute; legal terms are used.
JT You refer to the custom in Israel?
ANW Yes; and the gate, and the witnesses, and the taking off of the sandal: “Now this was the custom in former time in Israel concerning redemption and concerning exchange, to confirm the whole matter”. It is very pronounced.
JT All these things are very important. Some may ask, Why should we be legal? But it is a question of what is established before God. How could we have redemption, for instance, if Christ had not become Man? We could not have redemption without that. But He has become Man, and He has died. So the thing is established legally. Redemption had to be established through death, and death has taken place.
ANW Otherwise, why should we have the genealogy of Matthew 1 in addition to Luke 3?
JT In Matthew 1, begetting is in mind and the genealogy begins with Abraham, whereas in Luke 3 the word of is used and everything is traced back to God; you begin with Christ and go back to God.
VCL Does not chapter 4 of this book bring us into the liberty of Romans 8? In place of what the law could not do, the whole freedom of the Spirit’s realm comes in.
JT Very good.
JTJr And the legality of the Spirit’s position is established in Romans 8. Our right to address the Spirit is established [p. 701] legally.
AEW The word of Boaz to the elders and to the people is, “Ye are witnesses this day ... Ruth the Moabitess ... have I purchased to be my wife”. We have been having much as to Christ and the assembly, and I thought we might say the Spirit is helping us to be witnesses to the truth.
JT Well. John’s epistle would show that: “This is the witness”, it says. The thought of witness is alluded to several times in 1 John 5. “This is the witness, that God has given to us eternal life; and this life is in his Son”.
CAM In Galatians 4 it says: “God sent forth his Son, come of woman, come under law, that he might redeem those under law, that we might receive sonship”, verse 4.
JT That is a sequence: “that we might receive sonship” is a legal sequence. “Ye are all God’s sons by faith in Christ Jesus”, chapter 3: 26. Who can question it? And then, “But because ye are sons, God has sent out the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father”, chapter 4: 6. What can be more legal than that and yet what can be more precious?
CAM Would it not be right to say that one of the greatest things which has come into the souls of the saints through the ministry as to the Spirit is that we understand sonship in a way that we never understood it before. We now look at sonship more from the divine side, instead of trying to reach it from the need side.
JT So, God is bringing many sons to glory. He is doing that, and we want to be sure that we are amongst them, because God is doing it.
FSC Would the fields and the harvest which are spoken of so much in this book suggest the great idea of life out of death?
JT The book begins with the fields of Moab.
FSC But the further thought is in the fields of [p. 702] Boaz where the barley harvest and the wheat harvest are referred to.
JT Very good. The barley harvest comes first: that is, before the wheat harvest. The first is the resurrection of Christ; the second, the resurrection of the saints. The first thing we get in the book of Acts is that Christ is risen; “he presented himself living, after he had suffered”, chapter 1: 3. And then, in principle, we get the resurrection of the saints in the three thousand that were converted on one day. That is like the wheat harvest. So that the barley harvest is Christ risen and the wheat harvest is the saints; because you cannot have the assembly without the saints.
ABP Is it, “the first-fruits, Christ; then those that are the Christ’s at his coming”, 1 Corinthians 15: 23?
JT That is it. A thing that has been made very clear to me, just recently, is that you cannot have the assembly without the saints; Christ Himself could not be the assembly, you must have the saints. Therefore, we begin with Christ in the barley harvest, and then we come to the beginning, we might say, of the wheat harvest in the three thousand that were converted on the day of Pentecost.
ABP It says that Ruth kept with the maidens of Boaz “until the end of the barley-harvest and of the wheat-harvest”. That was all before union took place.
WWM It says, “ye are witnesses this day. And all the people that were in the gate and the elders said, We are witnesses”, chapter 4: 11. In Acts 10 Peter says, in relation to the bringing in of the gentiles, “We also are witnesses of all things which he did both in the country of the Jews and in Jerusalem ... . This man God raised up the third day and gave him to be openly seen, not of all the people, but of witnesses who were chosen before of God, us who have eaten and drunk with him after he arose from among the dead”, verse 39. There would be correspondence in this witness.
JT Very good. Witness is a great matter with God, because it is basic. “... whereof all we are witnesses”, Peter says in Acts 2: 32. They were witnessing to the resurrection of Christ.
DP In Boaz there was a man in Israel who had the ability to settle an issue on the ground of righteousness.
JT He had the ability; that word applies to him fully; he was a mighty man of wealth; he was a relative of Naomi, and indirectly of Ruth. He “will not rest until he have completed the matter this day”.
AR He settled it on the basis of Deuteronomy 25. That suggests manhood, does it not? Deuteronomy was written by a man of God.
JT Moses was the man of God. “... began Moses to unfold this law”, Deuteronomy 1: 5. It was what he said himself.
WAT Is the greatness of the wealth of Boaz seen in verse 9? It says, “I have bought all that was Elimelech’s”. Is what Christ has received in acquiring the assembly seen in that?
JT Well, it is the inheritance. “Boaz said to the elders and all the people, Ye are witnesses this day, that I have bought all that was Elimelech’s, and all that was Chilion’s and Mahlon’s, of the hand of Naomi; moreover Ruth the Moabitess, the wife of Mahlon, 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”, Ruth 4: 9. Now these are wonderful facts when we apply them spiritually, and bring them into the New Testament, because they refer to what has come to pass in Christ.
JMcD Boaz appreciated Ruth’s qualities and her worth; he was able to discern it and delighted in [p. 704] it.
JT Ruth took a very lowly place, you know, and Boaz commended her in the fullest way. He says, in chapter 2: 8: “Hearest thou not, my daughter? Go not to glean in another field, neither go from here, but keep here with my maidens. Let thine eyes be on the field which is being reaped, and go thou after them; have I not charged the young men not to touch thee?” And then in chapter 3: “Blessed be thou of Jehovah, my daughter! Thou hast shown more kindness at the end than at the first, inasmuch as thou followedst not young men, whether poor or rich. And now, my daughter, fear not: all that thou sayest will I do to thee; for all the gate of my people knows that thou art a woman of worth”, verse 10. Ruth gets the same title as the woman in Proverbs 31. “Who can find a woman of worth?” verse 10. Ruth gets that title here and she is a type of the assembly. It is very blessed that we can say these things together, because the idea of these meetings is that we say things together in holy fellowship one with another.
EAL Boaz adds, in chapter 2: 11, “It has fully been shown to me, all that thou hast done to thy mother-in-law since the death of thy husband”.
JT That is a great matter. She dealt kindly with her mother-in-law. So that everything confirms us as regards Ruth; she is commendable in every way as a type of the assembly.
ABP Boaz, and the kinsman, and the ten men, make a total of twelve men in the gate. Does that represent assembly administration?
JT Yes; it is like Acts 19; there were twelve men at Ephesus.
AP Is it important to see that we have the service of God brought in in Obed?
JT His name means ‘Worshipper’. That is a great point in the book; the consummation is in the worshipper; and then the full line of David. The last [p. 705] paragraph shows how the whole result is in the line leading up to David; and, of course, that means leading up to Christ. It reads: “Now these are the generations of Pherez. Pherez begot Hezron, and Hezron begot Ram, and Ram begot Amminadab, and Amminadab begot Nahshon, and Nahshon begot Salmon, and Salmon begot Boaz, and Boaz begot Obed, and Obed begot Jesse, and Jesse begot David”. And that is Christ in type, of course; therefore, we have come to the assembly; we have come to Christ; we have come to worship; it is all in these four chapters of the book of Ruth.
JTJr It is Judah’s line; his name means ‘Praise’. “When Israel went out of Egypt ... Judah was his sanctuary”, Psalm 114: 1.
JT Quite so; Obed would fit in with that; he is the worshipper.
RHS Would this link too with Hebrews 12? “Ye have come to mount Zion; and to the city of the living God”, etc., and then it says, “... to the assembly of the firstborn who are registered in heaven; ... and to Jesus”.
JT Very good; that is what we have come to.
FNW What is the instruction in this type in that Naomi, as well as Ruth, is retained in our minds to the end?
JT Naomi represents the Israel of God in the future; and that is the bearing of the book of Ruth. Ruth herself is a type of the remnant of Israel in the future, but she can be used as a type of the assembly at the present time.
FNW I was wondering if the motherly side, as well as the bridal side, of the assembly is carried forward? It says in Galatians, “Jerusalem above is free, which is our mother” (chapter 4: 26), and “the children of the desolate are more numerous than those of her that has a husband”, verse 27. Would that be indicated in Naomi?
[p. 706] JT Well, that is right. But let us just see what is said about Naomi here. It says that the child “shall be to thee a restorer of thy life” (that is a question of Naomi coming into life), “and a nourisher of thine old age; for thy daughter-in-law who loves thee, who is better to thee than seven sons, has borne him”, chapter 4: 15. We have alluded to Ruth’s love for Naomi; it is not only said that she clave to her, but that she loved her. And then it says, “Naomi took the child, and laid it in her bosom, and became nurse to it. And the women her neighbours gave it a name, saying, There is a son born to Naomi. And they called his name Obed. He is the father of Jesse, the father of David”. Now she is coming into her own, so to speak, because she is revived. I think it is very beautiful. It is really an allusion to Israel, what Israel will come into in the millennium; restoration, in freshness.
JAP It says also, “and may his name be famous in Israel!” The Lord Jesus will have that place in Israel in a day to come, will He not?
JT And so it says, in Philippians, “... that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow ... and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to God the Father’s glory”, chapter 2: 10.
SW Is there significance in the fact that the neighbours named this child? Are these persons in line, in keeping with what was going on?
JT Well, if you compare the first of Luke, for instance, the neighbours wanted to call the child’s name Zacharias, but Zacharias said, “John is his name”. But they do not say that here; the name they give is accepted. It is quite good when we say things that can be accepted by the brethren.
DP Does Ruth surpass Naomi?
JT Well, I would think so, in a certain sense. Naomi represents the people of God as a whole. One who loves the people of God, commends himself [p. 707] peculiarly; and Ruth loved the people of God; but then Ruth got a wonderful place; she became the wife of Boaz, the mighty man of wealth. She is a type of the assembly, which is greater than what Naomi sets out. She is greater than the millennial saints, she belongs to our own dispensation, in type, for she typifies the assembly.
CAM That bears on what you said at the beginning; that Ruth is a type of the assembly.
JT And I think that the book confirms fully what we have said; that is, that she can be considered as a type of the assembly, whereas Naomi represents the people of God in the millennium, when they will be revived and come into a great place.
AR It says, “And Naomi took the child, and laid it in her bosom, and became nurse to it”. Does that suggest the place that Christ will have in the affections of the godly remnant in a day to come?
JT Well; I think so. He will be glorified among His people; He will have a wonderful place there. But He has a greater place now in the affections of the assembly, His bride, according to the book of Revelation.
RDG Does the fact that this matter was done in the gate and that the neighbours come into it correspond with what Paul said to Agrippa, “this was not done in a corner”?
JT Very good. What we are having in these meetings is small, outwardly, but important.
Ques Would John 4 come into this?
JT Well, exactly; Obed means Worshipper.
SW Ruth comes under the notice of the servant in chapter 2, who, in type, is the Spirit, and she has a conversation with him.
JT I think it is very much like Rebecca; she had a conversation with the chief servant of Abraham, and Ruth is doing that here.
[p. 708] Rem Naomi says she came back empty, but actually she brings Ruth back with her.
JT Well, yes, it says that Ruth reserved some of the food and brought it to Naomi. Naomi came back empty, but Ruth fed her.
CAM So that we have not only our need supplied, but we are brought into most wonderful blessing. Naomi really comes into something that is wonderful.
JT Yes; and I would say to any young person today, that if he wants to come into fellowship he will be coming into what is really wonderful; for it is what God has done, it is the fellowship of God’s Son and God’s people.
ANW No one knew that better than Naomi!
TNW Do you think it might become more wonderful to some if they renounced the social side of things? It seems to negate what is so precious and there seems to be a tendency to that with some of the young.
JT Well, quite so, we have to be on the watch against worldliness; persons may be quite worldly and yet come to meetings such as these.
WAT I suppose we need to be prepared for a spiritual move. It says of Naomi that “she went forth out of the place where she had been”, chapter 1: 7.
JT Quite so.
JHE Was not Ruth willing to take a low place? And she was considerate of Naomi.
JT Just so; and she received a wonderful title. Boaz said, “my people knows that thou art a woman of worth”. And Boaz was to make himself a name in Bethlehem, and Ruth was to become his wife.
JHE Love considers for others.
EAL Was Naomi one who had an ear for the truth? She took the initiative in returning to the land of Judah because of what she had heard.
JT Quite so; she had ears to hear. It says, in [p. 709] Acts 11, that certain matters came to the ears of the assembly.
RDG Naomi was not called Mara, was she?
JT Not so far as we know.
ETP You stressed the thought of love as seen in Ruth. I wondered if the line of love is carried through in Naomi. It says that she laid the child in her bosom.
JT Quite so; it is the place of affection. Jesus is said to be in the bosom of the Father. And John lay in the bosom of Jesus.