Boaz Polygamous

[Who is like God?]

So I was reading Ruth after recently hearing a sermon on the book with my new knowledge about polygamy and suddenly I realized that Boaz was most likely a polygamous! Okay well he could have been divorced or widower as well. What do you guys and girls think? What is the probability he was polygamous?

P.S. I mentioned this to a pastor (who was having a hard time explaining why the other kinsmen redeemer had to much to loose in redeeming her) and is against polygamy and he baulked, and told me not to read between the lines, but that story will be a different thread someday.

 

[CecilW]

His conclusion that it was a monogamous union was equally "reading between the lines" and with modern western/Romish glasses, to boot.

Boaz was a respected middle aged man of the community. Leastwise, nothing suggests that he was a teenager or early 20s fellow. He had enough years and experience on him to lead his employees, plan the gathering in a way to help the poor while protecting their self-esteem, and dealing with village elders.

In their society, you did not reach that age and status as a bachelor and retain society's respect. A man who chose bachelorhood was deemed to be a selfish *beep* who was depriving the community of his services as a husband and father for his own lazy comfort and/or gain. This concept continued. It is why, in Jesus' time, you had to be married to be a member of the Sanhedrin and, if memory serves (I could be wrong), deserving of the title "Rabbi".

Since the Bible makes no big thing about PM most of the time, the lack of mention means nothing. Therefore, the burden logically falls on the monogamy apologist to present any reason to believe Boas was NOT already married when he accepted the task of acting as Kinsman Redeemer to his cousin's family and the cute little Moabitess from across the border ... *wry grin*

 

[Scarecrow]

Rabbi simply means teacher and does not indicate marital status...Jesus was referred to as Rabbi...I am not aware of any credible evidence to prove Jesus was ever married...also, just as in the case of Moses, the evidence to show the actual marital status of Boaz is insufficient to come to a conclusion either way...

 

[CecilW]

Rabbi simply means teacher and does not indicate marital status...Jesus was referred to as Rabbi...I am not aware of any credible evidence to prove Jesus was ever married...

I understand the compulsion to keep Jesus unmarried, though I don't share it. But it does seem as though I've read that the term "Rabbi" was no more lightly applied 2000 years ago than it is now, and that at that time, it carried with it the expectation of being married. The word itself does not carry that connotation, but the historical setting did.

...also, just as in the case of Moses, the evidence to show the actual marital status of Boaz is insufficient to come to a conclusion either way...

What question is there about Moses? Just before the exodus he's still married to Zipporah, a Midianite, a descendant of Abraham. A few weeks or months into the exodus, he marries an Ethiopian girl, not a descendant of Abraham, and draws the ire of his elder siblings and the direct support of God. No mention is made of Zipporah's death, but her Dad is alive and well and management consulting Moses. It follows that any burden of proof will fall on the one claiming Moses was NOT polygamous.

One may not have the conclusive sort of proof that would be contained in a simple Biblical statement that "he had two wives who dwelled together with him in peaceful harmony," Same with Boaz. Fair enough. But the heavy preponderance of evidence sure seems to point that way.

 

[Scarecrow]

"sure seems" is what typically leads to the development of organizations such as the Jehovah's Witnesses, etc… There is no conclusive evidence that Jesus was ever married (nor was it a mandatory requirement of a Rabbi), that Moses had concurrent wives, or that Boaz was married when he took Ruth. Therefore any argument stating that any of them were in such circumstances is a weak argument at best and by no means reason to accept what is conjecture as fact. I would be willing to consider alternatives to my current opinions in the event that I come across compelling evidence to the contrary of what I am aware of at this time, but I think that is highly unlikely.

 

[Tlaloc]

The evidence that Moses had concurrent wives is pretty well stated in Cecils post, he was concurrently married unless Zipporah was dead, and that that was never stated or implied, and would be kind of important if it had happened. Its a pretty big leap to speculate he was not concurrently married.

Boaz doesn't have that kind of evidence surrounding him, but the probability is that if he was well off and older in a family oriented culture he would have been married before the incident with Ruth.

 

[Corey]

The points that he is drawing from concerning Boaz is they mention two wives. They extol the second wife first in both cases. Rachel and Leah, then the story of Tamar who tricked Judah into relations in order to secure seed but he was already married also.

He is drawing from the fact that they pronounce the blessings of a two wife scenario with the second wife priority because that is what Ruth herself is. Second wife like Rachel and Tamar and Levirate like Tamar. After I read his post I went and read it again and this is where I figure he is coming from.

It seems they appeal to these two stories because they fit Boaz’s home. Two wives with the main character being the second and by levirate marriage.

It might not be convincing for everyone but the brother said it was for him!

 

[Who is like God?]

The points that he is drawing from concerning Boaz is they mention two wives. They extol the second wife first in both cases. Rachel and Leah, then the story of Tamar who tricked Judah into relations in order to secure seed but he was already married also.

He is drawing from the fact that they pronounce the blessings of a two wife scenario with the second wife priority because that is what Ruth herself is. Second wife like Rachel and Tamar and Levirate like Tamar. After I read his post I went and read it again and this is where I figure he is coming from.

It seems they appeal to these two stories because they fit Boaz’s home. Two wives with the main character being the second and by levirate marriage.

It might not be convincing for everyone but the brother said it was for him!

Indeed as you said this was one of the things that I was drawing my exploratory observation from. I had also recently looked into inheritance rules/laws and it would seem that the price that the first kinsmen redeemer would have to pay (the price the was to great for him) could have to do with that Obed or whoever the male off spring would be in that scenario, would be inheriting all that man's property as the first born son of both the un-named man and Ruth as well as Ruth's families property that was redeemed. But observing how he was about to jump on the train initially makes it obvious to me that he had the money ... and this at least for now the only thing that I have found that would indeed threaten his own inheritance ... the fact that he did not have a son and therefore knowing how important it was to keep family in the proper family it would seem that perhaps Boaz had a son already and if a son then at least a wife at some time.

Do to the nature of this observation and the fact that the "traditional church" put a lot of weight (ruining their romantic picture) on this passage being an example of Christ redeeming the church I would not press that this could very well be polygyny in practice. However like I said before standing on this side of the fence I see how it could most easily be polygyny.

 

[Corey]

...also, just as in the case of Moses, the evidence to show the actual marital status of Boaz is insufficient to come to a conclusion either way...

According to Josephus Moses acctually married the Ethiopian first. This would put her concurrent with Zipporah. I don't know how much this is worth to you but it does show the common Jewish understanding of Moses marital life as polygynous. Josephus sets the marriage while Moses is still in Egypt before he had to flee. According to Josephus Zipporah was the second wife.

Tharbis was the daughter of the king of the Ethiopians: she happened to see Moses as he led the army near the walls, and fought with great courage; and admiring the subtlety of his undertakings, and believing him to be the author of the Egyptians' success, . . . she fell deeply in love with him; and upon the prevalence of that passion, sent to him the most faithful of all her servants to discourse with him about their marriage. He thereupon accepted the offer, on condition she would procure the delivering up of the city; and gave her the assurance of an oath to take her to his wife; and that when he had once taken possession of the city, he would not break his oath to her. No sooner was the agreement made, but it took effect immediately; and when Moses had cut off the Ethiopians, he gave thanks to God, and consummated his marriage, and led the Egyptians back to their own land. ( Ant 2:243)

 

[Scarecrow]

I tend to agree that both were polygyneous, what I lack is conclusive proof. I am not trying to convince myself or anyone else, I think that the information we have makes it very likely that they were. This is like other situations where we can draw a clear inference, yet cannot conclusively prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt. In any case there is a considerable amount of clear evidence to support polygyny in the scriptures so these two individuals would only bolster any existing argument anyway.

 

[John_and_Lori]

I understand the compulsion to keep Jesus unmarried, though I don't share it.


Revelation 14:1-5 (King James Version)

Revelation 14

1And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads.

2And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps:

3And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth.

4These are they which were not defiled with women for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb.

5And in their mouth was found no guile: for they are without fault before the throne of God.



The need is "To be With out Spot " , {Prefect}======= JESUS CHRIST

This is how I see it.

 

[DiscussingTheTopic]

I do not see why it is necessary to know if Boaz was polygamous, in order receive a good eternal life or know what is morally right and wrong.

Does anyone disagree with the following two statements? If so, why?

1. If Boaz was monogamous that would not make polygamy immoral

2. If Boaz was polygamous that would not make polygamy moral

 

[sweetlissa]

If Boaz were monogamous, it would have no affect on polygyny. If Boaz were p-olygynous, it would have a very large effect on polygyny because it would be another polygynous marriage blessed by God and by the community.

 

[DiscussingTheTopic]

If Boaz were monogamous, it would have no affect on polygyny. If Boaz were p-olygynous, it would have a very large effect on polygyny because it would be another polygynous marriage blessed by God and by the community.

I believe Polygyny is Biblical but I highly disagree with your reasoning

1. the community could bless something that is morally wrong

2. God could bless people and use people (to accomplish his purpose) who did morally wrong things. And can even use morally wrong actions of sinners to accomplish his purpose.


Solomon's mother was an adulteress but that does not mean God approved the adultery because Solomon was in Jesus line and was selected as King.... God may use or bless people who have done things that he disproves of.