Ruth 3:3-7,13,14 and the Practice of Bundling

Status
Not open for further replies.

baron

Puritan Board Graduate
Bundling

Jonathan Edwards was not the first to preach against the practice of bundling as this article demonstrates:
The original bundlers: Boaz and Ruth, and seventeenth-century English courtship practices - Critical Essay | Journal of Social History | Find Articles at BNET

But notice that there is no evidenced adduced of a similar practice in ancient Near Eastern contexts; all the parallels are from later cultures. Ancient audiences would likely have found the idea as scandalous as we do. The problem in understanding Ruth 3 arises from the common misconception that what Naomi told Ruth to do is the same thing that Ruth did. Naomi's instructions to Ruth are highly dangerous, and the Hebrew underlines this with a whole series of double entendres. But Ruth immediately takes the encounter off in a different direction and it is clear that nothing immoral actually takes place. See my commentary for more details.

Iain
 
Jonathan Edwards was not the first to preach against the practice of bundling as this article demonstrates:
The original bundlers: Boaz and Ruth, and seventeenth-century English courtship practices - Critical Essay | Journal of Social History | Find Articles at BNET

But notice that there is no evidenced adduced of a similar practice in ancient Near Eastern contexts; all the parallels are from later cultures. Ancient audiences would likely have found the idea as scandalous as we do. The problem in understanding Ruth 3 arises from the common misconception that what Naomi told Ruth to do is the same thing that Ruth did. Naomi's instructions to Ruth are highly dangerous, and the Hebrew underlines this with a whole series of double entendres. But Ruth immediately takes the encounter off in a different direction and it is clear that nothing immoral actually takes place. See my commentary for more details.

Iain

Indeed, the text seems to be clear that Boaz goes out of his way to make sure that Ruth is protected, that no one takes advantage of her, that her name remains excellent, etc. (Boaz is quite the contrast from Elimelech in chapter 1). Also, he is careful to make sure that he does not overstep his bounds with regard to the "closer redeemer."
 
Jonathan Edwards was not the first to preach against the practice of bundling as this article demonstrates:
The original bundlers: Boaz and Ruth, and seventeenth-century English courtship practices - Critical Essay | Journal of Social History | Find Articles at BNET

But notice that there is no evidenced adduced of a similar practice in ancient Near Eastern contexts; all the parallels are from later cultures. Ancient audiences would likely have found the idea as scandalous as we do. The problem in understanding Ruth 3 arises from the common misconception that what Naomi told Ruth to do is the same thing that Ruth did. Naomi's instructions to Ruth are highly dangerous, and the Hebrew underlines this with a whole series of double entendres. But Ruth immediately takes the encounter off in a different direction and it is clear that nothing immoral actually takes place. See my commentary for more details.

Iain

Thanks. The chapter in the commentary that deals with this was a big help to me the last time I taught the story of Ruth to kids.
 
I let my third son and his now wife bundle a few times after I was sure they would get engaged. They had to leave the door open, though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top