What's up with Boaz's feet?

It's not about the feet. It's about the cloak.

It’s weird that Ruth goes to the threshing floor, uncovers Boaz’s feet, and lies down.

But what is weirder are many of the interpretations offered by critical scholars. It is commonly recognized that the Hebrew word for “foot”, regel, can be used as a euphemism for male genitalia, although the only strong usage in my opinion is Isaiah 7:20. Other instances like Exodus 4:25 and Isaiah 6:2 could simply mean “feet” rather than something else.

Ruth, however, utilizes a unique word, margelot, which comes from the rgl root but more literally means “place of the feet.” This word itself could be seen as the author’s attempt to clarify that he does not intend any euphemistic meaning that could be implied by “feet.”

Nevertheless, critical scholars cannot resist finding something more in Ruth’s action.

Photo by Marek Studzinski on Unsplash

Biblical Conspiracy Theorists

Critical scholars often act like biblical conspiracy theorists. The entire discipline of critical (most readers should think “liberal”) scholarship is founded upon the premise that the biblical text is dishonest. It is not the word of God. Rather it is a deceptive form of propaganda intended to legitimize those in power. Therefore, they approach the deceptive text with the goal of seeing past the text to hypothetical sources. Those in power ransacked these sources to create the current propagandized forms of biblical books, but with our superior, scholarly skills, we can peel back the layers and find the hidden messages.

When scholars begin with this kind of stance toward the text, it is no wonder they automatically assume the Bible does not mean what it means. They are the academic equivalent of flat earthers. “Don’t believe what you’ve been told. Throw out common sense and instead listen to us thread together the ‘facts’ in a way that will show you that what you thought you knew isn’t true.”

Don’t get me wrong. There are some helpful critical scholars, and we can learn some things from them. But it is essential to remember that those of us who begin from a position of faith in the God of the text are not starting from the same place as critical scholarship, and this largely explains our vastly different conclusions. We are not merely debating historical or literary data. We have fundamentally different approaches to the text itself.

What then of Boaz’s feet? Two lines of evidence flow from the context of Ruth itself, and rather than following the critical stance to “not believe the text,” I suggest it makes much more sense to trust a text that gives every sign of being a unified production, and which the people of God have always recognized as the word of God himself.

The Wisdom of Ruth and Boaz

The first line of evidence is the motif of “worth.” The entire book emphasizes the integrity of both Ruth and Boaz. Boaz is introduced to us as “a worthy man” (Ruth 2:1). The phrase could mean that he was “a man of great wealth” (NASB), but since the same word, chayil, is used of Ruth in 3:11, the emphasis most certainly is not on his wealth but his strength of character.

In their initial meeting, Boaz admonishes Ruth’s wisdom, which is displayed in her sacrificial care for Naomi (Ruth 2:11–12). In turn, Boaz utilizes his authority to protect Ruth from the dangers a young woman would face in the countryside and instructs his servants to intentionally drop barley for her to glean, demonstrating mercy and kindness (Ruth 2:14–16, 21–22).

When Ruth makes her proposal in chapter 3, Boaz accepts it because she is “a worthy woman” (eshet chayil; Ruth 3:11). In chapter 4, the town elders bless both Ruth and Boaz wishing for them to achieve worth (chayil; Ruth 4:11–12), and the women of the town tell Naomi that Ruth is better than seven sons (Ruth 4:15).

Some of the earliest readers of the book also saw the worthy character of Ruth and Boaz as a central theme of the book, and this is why Ruth often follows Proverbs in the Hebrew ordering of the Old Testament. Ruth, in particular, is seen as an example of the Proverbs 31 woman, who is also eshet chayil, a “worthy woman” or an “excellent wife” (Prov 31:10). The excellent wife depicted by King Lemuel’s mother is an embodiment of Lady Wisdom in Proverbs 1–3. Lady Wisdom then stands in contrast with the forbidden woman and adulteress of Proverbs 5–7.

The author would not destroy the entire portrait he is painting of this couple in a single episode. Proverbs, along with the rest of the entire Old Testament, view chastity as wisdom.

For this reason, the author takes pains to testify to their chastity on the threshing floor. Boaz is careful to instruct, “Let it not be known that the woman came to the threshing floor” (Ruth 3:14). He does not say this in order to hide what happened but rather to protect himself and Ruth from even the appearance of impropriety. Nothing immoral happened at the threshing floor, but if gossips knew they had been there together, they would’ve said that something immoral had happened.

Is the point of the book that Ruth is rewarded for fornication? Some critical commentators think so. But this runs against the entire testimony of Scripture and of Ruth itself. If Ruth and Boaz slept together on the threshing floor, then they would not be the examples of wisdom that they are.

Ruth’s Explanation

The second line of evidence is Ruth’s actual explanation of her action. Uncovering a man’s feet and lying down at them was not a normal thing women did in 12th century BC Bethlehem. There is no cultural significance that is hidden to us today. Even Boaz is startled when he wakes up to Ruth at his feet (Ruth 3:8).

Since both we the readers and Boaz himself do not understand the significance of Ruth’s action, we must rely on Ruth’s explanation of her action in verse 10: “Spread your wings over your servant, for you are a redeemer.” While the ESV's rendering of “your wings” is an accurate literal translation, it fails to communicate to us the idiom that Ruth is employing. The NIV gets it right when it says, “Spread the corner of your garment over me, since you are a guardian-redeemer of our family.”

Ruth is not comparing Boaz to a bird or a mother hen. Rather she is asking to be wrapped in Boaz’s garment, but they both understand that she is not asking to be wrapped in his cloak immediately and literally. Her request is symbolic. Ezekiel 16:8 clarifies the expression for us:

When I passed by you again and saw you, behold, you were at the age for love, and I spread the corner of my garment over you and covered your nakedness; I made my vow to you and entered into a covenant with you, declares the Lord GOD, and you became mine.

In Ezekiel, it is Israel that God spreads the corner of his garment over. The expression is the image of the intimacy and protection of the marriage covenant. Yes, Israel is portrayed as naked, but the nakedness of Israel in Ezekiel 16 signifies Israel’s poverty, not its availability.

Boaz had already described Ruth’s membership in God’s covenant with Israel with the same expression (Ruth 2:12). Now Ruth asks Boaz to initiate the covenant of marriage with her, bringing her within the corners of his cloak and giving her intimacy and protection from her poverty.

With this explanation, we can understand Ruth’s action as a visual aid for her appeal. By pulling the cloak that was covering him back and lying at his feet, Ruth put herself in the position to be covered by Boaz’s cloak. She is visually demonstrating her impoverished need and Boaz’s ability to meet her need and protect her.

While not a perfect comparison, I suppose it carries similar significance to a man getting down on one knee to propose. The gesture is a physical act symbolizing the respect, loyalty, service, and love being offered to the potential bride. It is a picture of the sacrificial love that a husband ought to give in marriage.

It’s not really about Boaz’s feet. It’s about his cloak. Ruth asks to be brought into the protection of Boaz’s garment by lying down at the place of his feet. By uncovering his feet and lying down, Ruth, a worthy woman, signifies to Boaz, a worthy man, that her mourning is over and that she needs and desires his intimacy and protection in a levirate marriage.