God Facts

 I think you will find this of great interest.  God made things the rightway.  They will never change...

we need to read this more than once to be reminded what AGREAT GOD WE SERVE.    

How

Great is our God!!! Our Creator and Redeemer . . . and do we THINK about it ???   God's accuracy may be observed in the hatching of eggs...          For example: -the eggs of the potato bug hatch in 7 days;

-those of the canary in 14 days; -

those of the barnyard hen in 21 days; - 

The eggs of ducks and geese hatch in 28 days; -those of the mallard in 35 days; -  eggs of the parrot and the ostrich hatch in 42 days.

(Notice, they are all divisible by seven, thenumber of days in a week!) 

God's wisdom is seen in the making of an elephant.  The four legs of this great beast all bendforward in the same direction.  No other quadruped is so made. God planned that this animal would have a hugebody, too large to live on two legs. For this reason He gave it four fulcrums so that it can rise from the ground easily.

The horse rises from the ground on its two front legs first.

A cow rises from the ground with its two hind legs first.

How wise the Lord is in all His works of creation!

God's wisdom is revealed in His arrangement of sections and segments, as well as in the number of grains. -

Each watermelon has an even number of stripes on the rind.

-

Each orange has an even number of segments.

-

Each ear of corn has an even number of rows.

-

Each stalk of wheat has an even number of grains.

-

Every bunch of bananas has on its lowest row an even number of bananas, and each row decreases by one, so that one row has an even number and the next row an odd number.

-The waves of the sea roll in on shore twenty-six to the minute in all kinds of weather. -All grains are found in even numbers on the stalks, and the Lord specified thirty fold, sixty fold, and a hundred fold all even  numbers. God has caused the flowers to blossom at certain specified times during the day. Linnaeus, the great botanist, once said that if he had a conservatory containing the right kind of soil, moisture and temperature, he could tell the time of day or night by the flowers that were open and those that were closed!

 The lives of each of you may be ordered by the Lord in a beautiful way for His glory, if you will only entrust Him with your life.  If you try to regulate your own life, it will only be a mess and a failure. Only the One Who made the brain and the heart can successfully  guide them to a profitable end.

I

HOPE YOU FIND THIS AS FASCINATING AS I DID.

May God Bless You in Ways You Never Even Dreamed. I didn't think twice about forwarding this one. 

The Bible When you carry "the Bible," Satan has a headache, when you open it, he collapses, when he sees you reading it, he loses his strength, AND when you stand on the Word of God, Satan can't hurt you!

And did you also know...When you are about to share this others, the devil will probably try to discourage you, but do it anyway. "Life without God is like an unsharpened pencil - it has no point. "  

"AMEN”

Did You Know?

 

The brutal murders of two New York City police officers days before Christmas shocked the nation. One of the slain officers, Rafael Ramos, was to be certified as a lay chaplain at 4:00 the afternoon he was killed.



  If you were to bump into Officer Ramos in plain clothes while he was off duty, you would probably never think he was a police officer. New York City cops have a certain look about them, a certain aura, and you can just tell they’re cops. But Officer Ramos was different; he did not have that same feel.



  Rafael was a person who loved the Lord. He had been serving faithfully for 14 years at his local church. The Lord was at the center of his life. God played a role in everything he did.
He viewed being a New York City officer as a service to his community and he believed he was doing God’s work because he was protecting and serving his community. He felt he was a part of the solution when it came to the trouble in our communities. 



 He felt that chaplaincy was the kind of work that brought you closer to those that were suffering and he paralleled it with the work he did as a police officer. Police officers run toward the problem while others run away. This is similar to chaplaincy because we seek out those who are suffering, while others might move away from suffering.



  Do you consider your work as doing God’s work? How do you treat those around you? What do you know about their life, so you can share about Jesus with them?

The Sign of the Cross

The Sign of the Cross

Customs can be powerful things!  And helpful!  Shaking hands as we meet someone or hugging as we greet a friend are "secular" examples.  Christians folding their hands or bowing their heads or closing their eyes when they pray are religious examples.  Sometimes our actions help us focus and express things.  This is one of the oldest and most universal of all Christian worship practices.

History of the "Sign of the Cross"

This practice has its roots in the first or second century with Baptism.  This gesture was made to express the Trinity as the person was baptized "In the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."  It was made twice--on the forehead and once on the heart. By the third century, it was universal and widely used in worship.  Around the year 200 in Carthage (modern Tunisia, Africa), Tertullian says: "We Christians wear out our foreheads with the Sign of the Cross".

WHY the "Sign?"  What are the Reasons?

The Sign of the Cross signifies, recalls and celebrates the following:

  

     -  Our Baptism, and that we are His children - His own, we belong to Him!

     -  God's mercy and grace!

     -  The Trinity

     -  Our thankful hearts!  It's a sign or act of thanksgiving.

     -  It sometimes has a prayer aspect; the Sign is expressing our trust in God or our prayer for 

        God's intervention (Ever see baseball players Cross themselves as they come to bat?).

HOW is the Sign done?  And WHEN?

Traditionally, it's done in this order:  head, heart, RIGHT shoulder, LEFT shoulder (often back 

to heart).  Catholics reversed the order after the time of Luther now going to left shoulder first. Anglicans/Episcopalians followed the Catholic change but Lutherans typically stick to the older, traditional way -- going to the right shoulder first.  But Lutherans (not being picky about customs) welcome either way and you'll find Lutherans doing it either way (it's perfectly okay).  Typically it's done with the thumb and two fingers touching, also indicating the Trinity.

Like nearly all Lutheran pastors, Our Pastor leads it, as leader of our congregation. Pastor leads it with what's called "the open Sign".  Examples are at the Invocation, the Benediction, and after receiving Christ in the Sacrament;  as the worship leader, I'm LEADING you in doing the Sign. It's ENTIRELY optional if you respond with it.  A century ago, ALL Lutherans did - now (especially in the USA)...not so much.  It's totally up to you. But doesn't this...well...make you...um...well....Catholic?

No more than if you sing hymns or fold your hands when you pray or proclaim the Nicene Creed or celebrate Communion or have Scripture readings - Catholics do those too!

Typically, it's done whenever the Trinity is proclaimed (such as the Invocation and Benediction) and after receiving Christ in Communion.  Again, the pastor LEADS, suggesting when it's appropriate.

“Comfort for Christians”

         

Session One: Guilt

Read Isaiah 40:1-2

For the next few weeks, we’ll be looking at practical ways that the Gospel comforts the believer.  We do that in a general sense WHENEVER we open the pages of Scripture, but we’re going to do it very purposefully and in practical ways. 

Of course, many Scriptures and promises will be repeated often – since they apply constantly.  Some are quite specific to a certain situation.  They are good Scriptures to keep in mind – for us and for others.  But you are ENCOURAGED to offer your own verses, to ADD to the Scriptures offered each week! 

And of course, while we’re going to focus only on the Gospel, we all know there is a “flip side” – the Law.  We’ll touch on that from time to time, not nothing more.  Gospel CAN be abused and actually become harmful (drinking too much water can kill you!).  But we’ll try to keep a RIGHT use in view.

“I Have Sinned!”

“Sin” is no longer a common word in the English language.  Not even in a lot of churches.  It’s hardly ever used in books or songs or films; it hardly appears in common English uses at all.  Even 20^th and 21^st Century sermons and hymns rarely mention it.  

In the Judeo-Christian world, the concepts of original sin and total depravity were once SO deeply ingrained, so completely assumed, that it was constantly stated, strongly and universally felt.  “That saved a WRETCH like me” John Newton wrote 200+ years ago in the now ancient hymn, “Amazing Grace.”  This kind of talk was common!   In this milieu, guilt is understandable!  Maybe unavoidable.

Times have changed.  The worldview is now post-Christian.  The common view of man is “I’m okay, you’re okay.”  We are fundamentally good – not perfect, but good. Yes, we struggle and slip up at times, we communicate poorly at times, we are misunderstood and our needs are often misunderstood.  This can lead to good people making bad choices.  In THIS mindset, there may be regret of sorts – but even that is just relative (heck, everyone else makes still worse choices!) and the “fault” for such really isn’t personal but communal.  “The prideful have no sins – except for pride.”  Think of the films, books and songs of the past 50 years; with the exception of some Country songs perhaps (!), is there much guilt?  Some people sense no NEED for comfort in this area because they sense no sin on their part.  We’ll leave it at that since THAT is a Law issue - they need the Law to tell them what they are, what they do and how serious that is…

For many of US, guilt remains REAL because sin remains REAL.  We didn’t stop sinning in the middle of the 20^th century.  We still do.  As much as ever.  And it’s PERSONAL, and it’s PAINFUL, and it’s HURTFUL, and it STINKS. 

It manifests itself in a plethora of ways.  Anger.  Depression.  Isolation.  Violence.  Accusative spirit.  Negativity.  Self-destructive behaviors.  A lot of different ways….

Alice had suffered from depression for some 50 years, since her mid-twenties.  All this began shortly after she married Jim, but it grew steadily worse.  Jim stood by her (even though the “worse” part of the vows was outweighing the “better” part of that).  They had two sons, and they too stood by her (although she was increasingly difficult to live with, and functionally stopped being much of a mother when they were still pretty young).  At first, just being cheerful and keeping her busy at least kept her functioning.  Then some medication was added, and that helped.  Then regular, weekly appointments with a counselor were added.  But in her late 50’s, it became all consuming.  She rarely left the house.  She became critical and negative. One-by-one, friendships were strained past the breaking point.  She ate – and put on over 200 pounds.  Fortunately, she didn’t drink.  Finally, at the age of 75, she agreed to be placed in an institution, a “loony farm” as Alice called it.  In one of the groups, a young lady spoke of an abortion, and cried.  Alice broke down in loud tears, and not for the young lady.   Shortly after Alice and Jim were married, she became pregnant.  They planned on not having children for a while, until Jim got out of the Army – and she felt she let Jim down by becoming pregnant.  Her hairdresser gave her the name and phone number of someone who’d take care of that.  She had “lived” with that for 50 years (“lived?).  Nonetheless, ultimately, Alice was one of the fortunate ones.  She was forgiven.  Including by her.

How did guilt manifest itself in Alice?

What finally helped Alice?

How have you witnessed guilt in people’s lives?  Have you had experience trying to help them?

Alice was forgiven, and she forgave herself.  Do these stories always have a happy ending?

Read Psalm 51 (so do including the heading in the ESV)

Recall the story of David and Bathsheba….

David repented only after Nathan almost tricked him into seeing his fault – but he did see it!  How does this Psalm reveal his sorrow and his faith?

Do you think David found healing in forgiveness?

 

 

Read John 8:1-11

While the text doesn’t expressly say it, Jesus’ handling of this suggests the woman was sorry.  What seems to be Jesus’ point to the accusers? 

What two important things do you think Jesus is saying in His counsel to the woman?

Read Luke 7:36-50

How do we know this woman is sorry?

What is the view of the “holy” people toward her?

What is the point of Jesus’ parable?

How is Jesus’ advice to this woman similar to the other?

Of course, this account also shows the need to respond to guilt with forgiveness!   Read Matthew 18:21-35, Matthew 11:25-26, Luke 6:37-42, Luke 11:4

If you can, tell of a time when you felt forgiven…

Read the following verses.   Write down what comfort this gives….

Isaiah1:18 _________________________________________________________________

Micah7:19 _________________________________________________________________

John3:16-17 ___________________________________________________________________

Psalm103:10-12 __________________________________________________________________

Psalm130:3-4 ___________________________________________________________________

John8:36 ___________________________________________________________________

Romans3:23-24 ___________________________________________________________________

2Corinthians5:21 ___________________________________________________________________

Ephesians4:32 ___________________________________________________________________

Colossians1:13-14 ___________________________________________________________________

1John1:8-9 _________________________________________________________

1John2:2 ___________________________________________________________________

Psalm32:5 ___________________________________________________________________

Psalm34:18 ___________________________________________________________________

Matthew11:28-30 ___________________________________________________________________

Luke15:10 __________________________________________________________________

Acts10:43 __________________________________________________________________

Colossians3:13 __________________________________________________________________

1 Timothy 1:15 __________________________________________________________________

The Practice of the Lutheran Churches since the Reformation

The doctrine of the Two Kingdoms is not the same as the American principle of the separation of church and state, which has its roots in the Enlightenment. We might like to think that it gave theological underpinning for that principle, but the truth is that the Reformers and their successors did not see it that way.

            The application of this theology has not always been sound. One DISASTEROUS

misapplication of the doctrine of two kingdoms is now constantly brought up - the participation of the Lutheran churches in Hitler's Third Reich. Church authorities mostly capitulated to the demands of the National Socialists, who rode to power on, among other things, the promise to restore Christian virtues to the demoralized society that was the Weimar Republic. The Right Hand of God was put in the service of the Left Hand of God. German nationalism and the superiority of the Nordic race was incorporated into the church's message to the world. The "deutsche Christen" (German Christians) were as uncritical of Hitler's agenda as were the Hitler Youth. This rendered them impotent and mute in the face of the unfolding horrors of the Third Reich. There were notable exceptions, thank God, like the Confessing Church and the men who subscribed the Barmen Declaration, but their resistance to National Sociaiism stands in stark contrast to the passivity of the vast majority of Christian iay people and their spiritual leaders. The activist role of Dietrich Bonhoeffer was exceptional and praiseworthy. It is noteworthy that LUTHERANS, of aI/ people, fell into this gross misuse - the very thing Luther sought to denounce. 

                Dietrich Bonhoeffer                              

An Old Doctrine for Today's World

Which brings us to contemporary America and the place of the doctrine of the Two Kingdoms in shaping the consciences of Lutherans who want to fulfill their calling as Christian citizens in a republic "of the people, by the people and for the people," where the people elect the men and women who rule them as servants of Christ's Kingdom of the Left.

To begin with, the doctrine of the Two Kingdoms rules out the legitimacy of a theocracy-even a republican (note the small "r")-theocracy. To call America a Christian nation from its inception is true only in the sense that it was settled by an overwhelming majority of Christians, who in writing a constitution for a new nation were determined not to recreate the European model of a Christian state on these shores. Jews and atheists were a minority who enjoyed the rights and privileges of the secular constitution. The American experiment was explicitly designed to avoid the religious conflicts that had plagued Europe and even some of the American colonies.

While no one of any significance is calling for the establishment of a Christian theocracy in America today, there are many Christians who believe that the government should legislate and govern in a way that conforms to Christian values as these are defined by a strong and vocal segment of the Christian community. To make that happen, they either have to form a Christian party (like the Christian Democrats in Italy and Germany) or work to control the agenda of an existing party, which is what appears to happen, from time-to-time, in the Republican Party. There is no conflict with the doctrine of the Two Kingdoms in this effort, as long as it is the work of individual Christians. Problems emerge when it becomes the action agenda, as opposed to the teaching agenda, of the
church. Christians can and should speak and vote their convictions (as should non-Christians) but they do so as citizens of the State, working in God's Left Hand.

The church, speaking with the authority of Christ as the kingdom of his right hand, has the undoubted duty of preaching and teaching the word of God. Its primary witness consists of the gospel of our Lord, Jesus Christ, which has the power to forgive the sins that the proclamation and experience of the law exposes. Its "law" words certainly include judgments on moral and ethicalissues facing the nation. Because we are a divided church, the judgments thus spoken will not be uniform. Even a cacophony of witnesses is better than none. The churches seek to persuade the public of the rightness of their positions on such matters as capital punishment, the "right" to health care, even the unrestricted "right" to own guns.

The churches also have the duty to inspire and train men and women for public service. Politics is no more a dirty business than coaching a football team. To support Christian politicians in their vocation is a religious duty, such support always contingent on how faithful they are to the word and will of the Lord Christ who rules secular society through his kingdom of the left. The Lutheran theology of "vocatio" applies equally to both Kingdoms.

No one should question that the church's preaching and teaching should influence attitudes and actions in the political life of the nation, the Left Hand of God. But for the church as the church, whether it be a denomination, a congregation or a loose confederation of congregations to get actively involved in party politics is to abdicate or compromise the unique and imperative responsibilities as the Kingdom of the Right. The mission of the church is not to create a kingdom of this world. Militant Islam is trying to do that very thing; we do not want to go there.

How about political pastors like Jesse Jackson and AI Sharpton? They have been directly and actively involved in party politics. Do they fall between the cracks of the categories of the right and left hands of God because they do not speak and act officially as ministers of a church or denomination? Perhaps. There is an Episcopal senator from Missouri (Danforth) and several decades ago there was an LCMS congressman from Ohio who fit the category of ordained ministers actively serving as servants of the kingdom of the left .. A Roman Catholic priest served as a congressman until the Pope ordered him to stop. We would say that ordination does not disqualify from governmental service, with the caveat that they not present themselves as speaking for the church; they are simply CHRISTIAN individuals, speaking their convictions and acting accordingly.

Until the presidential election of 1960 there was a strong majority who believed that a Catholic candidate was unacceptable because of the powerful influence of the Roman hierarchy, which could use spiritual discipline to force conformance to Catholic teaching. (Remember the bishops who would not commune John Kerry in 2004?) John Kennedy convinced the Baptists in Houston that he would not let the bishops control his decisions and actions. He meant it and was elected. In a curious historical turnaround, the same Baptist preachers are now hard at work to elect candidates and pass laws that conform to their position on public issues.

Is that wrong? Not until and unless these churches, as churches, move from advocacy of
issues to involvement in political action. We are seeing a lot of that today. There are religious leaders in America today who are singing the siren song of Christian nationalism. They would like to transform the GOP into God's Own Party. The reality is that men like Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Ted Haggard and other church leaders (whom the confessors would define as bishops) have moved beyond advocacy for an agenda to direct political action. They do not see themselves as merely Christian citizens working within the system (that is, the kingdom of the left), but as power brokers who would control the system as the church - as the Right Hand of God. In cases like these, they are moving the church out of the column of the Right Hand of God's governance into the column of the Left Hand of God. They are leftists of an unintended sort.

When the kingdom of the left intrudes on the kingdom of the right, engaging in protest is
certainly a legitimate work of the church and its leaders. We Lutherans have experienced precious little of that here. The actions of Nebraska in WW I in outlawing Lutheran schools because they were instructing in German and the actions of Arkansas in disallowing the use of wine in the Eucharist during the Prohibition era come to mind. More recently and more seriously were attempts to intimidate and penalize churches in the South for advocating and agitating for civil rights. Civil disobedience was certainly an appropriate response from the churches and their leaders. Making it a crime to feed and clothe and house illegal immigrants is a more contemporary (and thus controversial) illustration of laws of the kingdom of the left infringing on the mission and ministry of the kingdom of the right.

The Kirchenkampf in Nazi Germany was between the churches and the government and also between different camps in the German church. Passive obedience to government edicts was the drilled-in response of most German Christians. The church leaders who insisted that the government had no business limiting the preaching/teaching witness of the church were persecuted. The choice was between preaching a false gospel of racial purity and national destiny and remaining faithful to the Lord and his word.

We have had nothing like that here, of course, but there are subtle and not-so-subtle pressures on the church to support the government in times of war and refrain from criticizing it from the vantage of the word of God. It will be interesting to see how the government makes out in threatening to divest that Episcopal Church in Pasadena of their tax-exempt status for their preacher's strong advocacy of peace just before the last election.

Today's world is very different from the world of the Reformation. The powers that be (the left hand of God) look very different in a constitutional democracy than they did in the era of the divine (and often absolute) right of kings. But in 21^st century America as in first century Rome or 16^th century Germany ultimate authority to govern comes from God. In America today the penultimate authority is the vote of the citizens acting under the authority of the constitution. The legal doctrine of the separation of church and state helps to maintain the distinction between the right and left hand kingdoms of God, although it is not identical with it..

Whether American Lutherans are Republicans or Democrats, it falls on them particularly to distinguish between the work of the right and left hands of God. It is, after all, a confessional position that distinguishes us from many Protestant groups. Witnessing to the word of God in addressing the great moral issues of the day in pulpits, classrooms, and national assemblies is essential as well as legitimate. Individual members may certainly enter the political arena with the blessing of the church. But for the church or its officeholders to enter that same arena as church violates the biblical distinction between the two kingdoms, and it compromises and undermines the mission and ministry assigned to us by our gracious Lord.

Book of Ruth

Chapter 2

After a ten-year absence, Naomi and one of her two Moabite, widowed daughter-in-laws, return to Bethlehem.  She had left with her Hebrew husband and two teen sons but now returned in a much different situation.   The villagers were “stirred” by this – not only because of the tragedy of Naomi’s experience while away in Moab but likely also because (to be blunt) here are two penniless additional mouths to feed – and one of them isn’t even a Hebrew, a young woman who probably can’t be married off – young but a Moabite, one of the enemies of the Hebrews.  This is where Chapter One (Act 1 in this Readers’ Play) leaves off….  Perhaps there was a short intermission, and now….. Act 2

2:1-7

1.    “Gleaning”  was a unique aspect of Old Testament Law (often continued in Christian lands).  See Leviticus 19:9-10, Deuteronomy 24:19-22, Exodus 23:10-11.    Note that this “remaining” was not ONLY for the poor but also for the foreigner. 

2.     A new character enters the play…. a worthy man named Boaz.  The point that he is a relative of Naomi’s usually would not be special (people in these little villages were pretty much ALL related to each other!), but remember:  Naomi is not from the tribe of Judah, she was an Ephrathites.  Evidently, there were others from that northern tribe also in Bethlehem.  It so happens, one of these (likely few) was Boaz.  He would naturally take special interest in Naomi, a relative, but would not normally be expected to take unusual notice of Ruth.

3.    It seems Naomi was unable to participate in any gleaning, but Ruth goes for the two of them.  Remember: the Jewish Law was ALSO for foreigners – so Ruth is permitted to do this.   And it seems she does it LONG and HARD and WELL (see verse 7), collecting all she can for herself and for Naomi. 

4.    While Ruth begins gleaning without reference to whose land this was, she takes special note when she enters the land of Boaz. 

5.    Boaz himself comes to greet the reapers, greeting them with a typical Jewish blessing:  “The Lord be with you!”  And they respond, “The Lord also bless you!”   This BLESSING at meeting and leaving people was common among the Jews and early Christians – but is sadly a custom lost. 

2:7-9

1.    Boaz asks about a new person in the field….. it is reported to him that she is Ruth, a Moabite who had returned with Naomi.   Obviously, he is well aware of the situation but simply had not met Ruth.

2.    Boas addresses Ruth directly.  “My daughter” not only implies that Ruth is younger than he, but it is a familiar term of endearment, he is embracing her as a family member, as someone he cares about.  DO NOT MISS:  She is not Hebrew, she is not of his clan.   Here is a strong, strong theme of universal grace, of equal mercy to ALL people – regardless of race, color, gender, etc.  And note that he is going far beyond what the Law required of him.

3.    He instructs him to not glean elsewhere, but only in his own farm.  We can’t be sure the reasons for this, but it’s likely two:  First, he will permit her to glean MORE than what is left over, he is essentially saying she is welcome to all she and Naomi need from his land – don’t perhaps press her luck with others and perhaps limit herself to the glean.  Second, he may fear ill treatment of her – either because she is a Moabite (enemies of the Hebrews) or perhaps because she is young, single and (evidently) very attractive (verse 9?).  In any case, he seems to be proceeding from a strong sense that she NEEDS his protection and help.  And he freely gives it – as “my daughter.”    “Keep close to my young women” simply means to the female farm workers he has working there; they too will protect her and help her (no doubt by his order). 

2:10-13

1.    Verse 10.  Ruth’s question is well founded, but it’s not a question – it’s heart felt appreciation!  

2.     Boaz notes not ONLY her faithfulness to Naomi (a relative of his) but also of her now Jewish faith – she IS a sister in the faith.  Note:  One CAN be a fellow believer ( a brother and sister in that sense) but be of an entirely different race, culture, etc.   These are not common themes in the Old Testament but it’s very central to this book!

2:14-16

1.    Verse 14.  As one of the gleaners, she sits to eat – doing do with the young, female reapers with whom Boaz instructed her to associate.  But as she does, Boaz (who perhaps was also eating among them) offers her some of his food.  While this isn’t the same as inviting her to a State Dinner in her Honor, it IS a strong gesture of grace.  “Leftovers” simply means there was more food available than Ruth and the reapers could eat; she was well fed. 

2.    Verse 15.   The farm hands are told that Ruth will MORE THAN glean….. she may take what we wants from BEFORE it’s harvested and bundled, not after.  And from what IS harvested – pull some out for HER – and when she picks it up, consider it “gleaning.”   Ruth and Naomi are being provided for; this is no longer just the mandated “gleaning.” 

2:17-23

1.    Verse 17.  And Ruth gathers at LOT!   An “ephah” of barley” would be 29 POUNDS of barley – what they “gleaned” that day would be enough for the two of them for many days….  Point:  there is a superabundance of grace here – to Ruth, a Moabite, who simply is in need of grace.

2.     Verse 18-19.  Evidently, Naomi was unaware of the special grace Boaz was bestowing on Ruth (and her)…. 

3.    Verse 20.  She immediately praises God for Boaz, and blesses him….  She too responds with gratitude. 

4.    “He is one of our redeemers”.   While Christians see a LOT of similarity between Boaz and Jesus, and while this term CAN refer to a very specific law involving indentured servitude, here is likely means that Boaz is a relative – and thus one who is to be embraced as a helper, provider, even “savior” of a sort.  It is a term of praise for Boaz. 

5.    Verse 21.  That exact instruction isn’t recorded earlier in the chapter…  But the point is well taken.

End of Act 2…..

What questions fill you at this point?  What “loose ends” are left?    Pretending you didn’t read ahead, what might you be expecting in Act 3?