This is a Bible survey of Ruth and Naomi. You can also watch the video here.
Were they lesbian lovers? NO! Actually, both of them were identified as heterosexuals in the Bible.
- Naomi was the wife of Elimelech and had two children (Mahlon and Chilion) Ruth 1:2.
- Ruth was the wife of Naomi’s son (Mahlon) Ruth 4:10.
- The treatment of Ruth to Naomi is that of a mother because they were In-Laws. Naomi was the mother-in-law of Ruth and Ruth was the daughter-in-law of Naomi. You can read it all throughout the book of Ruth.
- Naomi was expecting Ruth to seek another husband. Ruth 1:11-13
- Ruth married Boaz. Ruth 4:13
The LGBT Bible interpreters maliciously interpreted Ruth 1:14-18
Ruth 1:14-18 14 Then they lifted up their voices and wept again. And Orpah kissed her mother-in-law, but Ruth clung to her. 15 And she said, “See, your sister-in-law has gone back to her people and to her gods; return after your sister-in-law.” 16 But Ruth said, “Do not urge me to leave you or to return from following you. For where you go I will go, and where you lodge I will lodge. Your people shall be my people, and your God my God. 17 Where you die I will die, and there will I be buried. May the LORD do so to me and more also if anything but death parts me from you.” 18 And when Naomi saw that she was determined to go with her, she said no more.
Pag-aralan natin yung salitang “clung” sa Hebrew. Sabi ng mga LGBT interpreters, ito raw ay kagaya ng Hebrew term sa Genesis 2:24 24 That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.
In Hebrew “dabaq” which means – to cling, stick, stay close, cleave, keep close, stick to, stick with, follow closely, and join to.
Ang Hebrew term na ginamit rin ng Ruth 1:14 but Ruth clung to her. Is also “dabaq” which means the same thing rin naman.
Pero ang tanong ay – pareho ba ang usage ng terms sa dalawang magkaibang context? The obvious answer is NO! The usage of “dabaq” in Genesis 2:24 is within the context of the covenant of marriage while the usage of “dabaq” in Ruth 1:14 is within the context of family. Remember, they were in-laws yan ang context. At hindi lang sa dalawang verses na yan ginamit ang salitang “dabaq”. Makikita rin natin ito Ezek 3:26, Psalm 22:15, 2 Kings 5:27 & Deut 28:21. Same word “dabaq” was used sa mga verses na yan and nothing from those verses suggests na ang term na “dabaq” refers to lovers in particular. Jan palang makikita na natin na sablay na ang kanilang attempt to exegete Ruth 1:14.
Another malicious interpretation of this passage is that if you read from verse 14-18, ito daw ay equivalent sa ating modified version ng wedding vow ng 21st century. Absolutely not! And it is very simple and without malice. It is a vow from a concerned daughter in law to stay sa kanyang mother in law dahil si Naomi is already old at patay na ang kanyang asawa na si Elimelech at dalawang anak na si Mahlon and Chilion.
So, the covenant Ruth made with Naomi is of daughter-to-mother covenant and not a lesbian lover-to-lover. Clearly, Ruth and Naomi weren’t lesbian lovers.
To God be the glory!
3 thoughts on “Were Ruth and Naomi Lesbian Lovers?”
Crazy how some twists the Word
Yes. It’s spreading here in the Philippines. It is similar to Brandon. Have you watch Jeff Durbin and James White debate with him?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I heard about it but did not watch it yet