Lesson 11: “Ruth and Esther”
COLLEEN TINKER | Editor, Proclamation! Magazine
Underlying Problem With This Lesson:
This lesson conscripts Ruth and Esther to represent the Great Controversy’s scenario: Jesus and Satan are battling for humanity, and the queen represents the remnant church who exposes Satan’s evil.
The first three studies of this week’s lesson featuring Ruth and Esther were relatively innocuous, but Tuesday tipped Adventism’s hand and revealed it’s foundational belief that Satan has a legitimate claim on humanity that Jesus must overthrow. The author even appeals to Michael’s struggle with Satan for the body of Moses recorded in Jude 9 to argue that Jesus must refute Satan in order to “win”.
The day’s lesson then ends by comparing Boaz’s securing the right to be “kinsman-redeemer” for Ruth and Naomi with Christ paying the price for us. In the context of the lesson, that price had to be paid to Satan—or at least it was paid to silence Satan’s claims on us.
Then, Wednesday’s lesson introduces Haman, the Persian descendant of Agag the Amelekite, who became enraged at Mordecai the Jew who would not bow to him in commanded deference. Thursday’s lesson develops this plot further and compares Haman with Satan seeking the death of God’s “bride” carrying the three angels’ messages to the world. Further, it uses Esther the beautiful woman as a type of God’s last-day remnant people who, with the King on their side, will be delivered as the Jews were delivered in Persia.
Friday ends the week with an EGW quote from Prophets and Kings using Esther and Mordecai as an illustration of God vindicating His commandment-keeping remnant from the great battle waged by Satan against Sabbath-keepers.
In these lessons, the biblical accounts are interpreted from a human-centric perspective, and Jesus is presented as someone who had to silence Satan with legitimate answers as an equal foe. Further, the symbolic treatment of the story of Esther, Mordecai, and Haman makes no mention of God’s overarching justice and faithfulness to His own promises to His people.
Christ Loves Us, But Satan Is “Closer Relative”
The story of Ruth and Naomi is legendary. Naomi and her husband and two sons left Israel during the times of the judges to escape a famine in Israel. They went to Moab where her sons married Moabite women, and then her husband and sons all died. When the famine in Israel ended, Naomi returned—and one daughter-in-law, Ruth, went with her.
The Mosaic covenant provided a way for Naomi to recover her family’s land in Israel, but it had to be purchased by a kinsman-redeemer, and Boaz was that close relative of Naomi’s family. The redemption of the family land and legacy, however, included the law of levirate marriage: the close relative would marry the widow of the Israelite man who had not had children, and the first child of their marriage would carry the name of the wife’s deceased first husband and would also inherit the family’s land that the kinsman-redeemer had purchased back for the family.
In other words, the kinsman-redeemer would provide an heir for the deceased man so his lineage would not disappear from Israel. The “risk” in this arrangement was that, if the kinsman-redeemer and the widow he married had only one son, that son would not only inherit the family’s land that had belonged to the deceased husband but also the inheritance he would receive from the kinsman-redeemer as well. In that case, the inheritance of both the kinsman-redeemer’s family and that of his mother’s first husband would belong to the line of his mother’s first deceased husband.
Boaz was willing to fulfill the role of the kinsman-redeemer, but there was one other man in Israel who was a closer relative. That man declined to fulfill the redemptive role and formally agreed that Boaz could take that position. We all know how the story ended: Boaz and Ruth had baby Obed, and Obed was the grandfather of King David—from whose line the Lord Jesus would come.
Yet author Shawn Boonstra does not deal with God’s hand in the lineage of the promised Seed which He was sending to fulfill His covenant with Abraham. Boonstra only deals with the aspect of Boaz needing to secure the right to function as the kinsman-redeemer and makes this application:
If we consider Boaz to be a type of Christ, this situation may reveal an issue at stake in the great controversy. Christ loves us, but there is a “closer relative” who also has a claim: Satan.
What?!
Boonstra is actually implying two heretical ideas: first, that Satan is in some way a “closer relative” to us humans than is the Lord Jesus, and second, that Christ had to deal with Satan on a basis of equals, one of whom had a stronger claim on us than the other.
I’m horrified at the clear implications of the great controversy in just this sentence: “Christ loves us, but there is a ‘closer relative’ who also has a claim: Satan.”
Ellen White has left us with the belief that Satan claimed to have supremacy and dominion over this world because Adam sinned. Instead of her teaching the biblical truth that all humanity died in Adam and that GOD is the One who bound all creation to decay after the fall, she has taught instead that Satan claimed us because Adam disobeyed.
She presents Satan as claiming power over the world, not as a being permitted by God to function in the world.
Boonstra enhances this idea by appealing to the story of Job, stating that Satan “laid claim to him as one of his own”, claiming that Job’s heart did not belong to God but to God’s blessings.
Jesus Does Not Purchase Us From Satan
Then Boonstra, on the authority of Ellen White, refers to the account in Jude 1:9 of Michael disputing with Satan over the body of Moses and says, “Satan was making some kind of claim on it [the body of Moses].”
He then quotes EGW from Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 478, where she discusses the Adventist interpretation of Jude 1:9 that Michael IS Jesus—and that Jesus resurrected Moses.
Of course, the Bible never HINTS at the idea that Moses was resurrected. Furthermore, it is clear that Michael the Archangel is NOT Jesus; in fact, Michael would not rebuke Satan but said, “The Lord rebuke you.” Yet Adventism continues to teach that Jesus, aka Michael, resurrected Moses from the dead.
This Adventist idea that Moses had to be resurrected is related to their teaching that when a person dies, he ceases to exist. For this reason, Adventism must have Moses resurrected in order for him to have appeared on the Mt. of Transfiguration with Jesus.
Yet in Tuesday’s lesson, all of this Adventist understanding is not articulated—but it is understood by the Adventist readers. In this way Boonstra leads us from his claim that Satan is the great controversy’s counterpart to Jesus that the “closer relative” was to Boaz in the story of Ruth. He ends the day’s lesson with these words:
In Ruth 4:1–12, Boaz travels to the gate of Bethlehem—the town where Christ would enter our world as our close relative. The elders gather, and finally a sandal (a symbol of ownership) is exchanged.
The gate of a village is where cases were decided: this is a type of judgment scene. It reflects the judgment scene of Daniel 7:13, 14, 22, 26, 27. We must not miss this critical aspect of judgment: judgment is in “favor of the saints” but only because Christ paid the price for us, just as Boaz did for his bride.
The Lord Jesus did NOT pay a price for us to purchase us away from Satan! Satan had no claim on us, and Jesus didn’t purchase us from Satan. His death did not satisfy Satan—it satisfied God Himself!
Even in our natural state as dead in sin and under the wrath of God, we do not belong to SATAN! The wicked unbelievers who do not repent and believe God are still HIS rebellious creations. It is God, not Satan, who has sentenced unbelievers to eternal punishment.
Further, hell is not under the oversight or control of Satan! God owns hell, and He is in charge of both believers and unbelievers. We did not have to be purchased out of Satan’s control; we have been purchased from DEATH which is our natural condition in Adam. Our spiritual death was God’s consequence for sin.
Jesus’ death paid for our sin—but it paid God’s demand, not Satan’s. He gains absolutely nothing from Jesus’s purchase of His bride. Rather, it is God who received Jesus’s death on our behalf. It is God who declared that Jesus’ death was sufficient to satisfy the penalty for all human sin. We are purchased from the Trinity’s death sentence leveled on all unbelievers. Satan has absolutely no place in this exchange!
Yet the great controversy makes Jesus in some sort of conflict with Satan in which they are battling for the souls of men. Yet the Bible says they are not! Satan is a defeated foe, a fallen angel. Jesus is Satan’s Creator, the eternal God the Son, and Jesus has never owed him anything. Further, Satan has never had a claim on us which Jesus had to disprove. He never had to win control away from Satan! Satan has never had any power or authority which the sovereign Lord did not grant Him. In fact, Jesus said to His disciples after His resurrection:
And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.”—Matthew 28:18 LSB
Adventism makes Satan a key player, an equal-but-opposite force in the universe over whom Jesus had to prove Himself superior, more powerful, and more worthy to claim us poor humans. This idea is pure heresy and is found nowhere in the Bible!
Haman as Satan
In Wednesday’s lesson Boonstra begins comparing the Time of Trouble in which Sabbath-keepers will be hunted and killed with the story of Esther. He uses the evil Haman as a representation of Satan and Mordecai as a representative of God’s commandment-keepers. In Thursday’s lesson he brings in Queen Esther as the beautiful woman who represents God’s church and helps to save God’s people.
Boonstra does not mention (although the Teachers Comments do) that Haman was a descendant of Agag the Amalekite. What is never mentioned in the lesson, however, is the fact that God had declared in Deuteronomy 25:17–19 that Israel was to “blot out the memory of Amalie from under heaven” because the nation had been hostile to Israel from the earliest days when the nation fled from Egypt.
In 1 Samuel 15 we read the account of King Saul going into battle agains the Amalekites. God told Saul to kill every Amalekite. He did destroy MOST of the city’s population—but he spared king Agag.
Although the king was later killed, the Amalekites were not destroyed.
Now, centuries later, Haman the Persian was a descendant of King Agag—and his murderous rage against Israel fanned into flame when Mordecai, a Jew who was loyal to the king and who had warned the king of a plot against his life, refused to show proper obeisance to Haman befitting his promotion in the royal court. Significantly, Mordecai, like Saul, was a descendant of Kush of the tribe of Benjamin.
Haman became enraged and secured a royal decree to destroy not only Mordecai but also all of Mordecai’s kinsmen: the Jews. These were the Jews who remained in Persia after the 70 years of Babylonian exile; they had developed lives in the kingdom and were thriving in Persia. Mordecai’s niece, Esther, had even become the queen.
We all know the story. Queen Esther, at the command of her uncle Mordecai, warned the king about Haman’s plot to kill all the Jews in Persia. Meanwhile, Haman had already constructed the gallows on which he planned to hang Mordecai on the day decreed for the destruction.
When the king realized Haman’s treachery, he turned on Haman and ordered that he be hanged on the gallows intended for Mordecai. In God’s perfect justice, Mordecai the Benjamite, a descendant of the family of Saul, succeeded in bringing to justice the murderous Haman descended from Agag whom King Saul had refused to kill!
The lesson, though, does not mention this divine justice nor God’s faithfulness to His own people, the Jews. God providentially exposed their death sentence and allowed Mordecai and Esther to equip the Jews and save the entire population of Persian Jews on the day that had been appointed by Haman for their slaughter.
The lesson, however, uses this story to enhance the great controversy scenario. Wednesday’s lesson ends with this paragraph:
The devil has laid claim to this world, but the presence of people who stay loyal to God—who keep His commandments—disproves his claim of complete supremacy. “When the Sabbath shall become the special point of controversy throughout Christendom, the persistent refusal of a small minority to yield to the popular demand will make them objects of universal execration.”—Ellen G. White, Signs of the Times, February 22, 1910.
Then, in a a final punch to reinforce this great controversy application, Thursday’s lesson says this:
In Revelation 12, the devil pursues Christ’s bride with hateful vengeance, but God intervenes to save her. The story of Esther also has a beautiful queen playing a central role in the drama, and God uses her powerfully to save His people.
God raised up His remnant church for a specific moment in history. As the 1,260 days of the Dark Ages drew to a close, God brought His bride out of hiding (compare with Rev. 12:14) to carry His final message of mercy—the three angels’ messages—to the world. We are here “for such a time as this” (Esther 4:14).
Esther Equated with Adventists
Boonstra, on Ellen White’s authority, compares Esther to the Adventists and uses Mordecai’s words to her as she prepared to expose Haman to the king; they, the Adventists, are here “for such a time as this”.
Of course, the story of Esther has no relationship at all to Adventism. Adventism, again, teaches a false gospel. Sabbath-keeping will NOT be the “special point of controversy throughout Christendom.”
The final assault in the world will be the antichrist’s rage against those who believe and trust the Lord Jesus instead of him! Nothing in Scripture even hints at a Sabbath-Sunday struggle. A created day is never the issue. The issue will be the object of one’s worship: will people worship the one true eternal, triune God and the risen Christ, or will they worship a false christ?
Adventism is inoculating Adventists against the true focus of history. Jesus—not the Sabbath—is the issue. Sabbath is not the seal of God, nor is is the sign of the seal of God. The seal of God is God Himself: the Holy Spirit literally indwells the born-again spirits of those who have trusted Christ and His finished work (Ephesians 1:13, 14). Yet Adventists are watching for a Sunday law. As long as a Sunday law is not in place, they will not believe that the Day of the Lord is near.
As long as the fourth commandment is is Adventism’s central focus, they will never see that the Lord Jesus asks for their entire loyalty. They will never see that the Lord asks them to surrender even their holy day and trust Him alone.
Ellen White Seals the Deal
Finally, Boonstra ends the week’s lesson with a quote from Prophets and Kings, pp. 605, 606. In it she again develops her speculation that the important people in the world will turn against the Sabbath-keeping minority. She says,
By false representations and angry appeals, men will stir up the passions of the people. Not having a ‘Thus saith the Scriptures’ to bring against the advocates of the Bible Sabbath, they will resort to oppressive enactments to supply the lack. To secure popularity and patronage, legislators will yield to the demand for Sunday laws. But those who fear God, cannot accept an institution that violates a precept of the Decalogue. On this battlefield will be fought the last great conflict in the controversy between truth and error. And we are not left in doubt as to the issue. Today, as in the days of Esther and Mordecai, the Lord will vindicate His truth and His people.”—Ellen G. White, Prophets and Kings, pp. 605, 606.
Again, Ellen White led the way in appraising the story of Esther to drive home the fear factor in Adventist consciences that they will ultimately have to face death for their loyalty to the fourth commandment. It’s easy to say “the Lord will vindicate His truth and His people”, but in the case of Adventism, the Lord’s truth and people are not defined by Adventism or Adventist beliefs.
The fourth commandment is not the factor that sets apart the saved from the unsaved! The issue is never obedience to the commandments or loyalty to a day.
Do You Believe?
The bottom line issue is this: do you believe in the Lord Jesus Christ? Have you been born again and adopted by God? Has His Spirit indwelled you and taught you to know Him and to call Him your Father?
The stories of Ruth and Esther are not examples of how to live. The end of the Teachers Comments applies the story of Ruth as how to live by “a serious code of ethics”. He describes her as humble, unworthy, non-judgmental—but the lesson never even mentions that she was far from a passive foreigner who did her mother-in-law’s bidding. She was the woman who left her home and her people to go with her mother-in-law because she BELIEVED.
She said to Naomi, “Your people shall be my people, and your God, my God.”—Ruth 1:16b
Ruth had faith in the true God. She understood her role in establishing Naomi—and herself—in the land of Israel, and she honored God in her devotion and obedience. She was not a mere example of piety; she was an example of God’s sovereign faithfulness to do what He promised in His own, unexpected way.
By contrast, Esther was not, as the Teachers Comments said, an example of “life in our modern and secular world”. She is not an example of how it pays to make oneself “lovable” nor to “vow to do whatever you can to solve your troubles, and trust in God’s grace to reverse the course of events.”
Queen Esther was used by God for His glory. Moreover, her relationship to Mordecai the Benjamite was a signifiant factor in this account. God used Mordecai and Esther to save His people. He kept His promises to protect and provide for His people, and to this day the Jewish Feast of Purim is celebrated to honor God deliverance and Mordecai’s successful counter-measures to save the Persian Jews!
The Lord has given us His word to reveal His faithfulness to His own promises and His faithfulness to provide for His people. The stories in the Bible are not mere examples for us; they are revelations of God’s work, of His intervention in our lives to make us alive, to cause us to believe, and to bring us into HIS story.
Have you recognized that you are a sinner and that you need a Savior? Have you admitted that the Great Controversy is a false teaching that has hidden reality from you?
Bring your sin, your spiritual death to Him. Lay yourself before His cross and see Him paying the full price for you sin as He endured the wrath of God as He hung between heaven and earth. See Him shatter your curse of death on the third day—and believe! Thank Him for calling you and for making you His!
Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ alone—and you will be saved! †
This weekly feature is dedicated to Adventists who are looking for biblical insights into the topics discussed in the Sabbath School lesson quarterly. We post articles which address each lesson as presented in the Sabbath School Bible Study Guide, including biblical commentary on them. We hope you find this material helpful and that you will come to know Jesus and His revelation of Himself in His word in profound biblical ways.
- June 28–July 4, 2025 - June 25, 2025
- We Got Mail - June 25, 2025
- Abortion In Adventism: Why Seventh-day Adventism Promotes Choice - June 22, 2025
Thank you for another encouraging treatise. One paraphrases Peter – I’m going to remind you of these matters, even tho you know them already. We thank you again for your dedication, and also for the great amount of time and effort! HF