The account of Ruth provides an outstanding example of the application of this loving provision of God’s law. Although having the right to glean, Ruth asked the one in charge of the harvesters for permission to do so, and this may have been the general practice of the gleaners. Ruth was treated kindly, Boaz even instructing his harvesters to pull out some of the ears from the bundles and leave them behind for her to glean. While this made it easier for Ruth, nevertheless it required effort on her part. She kept right on busily gleaning behind Boaz’ harvesters from morning to evening, sitting down in the house only a little while and taking time out to eat.—Ruth 2:5-7, 14-17.

It is evident that this fine arrangement for the poor of the land, while encouraging generosity, unselfishness and reliance on Jehovah’s blessing, in no way fostered laziness. It throws light on David’s statement: “I have not seen anyone righteous left entirely, nor his offspring looking for bread.” (Ps. 37:25) By availing themselves of the provision made for them by the Law, even the poor, by virtue of their hard work, would not go hungry, and neither they nor their children would have to beg for bread.

FIGURATIVE AND ILLUSTRATIVE USES

When the Ephraimites accused Gideon of not calling them to the fight at the start of the battle against Midian, Gideon said: “Are not the gleanings of Ephraim better than the grape gathering of Abi-ezer [the house to which Gideon belonged]?” He interpreted his illustration by pointing out that Ephraim’s part (though it followed the initial battle) in capturing Midian’s princes Oreb and Zeeb was far greater than all that Gideon himself had done. (Judg. 8:1-3; 6:11) The Scriptures also refer to the slaying of remaining ones in warfare, after the main portion of the conflict was over, as “a gleaning.” (Judg. 20:44, 45) The remnant remaining temporarily after Jehovah’s emptying the land of Judah is likened to “the gleaning when the grape gathering has come to an end,” and Micah speaks of the remnant of God’s inheritance in the midst of the morally corrupt people as “the gleaning of a grape gathering.”—Isa. 24:13; Mic. 7:1-8, 18; compare Jeremiah 6:9; 49:9, 10.

GLEDE

Glede [Heb., day·yahʹ].

The Hebrew name for this bird occurs in the list of unclean birds at Deuteronomy 14:13, but does not appear in the corresponding list at Leviticus 11:14. Five Hebrew manuscripts, and also the Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septuagint Version, omit day·yahʹ at Deuteronomy 14:13. Some scholars believe that it may be a scribal correction originally placed in the margin but which eventually was introduced into the text itself. However, the plural form (dhay·yohthʹ) appears at Isaiah 34:15 as describing birds gathered at the ruins of Edom following its desolation.

It is suggested that the Hebrew name of this bird is derived from the verb meaning “to fly swiftly.” The identification of the bird meant is quite uncertain; hence, the English name “glede” is probably as suitable a translation as any, since “glede” in English is a name variously applied to any of several birds of prey, though especially to the common European kite. Most modern authorities relate the Hebrew dhay·yohthʹ to the kite, there being more than one variety of this bird found in Palestine.—See KITE.

GLUTTON

A selfish, greedy person given to excessive indulgence, especially overeating. Gluttony in any form is diametrically opposed to Bible precepts and principles.

The Mosaic law struck at the root of the matter in that parents of an incorrigible son who was a glutton and a drunkard were to bring him to the older men of the city, who would have him stoned to death. (Deut. 21:18-21) As a warning to others, the Proverbs condemned even association with gluttons: “One having companionship with gluttons humiliates his father.” “Do not come to be among heavy drinkers of wine, among those who are gluttonous eaters of flesh. For a drunkard and a glutton will come to poverty, and drowsiness will clothe one with mere rags.”—Prov. 28:7; 23:20, 21.

In an effort to discredit Jesus Christ, one of the charges of slander hurled at him by his opponents was: “Look! A man gluttonous and given to drinking wine.” Jesus simply refuted the false charge by saying, “Wisdom is proved righteous by its works” or “by all its children.” (Matt. 11:19; Luke 7:34, 35) In other words, Jesus was saying, ‘Look at my righteous works and conduct and you will know the charge is false.’

Gluttony certainly has no place in the Christian congregation, and the apostle Paul wanted to make sure it would not creep in. So, when leaving Titus in Crete to look after the young Christian organization there, he reminded Titus what one of Crete’s own prophets (thought to have been Epimenides, a Cretan poet of the sixth century B.C.E.) had said: “Cretans are always liars, injurious wild beasts, unemployed gluttons.” Therefore, the overseers whom Titus would appoint, Paul said, should be men free of all such accusations, men who were not drunkards or greedy, and who had good self-control.—Titus 1:5-12.

Although not listed separately as a ‘work of the flesh,’ gluttony often accompanies drunken bouts and revelries, and is certainly included in the comprehensive expression “things like these,” the practicers of which “will not inherit God’s kingdom.” (Gal. 5:19, 21) Moderation in eating habits, as in all other activities, is a Christian virtue.—1 Tim. 3:2, 11.

GNAT

Any of a variety of small two-winged insects, many of which are bloodsuckers. The Hebrew word kin·nimʹ (or, kin·namʹ), when used with reference to the third plague visited upon Egypt (Ex. 8:16-18; Ps. 105:31), has been variously rendered “gnats” (NW, Ro, RS), “mosquitoes” (AT) and “lice” (AV); “sand flies” and “fleas” have been given as alternate readings. (AS [Ex. 8:16, ftn.]) Although there is uncertainty as to the particular insect or insects designated by the original-language word, the preference has generally been given to the renderings “gnats” and “mosquitoes.”

At Isaiah 51:6 the Hebrew term ken, ordinarily meaning “the right manner, this manner, thus,” is translated “gnat” (NW) and “gnats” (AS, ftn., RS). This is because ken here is evidently the singular form of kin·nimʹ (or, kin·namʹ), since the word preceding it in the text, k^emohʹ, by itself means “like” or “in like manner.”

The only other reference to the gnat in Scripture is in Jesus’ denunciation of the scribes and Pharisees for straining out the gnat but gulping down the camel. The Jewish religious leaders were sticklers for little things, filtering their beverages so as not to contract ceremonial defilement by swallowing a gnat. (Lev. 11:21-24) However, their disregarding the weightier matters of the Law was comparable to swallowing a camel, likewise a ceremonially unclean animal.—Lev. 11:4; Matt. 23:23, 24.

GOAD

An agricultural implement consisting of a rod approximately eight feet (2.5 meters) in length and chiefly used for driving and guiding bulls or oxen when plowing. One end of the rod is equipped with a sharp metal point to prick the animal, and a broad chisellike blade affixed to the other end is used for removing dirt and clay from the plowshare or clearing it of roots and thorns.

A “cattle goad” was used by Shamgar in killing 600 Philistines. The Bible record also mentions that when the Philistines had the upper hand on the Israelites during Saul’s reign, the Israelites were not permitted to have smiths and therefore were forced to go down to the Philistines to get their farming implements sharpened and to have their cattle goads (apparently the metal points) fixed fast.—Judg. 3:31; 1 Sam. 13:19-21.

The goad is compared to the words of a wise person, words that move the listener to advance in harmony with the wisdom heard. (Eccl. 12:11) The figurative expression “kicking against the goads” is drawn from the action of a stubborn bull that resists the prickings of the goad by kicking against it, resulting in injury to himself. The expression, therefore, denotes resisting or rebelling against rightful authority or a condition that cannot be altered, doing so to one’s own injury. This is exactly what Paul did before becoming a Christian, by fighting against the followers of Jesus Christ, who had the backing of Jehovah God.—Acts 26:14; compare Acts 5:38, 39.

GOAH

(Goʹah).

A site, now unknown, named with the hill of Gareb in Jeremiah’s prophecy concerning the rebuilding and extending of Jerusalem.—Jer. 31:38, 39.

GOAT

A cud-chewing mammal with hollow horns and usually long, relatively straight hair. The Syrian goat, distinguished by its long, drooping ears and its backward-curving horns, is the predominant breed of Palestine. Usually these goats are black; speckled ones are exceptional. (Gen. 30:32, 35) He-goats were one of the items of Tyre’s trade.—Ezek. 27:21.

In Bible times, some of the goat herds may have been quite large. Nabal, for example, had 1,000 goats. (1 Sam. 25:2, 3) Jacob’s gift to Esau included two hundred she-goats and twenty he-goats. (Gen. 32:13, 14) And the Arabs brought 7,700 he-goats to King Jehoshaphat of Judah.—2 Chron. 17:11.

To the Hebrews the goat was very valuable. (Prov. 27:26) It provided them with milk, from which butter and cheese could be made. (Prov. 27:27) Its flesh, particularly that of the kid, was eaten. (Gen. 27:9; Deut. 14:4; Judg. 6:19; 13:15; Luke 15:29) And for the Passover, either a male sheep or a year-old male goat could be used. (Ex. 12:5) Goat’s hair, made into fabric, was employed in various ways. (Num. 31:20) The “tents of Kedar” may have been made from black goat’s hair (Song of Sol. 1:5), and goat’s hair was used in the construction of the tabernacle. (Ex. 26:7; 35:26) Goatskins were made into bottles (see Genesis 21:15) and were also used for clothing, as by certain persecuted pre-Christian witnesses of Jehovah.—Heb. 11:37.

The Mosaic law prohibited eating the fat of a goat offered as a sacrifice (Lev. 7:23-25) and boiling a kid in its mother’s milk. (Ex. 23:19; 34:26; Deut. 14:21) The reason for the latter prohibition may have been that this practice had idolatrous associations. It is said that among certain ancient peoples a kid was seethed or boiled in its mother’s milk and then the broth was sprinkled on trees, fields and gardens, with a view to ensuring fertility.—See MILK.

The goat served as a sacrificial animal, being presented as a burnt offering (Lev. 1:10; 22:18, 19), a communion sacrifice (Lev. 3:6, 12), a sin offering (Ezra 8:35) and a guilt offering. (Lev. 5:6) Every firstborn of the goats was to be sacrificed, but not until at least eight days old. (Lev. 22:27; Num. 18:17) A female goat in its first year (or, a female lamb) was the prescribed sin offering for a person not a priest or a chieftain. (Lev. 4:28, 32; Num. 18:17) At certain times goats were sacrificed as sin offerings for the nation of Israel as a whole. (Lev. 23:19; Num. 28:11, 15, 16, 22, 26-30; 29:1-39; 2 Chron. 29:20-24; Ezra 6:17) A young male goat served as the sin offering for a chieftain. (Lev. 4:22-26) On the Day of Atonement, two goats were used, one as a sin offering for the twelve non-Levite tribes, and the other designated as for “Azazel.” (Lev. 16:1-27; see ATONEMENT DAY; AZAZEL.) Of course, those goats that were offered in sacrifice could not actually take away sins, but merely pictured the real sin-atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ.—Heb. 9:11-14; 10:3, 4.

FIGURATIVE AND PROPHETIC USAGE

The hair of the Shulammite girl was compared to a drove of goats, perhaps alluding to the glistening sheen of black hair or to the luxuriant abundance of the girl’s tresses. (Song of Sol. 4:1; 6:5) Israel’s small army, when compared with that of the Syrians, was likened to “two tiny flocks of goats.” (1 Ki. 20:27) Goats were used to represent people, particularly those in opposition to Jehovah. (Isa. 34:6, 7; compare Jeremiah 51:40; Ezekiel 34:17; Zechariah 10:3.) In Jesus’ illustration of the sheep and the goats, the goats represent those persons who refuse to do good to the least of his brothers.—Matt. 25:31-46.

The he-goat of Daniel’s prophecy represented the Grecian (or Greco-Macedonian) World Power. (Dan. 8:5-8, 21) Concerning this The Imperial Bible-Dictionary, Volume I, page 664, observes: “It is interesting to know that this [the goat] was the recognized symbol of their nation by the Macedonians themselves. Monuments are still extant in which this symbol occurs, as one of the pilasters of Persepolis, where a goat is depicted with one immense horn on his forehead, and a Persian holding the horn, by which is intended the subjection of Macedon by Persia” (something