The Land Belongs To Yahweh And Cannot Be Passed On Permanently. It Can Either Be Redeemed Early Or Will Be Passed Back At The Year of Yubile (Leviticus 25:23-28).
“And the land shall not be sold in perpetuity; for the land is mine. For you are strangers and sojourners with me.
The principle is now made clear. The reason that all this was to happen was because the land was Yahweh's. From this point of view they lived in it, not as owners, but as though they were resident aliens and visitors. That is why it could not be sold in perpetuity. All the land was His. They therefore had no right to sell it, only its use for a number of years.
“And in all the land of your possession you shall grant a redemption for the land.”
Furthermore this meant that they must be willing to guarantee redemption rights to those who through misfortune had been forced to sell the use of their property. This was to apply wherever His people lived in the land.
“If your brother has become poor, and sell some of his possession, then shall his kinsman who is next to him come, and shall redeem that which his brother has sold.”
Indeed when a man became poor and had to sell his land in order to survive, it was incumbent on his nearest male relative to buy the land back as soon as possible, and the purchaser could not refuse to sell. We call this man ‘the Kinsman Redeemer'.
We see this principle in action in the book of Ruth where Boaz acts as Kinsman Redeemer on behalf of Naomi. There Naomi had not yet sold her land, but was having to do so, and Boaz bought it as Kinsman Redeemer. But by putting himself in the position of ‘nearest relative' he also put himself in a position of having to raise up children in the name of Ruth's dead husband (Ruth 4:5; Ruth 4:10). While this was not strictly required by the levirate Law which referred to ‘a brother' (Deuteronomy 25:5-6), it had clearly become the interpretation of that Law, ‘brother' being given its wider meaning. Thus those who would inherit the land as a ‘brother' must inherit the wife and raise up seed to the dead man. However, as he was not literally a brother, there was nothing unseemly in his marrying her as well, and it would seem that he was required to do so. The woman and land went together. To take on the land meant to take on the responsibility of the dead man's family.
The book also illustrates how men were already finding ways round the legislation, i.e. the nearer kinsman who refused by pretending that he could not afford it (Ruth 4:6) when he had already said he would buy it (Ruth 4:4) simply because he did not want to have to raise up seed to Chilion. (Whether he could have taken this course if Boaz had not been willing to take on the responsibility we do not know. It appears to have been a mutually satisfactory arrangement allowed by custom - Ruth 4:7 with Deuteronomy 25:9. The spitting was excluded because it was by satisfactory arrangement).
“And if a man has no one to redeem it, and he has grown rich and finds sufficient to redeem it, then let him reckon the years of its sale, and restore the overplus to the man to whom he sold it; and he shall return to his possession.”
Should a man have no near kinsman wealthy enough to act for him, if he himself later became wealthy later he would still retain the right to buy back his land, giving compensation depending on the number of years still to go to the year of Yubile. So the right of a family to its own original land was very strong, and if one section of a family died out the right passed to the nearest relatives (Jeremiah 32:7-8). But the land must remain in the family. Even if sold it returned in the year of Yubile.
“But if he is not able to get it back for himself, then that which he has sold shall remain in the hand of him that has bought it until the year of yubile: and in the yubile it shall go out, and he shall return to his possession.”
Should he find himself in a position that he has no Kinsman Redeemer, and of not himself gaining sufficient wealth, then he would have to wait until the year of Yubile, but at the year of Yubile the land passed back to him anyway, and he could take possession of it, the buyer meanwhile having retained the use of it up to this date. Thus all were dealt with fairly.
The principle from all this for us is the concern that we should have that we share our good things with others. Our aim should not be to grab as much as we can for ourselves but to ensure that all share the good things of life, and that we do not claim for ourselves more than a reasonable proportion.