This document provides commentary from multiple scholars on Ruth Chapter 1. It summarizes the key events in the chapter where there was a famine in Bethlehem so Elimelech and his family, including his wife Naomi and their two sons, went to live in Moab. While there, Elimelech died and Naomi's sons married Moabite women but then also died, leaving Naomi widowed and childless in Moab. The commentary discusses possible historical contexts and judges this event may have taken place under as well as meanings of the names and characters.

1. RUTH 1 COMMENTARY
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
Naomi Loses Her Husband and Sons
1 In the days when the judges ruled,[a] there
was a famine in the land. So a man from
Bethlehem in Judah, together with his wife and
two sons, went to live for a while in the country
of Moab.
BARNES, "In the days when the Judges ruled - “Judged.” This note of time,
like that in Rth_4:7; Jdg_18:1; Jdg_17:6, indicates that this Book was written after
the rule of the judges had ceased. The genealogy Rth_4:17-22 points to the time of
David as the earliest when the Book of Ruth could have been written.
A famine - Caused probably by one of the hostile invasions recorded in the Book
of Judges. Most of the Jewish commentators, from the mention of Bethlehem, and
the resemblance of the names Boaz and Ibzan, refer this history to the judge Ibzan
Jdg_12:8, but without probability.
The country of Moab - Here, and in Rth_1:2, Rth_1:22; Rth_4:3, literally, “the
field” or “fields.” As the same word is elsewhere used of the territory of Moab, of the
Amalekites, of Edom, and of the Philistines, it would seem to be a term pointedly
used with reference to a foreign country, not the country of the speaker, or writer;
and to have been specially applied to Moab.
CLARKE, "When the judges ruled - We know not under what judge this
happened; some say under Ehud, others under Shamgar. See the preface.
There was a famine - Probably occasioned by the depredations of the
Philistines, Ammonites, etc., carrying off the corn as soon as it was ripe, or
destroying it on the field.
The Targum says: “God has decreed ten grievous famines to take place in the
world, to punish the inhabitants of the earth, before the coming of Messiah the king.
The first in the days of Adam; the second in the days of Lamech; the third in the days
of Abraham; the fourth in the days of Isaac; the fifth in the days of Jacob; the sixth in
the days of Boaz, who is called Abstan, (Ibzan), the just, of Beth-lehem-judah; the
seventh in the days of David, king of Israel; the eighth in the days of Elijah the
prophet; the ninth in the days of Elisha, in Samaria; the tenth is yet to come, and it is
1

2. not a famine of bread or of water but of hearing the word of prophecy from the
mouth of the Lord; and even now this famine is grievous in the land of Israel.”
GILL, "Now it came to pass, in the days when the judges ruled,.... So that it
appears that this history is of time and things after the affair of Micah, and of the
concubine of the Levite, and of the war between Israel and Benjamin; for in those
times there was no king nor judge in Israel; but to what time of the judges, and which
government of theirs it belongs to, is not agreed on. Josephus (o) places it in the
government of Eli, but that is too late for Boaz, the grandfather of Jesse, the father of
David, to live. Some Jewish writers, as Jarchi, say it was in the times of Ibzan, who
they say (p) is the same with Boaz, but without proof, and which times are too late
also for this history. The Jewish chronology (q) comes nearer the truth, which carries
it up as high as the times of Eglon, king of Moab, when Ehud was judge; and with
which Dr. Lightfoot (r) pretty much agrees, who puts this history between the third
and fourth chapters of Judges, and so must belong to the times of Ehud or Shamgar.
Junius refers it to the times of Deborah and Barak; and others (s), on account of the
famine, think it began in the times the Midianites oppressed Israel, and carried off
the fruits of the earth, which caused it, when Gideon was raised up to be their judge;
Alting (t) places it in the time of Jephthah; such is the uncertainty about the time
referred to:
that there was a famine in the land; the land of Canaan, that very fruitful
country. The Targum says this was the sixth famine that had been in the world, and it
was in the days of Boaz, who is called Ibzan the just, and who was of
Bethlehemjudah; but it is more probable that it was in the days of Gideon, as before
observed, than in the days of Ibzan
and a certain man of Bethlehemjudah; so called to distinguish it from another
Bethlehem in the tribe of Zebulun, Jos_19:15 which had its name from the
fruitfulness of the place, and the plenty of bread in it, and yet the famine was here;
hence this man with his family removed from it:
and went to sojourn in the country of Moab; where there was plenty; not to
dwell there, but to sojourn for a time, until the famine was over:
he and his wife, and his two sons; the names of each of them are next given.
HENRY, "The first words give all the date we have of this story. It was in the days
when the judges ruled (Rth_1:1), not in those disorderly times when there was no
king in Israel; but under which of the judges these things happened we are not told,
and the conjectures of the learned are very uncertain. It must have been towards the
beginning of the judges' time, for Boaz, who married Ruth, was born of Rahab, who
received the spies in Joshua's time. Some think it was in the days of Ehud, others of
Deborah; the learned bishop Patrick inclines to think it was in the days of Gideon,
because in his days only we read of a famine by the Midianites' invasion, Jdg_6:3,
Jdg_6:4. While the judges were ruling, some one city and some another, Providence
takes particular cognizance of Bethlehem, and has an eye to a King, to Messiah
himself, who should descend from two Gentile mothers, Rahab and Ruth. Here is,
I. A famine in the land, in the land of Canaan, that land flowing with milk and
honey. This was one of the judgments which God had threatened to bring upon them
for their sins, Lev_26:19, Lev_26:20. He has many arrows in his quiver. In the days
2

3. of the judges they were oppressed by their enemies; and, when by that judgment they
were not reformed, God tried this, for when he judges he will overcome. When the
land had rest, yet it had not plenty; even in Bethlehem, which signifies the house of
bread, there was scarcity. A fruitful land is turned into barrenness, to correct and
restrain the luxury and wantonness of those that dwell therein.
II. An account of one particular family distressed in the famine; it is that of
Elimelech. His name signifies my God a king, agreeable to the state of Israel when
the judges ruled, for the Lord was their King, and comfortable to him and his family
in their affliction, that God was theirs and that he reigns for ever. His wife was
Naomi, which signifies my amiable or pleasant one. But his sons' names were
Mahlon and Chilion, sickness and consumption, perhaps because weakly children,
and not likely to be long-lived. Such are the productions of our pleasant things, weak
and infirm, fading and dying.
JAMISON, "Rth_1:1-5. Elimelech, driven by famine into Moab, dies there.
in the days when the judges ruled — The beautiful and interesting story which
this book relates belongs to the early times of the judges. The precise date cannot be
ascertained.
BENSON, "Ruth 1:1. There was a famine in the land — This makes it probable
that the things here recorded came to pass in the days of Gideon, for that is the
only time when we read of a famine in the days of the judges; namely, when the
Midianites, Amalekites, &c., came and destroyed the increase of the earth, and
left no sustenance for Israel, nor for their cattle, 6:3-4.
COFFMAN, "THE AFFLICTIONS OF NAOMI AND HER RETURN TO
BETHLEHEM
ELIMELECH FLEES THE FAMINE IN JUDAH TO SOJOURN IN MOAB
(RUTH 1:1-5)
"And it came to pass in the days when the judges ruled, that there was a famine
in the land. And a certain man of Bethlehem-Judah went to sojourn in the
country of Moab, he, and his wife, and his two sons. And the name of the man
was Elimelech, and the name of his wife Naomi, and the name of his two sons
Mahlon and Chilion, Ephrathites of Bethlehem-Judah. And they came into the
country of Moab and continued there. And Elimelech, Naomi's husband, died;
and she was left, and her two sons. And they took them wives of the women of
Moab; the name of the one was Orpah, and the name of the other Ruth: and they
dwelt there about ten years. And Mahlon and Chilion died, both of them, and the
woman was left of her two children and of her husband."
The scene for this narrative is the high plateau east of the Dead Sea and south of
the Arnon river, some sixty miles from Bethlehem, and on a clear day it was
visible from Bethlehem. Bethlehem was the birthplace of both King David and of
Our Lord Jesus Christ, and is located only six or seven miles south of Jerusalem.
3

4. Some believe that Elimelech was NOT justified in making this move. Matthew
Henry labeled it as "unjustified."[1] And the Targum suggests that the death of
all three of these men was due to their leaving the land of Israel in the case of
Elimelech and because of their marrying strange women in that of the two sons.
Regarding the wives of the two sons, Josephus states that Elimelech arranged
those marriages, but the text here does not support that assertion. From him, we
also learn that Chilion married Orpah and that Mahlon married Ruth.[2]
"Ephrathites" (Ruth 1:2). The fact of Elimelech and his family being called by
this name seems to indicate some special honor, power, or ability that belonged
to them when they departed from Bethlehem. Ephrathah was an ancient name of
Bethlehem (Micah 5:2) and was also applied to the region in which Bethlehem
was located, and the term seems to indicate some connection with the ancient
aristocracy of the place. We have been unable to find out the basis of it, but
Adam Clarke and others have suggested that the names Chilion and Mahlon are
identified with the Joash and Saraph who are mentioned as having some kind of
dominion in Moab (1 Chronicles 4:22).[3] Naomi's statement later in this chapter
that the family went out "full" also seems to indicate their prominence and
affluence.
THE MEANING OF THE THESE PERSONAL NAMES
One of the interesting features of this paragraph is the meanings which scholars
have found in the personal names.
Elimelech means, `my God is king';[4] Naomi signifies `pleasant,'[5] `my sweet
one,'[6] or `amiable.'[7] Chilion and Mahlon are said to mean `sickness' and
`consumption'[8] or `sickly' and `wasting.'[9] Orpah is said to mean `stiff-
necked,'[10] and Ruth has been assigned the meaning of `friend,'[11]
`refreshment,' `satiation,' or `comfort.'[12] Very obviously, somebody is
guessing.
Regarding the names of the Moabite wives and that of Elimelech's two sons,
perhaps the most dependable analysis is that of Joyce G. Baldwin who declares
that, "The suggested meanings of Mahlon `weakly' and Chilion `pining' are
merely conjectural, and the meanings of Orpah and Ruth are not known."[13]
Hubbard agreed that in the case of Orpah, "The meaning remains an unsolved
mystery."[14]
The critical allegation against the Book of Ruth that makes it a production of
some post-exilic narrator bases their theory on the false proposition that the
names of Elimelech's sons are fictitious, invented for them centuries later and
designed to fit what happened to them, but Leon Morris cites plenty of proof that
the names Mahlon and Chilion, "Are actually good old Canaanite names."[15]
4

5. This fact drives us to the conclusion that the usual meanings assigned to the
names of these sons of Elimelech are not to be trusted. Since they indeed appear
to be authentic Canaanite names, the usual meanings assigned by commentators
could not possibly be correct, because, no parent in his right mind would fasten
upon a helpless little child a name with the kind of meaning that "scholars" have
assigned to the names Mahlon and Chilion.
Nothing but the stark and brutal facts of the disasters which befell this family in
Moab are related here. We are not told why Elimelech or either of his sons died,
merely that they died and left Naomi, Orpah, and Ruth widows in Moab with no
visible means of support.
Speaking of the marriage of the two sons to Moabite women, this was NOT
forbidden in the Law of Moses at the early period of this narrative, but severe
restrictions against Moabite descendants were later imposed. The Moabites were
descendants of Lot and his incestuous union with one of his daughters (Genesis
19). They accepted the pagan deity Chemosh as their god, and as a whole, the
Moabites were perpetual enemies of Israel. However, there were notable
instances of exceptions, as in that episode in which David's parents were
cordially received by the king of Moab (1 Samuel 22:3-4).
LANGE, "Ruth 1:1. And it came to pass in the days when the judges judged.
Nothing more definite is hereby expressed than that the occurrence about to be
related took place in the time when there was yet no king in Israel. In those days
there was no governor armed with imperative authority, who could help and
discipline the whole people. Everybody did what he would, and helped himself in
whatever way he thought best. Part of the tribe of Dan forsook the land in a
body, because they were no longer pleased with it, and had no mind to overcome
the remaining enemies; and Elimelech, an individual citizen, abandoned his
home when the times became bad.
There was a famine in the land. No rain fell, and the crops did not prosper.
Notwithstanding good and diligent cultivation, with which that at present
observed in those parts is not to be compared, no harvests were reaped from
those extensive grain-bearing plains which in good years produce abundant
supplies.[FN5] In such seasons of scarcity, southern Palestine naturally resorted
to importations from Egypt, as, the history of Joseph has already shown. The
increased prices, however, necessarily resulting from a failure of the home crops,
pressed with two-fold weight on the less affluent among the people. And if, by
hostilities on the part of the Philistines, or for any other reason, they were also
cut off from the granaries of Egypt, nothing remained but to look for supplies to
eastern countries. Even ancient Rome suffered famine whenever its connections
with Egypt were interrupted, an occurrence which sometimes, as under
5

6. Vespasian (Tacit. iii48, 5), involved serious political consequences.
The famine extended to the most fertile parts of the land, for it visited
Bethlehem. The very name, “House of Bread,” bespeaks a good and fertile
district. Even yet, notwithstanding poor cultivation, its soil is fruitful in olives,
pomegranates, almonds, figs, and grapes (Ritter, xvi287 [Gage’s transl. iii341]).
The region was “remarkably well watered in comparison with other parts of
Palestine.”[FN6] On this account, the name Ephratah, applied to Bethlehem and
the country around it, is perhaps to be explained as referring to the fruitfulness
insured by its waters.[FN7]
And a man went. The man left Bethlehem with his family in the time of famine,
in order, during its continuance, to sojourn in the fertile territories of Moab, on
the eastern side of the Dead Sea, whither the calamity did not extend. For this the
Jewish expositors rightly blame him. He left his neighbors and relatives in
distress, in order to live in the land of the enemy; forsook his home, in order to
reside as a stranger in Moab. If what he did was right, all Bethlehem should have
done the same! The case stood very different, when Abraham for a like reason
went to Egypt ( Genesis 12:10); for Abraham went with all his house, left no one
behind, and was everywhere a stranger. But Isaac is already forbidden from
adopting the same method of relief ( Genesis 26:2), and Jacob removes to Egypt,
not on account of the famine, but because his lost Joseph has been found again.
But this man undertakes, by his own strength and in selfish segregation from his
fellows, to change the orderings of divine providence. The famine was ordained
as a chastening discipline; but instead of repenting, he seeks to evade it by going
to a foreign land. Whether this can be done, the ensuing narrative is about to
show.
ELLICOTT, "(1) When the judges ruled.—Literally, when the judges judged.
This note of time is by no means definite. As we have seen, some have proposed
to connect the famine with the ravages of the Midianites Judges 6:1); or,
supposing the genealogy to be complete (which is more likely, however, to be
abridged, if at all, in the earlier generations), then since Boaz was the son of
Salmon (Salma, 1 Chronicles 2:11) and Rahab (Matthew 1:5), whom there can be
no reasonable grounds for supposing to be other than the Rahab of Jericho, the
events must be placed comparatively early in the period of the judges.
Beth-lehem.—See note on Genesis 35:19. Judah is added by way of distinction
from the Bethlehem in the tribe of Zebulun (Joshua 19:15).
6

7. Moab.—See notes on Genesis 19:37 : Numbers 21:13; Deuteronomy 2:9. The
land of Moab seems to have been of exceptional richness and fertility, as
allusions in the threats of Isaiah 16 Jeremiah 38, indicate. It was divided from
the land of Israel by the. Dead Sea, and on the north by the river Arnon, the old
boundary between Moab and the Amorites (Numbers 21:13). The journey of the
family from Bethlehem would probably first lead them near Jericho, and so
across the fords of the Jordan into the territory of the tribe of Reuben. Through
the hilly country of this tribe, another long journey would bring them to the
Arnon, the frontier river.
How far Elimelech was justified in fleeing, even under the pressure of the
famine, from the land of Jehovah to a land where Chemosh was worshipped and
the abominations practised of Baal-peor, may well be doubted, even though God
overruled it all for good. It was disobeying the spirit of God’s law, and holding of
little value the blessings of the land of promise.
PETT, "Introduction
Chapter 1. Driven By A Severe Famine Elimelech And His Family Seek Refuge
In Moab Only To Suffer The Consequences Of Forsaking The Sphere Of The
Covenant. He And His Sons Die And His Wife Naomi Returns To The Land Of
Judah Empty.
As we know from the ending to the story Elimelech could trace his ancestry back
to Judah through Perez (Ruth 4:18-22; compare 1 Chronicles 2:4). He would
thus be highly respected as one of the minority who could do so. And he lived,
and had land, in and around Bethelehem-judah. But a severe famine appears to
have smitten the land and, probably for the sake of his sons, he determined to
seek refuge in Moab, which was across the Jordan to the east of Israel, on the
other side of the Dead Sea. However, tragedy was the consequence of his decision
as YHWH ‘testified against them’ (Ruth 1:21). The writer clearly intends his
readers to see this tragedy as resulting from his desertion of the land of Promise.
The one named ‘My God is king’ had gone to another land where God was not
seen as king, in order to find refuge. He had virtually exposed YHWH to
ridicule. Yet out of that tragedy YHWH intends to bring triumph. What will
then follow is a revelation of the unmerited favour of God in the face of
disobedience.
The chapter follows the chiastic pattern which had been a feature of the Law of
Moses:
A There was famine in the land (Ruth 1:1)
B Elimelech and Naomi emigrated from Bethlehem and came into the country of
7

8. Moab (Ruth 1:2)
C Naomi’s husband and sons died (Ruth 1:3-5).
D Naomi and Ruth
E Naomi made a speech calling on her daughters-in-law to leave her (Ruth 1:8-9
a).
F Naomi kissed Orpah and Ruth goodbye (Ruth 1:9).
G All wept loudly (Ruth 1:9)
H Naomi could offer her daughters-in-law no sons (Ruth 1:11)
I Naomi was too old to have a husband (Ruth 1:12).
H' Naomi could offer her daughters-in-law no viable sons (Ruth 1:13)
G' All wept loudly (Ruth 1:14)
F' Orpah kissed Naomi goodbye (Ruth 1:14-15)
E' Ruth made a speech refusing to leave Naomi (Ruth 1:16-18)
D' They came to Bethlehem from Moab (Ruth 1:19)
C' Naomi was no longer pleasant but bitter for she had returned empty (Ruth
1:20-21)
B' Naomi left the country of Moab and returned to Bethlehem (Ruth 1:22)
A' It was the beginn
Note in A the emphasis on the fact that the initial phase of the story began with
famine, and ended with harvest. Central to the chiasmus in I is that hope has
gone because Naomi is too old to bear children. Thus while they might return to
the land of Judah, their cause would be hopeless. The emphasis all the way
through is on the tragedy of Naomi’s situation, only alleviated by the loyalty of
Ruth.
Ruth 1:1
‘And it came about in the days when the judges judged, that there was a famine
in the land. And a certain man of Beth-lehem-judah went to sojourn in the
country of Moab, he, and his wife, and his two sons.’
The famine occurred in the days of ‘the Judges’ (local rulers), each of whom at
various times ruled a part of Israel. There were many periods under the Judges
when the land was peaceful (see Judges 3:11; Judges 3:30 etc.), and this would
8

9. appear to have been one of them. If there are no gaps in the genealogy in Ruth
4:18-22 it suggests that it was probably late in that period, possibly in the time of
Samuel, although some (accepting gaps in the genealogy) relate it to the famines
caused by the predators in the time of Gideon (Judges 6). Whichever period we
accept the famine was of sufficient severity to cause a man of Bethlehem-judah to
seek refuge, with his family, in neighbouring Moab. This would involve crossing
the Jordan, possibly at Jericho, and moving southwards into Moab.
“Went to sojourn --.” That is, semi-permanently as a resident alien. His intention
would be to remain there until the famine was over.
“He, and his wife, and his two sons.” It was probably the need of his sons that he
had in mind when he made the move, especially if, as their names suggest, they
were weak and sickly. They would be in no condition to withstand famine. But
one whose name declared that ‘My God is king’ should never have been seeking
refuge in a land that was submissive to another god (Chemosh). He was belying
his name.
WHEDON, "SOJOURN OF ELIMELECH’S FAMILY IN MOAB, Ruth 1:1-5.
1. When the judges ruled — The age of the Judges extended from the death of
Joshua’s generation unto the time of Samuel’s public resignation of his office at
Gilgal, (1 Samuel 12,) when Saul was established king — a period, according to
the common chronology, of more than three hundred years. See Introduction to
Judges.
A famine in the land — Perhaps that scarcity of food and suffering caused in the
land of Israel by the seven years’ oppression of the Midianites, whose
devastations reached even to Gaza, and left no sustenance for man or beast.
Judges 6:4. According to Ruth 1:4, Naomi dwelt in the land of Moab about ten
years, and Ruth 1:6 gives the impression that the famine continued in the land of
Israel during most of this period, which comports well with the seven years of
Midianitish rule. According to this supposition the events of this book of Ruth
were contemporaneous with the judgeship of Gideon.
Beth-lehem-judah — So called to distinguish it from another city of the same
name in the tribe of Zebulun. Joshua 19:15. It is situated about six miles south of
Jerusalem. Its great celebrity is its being the birthplace of Ruth’s divine
descendant, Jesus the Messiah. Its ancient name was Ephrath or Ephratah. See,
9

10. further, notes on Genesis 35:19, and Matthew 2:1.
Went to sojourn — To reside for a time as a stranger; not to remain
permanently.
The country of Moab — Literally, The fields of Moab; the district east of the
Dead sea, forty or fifty miles in length by twenty in width, peopled by the
descendants of Moab, whose origin is narrated in Genesis 19:30-37. See also
notes on Numbers 21:13, and Deuteronomy 2:9. This region has long lain waste,
and the dangers of modern travel there have been so many that until quite
recently few have ventured to explore it. Captains Irby and Mangles passed
through it in 1818, and in their Travels describe the land as capable of rich
cultivation, and, though now so deserted, yet presenting evidences of former
plenty and fertility. In some places the form of fields is still visible, and the plains
are covered with the sites of towns on every eminence or spot convenient for the
construction of one. Wherever any spot is cultivated the corn is luxuriant, and
the multitude and close vicinity of the sites of ancient towns prove that the
population of the country was formerly proportioned to its fertility. In 1870
Professor Palmer passed through the fields of Moab, and his description of the
country confirms that of Irby and Mangles. “The uplands are very fertile and
productive; and, although the soil is badly tended by the few scattered Arab
tribes who inhabit it, large tracts of pasture land and extensive corn fields meet
the eye at every turn. Ruined villages and towns, broken walls that once enclosed
gardens and vineyards, remains of ancient roads — every thing in Moab tells of
the immense wealth and population which that country must have once
enjoyed.” In the days of Ehud the Israelites were subject to the Moabites for the
space of eighteen years, but under that judge the Moabites were “subdued,” after
which the land had rest fourscore years. Judges 3:12-30. From this history of
Ruth we find that amicable relations existed in her day between the two nations,
so that Moab became a place of refuge for Israelitish emigrants. So, too, in later
times, it continued to be an asylum for outcasts and wanderers, See 1 Samuel
22:3-4; Isaiah 16:3-4; Jeremiah 40:11-12.
His two sons — Who were, at the time of his emigration, unmarried.
PULPIT, "Now it came to pass. Or, more literally, "And it came to pass." The
"And" is somewhat remarkable, standing at the commencement of the Book. But
as it is also found at the commencement of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Joshua,
Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings, 2 Chronicles, Ezekiel, Esther, and Ezra,
its use, though inartistic, must be amenable to some literary law. The Books
specified, even including Ezekiel, are historical They are parcels of history, each
10

11. narrating events that had their genesis in more or less significant antecedent
occurrences. This historical genesis, so very different from an "absolute
commencement" of things, is indicated, though probably in unreflective
spontaneity, by the copulative "And." In the days when the judges ruled. Or,
more literally, "when the judges judged." In primitive times there was no
function that was more important for society than that of judiciously settling
disputes between man and man. Every such settlement, besides conferring a
benefit on society, and in particular on the individuals at variance, would
increase the moral influence and social elevation of the judge. By and by his
moral and social superiority would, in favorable circumstances, grow into
authority, specifically judicial on the one hand, and generically political, or semi-
political, on the other. When military prowess and skill in strategy were added, a
ruler, champion, or leader would be the result. Many such leaders rose up
among the Hebrews ere yet society was compactly organized. They were
vanously endowed; but most of them were only very partially equipped for the
judicious administration of the affairs of the commonwealth. All, however, were
called judges; and the discharge of their high duties was denominated judging,
even when it was entirely inconspicuous as regards judicial ability or judicious
determinations. The Hebrew word for judge is ‫ט‬ֵ‫פ‬ֹ‫שׁ‬ shofet; and it is an
interesting evidence of the very close kinship of Hebrew and Phoenician, that in
Carthage the chief magistrate, as we learn from Livy and other Roman writers,
was called sufes (originally, as we see from the inflection, sufet). That there was a
famine. An admirable though free rendering. In the original the structure of the
whole statement is exceedingly primitive and "agglutinative"—And (it) was in
the days of the judging of the judges, and (there) was a famine. In the land.
Namely, of Israel. The non-specification of the particular country referred to is
evidence that the writer was living in it, as one at home. Josephus says that it was
under the judgeship of Eli, the high priest, that the famine spoken of occurred
('Antiquities,' 5.9, 1). But here the historian speaks "without book," and without
any particular plausibility. Several expositors, such as Bishop Patrick, have
antedated, by a very long way, the calculation of Josephus They would assign the
famine to the period when the Midianites and Amalekites came up, "as
grasshoppers for multitude, to destroy the land," so that Israel was greatly
impoverished (see 6:1-40.). But it is in vain to multiply guesses. The date of the
famine is not given, and it is futile to make inquisition for it. And a certain man.
The interpolation of the individualizing word "certain" is quite uncalled for, and
now quite archaic. The simplicity of the original is sufficient, "And a man. Of
Bethlehem-judah. Or, as it might be still more literally represented, "of
Bethlehem, Judah." Them is no such single name as Bethlehem-judah. There is
only the apposition, for discrimination's sake, of one geographical name to
another, just as we may say, in English, Boston, Lincolnshire, or Alexandria,
Dumbartonshire. The localization of the main name is thus effectually indicated.
There is another Alexandria in Egypt; there is another Boston in the United
11

12. States of America; and there was in Palestine another Bethlehem, namely, in the
canton of Zebulun (see Joshua 19:15). Bethlehem, Judah, lies about six miles to
the south of Jerusalem. "Its appearance," says Dr. Porter, "is striking. It is
situated on a narrow ridge, which projects eastward from the central mountain
range, and breaks down in abrupt terraced slopes to deep valleys on the north,
east, and south. The terraces, admirably kept, and covered with rows of olives,
intermixed with the fig and the vine, sweep in graceful curves round the ridge,
regular as stairs". The valleys below are exceptionally fertile, and have been so
from time immemorial. Hence indeed the name Beth-lehem, or Bread-house. Its
modern name is Beit-lahm, or Flesh-house. Went to sojourn in the land of Moab.
We have no word in English that exactly, corresponds to the verb ‫גּוּר‬ rendered
sojourn. The cognate noun is uniformly translated, in King James's version,
stranger, and means foreigner. The verb means to dwell as a foreigner, but its
root-idea is yet undetermined. The Latin peregrinari admirably corresponds.
The man of Bethlehem, Judah, went forth from his own country to
"peregrinate" (Greek, παροικῆσαι) "in the land of Moab;" literally, "in the
fields of Moab," that is, "in the pastoral parts of the territory of Moab." It was
not a very great way off, this land of his "peregrination." Its blue mountains,
rising up luridly beyond the silver thread of the Jordan and the gleaming
expanse of the Dead Sea, are distinctly visible from the Mount of Olives and the
heights about Bethlehem. He, and his wife, and his two sons. The resumptive he
is employed for the purpose of linking on to him, in his "peregrination, the other
members of the little household. He emigrated "along with his wife and two
sons." He had fought hard to keep the wolf of hunger from his door, but was like
to be beaten. One after another the props of his hope that better days would soon
dawn had been swept from under him, and he saw no alternative but to leave for
a season the land of his fathers.
PULPIT, "Ruth 1:1-5
The emigrants and their trials.
We are introduced to the Hebrew family into which the Moabitess Ruth was
married.
I. THE BEAUTIFUL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE NAMES of both the Hebrew
parents.
12

13. II. THE WOLF OF HUNGER HAD COME PROWLING TO THE HEBREWS'
DOOR. In those conditions of society in which there is little commerce to unite
people to people, or when a city is in a state of siege, the consequences of famine
are inexpressibly sad and harrowing. Examples:—The recurring famines in
India; the famine in Jerusalem when besieged by the Romans, and as narrated
by Josephus: the famine in Leyden, when that city was, in 1573, besieged by the
Spaniards, and when one of the patriotic magistrates—a noble soul—said to the
hungry and mutinous people, "Friends, here is my body. Divide it among you to
satisfy your hunger, but banish all thoughts of surrendering to the cruel and
perfidious Spaniard. As commerce, however, grows under the fostering care of
those Christian influences that aim at realizing the brotherhood of all earth's
nations, local famines become more and more amenable to control and
neutralization.
III. THE HEBREW FAMILY WAS CONSTRAINED TO EMIGRATE. Many
tender ties get ruptured when emigration takes place. But the heart is pulled
onward by new hopes. Consider the importance of emigration from old and
over-crowded countries to the numerous rich fields lying fallow abroad. These
fields are just awaiting the presence of the cultivator to pour forth into the lap of
industry overflowing riches of food for the teeming millions of mother countries,
and corresponding riches of raw material for the skilled and skilful hands of
manufacturers.
IV. THE EMIGRANTS SEEM TO HAVE GOT A CORDIAL WELCOME IN
MOAB. It was creditable to the Moabites. Kindness and sympathy should always
be shown to strangers, and to all who are far removed from the sweet influences
of home.
V. MORTALITY SOON SADLY RAVAGED THE HEBREW HOME. All are
mortal. All must die. But in Christ—"the Resurrection and the Life"—we may
get the victory even over death. He has "brought life and immortality to light."
He who believeth in Him "shall never see death" (John 8:51; John 11:26). He
"hath," and "shall have," everlasting life.
HOMILIES BY J.R. THOMSON
On the Book of Ruth.
13

14. That the Book of Ruth is included in the canon of Scripture need excite no
surprise.
I. IT IS A CHAPTER FROM THE HISTORY OF THE HUMAN HEART.
Contrast it with the Book of Judges, to which it is a supplement, and which
records feats of arms, deeds of heroism, treachery, violence, and murder. Here
we are led aside from the highway of Hebrew history into a secluded by-path, a
green lane of private life. Here are simple stories of heart and home. In human
life, home, with its affections and relationships, plays an important part. In this
Book we have a glimpse into the domestic life of Israel, with its anxieties,
sorrows, and sweetness. Women and children, honest work and homely talk;
deaths, births, and marriages; loves, memories, and prayers, are all here. The
Bible is the book of man as God has made him.
II. IT IS A RECORD OF HUMAN VIRTUE, AND THE PROVIDENTIAL
CARE AND REWARD ASSURED TO VIRTUE. Human kindness, filial piety,
affectionate constancy, uncomplaining toil, true chastity, sweet patience, strong
faith, noble generosity, simple piety—are all here, and they are all observed by
God, and are shown to be pleasing to him, who rewards them in due time.
III. IT IS A PROOF OF THE SUPERIORITY OF HUMANITY TO
NATIONALITY. The Hebrews are often blamed for intense exclusiveness and
bigotry, yet no ancient literature is so liberal and catholic as the inspired books
of the Old Testament. This narrative shows no trace of national narrowness; it
proves that "God is no respecter of persons; but in every nation he that feareth
him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him." A pure and gentle
Moabitess is welcomed into a Hebrew home.
IV. IT SUPPLIES A LINK IN THE CHAIN OF THE GENEALOGY OF
DAVID, AND OF THAT SON OF DAVID WHO WAS DAVID'S LORD. Ruth
was one of three foreign women whose names are preserved in the table of our
Lord's descent from Abraham.—T.
Ruth 1:1, Ruth 1:2
14

15. A family of Bethlehem.
This Book is precious as a record of domestic life. The peaceful, prosperous,
happy home of the Ephrathite is rather suggested than described.
I. The TIME and STATE of society. "The days when the judges ruled." The
preceding Book enables us to picture what times of unsettlement, and
occasionally of anarchy, these were. The customs of the time were primitive, and
the habits of the people were simple. The elders sat at the gates of the little city.
Business was transacted with primitive simplicity. The tranquil course of
agricultural life diversified by a feast at sheep-shearing, or a mirthful harvest-
home.
II. The SCENE. "Bethlehem-judah." The fields of Bethlehem, in the territory of
Judah, are among the classic, the sacred spots of earth.
1. In Old Testament history. The home of Boaz; the scene of Ruth's gleaning, and
of her marriage. In these pastures was trained, in the household of Jesse, and
among his stalwart sons, the youthful David, who became the hero and the
darling, the minstrel and the king, of Israel.
2. In New Testament history. Between the pastures of Bethlehem and the stars of
heaven was sung the angels' song of good-will and peace. Hers was born the Son
of David, who was the Son of God. The visit of the shepherds and the wise men.
Herod's massacre of the babes, &c.
III. The PURSUITS of rural life. In Bethlehem-Ephratah Elimelech had his
inheritance. Here, for a time, he, like his fathers, tilled the fields and fed the
flocks he owned in peace. Even in times of trouble and disorder some secluded
spots are quiet; the bleating of the sheep is familiar, and the shouts of war are
unheard. In most men's breasts the scenes and pursuits of rural life are
cherished; perhaps it is hereditary. "God made the country." A simple and
natural piety is fed by fellowship with nature, the work of God's own hands.
15

16. IV. The PEACEFUL JOYS of home. In the sweet society of his wife Naomi ("the
pleasant"), his young sons Mahlon and Chillon, growing by his side in stature
and intelligence, the freeholder of Bethlehem passed the jocund days. How can
we think and speak quite worthily of the family and the home? Here is the Divine
nursery of the soul, the Divine school of life! Let us have no terms with the
fanatics who would reconstruct society upon another basis than domestic life.
The great lesson—gratitude to Providence for peace, congenial occupation, and a
happy home.—T.
Ruth 1:1, Ruth 1:2
Famine and impoverishment.
The former scene one bright and joyous. An honest Hebrew, of the tribe of
Judah, living upon the land of his inheritance, with the wife of his heart and the
children of his youth. Thus were formed the bonds which prosperity could not
dissolve and adversity could not snap. Here were learned the hereditary and
traditional lessons of faith, patience, forbearance, piety, and hope. A contrast
follows.
I. FAMINE. Probably from some incursion of the hostile forces of Midian into
the vale of Bethlehem; or, if not so, from a succession of bad harvests, or a
failure of pasture, scarcity and famine invaded the abodes of plenty and of peace.
II. IMPOVERISHMENT. Upon Elimelech the pressure of the times was
peculiarly severe, compelling him to break up his home, quit the modest but
cherished inheritance of his fathers, and seek subsistence elsewhere.
Lessons:—
1. Change of circumstances is a common incident in human life. Every person
has either experienced some such change, or has witnessed such reverse in the
16

17. condition of kindred or acquaintance. A fall from comfort, or even affluence, to
poverty frequently happens among occupiers, and even owners, of land, and still
more frequently in manufacturing and commercial communities.
2. Religion teaches sympathy with those in reduced circumstances. When a
neighbor is deprived not only of the usual conveniences of life, but of the means
of educating his children and of providing for his old age, we should net offer
reproach, or even cold, hard advice, but, if possible, substantial help, and always
considerate sympathy.
3. Religion has consolation for those in adversity. A message from heaven bids
them "be of good cheer!" Let diligence and frugality contend with
circumstances! Be patient and uncomplaining, and avoid that sign of a petty and
broken spirit, the dwelling fondly upon bygone prosperity! The sun of prosperity
may yet break through the clouds. Even if it be not so appointed, there may still
remain those blessings which are dearer than fortune's gifts—wife, child, a good
conscience, health, fortitude, hope I If calamity has come upon you through your
own fault, repent, and learn "the sweet uses of adversity." If through the fault of
others, refrain your heart from malice and revenge, and your lips from cursing.
Think rather of what Heaven has left than of what Heaven has taken. "Lay up
for yourselves treasures in heaven." Remember that, if Christians, "all things
are yours!"—T.
Ruth 1:1, Ruth 1:2
Emigration.
Picture the removal of this family from the home they loved. Taking with them, it
may be, the remnant of their cattle, they bade adieu to the familiar scenes where
they had known content and plenty, where they had formed their friendships
and alliances. The best prospect for them lay towards the east, and eastwards
accordingly they traveled. Whether they struck southwards by the foot of the
Salt Sea, or crossed the Jordan at the ford, they must soon have reached the
verdant highlands of Moab. Here it was, they were to seek a settlement and make
a home.
17

18. I. THESE CHANGES OF ABODE ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH
PROVIDENTIAL APPOINTMENT. Migrations have at all times been common
among pastoral, nomadic people. The tillers of the soil and the dwellers in cities
have been more stationary. Emigration a great fact in the social life of Britain in
our time. Owing to the increase of population, to geographical discovery, to the
application of steam to ocean voyages, emigration common among our artisan
and agricultural classes. Some become colonists through the pressure of the
times; others from love of adventure, and desire for a freer life. All of us have
friends who have emigrated. Thus God replenishes his earth.
II. THESE CHANGES AFFECT DIFFERENTLY DIFFERENT PERSONS.
Naomi would feel the severance most keenly, and would look forward with least
interest and hope to new surroundings and acquaintances. Her sons would not
realize the bitterness of change; the novelty of the circumstances would naturally
excite and charm them. Picture the emigrants, the friends they leave behind, the
scenes awaiting them, etc.
III. THESE CHANGES SHOULD BE WATCHED BY CHRISTIANS WITH
WISE AND PRAYERFUL INTEREST. Remember that the undecided are
yonder free from many restraints. By prayer and correspondence seek to retain
them under the power of the truth. Guide emigration into hopeful channels;
induce colonists to provide for themselves the word of God, the means of
education, the ministry of the gospel.—T.
PULPIT, "HOMILIES BY W.M. STATHAM
Ruth 1:1
"In the days when the judges ruled." This is the age in which the story happened
which constitutes Ruth's history, beautiful as an epic, and touching as a pathetic
drama of home life. The judges. Whether the earlier or later we know not.
Whether in the days of Deborah or the days of Gideon. Probably, however, the
latter, as history tells then of a famine through the invasion of the Midianites.
The judges. Religion means law, order, mutual respect, and, with all diversity of
circumstance, equality in the eyes of the law. A nation that perverts justice has
undermined the foundations of the commonwealth.
18

19. I. ALL JUDGES ARE REPRESENTATIVES AND INTERPRETERS OF THE
LAW. They are not creators of it; they are not allowed to govern others
according to their own will, but they are to be fair and wise interpreters of the
national jurisprudence. Law is a beautiful thing if it is founded on the Divine
sanctions; it means protection for the weak, safety for the industrious.
II. THE BEST ADMINISTRATION CANNOT MEET THE WANT CAUSED
BY WARS. Famine came! The Midianites came up and "destroyed the increase
of the earth." "And Israel was greatly impoverished because of the Midianites."
Here are the old border wars. Nature was as beautiful as ever, and the flowers of
Palestine as fragrant, and the corn as golden; but the enameled cup of the flower
was soon filled with the blood of slaughter, and the beautiful sheaves were
pillaged to supply the overrunning enemies of Israel. Such is the heart of man. In
every age out of that come forth wars; and although modern legislation is
enabled to fill the empty granary from other shores, yet in the main it still
remains true, war means, in the end, not only bloodshed and agony, but want.
III. ALL EARTHLY RULERSHIP IS THE SYMBOL OF A HIGHER
GOVERNMENT, As the fatherly relationship is symbolical of the Divine
Fatherhood, and the monarchical of the Divine King, so the earthly judge is to be
the emblem of a Divine Ruler, whose reign is righteousness, and who hath
appointed a day in which he will judge the world. There are schools of thought
that question human responsibility, that teach a doctrine of irresistible law, the
predicate of which is, that sin is not so much criminal or vicious, as the result of
innate tendencies which come under the dominion of resistless inclinations. But it
is to be noticed that these teachers would not excuse the thief who has robbed
them, or the murderer who has slain their child. To be consistent, however, they
ought; for they object to punishment in the plan of the Divine government.
Human instinct, however, and Divine revelation are at one in this; alike they ask,
"Wherefore should a man complain, a man for the punishment of his sin?" In all
ages and amongst all races where society is secure, and progress real, and
innocence safe, they are "those where the judges rule."—W.M.S.
Ruth 1:1
"There was a famine in the land." Providence led Elimelech, his wife Naomi, and
his two sons Mahlon and Chillon, into the land of Moab, on the other side of
Jordan. Whilst there was scarcity of bread in Israel, there was plenteous supply
19

20. in Moab. So they left their fatherland and home in Bethlehem. We carry "home"
with us when we go with wife and children. It is the exile's solitary lot that is so
sad. It is when God setteth the solitary in families, and the child is away from
home in a foreign land, amongst strange faces, that the heart grows sick. We
ought always to remember in prayer the exile and the stranger. Sometimes,
amongst the very poor, a man has to go and seek substance far away from wife
and child; but in this case sorrow was mitigated by mutual sympathy and help.
I. THERE ARE WORSE FAMINES THAN THIS. It was famine of another sort
that led Moses from Egypt, when he feared not the wrath of the king, that he
might enjoy the bread of God; and it was religious hunger that led the Pilgrim
Fathers first to Amsterdam, and then to New England, that they might find
liberty to worship God. In the day of famine we read Elimelech could not be
satisfied. No. And it is a mark of spiritual nobility never to be contented where
God is dishonored and worship demoralized. The word "Bethlehem" signifies
the house of bread; but there was barrenness in the once wealthy place of
harvest. And the name of Church cannot suffice when the place is no longer the
house of God, which the word Church means.
II. IS THIS FAMINE ELIMILECH'S NAME WAS A GUARANTEE OF
GUIDANCE AND SUPPLY. It means, "My God is King." Beautiful that. He
reigns, and will cause all things to work together for good. Mark the words, My
God; for as Paul says, "My God shall supply all your need." King! Yes, "the
earth is the Lord's, and the fullness thereof," and he will not let his children
want bread. They go without escort, but the Lord goes before them. There are no
camels or caravanserai behind them, but the Lord God of Israel is their reward.
So is Divine promise translated into family history.
III. THE TROUBLE THAT SEEMS LEAST LIKELY OFTEN COMES. Bread
wanting in Bethlehem, "the house of bread." Yes! But have not we often seen
this? The sorrows of life are often such surprises. They do not take the expected
form of the imagination, but they assume shapes which we never dreamed of.
The king not only loses his crown, but becomes an exile and a stranger in a
strange land. The rich man in health loses all in a night. A sudden flicker, and
the lamp of health which' always burned so brightly goes out in an hour.
IV. BETHLEHEM WAS A QUIET, RESTFUL ABODE. Nestling in its quiet
beauty, ten miles or so from time-beloved Jerusalem, who would have thought
20

21. that the golden ring of corn-fields which surrounded it would ever have been
taken off its hand? Very early in history it was productive. Here Jacob fed his
sheep in the olden times. Famine in a city impoverished and beleaguered we can
understand; but famine in Bethlehem! So it is. The rural quietness does not
always give us repose. There too the angel with the veiled face comes—the angel
of grief and want and death. Happy those who have a Father in heaven who is
also their Father and their King.—W.M.S.
BI, "In the days when the judges ruled.
The transition from Judges to Ruth
Leaving the Book of Judges and opening the story of Ruth, we pass from vehement
out-door life, from tempest and trouble, into quiet domestic scenes. After an
exhibition of the greater movements of a people we are brought, as it were, to a
cottage interior in the soft light of an autumn evening, to obscure lives passing
through the cycles of loss and comfort, affection and sorrow. We have seen the ebb
and flow of a nation’s fidelity and fortune; a few leaders appearing clearly on the
stage, and behind them a multitude indefinite, indiscriminate, the thousands who
form the ranks of battle and die on the field, who sway together from Jehovah to
Baal, and back to Jehovah again. What the Hebrews were at home, how they lived in
the villages of Judah or on the slopes of Tabor, the narrative has not paused to speak
of with detail. Now there is leisure after the strife, and the historian can describe old
customs and family events, can show us the toiling flockmaster, the busy reapers, the
women with their cares and uncertainties, the love and labour of simple life.
Thunderclouds of sin and judgment have rolled over the scene; but they have cleared
away, and we see human nature in examples that become familiar to us, no longer in
weird shadow or vivid lightning flash, but as we commonly know it, homely, erring,
enduring, imperfect, not unblest. (R. A. Watson, M. A.)
There was a famine in the land.
Famine, the consequence of sin
This might happen many ways: by the incursion of foreign enemies, by civil wars
among themselves, or by restraint of seasonable showers from heaven. Howsoever it
came, sin was the cause thereof: a toleration of idolaters and public monuments of
idolatry (Jdg_1:21; Jdg_1:27; Jdg_1:29-30; Jdg_3:5; Jdg_2:2), contrary to God’s
express commandment by the hand of Moses. They fell themselves unto idolatry
(Jdg_2:11-13; Jdg_2:17; Jdg_8:27).
I. That sins, Especially those aforenamed, deserve the judgments of God (Deu_
28:1-68; 1Ki_8:35-37). Therefore, to escape plagues, let us take heed of sin (Eze_
18:31; Rev_18:1-24).
II. That famine and dearth is a punishment for sin, and that a great plague (Eze_
5:16; Deu_28:23-24; Lev_26:19; Lev_26:29; Amo_4:1-13). And when this hand of
God cometh upon us, let us search our ways and humble ourselves (2Ch_7:14), that
the Lord may heal our land, for it is a terrible judgment (1Sa_24:14) and without
mercy (2Ki_6:10; 2Ki_6:29; Eze_4:10).
III. We may hereby see how God made His word good upon them, and that He
dallieth not with His people, in denouncing judgments against them; for Moses had
told them (Deu_28:1-68) that God would thus afflict them if rebellious against Him:
21

22. and here the story telleth us that in the days of the judges this famine came. (R.
Bernard.)
A famine in the land!
in the land of promise and in Bethlehem, the House of Bread! No doubt the state of
affairs in Bethlehem constituted a severe trial of faith to Elimelech and his family and
neighbours. It is very hard to see the meal growing less and less in the barrel; it is
even harder for those who have enjoyed times of refreshing from the presence of the
Lord, and seasons of genuine delight in His service, to lose the experience of the
Divine love and care, to find prayer becoming a burden and the Word of God lifeless
and unhelpful; but can either the one condition of things or the other be any excuse
or justification for forsaking the land of promise? For, to begin with, how can a
change of front help us under the circumstances? If corn be scarce in Canaan, where
God has pledged Himself to feed us, is it likely that better things will be found in a
land upon which, as we shall see, His curse is resting? If from any cause our sense of
the presence and approval of Jesus seems to have lost something of its distinctness,
even in that circle of Church life and Christian society with which we have been
associated, is it probable that we shall obtain truer solace and renewal in that “world”
the friendship of which is declared to be enmity to our Lord? And, after all, what is
the province of faith if it be of no service to us under such circumstances as these?
Christ, as we well know, changes not; if there be a change in our experience of Him,
the causes lie with us, and not with our Lord—the clouds are earth-born; what we
need is more sun, not less, and this we shall never obtain by turning our back upon
Him from whom every blessing of spiritual experience, as well as of earthly
enjoyment, flows. It is pretty certain that, like Elimelech, those whose hearts are
growing colder would protest almost with indignation that they have no intention of
any permanent abandonment of Christ. They are suffering from famine—from a loss
of spiritual enjoyment. To what may this unhappy state of things be due? Some,
perhaps, would frankly aver that they never have found enjoyment in Christ and His
service from the very commencement; they have sought to serve Him purely as a
matter of duty: for their pleasure they have looked to the world. Some, again, would
admit that there are both food and enjoyment in the Divine life for those who desire
to follow Christ, and at one time they themselves hoped that it would prove
permanently satisfying; but they confess that they got tired of it after a time, and it
seemed rather hard to them that they should be required to limit themselves to that
which, however good in itself, appeared to be somewhat restricted in character. Now,
our Bread is Christ, and dissatisfaction with our Bread is dissatisfaction with Him,
and confessions such as those to which we have been listening simply mean that the
Lord Jesus has ceased to be, or more probably has never been in any very real sense,
everything to us; such persons as those whose cases we have imagined have not
actually given up serving and loving the Lord, or at any rate do not think they have
done so, but into a heart which has never been completely surrendered to the Master
they have admitted other objects of regard, and these later affections, competing with
that earlier one, have dimmed its lustre and loosened its hold upon us. And are there
not others who, whilst desiring after a fashion to lead a Christian life, deliberately
place themselves beyond the reach, so to speak, of the nourishing and fructifying
grace of God by the very character of the circumstances by which they elect to
surround themselves? Their friends, their amusements, their books (not to mention
other matters) seem to be chosen almost with a view to hindering instead of assisting
their growth in Christ. But the Holy Spirit is Sovereign; He is the Lord of life as well
as the giver of it, and He feeds the souls who seek Him in accordance with His own
22

23. will, not in accordance with theirs. And the famine in Bethlehem took place “in the
days when the judges ruled.” It is impossible to read the historian’s account of those
days (Jdg_2:11, etc.) without realising that the times were very bad indeed, and just
such as we should expect to be characterised by famine and distress of all kinds. For,
to begin with, they were days of religion by fits and starts—days in which the
Israelites served God when they were in trouble and forgot Him as soon as their
circumstances improved. Is it likely that such a condition of things and such a
fashion of living can succeed? Will God bless those who, blind to His long-suffering,
set every law of gratitude and right behaviour at defiance in this hopeless kind of
way? But is not this precisely what some of us are constantly doing? No, religion by
fits and starts cannot possibly be a happy state of affairs: it must involve us in that
separation from God which results in famine. We shall not improve our
circumstances, however, by turning our backs upon God; let us understand that our
want is due to our own conduct, not to God’s unfaithfulness, and let us seek so to
amend our lives that He may yet be able to make our land flow with milk and honey.
Moreover, the days when the judges ruled were obviously days of intermittent
government: the arrangement was but a makeshift at the best. In our own ease it is
the absence of the autocratic rule of the Lord Jesus, or rather our fretful murmuring
against the rule, which lies at the root of most of our spiritual sorrow. We
acknowledge the Lord as our Saviour, but do we sufficiently recognise Him to be
Christ our King? It is impossible for us to fear the Lord and serve our own gods, and
be happy—try as we may. That there are times in the experience of all Christian
people when the pasture which once was green fails somewhat of its peaceful
restfulness no one who knows anything of life will for a moment deny. But this is
neither starvation nor a breaking of faith on the part of our covenant God. Elimelech
left Bethlehem in a moment of panic, or a fit of despondency or of world-hunger, but
others remained and trusted the God of their fathers; and when ten years later
Naomi, the solitary survivor of the little band, returned, she found her friends alive
and well and in the enjoyment of barley harvest. They had been tried, indeed, but
never forsaken. It was sad enough that Elimelech should have left the land of promise
and the House of Bread: it was worse that he should have selected Moab as his new
home. It was not merely that the people of the country were heathen, and that, as
Elimelech must have known, if he and his family were to remain true to God they
would have to lead lives of trial and to face unpopularity and perhaps persecution,
but Moab had acted with extraordinary bitterness to his ancestors in times past, and
in consequence was under a very terrible curse. Are we in no danger? Are there none
of us who are beginning to turn our heads, and our hearts too, in the direction of
those old associations and those old surroundings which did us so much injury in the
past—the scars of whose wounds, the fascination of whose attractions, have not yet
passed away? Are we wise in venturing where stronger men than we are have fallen,
where we ourselves fell not so long ago? God help us, and keep us true to Him and to
ourselves! (H. A. Hall, B. D.)
Bethlehem-judah.
The famine in Bethlehem
The home of Elimelech was in Bethlehem “Bethlehem-judah” as the historian is
careful to remark, in order to distinguish it from another Bethlehem in the territory
of the tribe of Zebulun. Its very name—Bethlehem, i.e., House of Bread—indicates its
fertility. And therefore the famine which drove Elimelech from Bethlehem must have
been extraordinarily protracted and severe; even the most wealthy and fertile parts of
the land must have been consumed by drought: there was no bread even in the very
23

24. House of Bread. Elimelech and his household were by no means likely to be the first
to feel the pinch of want, or to feel it most keenly; for he came of a good stock, of a
family that stood high in the tribe of Judah, and was a man of consideration and
wealth. The probability is that he was rich in flocks and herds, a sheep-master such
as Bethlehem has constantly produced, and that it was to find pastures for his
famishing flocks that he went to sojourn in Moab. (S. Cox, D. D.)
He, and his wife, and his two sons.—
Family names
The names are thoroughly Jewish, and are rich in meaning. Elimelech was a grand
name for a pious man; it means, “My God is King.” The mother is called Naomi, “the
gracious” or “sweetness.” Mahlon means “weakly,” and Chilion, “pining” or
“wasting,” referring probably to their bodily condition; for as they both died young it
is possible they were ailing from their birth. But it is noteworthy that in those olden
times parents were accustomed to give their children names according to some
peculiarity in their circumstances, or in the fond hope that the special virtue implied
in the name might be developed in after-life. Isaac’s firstborn is Esau, because of the
redness of his skin. Moses in exile calls his son Gershom, “For,” he said, “I have been
a stranger in a strange land.” The custom is dying out in these modern times. Parents
give children names without inquiring the meaning; the sound is more to them than
the sense. But there may be more involved, for good or evil, in the old custom than
we suppose. Shakespeare asks, “What’s in a name? A rose by any other name would
smell as sweet.” True, but as an American writer points out, “The influence of names
in the formation of character is probably much greater than is usually imagined, and
deserves the special attention of parents in their bestowment. Children should be
taught that the circumstances of their bearing the names of good men or women who
have lived before them constitutes an obligation upon them to imitate or perpetuate
their virtues.” It does not follow that the desired result will be obtained, yet it may be
an influence; and at least the name, when contrasted with the life, will be a constant
rebuke. (Wm. Braden.)
2 The man’s name was Elimelek, his wife’s
name was Naomi, and the names of his two sons
were Mahlon and Kilion. They were Ephrathites
from Bethlehem, Judah. And they went to Moab
and lived there.
CLARKE, "Elimelech - That is, God is my king.
Naomi - Beautiful or amiable.
24

25. Mahlon - Infirmity.
Chilion - Finished, completed.
GILL, "And the name of the man was Elimelech,.... Which signifies "my God
is King", as he was King over Israel. In the times of the judges, the government was a
theocracy; the judges were raised up immediately by the Lord, and ruled under him;
the Targum calls him a great man, and so Jarchi; and it is very likely he was,
especially if it be true what is said the Jewish chronology (u), that he was the brother
of Salmon, prince of the tribe of Judah; and it is certain that Boaz the son of Salmon
was a kinsman of his, Rth_2:1,
and the name of his wife Naomi; which signifies "sweet, pleasant", very likely a
comely person, and of a sweet disposition; a name of the same signification with
Naamah, the sister of Tubalcain, Gen_4:22 and according to the Talmudists she was
Elimelech's brother's daughter; for they say (w), that Elimelech, Salmon, and the
kinsman (spoken of in this book), and the father of Naomi, were all of them the sons
of Nahshon, prince of the tribe of Judah; the same Jarchi observes on Rth_1:22.
and the name of his two sons Mahlon and Chilion; which seem to have their
names from weakness and consumption, being perhaps weakly and consumptive
persons; and it appears they both died young. It is a tradition of the Jews, mentioned
by Aben Ezra, that these are the same with Joash and Saraph, who are said to have
dominion in Moab, 1Ch_4:22 which is not likely:
Ephrathites of Bethlehemjudah: Jarchi interprets Ephrathites by men of worth
and esteem; and the Targum is,"Ephrathites, great men of Bethlehemjudah''but no
doubt they were called so, because Ephratah was one of the names of Bethlehem,
Gen_35:19 so called from its fruitfulness; though Aben Ezra thinks it had its name
from Ephratah the wife of Caleb; but it was so called in the time of Moses, as in the
passage referred to:
and they came into the country of Moab, and continued there; unto their
death; all excepting Naomi, who returned when she heard the famine was over.
HENRY, "III. The removal of this family from Bethlehem into the country of
Moab on the other side Jordan, for subsistence, because of the famine, Rth_1:1, Rth_
1:2. It seems there was plenty in the country of Moab when there was scarcity of
bread in the land of Israel. Common gifts of providence are often bestowed in greater
plenty upon those that are strangers to God than upon those that know and worship
him. Moab is at ease from his youth, while Israel is emptied from vessel to vessel
(Jer_48:11), not because God loves Moabites better, but because they have their
portion in this life. Thither Elimelech goes, not to settle for ever, but to sojourn for a
time, during the dearth, as Abraham, on a similar occasion, went into Egypt, and
Isaac into the land of the Philistines. Now here, 1. Elimelech's care to provide for his
family, and his taking his wife and children with him, were without doubt
commendable. If any provide not for his own, he hath denied the faith, 1Ti_5:8.
When he was in his straits he did not forsake his house, go seek his fortune himself,
and leave his wife and children to shift for their own maintenance; but, as became a
tender husband and a loving father, where he went he took them with him, not as the
ostrich, Job_39:16. But, 2. I see not how his removal into the country of Moab, upon
this occasion, could be justified. Abraham and Isaac were only sojourners in Canaan,
25

26. and it was agreeable to their condition to remove; but the seed of Israel were now
fixed, and ought not to remove into the territories of the heathen. What reason had
Elimelech to go more than any of his neighbours? If by any ill husbandry he had
wasted his patrimony, and sold his land or mortgaged it (as it should seem, Rth_4:3,
Rth_4:4), which brought him into a more necessitous condition than others, the law
of God would have obliged his neighbours to relieve him (Lev_25:35); but that was
not his case, for he went out full, Rth_1:21. By those who tarried at home it appears
that the famine was not so extreme but that there was sufficient to keep life and soul
together; and his charge was but small, only two sons. But if he could not be content
with the short allowance that his neighbours took up with, and in the day of famine
could not be satisfied unless he kept as plentiful a table as he had done formerly, if he
could not live in hope that there would come years of plenty again in due time, or
could not with patience wait for those years, it was his fault, and he did by it
dishonour God and the good land he had given them, weaken the hands of his
brethren, with whom he should have been willing to take his lot, and set an ill
example to others. If all should do as he did Canaan would be dispeopled. Note, It is
an evidence of a discontented, distrustful, unstable spirit, to be weary of the place in
which God hath set us, and to be for leaving it immediately whenever we meet with
any uneasiness or inconvenience in it. It is folly to think of escaping that cross which,
being laid in our way, we ought to take up. It is our wisdom to make the best of that
which is, for it is seldom that changing our place is mending it. Or, if he would
remove, why to the country of Moab? If he had made enquiry, it is probable he would
have found plenty in some of the tribes of Israel, those, for instance, on the other side
Jordan, that bordered on the land of Moab; if he had had that zeal for God and his
worship, and that affection for his brethren which became an Israelite, he would not
have persuaded himself so easily to go and sojourn among Moabites.
JAMISON, "Elimelech — signifies “My God is king.”
Naomi — “fair or pleasant”; and their two sons, Mahlon and Chilion, are supposed
to be the same as Joash and Saraph (1Ch_4:22).
Ephrathites — The ancient name of Beth-lehem was Ephrath (Gen_35:19; Gen_
48:7), which was continued after the occupation of the land by the Hebrews, even
down to the time of the prophet Micah (Mic_5:2).
Beth-lehem-judah — so called to distinguish it from a town of the same name in
Zebulun. The family, compelled to emigrate to Moab through pressure of a famine,
settled for several years in that country. After the death of their father, the two sons
married Moabite women. This was a violation of the Mosaic law (Deu_7:3; Deu_
23:3; Ezr_9:2; Neh_13:23); and Jewish writers say that the early deaths of both the
young men were divine judgments inflicted on them for those unlawful connections.
BENSON, "Ruth 1:2. Ephrathites of Beth-lehem-judah — Bethlehem was
otherwise called Ephratha. Naomi signifies my amiable or pleasant one; Mahlon
and Chilion signify sickness and consumption. Probably they were sickly
children, and not likely to be long-lived. Such are the products of our pleasant
things, weak and infirm, fading and dying. They came into the country of Moab,
and continued there — Settled their habitation in that country, which it would
not have been lawful for them to have done, unless it had been in a time of great
public calamity, or great private necessity, as Maimonides observes.
26

27. PETT, "Detailed names are now given of the family. The family consisted of
Elimelech (‘my God is king’), his wife Naomi (‘my delight’ or ‘my sweetness’),
and their two growing sons Mahlon (‘sickness’) and Chilion (‘wasting’).
‘Sickness’ and ‘wasting’ probably refers to how they were seen when born, as
they struggled to survive, but it may well be that they had continued to
experience such problems. Having ‘gone to sojourn in the country of Moab’
(Ruth 1:1), they ‘came into the country of Moab and continued there’. The
double emphasis may have been bringing out the disapproval of the writer. They
had left God’s land.
Ephrath(ah) is closely connected with Bethlehem, possibly as the region in which
it was found, or possibly as the ancient name of Bethlehem itself (Genesis 35:19;
Genesis 48:7). In Genesis 35:19; Genesis 48:7 ‘the way to Ephrath’ leads to
Bethlehem. Compare Micah 5:2. Thus Ephrathites in this context may simply be
the name by which Bethlehemites were called. Bethlehem-judah is so called in
order to distinguish it from Bethlehem (house of bread) in Zebulun (Joshua
19:15).
PULPIT, "Now it came to pass. Or, more literally, "And it came to pass." The
"And" is somewhat remarkable, standing at the commencement of the Book. But
as it is also found at the commencement of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Joshua,
Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings, 2 Chronicles, Ezekiel, Esther, and Ezra,
its use, though inartistic, must be amenable to some literary law. The Books
specified, even including Ezekiel, are historical They are parcels of history, each
narrating events that had their genesis in more or less significant antecedent
occurrences. This historical genesis, so very different from an "absolute
commencement" of things, is indicated, though probably in unreflective
spontaneity, by the copulative "And." In the days when the judges ruled. Or,
more literally, "when the judges judged." In primitive times there was no
function that was more important for society than that of judiciously settling
disputes between man and man. Every such settlement, besides conferring a
benefit on society, and in particular on the individuals at variance, would
increase the moral influence and social elevation of the judge. By and by his
moral and social superiority would, in favorable circumstances, grow into
authority, specifically judicial on the one hand, and generically political, or semi-
political, on the other. When military prowess and skill in strategy were added, a
ruler, champion, or leader would be the result. Many such leaders rose up
among the Hebrews ere yet society was compactly organized. They were
vanously endowed; but most of them were only very partially equipped for the
judicious administration of the affairs of the commonwealth. All, however, were
called judges; and the discharge of their high duties was denominated judging,
even when it was entirely inconspicuous as regards judicial ability or judicious
27

28. determinations. The Hebrew word for judge is ‫ט‬ֵ‫פ‬ֹ‫שׁ‬ shofet; and it is an
interesting evidence of the very close kinship of Hebrew and Phoenician, that in
Carthage the chief magistrate, as we learn from Livy and other Roman writers,
was called sufes (originally, as we see from the inflection, sufet). That there was a
famine. An admirable though free rendering. In the original the structure of the
whole statement is exceedingly primitive and "agglutinative"—And (it) was in
the days of the judging of the judges, and (there) was a famine. In the land.
Namely, of Israel. The non-specification of the particular country referred to is
evidence that the writer was living in it, as one at home. Josephus says that it was
under the judgeship of Eli, the high priest, that the famine spoken of occurred
('Antiquities,' 5.9, 1). But here the historian speaks "without book," and without
any particular plausibility. Several expositors, such as Bishop Patrick, have
antedated, by a very long way, the calculation of Josephus They would assign the
famine to the period when the Midianites and Amalekites came up, "as
grasshoppers for multitude, to destroy the land," so that Israel was greatly
impoverished (see 6:1-40.). But it is in vain to multiply guesses. The date of the
famine is not given, and it is futile to make inquisition for it. And a certain man.
The interpolation of the individualizing word "certain" is quite uncalled for, and
now quite archaic. The simplicity of the original is sufficient, "And a man. Of
Bethlehem-judah. Or, as it might be still more literally represented, "of
Bethlehem, Judah." Them is no such single name as Bethlehem-judah. There is
only the apposition, for discrimination's sake, of one geographical name to
another, just as we may say, in English, Boston, Lincolnshire, or Alexandria,
Dumbartonshire. The localization of the main name is thus effectually indicated.
There is another Alexandria in Egypt; there is another Boston in the United
States of America; and there was in Palestine another Bethlehem, namely, in the
canton of Zebulun (see Joshua 19:15). Bethlehem, Judah, lies about six miles to
the south of Jerusalem. "Its appearance," says Dr. Porter, "is striking. It is
situated on a narrow ridge, which projects eastward from the central mountain
range, and breaks down in abrupt terraced slopes to deep valleys on the north,
east, and south. The terraces, admirably kept, and covered with rows of olives,
intermixed with the fig and the vine, sweep in graceful curves round the ridge,
regular as stairs". The valleys below are exceptionally fertile, and have been so
from time immemorial. Hence indeed the name Beth-lehem, or Bread-house. Its
modern name is Beit-lahm, or Flesh-house. Went to sojourn in the land of Moab.
We have no word in English that exactly, corresponds to the verb ‫גּוּר‬ rendered
sojourn. The cognate noun is uniformly translated, in King James's version,
stranger, and means foreigner. The verb means to dwell as a foreigner, but its
root-idea is yet undetermined. The Latin peregrinari admirably corresponds.
The man of Bethlehem, Judah, went forth from his own country to
"peregrinate" (Greek, παροικῆσαι) "in the land of Moab;" literally, "in the
fields of Moab," that is, "in the pastoral parts of the territory of Moab." It was
not a very great way off, this land of his "peregrination." Its blue mountains,
28

29. rising up luridly beyond the silver thread of the Jordan and the gleaming
expanse of the Dead Sea, are distinctly visible from the Mount of Olives and the
heights about Bethlehem. He, and his wife, and his two sons. The resumptive he
is employed for the purpose of linking on to him, in his "peregrination, the other
members of the little household. He emigrated "along with his wife and two
sons." He had fought hard to keep the wolf of hunger from his door, but was like
to be beaten. One after another the props of his hope that better days would soon
dawn had been swept from under him, and he saw no alternative but to leave for
a season the land of his fathers.
ELLICOTT, "(2) Naomi.—The name is derived from the Hebrew root meaning
to be pleasant (see below, Ruth 1:20). Mahlon and Chilion mean sickness and
wasting, it may be in reference to their premature death, the names being given
by reason of their feeble health. It is not certain which was the elder: Mahlon is
mentioned first in Ruth 1:2; Ruth 1:5, and Chilion in Ruth 4:9. It is probable,
however, that Mahlon was the elder.
Ephrathites.—See note on Genesis 35:19. Ephrath was the old name of
Bethlehem. Why, in the present passage, the town is called Bethlehem-judah, and
the inhabitants Ephrathites, does not appear/
LANGE, "Ruth 1:2. And the name of the man was Elimelech. His family was of
importance in the tribe of Judah (cf. chaps2,3), well known in Bethlehem ( Ruth
1:19 ff; Ruth 4:1 ff.), and by no means poor ( Ruth 1:21). The names of its
members may be held to testify to the same effect. In accordance with the spirit
of Israelitish life, they may be supposed to reflect those obvious peculiarities
which popular discernment remarked in the persons of those who bore them.
The man is named Elimelech, “my God is King.” All names compounded with
“melech,” king, with which we are acquainted, Abimelech, Ahimelech, etc, are
borne by distinguished persons. Now, it was precisely in contest with a king of
Moab, Eglon, that Israel had experienced that God is king; and yet, here an
Elimelech withdraws himself from the favor of God in order to live in Moab! His
wife’s name was Naomi, “the lovely, gracious one.” The name unquestionably
corresponded to the character. Whoever is loved as she was, and that by
daughters-in-law, is most certainly worthy of love. As to the names of the sons,
Mahlon and Chilion, the derivations which make them signify “sickly” and
“pining,” suggested perhaps by their subsequent fate, are undoubtedly
erroneous. For, surely, they bore them already when in Bethlehem, after leaving
which they continued in life over ten years in Moab. It is much more likely that
by these names, bestowed at birth, the parents expressed the feeling that these
sons were their “joy” and “ornament.” Mahlon (properly Machlon) may then be
derived from ‫חיל‬ ָ‫,מ‬ machol, “circle-dance,” Greek choros. Comp. 1 Kings 4:31,
where Heman, Chalcol, and Darda, are called sons of Machol; and in Greek,
Choregis or Chorokles, from choros. In like manner, Chilion[FN8] (or rather
29

30. Kilion), may, like ‫ָה‬‫לּ‬ַ‫כּ‬, kallah, a bride, be referred to ‫ַל‬‫ל‬ָ‫כּ‬, to crown. The name
would thus signify coronatus, just as kallah (bride) signifies a coronata. It is
particularly stated that they are “Ephrathites” of Bethlehem-judah. Ephratah
was the ancient name of Bethlehem and the region around it. Accordingly,
Ephrathites are natives of the city, persons properly belonging to the tribe of
Judah, not mere residents in Bethlehem from other tribes (cf. Judges 17:7).[FN9]
So David also, by a use of the word in obvious accord with this passage, is spoken
of as the son of an Ephrathite of Bethlehem-judah ( 1 Samuel 17:12); and the
prophet, when he announces Him who in the future is to come out of Bethlehem,
expressly speaks of Bethlehem-Ephratah ( Micah 5:1). For the same reason, the
full name Bethlehem-judah is constantly used, in order to prevent any confusion
with Bethlehem in Zebulun ( Joshua 19:15; cf. Com. on Judges 12:8), and also to
make it impossible to think of Ephrathites of the tribe of Ephraim.
LANGE, "“A man of Bethlehem-judah went to sojourn in Moab.” Because there
is famine at home, the family of Elimelech migrate to a foreign country. They
alone think that the distress cannot be borne. Instead of crying to God and
trusting in Him, along with their brethren, in Bethlehem, they proceed to an
enemy’s land, where heathen worship false gods. Their emigration testifies to a
decrease in their faith. Here it is not, as in the case of Abraham, Go to a land that
I will show thee; but it must rather be said, They went to a land that God had
rejected. The result was such as might have been expected. God did not bless
their departure, and therefore their entrance brought, no joy. They sought to
avoid one affliction, and fell into a heavier. The men escaped famine, but death
overtook them. They had not trusted God’s love at home, and so his judgments
smote them abroad.
Results like these should also be contemplated by many who undertake to
emigrate in our days. Not many go as Abraham went to Canaan, or as Jacob
went to Egypt; the majority follow in the steps of Elimelech.
Continue in thy land, and support thyself honestly. “To many”—says a book
called Sabbatliche Erinnerungen,—“it may be a necessity to leave their native
land, for the relations of life are manifold and often strange; but most of those
who in these days seize the pilgrim-staff, are not driven by distress. It is not
hunger after bread, or want of work that urges them, but hunger after gain, and
the want of life in God.”[FN14]
Starke: Dearth and famine are a great plague, and we have good reason to pray
with reference to them, “Good Lord, deliver us!”
It is true, indeed, that Elimelech emigrated to a heathen land, where the living
God was not acknowledged, while emigrants of the present day go for the most
part to lands where churches are already in existence. But, on the other hand,
Elimelech, notwithstanding his unbelieving flight, became after all no Moabite.
30

31. The emigrant’s grand concern should be not to have the spirit of a Moabite when
he leaves his native land. Many have ended much more sadly than Elimelech,
and have left no name behind. Elimelech’s kindred was yet visited with blessings,
because the faithful, believing spirit of an Israelitish woman, Naomi, worked in
his household.
Starke: Husband and wife should continue true to each other, in love and in
sorrow, in good and evil days.
“And the name of his wife was Naomi.” Naomi means, “pleasant, lovely.” As her
name, so her character. Her name was the mirror of her nature. And truly,
names ought not to be borne in vain. [Fuller: Names are given to men and
women, not only to distinguish them from each other, but also,—1. To stir them
up to verify the meanings and significations of their names. Wherefore let every
Obadiah strive to be a “servant of God,” every Nathaniel to be “a gift of God,”
Onesimus to be “profitable,” every Roger “quiet and peaceable” (?) Robert
“famous for counsel” (?), and William “a help and defense” to many2. To incite
them to imitate the virtues of those worthy persons who formerly have been
bearers and owners of their names. Let all Abrahams be faithful, Isaacs quiet,
Jacobs painful, Josephs chaste; every Lewis, pious; Edward, confessor of the
true faith; William, conqueror over his own corruptions. Let them also carefully
avoid those sins for which the bearers of the names stand branded to posterity.
Let every Jonah beware of frowardness, Thomas of distrustfulness, etc. If there
be two of our names, one exceedingly good, the other notoriously evil, let us
decline the vices of the one, and practice the virtues of the other. Let every Judas
not follow Judas Iscariot, who betrayed our Saviour, but Judas the brother of
James, the writer of the General Epistle; each Demetrius not follow him in the
Acts who made silver shrines for Diana, but Demetrius, 3 John, Ruth 1:12, who
had “a good report of all men;” every Ignatius not imitate Ignatius Loyola, the
lame father of blind obedience, but Ignatius, the worthy martyr in the primitive
church. And if it should chance, through the indiscretion of parents and
godfathers, that a bad name should be imposed on any, O let not “folly” be
“with” them, because Nabal is their name.…. In the days of Queen Elizabeth,
there was a royal ship called “The Revenge,” which, having maintained a long
fight against a fleet of Spaniards (wherein eight hundred great shot were
discharged against her), was at last fain to yield; but no sooner were her men
gone out of her, and two hundred fresh Spaniards come into her, but she
suddenly sunk them and herself; and so “The Revenge” was revenged. Shall
lifeless pieces of wood answer the names which men impose upon them, and shall
not reasonable souls do the same?—Tr.].
[Bp. Hall: Betwixt the reign of the Judges, Israel was plagued with tyranny; and
while some of them reigned, with famine. Seldom did that rebellious people want
31

32. somewhat to humble them. One rod is not enough for a stubborn child.
Fuller: The prodigal child complained, “How many hired servants of my father
have bread enough, and I die for hunger!” So here we see that the uncircumcized
Moabites, God’s slaves and vassals, had plenty of store, whilst Israel, God’s
children (but his prodigal children, which by their sins had displeased their
Heavenly Father), were pinched with penury.
The same: Let us not abuse strangers, and make a prey of them, but rather let us
be courteous unto them, lest the barbarians condemn us, who so courteously
entreated St. Paul, with his shipwrecked companions, and the Moabites in my
text, who suffered Elimelech, when he came into the land, to continue there.
The same: “And Elimelech died.” I have seldom seen a tree thrive that hath been
transplanted when it was old.
The same: “And she was left, and her two sons.” Here we see how mercifully
God dealt with Naomi, in that He quenched not all the sparks of her comfort at
once, but though He took away the stock, He left her the stems. Indeed,
afterwards He took them away also; but first He provided her with a gracious
daughter-in-law.—Tr.]
BI, "They came into the country of Moab, and continued there.
Lessons from the conduct of Elimelech and Naomi
1. Learn from the change in the circumstances of Naomi’s husband not to trust in
the uncertain possessions of this world. You may now be wealthy and respectable
among your neighbours and acquaintances; a few years or months may reduce
you to a condition of discomfort, if not of poverty and indigence.
2. Learn from the consequences of the step taken by Elimelech, the peril of
discontentedness and impatience under adverse circumstances. Should riches
make themselves wings, and poverty threaten to be your lot, beware of rashly
changing your habits and connections.
3. Ye that are parents, surrounded with a family of children, learn from this
history to reflect how soon these children may be taken away. And oh! strive and
pray, above all things, that they may be the children of God by faith in Jesus
Christ.
4. Learn from Naomi’s trials the beneficial effects of affliction; and from her
resolution to return to her native land—the land of Jehovah’s worship—that the
only true refuge in affliction is pure and undefiled religion. (H. Hughes, B.D.)
The wanderers
Thus the history of Ruth begins with a story of wanderers from God. It is a sad, but
not a strange commencement.
I. Why did they wander, and thus leave the home of their fathers? The answer given
is, “There was famine in the land.” God had sent upon them a temporary trouble, and
32

33. they fled from it. But when God chastens us in His wisdom, our duty is to yield with
contentment and submission. We should bear the rod and Him who hath appointed
it. When we patiently yield to His merciful chastisements, they become our most
precious blessings. “There was a famine in the land,” and they fled from it.
Temporary sufferings made their home for a little while uncomfortable, and they
could not patiently endure the will of God. It was their own land. It was their father’s
land. It was the Lord’s land. Their family and friends were there. Why should they
fly? The next season might be better, and more than repay them for the losses of the
present. The famine might follow them to the land whither they went, and make their
sufferings greater there than at home. When Socrates was urged by his friends to
escape from the prison where he was condemned to die, he answered them, “Tell me
of a land where men do not die, and I will escape to that.” How much better might
this family have found a quiet submission to the will of God! What an illustration this
is of sinful, foolish man! Adam had all the garden of Eden. One single restraint made
him a voluntary wanderer from God. How easily have all who have descended from
him rebelled and wandered since! But can we ever find happiness in running away
from God? Is there any happiness but in a cheerful, filial submission to God? See
where this wandering from God begins—in a spirit of rebellion and discontent. Oh,
be ye watchful there. Be ready to hear and to do the will of God. In the midst of your
trials remember His mercies.
II. But who were these wanderers whose story we have before us? They were a family
of Israelites, of professed believers in the Word of God. Never does sin seem to be
more dreadful than when man’s ingratitude is contrasted with God’s mercies. You are
never straitened in God. You have all things and abound in Him. He is rich in His
mercy to you all. Why should you wander?
III. This wandering was wholly unnecessary. These Israelites were not poor and
perishing. They “went out full.” Their wandering was therefore wilful, and this made
it the more rebellious and guilty. But is not all wandering from God unnecessary?
Why need we ever go astray from Him? It will be always a solemn charge against us,
“they went out full.” It is the wandering which makes us empty. If we go away from
God our own heedlessness or choice is the fountain of our guilt and sorrow. Why
need we wander?
IV. From whence did these Israelites wander? It was from the Lord’s own land,
Immanuel’s land. It was from the whole company of His people. It was from the
midst of the privileges of Divine revelation. It was from Bethlehem, the House of
Bread. It was a hasty, foolish wandering from a happy home. We will not call every
journey a wandering. It depends upon whence we came and whither we go, and
under whose direction we move. Jonah wandered. When God sent him to Nineveh he
fled to Tarshish. And God arrested him in the deep and brought him back. Manasseh
wandered. And he was taken in the thorns and bound with fetters, till, in the day of
his affliction, he sought the Lord and was forgiven. Demas wandered. From a love of
this present world he forsook his Master and returned no more. Judas wandered.
And how fearful was his end when he went to his own place! This is the wandering of
which we have to speak. It is a wandering from God, from His Spirit, from His Word,
from His Church. Whosoever goes astray from God voluntarily leaves the salvation
which has been provided for him, and makes it his condemnation that he has loved
darkness rather than light, because his ways are evil. But there are many wanderers
from God in a very peculiar sense. They go from the very midst of His family, from
Bethlehem itself, where Jesus is. They were born in His Church. They were early
dedicated to Him in His holy sacrament. They were taught His Word, and named and
registered among the number of His covenant people. They might have lived always
at His feet and in His favour. But they left Bethlehem in rebellious discontent.
33

34. V. Whither did these Israelites wander? “To the country of Moab”; to a land of
idolatry; a land of open licentiousness and crime. What a change of condition to
them! What though bread was abundant there! “Fulness of bread like that in
Sodom!” Man does not live by bread alone. And who that truly loved God would not
rather live with a famine in Bethlehem than with sinful abundance in Moab? They
went to Moab, but only “to sojourn there.” Just as Lot went to sojourn in Sodom.
Just as every wanderer from God goes into the world. It is but for recreation. It is
only a harmless indulgence. It is but for a season of enjoyment. They mean some time
to return and never to go back to Moab again. To die in Moab, without God and
without hope! Nothing is further from their thoughts than this. They will only dip in
the lake, like the swallow, and they shall feel refreshed for a longer flight. Ah, how
little they know of the dangers they encounter!
VI. And what were the results of their wandering? What could they be but wasting
sorrow and death? Ah, how sad are the results of a life of guilt! How mournful are the
consequences of a wandering from God! (S. H. Tyng, D. D.)
Spiritual advantages sacrificed to worldly gain
Were they wise in taking this step? For some reasons they were wise. There was an
abundance in the land of Moab, and a scarcity in the land of Judah. Worldly
prudence, then, seemed to point out some other spot as their dwelling-place. But one
thing they did not sufficiently consider—they were leaving behind them many of their
religious advantages. Yes, there is no doubt that Elimelech was wrong, very wrong, in
leaving the land of Judah with his family, and settling in the godless country of
Moab. It is a fearful thing to set little store by our religious advantages and blessings,
when God has given them to us. When, for instance, a person chooses a new home,
how apt he is to reckon how far he will be a gainer in a worldly point of view, putting
aside altogether his gain or loss in spiritual things! How sad, if he should grow richer
for this life, but poorer for eternity! Again, when a servant chooses a fresh situation,
is he not apt to measure the goodness of it by the wages he is to receive, instead of
thinking seriously how far his soul is likely to prosper in his new home? (Bp.
Oxeuden.)
Cowardly emigration
Emigration from one’s own land can only be justified when it becomes an inevitable
thing—where the population abounds more than the means of maintenance, and the
people require to be thinned by the emigration of some for the comfort and
advantage of all. But when people leave their country in the day of its difficulties, and
thus refuse their help, they play the part of cowards who desert the army when the
tide of battle rolls against its standards they act undutifully before God, unworthily as
patriots, and cruelly as human beings. Our best exertions at such a crisis are always
due; and instead of flinching from a sphere in which any good is possible to us, we
ought to show that duty calls us wherever we can be of service. (J. Cumming, D. D.)
The godly oppressed, while the wicked have abundance
This may seem a strange thing, that the godly should be oppressed with famine,
when worldlings and heathen wallow in their wealth. Of these David speaketh (Psa_
17:14; Psa_36:15; Psa_73:4; Psa_73:12). The like you may hear in Job (Job_21:7).
34

35. But of the righteous it is said that they often cry out of their afflictions, their sorrows
and nakedness, their hunger and misery; yea, our Saviour Christ pronounces Himself
in His members, poor, hungry, naked. Judge now between the outward estate of the
godly and the wicked; are they not contrary? That which of the world is condemned
is of the Lord commended. Yet be not terrified from godliness, but rather
strengthened in your profession. Then will you say, “Tell us the cause of this
inequality?” Our Saviour answers (Joh_15:19; Joh_16:20). He compares us to the
fruitful vine, which doth not only abide frost, snow, storm, and heat, but also at the
gathering time is broken off, that the grapes may be reached. The gold must be tried
in the furnace, the silver fined in the fire, the wheat purged in the floor, and, before it
be meat for man, must also he ground in the mill; so must we be proved in affliction,
fined in persecution, and crushed in pieces, under the burden of our own miseries,
that we may be made prepared bread for the Lord’s own spending. Why, then, doth
the Lord make such large promises to His Church of plenty, seeing it endures
continual poverty? I answer, the Church of God must be considered after two sorts:
the first, as it is cleansed in the blood of Christ, and washed pure from all outward
and notorious offences, unto which estate pertain all these outward promises of
liberality in the Scriptures. The second is the declined estate, or corrupted condition
of every one in the Church, even unto the world’s end: unto this pertain all the
punishments and tribulations which the godly endure, which the Lord sends upon
them that He may by little and little scour us from our transgressions and weary us
with the miseries of this life, that we may the more earnestly desire the life to come,
for the Lord doth here scourge us that we should not be condemned with the world.
(E. Topsell.)
Moab doomed
Moab was a doomed country. More than a hundred years before Ruth’s birth its
sentence had been pronounced through the mouth of the prophet Balaam: “There
shall come a Star out of Jacob; and a Sceptre shall arise out of Israel, and shall smite
the corners of Moab.” “The earth also, and the works that are therein, shall be burned
up.” (C. F. Hall.)
Elimelech an exile
In the “Field of Moab,” that is the upland canton bounded by the Amon on the north,
the mountains on the east, and the Dead Sea precipices on the west, people lived very
much as they did about Bethlehem, only more safely and in greater comfort. But the
worship was of Chemosh, and Elimelech must soon have discovered how great a
difference that made in thought and social custom and in the feeling of men toward
himself and his family. The rites of the god of Moab included festivals in which
humanity was disgraced. Standing apart from these he must have found his
prosperity hindered, for Chemosh was lord in everything. An alien who had come for
his own advantage, yet refused the national customs, would be scorned at least, if not
persecuted. Life in Moab became an exile, the Bethlehemites saw that hardship in
their own land would have been as easy to endure as the disdain of the heathen and
constant temptation to vile conformity. (R. A. Watson, M. A.)
35

36. 3 Now Elimelek, Naomi’s husband, died, and
she was left with her two sons.
GILL, "And Elimelech, Naomi's husband, died,.... According to Josephus (x),
after he had dwelt in the land ten years, and had married his two sons to Moabitish
women; but, as Alshech observes, the text shows that while he was living they were
not married to them, but after his death; and it is said of them only that they dwelt
there about ten years; so that it is most probable that their father died quickly after
he came into the land of Moab: and she was left, and her two sons; in a strange land,
she without a husband, and they without a father.
PETT, "We are not told how long they had been in Moab before Elimelech died,
but his death must have been a cruel blow to the family. The impression given is
that the sons were at the time in no position to provide the support that Naomi
needed. Many would see his death and its consequence as an indication of God’s
disapproval of what he had done.
PULPIT, "Now it came to pass. Or, more literally, "And it came to pass." The
"And" is somewhat remarkable, standing at the commencement of the Book. But
as it is also found at the commencement of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Joshua,
Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings, 2 Chronicles, Ezekiel, Esther, and Ezra,
its use, though inartistic, must be amenable to some literary law. The Books
specified, even including Ezekiel, are historical They are parcels of history, each
narrating events that had their genesis in more or less significant antecedent
occurrences. This historical genesis, so very different from an "absolute
commencement" of things, is indicated, though probably in unreflective
spontaneity, by the copulative "And." In the days when the judges ruled. Or,
more literally, "when the judges judged." In primitive times there was no
function that was more important for society than that of judiciously settling
disputes between man and man. Every such settlement, besides conferring a
benefit on society, and in particular on the individuals at variance, would
increase the moral influence and social elevation of the judge. By and by his
moral and social superiority would, in favorable circumstances, grow into
authority, specifically judicial on the one hand, and generically political, or semi-
political, on the other. When military prowess and skill in strategy were added, a
ruler, champion, or leader would be the result. Many such leaders rose up
among the Hebrews ere yet society was compactly organized. They were
vanously endowed; but most of them were only very partially equipped for the
judicious administration of the affairs of the commonwealth. All, however, were
called judges; and the discharge of their high duties was denominated judging,
even when it was entirely inconspicuous as regards judicial ability or judicious
36

37. determinations. The Hebrew word for judge is ‫ט‬ֵ‫פ‬ֹ‫שׁ‬ shofet; and it is an
interesting evidence of the very close kinship of Hebrew and Phoenician, that in
Carthage the chief magistrate, as we learn from Livy and other Roman writers,
was called sufes (originally, as we see from the inflection, sufet). That there was a
famine. An admirable though free rendering. In the original the structure of the
whole statement is exceedingly primitive and "agglutinative"—And (it) was in
the days of the judging of the judges, and (there) was a famine. In the land.
Namely, of Israel. The non-specification of the particular country referred to is
evidence that the writer was living in it, as one at home. Josephus says that it was
under the judgeship of Eli, the high priest, that the famine spoken of occurred
('Antiquities,' 5.9, 1). But here the historian speaks "without book," and without
any particular plausibility. Several expositors, such as Bishop Patrick, have
antedated, by a very long way, the calculation of Josephus They would assign the
famine to the period when the Midianites and Amalekites came up, "as
grasshoppers for multitude, to destroy the land," so that Israel was greatly
impoverished (see 6:1-40.). But it is in vain to multiply guesses. The date of the
famine is not given, and it is futile to make inquisition for it. And a certain man.
The interpolation of the individualizing word "certain" is quite uncalled for, and
now quite archaic. The simplicity of the original is sufficient, "And a man. Of
Bethlehem-judah. Or, as it might be still more literally represented, "of
Bethlehem, Judah." Them is no such single name as Bethlehem-judah. There is
only the apposition, for discrimination's sake, of one geographical name to
another, just as we may say, in English, Boston, Lincolnshire, or Alexandria,
Dumbartonshire. The localization of the main name is thus effectually indicated.
There is another Alexandria in Egypt; there is another Boston in the United
States of America; and there was in Palestine another Bethlehem, namely, in the
canton of Zebulun (see Joshua 19:15). Bethlehem, Judah, lies about six miles to
the south of Jerusalem. "Its appearance," says Dr. Porter, "is striking. It is
situated on a narrow ridge, which projects eastward from the central mountain
range, and breaks down in abrupt terraced slopes to deep valleys on the north,
east, and south. The terraces, admirably kept, and covered with rows of olives,
intermixed with the fig and the vine, sweep in graceful curves round the ridge,
regular as stairs". The valleys below are exceptionally fertile, and have been so
from time immemorial. Hence indeed the name Beth-lehem, or Bread-house. Its
modern name is Beit-lahm, or Flesh-house. Went to sojourn in the land of Moab.
We have no word in English that exactly, corresponds to the verb ‫גּוּר‬ rendered
sojourn. The cognate noun is uniformly translated, in King James's version,
stranger, and means foreigner. The verb means to dwell as a foreigner, but its
root-idea is yet undetermined. The Latin peregrinari admirably corresponds.
The man of Bethlehem, Judah, went forth from his own country to
"peregrinate" (Greek, παροικῆσαι) "in the land of Moab;" literally, "in the
fields of Moab," that is, "in the pastoral parts of the territory of Moab." It was
not a very great way off, this land of his "peregrination." Its blue mountains,
37

38. rising up luridly beyond the silver thread of the Jordan and the gleaming
expanse of the Dead Sea, are distinctly visible from the Mount of Olives and the
heights about Bethlehem. He, and his wife, and his two sons. The resumptive he
is employed for the purpose of linking on to him, in his "peregrination, the other
members of the little household. He emigrated "along with his wife and two
sons." He had fought hard to keep the wolf of hunger from his door, but was like
to be beaten. One after another the props of his hope that better days would soon
dawn had been swept from under him, and he saw no alternative but to leave for
a season the land of his fathers.
PULPIT, "Widowhood.
In the country of Moab Elimelech and his family found a home. A period of
repose seems to have been granted them. They learned to reconcile themselves to
new scenes and associations. But life is full of vicissitude. "Boast not thyself of
tomorrow." O, to live as those whose treasure and whose heart are above!
"Elimelech, Naomi's husband, died; and she was left." A brief, pathetic record!
I. The widow's SORROW. The observation of all, the experience of some
hearers, may fill up the outline. In every social circle, in every religious assembly,
are women who have been called upon to part with those upon whom they had
leaned for support and guidance, to whom they gave their hearts in youth, to
whom they had borne sons and daughters.
II. The widow's LOT. It is often one of hardship and trouble. As in the case
before us, it may be aggravated by—
1. Poverty.
2. Distance from home and friends.
3. The charge and care of children, who, though a blessing, are a burden and
responsibility.
38

39. III. The widow's CONSOLATION.
1. The promise of God: "Thy Maker is thy husband."
2. Opportunity of Christian service.
How different the widow's condition in Christian communities from that of such
among the heathen! The honor and the work of "widows indeed."
Lessons:—
1. Submission and patience under bereavement.
2. Sympathy with the afflicted and desolate.—T.
LANGE, "Ruth 1:3-5. And Elimelech died. Probably not long after his arrival in
Moab. This appears not only from the connecting “and”: “they came to Moab,
were there, and Elimelech died” (cf. the Com. on Judges 1:1), but may also be
inferred from the circumstance that the sons did not marry while he was yet
living.
The death of the father is the beginning of the sad catastrophe; but
notwithstanding its occurrence the sons are unwilling to return. On the contrary,
they proceed, in violation of the Mosaic law, to take Moabitish wives (cf. Com. on
Judges 3:6 f.). That such marriages fall within the prohibition of Deuteronomy
7:3 is not to be doubted. The restrictions of that passage apply to all who serve
false gods, and the idolatry of Ammon and Moab is as strongly abominated as
any other. That Moab and Ammon are not expressly named in the passage, is
owing to the fact that it speaks with reference to the country on this side of the
Jordan. In other passages, the worship and fellowship of Moab are rejected in
the same way as those of the other nations (cf. Judges 10:6). The question is not
what name a people bears, but what its religion and worship are. No doubt,
however, the old Jewish expositors are right when they maintain that the law
which forbids the entrance of an Ammonite or Moabite into the congregation of
Jehovah, even to the tenth generation ( Deuteronomy 23:3), does not bear on the
case of Ruth. For this can apply only to men, who from their sex are enabled to
act independently, not to women, who are selected and taken. A woman founded
no family in Israel, but was taken into one. For that reason, also, there is no
connection whatever between this law and that in Deuteronomy 7:2 ff. Israel was
forbidden to take wives for their sons from among the neighboring nations, not
because these entered into the congregation or founded strange families, but
39

40. because marriage is a covenant, and involves the danger of becoming mixed up
with idolatry.
Inapplicable, likewise, to the present case is the passage in Deuteronomy 21:10 ff,
adduced by Le Clerc in defense of Naomi’s sons. Doubtless, the fact that a
woman was a captive taken in war gave marriage with her an altogether
different character. In that case all the presuppositions which underlie the
enactment in Deuteronomy 7 were wanting. The woman, moreover, must first
bewail her kindred as dead, before she is allowed to be married. But Ruth and
Orpah were not captives. Marriage with them was in all respects such as
Deuteronomy 7 provided against. Nor does the narrative seek to hide the sin of
the young men.[FN10] It is precisely, as we shall see, the most striking beauty of
the thought of our Book, that the wrong which has been done is overcome, and
turned into a stepping-stone to a great end. The Midrash makes a daughter of
king Eglon out of Ruth. Her heart at least is noble and royal as any king’s
daughter could be, and her exterior was doubtless such as to correspond with it.
The name of the one was Orpah, and the name of the other Ruth. The
designation of girls by names borrowed from pleasing animals or flowers is
common to all nations. The conjecture that Orpah, or Orpha, as the LXX.
pronounce it, like Ophra, signifies a hind, is therefore undoubtedly in
accordance with Moabitish usage. A comparison might apparently be made with
cerva, Celtic carv (cf. Benfey, ii174). The name of Ruth would gain in interest, if
the derivation which I propose, were approved. Singularly enough the name of
the rose is not mentioned in the Scriptures, although this flower to this day
adorns the ruins of the holy land with wondrous beauty. The Mishna and
Talmud speak of it under its Greek name, ῥόδον (cf. my Rose und Nachtigall,
p19). Now it seems to me that in ‫רוּת‬ we have the ancient form of the word ῥόδον,
rosa, undoubtedly derived from the redness of the flower, ἐρυθρός, rutilus,
Sanskrit rudh-ira, Gothic rauds (Benfey, ii125). That even the Song of Solomon -
called Semitic and classical languages have many words and roots in common,
especially such as denote common objects, as colors, animals, plants, is manifest
from numerous instances, as e. g.ἀλφός, albus, ‫ן‬ָ‫ָב‬‫ל‬. At all events, the thought of
Ruth as the Moabitish Rose is in itself, apart from the philological probability,
too attractive to refrain from giving expression to the conjecture.[FN11]
And they dwelt there about ten years. The selection of such maidens as the sequel
shows Ruth and Orpah to be, and the peaceful relations which must have existed
between all parties concerned, may perhaps be allowed to reduce the offense of
Naomi’s sons against the marriage law to its mildest form. But the distance at
which they keep themselves from their native land and people when these are in
distress, in order to find happiness and rest for themselves elsewhere, does not
prove productive of blessings. The lot that befalls them is very sad. The father,
who feared lest he should not be able to live at home, had scarcely reached the
40

41. strangers’ land before he died. The sons founded their houses in Moab, and
Moab became their grave. They were probably determined not to return home
before the famine was over; and when it was over, they themselves were no more.
The father had emigrated in order to have more and to secure his family; and
now his widow had neither husband, nor sons, nor property. Mahlon and
Chilion had died childless; “joy” and “ornament” had given way to mourning
and the signs of bereavement—Naomi stood alone in a foreign land. Then she
arose with her daughters-in-law.
BI, "Elimelech, Naomi’s husband died.
The death of Elimelech
He went first from Israel, the land of the living, and led them thence, and so he now goeth out
of the world before them.
I. Death is the end of all, and it spareth none (Jos_23:14; Job_21:33; Ecc_6:6; Ecc_7:2; 1Co_
15:51; Heb_9:27).
II. A full supply of bodily wants cannot prevent death. The man must die in Moab, where
was food enough; the rich glutton must die also, and the rich man with his barn full.
III. Where men think to preserve life, there they may lose it, as Elimelech doth here, fleeing
from the famine in Israel, yet died where plenty was, in Moab; for no place is free from
death, and when the time appointed is come, man cannot pass it (Job_14:5). (R. Bernard.)
Elimelech’s departure and death
I. The cause of his departure. “There was a famine in the land.” Famine cometh from God. It
was threatened in the Mosaic law, as a punishment from Heaven for disobedience and sin
(Lev_26:18-20). See how many arrows Jehovah hath in His quiver! In how many ways He
can wither our comforts—blast our enjoyments. See how dependent we are upon Him. If
famine and its calamitous consequences be occasioned by sin, let us be thankful to God that
they are not inflicted upon us. We cannot deny that our sins are great and numerous,
considering the precious advantages we enjoy. Still God loadeth us daily with His benefits.
“He hath not dealt with us after our sins, nor rewarded us according to our iniquities.” Let us
learn to be thankful. Let us flee to the Redeemer’s Cross for pardon, on account of our past
forgetfulness of God. If famine and its accompanying horrors were experienced so frequently
in the land of promise, we may gather that we cannot be free from adversities in any station
or in any portion of the earth. When we are encompassed by difficulties—when we are ready
to wish that we were in the situation of some of our neighbours, did we but know how bitter
the ingredients which the hand of Providence not unfrequently puts into their cups, we should
murmur less at our own crosses, and endure with a more satisfied mind our own tribulations.
Let us learn, then, to be satisfied with the station which Providence has assigned us, and seek
for relief under the trials which are inseparable from it, in the holy Word of God. Religion is
the only effectual soother of human woe. It does not, indeed, remove miseries from those
who are under its hallowing dominion, but it mixes the sweet with the bitter, so as to render
the burden supportable. By directing the eye of the troubled Christian to that heavenly
Benefactor who was suspended for him on the Cross, and thereby opened for him a way to
the realms of unending blessedness, it deprives the trials of this temporary scene of much of
their bitterness, and imparts new energy to the sinking soul. Again, if the sore effects of
famine were felt in Canaan, while there was abundance in Moab—if Israelites suffered want,
when Egyptians, and Philistines, and Moabites suffered it not—the possession of many
41

42. earthly comforts is no evidence of spiritual safety, no sure sign of Divine favour and love.
The only heaven which the despisers of the Saviour shall enjoy lies on this side the tomb;
therefore they often receive more of the blessings of Providence than the heirs of glory.
II. Whither Elimelech directed his course when he departed from Canaan. By this conduct
this man evinced too great a regard for terrestrial bliss, and too little for that which is
heavenly. He slighted Divine ordinances and the privileges of the Lord’s sanctuary. The grace
of God has, indeed, enabled His servants to keep their garments clean in the midst of the
greatest pollutions, as Joseph in Egypt and Obadiah in the household of wicked Ahab; still it
is oftener the case, under such circumstances, that the Christian suffers more of evil than he
imparts of good. “The companion of fools shall be destroyed.” “Lead us not into temptation.”
If intercourse with the ungodly be so replete with danger, let us carefully avoid it.
III. What became of Elimelech in his new dwelling-place? “And Elimelech Naomi’s husband
died, and she was left, and her two sons.” We are not informed how soon he died; but that he
finished his life shortly after his settlement there is clear from his death happening before that
of his two sons, who lived only ten years after their arrival in Moab. How short the period he
escaped from the pressure of famine in the land of his nativity! And if he had greater
abundance of earthly comforts in his new habitation, how quickly were they all taken from
him! If he had remained in the land of religious advantages, he would not have had to sustain
adversities and hardships there long. Rather than resort to unlawful, or even questionable,
measures, to get rid of our troubles, we ought to implore aid from heaven, that we may
“endure” the “chastening” of the Lord—that we may bear the afflictions which His
providence allots to us with patience and humility—being fully persuaded that our heavenly
Parent doeth all things well—and likewise with earnest supplications for the accompanying
influences of the Divine Spirit, by which they become greatly instrumental in meetening our
souls for the habitations of the blessed. Learn:
1. That adversities and troubles should not be allowed to weigh too heavily on our minds.
2. That we should be very moderate in our estimation of, and desire for, earthly blessings.
(John Hughes.)
Out of one sorrow into another.
The end of one sorrow is the beginning of another, like the drops of rain distilling from the
top of a house, when one is gone, another follows; like a ship upon the sea, being on the top
of one wave, is presently cast down to the foot of another; like the seed which being spread
by the sower is haunted by the fowls, being green and past their reach is endangered by frost
and snow, being past the winter’s hurt, by beasts in summer, being ripe is cut with the sickle,
threshed with the flail, purged in the floor, ground in the mill, baked in the oven, chewed in
the teeth, and consumed in the stomach. This made David say (Psa_34:13). But be not
discouraged, for through many afflictions must we enter into the kingdom of heaven, and by
affliction we are made like the Son of God. (E. Topsell.)
She was left, and her two sons.
Comfort in bereavement
I. That albeit death is due to all, yet it seizeth not upon all at once; but one dieth now and
another hereafter. But God will have mankind upon earth till the last day; He forbeareth
some, and reprieveth them for their amendment; for the lengthening of life is for our further
repentance.
II. That the Lord, in afflicting His children, sweeteneth the same with some comforts. He
42

43. wholly leaveth not them without some taste of His mercy and goodness, as we may see in His
dealing with Naomi. He took away her husband, and left her two sons, and after took them
away, but gave her an excellent daughter-in-law. If we look upon the affliction, let us also
consider what cause of comfort we have; mark when, for what, how long or short, what it is
allayed with, that we be not wholly cast down. (R. Bernard.)
4 They married Moabite women, one named
Orpah and the other Ruth. After they had lived
there about ten years,
BARNES, "Marriages of Israelites with women of Ammon or Moab are nowhere in the
Law expressly forbidden, as were marriages with the women of Canaan Deu_7:1-3. In the
days of Nehemiah the special law Deu_23:3-6 was interpreted as forbidding them, and as
excluding the children of such marriages from the congregation of Israel Neh_13:1-3.
Probably the marriages of Mahlon and Chilion would be justified by necessity, living as they
were in a foreign land. Ruth was the wife of the older brother, Mahlon Rth_4:10.
CLARKE, "And they took them wives - The Targum very properly observes, that they
transgressed the decree of the word of the Lord, and took to themselves strange women.
GILL, "And they took them wives of the women of Moab,.... Not before they were
proselyted to the Jewish religion, as Aben Ezra thinks, and which seems plainly to be the case
of Ruth; at least she was so afterwards, if not before; and also of Orpah, as the same writer
concludes from Rth_1:15 though others are of a different opinion, and some excuse their
marriage, and others condemn it as unlawful, among whom is the Targumist, who
paraphrases the words,"and they transgressed the decree of the Word of the Lord, and took to
them strange wives of the daughters of Moab;''however it was so permitted by the Lord, and
ordered in Providence, that from one of them the Messiah might spring:
and the name of the one was Orpah; she was married to Chilion; and Alshech gathers from
hence that the youngest was married first before his brother:
and the name of the other Ruth the Targum adds,"the daughter of Eglon, king of
Moab;''and that she was his daughter, or the daughter of his son, is a notion commonly
received with the Jews (y) though without any just foundation; she was married to Mahlon,
Rth_4:10, one Philo (z) asserts these two women to be own sisters, for what reason does not
appear; and a Jewish writer (a) says they were both daughters of Eglon, king of Moab: and
they dwelt there about ten years; that is, Mahlon and Chilion, who married these women;
which is to be reckoned either from the time they came into the land, or from the time of their
marriage; the latter seems to be the case from the connection of the words.
43

44. HENRY, "IV. The marriage of his two sons to two of the daughters of Moab after his
death, Rth_1:4. All agree that this was ill done. The Chaldee says, They transgressed the
decree of the word of the Lord in taking strange wives. If they would not stay unmarried till
their return to the land of Israel, they were not so far off but that they might have fetched
themselves wives thence. Little did Elimelech think, when he went to sojourn in Moab, that
ever his sons would thus join in affinity with Moabites. But those that bring young people
into bad acquaintance, and take them out of the way of public ordinances, though they may
think them well-principled and armed against temptation, know not what they do, nor what
will be the end thereof. It does not appear that the women they married were proselyted to the
Jewish religion, for Orpah is said to return to her gods (Rth_1:15); the gods of Moab were
hers still. It is a groundless tradition of the Jews that Ruth was the daughter of Eglon king of
Moab, yet the Chaldee paraphrast inserts it; but this and their other tradition, which he inserts
likewise, cannot agree, that Boaz who married Ruth was the same with Ibzan, who judged
Israel 200 years after Eglon's death, Jdg_12:1-15.
SBC, "The Book of Ruth is a love-story told in four chapters. It gives us a glimpse of
everyday life in Bethlehem; in home and in harvest-field, in its general gossip and its law-
suits, more than three thousand years ago.
I. Glancing back over the lines of this sweet and pure pastoral idyll, we feel that rarely did
human story more impressively demonstrate the unspeakable worth of lowly folk, the fine
and favourable issues of seemingly suppressed lives, the hidden wealth of true and
unobtrusive souls, for nations and for the race. Notoriety counts for nothing in the sum of
things. The world’s future lay more in quiet Bethlehem, with Naomi and Ruth, than it did at
the headquarters of Judge Eli. Let us not despise ourselves. God does not, and our future is
with Him. Every name is historic in His estimate.
II. But we are not near enough to the heart of this story to hear its beat and feel its warmth,
until we see that it is a true and tender, pure and heroic woman’s love that gives such grace to
these Hebrew homes and confers such peerless worth on these lowly lives. The spell of the
Book of Ruth is Ruth herself, and the chief charm of Ruth is her unselfish and devoted love.
III. Life and love lead to God. For life is God’s gift, and love is of God’s nature. "We love,
because He first loved us." This is true of the love in the home as much as of the love of the
Church. All pure and unselfish love comes from God and leads to God.
Thus the story of Ruth is a fragment in a missionary report. It tells of the conversion of a
Gentile and illustrates the wisest way of winning souls. God saves the world by love, and we
cannot succeed by departing from His method and ignoring His Spirit. Naomi is a typical
home missionary, and Ruth is the pattern and prophecy of the success that crowns wise and
loving labour.
J. Clifford, Daily Strength for Daily Living, p. 119.
BENSON, "Ruth 1:4. They took them wives of the daughters of Moab — Either
these women were proselytes when they married them, which what is afterward
recorded of Ruth (Ruth 1:16) renders very probable, or they sinned in marrying
them, and therefore might be punished with short lives and want of issue. The
Chaldee paraphrast declares for the latter opinion. “Their days were cut short,”
44

45. says he, “because they married strange women.”
PETT, "But gradually the sons would grow up, and it was at that point that they
took Midianite wives for themselves. These were named Orpah and Ruth. There
is no certainty as to the significance of the names, which would be Moabite
names. While there appears to have been good relations between Israel and
Moab at the time, their taking of foreign wives might well have been seen by
many as a downward step, a consequence of Elimelech’s initial mistake.
Compare how associating with surrounding nations is disapproved of in Judges
1, although admittedly there it was because they were Canaanites. But the
Moabites were disapproved of almost as much, as Deuteronomy 23:1 ff makes
clear. And then ‘about ten years’ passed by while they continued to dwell among
the Moabites. ‘Ten’ regularly means ‘a good number’. There may be a hint in
this that they remained there overlong. That may have been seen as the reason
why the sons also died.
We note that during those ten years neither son had fathered an heir. Both
marriages were barren, a further sign of YHWH’s disapproval. It would have
been seen as signifying YHWH’s disapproval of their presence in Moab. And it
meant that Orpah and Ruth had no one to act as their protector in the future.
They shared in Naomi’s desolation, three poor women with no male protector.
ELLICOTT, "(4) They took them wives.—This seems to have been after the
father’s death. The fault of settling on a heathen soil begun by the father is
carried on by the sons in marrying heathen women, for such we cannot doubt
they must have been in the first instance. The Targum (or ancient Chaldee
paraphrase) says: “They transgressed against the decree of the Word of the
Lord, and took to themselves strange wives.” This act was to incur a further risk
of being involved in idolatry, as King Solomon found.
Ruth.—This name will mean either “comeliness” or “companion.” according to
the spelling of which we suppose the present name to be a contraction. The
Syriac spelling supports the latter view. Ruth was the wife of Mahlon (Ruth
4:10), apparently the elder sou. The Targum calls Ruth the daughter of Eglon,
king of Moab, obviously from the wish to exalt the dignity of Ruth.
COKE, "Ruth 1:4. They took them wives of the women of Moab— We must
necessarily conclude from this, that these women had become proselytes to the
Jewish religion; for otherwise it was not lawful for Jews to have married them.
The case is plain with respect to Ruth (see Ruth 1:16.); and it appears to me, that
Orpah not only left her mother and returned to her own country, but also
apostatised from the religion that she had embraced to the idol worship of Moab.
45

46. See Ruth 1:15 and also Prideaux's Connection, vol. 2:
Note; Worldly comforts and crosses are nearer than we suspect; while we are
rejoicing in the settlement of our children, the pleasing prospect vanishes in an
instant, and death lays all our hopes in the grave.
NISBET, "A HEBREW IDYLL
‘The name of the other Ruth.’
Ruth 1:4
The Book of Ruth is a love-story told in four chapters. It gives us a glimpse of
everyday life in Bethlehem; in home and in harvest-field, in its general gossip
and its law-suits, more than three thousand years ago.
I. Glancing back over the lines of this sweet and pure pastoral idyll, we feel that
rarely did human story more impressively demonstrate the unspeakable worth of
lowly folk, the fine and favourable issues of seemingly suppressed lives, the
hidden wealth of true and unobtrusive souls, for nations and for the race.
Notoriety counts for nothing in the sum of things. The world’s future lay more in
quiet Bethlehem, with Naomi and Ruth, than it did at the headquarters of Judge
Eli. Let us not despise ourselves. God does not, and our future is with Him.
Every name is historic in His estimate.
II. But we are not near enough to the heart of this story to hear its beat and feel
its warmth, until we see that it is a true and tender, pure and heroic woman’s
love that gives such grace to these Hebrew homes and confers such peerless
worth on these lowly lives.—The spell of the Book of Ruth is Ruth herself, and
the chief charm of Ruth is her unselfish and devoted love.
III. Life and love lead to God.—For life is God’s gift, and love is of God’s nature.
‘We love, because He first loved us.’ This is true of the love in the home as much
as of the love of the Church. All pure and unselfish love comes from God and
leads to God.
Thus the story of Ruth is a fragment in a missionary report. It tells of the
conversion of a Gentile and illustrates the wisest way of winning souls. God saves
the world by love, and we cannot succeed by departing from His method and
46

47. ignoring His Spirit. Naomi is a typical home missionary, and Ruth is the pattern
and prophecy of the success that crowns wise and loving labour.
Illustrations
(1) ‘Before God sets His nation aside, He will try them under human kings for
several hundred years; and in the Books of Samuel we have the opening of the
record of these kings. Before our knowledge of the period of the Judges is
complete, the story of the Book of Ruth remains to be told. It is in sweet contrast
to the two closing stories of the Book we have just finished, but that it belongs to
this period is clear from the first verse. This is the only instance in the Bible in
which a whole Book is devoted to the history of a woman. But Ruth was an
ancestress of Christ—the Mary of the Old Testament. The chief interest of the
Book to us, outside of its own beauty, is the genealogical table at the end.
Probably the events here recorded occurred near the close of the period of the
Judges.’
(2) ‘Ruth, when we first see her, was a Gentile, worshipping idols in a far
country. At the close of her history we see her in God’s chosen land, worshipping
Him, and sustaining the part of the bride of Boaz. Her history just shows how
any lost and wandering soul far from God can, if willing to make the decision
which Ruth made, be brought nigh, be numbered among God’s children, and
become a part of the Bride of Christ. Notice the genealogical table (Ruth
4:18-22), and remember that Moab, one of Ruth’s ancestors, was the son of Lot,
Abraham’s nephew (see Genesis 19:36-37). It matters not what our ancestors
have been, or done; that does not hinder from coming to Christ.’
(3) ‘The Book of Ruth is the romance of the Bible. The tale has movement, and
tragic incident, and happy consummation. Its pastoral simplicity delights us. We
are tired of heated discussions and high politics, of jarring controversy and
commercial panics. We pine for the country air, for the fragrant meadows and
the yellow corn, and the simple discourse of simple men. We can forget the haste
and hurry of the world, and even ourselves, in the hopes and fears and fortunes
of country life. The lessons we learn are easy and pointed; they are practical
rather than deep, and yet they are of living force; and as we read, the sense of
greater things is with us, for we know that the story plays a part—subordinate,
no doubt, but real—in the great drama of the world. Ruth, for all that her own
life’s story is complete, is one who takes a place in the great moving procession of
47

48. characters which preceded the Christ.’
PULPIT, "Now it came to pass. Or, more literally, "And it came to pass." The
"And" is somewhat remarkable, standing at the commencement of the Book. But
as it is also found at the commencement of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Joshua,
Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings, 2 Chronicles, Ezekiel, Esther, and Ezra,
its use, though inartistic, must be amenable to some literary law. The Books
specified, even including Ezekiel, are historical They are parcels of history, each
narrating events that had their genesis in more or less significant antecedent
occurrences. This historical genesis, so very different from an "absolute
commencement" of things, is indicated, though probably in unreflective
spontaneity, by the copulative "And." In the days when the judges ruled. Or,
more literally, "when the judges judged." In primitive times there was no
function that was more important for society than that of judiciously settling
disputes between man and man. Every such settlement, besides conferring a
benefit on society, and in particular on the individuals at variance, would
increase the moral influence and social elevation of the judge. By and by his
moral and social superiority would, in favorable circumstances, grow into
authority, specifically judicial on the one hand, and generically political, or semi-
political, on the other. When military prowess and skill in strategy were added, a
ruler, champion, or leader would be the result. Many such leaders rose up
among the Hebrews ere yet society was compactly organized. They were
vanously endowed; but most of them were only very partially equipped for the
judicious administration of the affairs of the commonwealth. All, however, were
called judges; and the discharge of their high duties was denominated judging,
even when it was entirely inconspicuous as regards judicial ability or judicious
determinations. The Hebrew word for judge is ‫ט‬ֵ‫פ‬ֹ‫שׁ‬ shofet; and it is an
interesting evidence of the very close kinship of Hebrew and Phoenician, that in
Carthage the chief magistrate, as we learn from Livy and other Roman writers,
was called sufes (originally, as we see from the inflection, sufet). That there was a
famine. An admirable though free rendering. In the original the structure of the
whole statement is exceedingly primitive and "agglutinative"—And (it) was in
the days of the judging of the judges, and (there) was a famine. In the land.
Namely, of Israel. The non-specification of the particular country referred to is
evidence that the writer was living in it, as one at home. Josephus says that it was
under the judgeship of Eli, the high priest, that the famine spoken of occurred
('Antiquities,' 5.9, 1). But here the historian speaks "without book," and without
any particular plausibility. Several expositors, such as Bishop Patrick, have
antedated, by a very long way, the calculation of Josephus They would assign the
famine to the period when the Midianites and Amalekites came up, "as
grasshoppers for multitude, to destroy the land," so that Israel was greatly
impoverished (see 6:1-40.). But it is in vain to multiply guesses. The date of the
famine is not given, and it is futile to make inquisition for it. And a certain man.
48

49. The interpolation of the individualizing word "certain" is quite uncalled for, and
now quite archaic. The simplicity of the original is sufficient, "And a man. Of
Bethlehem-judah. Or, as it might be still more literally represented, "of
Bethlehem, Judah." Them is no such single name as Bethlehem-judah. There is
only the apposition, for discrimination's sake, of one geographical name to
another, just as we may say, in English, Boston, Lincolnshire, or Alexandria,
Dumbartonshire. The localization of the main name is thus effectually indicated.
There is another Alexandria in Egypt; there is another Boston in the United
States of America; and there was in Palestine another Bethlehem, namely, in the
canton of Zebulun (see Joshua 19:15). Bethlehem, Judah, lies about six miles to
the south of Jerusalem. "Its appearance," says Dr. Porter, "is striking. It is
situated on a narrow ridge, which projects eastward from the central mountain
range, and breaks down in abrupt terraced slopes to deep valleys on the north,
east, and south. The terraces, admirably kept, and covered with rows of olives,
intermixed with the fig and the vine, sweep in graceful curves round the ridge,
regular as stairs". The valleys below are exceptionally fertile, and have been so
from time immemorial. Hence indeed the name Beth-lehem, or Bread-house. Its
modern name is Beit-lahm, or Flesh-house. Went to sojourn in the land of Moab.
We have no word in English that exactly, corresponds to the verb ‫גּוּר‬ rendered
sojourn. The cognate noun is uniformly translated, in King James's version,
stranger, and means foreigner. The verb means to dwell as a foreigner, but its
root-idea is yet undetermined. The Latin peregrinari admirably corresponds.
The man of Bethlehem, Judah, went forth from his own country to
"peregrinate" (Greek, παροικῆσαι) "in the land of Moab;" literally, "in the
fields of Moab," that is, "in the pastoral parts of the territory of Moab." It was
not a very great way off, this land of his "peregrination." Its blue mountains,
rising up luridly beyond the silver thread of the Jordan and the gleaming
expanse of the Dead Sea, are distinctly visible from the Mount of Olives and the
heights about Bethlehem. He, and his wife, and his two sons. The resumptive he
is employed for the purpose of linking on to him, in his "peregrination, the other
members of the little household. He emigrated "along with his wife and two
sons." He had fought hard to keep the wolf of hunger from his door, but was like
to be beaten. One after another the props of his hope that better days would soon
dawn had been swept from under him, and he saw no alternative but to leave for
a season the land of his fathers.
WHEDON, "4. They took them wives — “A kind of phrase,” says Kitto, “which
usually occurs in a bad sense, as done without the concurrence of their parents,
or not left so entirely to them as custom required.”
Of the women of Moab — The law condemned intermarriages with the
Canaanitish tribes, but, inasmuch as Israel and Moab were descended from
49

50. kindred ancestors, Abraham and Lot, not with the daughters of the Moabites,
(Deuteronomy 7:3;) it commanded, however, that no Moabite, even to the tenth
generation, should enter the congregation of the Lord. Deuteronomy 23:3. In the
days of Ezra and Nehemiah the law was so construed as to prohibit all
intermarriage with foreigners. Exodus 9, and Nehemiah 13.
But it was a distinguishing feature of the age of the Judges that every man did
that which was right in his own eyes, (Judges 17:6;) the law was not enforced,
and men forgot the commandments of the Lord and indulged in such looseness
as even to intermarry with the idolatrous Canaanites. See Judges 3:5-6.
In this marriage of Ruth, the Moabitess, and Mahlon, the Beth-lehemite, we may
now see the overruling hand of Providence, by which a Gentile woman is
adopted into the family from which Christ had his human lineage, thus typifying
the reception of the Gentiles into the kingdom of the Messiah, and the elevation,
by the Gospel, of different nations above narrow sectional prejudices and
partition-walls into feelings of a common brotherhood. “The story of Ruth has
shed a peaceful light over what else would be the accursed race of Moab. We
strain our gaze to know something of the long line of the purple hills of Moab,
which form the background at once of the history and of the geography of
Palestine. It is a satisfaction to feel that there is one tender association which
unites them with the familiar history and scenery of Judea — that from their
recesses, across the deep gulf which separates the two regions, came the Gentile
ancestress of David and the Messiah.” — Stanley.
PULPIT, "Marriage.
The notes of time found in this narrative are meager. It is not easy to decide to
what the "ten years "here mentioned refer. After the death of Elimelech, the two
sons were spared to be the occupation and the solace of the widow's life. Naomi
saw them grow up to manhood. Then the young men "took them wives of the
women of Moab."
I. MARRIAGE IS LAWFUL BETWEEN PERSONS OF DIFFERENT
NATIONS. There was nothing in the law of Moses to prevent these young men
from acting as they did, although the children of Israel were not allowed to
intermarry with the Canaanites. Later in Jewish history Nehemiah interpreted
the law as forbidding marriage with the children of Moab, But he seems to have
50

51. acted with unjust severity. These Moabitish women were virtuous, kind, devoted;
conformed to the religion of their husbands, and one of them found a solid
satisfaction in the worship of Jehovah. The conduct of the young men seems to
have been natural and blameless.
II. MARRIAGE SHOULD ONLY BE-ENTERED UPON AFTER SERIOUS
AND PRAYERFUL DELIBERATION, AND WITH A CONVICTION OF ITS
ACCEPTABLENESS TO GOD. Sensible and Christian people should
discountenance the practice of treating marriage with levity. Consideration
should be given to time, to circumstances, and, above all, to character.
Confidence and esteem must be, with affection, the basis of wedded happiness;
and these cannot exist in their completeness where there is dissimilarity of
conviction and aim—where one party is living to the world, and the other would
live unto the Lord. Error here involves misery, and perhaps disaster and ruin.
Lessons:—
1. Let elders inculcate just views of the marriage relationship upon the young.
2. Let the young avoid committing themselves to a contract of marriage until a
fair experience of life has been acquired.
3. Let Christians marry "only in the Lord."—T.
PULPIT, "Ruth 1:4, Ruth 1:5
A foreign land.
"And they dwelled there about ten years." Memorable years! Marriages and
births had given place to separation and bereavement. Elimelech the father died;
so also did the two sons Mahlon and Chillon. Thus we have the sad picture of
three widows.
51

52. I. WE CAN FLY FROM FAMINE, BUT NOT FROM DEATH. We need not
enter upon the argument of some expositors, as to whether Elimelech did right to
leave Bethlehem; whether by famine is not meant insufficiency of plenty rather
than actual want. We must be content with the fact that he thought it prudent
and wise to go. And now with fullness of bread came the saddest experience of
all. How often it happens that when circumstances improve, those we hoped to
enjoy them with are taken away. We climb the hill together, and then with new
and fair prospect comes the desolation of death amid the beauties and blessings
of earth and sky. These are darker clouds than covered them in Bethlehem. We
never know how dear are the living till they are gone; then we see it was their
presence that gave life and peace to so many scenes, that gave inspiration to
labor and sweetness to success.
II. TROUBLES OFTEN COME WAVE UPON WAVE. Ten years! and lo, three
out of the four pilgrims are at rest. No more fatigue, no more distress for them.
True; but those that are left! What of them? It is often easier to go than to
remain. It is all summed up in the consciousness, I have but to live, and to live
without them. Nor is this a morbid feeling. It is a most sacred emotion. True,
time will alleviate; but there will always be graves in the heart, and men and
women who have lost their beloved ones can never be the same again. Character
will be softened, purified, elevated. Heaven will be nearer and dearer to the
heart. Ten years! How fleetly they fly, and yet what a long volume of experience
may be bound up in them.
III. EVERY HOME IS BUT AS A TENT LIFE. They dwelled there. Got used to
the new people, the new skies, the new ways. After a time, to a family removed to
another shore, there are always some tendrils gathering round the place, and in
time they feel in leaving that a sense of loss. Strange as it all seemed at first, in
time touches of experience make it homelike to them. Still the old first home, the
dear village of childhood and youth, nestles in the heart. How many in life's
evening like to go back and live near the abode of the morning. We dwell! So it
seems; and we look at the picture of the world's life-pilgrimage as though, like
some panorama, it was all outside us. But we pass onward too, and ere long grey
hairs are here and there upon us, though we know it not. At times we look back.
Ten years! And their experience is within us, as well as behind us.—W.M.S.
BI, "They took them wives of the women of Moab.
Sinful marriages
The sin of these young men in marrying strange women is not expressly denounced
as a sin in the story, although it is denounced in the Targum, which commences Rth_
1:4 thus: “They transgressed the commandment of the Lord, and took foreign wives
52

53. from among the daughters of Moab.” But no one can read the Old Testament without
feeling that they sinned against the law, for to the Hebrews marriage was a religious
covenant; and St. Paul does but utter an admitted and familiar truth when he asks,
“What fellowship has light with darkness, or Belial with God?” The reason of the law
is given in the passage just cited from Deuteronomy—“they will turn away thy
children from Me, and they will serve false gods.” The daughters of Moab were
specially obnoxious to the faithful Israelites. They appear to have been among the
most fascinating, and the most wanton and profligate, women of antiquity. Their
gods—Chemosh, Moloch, Baal-peor—were incarnations of lust and cruelty. They
demanded human sacrifices. Children were cast into their burning arms. In their
ritual sensuality was accounted piety. True, Mahlon and Chilion were exceptionally
fortunate in their wives. They were not turned to the service of false gods, though
there was grave reason to fear that they might be; but, on the other hand, neither did
they turn their wives to the service of the only true God. It was not till after her
husband’s death that Ruth learned to take shelter under the wings of the Lord God of
Israel (Rth_2:12); and Orpah, as we are expressly told (Rth_1:15), “went back to her
people and her gods.”(S. Cox, D. D.)
In the country of Moab
It is wonderful how soon and how easily one gets used to a change of circumstances
when the change itself is brought about gradually. The country of Moab, into which
Elimelech and his family had journeyed, had of course its own language, its own
fashions, and its own religion too, and these were as dissimilar as possible from those
of the country which they had just now left. Yet the new-comers were in no serious
sense shocked by what they saw and heard—had they so been they would have
retraced their steps without delay; but each day brought its own novelty, and they
managed to accustom themselves to the new things of to-day before it became
necessary to face those of the morrow. Looking calmly at our fashion of living and
way of acting now, some of us are compelled to admit how much we have changed in
recent years; we never guessed that the alteration was so great or so complete; we
never meant to have come so far. Worst of all, we never thought we should have felt
the change so little. We remember well the qualms of conscience by which we were
troubled when first we commenced to wander: we recollect now how the protests of
our heart became fainter and fainter day by day until they ceased to be anything more
than a hardly audible whisper. We went to sojourn in the country of Moab: we came
into the country of Moab, and continued there. To begin with, our intentions were
purely selfish, as selfish as were those of Lot when he elected to pitch his tent toward
Sodom. We were going to get what we could out of Moab; they who lived there had
something that we coveted, and we determined to make them share it with us. And,
moreover, we had no serious intention of giving Moab anything in return. It is,
indeed, just possible that at one time we may have possessed the Quixotic idea of
remodelling life in Moab to suit our own ideas, but if so we soon abandoned the idea;
for on the one hand we found that Moab was not willing to be remodelled—indeed,
when we faintly suggested something of the kind, they said to us, as Sodom had said
to Lot, and with not a little point, “Stand back; this one came in to sojourn, and he
will needs be a judge”; and on the other hand, our own opinions were neither
sufficiently clear in our own minds nor dear to our own hearts to enable us to graft
them upon others. We were somewhat surprised, it may be, and a little pained, at the
way in which our new neighbours received our well-meant attempts, in the early days
of our life in Moab, to bring before them the advantages of a life of obedience and
surrender to God. “If Bethlehem was such a charming place, and the life there so
53

54. delightful, why did you exchange it for our country?” they not unnaturally inquired;
“if Bethlehem did not satisfy you, how can you suppose that it will satisfy us?” Nor
may we forget that in leaving the land of promise the wanderer never intends to be
absent for other than a short period. If, on parting from our true home, any one had
suggested that we should have been found in Moab to-day, we should have denied
the imputation with indignation. Yet here we are still; and here in His great mercy
the Good Shepherd has found us, and hence He desires to carry us home again—to
our home and His. So they came into the country of Moab, and appear to have been
received there with courtesy and hospitality. The world is always glad when those
who have been making a somewhat definite profession of devotion to God show signs
of a desire to relax the strictness of their behaviour; it is always willing to meet such
persons more than half-way, and to do its best to enable them to quiet the still
struggling conscience with as little delay as possible. If the world would only
persecute us when it finds us on its own ground, there would be some hope that our
stay in Moab would prove short indeed. Not that the world is any more prompted by
unselfishness in its reception of us than were we ourselves in our journey to Moab;
our new friends rejoice that, by our change of front, another protest against their way
of life has died a natural death, and they are only too glad to be present and assist at
its obsequies; they are, moreover, clear-sighted enough to see without being told that
our surrender is a tacit victory for the world and indifferentism, and pro tanto a
defeat for the gospel and a discredit to the life of faith in Christ. (H. A. Hall, B. D.)
Alternation of shadow and sunshine in life
And thus the world moves on—deaths and marriages, marriages and deaths. The
household which to-day mourns as though all joy had taken flight for ever to-morrow
resounds with the laughter of many voices at a newborn happiness. The faces all tear-
stained yesterday are bright with smiles to-day. The bell which slowly tolled the
funeral knell an hour ago now rings out the joyous wedding chime. So it must be, so
it ought to be. Probably life would lose half its beauty but for this alternation of
shadow and sunshine; at least, this we know, that human hearts need both the
darkness and the light, or they will not grow to that perfection of truth and purity
which God has designed they shall attain. Elimelech died, the sons married. It is a
simple statement, yet a whole world of change is involved in it for that small
household. (W. Braden.)
5 both Mahlon and Kilion also died, and Naomi
was left without her two sons and her husband.
CLARKE, "And Mahlon and Chilion died - The Targum adds, And because
they transgressed the decree of the word of the Lord, and joined affinity with strange
54

55. people, therefore their days were cut off. It is very likely that there is more here than
conjecture.
GILL, "And Mahlon and Chilion died also both of them,.... As well as their
father, in the land of Moab, after they had lived with their wives in it about ten years;
the Targum is,"because they transgressed the decree of the Word of the Lord, and
joined in affinity with strange people, their days were cut off;''or shortened:
and the woman was left of her two sons and her husband; deprived both of
her husband and her sons, which was a great affliction, aggravated by her being in a
strange country; many are the afflictions of the righteous.
HENRY, "V. The death of Elimelech and his two sons, and the disconsolate
condition Naomi was thereby reduced to. Her husband died (Rth_1:3) and her two
sons (Rth_1:5) soon after their marriage, and the Chaldee says, Their days were
shortened, because they transgressed the law in marrying strange wives. See here, 1.
That wherever we go we cannot out-run death, whose fatal arrows fly in all places. 2.
That we cannot expect to prosper when we go out of the way of our duty. He that will
save his life by any indirect course shall lose it. 3. That death, when it comes into a
family, often makes breach upon breach. One is taken away to prepare another to
follow soon after; one is taken away, and that affliction is not duly improved, and
therefore God sends another of the same kind. When Naomi had lost her husband
she took so much the more complacency and put so much the more confidence in her
sons. Under the shadow of these surviving comforts she thinks she shall live among
the heathen, and exceedingly glad she was of these gourds; but behold they wither
presently, green and growing up in the morning, cut down and dried up before
night, buried soon after they were married, for neither of them left any children. So
uncertain and transient are all our enjoyments here. It is therefore our wisdom to
make sure of those comforts that will be made sure and of which death cannot rob us.
But how desolate was the condition, and how disconsolate the spirit, of poor Naomi,
when the woman was left of her two sons and her husband! When these two things,
loss of children and widowhood, come upon her in a moment, come upon her in
their perfection, by whom shall she be comforted? Isa_47:9; Isa_51:19. It is God
alone who has wherewithal to comfort those who are thus cast down.
BI, "Mahlon and Chilion died also both of them.
Bereavement a blessing
What a melancholy collapse it all had been! For those so dear to her, death; for
herself, solitude—the woman was left of her two sons and her husband. And yet what
a marvellous blessing bereavement not only may be but often is. Surrounded by those
who make up to us our world, we are slow to raise our eyes above or beyond them, or
to realise that we have any need which they are incapable of supplying; but when they
are taken from us, these beloved ones upon whom alone we have leaned and to whom
alone we have been in the habit of looking for strength and consolation and advice,
then it sometimes is that the soul looks up as she hears the Master calling her by
name, and through her tears recognises for the first time the patient Lord who has
ever been her truest friend. God would not have us love our dear ones one whit the
less, but He would have us learn to put Him first and to trust Him implicitly about
them no less than about ourselves. (H. A. Hall, B. D.)
55

56. Enormous trials
Observe—
1. That many afflictions do attend the most gracious souls (Psa_34:19).
2. Crosses seldom come single upon God’s servants.
3. God did wonderfully support her in all these her great trials, and left her upon
Scripture record as a pattern of patience unto all succeeding generations. (C.
Ness.)
BENSON, "Ruth 1:5-6. The woman was left of her two sons and her husband —
Loss of children and widowhood are both come upon her. By whom shall she be
comforted? It is God alone who is able to comfort those who are thus cast down.
The Lord had visited his people in giving them bread — That is, food: so she
stayed no longer than necessity forced her.
PULPIT, "And, to make a long story short, Machlon and Chillon died also both
of them. "Like green apples," says Fuller, "cudgelled off the tree." But why
"cudgelled?" There is no evidence in the text of Divine displeasure, and the
Christian expositor, when going beyond the text in quest of principles, should not
forget the tower of Siloam, and the victims of Pilate s bloodthirstiness (see Luke
13:1-5). And the woman was left of her two children and of her husband. That is,
"of her two children as well as of her husband." She became as it were their
relict too. She remained behind after they had gone on before. If all sentiment
were to be taken out of the expression, it might then be simply said, in very
commonplace prose, she survived them. Poor woman! "Of the two sexes," says
Fuller, "the woman is the weaker; of women, old women are most feeble; of old
women, widows most woeful; of widows, those that are poor, their plight most
pitiful; of poor widows, those who want children, their case most doleful; of
widows that want children, those that once had them, and after lost them, their
estate most desolate; of widows that have had children, those that are strangers
in a foreign country, their condition most comfortless. Yet all these met together
in Naomi, as in the center of sorrow, to make the measure of her misery pressed
down, shaken together, running over. I conclude, therefore, many men have had
affliction—none like Job; many women have had tribulation—none like Naomi."
PULPIT, "Double desolation.
In the happiness of her children Naomi would revive the happy years of her own
early married life. But the bright sky was soon clouded over by the shadow of
death. Perhaps inheriting their father's constitution, her sons died in early
56

57. manhood. She became a childless widow. Three widows were in one house, each
bearing in her silent heart her own burden of grief.
I. SOME ARE CALLED UPON TO ENDURE REPEATED BEREAVEMENTS.
Households there are which have been visited again and again by the angel of
death. Youthful lives are snapped asunder; youthful hearts are left desolate.
Some are called upon to endure prolonged age, whilst children and friends, the
joy of their hearts, are taken from them. Here and there is one who can exclaim,
"All thy waves and thy billows are gone over me."
II. FOR SUCH GOD HAS PROMISES OF GRACE AND PURPOSES OF
MERCY.
1. The assurances of the Divine remembrance and kindness. "The mountains
shall depart," etc.
2. The sympathy of the Divine High Priest. The miracle of the raising of the
widow's son at Nain is an illustration.
3. Grace of submission shall be imparted. "The Lord gave, and the Lord hath
taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord."
4. Intentions of Divine wisdom shall be accomplished. Thus shall the heart be
weaned from earth; thus shall Christian character be matured; thus shall saints
be prepared for glory. How can the vicissitudes of life be borne by those who are
strangers to Christian principles, to Christian consolations, to Christian hopes?
May ours be the happy lot of the Christian, from whom (as from all the children
of men) the future is hidden; but who knows himself to be the object of a
Father's love and a Savior's care, and to whose heart comes day by day a voice
from heaven, saying, "I will never leave thee! I will never forsake thee!"—T.
WHEDON, "5. The woman was left of her two sons and her husband — That is,
she alone remained of the family that came from Beth-lehem. They emigrated
from the land of their people to escape the miseries of famine, but in the
plenteous land of Moab death overtook them. The Targum and the Jewish
57

58. writers generally regard these deaths as a judgment on the family of Elimelech
for seeking comfort among idolaters, and intermarrying with them. Generally,
those who are easily induced by losses or difficulties to change their places or
pursuits in life seldom reap advantage from their changes. The bitter losses and
changes of Naomi, however, were overruled by a wise and gracious Providence to
the honour of her name and the blessing of the world.
Naomi and Ruth Return to Bethlehem
6 When Naomi heard in Moab that the Lord
had come to the aid of his people by providing
food for them, she and her daughters-in-law
prepared to return home from there.
CLARKE, "She had heard - By the mouth of an angel, says the Targum.
The Lord had visited his people - “Because of the righteousness of Ibzan the
judge, and because of the supplications of pious Boaz.” - Targum.
It is imagined, and not without probability, that Mahlon and Chilion are the same
with Joash and Saraph, mentioned 1Ch_4:22, where the Hebrew should be thus
translated, and Joash and Saraph, who married in Moab, and dwelt in Lehem. See
the Hebrew.
GILL, "Then she arose with her daughters in law, that she might return
from the country of Moab,.... After the death of her two sons, and having heard of
the ceasing of the famine in Israel, she had a desire to go into her own country, where
she would have better opportunities of serving the Lord; and having no heart to stay
in Moab, an idolatrous country, where she had lost her husband, and her two sons;
and therefore prepared for her journey, and set forward, and her two daughters-in-
law with her, to accompany her some part of the way; for it does not appear to be
their intention, at least at first setting out, to go with her into the land of Canaan; and
therefore it is only said, that they arose
that she might return, &c.
for she had heard in the country of Moab: which was near the land of Israel,
the borders of it reaching to the salt sea; the Targum says she heard it by the mouth
58

59. of an angel, but it is highly probable it was by common fame:
that the Lord had visited his people in giving them bread; that he had been
kind and gracious to the people of Israel, by granting them plenty of provisions;
which might be their happy case after Gideon had vanquished the Midianites, who
came yearly, and destroyed and carried off the fruits of the earth, which had caused a
famine; see Jdg_6:3. It seems as if the famine had continued ten years, see Rth_1:4
nor need this be thought incredible, since there was a famine in Lydia, which lasted
eighteen years (b).
HENRY, "See here, I. The good affection Naomi bore to the land of Israel, Rth_
1:6. Though she could not stay in it while the famine lasted, she would not stay out of
it when the famine ceased. Though the country of Moab had afforded her shelter and
supply in a time of need, yet she did not intend it should be her rest for ever; no land
should be that but the holy land, in which the sanctuary of God was, of which he had
said, This is my rest for ever. Observe,
1. God, at last, returned in mercy to his people; for, though he contend long, he will
not contend always. As the judgment of oppression, under which they often groaned
in the time of the judges, still came to an end, after a while, when God had raised
them up a deliverer, so here the judgment of famine: At length God graciously visited
his people in giving them bread. Plenty is God's gift, and it is his visitation which by
bread, the staff of life, holds our souls in life. Though this mercy be the more striking
when it comes after famine, yet if we have constantly enjoyed it, and never knew what
famine meant, we are not to think it the less valuable.
2. Naomi then returned, in duty to her people. She had often enquired of their
state, what harvests they had and how the markets went, and still the tidings were
discouraging; but like the prophet's servant, who, having looked seven times and
seen no sign of rain, at length discerned a cloud no bigger than a man's hand, which
soon overspread the heavens, so Naomi at last has good news brought her of plenty
in Bethlehem, and then she can think of no other than returning thither again. Hew
new alliances in the country of Moab could not make her forget her relation to the
land of Israel. Note, Though there be a reason for our being in bad places, yet, when
the reason ceases, we must by no means continue in them. Forced absence from
God's ordinances, and forced presence with wicked people, are great afflictions; but
when the force ceases, and such a situation is continued of choice, then it becomes a
great sin. It should seem she began to think of returning immediately upon the death
of her two sons, (1.) Because she looked upon that affliction to be a judgment upon
her family for lingering in the country of Moab; and hearing this to be the voice of the
rod, and of him that appointed it, she obeys and returns. Had she returned upon the
death of her husband, perhaps she might have saved the life of her sons; but, when
God judgeth he will overcome, and, if one affliction prevail not to awaken us to a
sight and sense of sin and duty, another shall. When death comes into a family it
ought to be improved for the reforming of what is amiss in the family: when relations
are taken away from us we are put upon enquiry whether, in some instance or other,
we are not out of the way of our duty, that we may return to it. God calls our sins to
remembrance, when he slays a son, 1Ki_17:18. And, if he thus hedge up our way with
thorns, it is that he may oblige us to say, We will go and return to our first husband,
as Naomi here to her country, Hos_2:7. (2.) Because the land of Moab had now
become a melancholy place to her. It is with little pleasure that she can breathe in
that air in which her husband and sons had expired, or go on that ground in which
they lay buried out of her sight, but not out of her thoughts; now she will go to
59

60. Canaan again. Thus God takes away from us the comforts we stay ourselves too much
upon and solace ourselves too much in, here in the land of our sojourning, that we
may think more of our home in the other world, and by faith and hope may hasten
towards it. Earth is embittered to us, that heaven may be endeared.
JAMISON, "Rth_1:6-18. Naomi returning home, Ruth accompanies her.
Then she arose with her daughters-in-law, that she might return from
the country of Moab — The aged widow, longing to enjoy the privileges of Israel,
resolved to return to her native land as soon as she was assured that the famine had
ceased, and made the necessary arrangements with her daughters-in-law.
COFFMAN, "NAOMI DECIDES TO RETURN TO BETHLEHEM (Ruth
1:6-10)
"Then she arose with her daughters-in-law, that she might return from the
country of Moab: for she had heard in the country of Moab how that Jehovah
had visited his people in giving them bread. And she went forth out of the place
where she was, and her two daughters-in-law with her; and they went on the way
to return unto the land of Judah. And Naomi said unto her two daughters-in-
law, Go, return each of you to her mother's house: Jehovah deal kindly with you,
as ye have dealt with the dead, and with me. Jehovah grant you that ye may find
rest, each of you in the house of her husband. Then she kissed them, and they
lifted up their voice and wept. And they said unto her, Nay, but we will return
with thee unto thy people."
"Then she arose" (Ruth 1:6). "The verb here is used of rising from a prone
position and also for the commencement of an action, such as the beginning of a
journey."[16]
"Jehovah had visited his people giving them bread" (Ruth 1:6). When any
people have bread it is because God has blessed them in providing it.
"And they went forth" (Ruth 1:7). The three widows went together on the way
back to Judah, but at this point in the narrative, the matter of their going all the
way to Bethlehem had not been decided. The widowed wives of her two sons, at
this point, were merely extending the ancient oriental courtesy of going part of
the way as an escort for their mother-in-law, a custom which ordinarily would
have ended at the border of Moab.
"Jehovah deal kindly with you." (Ruth 1:8). Naomi's faith shines in these words.
According to the usual thinking of that time, Chemosh was considered the God
of Moab, but no such nonsense as that entered Naomi's mind. She recognized
Jehovah as the true God of all lands.
"As you have dealt with the dead." (Ruth 1:8). "This means, `as you have dealt
60

61. with my sons, your husbands, while they lived.'"[17]
"Then she kissed them, and they lifted up their voices and wept." (Ruth 1:9).
This indicates that the little company had reached the border, or the turning
point, from which the friendly escort might have turned back. The simple
meaning here is that Naomi kissed her daughters-in-law goodbye.
This paragraph introduces us to the author's characteristic device of using
conversations to carry forward the thread of his narrative. Morris stated that,
"Over fifty out of the total of eighty-five verses in the whole book are taken up
with dialogue."[18]
"They lifted up their voice and wept." (Ruth 1:9). This was the tearful prelude to
the dialogue that followed. The moment of truth had come; it was time for the
loving, courteous escort of Naomi on the way to Judah to be terminated, but the
human emotions overflowed in a fountain of tears, the implication being that all
three of them wept together.
"And they said, Nay, but we will return with thee unto thy people." (Ruth 1:10).
Both of the daughters-in-law, at first, decided to go with Naomi to Judah, but
Naomi wisely tried to dissuade them. As Moabitesses, they might not have
received any welcome whatever in Israel!
Before leaving this paragraph, there is a very important characteristic of it that
we should note. Leon Morris tells us that there are some very unusual
grammatical constructions here, a kind of confusion of masculine and feminine
terms, as well as plural and singular terms. "These grammatical distinctions are
not used with the precision required in later times."[19] This, of course, indicates
a VERY EARLY PERIOD for the writing of Ruth, thus giving strong support
for the date which we proposed in the introduction (which see). The critical
effort to avoid the strength of this argument is the ridiculous supposition that,
"Maybe the late narrator purposely copied the earlier style of writing"! Why
would any writer have ever done a stupid thing like that?
ELLICOTT, "(6) That she might return.—Literally, and she returned. Clearly,
therefore, the three women actually began the journey; and when the start has
been made. Naomi urges her companions to return. Then, as with Pliable in the
Pilgrim’s Progress, so with Orpah: the dangers and difficulties of the way were
too much for her affection.
The Lord had visited His people.—The famine had ceased, and Naomi’s heart
yearns for the old home. Perhaps, too, the scenes where everything reminded her
of her husband and sons, filled her with sadness (for it would appear that she set
out immediately after her sons’ death), and perhaps, too, her conscience smote
61

62. her for distrusting the mercies of the God of Israel.
PETT, "News meanwhile reached her that the famine in Israel had come to an
end, because ‘YHWH had visited his people in giving them bread.’ Note how the
famine, and its ending, were thus both laid at God’s door. YHWH was seen as
the withholder of food and the provider of food. To Naomi at least there was no
doubt as to Who had been responsible for the famine, and Who was now
responsible for it having ended. And she may well have asked herself why she
had not been there when God acted in deliverance. It would bring home to her
the sinfulness of her position. She may also have felt that this same YHWH was
the One Who could visit her and fill the emptiness that was in her heart.
However that may be the news made her determine to return to Israel, and she
arose with her daughters-in-law in order to set out for home, where she could
once again enjoy the provision of YHWH.
PULPIT, "Then—the conjunction in Hebrew is the common generic copulative
and—she arose. She had been sitting, as it were, where her husband had settled,
and she now rose up to depart (see Ruth 1:4). She, and her daughters-in, law.
The word for "her daughters-in-law—" ָ‫יה‬ ֶ‫לּת‬ַ‫כּ‬ —is literally "her brides," that is,
the brides of her sons. That she might return—an admirable rendering into
English idiom. The phrase in the original is simply "and she returned," that is,
"and she began to return." From the country of Moab: for she had heard in the
country of Moab how that the Lord had visited his people in giving them bread.
Or, more literally, "for she heard in the country of Moab that Jehovah"—or,
rather, "Yahveh," or, as Epiphanius gives it, ἰαβέ—"had visited his people to
give them bread." There is no warrant, however, and no need, to add, with the
Chaldee Targumist, that the news was conveyed by the mouth of an angel. And
the representation is not that Yahveh, in giving, bread to his people, had thereby
visited them; it is that he hid visited them" to give them bread. The word ‫ד‬ַ‫ק‬ָ‫,פ‬
rendered visited, is quite peculiar, with no analogue in English, German, Greek,
or Latin. Yahveh had directed his attention to his people, and had, so to speak,
made inquisition into their state, and had hence taken steps to give them bread
(see Exodus 3:16 ; Exodus 4:31). They had already got it, or, as the Septuagint
translates, they had got loaves ( ἀρτοῦς). The Vulgate translates it meats (escas).
It is assumed in the tidings that the seasons and their products, and all beneficent
influences in nature, belong to Yahveh. It is likewise assumed that the Hebrews
were his people, albeit not in such a sense as to secure for them more "bread"
and "milk and honey" than other peoples enjoyed. Their chief prerogatives were
spiritual and moral. They were his Messianic people. That is the key to unlock
the secret of the whole Old Testament Scriptures.
WHEDON, "6. She arose with her daughters in law — She made known to them
her intention to return on foot and alone to the land of Israel; and when the time
of her departure came, Orpah and Ruth arose and went forth with her to bear
62

63. her company a little way on her journey, perhaps undecided whether to go all
the way with her or not.
She had heard — Probably by some traveller that had recently passed through
the land of Judea. But the tidings may not have reached her until several years
after the famine had ceased, for sometimes intelligence travels with wonderful
slowness in the East, and particularly in that age, when there was probably very
little intercourse between Israel and the surrounding nations.
The Lord had visited his people in giving them bread — By raising up Gideon to
end the oppression of the Midianites, who for seven years had consumed the
produce of their fields, and by now causing the fields to yield unwonted
abundance. The sacred historian sees in all this the hand of Jehovah.
Verses 6-22
NAOMI’S RETURN WITH RUTH TO BETHLEHEM, Ruth 1:6-22.
Bereft of her husband and her sons, the desolate Naomi turns her heart towards
the land of her people. To her Moab has been a land of sorrows, and though the
graves of her beloved dead are there, they are so full of bitter recollections that
she wishes not to linger near them. The ten years of her sojourn in these sunny,
fertile fields of abundance have been to her worse than years of famine.
PULPIT, "HOMILIES BY W.M. STATHAM
Ruth 1:6, Ruth 1:7
Home returning.
"Then she arose with her daughters-in-law, that she might return. And they
went on their way to return." Home again! The first step is everything! "She
arose." It was all well with the prodigal when he did that. Not simply when he
said, "I will arise;" but when be arose and went to his father. Directly the eye
and the heart and the step agree, then the whole is settled. We read nothing of
the preliminaries of departure. Who does not know the power of the loadstone
63

64. when it first begins to act? When the breeze swells the sail from the foreign port,
the sailor sees not the intervening waters, but the home cottage under the
familiar cliffs. There are many beautiful home-returnings in the Bible, but the
best of all is the son seeking the father's house.
I. HEARTS ARE UNITED BY COMMON EXPERIENCES. These daughters-
in-law were not of her land, nor of her religion; they were not Hebrews; but they
were widows! A common sorrow is a welding power, uniting hearts more closely
than before. It is said that a babe in a house is a new clasp of affection between
husband and wife. True; but an empty cradle has done more than a living child.
During the time of these ten years these two wives remained still heathen. We do
not know what family they sprang from, or if they were sisters. We do know that
Naomi exercised no control or domination over their religious principles. She
respects their personal liberty and responsibility; she even urges Ruth not to let
natural affection for her override her religious convictions, but to go back to
"her gods," as Orpah did. "Behold, thy sister-in-law is gone back unto her
people, and unto her gods: return thou after thy sister-in-law." What a sorrow it
must have been to her that her sons had married heathen women. We can
respect that sorrow. And we can see that Naomi did not slight her own religion
when she said these words, but used them as a test of the sincerity of Ruth. A
common sorrow had brought them all very close together. "For," as Bailey says
in Festus, "the world is one, and hath one great heart."
II. RETURN JOURNEYS HAVE A TOUCHING ELOQUENCE IN THEIR
SCENES. There were the places Naomi had traversed with her husband and her
boys; places of rest under the shadow of the rocks, and of refreshment at the
wells. Much must there have been, to recall conversations touched with anxiety
concerning their future in the land of Moab. So would many places speak to us
today. There, care gazed at us wistfully, and we remember all the thoughts it
suggested. There she heard the tinkling of the bells of the camels, as the little
trading cavalcade passed by her. What reminiscences! And they would all
remind her of the good hand which had led her on, and never forgotten or
forsaken her.
III. RETURN JOURNEYS REMIND US OF LITTLE EPISODES OF LIFE
THAT ARE OVER FOR EVER. We cannot in the ordinary course of an
unbroken and unshifting home realize the flight of time so well as when we have
marked changes, which by their very abruptness divide life into chapters, which,
like volumes, have their commencement and close. A new nest has to be built,
64

65. and new trees have to be sought to build it in. Thus with ordinary observation we
may notice how those who have had to seek new homes find the pilgrim-nature
of life more marked in their thought than those who are born and brought up
and settled through the long years in one home. There is a dreamy sense of
continuance unbroken in some lives! "That she might return!" But she would
not, could not take all of herself with her. She would leave, as we all do, a
memory of character, an influence of good or evil over those who had been
associated with her in the foreign land.—W.M.S.
LANGE, "Ruth 1:6. For Jehovah had visited his people to give them bread.
Believing Israel sees the government of God in everything. Everything comes
from Him and is designed to discipline and instruct mankind. In Deuteronomy
28:47-48, it is written that in case Israel shall apostatize from God and cease to
serve Him, it shall serve its enemies, and that in hunger and thirst, in nakedness
and want. That the famine which had at this time befallen Bethlehem was the
consequence of one of those military tyrannies which, as the Book of Judges
relates, chastised the people, there is not the least indication. But a chastisement
it certainly was, even though this is not asserted. And doubtless, the people, as it
usually did under such circumstances, turned with penitence and prayer to its
God. Then the years of famine came to an end. God remembered his people. It is
a judgment of God when He allows men to go their own ways and help
themselves in their necessities and sufferings (cf. the ὑπεριδών, Acts 17:30); but
in his mercy He remembers them, as he remembered Israel in Egypt ( Exodus
2:24). The word ‫ד‬ַ‫ק‬ָ‫פּ‬ here used, occurs repeatedly for such a return of divine
remembrance. God remembered (‫ד‬ַ‫ק‬ָ‫)פּ‬ Sarah, silently mourning over her
childlessness ( Genesis 21:1). After Moses had performed wonders before Israel
in Egypt, the people believed, and when they heard that God had observed (‫ד‬ַ‫ק‬ָ‫)פּ‬
the sufferings of the people, and had looked upon their affliction, they bowed
down and worshipped ( Exodus 4:31).
From the turn of the language that God “remembered” to “give bread” to his
people, more particularly to Bethlehem, the “House of Bread,” it may properly
be inferred that the famine was not the result of war, but of drought.
Note on Bethlehem and the grave of Rachel. “No one,” says Robinson (Bibl. Res.
i471), has ever doubted, I believe, that the present Beit Lahm, ‘House of Flesh,’
of the Arabs, is identical with the ancient Bethlehem, ‘House of Bread,’ of the
Jews. The present distance of two hours from Jerusalem corresponds very
exactly to the six Roman miles of antiquity.” Schubert justly calls it the most
attractive and significant of all the world’s birthplaces.
This Bethlehem, where Rachel died, where Boaz married Ruth, where David was
65

66. born, and Jesus Christ entered the world, is to-day, as Ritter remarks, a little
city or village “hardly worthy of mention on its own account, having scarcely a
single noteworthy characteristic, except the unchanging carpet of green, and the
beautiful sky from which once the glory of the Lord shone round about the
shepherds.”
Bethlehem lies two short hours south of Jerusalem, on two moderate-sized hills,
on whose northern and eastern declivities the dwelling-houses of the place are
built. It is bounded on the south by the Wady et Taamirah. During the reign of
the emperor Justinian it flourished greatly for a season, which, however, did not
prove long. Its present inhabitants are mostly Christians. They are a strong and
energetic race. During the Middle Ages, warlike feuds seem to have given the
place a better title to be called Bethlachem, House of War, than Bethlehem.
Toward the west, there is a succession of irregular hills and valleys as far as the
chapel over Rachel’s sepulchre. The Jews considered this as an especially sacred
spot.[FN12] The monument is described by Benjamin of Tudela, who visited
Palestine somewhere between a. d1160,1173, is consisting of “eleven stones,
according to the number of the sons of Jacob, with a cupola resting on four
pillars over them; and all passing Jews write their names on the stones of the
monument” (ed. Asher, p40). The Jewish traveller Petachia (circa a. d1175–80),
writes as follows: “Eleven stones lie on the grave of Rachel, according to the
eleven tribes, for Benjamin was only born as his mother died. The stones are of
marble; and the stone of Jacob, also marble, covers all the others, and is very
large, so that it requires many persons to move it.” This induces the author to
add the following legend: “The monks who live a mile away, once took the stone
from the grave, and deposited it by their church; but the next morning they saw
it again at the grave as before” (ed. Carmoly, p97).
The author of Jichus ha Abot gives a description of the cupola as it was in his
time (cf. Hottinger, Cippi Hebraici, p33, Carmoly, Itineraires, etc, p436). The
Arabian traveller Edrisi (about a. d1150; ed. Jaubert, i345) and another
anonymous writer (Fundgruben des Orients, ii135; Carmoly, p457) also speak of
it.
Buckingham’s description (a. d1816) is as follows: “We entered it on the south
side by an aperture through which it was difficult to crawl, as it has no doorway,
and found on the inside a square mass of masonry in the centre, built up from
the floor nearly to the roof, and of such a size as to leave barely a narrow passage
for walking around it. It is plastered with white stucco on the outer surface, and
is sufficiently large and high to enclose within it any ancient pillar that might
have been found on the grave of Rachel. Around the interior face of the walls is
an arched recess on each side, and over every part of the stucco are written and
engraved a profusion of names, in Hebrew, Arabic, and Roman characters.” (Cf.
66

67. Palestine, i336.)
BI, "She arose . . . that she might return.
Homeward longings
Observe—
1. God’s house of worldly correction is to God’s people a school of heavenly
instruction. Naomi’s crosses and losses she met with in Moab made her soul to sit
loose from that cursed country, and to long for Canaan—that blessed land of
promise. God’s rod hath a voice (Mic_6:9), and now Naomi’s ear was open to
hear the instruction of it (Job_36:8-10; Mic_2:10). It is a rich mercy when
affliction brings us from worse to better, from Moab to Canaan, further off from
sin and nearer to God.
2. Godly souls should lead convincing lives. Such and so amiable was the
conversation of godly Naomi in the eyes of those two daughters of Moab that it
convinced them both—to love her and her people, and to go along with her out of
their own native country unto her land. Plato saith, “If moral virtue could be
beheld with mortal eyes, it would attract all hearts to be enamoured with it.” How
much more, then, would theological virtue or supernatural grace do so?
3. Every heart should hanker heavenward, as Naomi did homeward from Moab
to Canaan. (C. Ness.)
A woman of character
I. She retained her religion—her allegiance to the one true and living God—in the
midst of surrounding idolatry.
II. She Believed in God even in the midst of adversity.
III. She exercised an influence for good on others.
1. On those who had known her intimately—her own household.
2. On those who had known her long—long enough to find out her true character.
3. On those who, according to all experience, are least easily influenced by one in
her position—on her daughters-in-law.
IV. She could deny herself for the good of others.
1. It would have been an advantage to her to have these two strong, active young
women with her to work for her in her old age. But a settlement would be easier
for them in their own land than in Judah. So she bade them return, and was
willing to go home alone.
2. She rose, too, above that petty jealousy which might have been excused in one
so circumstanced, and wished them that provision which was the best security for
rest and honour for a woman: “rest each of them in the house of her husband.”
Naomi’s religion was no mere surface thing. It had become a part of herself. It
had informed her character. It saved her from the corruptions of idolatry, from
despair, and it enabled her to exercise a beneficent power over those who knew
her best. What imperfect religion could do for her the sublime faith of Christ can
do for all. (Joseph Ogle.)
67

68. The awakening
To trace the course of the wanderer away from God is sad and painful. The result of
misery and regret is always the same; whether he ever return to God or not his
sorrow over the remembrance of his wandering will be equally sure. We must never
hesitate, therefore, in proclaiming to all the wanderers from God, “You will find no
rest in Moab.” But I am not now to trace this course of sin to its dreadful result.
There is for some a day of awakening in the present life. And, painful as this day may
be, it is still a happy day. It is the beginning of a new life, a happy life, a life of glory.
It is the dawning of a light which is prepared as the morning. It is the blessed
visitation of the grace and goodness of God to the lost and guilty. We must never
forget that this awakening of the soul is the work of God. Idolatry and enmity to God
reign throughout the land of Moab. There Naomi dwells. There, if God permitted,
Naomi would die. There, if God did not arrest and arouse him, the sinner would
perish. To leave him in prosperity in this condition is to leave him to hopeless
destruction. God speaks unto him in his prosperity, and he says, “I will not hear.”
This is his manner from his youth. Then God sends awakening providences.
Afflictions and losses are multiplied. The nest is broken up. The soul is made
sorrowful. Thus it was with Naomi. Her husband died. Her two sons are taken away.
How many of His children have been saved by the bitter remedy of affliction, and
have thus been taught to bless the chastenings of the Lord! But why should you make
affliction necessary to your soul’s salvation? Let the goodness of the Lord lead you to
repentance. Let His love awaken your gratitude. But whether affliction or joy be
made the instrument to awaken the soul, it is equally a Divine instrument. Welcome
it, do not resist it, but cultivate it as a priceless gift. Now God means to bless you
indeed. Listen to His voice with gladness. In this day of awakening, Naomi found that
she had gained nothing by her wandering from God. There had been a famine in
Judah. But ah, she had found a far worse famine in Moab. There every comfort had
failed and every hope had departed. In no single point was her condition improved
by her flight from Israel. But was this peculiar to her? Can you ever gain in such a
course? Are you ever the happier for transgression, or made the more contented by
forgetting your Creator? Far enough from all this is your actual experience. Your
awakened mind looks back upon life, to say, with distress, “I have sinned, and what
hath it profited me?” There is not a single real pleasure, or joy, or gain in life, of
which any man can truly say, “This, at least, is the reward of my sin.” Even if you
never truly repent, your retrospect of life will be just as unsatisfying and destitute of
comfort to your soul. You will despise all that you have gained. You will despise
yourself for pursuing vanities so madly. And nothing will remain to you as the result
but the most overwhelming despair. How much you have lost! You have thrown away
the favour of God. You have sacrificed your peace of conscience. You have lost your
early readiness to receive religious impressions. But good news from the Lord’s land
comes to this awakened wanderer. “Naomi heard in the country of Moab how that
the Lord had visited His people in giving them bread.” What precious intelligence
does the gospel bring to the guilty! It declares the pardoning love of God. It
proclaims complete atonement in the blood of Jesus. It announces full salvation in
His merits and death. It exhibits God reconciled to those who have rebelled against
Him. The message comes to you. Receive it. Rejoice in it. It is a message from God to
each of you. Then the awakened wanderer sets out at once on a return. Naomi “arose,
that she might return from the country of Moab; wherefore she went forth out of the
place where she was, on the way to return into the land of Judah.” Yes—the very first
thing, when your mind is awakened, and you see and feel your guilt, is to go back.
Many think they must first feel much, and mourn much, and suffer much, before they
can hope to go back in peace to God. But why? Will your suffering save you? Will
your multiplied tears add anything to a Saviour’s worth? Is your dwelling on fire?
68

69. And must you wait until you are scorched with the flames before you can escape in
safety? Have you mistaken your road in journeying? And can you recover your lost
steps the better by delay or hesitation or fruitless grief? Nay. You want all the time
for actual pursuit. You have none to waste. Turn! Turn! fly! Fly! ‘Tis madness to
defer. Naomi goes to no other part of Moab, to no other land of idolatry. She goes
directly back to the land of Judah. This is a blessed example. How many go from one
broken cistern to another! But all these efforts are vain. Edom or Babylon are no
better than Moab. No. You must fly to Bethlehem at once. Now is the accepted time.
This is the day of your salvation. (S. H. Tyng, D. D.)
How that the Lord had visited His people in giving them bread.
God’s dealings with His people
I. God seeth His people in adversity and want, and cometh in His due time to help
them (Exo_3:7-8), which is from His mere mercy and the stability of His love and
promise to His people.
II. God hath ever had more specially a people of His own called “His people.” This
should make us to examine ourselves how we be God’s people, whether according to
creation or after the work of regeneration.
III. Corporal food and the necessaries of this life are God’s gift (Lev_26:4-5; Deu_
11:14-15; Hos_2:8-9; Joe_2:19). (R. Bernard.)
Good news from the far country
I. God will certainly revive His people with some good news from heaven when their
hearts are almost dead within them upon earth (Pro_25:25). This cheered up her
drooping spirit, that was almost dead within her by her manifold afflictions. This is
one of God’s methods, first to kill and then to make alive (1Sa_2:6; Psa_16:10; Psa_
18:16; Psa_90:3); the good news God sent concerning the weal of Zion to His people
as they sat weeping by the waters of Babylon (Psa_137:1-2) was a little reviving to
them in their bondage (Ezr_9:8); and when His people were humbled He then
granted them some deliverance (2Ch_12:7). Heaven is called a far country (Mat_
25:14); good news from thence brought in by the Holy Spirit. Oh, how welcome
should that be to us and how unspeakably comfortable! (1Pe_1:8).
II. God hath His visiting times and seasons in relation to His own people.
1. Sometimes God visits their sins (Jer_14:10), and then He fulfils His word of
threatening evil against them. This is called God’s visiting in His anger (Job_
35:15), but He retains not His anger for ever (Psa_57:11).
2. He sometimes also visits in mercy (2Sa_24:16). This is that visit which David
begs, “Oh visit me with Thy salvation” (Psa_106:4).
III. Grace and bounty follow want and penury through Divine goodness to His
people. After a long scarcity (of ten years) God visits them with plenty. This holds
true both in the temporal and spiritual famine (Amo_8:11). (C. Ness.)
Naomi’s undying faith and loyalty to Israel’s God
During all those ten years of absence, Naomi had maintained in undiminished
69

70. strength her attachment to the service and worship of the true God.”Among
innumerable incorrupt she stood,” like Abdiel in the midst of fallen angels, or like
Noah in the midst of a revolted world. There must have been root and reality about
her religion to make it thus evergreen and perennial. So have we sometimes seen in
the Arabian desert a solitary palm fed by a fountain, and glassing its beauty and
abundance in that from which it derived all its verdure and life. How many persons
are there whose religion could not endure the test of an ordeal a hundred times less
severe than this! It is a thing of mere outward imitation and reflection. Withdraw
them from the midst of favouring external influences, and their superficial piety will
speedily vanish away like the morning dew. Like the vase that has been electrotyped
so as to resemble silver, a little tear and wear brings into view the inferior metal
which forms its real material. Carey used to complain bitterly, in his days, that the
Christianity of many who came out of England to India did not survive a sea voyage.
It was all gone before they had “doubled the Cape.” In like manner, the Sabbath-
keeping and the church-attendance of multitudes have undergone sad decadence
during a few months of residence in Berlin or Paris. And yet the degree in which our
secret devotion and our Christian habits can live and flourish in the midst of
unfriendly influences and when dependent on inward support alone, is the true test
of the reality and strength of our religion. Naomi had nobly stood this test, and had
thus proved herself to be “an Israelite indeed.” (A. Thomson, D. D.)
7 With her two daughters-in-law she left the
place where she had been living and set out on
the road that would take them back to the land
of Judah.
GILL, "Wherefore she went forth out of the place where she was,.... What
part of Moab she had dwelt in, and now removed from, is not said; it is called the
country or field of Moab, she returned from; hence some have thought, that she and
her husband, and her sons, did not live in any of the cities of Moab, but in a field;
either because the Moabites would not suffer them to dwell in their cities, only
allowed them to pitch their tents in their fields; or they chose to dwell there, that they
might as much as possible avoid conversation with them, and be preserved from
their idolatry, and other corruptions:
and her two daughters in law with her; who, out of respect to her,
accompanied her some part of the way, as relations and friends usually did:
and they went on the way to return unto the land of Judah; they went along
with her to the border of the land of Judah, in her return thither; for returning can
only be said of her with any propriety, because her two daughters had never been
there; that was not the country from whence they came, and therefore could not be
said to return thither.
70

71. HENRY, "II. The good affection which her daughters-in-law, and one of them
especially, bore to her, and her generous return of their good affection.
1. They were both so kind as to accompany her, some part of the way at least, when
she returned towards the land of Judah. Her two daughters-in-law did not go about
to persuade her to continue in the land of Moab, but, if she was resolved to go home,
would pay her all possible civility and respect at parting; and this was one instance of
it: they would bring her on her way, at least to the utmost limits of their country,
and help her to carry her luggage as far as they went, for it does not appear that she
had any servant to attend her, Rth_1:7. By this we see both that Naomi, as became an
Israelite, had been very kind and obliging to them and had won their love, in which
she is an example to all mothers-in-law, and that Orpah and Ruth had a just sense of
her kindness, for they were willing to return it thus far. It was a sign they had dwelt
together in unity, though those were dead by whom the relation between them came.
Though they retained an affection for the gods of Moab (Rth_1:15), and Naomi was
still faithful to the God of Israel, yet that was no hindrance to either side from love
and kindness, and all the good offices that the relation required. Mothers-in-law and
daughters-in-law are too often at variance (Mat_10:35), and therefore it is the more
commendable if they live in love; let all who sustain this relation aim at the praise of
doing so.
PETT, "The three of them left the place where they had been residing, and took
the road to the land of Judah. For the description ‘the land of Judah’ compare
Deuteronomy 34:2; 1 Samuel 22:5; 1 Samuel 30:16. ‘They went on the way.’ The
two young widows probably assumed that they would be going with Naomi, but
it is clear from what follows that this was not Naomi’s intention. She wanted
their company thus far until the time came for a leave-taking, but her intention
was that the two young widows should remain in Moab and return to their
family homes.
PULPIT, "And so she went forth out of the place where she was. There is no
attempt on the part of the writer to localize the spot. And her two daughters-in-
law with her. They had kept, it seems, on terms of affectionate sympathy with
their mother-in-law. The jealousies that so often disturb the peace of households
had no place within the bounds of Naomi's jurisdiction. The home of which she
was the matronly center had been kept in its own beautiful orbit by the law of
mutual respect, deference, affection, and esteem—the law that insures happiness
to both the loving and the loved. "If there were more Naomis," says Lawson,
"there might be more Orpahs and Ruths." And they went on the way to return
to the land of Judah. Having left her Moabitish abode, and got into the
frequented track which led in the direction of her native land, she journeyed
onward for a stage or two, accompanied by her daughters-in-law. Such is the
picture. It must be subsumed in it that her daughters-in-law had made up their
minds to go with her to the land of her nativity. The subject had been often
talked over and discussed. Naomi would from time to time start objections to
71

72. their kind intention. They, on their part, would try to remove her difficulties,
and would insist on accompanying her. So the three widows journeyed onward
together, walking. Adversity had pressed hard on their attenuated resources, and
they would not be encumbered with burdensome baggage.
LANGE, "Ruth 1:7. And she went forth out of the place. The place is not named,
nor is it necessary. The Israelitish family had after all not become naturalized in
it. No one asks Naomi to stay. No one accompanies her, save her two daughters-
in-law, the youthful widows of her too early faded sons.
And they already went on the way. Until then Naomi had looked on her
daughters-in-law as only bearing her company for a while before parting. But
being now far from their place of residence, on the highway from Moab to
Judah, she stops, and bids them return.
BI, "Her two daughters-in-law with her.
The promising commencement
Here we have the most happy and promising commencement of a new work. We see
them all set out together upon the same road and apparently for the same result. No
one who saw them set out upon their journey could anticipate that they would
voluntarily separate, or imagine that one was more likely than the other to reach the
end proposed. We are obliged to wait until succeeding trials shall bring their real
characters individually to light before we can discriminate between them. By a great
variety of means God stirs up sinful men to seek after Himself. Anxious, excited,
apparently earnest and sincere, they set out upon their journey back to the gracious
Being whom they have so long neglected. Yes; they really set out, and appear to set
out sincerely. I do not mean that such persons feel their need and danger: that they
meditate sincerely upon their return to God; that they resolve they will go back. No. I
mean that they actually begin their journey. The prodigal not only says, “I will arise
and go to my father”; he does arise and go. The wise and foolish virgins both take
their lamps and go forth to meet the bridegroom. Thus all go together “on the way to
return into the land of Judah.” As far as this journey lies still within the limits of
Moab, so far they may unite to go. Up to a certain point they must take the same path
and travel in the same direction: Ah, how many of these young travellers have I seen!
The Church delighted over them. Christian friends were encouraged by them. The
brightest and most blessed hopes clustered around them. The Lord only, who
knoweth the hearts of the children of men, could have told us which were the Orpahs
and which were the Ruths of this hopeful company. His judgment at the last
separates the precious from the vile, divides the gold from the dross, and assigns to
each his own place. But we must follow our travellers in their journey, and see why
and where they separate. As we thus follow them we see them meet with many trials
of faith and patience on the road. Your former habits of sin are to be renounced. But,
in addition to these, new habits of conduct and feeling are to be acquired. The habit
of secret prayer in your closet and chamber; the habit of constant, earnest study of
the Word of God; the habit of watchfulness over your easily-besetting sins; the habit
of caution in your allowed indulgences; the habit of consideration and discernment
in your relations and company; the habit of resistance to your inward propensities to
evil; and, above all, the habit of constant remembrance of God your Saviour, and of
simple, earnest faith in His presence, protection, and help; all these, if I should
mention no more, are to be acquired, cultivated, and maintained. If all this could be
72

73. done by single effort, it would be easy work. But that is impossible. It is a journey of
successive steps, of continued progress; and you have to press forward in it with the
utmost determination and the most sincere desire. But above all these habits of
outward life, you have to come with the deep sense of sin, with a consciousness that
you are condemned and destitute, with an entire refusal to trust in any virtue or
excellence of your own, and to cast yourself in an affectionate and simple trust at
your Saviour’s feet. When you come to serve the Lord, you must prepare your soul for
temptation. From the day you set out on your heavenly journey discouragements and
difficulties will seem to multiply around you. The world will be arrayed against you.
The habits, opinions, and plans of worldly people are constant obstacles in your way.
The professed Christians around you are often fearful obstacles in the way. You see
those who profess to follow Christ in many instances living just as gaily, as
extravagantly, as indulgently, often as sinfully, as if they had made no such
profession. Your own inward heart and feelings will often be very discouraging to
you. There is such backwardness in prayer; such want of deep interest in the Word
and service of God; so little sensible enjoyment often in your new path; such a
necessity for constant warfare and constant watchfulness within yourself. If you relax
a moment, you fall. Ah, these are great discouragements, great trials to your faith and
patience. Nothing can endure through them but a heart that really loves Jesus more
than all the world, and a spirit that willingly sacrifices itself for His service and glory.
If this is your heart and spirit, then all these discouragements are instruments of new
strength. Orpah may feel dispirited and weary. Ruth only loves the more, the more
she is tried. To Orpah the way grows more unattractive and tedious as she goes on.
To Ruth every step brings new determination and new desire to press on even to the
end. (S. H. Tyng, D. D.)
8 Then Naomi said to her two daughters-in-law,
“Go back, each of you, to your mother’s home.
May the Lord show you kindness, as you have
shown kindness to your dead husbands and to
me.
BARNES, "Accompanying their mother-in-law to the borders of their own land
would probably be an act of Oriental courtesy. Naomi with no less courtesy presses
them to return. The mention of the mother’s house, which the separation of the
women’s house or tent from that of the men facilitates, is natural in her mouth, and
has more tenderness in it than father’s house would have had; it does not imply the
death of their fathers Rth_2:11.
GILL, "And Naomi said to her two daughters in law,.... When they were
73

74. come, as it is very probable, to the utmost limits of the land of Moab, and to the
borders of the land of Israel:
go, return each unto her mother's house: the mother's house is mentioned,
and not the father's, not because they had no father living; for it is certain Ruth had a
father as well as a mother, Rth_2:11 but because mothers are most affectionate to
their daughters, and they most conversant together; and because women in those
times had apartments to themselves, and who used to take their daughters to them
when become widows; though such was the strong love of those young widows to
their mother-in-law, that they chose rather to dwell with her, while she lived in
Moab, than with their own mothers:
the Lord deal kindly with you, as ye have dealt with the dead, and with
me; that is, with their husbands, who were dead; as the Targum is, that they refused
to marry men after their death; or rather it respects their affectionate care of their
husbands, and behaviour towards them when living, as well as the respect they
showed to their memory, at and since their death; and also their filial duty to her,
both before and since; and particularly, as the Targum expresses it, in that they had
fed and supported her.
HENRY, "2. When they had gone a little way with her Naomi, with a great deal of
affection, urged them to go back (Rth_1:8, Rth_1:9): Return each to her mother's
house. When they were dislodged by a sad providence from the house of their
husbands it was a mercy to them that they had their parents yet living, that they had
their houses to go to, where they might be welcome and easy, and were not turned
out to the wide world. Naomi suggests that their own mothers would be more
agreeable to them than a mother-in-law, especially when their own mothers had
houses and their mother-in-law was not sure she had a place to lay her head in which
she could call her own. She dismisses them,
(1.) With commendation. This is a debt owing to those who have conducted
themselves well in any relation, they ought to have the praise of it: You have dealt
kindly with the dead and with me, that is, “You were good wives to your husbands
that are gone, and have been good daughters to me, and not wanting to your duty in
either relation.” Note, When we and our relations are parting, by death or otherwise,
it is very comfortable if we have both their testimony and the testimony of our own
consciences for us that while we were together we carefully endeavoured to do our
duty in the relation. This will help to allay the bitterness of parting; and, while we are
together, we should labour so to conduct ourselves as that when we part we may not
have cause to reflect with regret upon our miscarriages in the relation.
(2.) With prayer. It is very proper for friends, when they part, to part with prayer.
She sends them home with her blessing; and the blessing of a mother-in-law is not to
be slighted. In this blessing she twice mentions the name Jehovah, Israel's God, and
the only true God, that she might direct her daughters to look up to him as the only
fountain of all good. To him she prays in general that he would recompense to them
the kindness they had shown to her and hers. It may be expected and prayed for in
faith that God will deal kindly with those that have dealt kindly with their relations.
He that watereth shall be watered also himself. And, in particular, that they might
be happy in marrying again: The Lord grant that you may find rest, each of you in
the house of her husband. Note, [1.] It is very fit that, according to the apostle's
direction (1Ti_5:14), the younger women, and he speaks there of young widows,
should marry, bear children, and guide the house. And it is a pity that those who
have approved themselves good wives should not again be blessed with good
74

75. husbands, especially those that, like these widows, have no children. [2.] The married
state is a state of rest, such rest as this world affords, rest in the house of a husband,
more than can be expected in the house of a mother or a mother-in-law. [3.] This rest
is God's gift. If any content and satisfaction be found in our outward condition, God
must be acknowledged in it. There are those that are unequally yoked, that find little
rest even in the house of a husband. Their affliction ought to make those the more
thankful to whom the relation is comfortable. Yet let God be the rest of the soul, and
no perfect rest thought of on this side heaven.
(3.) She dismissed them with great affection: She kissed them, wished she had
somewhat better to give them, but silver and gold she had none. However, this
parting kiss shall be the seal of such a true friendship as (though she never see them
more) she will, while she lives, retain the pleasing remembrance of. If relations must
part, let them thus part in love, that they may (if they never meet again in this world)
meet in the world of everlasting love.
JAMISON, "Naomi said unto her two daughters-in-law, Go, return each
to her mother’s house — In Eastern countries women occupy apartments
separate from those of men, and daughters are most frequently in those of their
mother.
the Lord deal kindly with you, as ye have dealt with the dead — that is,
with my sons, your husbands, while they lived.
BENSON, "Ruth 1:8. Return each to her mother’s house — She desires them to
accompany her no farther, but to go back to their own home. And it seems it was
usual in Moab, as well as in Israel, for widows to dwell with their parents. But
she says, mother’s, rather than father’s house, because daughters used to
converse more frequently with their mothers, and to dwell in the same
apartments with them, which then were distinct from those parts of the house
where the men dwelt. The dead — With my sons, your husbands, while they
lived.
PETT, "When they had reach a certain point, possibly at the crossing of the
Arnon which divided Moab from the territory of Reuben, Naomi encouraged her
two daughters-in-law to return to their family homes. She prayed that in view of
the loyalty they had shown to her and her dead sons, YHWH would deal kindly
with them. But she was well aware that in returning to their homes they would
also be returning to their national god, Chemosh (Ruth 1:15). There would now
be no one to lead them in the way of YHWH. Nevertheless she prayed that
YHWH may provide them with good husbands, so that they would find
contentment in their new homes.
“Return each of you to her mother”s house.’ Normally we would expect
reference to be made to ‘her father’s house’. The emphasis may be on the fact
that they are again to take shelter in the women’s quarters, which would be
75

76. presided over by their mothers, thereby demonstrating that they were once more
available. This would often be where marriages were initially arranged and
where the future bridegroom came to discuss the wedding, which may by
tradition have been mainly the responsibility of the mother (compare Genesis
24:28; Song of Solomon 3:4; Song of Solomon 8:2).
PULPIT, "And Naomi said to her two daughters-in-law, Go, return each to her
mother's house. She reverted, with deeper earnestness, to their theme, of
discussion. She acknowledged that most kindly had they acted toward her. Her
heart was filled with gratitude. It was likewise agitated with grief at the prospect
of bidding them a final farewell, Nevertheless, she felt that it would be
unreasonable and unkind to invite them to be, to any further degree, sharers of
her adversity. Hence, thanking them for their loving convoy, she would remind
them that every step further on would only increase the length of their return-
journey; and she said, Go, return each to her mother's home. There, in the
females' apartment, and in the bosom of their mothers, they would surely find a
welcome and a refuge. She judges of their mothers by herself, and she refers
rather to them than to their fathers, partly, perhaps, because she bears in mind
her own motherhood, but principally, no doubt, because, in those Oriental
countries, it lay very particularly within the province of mothers to make
arrangements in reference to their daughters. May Yahveh deal kindly with you,
as ye have dealt with the deceased, and with me. It is beautiful gratitude, and at
the same time a touching monument to the faithfulness and gentleness that had
characterized and adorned the young widows. Her simple Hebrew theology,
moreover, comes finely out. She assumes that her own Yahveh reigned in Moab
as in Judah, and that all blessing descended from him. There is a little
peculiarity in the Hebrew pronouns in this clause. They are masculine instead of
feminine. The influence of the stronger sex overrides grammatically, for the
moment, the influence of the weaker.
LANGE, "Note to verse Ruth 8: “Jehovah deal kindly with you, as ye have dealt
with the dead and with me.” The love which unites husband and wife in
marriage, reconciles the contrasts inherent in difference of nationality, makes
peace, gives a good conscience, and leaves a blessed memory. Christian families,
too, will do well to look upon the good understanding existing between Naomi
and her daughters-in-law as an example to be followed. It originated in the right
love of the wives for their husbands, and of the mother for her sons. A right love
rejoices in the happiness of its objects, even though derived through others. The
jealousy of mothers toward their children-in-law, and of wives toward their
husbands’ parents does not spring from love.
A pleasing instance of right relations with a mother-in-law comes to light in the
gospel history. Jesus enters into the house of Peter, whose mother-in-law lies sick
of a fever. Request is immediately made in her behalf, and Hebrews, always full
76

77. of love ready to flow forth in miracles wherever He sees love, hears her
( Matthew 8:14 ff. and paral.). The term πενθερά, used in this account by the
gospels, is also employed by the Sept. with reference to Naomi.
Origen has a remarkable passage, thoroughly worthy of his noble spirit (cf. on
Job, Lib. i.): “Blessed is Ruth who so clave to her aged mother-in-law that she
would not leave her until death. For this reason, Scripture indeed has justly
extolled her; but God has beatified her forever. But He will Judges, and in the
resurrection condemn, all those wicked and ungodly daughters-in-law who deal
out abuse and wrong to their parents-in-law, unmindful of the fact that they gave
life and sustenance to their husbands.…. If, therefore, thou lovest thy husband,
O wife, then love them also who gave him being, and thus brought up a son for
themselves and a husband for thee. Seek not to divide the son from his father or
mother! Seek not to bring the son to despise or father or mother, lest thou fall
into the condemnation of the Lord in the day of awful inquest and judgment.”
But these excellent words never found the right echo. Even Jerome says: prope
modum naturale Esther, ut nurus socrum et socrus oderit nurum. And yet it
never was the case where Christian virtue was actually alive.
Monica, the mother of Augustine, had to endure not a little from her mother-in-
law. The latter supported Monica’s disobedient maid-servants against their
mistress. She allowed them to bring her all sorts of evil reports about her. Her
daughter-in-law she daily chided and provoked. But Monica met her with such
complaisant love, quiet obedience, and amiable patience, as to conquer the
irritable mother-in-law, so that she became, and continued to be to the last, the
friend and protectress of her daughter-in-law. No wonder that from such a heart
there sprang the faith and spirit of a man like Augustine (cf. Barthel, Monica,
p31).
Not only the history, but also the traditions and the poetry, of the Middle Ages,
frequently depict the sufferings of daughters-in-law, inflicted on them by the
mothers of their husbands. As part of the “swan-legends” of the lower Rhine, we
have the peculiar story of Matabruna, the bad wife of the king of Lillefort, who
persecuted and tormented her pious and believing daughter-in-law Beatrix, until
at last the latter, by God’s help, came off victorious (cf. Wolf, Niederl‫ה‬ndische
Sagen, p175; also my treatise on the Schwan, p24).
Hermann Boerhaave’s step-mother having died, the universally celebrated
physician wrote as follows: “All the skill with which God has endowed me I
applied, and spent whole half-nights in considering her disease, in order to
prolong her life,—but all in vain.…. But I weep too, as often as the thought
occurs to me that now I shall have no more opportunity to show her my love,
veneration, and gratitude; and I should be altogether inconsolable, if, since my
coming of age, I had been even once guilty of disrespect or ingratitude toward
77

78. her.”
It may hence be seen how deeply-grounded in the nature of things it Isaiah, that
in German [and if in German, then in English too.—Tr.] glauben [to believe] and
lieben [to love] are really of the sam root. In Gothic, liubs means, “dear,
beloved”; liuban, “to be beloved.” With this, the likewise Gothic laubjan,
galaubjan, “to believe,” is connected. In the version of Ulfilas, even ἐλπίς, hope,
is at Romans 15:13 translated by lubains. And in truth: Faith, Love, Hope, these
three are one; but the greatest of them is Love.
PULPIT, "HOMILIES BY J.R. THOMSON
Ruth 1:8
Kindness.
Tidings reached Naomi that peace and plenty had returned to Judah, and she
resolved to return to Bethlehem. She acknowledged the Lord's goodness, who
"had visited his people in giving them bread." Doubtless she sought the Lord's
guidance with reference to her return. It must have needed courage on her part
to form and carry out this resolution. Her affectionate daughters-in-law
accompanied her part of the way. Then came the hour of separation. As Naomi
bade the young widows return, she uttered words of testimony to their kindness,
words of prayer that Heaven might deal kindly with them. Coming from her lips,
this witness was precious. They had dealt kindly with the dead—their husbands,
her sons. They had dealt kindly with her, in her bereavements and loneliness;
they had sympathized with her, and now were willing to accompany her to the
land of her birth and early days.
I. THE FOUNDATION OF KINDNESS. We must seek this below what is called
"good nature;" and, taught by Christianity, must find it in the brotherhood of
man, the fatherhood of God. The sacrifice of Christ is the power and the model
of true Christian kindness.
II. THE SPHERE OF KINDNESS. The family, as in the passage before, s, comes
first. "Kind" is related, as a word, to "kin." "Charity begins at home." But, as
has been remarked, it does not end there. Kindness should be shown to our
fellow-creatures, as Christians, as neighbors, as fellow-countrymen, as members
78

79. of the human race.
III. THE DIFFICULTIES in the way of kindness. It is not always easy for
persons of one nation to agree with those of another; foreigners are often foes. It
is not always easy for mothers-in-law to agree with daughters-in-law. Yet these
difficulties may be overcome, as in this narrative.
IV. THE RECOMPENSE of kindness. Naomi's prayer was answered, and the
Lord dealt kindly with those who had shown kindness. True kindness will
breathe many a prayer. And the Lord's loving-kindness, condescending,
unmerited, and free, is his people s most precious possession; it is "better than
life!"—T.
PULPIT, "Benedictions.
The Hebrews were fond of benedictions. "The Lord bless thee and keep thee,"
"And Jacob blessed Joseph, and said, The God which fed me all my life long
unto this day, the angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads." "The
Lord bless thee out of Zion." These Scriptures of olden time touch us so tenderly,
because they recognize the living hand, the loving heart of God. It is this which
will make them never grow old. It is this which makes their inspiration living,
and keeps their fountains of consolation open still. We are always meeting and
parting, journeying forth and returning home. Our families are broken up, our
churches have gates of entrance and departure, and the picture of life is always
one of a tent-life. We are pilgrims and strangers, as all our fathers were. The
keynote of all that I have to say to you from this text is in that word "kindly."
The argument is this. We can understand kindness in the sphere of the human,
and rise from that to a prayer for the Divine kindness. No society in any age can
be cemented together by force alone. Feudalism, for instance, in olden times, was
not all terror. The baron could command his dependents in time of war, as he fed
and housed and clothed them in times of peace; but, as the old chroniclers tell us,
there was often a rare hospitality, a hearty cheerfulness, a chivalrous affection in
the somewhat stern relationship; nor will any political economy of government
ever be able to preserve nations in allegiance to each other, or at peace amongst
themselves, without the cultivation of Christian brotherhood.
I. THE LORD KNOWS BEST WHAT KINDNESS IS. The Lord deal kindly
with you. Has he been kind? That is the question for us all. At times we should
79

80. have been tempted to answer, No! The vine is blighted, the fig tree withered, the
locusts have spoiled the green of spring, the little lambs have died. Kindly? Yes,
we shall answer one time when we stand in our lot at the end of days. For
kindness is not indulgence. I am thankful that this once common word has
dropped out of our prayers—Indulgent Father. No word in the English language
describes a feebler state of being than the word indulgence; it refers always to
the weaker side of our nature; that which is pleasant to us, that which eases us of
pain and of discipline and effort. Prayer like this goes to the heart; more
especially from the Naomis of the universe who have had so hard a time of it, to
whom life has been so full of bereavement and battle. But if you study life, you
will see it is the indulged who complain; it is those nursed in the lap of luxury
who whine and whimper if the sun does not shine, if the pomegranate, and the
fig, and the grape do not supplement the bread. Indulgence breeds supercilious
mannerism and contempt for common things in them; and all seems so very
strange if men, and women, and things are not ready for their comfort. God's
kindness to us may take forms which surprise us. At the heart of his severest
judgments there is mercy, in the bitter spring there is healing water, in the
desolated altar there is the downfall of idolatry. Abba, Father, we cry, and he
seems not to hear us. The wild winds seem to waft away into empty space our
cries for help and pity, but he who sitteth in the heavens hears and answers
according to the wisdom of his own will. The kindest things God has ever done
for us have been, perhaps, the strangest and severest. So it was with Daniel, and
Jacob, and Joseph, and Abraham our father. All God's ways are clone in truth,
and truth is always kindness, for the music of the universe is set in that key. The
throne of the Almighty himself has its firm pillars planted on that. Away we go
to business and duty. Farewell to son and daughter. Go thy way, pilgrim of life,
with knapsack and staff; henceforth our paths are separate, and for you there
will come battles when we cannot fight beside you, burdens we cannot help you
to bear. To another hearth you will come at evening, when the day's work is
done, and the anodynes of sympathy are needed for the worker's heart. "Go thy
way. The Lord deal kindly with thee."
II. THE LORD ALONE WILL BE WITH US ALL THROUGH OUR FUTURE
PILGRIMAGE. Apart from Divine power, which we have not to bless with,
there is Divine presence which we all need. Christ will be with us to the end.
Never will come a battle, a temptation, a solitude, a sorrow, a needful sacrifice,
but the Lord will be at hand. The scepter will never be laid in front of an empty
throne. The Lord reigns. It is touching to see the struggles of modern thought in
the minds of men who have drifted away from the incarnation and resurrection
of our Lord. "The ocean encroaches more and more each year"—to use a figure
of one who has marked the "ebb" of thought—"and he watches his fields eaten
80

81. up from year to year." Yes, says the same writer, who is depicting the
drift:—"The meadow-land, whereon he played in the innocent delights of
childhood, has now become a marshy waste of sand. The garden where he
gathered flowers, an offering of love and devotion to his parents, is now sown
with sea-salt. The church where he offered up his childish prayers, and
wondered at the high mysteries of which his teachers spoke, stands tottering
upon the edge of a crumbling cliff that the next storm may bring down in ruin."
And this is rightly called "an experience of spiritual misery." Pathetic, indeed, is
this. The picture is most touching and saddening! Who can feel it more than
those who suffer the eclipse of faith? We, who worship here, trust in the living
God, who as we believe revealed himself to our fathers by the prophets, and who
in these last days has spoken to us by his Son, whom he hath made heir of all
things, and hath given us this testimony, in that he hath raised him from the
dead.—W.M.S.
Ruth 1:8
"As you have dealt with the dead and me." This beautiful analogy, which has its
root idea in love and home, is very suggestive.
I. THE LORD KNOWS BEST WHAT OTHERS HAVE BEEN TO US. "As you
have dealt with the dead and me." You have been good and true to them, Naomi
says, with a voice that trembles with remembrances of the old days gone forever.
It is a touching little sentence. The dead. So silent now. Never to come back for
us to touch imperfectness into riper good; never to charm away with pleasant
thoughts the dull hours; never to fill with deeper meanings of love the half-empty
words; never to make more Divine the common service of life; never to put the
best interpretation upon conduct; never to lift the leaden crown of care from the
anxious brow; never to help to transfigure the mean and lowly with heavenly
hopes and aspirations. Gone! What a world of vacancy, and silence, and subtle
mystery! Is it strange we should wish well to those who were kind to the dead?
And Naomi links her own being with them still. "The dead and me." And with
true hearts they never can be disassociated. Anniversaries of remembrance make
our separations no more distant. They soften them. They give place for
comforting remembrances; but the dead are near as ever! "The dead and me!"
Who shall separate? None. Christ died, yea, rather is risen again, and he will
raise us up together to the heavenly places. What a blessing so to live, so to fill
our place as sons and daughters, so to sweeten, sublime, and sanctify life that
others may make our conduct a plea with that God who has known our heart
81

82. and life, and say, "The Lord deal kindly with you, as you have dealt with the
dead and me."
II. THE LORD HAS GIVEN US GUARANTEES OF HIS KINDNESS. We are
not left to meditate on rain and fruitful seasons only. Not the green of spring, nor
the south wind of summer, nor the gold of autumn alone proclaim his goodness.
So long as the story of the cross has Divine meaning for us, so long as we believe
it, not alone as the spirit of a good man's life, but as the revelation of God
manifest in the flesh, so long can we exclaim, "Herein is love, not that we loved
God, but that he loved us." Nor can we exclude conscience from our argument;
that, too, is a guarantee that the Almighty cares for us, that he will not let us sin
and suffer without the very voice Divine awakening, alarming, and arresting us.
None but a good Being would have put conscience there, and made it universal,
and filled it with such sweet benedictions for the soul. We are surrounded by
evidences of the Eternal pity. God who spared not his own Son, will with him
also freely give us all things—for man is still his child, and he has a desire to the
work of his hands. When we pray, therefore, "The Lord deal kindly with thee,"
we only ask him to be like himself, we only put him in remembrance of his
promise to hear when we call upon him. Some would think God kind, indeed, if
he were less severe on sin; to them all law is baneful, and the sorest evils are only
evidences of an imperfect brain, or an untrained mind, or an ungovernable
power of impulse. How, then, should the law of God be other than dislikable—
nay, detestable to them; but he who prepared the light, prepared also the throne
of his judgment, and he will by no means clear the guilty—for the love of God
would be but a weak sentiment if it were not harmonized with a law which
means order, truth, righteousness, and justice in all domains of his eternal
empire. We only predicate that love is the root of law, as it is also the essence of
mercy, and how God's kindness even on the cross shows that justice and mercy
blend with each other.
III. THE LORD LOOKS FOR OUR LOVE TO HIM IN OUR LOVE TO EACH
OTHER. If we love him we shall feed his lambs, forgive our enemies, and fulfill
the whole law of love. How many there have been who, professing even an
extreme sanctity, have robbed their partners, deluded their followers, and
sometimes darkened forever a brightly opening life. It is saddening to think what
religion has suffered from those whose countenances advertise asperity and
contempt, selfishness and pride, whilst they carry their Bibles under their arms,
and seem shocked at the exuberance of a healthy joy. Deal kindly? Not they.
Their silken words are often the soft sheaths of dagger purposes, and their sham
friendship is often only the occasion of stealing mental photographs of you to
82

83. distribute among their friends. Deal kindly? Why they sleep as well when they
have wounded as when they have healed, and they do not understand what the
plan of salvation has to do with a conscientious rectitude, a tender consideration,
and a warm and loving heart. Deal kindly. Let the Church arise and shine, and
put on her beautiful garments. Let the venerable Apostle John take his place
once more in the midst of the Churches, and say, "Beloved, let us love one
another, for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, for God is
love." "If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in
us." "My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue, but in deed
and truth." "He that loveth his brother abideth in the light, and there is none
occasion of stumbling in him." How true we feel all this to be, and yet how hard
in such a world as this. God is light, God is love, but unless we walk in the light
with him we know nothing of it at all. It is still more popular to discuss a mystery
than to seek after a Divine ideal. It is still true that many appraise their goodness
by their greater enlightenment on some disputable points of religion, and they
greatly hope their friend and brother will come to see like themselves. Alas! alas!
all the while we may perchance be so untrue to Christ, we may be experiencing
no sensitive grief that we are unlike the chief Shepherd of the sheep, so worldly,
so captious, so dull in all Divine sensibilities. Naomi's prayer, therefore, may
teach us much today about God—our Savior; much, too, about ourselves. This,
at all events, is true. If the harvests of love come late, they are very real and very
precious. Years alone can reveal character. We know what others are in times of
test and trial, as Naomi did in a strange land. She was a mother-in-law, and that
is a hard part to fulfill, often the subject of satire, too often, indeed, an
experience which awakens slender sympathy; she yet gained the crown of trust,
and honor, and love. And now, how can she speak better for others than by
speaking to God for them? The God who has never left her, the God who has
been the husband of the widow, the God who sent her human solace in the trying
hours of her bereavement in the far away land. "The Lord deal kindly with
you." When once in the hush of death a girl stood at the threshold of the door,
trembling, as childhood does, in the presence of death, the mother, bending over
the quiet sleeper, beckoned her in. She regained confidence then, and taking up
the cold hand kissed it, and said of her dead brother, "Mother, that hand never
struck me." How beautiful I Can we say the same, that we never wounded the
dead? Can we say it of the Christ himself, that we never crucified the Son of God
afresh? And now we look up to the great Father of our spirits, and the God of
our salvation, and pray him to bless all we love, to make them his own now and
evermore. His kindness is truer, deeper, wiser than our own. "The Lord bless
them and keep them." "The Lord deal kindly with them."—W.M.S.
LANGE, "Ruth 1:8. Jehovah deal kindly with you, as ye have dealt with the
dead and with me. A scene now begins of unequaled tenderness and amiableness.
We get a look into a family-life that may serve as a model for all. It is an honor to
83

84. the deceased sons, Mahlon and Chilion, that they made such a selection of wives;
but they must also have been worthy of the enduring love they awakened,
notwithstanding that there were no children to strengthen the bonds of affection.
The attachment of the Moabitish women, Ruth and Orpah, to their new family,
must be grounded in psychological facts, with a knowledge of which exegesis
cannot dispense. The Moabitish women had entered into an Israelitish house,
and had breathed the beneficent atmosphere of a family of Judah. Marriage and
family life form the real mirror of religious belief and worship. Hence, the
apostle, in his sublime manner, arranges the relations of husband and wife by
referring to the love of Christ for his church ( Ephesians 5:22 ff.). Ancient Israel,
therefore, distinguished itself from the inhabitants of Canaan, not merely by the
name of its God, but by its life at home in the family, by faithfulness and love to
wife and child. Purity and morality in marriage were the necessary results of
faith in the only, living God, as much as a life of unchaste and sensual pleasures
belonged to the abominations of idolatry among the Ammonites and Moabites.
Among the worst sins into which Israel fell in the desert, was the whoredom with
the daughters of Moab in the service of Baal-Peor ( Numbers 25); by executing
summary and terrible punishment on which, Phinehas the priest won for himself
an enduring blessing. The Mosaic law does not contain special and extended
instructions as to the treatment of wife and child. But the command, “thou shalt
not commit adultery,” stands among the Sinaitic Ten as the reflection of that
other which says, “thou shalt have no other gods.” An affectionate, moral family
life had become an Israelitish characteristic through the influence of the
Israelitish faith, as is evident already in patriarchal times from the instances of
Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel and Leah. But it showed itself still more brightly in
Israel as a nation, living by the side of other tribes in Canaan, since monogamy
had become its natural and prevailing practice. Every profounder apprehension
of domestic relations, brought about by man’s consciousness of God, affects the
wife especially. She experiences most deeply the beneficence of a life sanctified by
the law of God. Her happiness and her love, indissolubly connected, depend
upon the moral education of the man she follows. Ruth and Orpah felt the
impression of the higher morality which, in contrast with the Moabitish home,
pervaded every Israelitish household. It is not necessary to conceive of Mahlon
and Chilion as men of eminence in this respect; but they held fast to their famile
traditions, according to which the wife occupied a position of tenderness,
protected by love and solicitude. They did not act in entire accordance with the
law when they married Moabitish wives; but neither did they unite with them in
the idolatry of Baal-Peor. Although they may not have been specially pious and
god-fearing men, their national mode of home and married life nevertheless
contrasted with that of Moab, and all the more strongly because they lived in the
midst of Moab. Both the young women, acquainted with the fate of Moabitish
marriages, felt themselves gratefully attracted to the Israelitish house into which
they entered. They had not accepted the law and the God of Israel; but they
84

85. requited the kind and tender treatment they received with equally self-sacrificing
love. That Naomi can acknowledge this, after having observed them through ten
years of married life, what a picture of peace and happiness does it suggest! The
women had not only heard the religion of Jehovah confessed in Moab (cf. the
expression: Jehovah deal kindly with you, etc.), but they had seen the expression
of it in the life. What they have done and are yet ready to do, is the consequence
thereof. For national divisions, we here see, are overcome rather by the
preaching of the life than by the verbal proclamation of doctrine.
Naomi praises not only the love which Ruth and Orpah have manifested toward
their husbands, but also that which they have shown towards herself, the
mother-in-law. And this is yet more noteworthy. Ancients and moderns unite in
complaints of the unhappy relations between daughters-and mothers-in-law.
Plutarch, treating of the duties of married persons, relates that in Leptis, in
Africa, it was customary for the bride on the day after the wedding to send to the
bridegroom’s mother to ask for a pot, which the latter refuses, pretending that
she has none, in order that the young wife may speedily become acquainted with
the stepmotherly disposition of her mother-in-law, and be less easily provoked
when subsequently more serious troubles arise.[FN26] In Terence (Hecyra, ii1,
4), Laches laments “that all mothers-in-law have ever hated their daughters-in-
law” (uno animo omnes socrus oderunt nurus).[FN27] Juvenal, in his satire
against women (vi231), says, in a rather coarse way, that matrimonial peace is
inconceivable so long as the mother-in-law lives (desperanda salva concordia
socru). Old German popular sayings faithfully reproduce the ancient maxims:
“Diu Swiger ne weiss, dass sie Snur gewesan” (the mother-in-law has forgotten
that she was ever a daughter-in-law);[FN28] “Die beste Swigar ist die, auf deren
Rock die G‫ה‬nse weiden” (the best mother-in-law is one on whose gown the geese
feed, i. e. who is dead).
The family life of Naomi with her daughters-in-law affords no trace whatever of
such sad experiences. They mutually love each other—both during the lives of
the husbands and after their decease,—although they belong to different tribes.
The praise for this naturally belongs largely to the mother, whose kind and
genial soul evidently answered to her beautiful name. Thus much may also be
gathered from her further conversation with her daughters. But the unhappy
relations between daughter and mother-in-law, elsewhere usual, must in general
have been unknown in Israel. Otherwise the prophet could not represent it as a
sign of the extremest social ruin that, as the son against the father, and the
daughter against the mother, so the daughter-in-law rises up against the mother-
in-law ( Micah 7:6); a passage to which Christ alludes when he speaks of the
effects to be brought about in social life by his gospel ( Matthew 10:35).
BI, "The Lord deal kindly with you.
85

86. Naomi’s prayer for her daughters-in-law
I. That it is a duty to pray for those which do either us or ours good.
II. That at parting friends are to pray one for another, as we may see the practice of it
in Isaac (Gen_28:1; Gen_28:3); Laban (Gen_31:55); Jacob (Gen_43:14); and in Paul
(Act_20:36).
III. That the godly are persuaded that the Lord is a merciful rewarder of the duties of
love which one doth towards another (Col_3:24).
IV. That children should so well deserve of parents, yea, though but parents-in-law,
as they may be moved heartily to pray for them, as Naomi doth in this place. A good
carriage is a duty towards all, then much more to parents; and the prayers of parents
is a means to put a blessing upon their children.
V. That God will not only barely reward, but so deal with us as we deal with others.
(R. Bernard.)
The benedictions of life
The key-note of all I have to say is in that word “kindly.” The argument is this. We
can understand kindness in the sphere of the human, and rise from that to a prayer
for the Divine kindness. No society in any age can be cemented together by force
alone. Feudalism, for instance, in olden times, was not all terror. The baron could
command his dependents in time of war, as he fed and housed and clothed them in
times of peace; but, as the old chroniclers tell us, there was often a rare hospitality, a
hearty cheerfulness, a chivalrous affection in the somewhat stern relationship.
I. The Lord knows best what kindness is. The Lord deal kindly with you. Has He been
kind? At times we should have been tempted to answer, No! The vine is blighted, the
fig-tree withered, the locusts have spoiled the green of spring. Kindly? Yes, we shall
answer one time when we stand in our lot at the end of days. For kindness is not
indulgence. God’s kindness to us may take forms which surprise us. At the heart of
His severest judgments there is mercy, in the bitter spring there is healing water. The
kindest things God has ever done for us have been, perhaps, the strangest and
severest. So it was with Daniel and Jacob and Joseph and Abraham, our father. All
God’s ways are done in truth, and truth is always kindness.
II. The Lord knows best what others have been to us. “As you have dealt with the
dead and me.” It is a touching little sentence. The dead. So silent now. Never to come
back, for us to touch imperfectness into riper good. Gone! What a word of vacancy,
and silence, and subtle mystery! Is it strange we should wish well to those who were
kind to the dead? And Naomi links her own being with them still: “The dead and me.”
And with true hearts they never can be dissociated. Anniversaries of remembrance
make our separations no more distant. They soften them. They give place for
comforting remembrances: but the dead are near as ever. “The dead and me!” Who
shall separate? None. Christ died, yea, rather is risen again, and He will raise us up
together to the heavenly places.
III. The Lord alone will be with us all through our future pilgrimage. Apart from
Divine power, which we have not to bless with, there is Divine presence which we all
need. Christ will be with us to the end. Never will come a battle, a temptation, a
solitude, a sorrow, a needful sacrifice, but the Lord will be at hand.
IV. The Lord has given us guarantees of His kindness. We are not left to meditate on
rain and fruitful seasons only. Not the green of spring, nor the south wind of
86

87. summer, nor the gold of autumn alone proclaim His goodness.(W. M. Statham.)
As ye have dealt with the dead, and with me.
Kindness to the departed
Let us inquire how many things a dying godly man leaves behind him in this world.
His soul is sent before him (Rev_14:13). He leaveth behind him—
I. His body, to which we must be kind, by burial and lamentation.
II. His estate, to which we must be kind, by careful and faithful administration.
III. His children, friends, or kindred, to whom we must be kind, by love and
affection.
IV. His faults and failings, to which we must be kind, by silence and suppression.
V. His memory and virtues, to which we must be kind, by congratulation,
commemoration, and imitation. (T. Fuller, B. D.)
Behaviour in the light of death
You know not, husbands and wives, how long you may dwell together. Death may
soon come, and will doubtless, sooner or later, come and tear away the one of you
from the other. When that event shall take place, how will you wish to have behaved?
Behave at present as you would then wish to have behaved, for then you will not be
able to bring back the present time. Many great miracles have been wrought by the
power of God, but it never did, nor ever will, recall the time that is past. How
comfortable was it to Orpah and Ruth to hear Naomi say, “Ye have dealt kindly with
the dead!” And how comfortable was the reflection to them through life that she had
reason to give them this commendation! (G. Lawson.)
Showing kindness to the dead
It was much to be able to say this, when we consider how difficult the discharge of
the duties of law-relationship often is, and how apt it is to be judged with suspicion
and severity even when it is well done. The fact has been noticed long ago in the
pages of many a Greek and Roman satirist. But Naomi was not aware, when she
spoke this generous tribute, how very much their conduct had been the result of her
own. She had won the confidence and veneration of their young hearts by her
unselfishness, her forbearance, her charitable judgments, her holy consistency, and
her discretion. We often make for ourselves the beds we are to lie upon, and we may
be certain that there would be more Ruths in the world if there were more Naomis.
But how blessed when it can thus be said of us, that we have dealt kindly with the
dead”! We should make it our habitual and earnest aim so to behave ourselves
towards our kindred that, should we be called to stand beside their open graves, this
would be the testimony of others and of our own consciences. But we must not forget
that there is an important sense in which we may prove our undying love for the dead
by our kindness to the living. Those two young widows expressed their affection for
their departed husbands by their thoughtful attentions to Naomi. They loved her for
her own sake, but they loved her doubly for their sakes. Religion, indeed, warrants us
to think of our friends beyond the grave as still living, though absent. David’s nobly
generous spirit rejoiced that he could still reach his departed Jonathan in lavishing
87

88. respect and kindness upon Jonathan’s only surviving son, Mephibosheth. And this
sentiment reaches its highest possible point of sublimity, and becomes, as it were,
transfigured, when we show kindness to another because he belongs to Christ. In this
way we can still reach Him in His members, and anoint His blessed feet with our
precious ointment and wash them with our tears. That poor sufferer whom you
relieved by your benefactions and soothed by your sympathy was a disguised Christ.
Even the cup of cold water given to a disciple in the name of a disciple is to be
remembered by Him on another day. (A. Thomson, D. D.)
9 May the Lord grant that each of you will find
rest in the home of another husband.”
Then she kissed them goodbye and they wept
aloud
GILL, "The Lord grant you,.... Some make a supplement here, the Targum a
perfect reward, Aben Ezra an husband; and so Josephus says (c), she wished them
happier marriages than they had with her sons, who were so soon taken from them;
but a supplement seems needless, for what follows is connected with the wish, and
contains the sum of it:
that you may find rest; each of you:
in the house of her husband; that is, that they might each of them be blessed
with a good husband, with whom they might live free from brawls and contentions,
as well as from the distressing cares of life, having husbands to provide all things
necessary for them, and so from all the sorrows and distresses of a widowhood
estate:
then she kissed them; in token of her affection for them, and in order to part with
them; it being usual then as now for relations and friends to kiss at parting:
and they lifted up their voice and wept; to think they must part, and never see
one another more; their passions worked vehemently, and broke out in sobs, and
sighs, and tears, and loud crying.
JAMISON, "The Lord grant you that ye may find rest — enjoy a life of
tranquillity, undisturbed by the cares, encumbrances, and vexatious troubles to
which a state of widowhood is peculiarly exposed.
Then she kissed them — the Oriental manner when friends are parting.
88

89. BI, "The Lord grant you that ye may find rest, each of you in the house of her
husband.
The rest of marriage
1. Man’s Maker is the chief maker of all men and women’s marriages in the
world. It is the work of God to provide an helpmeet for man, hence it is called the
covenant of God (Pro_2:17), and therefore honourable to all (Heb_13:4).
Religious Naomi looks up here unto God, saying in effect, “The Lord grant you
good husbands.”Grace should be sought for, in the first place, in those seven
qualifications of good matches and marriages: grace, race, face, arts, parts,
portion, proportion.
2. A married state is a state of rest. So it is called here and Rth_3:1. Hence
marriage is called the port or haven of young people, whose affections while
unmarried are continually floating and tossed to and fro like a ship upon the
waters, till they come into this happy harbour. There is a natural propension in
most persons towards nuptial communion, as all created beings have a natural
tendency to their proper centre, and are restless out of it. (C. Ness.)
Rest in marriage
If it is to be wished that wives may find rest in the houses of their husbands, it must
be the duty of husbands to do what they can to procure them rest, not only by
endeavouring to provide for them what is necessary for their subsistence and
comfortable accommodation, but by such a kind behaviour as will promote their
satisfaction and comfort. Men and women may have affluence without rest, and rest
without affluence. But let women also contribute to procure rest for themselves by
frugality, by industry, by such behaviour to their husbands as will merit constant
returns of kindness. (G. Lawson.)
PULPIT, "May Yahveh grant to you that ye may find rest, each in the house of
her husband. Naomi again, when the current of her tenderest feelings was
running full and strong, lifts up her longing heart toward her own Yahveh. He
was the God not of the Hebrews only, but of the Gentiles likewise, and rifled and
overruled in Moab. The prayer is, in its form, full of syntactical peculiarity:
"May Yahveh give to you," and, as the result of his giving, "may you find rest,
each [in] the house of her husband." The expression, "the house of her
husband," is used locatively. It is an answer to the suppressed question, "Where
are they to find rest?" And hence, in our English idiom, we must insert the
preposition, "in the house of her husband." As to the substance of the prayer, it
has, as truly as the grammatical syntax, its own tinge of Orientalism. Young
females in Moab had but little scope for a life of usefulness and happiness, unless
shielded round and round within the home of a pure and devoted husband.
Naomi was well aware of this, and hence, in her motherly solicitude for her
virtuous daughters-in-law, she gave them to understand that it would be the
opposite of a grief to her if they should seek, in the one way open to them in that
comparatively undeveloped state of society, to brighten the homes of the lonely.
89

90. In such homes, it circumstances were propitious, they would find deliverance
from unrest and anxiety. They would find rest. It would be a position in which
they could abide, and in which their tenderest feelings and most honorable
desires would find satisfaction and repose. The peculiar force of the Hebrew
‫ה‬ָ‫נוּח‬ ְ‫מ‬ is finely displayed by the texture of the associated expressions in Isaiah
32:17, Isaiah 32:18 : "And the work of righteousness shall be peace; and the
effect of righteousness quietness and assurance forever; and my people shall
dwell in a peaceable habitation, and in sure dwellings, and in quiet resting-
places" ( ‫ת‬ֹ‫נוּח‬ ְ‫מ‬ ). And she kissed them, locking them lingeringly and lovingly in a
farewell embrace. "Kissed them." The preposition to, according to the
customary Hebrew idiom, stands before the pronoun. In kissing, Naomi
imparted herself passionately to her beloved daughters-in-law, and clung to
them. There would be full-hearted reciprocation, and each to each would cling
"in their embracement, as they grew together" (Shakespeare, Henry VIII.). And
they lifted up their voice and wept. The idea is not that all three wept aloud. The
pronoun "they" refers to the daughters-in-law, as is evident both from the
preceding and from the succeeding context. The fine idiomatic version of the
Vulgate brings out successfully and unambiguously the true state of the case—
quae elevata voce flere coeperunt. The lifting, up of the voice in weeping must be
thought of according to the measure of Oriental, as distinguished from
Occidental, custom. In the East there is less self-restraint in this matter than in
the West.
LANGE,"Ruth 1:9-10. Jehovah grant you that you may find a safe place. If he be
truly worthy of love who amid his own sorrow still thinks of the welfare of
others, then, surely, Naomi is worthy of love. She has been called upon to part
with all that was dear to her, with husband and children. She stands quite alone
in her advanced age. But even yet all partings are not over. She thinks that now
also she must no longer allow herself to be accompanied by Orpah and Ruth.
Both the daughters-in-law are yet young; should she take them with her into her
uncertain lot! She has not the presumption to forget their future in thoughts
about her own; nor the vanity to think that the widows of her sons should not
marry again. The position of a single woman in antiquity was an unhappy one. It
was altogether customary for youthful widows to marry again. Only a husband’s
house is the true asylum for a woman. There she finds protection, safety, and
honor. That is the idea of the menuchah, the rest, which Naomi wishes that
Jehovah may give each of them in the house of another husband. It is impossible
to imagine a more beautiful expression of the end of marriage to a woman. The
possession of a menuchah, an asylum of honor and freedom, is the highest
happiness; the want of it, a terrible misfortune. Among other evils, Israel is told
that in the event of disobedience it shall have no menuchah ( Deuteronomy
28:65).[FN29] The holy land, if it be possessed in faith, Isaiah, as it were, the
earthly house to which Israel has come, like a wife to the house of her husband.
90

91. “Hitherto,” says Moses, Deuteronomy 12:9, “you have not yet come unto the
menuchah which Jehovah your God gives you.” The desert had no place of rest,
properly speaking: it was only the way, not the goal. Solomon was the first who
could praise God for the complete gift of menuchah to his people ( 1 Kings 8:56).
It is true, Israel’s highest menuchah is God, Jehovah himself and his redemption.
He is the true goal of life. Says the prophet ( Isaiah 11:10): “And it shall come to
pass in that day: the Root of Jesse—to him shall the nations repair, and his
menuchah is glory.” And, hence, Christ also says, Matthew 11:29 : “Learn of me,
that I am meek and lowly in heart, and you shall find rest (ἀ‫ם‬‫,נבץףים‬
menuchah) for your souls.”
Such a menuchah Orpah and Ruth had enjoyed in the homes of their husbands;
and they are, as it were, vocationless, if they find not another. It was in the
natural course of ancient social life that they should marry again among the
people to whom they belonged. Naomi thinks it wrong for her to take them away
from that people. Turn back, she says; may the blessing of the God of Israel be
with you even in the midst of Moab! May He grant you rest in the house of a new
husband! And she kisses them, as the signal of parting (cf. Ruth 1:14),—but a
loud weeping arises. Naomi finds it hard to be obliged to leave these last dear
friends whom she has become accustomed to regard as daughters. Orpah and
Ruth are unwilling to turn back, unwilling to let the loved Naomi proceed alone
on her solitary way through life. “We go with thee,” they say, “to thy people.”
10 and said to her, “We will go back with you to
your people.”
GILL, "And they said unto her,.... When they had eased themselves in cries and tears, and
had recovered their speech:
surely we will return with thee unto thy people; to be proselyted, as the Targum; not only
to dwell with them, but to worship with them.
HENRY, "3. The two young widows could not think of parting with their good
mother-in-law, so much had the good conversation of that pious Israelite won upon
them. They not only lifted up their voice and wept, as loth to part, but they professed
a resolution to adhere to her (Rth_1:10): “Surely we will return with thee unto thy
91

92. people, and take our lot with thee.” It is a rare instance of affection to a mother-in-
law and an evidence that they had, for her sake, conceived a good opinion of the
people of Israel. Even Orpah, who afterwards went back to her gods, now seemed
resolved to go forward with Naomi. The sad ceremony of parting, and the tears shed
on that occasion, drew from her this protestation, but it did not hold. Strong
passions, without a settled judgment, commonly produce weak resolutions.
PULPIT, "And they said unto her, Surely we will return with thee unto thy
people. So King James's version. The expression in the original is broken at the
commencement: "And they said to her, For with thee we shall return to thy
people." It is as if they had said, "Do not insist on our return to our mothers'
homes, for with thee we shall return to thy people." Note the expression, "we
shall return, instead of "we shall go with thee in thy return to thy people." For
the moment they identify themselves with their mother-in-law, as if they had
come with her from Judah.
PULPIT, "Ruth 1:10-14
Separation.
These three women were bound together by the memory of common happiness,
by the memory of common sorrows. The proposal that they should part, however
reasonable and just, could not but reopen the flood-gates of their grief. Orpah
found her consolation in her home in Moab, and Ruth found hers in Naomi's
life-long society and affection. But as the three stand before us on the borders of
the land, as Naomi begs her daughters-in-law to return, the sorrow and the
sanctity of human separations are suggested to our minds.
I. SEPARATIONS BETWEEN LOVING FRIENDS ARE OFTEN EXPEDIENT
AND NECESSARY.
II. SEPARATIONS ARE SOMETIMES THE OCCASION OF ALMOST THE
BITTEREST SORROWS OF HUMAN LIFE.
III. SEPARATIONS MAY, BY GOD'S GRACE, BE MADE A DISCIPLINE OF
THE SOUL'S HEALTH AND WELFARE.
92

93. IV. SEPARATIONS MAY BE OVERRULED, BY GOD'S PROVIDENCE, FOR
THE REAL GOOD, PROSPERITY, AND HAPPINESS OF THOSE WHO ARE
PUT APART.
V. SEPARATIONS REMIND US OF HIM WHO HAS SAID, "I WILL NEVER
LEAVE THEE; I WILL NEVER FORSAKE THEE"—T.
BI, "Surely we will return with thee.
Promises and purposes
I. Promises of speech and purposes of heart, whether to God, to His church, or to individuals,
ought to go hand in hand. If a man’s word does not express his meaning and bind him,
nothing can.
II. Promises and purposes often proceed from passion instead of principle.
III. Promises and purposes proceeding merely from passion soon fall to the ground. “I go,
sir,” one said in the Gospels, and “went not.” Some persons melting under the ministry of the
Word as a summer brook (Job_6:15-20). A changed heart necessary to perseverance. Saul
may have religious fits, and Jehu much zeal; for want of a regenerated nature both come to
nothing. (John Macgowan.)
Promise and purpose to be allied
1. Promises of speech and purposes of spirit should walk hand in hand together. None
ought to promise with their mouths what they do not purpose with their hearts; this is to
be fraudulent and deceitful, which is destructive to human society. God’s children are all
such as will not lie (Isa_63:8), to say and unsay, or to say one thing and think another, to
blow hot and cold with one blast. Ye that have promised to give up yourselves to Christ,
and to go with Him in ways of holiness, it must be your purpose to depart from iniquity
(2Ti_2:19; Rev_14:4; Hos_2:7).
2. Promises of the mouth, yea, and purposes of the mind, do oft proceed from passion,
and not from principle. So did Orpah’s here; it was only a pang of passion which the
discreet matron prudently distrusts, and therefore tries them both with powerful
dissuasives. Thus Saul in a passion promised fairly to David (1Sa_24:16-17; 1Sa_26:21),
and David discovered all those fair promises to proceed more from sudden passion than
from fixed principles; therefore did he distrust both his talk and his tears. Hereupon
David gets him up into the hold, well knowing there was little hold to be taken at such
passionate promises and protestations (1Sa_24:22). Yea, and out of the land too, as not
daring to trust his reconciliation in passion and strong conviction without any true
conversion (1Sa_26:25; 1Sa_27:1-2; 1Sa_27:4), otherwise his malice had been restless
and he faithless.
3. Purposes and promises that proceed from passion, and not from principle, do soon
dwindle away into nothing. Thus did Orpah’s (Rth_1:14), who said with that son in the
parable (Mat_21:30), “I go, sir”; yea, but when, sir? So here, it is certain we will return
with thee, was enough uncertain. It is a maxim, second thoughts are better than first, but
Orpah’s first were better than her second; her purposes and promises do dwindle away
and vanish into smoke. (C. Ness.)
93

94. The failure of good impulses
The bright morning does not always shine into the perfect day; the sweetest spring-bud of
promise does not always ripen into precious fruit. The seed that was cast on stony ground
grew rapidly up, but withered in a moment. Orpah’s decision was the decision of impulsive
feeling, of filial affection; it was strong suddenly, it grew up in an instant, and in an instant it
perished; and she resolved to forsake Ruth and Naomi, and return to her gods, her people,
and her country. (J. Cumming.)
11 But Naomi said, “Return home, my
daughters. Why would you come with me? Am I
going to have any more sons, who could become
your husbands?
BARNES, "See marginal references and notes. The Levirate law probably existed
among the Moabites, and in Israel extended beyond the brother in the strict sense,
and applied to the nearest relations, since Boaz was only the kinsman of Elimelech
Rth_3:12.
CLARKE, "Are there yet any more sons - This was spoken in allusion to the
custom, that when a married brother died without leaving posterity, his brother
should take his widow; and the children of such a marriage were accounted the
children of the deceased brother. There is something very persuasive and affecting in
the address of Naomi to her daughters-in-law. Let us observe the particulars: -
1. She intimates that she had no other sons to give them.
2. That she was not with child; so there could be no expectation.
3. That she was too old to have a husband.
4. That though she should marry that night, and have children, yet they could not
wait till such sons were marriageable; she therefore begs them to return to
their own country where they might be comfortably settled among their own
kindred.
GILL, "And Naomi said, turn again, my daughters,.... Supposing this
resolution of theirs only arose from a natural affection, and not from any love to the
God or people of Israel; at least doubting whether it was so or not, and willing to try
whether anyone, or both of them, were really from a principle of religion inclined to
94

95. go with her; and desirous that they would thoroughly consider what they did, lest
they should repent and apostatize, and bring a reproach upon the true religion:
why will ye go with me? what reason can you give? this she said in order to get out
of them if there was any real inclination in them to the true worship and service of
God; though she keeps out that from her own questions put to them as follows, that it
might come purely from themselves:
are there yet any more sons in my womb, that they may be your
husbands? is there any likelihood that I should ever have any sons to be instead of
husbands, or really husbands to you? can it be thought that at my age, supposing I
had an husband, or an husband's brother to marry me, that there is in me a natural
power of conceiving and bearing children? this therefore can surely be no
inducement to you to go along with me; for some, as Jarchi, think she refers to the
law of a husband's brother marrying his widow, and raising up seed to him, which
was known among the Gentiles before it was given to Israel; see Gen_38:8, to which
Aben Ezra rightly objects, that that law respects a brother by the father's side, and
not by the mother's only; to which may be added, that this law was not binding on a
brother unborn, but on one that was living before the death of his brother; besides if
this law had been in her mind, it would rather have furnished out an encouraging
reason them to go with her, since there were kinsmen of her sons, to whom they
might be married, as one of them afterwards was.
HENRY, "4. Naomi sets herself to dissuade them from going along with her, Rth_
1:11-13.
(1.) Naomi urges her afflicted condition. If she had had any sons in Canaan, or any
near kinsmen, whom she could have expected to marry the widows, to raise up seed
to those that were gone, and to redeem the mortgaged estate of the family, it might
have been some encouragement to them to hope for a comfortable settlement at
Bethlehem. But she had no sons, nor could she think of any near kinsman likely to do
the kinsman's part, and therefore argues that she was never likely to have any sons to
be husbands for them, for she was too old to have a husband; it became here age to
think of dying and going out of the world, not of marrying and beginning the world
again. Or, if she had a husband, she could not expect to have children, nor, if she had
sons, could she think that these young widows would stay unmarried till her sons
that should yet be born would grow up to be marriageable. Yet this was not all: she
could not only not propose to herself to marry them like themselves, but she knew
not how to maintain them like themselves. The greatest grievance of that poor
condition to which she was reduced was that she was not in a capacity to do for them
as she would: It grieveth me more for your sakes than for my own that the hand of
the Lord has gone out against me. Observe, [1.] She judges herself chiefly aimed at in
the affliction, that God's quarrel was principally with her: “The hand of the Lord has
gone out against me. I am the sinner; it is with me that God has a controversy; it is
with me that he is contending; I take it to myself.” This well becomes us when we are
under affliction; though many others share in the trouble, yet we must hear the voice
of the rod as if it spoke only against us and to us, not billeting the rebukes of it at
other people's houses, but taking them to ourselves. [2.] She laments most the
trouble that redounded to them from it. She was the sinner, but they were the
sufferers: It grieveth me much for your sakes. A gracious generous spirit can better
bear its own burden than it can bear to see it a grievance to others, or others in any
way drawn into trouble by it. Naomi could more easily want herself than see her
daughters want. “Therefore turn again, my daughters, for, alas! I am in no capacity
95

96. to do you any kindness.” But,
(2.) Did Naomi do well thus to discourage her daughters from going with her,
when, by taking them with her, she might save them from the idolatry of Moab and
bring them to the faith and worship of the God of Israel? Naomi, no doubt, desired to
do so. But, [1.] If they did come with her, she would not have them to come upon her
account. Those that take upon them a profession of religion only in complaisance to
their relations, to oblige their friends, or for the sake of company, will be converts of
small value and of short continuance. [2.] If they did come with her, she would have
them to make it their deliberate choice, and to sit down first and count the cost, as it
concerns those to do that may take up a profession of religion. It is good for us to be
told the worst. Our Saviour took this course with him who, in the heat of zeal, spoke
that bold word, Master, I will follow thee whithersoever thou goest. “Come, come,”
says Christ, “canst thou fare as I fare? The Son of man has not where to lay his head;
know this, and then consider whether thou canst find in thy heart to take thy lot with
him,” Mat_8:19, Mat_8:20. Thus Naomi deals with her daughters-in-law. Thoughts
ripened into resolves by serious consideration are likely to be kept always in the
imagination of the heart, whereas what is soon ripe is soon rotten.
JAMISON, "are there yet any more sons in my womb, that they may be
your husbands? — This alludes to the ancient custom (Gen_38:26) afterwards
expressly sanctioned by the law of Moses (Deu_25:5), which required a younger son
to marry the widow of his deceased brother.
COFFMAN, "ORPAH RETURNS
"And Naomi said, Turn again my daughters: Why will ye go with me? have I yet
sons in my womb, that they may be your husbands? Turn again, my daughters,
go your way; for I am too old to have a husband. If I should say I have hope, if I
should even have a husband tonight, and should also bear sons; would ye
therefore tarry till they were grown? would ye therefore stay from having a
husband? nay, my daughters,; for it grieveth me much for your sakes, for the
hand of Jehovah hath gone forth against me. And they lifted up their voice, and
wept again: and Orpah kissed her mother-in-law; but Ruth clave unto her."
One of the very important things in this paragraph is that Naomi spelled out for
her daughters-in-law, that there was in their situation no prospect whatever of
any such thing as a levirate marriage. "Naomi is saying that there is no prospect
of such a marriage in this case."[20] Baldwin agreed with this, writing that,
"Naomi argued that in their case the law of levirate marriage could not possibly
apply."[21]
"My daughters - my daughters - my daughters" (Ruth 1:11,12,13). The powerful
emotional thrust of these lines is evident. The manifest love which united the
hearts of those grieving ladies is brilliantly portrayed by the sobbing words of
Naomi.
"The hand of Jehovah is gone forth against me" (Ruth 1:13). "These words
96

97. emphasize a conviction that underlies every word of this Book, namely, that
things do not happen by chance. God is sovereign, and He brings to pass what
He will."[22] Of course, some things do happen by chance (Ecclesiastes 9:11), but
it is also true that the omnipotent God is ABLE to overrule every chance and
happenstance in the achievement of His own sovereign will. Jehovah was not
Naomi's enemy here, despite her mistaken thoughts that God was against her.
Such are the inscrutable and unfathomable mysteries of all life upon this earth,
that all believers should learn to trust where they cannot see and say with the
patriarch Job, "Though he slay me, yet will I trust him."
COKE, "Ruth 1:11. Are there yet any more sons in my womb, &c.— Naomi
refers in these words to that very ancient custom, which seems to have existed
from the beginning of the world, of the brother marrying the widow of his
brother when the latter has died without children. See Genesis 38 and
Deuteronomy 25:5. There is great beauty and pathos in this natural and
unadorned relation of the parting of Naomi and her daughters.
PULPIT, "And Naomi said, Turn back, my daughters. To what purpose should
you go with me? Have I yet sons in my womb, that might be husbands to you?
According to the old Levirate law—a survival of rude and barbarous times—
Orpah and Ruth, having had husbands who died without issue, would have been
entitled to claim marriage with their husbands' brothers, if such surviving
brothers there had been (see Deuteronomy 25:5-9; Matthew 22:24-28). And if the
surviving brothers were too young to be married, the widows, if they chose,
might wait on till they reached maturity (see Genesis 38:1-30.). It is in the light of
these customs that we are to read Naomi's remonstrance's. The phraseology in
the second interrogation is very primitive, and primitively ' agglutinative.' "Are
there yet to be sons in my womb, and they shall be to you for husbands?" (see on
verse 1)/
ELLICOTT, "(11) The advice of Naomi thus far is insufficient to shake the
affectionate resolve of the two women. She then paints the loneliness of her lot.
She has no more sons, and can hope for none; nay, if sons were to be even now
born to her, what good would that do them? Still her lot is worse than theirs.
They, in spite of their great loss, are young, and from their mothers’ houses they
may again go forth to homes of their own. She, old, childless, and solitary, must
wend her weary way back to live unaided as best she may.
LANGE, "Ruth 1:11-13. And Naomi said: Have I then yet sons in my womb? It
is by means of two considerations that Naomi seeks to persuade her daughters-
in-law to return: first, she holds out to them the prospect of new family
connections in Moab; and, secondly, she shows them that all hope of renewed
married happiness is ended if they go with her. The surprising delicacy with
which this is done, is such as to show clearly how truly a religious love educates
97

98. and refines. The ultimate cause of the grief occasioned by the necessity of
impending separation, lies after all solely in the fact that Ruth and Orpah are
Moabitesses. Naomi could not bear to tell them that if they, as daughters of
Moab, went with her to Israel, they would find themselves in a less hospitable
situation than they had hitherto enjoyed. She is too tender to remind these good
children of the fact that Israel does not sanction connections with Moab. On this
account, she had already suggested ( Ruth 1:8), with special emphasis, that they
should return to Moab, each to her mother’s house, thus putting the natural
Moabitish mother over against herself, the Israelitish mother-in-law. She would
thereby intimate to them, as delicately and indirectly as possible, that they could
hope for nothing in Israel except what she herself could give; that they could
enter into her house, indeed, but not into Israel’s national life. Naomi’s speech in
Ruth 1:12-13, is a climactic utterance of grief,[FN30] which often says so many
really unnecessary things, in order to conceal others which it dares not say.
Orpah and Ruth are themselves aware of all that Naomi says to them in these
verses. In wishing to go with her, they cannot possibly have a thought of building
hopes on sons yet to be born to Naomi by another marriage. But—and this is
what Naomi would make them feel—any other hope than this vain one, they as
Moabitish women could not have in Israel. If I myself—she gives them to
understand—could yet have sons, I would take you with me. My home would
then be your home too. To me you are dear as daughters-in-law, whether in
Israel or in Moab, but other prospect have you none. Here where everything
turns on love, the fulfiller of every law, Naomi does not think of the legal
provisions with respect to levirate marriages; but she heaps up the
improbabilities against her being able to furnish husbands to her daughters-in-
law in Israel, in order in this veiled manner to indicate that this was nevertheless
the only possible ground of hope for them in Israel.
For I am worse off than you are. It is very painful for Naomi to let them go, for
she is entirely alone. But she cannot answer it to take them with her, seeing she
can offer them no new home. Undoubtedly, she is in a worse situation than that
of the young women. For them there is yet a possible future among their people.
Naomi has buried her happiness in a distant grave. For her there is no future.
The last of those dear to her, she herself must tear away from her heart.
“Jehovah’s hand,” she says, “went forth against me.” She is soon to experience
that his mercy is not yet exhausted.
BI 11-13, "It grieveth me much for your sakes that the hand of the Lord is gone out against
me.
Naomi’s parting address
This is a great aggravation of the afflictions of many parents, that their children are involved
with themselves. They could bear poverty, they could bear reproach, they could bear death
itself, had they none who depended on them for bread and for respectability in the world.
God has the same right to rule over the fruit of our bodies as over ourselves, and to allot to
98

99. them their share of the good or the bad things of this world. It is bitterest of all, when we
have reason to think that our sins have provoked God to punish us in the persons of our
friends, or to inflict those strokes which our friends must feel as heavily as ourselves. Let us
beware of ever exposing ourselves to such heart-piercing reflections by conduct that may
bring down God’s displeasure upon our families. God’s people may sometimes, without good
reason, think that the hand of the Lord is gone forth against them, in the calamities which
befall their families or friends. Our afflictions are hard enough to be borne by us, without the
addition of groundless reflections against ourselves. At the same time, the error is much more
common of insensibility to the Divine displeasure, when it has been really kindled by our
sins, than of vexing ourselves with unjust suspicions of God’s anger. There is one thing that
still remains to be considered concerning this parting speech of Naomi to her daughters-in-
law. Why did she dissuade them from going with her to the land of Judah, where the true God
was well known, and persuade them to return to a country of abominable idolaters? We are
not bound to justify all that Naomi spake or did. But, in charity to that good woman, we
ought to believe that, for years past, she had been endeavouring, by her practice and her
converse, to recommend to her young friends the worship of the God of Israel. If they were
truly turned from the error of their ways, nothing that is here said was likely to drive them
back to their own country. They might have been disgusted even with Naomi’s own conduct,
if she had not fairly told them what inconveniences they were to encounter in going to her
land, and to her people. Our Lord very plainly told His followers what they were to expect in
His service. “The foxes have holes,” etc. We may, however, observe, that Christ usually
administered proper antidotes against the fears which the doctrine of the Cross might excite
in the minds of His hearers. It may be doubted whether Naomi, in the dejection of her spirits,
did not overlook the powerful consolations which might have encouraged her young friends
to follow her into the land of Israel, and would have more than compensated all the
inconveniences to which they would have been exposed in a strange land. Doubtless she had
often spoken of those privileges to them in former times; but as yet they had not learned their
nature, and perhaps Naomi now despaired of ever being able to give them a perfect idea of it.
(G. Lawson.)
12 Return home, my daughters; I am too old to
have another husband. Even if I thought there
was still hope for me—even if I had a husband
tonight and then gave birth to sons—
GILL, "Turn again, my daughters, go your way,.... This she repeated still to
try their affections to her, and especially whether there was any real love to the God
of Israel, his people, and worship, but still proceeds upon the same topic:
for I am too old to have an husband; and can never think of marrying again on
account of age, nor can you surely ever think I should, at these years I am now
arrived to:
99

100. if I should say I have hope; of marrying, and bearing children; suppose that:
if I should have a husband also tonight; be married to a man directly, suppose
that:
and should also bear sons; conceive and bear, not female but male children,
allow that; all which are mere suppositions, and, could they be admitted, would not
furnish out any reason why you should be desirous of going with me.
JAMISON 12-13, "Turn again, my daughters, go your way — That Naomi
should dissuade her daughters-in-law so strongly from accompanying her to the land
of Israel may appear strange. But it was the wisest and most prudent course for her
to adopt: first, because they might be influenced by hopes which could not be
realized; second, because they might be led, under temporary excitement, to take a
step they might afterwards regret; and, third, because the sincerity and strength of
their conversion to the true religion, which she had taught them, would be
thoroughly tested.
PULPIT, "Turn back, my daughters, go; for I am too old to have a husband. But
even if I could say, I have hope; yea, even if I had a husband this very night; yea,
even if I had already given birth to sons; (Ruth 1:13) would ye therefore wait till
they grew up? would ye therefore shut yourselves up so as not to have husbands?
nay, my daughters; for my lot is exceedingly bitter, more than even yours, for the
hand of Yahveh has gone out against me. Most pathetic pleading, and not easily
reproduced on lines of literal rendering. "Go, for I am too old to have a
husband." A euphemistic rendering; but the original is euphemistic too, though
under another phraseological phase. "But even if I could say, I have hope." The
poverty of the Hebrew verb, in respect of provision to express "moods, ' is
conspicuous: "that," i.e. "suppose that I said, I have hope." Mark the climactic
representation. Firstly, Naomi makes, for argument's sake, the supposition that
she might yet have sons; then, secondly, she carries her supposition much higher,
namely, that she might that very night have a husband; and then, thirdly, she
carries the supposition a great deal higher still, namely, that even already her
sons were brought forth: "Would you therefore wait?" Note the therefore. Ibn
Ezra, the Septuagint, the Vulgate, and King James's version assume that ‫ן‬ֵ‫ָה‬‫ל‬
means for them. The feminine pronoun, however, as applied to Naomi's sons, is,
on that supposition, all but inexplicable. It is much better to assume, with the
majority of modern critics, that it is equivalent to ‫ן‬ֵ‫כ‬ָ‫ל‬, whether we call it a
Chaldaism or not. Certainly it was current in Chaldee (see Daniel 2:6, Daniel
2:9 ). But it may have floated in circles of Semitic society that were never
included within Chaldaea proper. Indeed, there were no precise limits bounding
off the Chaldee language from the kindred dialects, just as there are no such
limits in English or in German, or in any member of a linguistic group. Idioms
often overlap. In the two interrogative clauses, "Would ye for that purpose wait
till they grew up. Would ye for that purpose seclude, yourselves, so as not to have
100

101. husbands? there is a parallelism; only, in the second clause, the representation
rises. "For my lot is exceedingly bitter, more than even yours;" literally, "for it is
bitter to me exceedingly, beyond you." The verb is used impersonally. Naomi
means that her case was even more lamentable than theirs, so that she could not
encourage them to hang their dependence on her help, or to hope for a retrieval
of their circumstances in becoming partakers of her fortunes. The translation of
King James's version, "for your sakes," though decidedly supported by the
Septuagint, is unnatural. Pagnin and Drusius both give the correct rendering,
"more than you." So do Michaelis and Wright, But Bertheau and Gesenius agree
with King James s version. The Syriac Peshito, strange to say, gives both
translations, "I feel very bitterly for you, and to me it is more bitter than to you."
13 would you wait until they grew up? Would
you remain unmarried for them? No, my
daughters. It is more bitter for me than for you,
because the Lord’s hand has turned against
me!”
GILL, "Would you tarry for them till they were grown?.... It is not to be
thought that they would tarry till she was married and had children, and then till
these infants were grown up to men's estate, and be marriageable; for though Tamar
tarried for Shelah, yet he was born, and of some years of age, though not a grown
man, Gen_38:11.
would ye stay for them from having husbands? they were young widows, and
it was fit they should marry again; and it could not be imagined that they would deny
themselves having husbands, in expectation of any sons of her's:
nay, my daughters; I am well satisfied you will never tarry for them, nor deprive
yourselves of such a benefit; it is unreasonable to suppose it:
for it grieveth me much for your sakes; that she could be of no manner of
service to them, either to give them husbands, or to support and maintain them,
should they go with her; or "I have exceedingly more bitterness than you" (d); her
condition and circumstances were much worse than theirs; for though they had lost
their husbands, she had lost both husband and children: or it was more bitter and
grievous to her to be separated from them, than it was for them to be separated from
her; her affection to them was as strong, or stronger than theirs to her; or they had
friends in their own country that would be kind to them, but as for her, she was in
deep poverty and distress, and when she came into her own country, knew not that
101

102. she had any friends left to take any notice of her:
that the hand of the Lord is gone out against me; in taking away her husband
and children, and reducing her to a low estate, penniless and friendless; so poor, as it
appears, that her daughter-in-law, when come to the land of Canaan, was obliged to
glean for the livelihood of them both, as in the next chapter.
PETT, "Furthermore even if there had been a chance that she could produce
children, and was able immediately to marry, would they really want to wait
until any sons so born would grow up? By that time the women too would be
almost beyond childbearing. No it was better for them that they left her and
returned to their families and sought husbands in Moab. She assured them of the
grief that she felt that YHWH had so dealt with her that she could offer them
nothing, because His hand had ‘gone forth against her’. The whole move to
Moab, although seeming a good idea at the time, was now seen as a disaster.
YHWH had not been in it for good.
BENSON, "Ruth 1:13. It grieveth me — That you are left without the comfort of
husbands or children; that I must part with such affectionate daughters; and
that my circumstances are such that I cannot invite you to go along with me. For
her condition was so mean at this time that Ruth, when she came to her mother’s
city, was forced to glean for a living. It is with me that God has a controversy.
This language becomes us when we are under affliction; though many others
share in the trouble, yet we are to hear the voice of the rod, as if it spake only to
us. But did not she wish to bring them to the worship of the God of Israel?
Undoubtedly she did. But she would have them first consider upon what terms,
lest, having set their hand to the plough, they should look back.
14 At this they wept aloud again. Then Orpah
kissed her mother-in-law goodbye, but Ruth
clung to her.
BARNES, "The kiss at parting as well as at meeting is the customary friendly and
respectful salutation in the East. The difference between mere kindness of manner
and self-sacrificing love is most vividly depicted in the words and conduct of the two
women. Ruth’s determination is stedfast to cast in her lot with the people of the Lord
(compare the marginal references and Mat_15:22-28).
102

103. CLARKE, "And Orpah kissed her mother-in-law - The Septuagint add, Και
επεστρεψεν εις τον λαον αυτης, And returned to her own people. The Vulgate, Syrian,
and Arabic, are to the same purpose.
GILL, "And they lifted up their voice, and wept again,.... Not being able to
bear the thought of parting, or that they must be obliged to it:
and Orpah kissed her mother in law; gave her the parting kiss, as the Jews (e)
call it; and which was used by other people (f); but not without affection to her, and
took her leave of her, as her kiss testified, since it must be so; and being moved by
her reasons, and having a greater inclination to her own country than Ruth had; of
the kiss at parting, see Gen_31:28.
but Ruth clave unto her; hung about her, would not part from her, but cleaved
unto her in body and mind; forsaking her own people, and her father's house; neither
the thought of them, nor of her native country, nor of not having an husband, or any
likelihood of it, nor of poverty and distress, had any manner of influence upon her,
but determined she was to go and abide with her.
HENRY, "5. Orpah was easily persuaded to yield to her own corrupt inclination,
and to go back to her country, her kindred, and her father's house, now when she
stood fair for an effectual call from it. They both lifted up their voice and wept again
(Rth_1:14), being much affected with the tender things that Naomi had said. But it
had a different effect upon them: to Orpah it was a savour of death unto death; the
representation Naomi had made of the inconveniences they must count upon if they
went forward to Canaan sent her back to the country of Moab, and served her as an
excuse for her apostasy; but, on the contrary, it strengthened Ruth's resolution, and
her good affection to Naomi, with whose wisdom and goodness she was never so
charmed as she was upon this occasion; thus to her it was a savour of life unto life.
(1.) Orpah kissed her mother-in-law, that is, took an affectionate leave of her, bade
her farewell for ever, without any purpose to follow her hereafter, as he that said he
would follow Christ when he had buried his father or bidden those farewell that were
at home. Orpah's kiss showed she had an affection for Naomi and was loth to part
from her; yet she did not love her well enough to leave her country for her sake. Thus
many have a value and affection for Christ, and yet come short of salvation by him,
because they cannot find in their hearts to forsake other things for him. They love
him and yet leave him, because they do not love him enough, but love other things
better. Thus the young man that went away from Christ went away sorrowful, Mat_
19:22. But, (2.) Ruth clave unto her. Whether, when she came from home, she was
resolved to go forward with her or no does not appear; perhaps she was before
determined what to do, out of a sincere affection for the God of Israel and to his law,
of which, by the good instructions of Naomi, she had some knowledge.
BENSON, "Ruth 1:14. Kissed — Departed from her with a kiss. Bade her
farewell for ever. She loved Naomi; but she did not love her so well as to quit her
country for her sake. Thus many have a value for Christ, and yet come short of
salvation by him, because they cannot find in their hearts to forsake other things
103

104. for him. They love him, and yet leave him, because they do not love him enough,
but love other things better.
PULPIT, "And they, the daughters-in-law, lifted up their voice in unison and
unity, as if instead of two voices there had been but one. Hence the propriety of
the singular number, as in Ruth 1:9. And wept again. The "again" doubles back
on the statement in Ruth 1:9. With uplifted voice, in shrill Oriental wail, and
amid streams of tears, they bemoaned their hapless lot. Then, after the paroxysm
of grief had somewhat spent itself, Orpah yielded to her mother-in-law's
dissuasives, and at length imprinted on her, reluctantly and passionately, a
farewell kiss. Then, not waiting to ascertain the ultimate decision of Ruth, or
rather, perhaps, having now a fixed presentiment what it would be, she moved
regretfully and tearfully away. She was afraid, perhaps, that if she, as well as
Ruth, should insist on accompanying her mother-in-law, the two might be
unreasonably burdensome to the aged widow. Perhaps, too, she was not without
fear that her own burden in a foreign land, amid strangers, might be too heavy
to be borne. There is not, however, the slightest need for supposing that she was,
in any respect, deficient in attachment to her mother-in-law. But, it is added,
Ruth clave to her mother-in-law, all reasonings, remonstrances, dissuasives on
Naomi's part notwithstanding. Ruth would not be parted from her. "Clave." It is
the same word that is used in the primitive law of marriage. "Therefore shall a
man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they shall
be one flesh" (Genesis 2:24). It occurs again in Psalms 63:8 : "My soul followeth
hard after thee; and in Psalms 119:31 : "I have stuck to thy testimonies." Joshua
said, "Cleave unto the Lord thy God" (Joshua 23:8); and many have had sweet,
while others have had bitter, experience of the truth that "there is a friend that
sticketh closer than a brother" (Proverbs 18:24).
LANGE, "Ruth 1:14. But Ruth clave unto her. Orpah suffers herself to be
persuaded, and goes; but Ruth remains, and will not leave her. The result of
Naomi’s tears Isaiah, that Orpah takes leave of her, and that Ruth clings to her
only the more closely. The hopelessness of the future, on which the mother had
dilated, leads Orpah back to Moab, but suffers Ruth to go with her to Israel. All
that Naomi had said, her solitariness, poverty, sorrow, only served to attach her
more firmly. Orpah too was attached and well disposed; but still, with eyes of
love, although she had them, she yet saw herself, while Ruth saw only the
beloved one. It might be said with a certain degree of truth, that the same cause
induced Orpah to go and Ruth to remain, the fact, namely, that Naomi had no
longer either son or husband. The one wished to become a wife again, the other
to remain a daughter. Few among the natural children of men are as kind and
good as Orpah; but a love like that of Ruth has scarcely entered the thoughts of
poets. Antigone dies for love of her brother; but the life which awaited Ruth was
more painful than death. Alcestis sacrifices herself for her husband, and Sigune
104

105. (in the Parcival of Wolfram v. Eschenbach) persistently continues in a solitary
cell, with the corpse of her lover whom she had driven into battle, until she dies;
but Ruth goes to a foreign land and chooses poverty, not for a husband or a
lover, but for the mother of him who long since was torn away from her. She
refuses to leave her for the very reason that she is poor, old, and childless.
Naomi, having lost her sons, shall not on that account lose her daughters also.
Rather than leave her to suffer alone, Ruth will starve with, or beg for her. Here
is love for the dead and the living, surpassing that of Alcestis and Sigune. That
Ruth does for her mother-in-law, what as the highest filial love the poet invents
for Antigone, when he represents her as not leaving her blind father, is in actual
life almost unexampled. Nor would it be easy to find an instance of a deeper
conflict than that which love had to sustain on this occasion. The foundation of it
was laid when Elimelech left his people in order not to share their woes. It was
rendered inevitable, when, against the law of Israel, his sons took wives of the
daughters of Moab. It broke out when the men died. Their love for their
Israelitish husbands had made the women strangers in their native land; and the
love of Naomi for her Moabitish daughters made her doubly childless in Israel.
Nationality, laws, and custom, were about to separate mother- and daughters-in-
law. But as love had united them, so also love alone has power to solve the
conflict, but only such a love as Ruth’s. Orpah escapes the struggle by returning
to Moab; Ruth ends it by going with Naomi.
WHJEDON, "14. Orpah kissed her mother-in-law — The last sad kiss of a
tearful separation; after which she, unlike Ruth, turned back again to her people
and her gods. The great deity of the Moabites was Chemosh. Numbers 21:29;
Judges 11:24.
But Ruth clave unto her — She would not leave nor forsake her. It was not
merely because of a tender affection for her mother in law that she clung to her,
but also a yearning desire to know more of the God and land of Israel. Compare
Ruth 2:11-12. Like Martha and Mary of New Testament history. Orpah and
Ruth represent two different types of character. Orpah’s home attachments, and
desire to find rest in another husband’s house, control and limit her life-
influence and action. Ruth’s loftier spirit discerns in the God of Israel the
fountain of a purer religion than the Moabitish idolatry affords, and gladly
forsakes father and mother and sister and native land to identify herself in any
way with the people of Jehovah. Thus it is that, in some decisive moment, every
soul that attains salvation makes its choice, by which it adopts the true Jehovah
as its portion. It abandons all the former idolatries of its life, and becomes a true
worshipper of the true God.
BI, "Orpah kissed her mother-in-law; but Ruth clave unto her.
Orpah’s defection
I. Worldly respects are great hindrances in the course of godliness. The world
105

106. keepeth from the entertaining of the truth (Mat_22:5); it hindereth in the receiving
of it.
II. An unsound heart may for a time make a fair show in the way to Canaan, but yet
turn back at the last, as Orpah doth here. And this is by reason, first, of certain
motions of religion, which maketh them in general to approve of the same; holding
this, that it is a good thing to be religious, and that none can find fault with a man for
that. Further, the working of the Word, moving the heart in some sort to entertain it.
And, lastly, the desire of praise and good esteem with men: these will make hollow
hearts to set on a while to heavenward, but shall not be able to enter.
III. Such as want soundness towards God for religion may yet have otherwise
commendable parts in them. For Orpah is commended for a kind wife, as well as
Ruth by Naomi, and for a kind daughter-in-law (verse 8); and she showed good
humanity in going on the way with her mother-in-law, yea, a good natural affection
in weeping so at parting. (R. Bernhard.)
Orpah; or, the mere professor
An onlooker not able to discover the difference between Orpah and Ruth so far. The
crisis has come. Both had made professions (verse 10). Here the difference is made
apparent.
I. We learn that it is possible to go a long way towards Christianity and yet not to be a
Christian. To be born, educated, and dwell in Christian households, these are great
blessings, but do not constitute or make a Christian. It will not do to be almost, we
must be altogether, decided for Christ. The cup that is almost sound will not hold
water. The ship that is almost whole will not weather the storm. Feelings, sentiment,
profession are all good if they spring from a living faith in Jesus Christ; without this
they are worse than worthless.
II. We learn that it is possible to deceive ourselves, and to think that all is right when
in truth all is wrong with our souls. Hardly possible that Orpah played the conscious
hypocrite. She meant what she did when she became a proselyte—did not
deliberately act a part. Feeling and sentiment (love for her husband) blinded her
eyes. Love to God, which she had thought supreme in her heart, subordinate to the
love of Moab. This often so with men; they are not hypocrites, they are self-deceivers.
Education, circumstances, the force of influences around them, produce an
emotional religion which they mistake for vital godliness. They hear with joy like the
“stony-ground hearers.”
III. We learn that our religion will not profit us at all unless it be characterised by
perseverance to the end. Improvement: Is our profession a mere profession or the
fruit of a living faith? Brought by circumstances to the boundary-line between life
and death, have we stopped there? The Bible full of such instances. Felix trembled;
Balaam prophesied; Herod heard gladly; Judas sat at the sacramental table with our
Lord! Whatever we do, we must not stop short of conversion; if we do, we perish.
(Aubrey C. Price, B. A.)
A good word for Orpah
The others did not greatly blame her, and we, for our part, may not reproach her. It is
unnecessary to suppose that in returning to her kinsfolk and settling down to the
tasks that offered in her mother’s house she was guilty of despising truth and love
106

107. and renouncing the best. We may reasonably imagine her henceforth bearing witness
for a higher morality, and affirming the goodness of the Hebrew religion among her
friends and acquaintances. Ruth goes where affection and duty lead her; but for
Orpah too it may be claimed that in love and duty she goes back. She is not one who
says, “Moab has done nothing for me; Moab has no claim upon me; I am free to leave
my country; I am under no debt to my people.” We shall not take her as a type of
selfishness, worldliness, or backsliding, this Moabite woman. Let us rather believe
that she knew of those at home who needed the help she could give, and that with the
thought of least hazard to herself mingled one of the duty she owed to others. (R. A.
Watson, M. A.)
15 “Look,” said Naomi, “your sister-in-law is
going back to her people and her gods. Go back
with her.”
CLARKE, "Gone back - unto her gods - They were probably both idolaters,
their having been proselytes is an unfounded conjecture. Chemosh was the grand idol
of the Moabites. The conversion of Ruth probably commenced at this time.
GILL, "And she said,.... That is, Naomi to Ruth, after Orpah was gone:
behold, thy sister in law is gone back unto her people, and unto her gods;
meaning Orpah, who was the wife of her husband's brother, as the word used
signifies; she was not only on the road turning back to her own country and people,
but to the gods thereof, Baalpeor or Priapus, and Chemosh, Num_21:29 from whence
Aben Ezra concludes, that she had been a proselyte to the true religion, and had
renounced the gods of her nation, and retained the same profession while her
husband lived, and unto this time, and now apostatized, since she is said to go back
to her gods; and in this he is followed by some Christian interpreters (g), and not
without reason:
return thou after thy sister in law: this she said, not that in good earnest she
desired her to return, at least to her former religion, only relates, though not as
approving of, the conduct of her sister, rather as upbraiding it; but to try her
sincerity and steadfastness, when such an instance and example was before her.
HENRY, "6. Naomi persuades Ruth to go back, urging, as a further inducement,
her sister's example (Rth_1:15): Thy sister-in-law has gone back to her people, and
therefore of course gone back to her gods; for, whatever she might do while she lived
with her mother-in-law, it would be next to impossible for her to show any respect to
the God of Israel when she went to live among the worshippers of Chemosh. Those
that forsake the communion of saints, and return to the people of Moab, will
107

108. certainly break off their communion with God, and embrace the idols of Moab. Now,
return thou after thy sister, that is, “If ever thou wilt return, return now. This is the
greatest trial of thy constancy; stand this trial, and thou art mine for ever.” Such
offences as that of Orpah's revolt must needs come, that those who are perfect and
sincere may be made manifest, as Ruth was upon this occasion.
COFFMAN, "RUTH GOES WITH NAOMI
"And she said, Behold, thy sister-in-law is gone back unto her people, and unto
unto her god; return thou after thy sister-in-law. And Ruth said, Entreat me not
to leave thee, and to return from following after thee; for whither thou goest, I
will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge; thy people shall be my people, and
thy God my God; where thou diest, I will die, and there will I be buried; Jehovah
do so to me and more also, if aught but death part thee and me. And when she
saw that she was stedfastly minded to go with her, she left off speaking unto
her."
"Return thou after thy sister-in-law" (Ruth 1:15). Naomi was still entreating
Ruth to return, but Ruth replied to that with a command of her own, "Entreat
me not to leave thee"!
"Entreat me not to leave thee" (Ruth 1:16). These are the opening words of one
of the most magnificent declarations of loving loyalty to be found anywhere in
the literature of all mankind. This writer has heard them intoned on the occasion
of a hundred weddings, 3,000 years after Ruth spoke them, and as Hubbard
stated it, "These words tower as a majestic monument of faithfulness,"[23] rising
supremely above all of the prosaic platitudes of a thousand libraries.
"Thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God" (Ruth 1:16). "This means
she will join in Naomi's religion. She is determined to be hers "usque ad aras" -
to the very altars. Thy God shall be my God, and farewell to all the gods of
Moab, which are vanity and a lie."[24]
"Jehovah do so to me, and more also, if aught but death part thee and me" (Ruth
1:17). The form of this ancient oath is found only in the books of Samuel and
Kings (1 Samuel 14:44; 20:13; 1 Kings 19:2; 20:10). The great significance of it is
that, "Ruth does not say [~'Elohiym] (God) as foreigners do, but [~Yahweh]
(Jehovah), indicating that Ruth is the follower of the true God."[25] The Book of
Ruth is so written that one naturally anticipates that the narrative will
subsequently reveal some special reward from Jehovah for this most remarkable
confession of faith and devotion. In this, we are not disappointed.
"One further word about Ruth's immortal words. They encompassed both the
vertical and horizontal dimensions of life. In geography, they covered all future
locations. In chronology, they extended from the present into eternity. In
108

109. theology, they embraced exclusively Jehovah the God of Israel. In genealogy,
they merged the young Moabitess with Naomi's family, securely sealing all exits
with an oath."[26]
"The Lord do so to me, and more also, if aught but death part thee and me."
(Ruth 1:17). Yes, indeed, Ruth honored this vow, and what a blessing she proved
to be for Naomi. At the very moment when Naomi had been tempted to believe
that God was against her, He was preparing wonderful things for her future. "In
her old age, Naomi was honored and nourished in the house of the wealthy Boaz
where she became the nurse of Ruth's son, the grandfather of King David (Ruth
4:16)."[27]
BENSON, "Ruth 1:15. Is gone back to her people and to her gods — By this it
appears, if Orpah had been a proselyte to the Jewish religion, she afterward
apostatized. Those that forsake the communion of saints will certainly break off
their communion with God. Return thou after thy sister-in-law — This she said
to try Ruth’s sincerity and constancy, and in order that she might intimate to her
that if she went with her she must be firm in her attachment to the true religion.
COKE, "Ruth 1:15. Thy sister-in-law is gone back unto her people, and unto her
gods— It is not by any means a just consequence from hence, that Orpah had
never been proselyted to the Jewish religion. The contrary is a much more
natural deduction; for if she had not once left them, she could not have returned
to them. Ruth continued steadfast to the faith that she had embraced; Orpah
returned back to Moab and to Chemosh. They who consider the friendless and
forlorn state of Naomi, will not wonder much at her solicitude that her daughters
should remain in their own country, and amidst their friends; where, doubtless,
they might have continued to profess the true religion had they been inclined to
do so. That state of Naomi, however, adds great lustre to the piety and filial
affection of Ruth.
REFLECTIONS.—Naomi, having heard that plenty was again restored to Israel,
1. Resolves to return to her own country. Moab was now a land of sorrow to her;
every object around her renewed the bitter remembrance of her losses, and no
comforter was near, who, with discourse of holy resignation to Israel's God,
could alleviate her griefs. Note; (1.) They, who are compelled for a time to dwell
among those who are strangers to God, ought to embrace the first moment of
liberty to return to God's people and ordinances. (2.) Change of place is often a
useful assistant in calming the griefs which are exasperated by the sight of
objects that remind us of those who are taken from us. (3.) When God afflicts, it
is good to examine whether something in us has not brought his rod upon us. (4.)
It is even a mercy to have this land of our sojourning embittered to us, that we
may be more weaned from earth, and have our conversation in heaven.
109

110. 2. Her daughters accompany her to the borders of Moab; and there Naomi with
tender affection intends to dismiss them, praying God to give them a comfortable
settlement, each in the house of her husband; and acknowledging, to their great
commendation, the affection that they had shewn to the living and the dead, as
good wives and dutiful daughters. They kiss, embrace, then burst into a flood of
tears, the involuntary effusion of tenderness, which cannot bear the heart-
breaking separation from those we love. Note; (1.) When friends part in prayer,
they may comfortably hope, either in time or eternity, to meet in praise. (2.)
They, who conscientiously fulfil their relative duties in life, will have the comfort
of it in a parting hour. (3.) Though the parting of tender and affectionate friends
is painful, it is a kind of pleasing pain, of which we wish not to be insensible.
3. Unable to support the thought of parting, they both resolve to accompany her;
but Naomi, fearful lest they should afterwards repent the hasty resolution, and
perhaps to try whether they had any desire after the worship of the God of Israel
as their motive, seeks to dissuade, and advises them to weigh the matter well
before they determined. They could hope for nothing with her. God's afflicting
hand was upon her, her circumstances distressed, and no provision for them in
Beth-lehem, which grieved her more for their sakes than her own. Such a
remonstrance produced a fresh torrent of tears. Orpah, though affectionately
attached to Naomi, discouraged now by the difficulties, kisses her, and returns.
Ruth, more determined, refuses to go back, and resolves to cleave to her. Note;
(1.) Hasty resolutions are easily broken. (2.) Tender hearts can better bear want
themselves, than see those whom they love exposed to it. (3.) They who would
follow Christ ought first to count the cost. (4.) Many say, I will go with thee, who,
on the first difficulties, turn back, and walk no more with Jesus. (5.) The
difficulties of the way will bind the faithful soul closer to the Saviour.
4. To make the last essay of Ruth's determined purpose, Naomi again urges her
to return, and pleads her sister's example, who was returned to her people and
her gods. But Ruth was fixed, and her choice unalterable. She begs her mother to
desist from dissuading her. "Though the place be distant, and the country
unknown, I will go with thee; if thy lodging be a cottage, I seek no better
covering; thy people shall be my people, in their manners, customs, and religion;
and thy God, my God, renouncing every abomination of Moab, and owning
Israel's God alone: Never will I quit thee; on the same spot our dying eyes shall
close, and in the same grave our kindred dust shall mingle, and make the clods of
the valley sweeter by the union." Such is her purpose; and, to prevent farther
entreaty, she binds her soul by a solemn vow, never but by death to part from
her. Note; (1.) Nothing will be able to separate the faithful heart from Jesus; no,
not death itself. (2.) They are truly our enemies who seek to turn us back from
God and godliness. (3.) When we give up our hearts to God, and choose our
portion among God's poor people, then in life or death we shall surrender
110

111. ourselves up to be disposed of by him as shall please him, content in every
station, and welcoming every cross.
5. Naomi, satisfied now, attempts no more to dissuade her: happy, no doubt, to
hear her daughter's pious choice; and glad, amidst every distress, to bring her to
the worship of Israel's God, and to the communion of his people.
PULPIT, "And she said, Behold, thy sister-in-law is gone back to her people, and
to her gods: return thou after thy sister-in-law. The expression that stands in
King James's version thus, "and to her gods," is rendered by Dr. Cassel "and to
her God." The same interpretation, it is noteworthy, is given in the Targum of
Jonathan, who renders the expression, "and to her Fear" ( ‫הּ‬ ָ‫רּ‬ְ‫ל‬ַ‫ח‬ ְ‫דּ‬ ‫ַת‬‫ו‬ְ‫.)וּל‬ Such a
translation assumes that the Moabites were not only theists, but monotheists.
And yet in the mythology, or primitive theology, of Moab, we read both of Baal-
Peor and of Chemosh. As to the former, see Numbers 25:8, Numbers 25:5;
Deuteronomy 4:3; Psalms 106:28; Hosea 9:10. As to the latter, see 11:24; 1 Kings
11:7, 1 Kings 11:33; Jeremiah 48:7, Jeremiah 48:13. In Numbers, moreover,
Numbers 21:29, and in Jeremiah 48:46, the Moabites are called the people of
Chemosh, and frequently is their national god called Chemosh in the inscription
of King Mesha on the Moabitish Stone, so recently discovered and deciphered. It
is supposed, not without reason, that the two names belonged to one deity,
Chemosh being the old native name. Nevertheless, the translation "to her god" is
an interpretation, not a literal rendering, and, on the other hand, the translation
"to her gods" would, on the hypothesis of the monotheism of the Moabites, be
unidiomatic. The original expression, "to her Elohim," does not tell anything,
and was not intended by Naomi to tell anything, or to hint anything, of a
numerical character concerning the object or objects of the Moabitish worship.
It was an expression equally appropriate whether there was, or was not, a
plurality of objects worshipped. It might be liberally rendered, and to her own
forms of religious worship. The word elohim was a survival of ancient
polytheistic theology and worship, when a plurality of powers were held in awe.
"For," says Fuller, "the heathen, supposing that the whole world, with all the
creatures therein, was too great a diocese to be daily visited by one and the same
deity, they therefore assigned sundry gods to several creatures." The time
arrived, however, when the great idea flashed into the Hebrew mind, The Powers
are One and hence the plural noun, with its subtended conception of unity,
became construed with verbs and adjectives in the singular number. It was so
construed when applied to the one living God; but it readily retained its original
applicability to a plurality of deifies, and hence, in such a passage as the one
before us, where there is neither adjective nor verb to indicate the number, the
word is quite incapable of exact rendering into English. Orpah had returned to
her people and her Elohim. Return thou after thy sister-in-law. Are we then to
suppose that Naomi desired Ruth to return to her Moabitish faith? Is it with a
111

112. slight degree of criticism that she referred to Orpah's palinode? Would she
desire that Ruth should, in this matter, follow in her sister-in-law's wake? We
touch on tender topics. Not unlikely she had all along suspected or seen that
Orpah would not have insuperable religious scruples. And not unlikely, too, she
would herself be free from narrow religious bigotry, at least to the extent of
dimly admitting that the true worship of the heart could reach the true God,
even when offensive names, and forms, and symbolisms were present in the outer
courts of the creed. Nevertheless, when she said to Ruth, "Return thou after thy
sister-in-law," she no doubt was rather putting her daughter-in-law to a final
test, and leading her to thorough self-sifting, than encouraging her to go back to
her ancestral forms of worship. "God," says Fuller, "wrestled with Jacob with
desire to be conquered; so Naomi no doubt opposed Ruth, hoping and wishing
that she herself might be foiled."
PULPIT, "Ruth 1:15-22
Devoted attachment.
I. Ruth was fixed in her desire and determination to CAST IS HER LOT WITH
HER DESOLATE AND DESTITUTE MOTHER-IN-LAW. The absolute
unselfishness of this determination is noteworthy, for—
1. Be it noted that Naomi was not one of those who are always murmuring and
complaining because they do not receive sufficient consideration.
2. Still less did she claim as a right, or urge as a duty, that her daughter-in-law
should become her companion in travel, and wait upon her as an attendant.
3. On the contrary, she was careful to put Ruth in an attitude of entire freedom,
so that, if she had a secret wish to go back to her Moabitish friends, she could
have gratified her desire without laying herself open to the imputation of
coldness or ingratitude.
4. Ruth was tested nevertheless, as all of us in our respective relations have either
already been or will be. Eve, for instance, was emphatically tested. So was Adam.
112

113. Abraham too. Joseph also. Very particularly the second Adam, our Lord Jesus
Christ, when he was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness. Judas was tested
when the demon of cupidity entered into his heart. So was Peter when he stood
warming himself at the fire in the court of the high priest's palace. All who are
tried are tested. And all men without exception have to endure trial and trials. It
was as regards the strength of her attachment to her mother-in-law that Ruth
was tested. Not only did Naomi hold out no hopes of home-comfort in Judah, she
expressly said, dissuasively, when Orpah had gone back, "Behold, thy sister-in-
law has gone back to her people, and to her Elohim: return thou after thy sister-
in-law" (verse 15).
5. Ruth stood the test. Not so did Eve. Not so Adam. But Abraham stood it. So
Joseph. Emphatically did Jesus stand it, so that lib knows how to succor those
who are tempted. Judas did not stand the test Nor at first did Peter, though
afterwards He repented, and, when reconverted, was able to strengthen his
brethren. Ruth, for love to Naomi, was able to say in her heart, "Farewell,
Melchom! Farewell, Chemosh! Farewell, Moab! Welcome, Israeli Welcome,
Canaan! Welcome, Bethlehem!" (Fuller).
6. She witnessed a good and most noble confession of love and devotedness (see
verses 16, 17). She said, "Insist not on me forsaking thee; for whither thou goest,
I will go; wheresoever thou lodgest, I will lodge; thy people is my people, and thy
God my God: where thou diest, will I die, and there will I be buried. So may
Yahveh do to me, and still more, if aught but death part thee and me."
"Nothing," says Matthew Henry, "could be said more fine, more brave."
"Truly," says Dr. Kitto, "the simple eloquence of the mouth that speaks out of
the abundance of the heart never found more beautiful and touching expression
than in these words of this young widow" ('Daily Bible-Illustrations'). "Her
vow," says S. Cox, "has stamped itself on the very heart of the world; and that
not because of the beauty of its form simply, though even in our English version
it sounds like a sweet and noble music, but because it expresses in a worthy form,
and once for all, the utter devotion of a genuine and self-conquering love. It is the
spirit which informs and breathes through these melodious words that make
them so precious to us, and that also renders it impossible to utter any fitting
comment on them". Be it borne in mind that something of the same enthusiasm
of love, that dwelt in the heart of Ruth, should be found in the center of every
home. Wheresoever a heart is swayed and dominated by the might and mastery
of a great affection, the entire character becomes clothed with mingled dignity
and beauty.
113

114. II. THE ENTRY OF THE TWO WIDOWS INTO BETHLEHEM. There was no
more talk, no more thought, of turning back. The hearts of the two widows were
locked together forever. Hence they traveled on from stage to stage, until, worn
and wearied, they entered Bethlehem.
1. Note the effect on the citizens, especially the female portion of them (see verse
19). Naomi, passing along through the streets, was recognized. The news flew
from individual to individual, from house to house, from lane to lane. There was
a running to and fro of excited mothers and maidens. All were eager to see the
returned emigrant, and her pensive Moabitish companion. Her old
acquaintances, in particular, when they had seen and identified her, broke up
into groups, and talked, and said, Is that Naomi? That, Naomi I Is this Naomi?
This, Naomi! "So unlike is the rose when it is withered to what it was when it
was blooming."
2. Note the effect on Naomi herself. As she looked on old scenes, and witnessed
the excitement and commotion of old neighbors and acquaintances, her heart felt
overwhelmed within her, and she said to the sympathizing friends who clustered
around her, "Call me not Naomi, call me Mara: for the Almighty hath dealt very
bitterly with me" (see verses 20, 21). But it surely will be permitted to us not only
to mingle our tears with those of the afflicted widow, but likewise to pause
reverently ere we unreservedly accept or endorse her attribution of all her trials
and woes to the hand and heart of the Lord. It should nevertheless be borne in
mind that even those trials that come most directly from men's own acts or
choices come to pass by the permission of the Almighty, and are so overruled by
him that they will be made to work for good to them who love him (Romans
8:28).
LANGE, "Ruth 1:15. Thy sister-in-law returned home to her people and to her
God. In these remarkable words lies the key to the understanding of Ruth
1:11-13. Her daughters had said to her ( Ruth 1:10), “We will go with thee to thy
people.” It grieves Naomi to be obliged to tell them, with all possible tenderness,
that in the sense in which they mean it, this is altogether impossible. It was
necessary to intimate to them that a deeper than merely national distinction
compels their present parting: that what her sons had done in Moab, was not
customary in Israel; that her personal love for them was indeed so great, that she
would gladly give them other sons, if she had them, but that the people of Israel
was separated from all other nations by the God of Israel. Orpah understood
this. Strong as her affection for Naomi was, her natural desire for another
114

115. resting-place in a husband’s house was yet stronger; and as she could not hope
for this in Israel, she took leave and went back. For the same reason, Naomi now
speaks more plainly to Ruth: thy sister-in-law returned home to her people and
to her God. It is not that we belong to different nations, but that we worship
different Gods, that separates us here at the gates of Israel.
BI, "Thy sister-in-law is gone back unto her people, and unto her gods.
Backsliding
1. The backslidings of such as set out fair, and do begin well, is a sore temptation
to young converts and proselytes. It was no less to the very disciples themselves
(Joh_6:66-67). Thus it was also an occasion of stumbling unto the primitive
Christians to behold the backslidings of two such forward professors as
Hymenaeus and Philetus had been; insomuch that the apostle saith to them,
“Nevertheless the foundation” (of God’s election) “standeth sure; the Lord
knoweth them that are His,” etc. As the multitude of sinners cannot give any
patronage to the evil ways of sin, so neither can the paucity of saints put any
disgrace or disparagement upon the good ways of God.
2. Some forward followers of the only true and living God may apostatise from
thence to embrace the vanities of the Gentiles.
3. That love to the ways and worship of God is a sincere love which doth undergo
trials and temptations, yet bears up against all: godly Ruth rides out the storm
against wind and tide of both the sister’s pattern and the mother’s precept. (C.
Ness.)
The painful separation
Nothing can be more encouraging to the Christian heart than to see the young setting
out to seek the Lord. It is a beautiful exercise and exhibition of youth. Never do the
morning hours appear so bright or so promising. We cannot suspect the sincerity of
any, and therefore we encourage them to press forward. We have seen these youthful
travellers going with Naomi out of the place where they dwelt, on the way to return
unto the land of Judah. For a time they travel together happily and affectionately.
There is a line which divides Moab from Judah. This is a painful but an inevitable
crisis. The two sisters must separate. There is just such a line in our soul’s history
where similar entire separation must take place. The awakened mind sees its own
sinfulness and need, acknowledges the darkness and emptiness of the Moab in which
it has dwelt, and truly feels the importance of those blessed offers which the gospel
proclaims. The Holy Spirit has taught the sinner the guiltiness and wretchedness of
his past life. He knows, he sees, he feels the truth. But he does not love the truth. He
does not embrace and choose it for his own, his portion for ever. If he would really do
this, all would be well. His heart he cannot, will not, give to Christ. Anything else he
will do. But nothing else will avail him anything. Poor Orpah! How often have I seen
young travellers to eternity stopping just where you stop; hesitating just where you
hesitate. Nothing more can be done for you where you are. There is Moab. You have
tried that, and found it empty and unhappy. There is Judah. All its provisions and
offers are before you, and brought for your acceptance. Never will you be sorry if you
take your portion there. Here are Naomi and Ruth. They are journeying to the land
which the Lord hath promised them. Soon they will be far from you, out of your
sight. Then you will mourn over the separation which you foolishly made. You may
115

116. go back to Moab, and bury yourself in its sins and follies. But you will find no peace
or happiness there. Your conscience will never again allow you to rest. Orpah goes
“back to her people and her gods.” This is a most important fact in her history. She
does not, cannot remain where they part. That is a place most unnatural and
unattractive. No; she goes back, while Ruth and Naomi go forward. The separation
grows wider every hour. This is a most affecting illustration. The awakened and
convinced mind can never abide at the line where a Saviour is refused. There is no
permanency in such a state of mind. There is no home for the soul there. You go
back. It may be to self-indulgence, dissipation, and sensual delights. It may be to
giddiness, frivolity, and empty, cheerless mirth. It may be to business, covetousness,
and unceasing occupation. It may be to infidelity and assumed unbelief and
argument. It may be to open hostility and persecution of the gospel, and those who
love it. It may be to absolute and dreadful hardness of heart. But to whatever it shall
be, you still go back. The worst opposers of the gospel we ever meet are those who
once were almost Christians. But you say you will hereafter return to Christ. You
cannot do this but by His own Spirit. And that Spirit you have driven far from you.
There is a spring that returneth in creation when the winter has gone. But you have
buried the sacred seed of your soul’s welfare beneath a winter which knows no
coming spring. You will mourn at the last, when your flesh and your body are
consumed. But it will be with a worldly sorrow which worketh death, and not with a
godly sorrow which worketh repentance unto salvation. This is the fearful prospect in
your return with Orpah. (S. H. Tyng, D. D.)
Orpah
I. Orpah was a Moabitish woman—had been married to one of the sons of
Elimelech—and was now a widow. She had been brought up amid the absurdities and
impurities and superstitions of idolatry. But her connection with an Israelitish family
was a great advantage to her, and ought to have been improved by her, to the benefit
of her soul, and deemed a peculiar privilege and blessing. Oh, then, let us associate
with those who live for another world whose spirit and words and conduct diffuse the
savour of heaven, and are calculated to keep God and eternity in our minds.
II. Orpah possessed many natural excellences, which made her lovely and amiable,
though still lacking that new heart and that devotedness to God without which no
man can be saved.
1. Orpah acted well in the character of a wife.
2. Orpah conducted herself with kindness and tenderness and affection towards
her mother-in-law, Naomi, also.
3. Another valuable feature, which we cannot view but with great interest, in the
character of Orpah, was her intention to accompany Naomi to the land of Judah.
It is well to see hopeful beginnings—to see the careless aroused, the indifferent in
some degree alarmed about their sins, and paying more attention than before to
the welfare of their souls. It is well to see the profane putting on the decencies of
morality, and renouncing their vile habits and pursuits. It is well, we say, to see
these hopeful signs. But, alas! they often disappoint our fondest hopes.
III. Orpah’s fatal deficiency, She only began her march to Canaan—her resolution
failed—she persevered not, but returned to her own land! Naomi wished not to
prevent either Ruth or Orpah from accompanying her to Canaan, but from doing so
for her sake. She had no earthly inducement to hold out to them. If they came, she
wished them to come from religious considerations alone. If we take up the cause of
God from any but spiritual motives—if we attach ourselves to the cause and people of
God from earthly views, our religion is hateful in heaven. The “loaves and fishes” are
116

117. to have nothing to do with our pursuit of Christ, but the attractions of His grace—the
privilege of serving Him, and a supreme desire to be His—His alone—His for ever.
1. Orpah forsook the cause of God—she returned to her people. Their maxims
and their habits, after all, were more congenial with her mind. Woe awaits those
who are kept from “following the Lord fully” from regard to earthly connections
and associates.
2. Orpah forsook the cause of God with great reluctance. Agrippa-like, she was
almost persuaded to go with her to the land of Judah, yet, though with many
misgivings, she retraced her steps to her own country, and saw her no more.
Now, with the view of inducing these wavering characters, who are thus daily
withstanding the convictions of their own minds—who return to Moab, but with
many tears—to hasten out of their present condition, we beg to say a few words
concerning their danger. It is a great mercy to have our minds in the smallest
degree impressed with Divine things, and awakened to the importance of the
things which accompany salvation. It is a mercy to be made to feel some measure
of anxiety about our never-dying souls and their everlasting welfare. It is the Holy
Ghost striving with us, and bidding us to consider our peril while yet it may be
avoided. With the view of urging these characters to a speedy determination to be
altogether on the Lord’s side, we beg to add a few remarks likewise concerning
their present folly. When man neglects to follow the admonitions of his
conscience, he deprives himself of all comfort. He cannot enjoy inward
tranquillity in this state. There is something within him constantly telling him
that his end cannot be desirable if a radical spiritual change does not take place in
him. He cannot have real joy in this condition. If your religion resembles that of
Orpah, give God no rest till the weight of your transgression drives you to the
Saviour, and a believing view of His matchless love constrains you to devote your
persons and your talents to His service and glory. (John Hughes.)
Orpah and Ruth
I. Family sorrows.
1. Want.
2. Separation.
3. Death.
II. Family errors.
1. Preference of worldly comfort before religious privileges.
2. Formation of worldly connections.
III. Family attachments.
1. Their power. The amiableness of Naomi has so attached these idolaters to her
that they are willing to forsake even their own mother.
2. Their weakness. The case of Orpah may teach us that an attachment to
religious people is not religion; nor can it, of itself, produce religion in the heart.
IV. Family mercies.
1. The return of moderate prosperity.
2. Converting grace bestowed upon an idolater. (Homilist.)
117

118. The danger of religious indifference
A family perished, not long ago, by a fire in their own house. They were not
consumed by the flames, but suffocated by the smoke. No blaze was visible at all, nor
could any alarming sign of fire be discovered from the street, and yet death came as
effectually upon them as if they had been burned to ashes. Thus is sin fatal in its
consequences, few being destroyed by outrageous forms of it, flaming up with lurid
glare, but multitudes perishing by the stifling smoke of indifference and spiritual
slumber. (J. H. Norton.)
Unto her people, and unto her gods
When Christian set out from the City of Destruction, he too, for a short part of his
journey, was attended by two companions: the first indeed, Obstinate, only went with
him in order to try and bring him back to what he considered wiser courses, but the
other, Pliable, was absolutely sincere in his desire to reach the Celestial City.” I
intend to go along with this good man,” he said, “and to cast in my lot with him”; he
might have availed himself of the words of sincerely-meant devotion in which Orpah
joined with Ruth, and have declared, “Surely I will return with thee unto thy people.”
Yet, as we know, when the pilgrims, “being heedless,” fell into the Slough of
Despondency, poor Pliable, his virtuous intentions notwithstanding, “gave a
desperate struggle or two, and got out of the mire, on that side of the Slough which
was next to his own house. So away he went, and Christian saw him no more.” There
are one or two particulars in which the behaviour of Orpah was not unlike that of
well meaning Pliable. To begin with, there can be no question but that she had a
sincere affection and regard for Naomi, and would genuinely have liked to spend the
remainder of her days in her society; but the attachment was purely personal, and in
all such friendships there is a breaking point, a limit to the extent to which others are
prepared to follow us. For it is only us whom they are following, and our path may
lead us into circumstances more trying than they are prepared to undergo whose
hearts are not buoyed up by the hope which animates our own. Another somewhat
sad reflection respecting the history of Orpah springs from the fact that she actually
started for the better land, and indeed went some considerable way on the journey.
The thought of those fellow-travellers of ours who set out so cheerily with us and yet
failed after all to persevere is one of the saddest that comes into our memory when
we review our pilgrimage. We call to mind their fervour, their enthusiasm, their
kindly interest; we shall never forget how our heart sank within us when they
announced their intention of turning back. And in the case of Orpah our feelings are
the more regretful because we bear in mind that she was full of the best possible
resolutions of going further still. “Surely,” she said, no less earnestly than did Ruth
herself, “Surely we will return with thee unto thy people.” But, as we have already
noticed, the desire in her mind was to be, as she put it, “with thee “; it was the
personal element in her relation to Naomi which, however charming in itself,
constituted the weakness of her position—it was on this rock that her frail vessel was
wrecked at last. Further, if Orpah’s decision pains us, can we remain unmoved at
Orpah’s tears? She is quite clear in her own mind that she can go no further; she will
leave no inconsiderable portion of her heart behind her when she says farewell to
Naomi; she lifted up her voice and wept; she lifted up her voice and wept again. Alas
for the impotence of tears! The question for each to ask himself is not, What have I
felt? but, What have I done? Orpah loved Naomi dearly, and wept bitterly at the
prospect of parting from her, but returned to her people and her gods nevertheless.
And here we must pause to inquire how far Naomi was to blame for the failure of
118

119. Orpah. We recognise the honesty with which the older woman points out to her
companions the sacrifice which they will be called upon to make if they elect to go
further with her. She must have known, she evidently did know, that by turning back
Orpah was losing her reversionary interest in the property of her deceased husband,
yet we do not find Naomi telling her of this. Warn people by all means that life in the
kingdom of heaven is the life of a servant and a soldier, but tell them too that their
entry into the kingdom has made them inheritors of a possession greater and more
real than anything than the world can offer, and which it would be the most fearful
madness to throw away. Love had brought Orpah a long way towards the land of
Judah: might not a little affectionate entreaty have brought her further still? It is
important that before passing away from the story of Orpah we should try to realise
what it was that she lost by turning back. And with the inheritance, redeemed as it
was by Boaz, Orpah had also lost the honour—Ruth’s chiefest glory in the ages yet to
come—of being the ancestress of David and of the Messiah. Of all the promises to
Abraham, that upon which in all probability the patriarch set the greatest store was
God’s pledge that in him all the nations of the world should be blessed. To be an
inheritor of the kingdom of heaven is in itself a marvel of grace, the true meaning of
which we shall never fully know here, but to have it in one’s power to bring
redemption within the reach of others, surely this is an infinitely greater marvel still.
God offers us salvation as the satisfaction of the needs of our own heart; but He also
offers it to us in order that we may be qualified as the possessors of it to work with
Him in plucking from the burning those who are the bondsmen of Satan and of sin.
What answer shall we give to Him that speaketh? (H. A. Hall, B. D.)
The parting-place
Where was it that Orpah parted from her companions? She went with them some
way, possibly a great way, but at last they reached a point in the journey which was
geographically, so to speak, one of decision, one beyond which no one could pass
without committing herself to new things and a new life, and at this point Orpah
made up her mind to return. What more likely than that this point was the river
itself, which if they adopted the southern route would form the boundary between
Moab and the land of Judah? The river flows still, and each pilgrim has to make up
his mind whether or not he shall cross it. There, then, flows the river: shall we cross?
Sometimes it seems to us to be the river of surrender. Can I give myself wholly and
unreservedly to God? And can I give up, or consent to His taking from me, whatever
is contrary to His will and therefore to my happiness, love it as I may? Sometimes the
river is one of confession. We have travelled thus far without our life or our relation
to the world being appreciably affected or altered, and God, who is infinitely tender
in His dealing with the returning soul, often postpones the necessity of or the
occasion for a definite confession of our allegiance to Him until we are strong enough
to make it. Yet sooner or later the river has to be crossed, and the more definitely the
confession is made the better it always is for the soul. And sometimes the river is that
of a consistent life.” I would not shrink from throwing in my lot with that of the
people of God,” says many an one, “if I could only hope to lead a consistent life: I will
make no profession unless I can carry it out, and I fail to see how under my
circumstances that can be possible.” Certainly God requires that those who follow
Him shall follow Him fully, as Caleb did, but God asks no one to lead the life of faith
in his own strength or trusting to his own resources. A new life lies before you; but to
enable you to live it, God offers you new strength. (H. A. Hall, B. D.)
119

120. SIMEON 15-17, "THE CHARACTER OF RUTH
Ruth 1:15-17. She (Naomi) said, Behold, thy sister-in-law is gone back unto her
people, and unto her gods: return thou after thy sister-in-law. And Ruth said, Entreat
me not to leave thee, or to return from following after thee: for whither thou goest, I
will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy
God my God: where thou diest, will I die, and there will I be buried: the Lord do so to
me, and more also, if ought but death part thee and me.
THE study of Scripture characters is very instructive: for, in them, we see human
nature in all its diversified conditions, not as artificially delineated by a brilliant fancy
or a warm imagination, but as really existing, and exhibited to our view. For subjects
of public discussion, too, they are peculiarly favourable; because, in presenting real
scenes, they bring before us circumstances which are of daily occurrence, or which, at
least, are well adapted to shew us how to act, when such circumstances occur. The
partings of friends and relatives are common: and, inasmuch as they give birth to a
great variety of emotions in the mind, they elicit the inward character with great
fidelity. Such is the incident which we are now about to consider, and which will
reflect peculiar light on the dispositions of one, who, though a Moabitess by birth,
was one of the progenitors of our blessed Lord.
From this farewell scene, and the distinguished excellence of Ruth’s behaviour, I
shall be led to mark her character,
I. Simply as here depicted—
In the circumstances before us, she approves herself a pattern,
1. Of filial piety—
[Her mother-in-law, Naomi, had long endeared herself to her; and now was about to
part with her, and to return to the land of Israel. But Ruth would not suffer her to
depart alone, but determined to adhere to her to the latest hour of her life. Nor in this
determination was she biased by any selfish hopes of future aggrandizement. Her
love was altogether pure and disinterested. She well knew, that, though Naomi was
once possessed of opulence, she was now reduced to poverty: nor had Naomi any
surviving son, who might be united to her, and raise up seed to his departed brother.
All this was faithfully represented by Naomi, both to her and to her sister Orpah, in
the most affecting terms: “Naomi said, Turn again, my daughters: why will ye go with
me? Are there yet any more sons in my womb, that they may be your husbands? Turn
again, my daughters; go your way; for I am too old to have an husband. If I should
say, I have hope, if I should have a husband also to-night, and should bear sons,
would ye tarry for them till they were grown? would ye stay for them from having
husbands? Nay, my daughters; for it grieveth me much, for your sakes, that the hand
of the Lord is gone out against me. And they lift up their voice, and wept again [Note:
ver. 11–14.].” But nothing could shake the resolution of Ruth: she determined to
renounce all her old relatives, and the prospects she might have in her native land,
120

121. and to cleave steadfastly to Naomi, even unto death. And the manner in which she
refused to acquiesce in her mother’s proposal was tender and affectionate in the
extreme: “Entreat me not to leave thee, or to return from following after thee.” This,
in other words, was as if she had said, “You know that any request of thine, however
difficult or self-denying it were, would be obeyed with the utmost alacrity: but to ask
me to forsake thee, this is too much: it would break my heart: I could not do it: I pray
you to forbear putting me to so severe a trial: ‘Entreat me not to leave thee;’ for the
alternative, of parting with thee or disobeying thy command, is as a sword in my
bones, a wound which I cannot possibly endure. Be the sacrifice ever so great, I am
ready to make it; I shall delight in making it.”
Thus did this duteous female, from love to her mother, make, in effect, the very reply
which St. Paul, many hundred years afterwards, gave, from love to the Saviour, and
on an occasion not very dissimilar: “What mean ye to weep and to break mine heart?
for I am ready not to be bound only, but also to die at Jerusalem, for the name of the
Lord Jesus [Note: Acts 21:13.].”]
2. Of vital godliness—
[This was at the root, and was the true spring of her determined resolution: “Thy
people shall be my people, and thy God my God.” She had been instructed by her
mother in the knowledge of the true God; and she determined to consecrate herself
to his service, and to take her portion with his people. This was very particularly
noticed by Boaz, as no less conspicuous than her filial piety: “It hath fully been shewn
me all that thou hast done unto thy mother-in-law since the death of thine husband;
and how thou hast left thy father and thy mother, and the land of thy nativity, and art
come unto a people which thou knewest not heretofore: the Lord recompense thy
work; and a full reward be given thee of the Lord God of Israel, under whose wings
thou art come to trust [Note: Ruth 2:11-12.].” Her desire after God was paramount to
every other consideration under heaven. She believed that his people were happy
above all other people: and, whatever she might endure in this life, she determined to
unite with them, and, as far as possible, to participate their lot. Her views of religion
might not be clear: but it is evident that a principle of vital godliness was rooted in
her heart, and powerfully operative in her life. In fact, she acted in perfect conformity
with that injunction that was afterwards given by our Lord, “Whosoever he be of you
that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple [Note: Luke 14:33.].”]
But her character will appear in yet brighter colours, if we consider it,
II. As compared with that of Orpah and Naomi—
Compare it with that of Orpah—
[Orpah loved her mother-in-law; and, at first, determined not to part from her. In
answer to the suggestions of Naomi, she joined with Ruth in saying, “Surely we will
return with thee unto thy people [Note: ver. 10.].” But, when a faithful representation
was given her respecting the sacrifices she would be called to make, she repented of
121

122. her good intentions, and, taking an affectionate leave of her mother-in-law, “returned
to her own people, and to her idol-gods [Note: ver. 15.].” Like the rich youth in the
Gospel, she departed, reluctantly indeed, yet finally and for ever [Note: Matthew
19:21-22.]. “Orpah,” it is said, “kissed her mother-in-law: but Ruth clave unto her
[Note: ver. 14.].” Happy Ruth! “thou didst choose the better part: and never was it
taken from thee [Note: Luke 10:42.],” nor ever hadst thou reason to regret thy choice.
It was wise as that of Moses, when he “chose rather to suffer affliction with the
people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season [Note: Hebrews
11:25.].” We congratulate thee on the strength of thy principles, or rather, on the
grace given thee of the Lord. Unhappy Orpah! we know not what was thy condition in
after life: but, whatever it was, dost thou not now bemoan thine instability? Dost
thou not now wish that thou hadst been faithful to thy convictions, and hadst cast in
thy lot with God’s chosen people? As for thee, Ruth, thou favoured saint, even if thou
hadst been as miserable in after life as thou wast happy, we should have pronounced
thee blessed: but doubly blessed wast thou in the distinctions conferred upon thee in
this world, as earnests of the glory which thou inheritest in the realms of bliss, even
in the bosom of thy descendant, thy Saviour, and thy God.]
Compare it, also, with that of Naomi—
[That Naomi was a pious character, we have no doubt; and amiable too: for by her
conduct she conciliated the regard of both her daughters-in-law, who, though
Moabites by birth, were through her convinced of the superior excellence of the
Jewish religion, and the superior happiness of those who were imbued with it. And
we cannot but earnestly call the attention of Christian parents to this trait of Naomi’s
character. For there are too many, who, whilst they profess godliness, make it odious
to all who come in contact with them, and especially to those who are dependent on
them. Their tempers are so hasty, so imperious, so ungoverned, that their very
daughters are glad of an occasion to get from under their roof. I must tell all such
professors, that they are a disgrace to their profession; and that if religion do not
make us lovely and amiable in all our family relations, it does nothing for us, but
deceives us to our ruin.
Yet I cannot think very highly of Naomi’s character, when I see the advice which she
gave to her daughters. She loved them, it is true: but her love was of too carnal a
nature: for she had more respect to their temporal welfare than to the welfare of their
souls. Some would offer an apology for her; that she only intended to try the sincerity
of their love. But, supposing she had done this in the first instance, which yet she had
no right to do, especially when they had both said, “Surely we will return with thee
unto thy people:” (I say again, she had no right to “cast a stumbling-block in their
way,” and by repeated entreaties to urge their return to their idolatrous friends and
their idol-gods:) but when she saw, unhappily, that she had prevailed with Orpah,
had she any right to urge Ruth to follow her sad example? Should she not rather have
rent her garments, yea, and torn the very hair from her head with anguish, at the
thought of having so fatally prevailed to ruin her daughter’s soul? Should she not
rather have striven to undo what she had done to Orpah, than continue to exert the
same fatal influence with Ruth? Should not the advice of Moses to Hobab have been
hers to both of them, “Come with me, and God will do you good [Note: Numbers
10:29-32.]?” Naomi, thou hast given us a picture too often realized in the present
day: in thee we see a mother more anxious about the providing of husbands for her
daughters, than the saving of their souls. Thou didst love thy daughters, it is true; but
122

123. thy concern for their temporal welfare overpowered all other considerations, and not
only kept thee from leading their minds to God, but actually induced thee to exert
thine influence in opposition to their good desires: thou wast a tempter to them,
when thou shouldest have done all in thy power to keep them from temptation, and
have had thy whole soul bent on securing their everlasting salvation. Beloved Ruth,
we bless God that thou wast enabled to withstand the solicitations given thee, though
from so high a quarter: for we are told by our Lord and Saviour, “He that loveth
father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me [Note: Matthew 10:37.].” Thou
didst well, in that thy refusal was so tender, so affectionate, so respectful: but still
thou didst well, also, that thou wast firm. Thy firmness has reflected a lustre on thy
character: for whilst it detracted nothing from thy filial piety, seeing that “we must
obey God rather than man,” it has shewn how much more pure thy love was than that
of thy mother, and how much more rigid and firm thy piety.]
Address—
1. To parents—
[Learn, I pray you, from Naomi; learn to instruct your children and dependents in
the knowledge of the true God, and to conciliate their regards by the most unwearied
efforts of tenderness and love. But beware how you discourage in them any good
desire. I will grant that there are in Scripture other instances of persons labouring to
counteract the movements of personal affection. Ittai, the Gittite, when following
David in his flight from Absalom, was urged to leave him [Note: 2 Samuel 15:19-21.];
as Elisha also was repeatedly by Elijah previous to his assumption to heaven [Note: 2
Kings 2:2; 2 Kings 2:4; 2 Kings 2:6.]. But there was no positive duty lying upon them,
or, at all events, none which David and Elijah were not at liberty to dispense with.
But Naomi had no right whatever to discourage the pious purposes of her daughters:
if she had chosen to dispense with their attendance on her, she had no authority to
dissuade them from devoting themselves to God. Remember, then, the true limits of
your authority: it may be, and should be, energetically used for God: but it must not,
even in advice, be used against him. Your influence is great; and on it may depend
the salvation of your offspring. Oh, what a grief must it have been to Naomi, in after
life, that she had given such fatal counsel to her apostate daughter! And who can tell
what cause you may have to bewail the discouraging of pious emotions in your
children, even in one single instance? And think not that even piety renders this
caution unnecessary. Rebekah was pious; yet when she feared that her beloved Jacob
would lose the birthright, what a device did she suggest, and with what horrid
impiety did she urge him to adopt it [Note: Genesis 27:12-13.]! Beware, I say, of
following Naomi in this respect; and rather use your influence, like Lois and Eunice,
for the training of your Timothy to the highest attainments of piety and virtue [Note:
2 Timothy 1:5.].]
2. To young people—
[Cultivate, to the utmost, an affectionate and obediential spirit towards your parents.
This is a frame of mind peculiarly pleasing to God. When he enjoined it in the
Decalogue, he wrote it with his own finger on a tablet of stone: and it is distinguished
above all the other commandments by this, that it was “the first commandment with
123

124. promise [Note: Ephesians 6:2.].” The exercise of this spirit pre-eminently
characterized our blessed Lord in his early days: “He went down with his parents to
Nazareth, and was subject unto them [Note: Luke 2:51.].” This is the best return that
you can make to your parents for all the care which they take of you, and all their
labours for your good. Especially, if, like Naomi, they be brought into affliction and
penury, forsake them not then; but rather redouble your attentions to them; and
account no sacrifice too great to make, if by any means you may be a comfort to them
in their declining years.
At the same time be attentive to the concerns of your souls. Embrace the God of
Israel as your God; and worship him, and serve him, and “cleave unto him with full
purpose of heart [Note: Acts 11:23.].” And let no hopes of improving your temporal
condition, either in marriage or in any other way, draw you aside from him.
Renounce all for God; and “count all things but loss for the excellency of the
knowledge of Christ Jesus your Lord.” If others turn from the Lord, and go back unto
the world, do not ye follow them. Even though they be your near relatives, with
whom you have been bound in ties of the closest amity, let them not prevail: yea,
though their prudence be proposed to you as the fittest pattern to follow, and the
proposal come from the highest authority, still be faithful to your convictions; and be
faithful to your God. This will issue most to your satisfaction; this will bring you
peace at the last: for so it is written; “Hearken, O daughter, and incline thine ear:
forget, also, thine own people, and thy father’s house: so will the King greatly desire
thy beauty; for He is thy Lord; and worship thou him [Note: Psalms 45:10-11.].”]
16 But Ruth replied, “Don’t urge me to leave
you or to turn back from you. Where you go I
will go, and where you stay I will stay. Your
people will be my people and your God my God.
CLARKE, "And Ruth said - A more perfect surrender was never made of friendly
feelings to a friend: I will not leave thee - I will follow thee: I will lodge where thou
lodgest - take the same fare with which thou meetest; thy people shall be my people -
I most cheerfully abandon my own country, and determine to end my days in thine. I
will also henceforth have no god but thy God, and be joined with thee in worship, as I
am in affection and consanguinity. I will cleave unto thee even unto death; die where
thou diest; and be buried, if possible, in the same grave. This was a most
extraordinary attachment, and evidently without any secular motive.
The Targum adds several things to this conversation between Naomi and Ruth. I
shall subjoin them: “And Ruth said, Entreat me not to leave thee,” for I desire to
become a proselyte. And Naomi said, We are commanded to keep the Sabbath and
other holy days; and on it not to travel more than two thousand cubits. And Ruth
124

125. said, “Whither thou goest, I will go.” And Naomi said, We are commanded not to
lodge with the Gentiles. Ruth answered, “Where thou lodgest, I will lodge.” And
Naomi said, We are commanded to observe the one hundred and thirteen precepts.
Ruth answered, What thy people observe, that will I observe; as if they had been my
people of old. And Naomi said, We are commanded not to worship with any strange
worship. Ruth answered, “Thy God shall be my God.” Naomi said, We have four
kinds of capital punishment for criminals; stoning, burning, beheading, and hanging.
Ruth answered, “In whatsoever manner thou diest, I will die.” Naomi said, We have a
house of burial. Ruth answered, “And there will I be buried.”
It is very likely that some such conversation as this took place between the elders
and those who were becoming proselytes. This verse is famous among those who
strive to divine by the Bible. I should relate the particulars, but am afraid they might
lead to a continuance of the practice. In my youth I have seen it done, and was then
terrified.
GILL, "And Ruth said, entreat me not to leave thee, or to return from
following after thee,.... Do not make use of any arguments to persuade me to go
back: or "do not meet me", or "be against me" (h); do not meet me with objections, or
be in my way, or an hinderance to me, in going along with thee; do not be against it,
for to be against that was to be against her inclination, desires, and resolutions, and
against her interest:
for whither thou goest I will go: let the country she was going to be what it
would, though unknown to her, and though she should never see her own country
any more:
and where thou lodgest I will lodge; though in ever so mean a cottage, or under
the open air:
thy people shall be my people; whom I shall choose to dwell among, and
converse with; whose religion, laws, and customs she should readily comply with,
having heard much of them, their wisdom, goodness, and piety, of which she had a
specimen and an example in Naomi, and by whom she judged of the rest:
and thy God my God; not Chemosh, nor Baalpeor, nor other gods of the Moabites,
be they what they will, but Jehovah, the God of Naomi, and of the people of Israel. So
a soul that is truly brought to Christ affectionately loves him, and heartily cleaves
unto him, resolves in the strength of divine grace to follow him, the Lamb,
whithersoever he goes or directs; and is desirous to have communion with none but
him, and that he also would not be as a wayfaring man, that tarries but a night; his
people are the excellent of the earth, whom to converse with is all his delight and
pleasure; and Christ's God is his God, and his Father is his Father: and, in a word, he
determines to have no other Saviour but him, and to walk in all his commands and
ordinances.
HENRY, "7. Ruth puts an end to the debate by a most solemn profession of her
immovable resolution never to forsake her, nor to return to her own country and her
old relations again, Rth_1:16, Rth_1:17.
(1.) Nothing could be said more fine, more brave, than this. She seems to have had
another spirit, and another speech, now that her sister had gone, and it is an instance
of the grace of God inclining the soul to the resolute choice of the better part. Draw
125

126. me thus, and we will run after thee. Her mother's dissuasions made her the more
resolute; as when Joshua said to the people, You cannot serve the Lord, they said it
with the more vehemence, Nay, but we will. [1.] She begs of her mother-in-law to say
no more against her going: “Entreat me not to leave thee, or to return from
following after thee; for all thy entreaties now cannot shake that resolution which
thy instructions formerly have wrought in me, and therefore let me hear no more of
them.” Note, It is a great vexation and uneasiness to those that are resolved for God
and religion to be tempted and solicited to alter their resolution. Those that would
not think of it would not hear of it. Entreat me not. The margin reads it, Be not
against me. Note, We are to reckon those against us, and really our enemies, that
would hinder us in our way to the heavenly Canaan. Our relations they may be, but
they cannot be our friends, that would dissuade us from and discourage us in the
service of God and the work of religion. [2.] She is very particular in her resolution to
cleave to her and never to forsake her; and she speaks the language of one resolved
for God and heaven. She is so in love, not with her mother's beauty, or riches, or
gaiety (all these were withered and gone), but with her wisdom, and virtue, and
grace, which remained with her, even in her present poor and melancholy condition,
that she resolves to cleave to her. First, She will travel with her: Whither thou goest I
will go, though to a country I never saw and in a low and ill opinion of which I have
been trained up; though far from my own country, yet with thee every road shall be
pleasant. Secondly, She will dwell with her: “Where thou lodgest I will lodge, though
it be in a cottage, nay, though it be no better a lodging than Jacob had when he had
the stones for his pillow. Where thou settest up thy staff I will set up mine, be it
where it may.” Thirdly, She will twist interest with her: Thy people shall be my
people. From Naomi's character she concludes certainly that the great nation was a
wise and an understanding people. She judges of them all by her good mother, who,
wherever she went, was a credit to her country (as all those should study to be who
profess relation to the better country, that is, the heavenly), and therefore she will
think herself happy if she may be reckoned one of them. “Thy people shall be mine to
associate with, to be conformable to, and to be concerned for.” Fourthly, She will join
in religion with her. Thus she determined to be hers usque ad aras - to the very
altars: “Thy God shall be my God, and farewell to all the gods of Moab, which are
vanity and a lie. I will adore the God of Israel, the only living and true God, trust in
him alone, serve him, and in every thing be ruled by him;” this is to take the Lord for
our God. Fifthly, She will gladly die in the same bed: Where thou diest will I die. She
takes it for granted they must both die, and that in all probability Naomi, as the
elder, would die first, and resolves to continue in the same house, if it might be, till
her days also were fulfilled, intimating likewise a desire to partake of her happiness
in death; she wishes to die in the same place, in token of her dying after the same
manner. “Let me die the death of righteous Naomi, and let my last end be like hers.”
Sixthly, She will desire to be buried in the same grave, and to lay her bones by hers:
There will I be buried, not desiring to have so much as her dead body carried back to
the country of Moab, in token of any remaining kindness for it; but, Naomi and she
having joined souls, she desires they may mingle dust, in hopes of rising together,
and being together for ever in the other world. [3.] She backs her resolution to
adhere to Naomi with a solemn oath: The Lord do so to me, and more also (which
was an ancient form of imprecation), if aught but death part thee and me. An oath
for confirmation was an end of this strife, and would leave a lasting obligation upon
her never to forsake that good way she was now making choice of. First, It is implied
that death would separate between them for a time. She could promise to die and be
buried in the same place, but not at the same time; it might so happen that she might
die first, and this would part them. Note, Death parts those whom nothing else will
part. A dying hour is a parting hour, and should be so thought of by us and prepared
126

127. for. Secondly, It is resolved that nothing else should part them; not any kindness
from her own family and people, nor any hope of preferment among them, not any
unkindness from Israel, nor the fear of poverty and disgrace among them. “No, I will
never leave thee.” Now,
BENSON, "Ruth 1:16-17. Entreat me not to leave thee — For all thy entreaties
cannot shake that resolution which thy instructions, formerly given, have
wrought in me. Whither thou goest, I will go — Though to a country I never saw,
which I have been taught to despise, and far distant from my own country.
Where thou lodgest, I will lodge — Though it be in a cottage; nay, though it be
no better a lodging than Jacob had when he put the stones for his pillow. Thy
people shall be my people — For, judging from what I have seen in thee, I
conclude they must be a wise and understanding people, and I shall think myself
happy if I may be reckoned one of them, may be associated with them, and
conformed to them. And thy God shall be my God — Farewell to Chemosh and
all the gods of Moab, which are vanities and lies. I will adore the God of Israel,
the only living and true God; will trust in him alone, will love and serve him
alone, and in every thing be commanded and ruled by him. Where thou diest will
I die — In the same place, in token of my dying in the same spirit. Let me die the
death of the righteous Naomi, and let my last end be like hers! And there will I
be buried — Not desiring to have so much as my dead body carried back to the
country of Moab, in token of any remaining regard for it. But I will be buried in
the same grave with thee, and my bones shall lie by thine, that, as we have joined
souls, our dust may be mingled, and we may rise together, and remain together
for ever. Happy Naomi, though deprived of her husband and her sons, that has
such a daughter-in-law to comfort her in her widowhood and amidst her
bereavements! And happy Ruth, who has profited so much by the instructions of
her mother-in-law, and who has so fully imbibed the genuine principles and
spirit of the true religion! Surely she was a glorious instance of the grace of God
inclining the soul to a resolute choice of the good part. The Lord do so to me, and
more also — An ancient form this of imprecation, by which Ruth confirms, with
a solemn oath, her resolution to adhere to Naomi till death. She knew that death
would part them for a time, but was resolved that nothing else should; not any
kindness from her own family and people, nor any hope of preferment among
them; nor any unkindness from Israel, nor the fear of poverty and disgrace
among them. No; I will never leave thee.
PETT 16-17, "Ruth firmly sets aside Naomi’s arguments. She begs Naomi not to
entreat her to leave her. Rather she wishes to share in all that Naomi will face in
the future. She will go where she goes. She will lodge where she lodges. Naomi’s
people will be her people, and Naomi’s God will be her God. She will die where
Naomi dies, so much is she committed to Naomi’s Israelite background. And she
will be buried in the same land in which Naomi will be buried. The place where a
person wished to be buried was a sign of the place that they saw as ‘home’. Thus
127

128. this was thus a total commitment to being an Israelite. It was a reasonable
position to take. By marrying a Yahwist she had already had to conform to
Yahwism. And she would be looked on by many as an Israelite, because she had
been incorporated into an Israelite family. The continued stress on the fact that
she was a Moabite is mainly the author’s, for to all intents and purposes to
marry an Israelite and to commence worshipping YHWH and observing the
Feasts was to become an Israelite (Exodus 12:48 - as a woman she would not
require circumcision). It was happening all the time. Compare how Moses had
married, first a Midianite, and then an Egyptian. The author is concerned to
bring out that David had within him Moabite blood, but having said that, that it
was the blood of someone who had chosen to be an Israelite and a Yahwist. It
would be an encouragement to all foreigners (apart from Canaanites) who were
considering becoming Yahwists, and would indicate to them that YHWH would
accept them on equal terms and equally bless them.
Once again we have emphasis laid on the fact that by her decision Ruth, like her
sister-in-law, was choosing which god she served. Indeed Ruth could have gone
back with Naomi but have demanded to serve the god of Moab. But she
committed herself to serving Naomi’s God. This could only be because she had
come truly to believe in YHWH. She wanted to be included in YHWH’s
covenant. As a wife she would have been expected to conform to the worship of
her husband’s God, even if she had retained aspects of her old religious life. But
she could now have chosen to renege on her commitment to YHWH. Thus we see
in Ruth a true believer to whom YHWH was very real, to such an extent that she
was not willing to turn her back on Him..
LANGE, "Ruth 1:16-17. And Ruth said, Thy people is my people, and thy God
my God. Naomi’s house, her character and life, have won for her the love of her
daughters-in-law. Ruth cleaves to her and will not leave her, although poverty
and misery await her. For love to her she proposes to give up not only home and
family, but also all the heart-joys that might there yet be hers. She cleaves to her
thus, although she is of Israel. Naomi and her house have made Israel also
appear lovely in the eyes of Ruth. Who would not wish to go to a people whose
sole known representatives were so amiable as Naomi and her family! In Moab,
the young women had not been made aware that one cannot be united to Israel
without acknowledging Israel’s God, for they had entered the marriage relation
with sons of Israel without entering into covenant with their God. Now, however,
they learn, from Naomi’s intimations, that that which Mahlon and Chilion had
done, was against the custom of Israel. The discovery instantly manifests itself in
different effects on Orpah and Ruth. Orpah is repelled, because she thinks only
of the bridal she might lose. Ruth is attracted for if that which distinguishes this
people which she already loves be its God, then she loves that God also. In Naomi
128

129. she loves both people and God. Ruth’s love is true love: it cleaves to Naomi not
for advantages, but on account of her virtues and amiability. Ruth desires to be
one with her for life. She will not let her be alone, wher ever she may be. What
Naomi has, she also will have, her people and her God. And this she expresses at
once, so clearly and decidedly, that in Ruth 1:17 she swears by Jehovah, the God
of Israel. The Jewish expositors, after the example of the Targum, suppose a
dialogue to have taken place in which Naomi has first explained to Ruth the
difficulties connected with faith in the God of Israel. All this, however, should be
considered merely as a didactic anticipation of her subsequent experiences. In
our narrative, the confession of Ruth, “thy God is my God,” is the highest stage
of that devotion which she yields to Naomi for life. She has vowed that nothing
shall separate her love from its object; for whatever could separate it, would
make it imperfect. But since the God of Israel is the true ground of all the love
which she felt for her Israelitish friends, it follows that her confession of Him is
the keystone of her vow. It is at the same time the true solution of the conflict
into which persons who mutually loved each other had fallen. It rectifies the
error committed by her husband when he took the Moabitish woman
notwithstanding her relation to the idol of Moab. The unity of the spirit has been
attained, which not only shows true love, but even in memory reconciles what
was amiss in the past. For Naomi’s grief was so great, not only because she had
lost her sons, but also because the daughters-in-law which she had must be given
up, and she be left alone. And as love enforced the separation, so love also
became the cord drawing to a yet closer union. If Naomi believed herself fallen
out of the favor of God on Moab’s account, she could derive comfort from Ruth
who for her sake entered into the people of God.
LANGE, "“Jehovah deal kindly with you, as ye have deal with the dead and with
me.” Naomi’s husband was dead. Her sons had married Moabitesses, and had
died childless. Usually, and sometimes even in “believing” families, mothers-in-
law and daughters-in-law are not on the best of terms. But Naomi, although in
Moab, enjoyed such love in the house of her sons, that her daughters-in-law did
not leave her, but went with her, and that Ruth, for her sake, left native land,
parents, and property. She won love because she was Naomi, “pleasant.” She
cherished no vanity, sought no strife, and did not wish to rule; hence she had
peace and love.
Starke: “Piety, wherever found, has the power to win the hearts of people. It is
able to diffuse joy even among those who do not believe.”
Naomi was pleasant and pious. She illustrated the saying of the apostle Peter
(1Epis. Ruth 3:1): “that, if any obey not the word, they may also without the
129

130. word be won by the conversation of the wives.” By her conduct she preached the
God of Israel, “in a meek and quiet spirit,” in the midst of Moab; and hence the
love which she won redounded to the praise of Israel, and became a silent
preaching of the truth to unbelievers.
Starke: “As long as the Church is called Naomi, there is no lack of adherents;
but when she appears as Mara, and is signed with the cross of Christ, many go
back.”
“And Ruth said, Thy people is my people, and thy God my God.” Ruth is a
prophecy, than which none could be more beautiful and engaging, of the
entrance of the heathen world into the kingdom of God. She comes forth out of
Moab, an idolatrous people, full of wantonness and sin, and is herself so tender
and pure. In a land where dissolute sensuality formed one of the elements of idol
worship, a woman appears, as wife and daughter, chaste as the rose of spring,
and unsurpassed in these relations by any other character in Holy Writ. Without
living in Israel, she is first elevated, then won, by the life of Israel, as displayed in
a foreign land. Amid surrounding enmity and jealousy toward Israel, she is
capable of being formed and attracted through love.
It is an undeniable fact that women have at all times entered more deeply than
men into the higher moral spirit of the fellowship with God mediated by Christ.
Women, especially, feel that marriage is a divinely instituted and sacred union.
Their hearts teach them to know the value of the great treasure and consolation
which faith in the living God gives to them especially. Ruth’s confession of God
and his people originated in the home of her married life. It sprang from the love
with which she was permitted to embrace Israelites. It was because in these
persons she loved the confessors of Jehovah, that her feelings had a moral power
which never decays.
An ancient church teacher says: “Had she not been inspired, she had not said
what she said, or done what she did. For what is she chiefly praised? For her love
to the people of Israel or her innocence, for her obedience or her faith? For her
love to the people of Israel. For had she desired marriage only as a means of
pleasure, she would rather have sought to obtain one of the young men. But as
she sought not sensual gratification, but the satisfaction of conscience, she chose
a holy family rather than youthful age.”
How great a lesson is here for the church considered in its missionary character!
The conduct of one Israelitish woman in a foreign land, was able to call forth a
love and a confession of God, like that of Ruth. How imperative, then, the duty of
130

131. Christians at home, and how easy of execution, to, win Jews and other
unbelievers. For love is the fountain of faith. It is written, Thou shalt love thy
God with all thy heart. The Jews must learn to love Christ in the Christian, and
the Christian in Christ. Love removes all prejudices, divisions, and sad
remembrances. Ruth loves a woman, and is thereby led to the God whom that
woman confesses. Must not men love, if they would be loved? Only love opens
the fountain of faith, but faith sanctifies and confirms love.
Pascal: “The heart has reasons which the reason does not comprehend. This is
seen in a thousand things. It is the heart that feels God, not the reason. Hence,
that is the more perfect faith which feels God in the heart.”
Ruth is not only the type of a convert, but also a teacher of those who seek to
convert others. For she shows that converts are made, not by words, but by the
life, not by disputations, but by love, not by the legerdemain of a sentimental
sermon, but by the faithful discharge of the duties of life. She teaches also by
what she gives up,—people, home, parents, customs,—and all from love. She has
had a taste of an Israelitish heart and household. Whoever has tasted Christ, can
never again live without him,—can never leave him who loves all, suffered for
all, weeps with all, and redeems all. If Jews and heathen taste him, this is
effected, not through external institutions, through dead works, but through
prayer, which fills the lives of Christians with its sweetness. To the fanatical, the
disputatious, the canting, the selfish, the avaricious,—and also to the
characterless and slavish,—who would say: thy people is my people, thy God is
my God?
“Where thou abidest, I will abide; where thou diest, I will die.” Ruth is not only
enrolled among the feminine worthies of Israel, with Sarah, Rebecca, Leah, and
Rachel, but heathenism itself throughout its vast extent cannot show a single
woman who is her equal in love. For hers is a love outliving the grave, and
sustained by no fleshly relationship, for when her husband was dead no living
person, mutually dear, existed to connect her with Naomi. Neither self-interest,
nor hope, nor vanity, mix themselves up with this love. It is a purely moral and
spiritual love, of which no other instance is on record. It is in fact the love of
those whom God by his mercy has won for himself, and who love God in their
brethren. It is the evangelical love of the Apostles, who loved Greeks and Franks,
Persians and Scythians, as their own flesh and blood. Such love as this followed
the steps of our Lord, and tarried where he was. Confession, martyrdom, prayer,
and every brotherly thought or deed, spring from the love of the converted heart.
The more heartily the soul cries out to Christ himself, Thy people is my people,
and thy God my God, the more fervently burns this love.
Zinzendorf: I speak because I believe; I love, because many sins are forgiven me.
Sailer: Lead men through love to love. For love cultivates and preserves the true
131

132. and the good by doctrine, life, prayer, watchfulness, and by a thousand other
inventions of its inexhaustible genius.
PULPIT, "And Ruth said, Insist not on me forsaking thee: for whither thou
goest, I will go. Ruth's mind was made up. Her heart would not be wrenched
away from her mother-in-law. The length of the journey, its dangers, and the
inevitable fatigue accompanying it, moved not, by so much as a jot, her
resolution. Had not her mother-in-law the same distance to travel, the same
fatigue to endure, the same perils to encounter? Might not the aged traveler,
moreover, derive some assistance and cheer from the company of a young, ready-
handed, and willing-hearted companion? She was resolved. Nothing on earth
would separate them. Wheresoever thou lodgest, I will lodge. A better version
than Luther's, "Where thou stayest, I will stay" (wo du bleibest, da bleibe ich
auch). The reference is not to the ultimate destination, but to the nightly halts, ‫לוּן‬
is the verb employed; and it is rendered "to tarry all night" in Genesis 24:54;
Genesis 28:11; Genesis 31:54; 19:6, etc. It is the Latin pernoctare and the
German ubernachten, the former being the rendering of the Vulgate, and the
latter the translation in the Berlenburger Bibel. Thy people (is) my people, and
thy God my God. There being no verb in the original, it is well to supply the
simplest copula. Ruth claims, as it were, Naomi's people and Naomi's God as her
own already.
WHEDON, "16. Entreat me not to leave thee — Nothing in all the range of
literature can surpass the beauty and tenderness of Ruth’s reply to Naomi,
contained in this and the following verse. The Chaldee Paraphrase puts the
passage in the following form: “And Ruth said, Entreat me not to leave and
return from following after thee, for I desire to become a proselyte. Said Naomi,
We are commanded to observe the Sabbath and good days, in not travelling
more than two thousand cubits. Said Ruth, To every place whither thou goest I
will go. Said Naomi, We are commanded not to lodge with the Gentiles. Said
Ruth, Wheresoever thou lodgest I will lodge. Said Naomi, We are commanded to
keep six hundred and thirteen precepts.
Said Ruth, What thy people keep I will keep, as if they were my people from of
old until now. Said Naomi, We are commanded not to worship with a strange
worship. Said Ruth, Thy God shall himself be my God. Said Naomi, We have
four kinds of capital punishment for criminals: stoning, burning, beheading, and
hanging. Said Ruth, In whatever way thou diest I will die. Said Naomi, We have
a house of burial. Said Ruth, And there will I be buried.” Blessed are the human
ties that lead us to God and heaven!
NISBET, "THE CHARM OF CHARACTER
‘Intreat me not to leave thee.’
132

133. Ruth 1:16
Now, this chapter illustrates:—
I. A noble influence.—Observe the contrast. Here is Naomi bidding Ruth go
home. To go with Naomi means to share her poverty and loneliness; probably to
be without the shelter of a married woman’s home—which then was almost more
than life. To go with Naomi means leaving her own people to dwell among
strangers of another religion, and of a hostile race. And Naomi loves her
daughter too well not to set all this before her; so, sacrificing her own wish, she
bids Ruth go. But while her words speak thus, her life, her love, her character
have so won upon Ruth’s heart that she will not heed the words which would
send her away, but bursts out with impetuous haste, ‘Intreat me not’ … The
language of the life has proved mightier than the language of the lip. Now, what
was there in Naomi to make her so attractive and winning? Well, names were
significant in those days, and as ‘Naomi’ meant ‘the lovely, gracious, or pleasant
one,’ I think we shall not err in supposing that the name indicated a sunny
disposition and pleasant bearing, which made its owner ‘lovely’ in the best of
senses. She had the kindly spirit and loving temper that win the trust and
affection of others. But, on the other hand, she was steadfast to principle, and did
not forsake the God of her fathers in a heathen land. Not that she was a bigot;
her sons’ heathen wives found in her a true mother, but they knew Whom she
worshipped.
There are two blunders, into one of which most are apt to fall. Some mistake
bigotry for firmness, and fancy that wrathful denunciation of others is a proof of
boldness in the truth. Others mistake a mild indifference for charity, and think
to prove their catholicity by affecting an equal regard for all religions alike. Both
extremes are wrong. The right spirit is that which combines firmness and
charity. Our faith in God should make us true to conviction: our knowledge of
ourselves and our liability to err should teach us to think charitably of our
fellow-men. And so it is in a character like this of Naomi that we find the secret
of an attractive life. Consistency, charity, and the charm of kindly grace—if only
we blended these three in ourselves, many would be like Ruth, the Moabitess,
and gladly accompany us to the Canaan above. Are we making it easier or
harder for others to say, ‘Thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God?’
II. A wise resolve.—(a) Ruth had made up her mind to seek the best Society. We
are made for society; we all want a people of our own—a little world which will
133

134. help us to realise ourselves by contact with others. An isolated life is unnatural.
But society may be a blessing or a curse. ‘Tell me with whom thou walkest, and I
will tell thee who thou art,’ say the Spaniards; and our own English proverb
amounts to the same thing—‘A man is known by his friends.’ ‘He that walketh
with wise men shall be wise, but a companion of fools shall be destroyed.’ The
evil influences of wicked society will dry up all the best springs of your life, and
deaden your finest susceptibilities. But true friendship ever blesses and ennobles
the friends. Such is the influence of all good company, and it was therefore a wise
resolve on the part of Ruth to adopt as her people the nation which worshipped
God.
(b) Ruth had made up her mind to seek the true worship. She came of a heathen
race, and so the acceptance of Naomi’s God was a renunciation of idolatry, and a
turning to the one Lord of Hosts who made heaven and earth. It was a wise and
noble resolve. Well, we are not idolaters, and we are not so foolish as to give any
credence to the fantastic mythologies of heathen lands. And yet we may be
worshippers of false gods, and believers in a heathen creed. For what is belief? It
is not an opinion; it is the faith we live by. And what is worship? It is not bowing
the knee, and bending the head in a religious service; it is the heart’s homage to
what you deem of worth. And so our belief and worship do not always coincide
with our professions. What is your god—in whom you believe, and whom you
worship? Respectability? Pleasure? Power? Money? Or do you set far above all
that is earthly, Him who is Lord of all and King of men? Do you regard His
favour as life, and His displeasure as making success a mockery, riches a curse,
the praise of men as a millstone about your neck? The Lord is not your God until
He is thus enthroned in your heart, and supreme in your life. Have you made
Ruth’s resolve your own?
Illustrations
(1) ‘The interest here is more domestic than national, and its charm gathers
round the personal fortunes of two poor and lonely widows. But directly these
are brought into line with this Divine purpose they become radiant with beauty
and interest. The character of Ruth is one of the sweetest in literature. Nor is that
of Naomi hardly inferior. The value of the little book is enhanced by its position
between the warlike Books of Judges and Samuel. Its talk of fields and home and
children, of rural customs and of human loves, are not the less beautiful because
it also enshrines the fact that Gentile blood mingles with that of the chosen
people, and that at length, through this Moabitess, comes the fulfilment of the
134

135. promised Messiah. In Christ Jesus the middle wall of partition is broken down.’
(2) ‘An ancient Persian seer once told this parable: “One day a friend put into
my hands a piece of scented clay. I took it, and said to it, ‘What art thou? Art
thou musk? for I am charmed with thy fragrance.’ It answered, ‘I was a mean
piece of clay, but I was some time in company with the rose, and the fragrance of
my sweet companion was communicated to me, and I became what I am.
Otherwise I should only be a bit of clay as I seem!’”’
(3) ‘It is one thing to love the ways of the Lord when all is fair, and quite another
to cleave to them under all discouragements and difficulties. The kiss of outward
profession is very cheap and easy, but the practical cleaving to the Lord, which
must show itself in holy decision for truth and holiness, is not so small a matter.
How stands the case with us? Is our heart fixed upon Jesus, is the sacrifice bound
with cords to the horns of the altar? Have we counted the cost, and are we
solemnly ready to suffer all worldly loss for the Master’s sake? The after gain
will be an abundant recompense, for Egypt’s treasures are not to be compared
with the glory to be revealed. Orpah is heard of no more: in glorious ease and
idolatrous pleasure her life melts into the gloom of death; but Ruth lives in
history and in heaven, for grace has placed her in the noble line whence sprung
the King of kings.’
PULPIT, "HOMILIES BY J.R. THOMSON
Ruth 1:16-18
Constancy.
For simple pathos and unstudied eloquence, this language is unsurpassed. "One
touch of nature makes the whole world kin." Here is the fervent outpouring of a
true heart. Love and resolution are at their height. Thousands of human souls
have expressed their mutual attachment in these words. They are not words of
extravagance or of passion, but of feeling, of principle, of a fixed and changeless
mind. Constancy must be admired, even by the inconstant.
I. THERE WERE INFLUENCES OPPOSED TO RUTH'S CONSTANCY.
135

136. 1. Early associations and friendships would have tied her to Moab.
2. The entreaty of Naomi that she would return set her perfectly free to do so, if
she had been disposed.
3. The example of her sister-in-law, Orpah, could not but have some weight.
Orpah had been, like Ruth, kind alike to the living and the dead, yet she wept,
kissed her mother-in-law, and returned.
4. The religion of her childhood could scarcely have been without attractions for
her. Could she leave the temples, the deities, the observances of her earliest days
behind?
II. THERE WERE MANIFESTATIONS OF PIOUS CONSTANCY IN RUTH'S
RESOLVES.
1. She would go with Naomi, though by an unknown route.
2. She would dwell with Naomi, though in an unknown home.
3. She would die with Naomi, though to be buried in an unknown grave.
III. THERE WAS A RELIGIOUS FOUNDATION FOR RUTH'S
CONSTANCY.
1. Apparent from the resolution—"Thy people shall be my people, and thy God
my God."
136

137. 2. Apparent from the adjuration she employed—"The Lord do so," etc.
IV. THE TRIUMPH AND RECOMPENSE OF RUTH'S CONSTANCY.
1. Her fidelity and devotion were reciprocated by Naomi.
2. In the providence of God Ruth was rewarded by an honorable position and a
happy life.—T.
PULPIT, "HOMILIES BY W.M. STATHAM
Ruth 1:16, Ruth 1:17
"Entreat me not to leave thee." A mother and a daughter-in-law are to go
together. The daughter wishes it, and petitions with most eloquent ardor that it
shall be so. A mother-in-law is sometimes—alas, too often—the subject of
criticism and satire. It is a difficult position to fill, and many bitterly unkind and
untrue caricatures have been made upon the relationship. In this case Naomi had
made herself beloved by both Orpah and Ruth, and it was only through Naomi's
words, "Turn again," that Orpah went back; for they had both said, "Surely we
will return with thee unto thy people." Ruth, however, remained firm, and her
fidelity has made these words quickening to many undecided souls.
I. ENTREATY MAY PROVE TOO EARNEST. "Entreat me not." It is the
language of a heart that feels what limits there are to the power of resistance
within us. Test may turn in unwise hands into overpowering temptation. Naomi
knew where to stop, and Ruth remains to us a picture of heroic devotion. Orpah
failed in courage, but was not destitute of affection, for her farewell is
accompanied with a kiss of love. In her character we see impulse without
strength. But "Ruth clave unto her." And it was no light sacrifice to leave
fatherland and home. We can hardly call the test at first a religious one, for it is
evident that Ruth's love for her mother-in-law was the immediate occasion of her
cleaving to her, and leaving the Moabitish gods. In time, doubtless, her nominal
faith turned into a living heritage.
II. LOVE CREATES THE FINEST ELOQUENCE. There is no utterance in the
137

138. Old Testament more pathetic and melodious than these words. They are idyllic
in their eloquence. There is nothing stilted or artificial in them, and they have in
them a rhythm of melody which is more beautiful than a mere rhyme of words.
Courage and sacrifice, love and devotion, breathe all through them. They
condense too all that is prophetic of coming experience—the lodging and the
loneliness, the weary pilgrimage and the grave in a foreign land. The mind
cannot frame sentences like these without the glow of a sincere and sacrificial
heart. We feel as we read them what grandeur there is in human nature when
love evokes all its depth of power. It is not a skilful touch that can do this, but a
soul alive to the calls of love and duty.
III. NO TRUE LIFE WAS EVER LIVED IN VAIN. It was what Naomi had been
to her, what she was in herself, that made this sacrifice possible. Love creates
love. The charm of friendship may be merely intellectual, and then, after the
feast of reason, all is' over. But Naomi's character was rooted in religion. She did
not carry the mere roll of the prophets in her hand; she carried the spirit of the
Holy Book in her heart. Ruth had never been in synagogue or temple; she had
listened to no Rabbi, and never sat at the feet of the doctors; but as "the earliest
piety is mother's love," so the character of a true mother is a stem around which
the tendrils of the young heart climb to the mother's God. None of us liveth to
himself. And so from the flower of piety, the seed drops into other hearts, and
brings forth fruit after many days.—W.M.S.
ELLICOTT, Verse 16-17
A Woman’s Choice
And Ruth said, Intreat me not to leave thee, and to return from following after
thee: for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy
people shall be my people, and thy God my God: where thou diest, will I die, and
there will I be buried: the Lord do so to me, and more also, if aught but death
part thee and me.—Ruth 1:16-17.
1. At what period the events narrated in the Book of Ruth occurred we are not
expressly told. All we are told is that it was “in the days when the judges judged”
(chap.Ruth 1:1). But as Israel was under the Judges for nearly five centuries—as
long, let us say, as from the accession of the Plantagenet Henry v. to the present
day—the phrase does not go far towards dating the Book. But another phrase in
it (chap.Ruth 4:21-22), from which we learn that Boaz was the great-grandfather
of David, makes it pretty certain that the Judge in whose days Ruth the alien was
admitted to the Commonwealth of Israel was the venerable but most unhappy
Eli. Ruth’s son was Jesse’s father; Jesse was the father of David. It is very
probable, therefore, that, when he was a child, Ruth may have fondled Jesse in
138

139. her arms.
As a fragment of early literary work, the Book of Ruth stands alone; it is
certainly a curious and unexpected “find” in the annals of Israel. Take it as we
may, it remains unproved and unexplained—a gem of literature so rare as to be
priceless. The very genius of simple narration is in this Hebrew tale; and around
it a gentle glamourie floats in which—
All puts on a gentle hue,
Hanging in the shadowy air
Like a picture rich and rare;
It is a climate where, they say,
The night is more beloved than day.
The book has an office in the Bible not unlike that which God has given to the
flowers in the world of nature; it softens, it sweetens, it soothes. And as God has
greatly cared for His flowers, so He has greatly cared for this book. Its Maker
has made it very beautiful.1 [Note: Armstrong Black.]
A recent Congregationalist quotes the following from the Saturday Evening Post
as the sentiment of Senator Beveridge: “The Bible has something for everybody.
If you are a politician, or even a statesman, no matter how shrewd you are, you
can read with profit, several times a year, the career of David, the cleverest
politician and one of the greatest statesmen who ever lived. If you are a business
man, the Proverbs of Solomon will tone you up like mountain air. If you are a
woman, read Ruth. A man of practical life, a great man, but purely a man of the
world, once said to me: ‘If I could enact one statute for all the women of
America, it would be that each of them should read the Book of Ruth once a
month.’”2 [Note: A. Lewis.]
2. The Book of Ruth is the story of Ruth the Moabitess. Now in the whole gallery
of Scripture portraits there are few which are more familiar to us, or more
attractive, than the sweet figure of “Ruth standing amid the alien corn.” Nor is it
the least of her attractions to the Christian heart that the blood of Ruth ran in
the veins of Jesus of Nazareth. In his genealogy of our Lord, St. Matthew
inscribes the names of only four women—Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba;
and among these four, Ruth easily holds the pre-eminence. Tamar, Rahab, and
Bathsheba were all women of dubious virtue, even when judged by the standards
of antiquity; but, judged by the moral standard of any age, Ruth is not only pure
and sweet as the fields in which she gleaned, she rises to an heroic pitch of
unselfish devotion and love.
139

140. 3. Than the scene depicted in the first chapter there is hardly any more beautiful
and affecting in the whole range of Old Testament Scriptures. All three actors in
it are admirable, and are admirably portrayed. Even Orpah shows a love and
devotion which command our respect, although her love did not rise to the full
heroic pitch; while of Ruth and Naomi it is hard to say which is the more
admirable—Naomi, in putting from her her sole comfort and stay, or Ruth, in
leaving all that she had in order to become the stay and comfort of Naomi’s
declining years. The exquisite and pathetic beauty of the scene has been
recognized from of old, and has inspired painter after painter, musician after
musician; while Ruth’s famous reply to Naomi’s dissuasive entreaties takes high
rank among the sentences which the world will not willingly let die.
It was a voice of the night which said, “Behold, thy sister-in-law is gone back
unto her people, and unto her gods: return thou after thy sister-in-law”—a long-
drawn-out complaint flung after Orpah in vain, and echoing back its own
unanswered monotone to Ruth as, amidst “shadows numberless,” she stood
alone by Naomi; but it awakened a morning song, the first of the dawn of the
better day in which it was to be known how much God loved the world—a song
that was sung while it was yet dark, as Ruth’s soul rose on the wing until the
unrisen Sun of God’s own love shone on her face; a song in which notes that
escaped from heaven and God are mingled with hers; a song the words of which
one can scarcely read for fear of doing wrong to their own plaintive melody.1
[Note: A. Lewis.]
4. And yet, in this contest of self-sacrificing love, it is hard to tell whether the
palm should be awarded to Ruth or to Naomi. Has not Naomi discharged her full
duty of dissuasion in placing the discomforts and dangers of her lot before her
daughter? She, at all events, thinks that she has not. When Orpah has kissed her
and gone back, while Ruth is still “cleaving” to her, she renews her entreaties
and dissuasions. “Thy sister-in-law has gone back to her people, and to her gods;
go thou also. It is not simply, or mainly, that we belong to different races; we
worship different gods. It is this that really separates us, and makes it impossible
that you should find an asylum in Judah. Return, then, after thy sister.” When
we consider how dark and solitary Naomi’s path must have been had Ruth
yielded to her entreaties, we cannot but feel that these two noble women were
well matched, that it is hard to say in which of them love was the more generous
and self-forgetting.
If, in the judgment of the world, Ruth carries off the palm, it is, in part, because
we expect more of a mother in Israel than of a daughter of Moab; but it is still
more, I think, in virtue of the exquisite and pathetic words in which her reply to
the dissuasions of Naomi is couched. Her vow has stamped itself on the very
heart of the world; and that not because of the beauty of its form simply—
though even in our English Version it sounds like a sweet and noble music—but
140

141. because it expresses, in a worthy form and once for all, the utter devotion of a
genuine and self-conquering love. It is the spirit which informs and breathes
through these melodious words that makes them so precious to us, and that also
renders it impossible to utter any fitting comment on them. They shine most
purely in their own light. “Intreat me not to leave thee, and to return from
following after thee: for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I
will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God: where thou diest,
will I die, and there will I be buried: the Lord do so to me, and more also, if
aught but death part thee and me.” One wonders where the woman found breath
to utter such words as these as she lay weeping on Naomi’s breast, and that her
voice did not break into inarticulate sobs and sighs under the weight of so
impassioned a tenderness.1 [Note: S. Cox.]
Our subject is a woman’s choice. We may consider—
I. How she made it.
II. What it was.
I
How Ruth made her Choice
Ruth chose to cast in her lot with Naomi out of the love she had for Naomi
herself. But that was not all. Orpah also loved Naomi. There was evidently more
than human affection in the choice which Ruth made; there was love Divine. She
knew and loved Naomi; she also knew and loved Naomi’s God. And there was a
third element. There was decision of the will. Under the emotion of love to
Naomi, under the constraint of love for Naomi’s God, Ruth made choice, and it
was a deliberate act of the will.
One may say, How came Ruth to know who was the God of Naomi? I answer: As
God said of Abraham, I know that Abraham will instruct his children; so may
one confidently say of Naomi: I know that Naomi had catechized and instructed
her daughter-in-law, and often taught her that the God of the Israelites was the
onely true God, who made Heaven and Earth, and that all others were but Idols,
the workes of men’s hands. Yet as the Samaritans beleeved our Saviour first
upon the relation of the woman that came from the Well, but afterwards said
unto her, John 4:42, “Now we beleeve, not because of thy saying; for we have
heard him our selves and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the
world.” So happily Ruth was induced first to the liking of the God of Israel, upon
the credit of Naomies words, but afterwards her love of him proceeded from a
more certaine ground, the motions of God’s holy Spirit in her heart.1 [Note:
Thomas Fuller.]
1. Her affection for Naomi.—The words of the text speak to us of rare devotion,
141

142. of unwavering decision. “As an expression,” says one writer, “of the tenderest
and most faithful friendship, they are unrivalled.” “The words in which the
resolve is uttered,” says another, “constitute the most determined, the most
decisive, the most unhesitating confession of love, in all literature.” “It may be
doubted,” writes a third, “whether in all the crowded records of womanly
heroism and self-sacrifice we anywhere meet a courage and devotion surpassing
this.” This is high praise, and yet we feel it is not too high, for this one utterance
would set Ruth on a pedestal by herself, making her worthy to stand near the
front rank of that great company of witnesses whose words and example have
proved an inspiration to succeeding generations.
Ruth’s attachment to her mother-in-law opens up the possibilities of human love:
the might of a true and noble attachment: that love to the individual which may
overcome the more general love even to relatives, friends, and country. It is an
illustration of the power that one heart may have upon another. Think of it; it is
one of those things that add glory and solemnity to human life. This personality
of Naomi’s was everything that a human personality could be to Ruth. Ruth
knew that if Naomi had never come to her land her life would have been a very
different life—in its thoughts, purposes, and realizations—from what it was now.
Whilst I was making preparations for my journey, Kachi Ram entered the tent.
He looked frightened and perplexed. “What are you doing, sir?” inquired he
hurriedly. “The doctor says you are going to leave alone to-night, cross the
mountain range, and go to Lhassa by yourself.”
“Yes, that is true.”
“Oh, sir! the perils and dangers are too great; you cannot go.”
“I know, but I am going to try.”
“Oh, sir! then I will come with you.”
“No, Kachi, you will suffer too much—go back to your father and mother now
that you have the opportunity.”
“No, sir, where you go, I will go. Small men never suffer. If they do, it does not
matter. Only great men’s sufferings are worth noticing. If you suffer, I will
suffer. I will come.”1 [Note: A. H. Savage Landor, In the Forbidden Land.]
In this world’s strange vanishing show,
The one truth is Loving. O sister, the dark cloud that veils
All life lets this rift through to glorify future and past.
142

143. “Love ever—love only—love faithfully—love to the last.”
2. Her love to God.—Naomi knew the true God. When the cold, senseless, dumb,
dead idols of Moab could do nothing for a young, bursting, sobbing, breaking
heart, then old Naomi would come near with the faith of Israel, and with her
prayer to the God of Israel. And what she knew of God she had been careful to
teach her sons and her sons’ wives. And now all that is rushing through Ruth’s
blood and pulsing in her veins, as she stands at the turn of the road and says, “I
cannot leave old Naomi. At the thought of parting with her this flashes in upon
me. She is more than life, and meat, and drink, and wealth, and everything to
me. To be with her is life, and to part from her is darkness, and misery, and
death.”
Do we not find here a venture of faith, as great a venture, indeed, in its own way,
as that of Abraham when he went forth, not knowing whither he went? Ruth had
listened to Naomi’s words of warning—that hardship and persecution and
privation awaited them: they would be going among a people who did not take
kindly to foreigners and treated them as aliens; and while no doubt they would
be a comfort to their mother-in-law, yet they would mar their own future. “Go,”
said Naomi to her daughters-in-law, “return each of you to her mother’s house:
and the Lord deal kindly with you, as ye have done with the dead, and with me.”
Ruth heard those arguments and warnings, and this is her answer: “Intreat me
not to leave thee, and to return from following after thee.” “What are bonds and
imprisonment to a soul of this heroic mould? “What mean ye to weep and to
break mine heart? for I am ready not to be bound only, but also to die at
Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus.” There is a gulf of centuries between
those words of St. Paul and the words of Ruth, but they vibrate with the same
emotion, the same passion pulsates in both.
What we here read teaches that God not only knows human sorrow, but can
transmit through a human heart something of His own power to alleviate and
heal. Ruth’s love was in this one instance to do what His own was in the fulness
of the time to do universally in Jesus Christ: she was to give rest to one who was
weary and heavy-laden. This Gentile woman at one step came across the
boundaries of life into its glorious liberty, when she so loved and made sacrifice;
on her altar there was Christian flame before the time, and her love was that of
the daughters of God. They who can be to any lonely and ailing heart what Ruth
was to Naomi have the Divine within them; they are making some spot of our
world a part of the new earth under the new heavens; they are in their measure
wielding the power by which God Himself makes all things new. Love of such
quality as Ruth’s never faileth: it is of unconquerable strength. Like hers, all love
will overcome when it is reinforced by the Divine, and when it says not only “Thy
people my people,” but also “Thy God my God.” But that it may retain its virtue
and possess the power of an endless life, it must be continually renewed and
143

144. purified in the love of God.
We have, perhaps, been accustomed to think of faith as taking the precedence of
love—I mean in point of time. I will not say that that does not represent the fact
in any sense at all. But I do say that the converse is distinctly true, namely, that
faith follows love, and makes its presence known as it could not do if love were
wanting. The more we dwell upon it, the more clearly shall we see that St. Peter
was right when he said, “Above all things have fervent love among yourselves,”
for the simple reason that it cannot stand alone, that in its train will follow all
other qualities which adorn and make life beautiful.
“Love”
Is a short word that says so very much!
It says that you confide in me.1 [Note: J. Flew, Studies in Browning, 140.]
Ruth shows how instantly and entirely she adopts Naomi’s religion by sealing
her vow with the Hebrew oath and by calling on the God of the Hebrews:
“Jehovah do so to me, and more also, if aught but death part thee and me.”
3. Her decision.—Ruth’s resolution to join the Lord’s people was the result of
deliberate resolve. To quote old Bishop Hall: “She must evidently have been a
proselyte, converted to the faith of Israel prior to the utterance of these words, or
else, surely, she would never have been so determined in her language.” If Ruth
had been persuaded to take the step of joining Israel, and if her coming as far as
she did had been the result of outward pressure brought to bear upon her,
depend upon it she would have gone back when Naomi presented before her eyes
all that she would have to bear, and what her profession would entail.
Here we have the resolution of Ruth portrayed in lively Colours; so that if we
consider her Sex, a Woman; her Nation, a Moabite; one may boldly pronounce
of her what our Saviour did of the Centurion, “Verily I say unto you, I have not
found so great faith, no, not in Israel.”1 [Note: Thomas Fuller.]
Love is the thoughtful outgoing of one’s whole nature to another. It is really an
act of the will, though most times unconsciously so. It belongs distinctly to the
realm of choice. It is not essentially an emotion merely, though it sweeps all the
emotional power of a man as the whirlwind sweeps down the valley. It is not of
the heart primarily, though it absolutely controls the heart. It is wholly in itself a
matter of choice. The will gathers up all the information at hand, and displays it
skilfully before the heart until it is enraptured and completely swept along as the
will meant it should be.
When a soul, by choice and conscience, doth
144

145. Throw out her full force on another soul,
The conscience and the concentration both
Make mere life, Love. For Life in perfect whole
And aim consummated, is Love in sooth,
As nature’s magnet-heat rounds pole with pole.
It was not an easy choice. If we would understand the scene, especially the stress
laid on these young widows finding new husbands, we must remember that in the
East of antiquity, as in many Eastern lands to this day, the position of an
unmarried woman, whether maid or widow, was a very unhappy and perilous
one. Only in the house of a husband could a woman be sure of respect and
protection. Hence the Hebrews spoke of the husband’s house as a woman’s
menuchah, or “rest”—her secure and happy asylum from servitude, neglect,
licence. It was such an “asylum” of honour and freedom that Naomi desired for
Orpah and Ruth. But, as she had to explain to them, such an “asylum,” while it
might be open to them in Moab, would be fast closed against them in Judah. In
marrying them her sons had sinned against the Hebrew law. That sin was not
likely to be repeated by Israelites living in their own land. Yet how is Naomi to
tell them of this fatal separation between the two races? How is she to make these
loving women aware that, if they carry out their resolve to go with her, they must
resign all hope of honour and regard?
Three things were involved in the act of will by which Ruth made her choice. We
may call them docility, detachment, and determination.
(1) Docility.—Docility is a desire and readiness to learn. The first words of Saul
of Tarsus after his vision exactly express this frame of mind: “What shall I do,
Lord?” (Acts 22:10). Certainly this feature was present also in the case of Ruth;
this readiness to learn from others, and to give due place to the effect of the
influence under which she had been brought. She, who had learnt so much from
Naomi, felt that she could not cut herself off from the opportunity of learning
more. And this is so important for us all. Though it is hard, though it humbles us
and makes us feel our ignorance; yet it is all bound up with a converted heart.
“Except ye be converted, and become as little children.” We must be teachable—
ready to learn—and this in many different ways—e.g., under the hand of God,
recognizing (what we are so apt to miss) the true meaning of things in our own
life, when seen in their relation to His providence. Or, again, under the influence
of others with whom we have to do; not, of course, in a sense which would be
weakness, surrendering ourselves to every influence in turn, or easily led by any
one who may seek to gain a hold upon us, but a readiness to be taught by others,
as against an obstinate persistence in thinking that we always know best, and
145

146. have nothing left to learn. And, once more, under the voice of conscience,
learning to recognize the harm which we do to ourselves by all our little
resistances to its voice, and the risk which we run thereby of silencing it
altogether.
(2) Detachment.—What a tremendous strain this crisis put on her! Her home,
with all its associations; her religion, which had been no heathenism to her, but
rather her idea of truth; and then Orpah, the one person whose experiences had
been most like her own, to whom, therefore, she must have been bound by ties of
the closest sympathy—she had to detach herself from all these in her great act of
choice; and this may well come home, in its degree, to us. How strong are the ties
of old associations, old ideas, old sympathies, and friendships! And yet at times
we may find that it is just these things which may be holding us back from
making a right choice, in simple faithfulness to our conscience and to God. Then
we shall learn the cost of true conversion, and the need that we have of that
detachment from all else but Him which enables us to say,” Master, I will follow
thee whithersoever thou goest” (Matthew 8:19).
(3) Determination.—“Naomi saw that Ruth was stedfastly minded.” And it was
no less than the plain truth, as her whole after-life declared. Ruth went as far as
she knew how when she said: “The Lord do so to me, and more also, if aught but
death part thee and me.” St. Paul lifts our assurance to a higher point: “For I am
persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things
present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other
creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ
Jesus our Lord” (Romans 8:38-39).
All heaven is blazing yet
With the meridian sun:
Make haste, unshadowing sun, make haste to set;
O lifeless life, have done.
I choose what once I chose;
What once I willed, I will;
Only the heart its own bereavement knows;
O clamorous heart, lie still.
That which I chose, I choose;
146

147. That which I willed, I will;
That which I once refused, I still refuse:
O hope deferred, be still.
That which I chose and choose
And will is Jesus’ Will:
He hath not lost his life who seems to lose:
O hope deferred, hope still.1 [Note: C. G. Rossetti.]
II
What the Choice was
Ruth herself tells us what her choice was. The way which Naomi went was to be
her way; and Naomi’s abode her abode; Naomi’s people were to be her people;
and Naomi’s God her God; where Naomi died she would die, and there would
she be buried. The enumeration may not be complete; it may not name all that
the Christian choice involves; but it is full of instruction.
1. “Whither thou goest, I will go.” It was a brave thing to say. She had never
been in the land of Israel: she knew nothing of its nature. For aught she could
tell, it might be such a change, after the land of Moab, that it would be hard to
live there. “Whither thou goest, I will go. I care not whether thou turnest to the
north or to the south, to the east or to the west. All points of the compass are
alike to me, for the loadstone of grace has touched my heart; and, so long as I go
where the Lord and His people are, it matters little to me whether I turn to the
right hand or to the left.” The soul that really makes a true profession of Christ
will know how to keep by the footsteps of the flock.
These two widowed women travelled across Moab to Israel—two lonely women
who were all in all to each other. “Who is this that goeth up through the
wilderness, leaning upon the arm of her beloved?” What a picture of Christ and
His people—Naomi and Ruth travelling together from Moab to Bethlehem in the
Land of Promise. So with us. Since we have seen Christ the world has changed to
us, and, thank God, we do not care for it. Since we have seen Christ, and have
become enamoured of Him, we can let the world go by, for—
Ah, the Master is so fair!
His smile so sweet on banished men,
That they who meet Him unaware,
147

148. Can never rest on earth again.
And they who see Him risen afar,
On God’s right hand, to welcome them,
Forgetful stand of home and land,
Desiring fair Jerusalem.
2. “Where thou lodgest, I will lodge.” She made no conditions. She did not say,
“Where thou lodgest, I will lodge, if it is a nice large house. Where thou lodgest I
will lodge, if there is luxurious accommodation.” Ruth’s soul despised fencing
her resolve with mean conditions. “Where thou lodgest I will lodge, whether it be
in a barn, in a shed, in a cottage, in a palace, or in the open air.”
A good Companion, saith the Latine Proverb, is pro viatico; I may adde also pro
diversorio: Ruth, so be it she may enjoy Naomies gracious companie, will be
content with any Lodging, though happily it may be no better than Jacob had,
Genesis 28:11. And yet we see how some have been discouraged even from the
company of our Saviour, for feare of hard lodging; witnesse the Scribe, to whom
when our Saviour said, “The foxes have their holes, and the Fowles of the ayre
have nests, but the Sonne of man hath not where to lay his head”: This cold
comfort perfectly quencht his forward zeale, and he never appeared afterward;
whereas he ought to have said to our Saviour as Ruth to Naomi, “Where thou
lodgest will I lodge.”1 [Note: Thomas Fuller.]
3. “Thy people shall by my people.” “Thy people!” they were the very people she
had been taught from her infancy to despise and hate. Ruth had learned to curse
them. Likely enough, either her brothers or her cousins had gone to war with
Israel; for we know that Moab dreadfully tried and perplexed the people of
Israel. And yet here is Ruth throwing in her lot with a people that hitherto she
had looked down upon, and whom, up to the present, her family had opposed.
There are closer ties than the ties of nationality, or even of blood.
Haman being offended with Mordecai, as if it had been but leane and weak
revenge to spit his spight upon one person, hated all the Jewes for Mordecai’s
sake: the mad Beare stung with one Bee, would needs throw downe the whole
Hive. But cleane contrarie, Naomi had so graciously demeaned her selfe, that
Ruth for her sake is fallen in love with all the Jewes.1 [Note: Thomas Fuller.]
The sentiment enthusiastically responded to by the human instincts of a Roman
audience, even in Rome’s most corrupt days, has yet to be extended and applied
by Christian England to international interests. We are a nation, and nothing
148

149. that concerns other nations do we deem foreign to us. Through good and evil
report to this principle we must firmly adhere, if we would have our claim of
“teaching the nations how to live” held for more than an idle boast. It is not
enough that we have established, and are resolute to further and maintain, our
own freedom and nationality. Our wishes and endeavours must tend to secure
the same blessings for other countries. As no man will reach heaven who seeks to
reach it alone, so no nation will ever develop the highest and most enduring
forms of national life, while it is contented to remain the passive and
uninterested spectator of the onward and upward struggles of kindred peoples.
A recluse tribe is as anomalous as a single anchorite.1 [Note: C. W. Stubbs, God
and the People, 113.]
There are two good thoughts here.
(1) The influence of true friendship does not end with the friend: the love drawn
forth is not confined to the one who draws it forth. Every true and ennobling
love that is kindled within us, while it finds its focus in the friend that kindled it,
casts a warm glow over all those who are associated with that friend. I have
loved a nation for the sake of one man in the nation. I have loved to look at the
son of a great man whom I have honoured and loved; I have loved to look at the
house where he lived; the paths which he walked, the books that he wrote,
everything that appertained to him became more sacred to me for the love I bore
him. A great, loving personality draws out our love not only towards himself, but
towards his people.
(2) Those who are striving to serve the Lord should cling to those who are the
disciples of the same Master. The law of dependence, as it acts upon this world of
human beings, and resolves itself into other laws of influence and sympathy, is
found in all the relations of man. In itself it is a beautiful thing, this leaning of
one upon another, this clasping of hand with hand in the great circle of human
brotherhood, and feeling the electric spark, as the touch of a single finger sends a
thrill through the multitude.
In every pause
Of labour, when the labourer looked upon
His fellow, such endearing sympathy,
Such union in discipleship shone through
The lovely lattice of his loving soul,
That each exchange of glances seemed a swift
And mutual sacrament.1 [Note: Anna Bunston, The Porch of Paradise, 25.]
149

150. 4. “And thy God my God.” Ruth was not content to be a secret idolater in the
Lord’s land, as too many are. She might have gone with Naomi, and been
introduced into the Israelitish society, and yet all the while, in the secret shrine of
her heart, have been worshipping her old gods.
Again there are two thoughts here.
(1) There are some people in the world who are called “Christian”—and we do
not doubt their Christianity, we only call into question their consistency—who
would drive us away from God, if we had not this Book and God’s own Spirit to
guide us. There is a piety abroad that is repellent; and if we had no other light
than the light which their example gives, we would say, “Give us any God rather
than theirs.” There are others who, as they charm us by their spirit of meekness
and gentleness, of truth and of grace, as well as by their strength and courage,
make us exclaim, “Oh, that their God may be our God!” Judson the missionary
died; other missionaries laboured after him; but those who knew Judson did not
want to hear of any other God than Judson’s God. That is to be a living epistle,
known and read of all men.
(2) Love between man and man, parent and child, or between husband and wife,
can reach its highest and fullest attainment only when cemented by love to God.
It may not be absolutely wrong for a man to marry an unbeliever, but we have
known many homes unhappy through lack of agreement on religious subjects.
To be sure, all so-called Christian homes are not happy, but, other things being
equal, the husband and wife whose love is centred on something great and noble
above and outside of themselves will love each other more, and live more happily
together. It is a principle of psychology, as well as a fact of human experience,
that the highest friendship is formed not by the love two persons have for each
other, but in the common love both have for something else. And what greater
else can there be than religion? It is religion that makes our earthly friendships
eternal; love, which is the soul of friendship, is the fruit of religion. “Beloved, let
us love one another: for love is of God; for every one that loveth is born of God,
and knoweth God.” God did not come between Naomi and Ruth as a barrier to
separate them, but as a spiritual power to bind them more closely together. Their
friendship reached its perfection only when Ruth said: “Thy God shall be my
God.”
Philip Henry’s advice to his children regarding marriage was, “Please God, and
please yourselves, and you will please me”; his usual compliment to his newly
married friends: “Others wish you all happiness. I wish you all holiness, and
then there will be no doubt but you will enjoy all happiness.”
5. “Where thou diest, will I die.” So Ruth had no thought of returning. She had
no idea of simply going to inspect the land of Israel, and then returning to her
own. “Where thou diest I will die”; or, in other words, Ruth made a life-gift of
150

151. herself to the people.
Love loves for ever,
And finds a sort of joy in pain,
And gives with nought to take again,
And loves too well to end in vain:
Is the gain small then?
Love laughs at “never,”
Outlives our life, exceeds the span
Appointed to mere mortal man:
All which love is and does and can
Is all in all then.1 [Note: C. G. Rossetti.]
I shall tell you the story of a daughter who dearly loved her father and stuck by
him to the end. Her name was Margaret Roper, and her father was Sir Thomas
More. When he was imprisoned, she loved him the more for his misfortunes.
When he lay in the Tower under sentence of death, his chief comfort was the
visits and letters of Margaret, and the night before his execution he wrote her a
letter with a bit of charcoal saying, “I have never liked your manner better than
when you kissed me last night (before the guard of soldiers), for I am most
pleased when daughterly love has no leisure to look to worldly courtesy.”
Two or three years ago, in a book by Professor Stearns, an American theologian
of great promise, who, to the loss and regret of the universal Church, was carried
away in his prime immediately after the publication of this book, I came across a
phrase which struck me much at the time and has dwelt in my memory ever
since. It was “permanent choice.” I never had heard that phrase before, and I
never had reflected on the thing very much until I found it designated by that
happy phrase. Now what do you think permanent choice may mean? You know
how will is always at work every day. To get up in the morning is an act of will,
and it is not always a very easy one. In dressing there are many acts of will, and
in taking breakfast, and so on, all through the day. But most acts of will must be
about trivial things and be soon forgotten. There are other acts of will that
cannot be forgotten. Their effects are permanent, and they imply hundreds of
thousands of other acts of will which are, so to speak, involved in them. I think it
was of these that Professor Stearns spoke, but there is something else in this
remarkable phrase. I think he meant that the will in a permanent choice stands
to this choice, approving it, believing in it, glorying in it, and never wishing to
151

152. change it.1 [Note: Professor James Stalker.]
Oh, surely, love is higher, deeper,
Than human smile and human speech;
So high, so deep, the angel-reaper
Cannot reach.
6. “And there will I be buried.” This is not a useless addition to the resolution to
die with Naomi. To be buried in the sepulchre of some family is to be recognized
as of the family kinship. There is no other recognition that is so hard to obtain or
so difficult to lose. When she said, “And there will I be buried,” Ruth threw in
her lot with Naomi and Naomi’s people fully and finally. To offer to be buried
with Naomi’s kinsfolk was the last and most whole-hearted act of surrender.
The ancients were wonderfully devoted to the sepulchres of their fathers. I
confess that I should not have been much surprised if Ruth had said, “Well,
Naomi, I am willing to live in your country, and I am willing to die there; but,
after I have breathed my last, would it be asking too much to request that my
bones be sent back to the sepulchre of my father and mother in the land of
Moab?” Yes, she would have said that, if she had not been the Ruth that she was;
but, altogether consecrated, she would not even have her bones go back into her
old country. No, dead as well as living, she would have fellowship with the Lord’s
people.1 [Note: A. G. Brown.]
A certain beadle had fancied the manse housemaid, but was at a loss for an
opportunity to declare himself. One day—a Sunday—when his duties were
ended, he looked sheepish, and said, “Mary, wad ye tak a turn, Mary?” He led
her to the churchyard, and pointing with his finger, got out, “My fowk lie there,
Mary; wad ye like to lie there?”2 [Note: Dean Ramsay, Reminiscences of Scottish
Life and Character, 305.]
MACLAREN 16-22, "A GENTLE HEROINE, A GENTILE CONVERT
The lovely idyl of Ruth is in sharp contrast with the bloody and turbulent annals of
Judges. It completes, but does not contradict, these, and happily reminds us of what
we are apt to forget in reading such pages, that no times are so wild but that in them
are quiet corners, green oases, all the greener for their surroundings, where life glides
on in peaceful isolation from the tumult. Men and women love and work and weep
and laugh, the gossips of Bethlehem talk over Naomi’s return (‘they said,’ in Rth_
1:19, is feminine), Boaz stands among his corn, and no sounds of war disturb them.
Thank God! the blackest times were not so dismal in reality as they look in history.
There are clefts in the grim rock, and flowers blooming, sheltered in the clefts. The
peaceful pictures of this little book, multiplied many thousand times, have to be set
as a background to the lurid pictures of the Book of Judges.
The text begins in the middle of Naomi’s remonstrance with her two daughters-in-
152

153. law. We need not deal with the former part of the conversation, nor follow Orpah as
she goes back to her home and her gods. She is the first in the sad series of those, ‘not
far from the kingdom of God,’ who needed but a little more resolution at the critical
moment, and, for want of it, shut themselves out from the covenant, and sank back to
a world which they had half renounced.
So these two lonely widows are left, each seeking to sacrifice herself for the other.
Who shall decide which was the more noble and truly womanly in her self-
forgetfulness,-the elder, sadder heart, which strove to secure for the other some joy
and fellowship at the price of its own deepened solitude; or the younger, which
steeled itself against entreaties, and cast away friends and country for love’s sweet
sake? We rightly praise Ruth’s vow, but we should not forget Naomi’s unselfish
pleading to be left to tread her weary path alone.
Ruth’s passionate burst of tenderness is immortal. It has put into fitting words for all
generations the deepest thoughts of loving hearts, and comes to us over all the
centuries between, as warm and living as when it welled up from that gentle, heroic
soul. The two strongest emotions of our nature are blended in it, and each gives a
portion of its fervour-love and religion. So closely are they interwoven that it is
difficult to allot to each its share in the united stream; but, without trying to
determine to which of them the greater part of its volume and force is due, and while
conscious of the danger of spoiling such words by comments weaker than
themselves, we may seek to put into distinct form the impressions which they make.
We see in them the heroism of gentleness. Put the sweet figure of the Moabitess
beside the heroes of the Book of Judges, and we feel the contrast. But is there
anything in its pages more truly heroic than her deed, as she turned her back on the
blue hills of Moab, and chose the joyless lot of the widowed companion of a widow
aged and poor, in a land of strangers, the enemies of her country and its gods? It is
easier far to rush on the spears of the foe, amid the whirl and excitement of battle,
than to choose with open eyes so dreary a lifelong path. The gentleness of a true
woman covers a courage of the patient, silent sort, which, in its meek steadfastness,
is nobler than the contempt of personal danger, which is vulgarly called bravery. It is
harder to endure than to strike. The supreme type of heroic, as of all, virtue is Jesus
Christ, whose gentleness was the velvet glove on the iron hand of an inflexible will. Of
that best kind of heroes there are few brighter examples, even in the annals of the
Church which numbers its virgin martyrs by the score, than this sweet figure of Ruth,
as the eager vow comes from her young lips, which had already tasted sorrow, and
were ready to drink its bitterest cup at the call of duty. She may well teach us to
rectify our judgments, and to recognise the quiet heroism of many a modest life of
uncomplaining suffering. Her example has a special message to women, and exhorts
them to see to it that, in the cultivation of the so-called womanly excellence of
gentleness, they do not let it run into weakness, nor, on the other hand, aim at
strength, to the loss of meekness. The yielding birch-tree, the ‘lady of the woods,’
bends in all its elastic branches and tossing ringlets of foliage to the wind; but it
stands upright after storms that level oaks and pines. God’s strength is gentle
strength, and ours is likest His when it is meek and lowly, like that of the ‘strong Son
of God.’
Ruth’s great words may suggest, too, the surrender which is the natural language of
true love. Her story comes in among all these records of bloodshed and hate, like a
bit of calm blue sky among piles of ragged thunder-clouds, or a breath of fresh air in
the oppressive atmosphere of a slaughter-house. Even in these wild times there was
still a quiet corner where love could spread his wings. The question has often been
asked, what the purpose of the Book of Ruth is, and various answers have been given.
The genealogical table at the end, showing David’s descent from her, the example
153

154. which it supplies of the reception of a Gentile into Israel, and other reasons for its
presence in Scripture, have been alleged, and, no doubt, correctly. But the Bible is a
very human book, just because it is a divine one; and surely it would be no unworthy
object to enshrine in its pages a picture of the noble working of that human love
which makes so much of human life. The hallowing of the family is a distinct purpose
of the Old Testament, and the beautiful example which this narrative gives of the
elevating influence of domestic affection entitles it to a place in the canon. How many
hearts, since Ruth spoke her vow, have found in it the words that fitted their love
best! How often they have been repeated by quivering lips, and heard as music by
loving ears! How solemn, and even awful, is that perennial freshness of words which
came hot and broken by tears, from lips that have long ago mouldered into dust!
What has made them thus ‘enduring for ever,’ is that they express most purely the
self-sacrifice which is essential to all noble love. The very inmost longing of love is to
give itself away to the object beloved. It is not so much a desire to acquire as to
bestow, or, rather, the antithesis of giving and receiving melts into one action which
has a twofold motion,-one outwards, to give; one inwards, to receive. To love is to
give one’s self away, therefore all lesser givings are its food and delight; and, when
Ruth threw herself on Naomi’s withered breast, and sobbed out her passionate
resolve, she was speaking the eternal language of love, and claiming Naomi for her
own, in the very act of giving herself to Naomi, Human love should be the parent of
all self-sacrificing as of all heroic virtues; and in our homes we do not live in love, as
we ought, unless it leads us to the daily exercise of self-suppression and surrender,
which is not felt to be loss but the natural expression of our love, which it would be a
crime against it, and a pain to ourselves, to withhold. If Ruth’s temper lived in our
families, they would be true ‘houses of God’ and ‘gates of heaven.’
We hear in Ruth’s words also that forsaking of all things which is an essential of all
true religion. We have said that it was difficult to separate, in the words, the effects of
love to Naomi from those of adoption of Naomi’s faith. Apparently Ruth’s adhesion
to the worship of Jehovah was originally due to her love for her mother-in-law. It is
in order to be one with her in all things that she says, ‘Thy God shall be my God.’ And
it was because Jehovah was Naomi’s God that Ruth chose Him for hers. But whatever
the origin of her faith, it was genuine and robust enough to bear the strain of casting
Chemosh and the gods of Moab behind her, and setting herself with full purpose of
heart to seek the Lord. Abandoning them was digging an impassable gulf between
herself and all her past, with its friendships, loves, and habits. She is one of the first,
and not the least noble, of the long series of those who ‘suffer the loss of all things,
and count them but dung, that they may win’ God for their dearest treasure. We have
seen how, in her, human love wrought self-sacrifice. But it was not human love alone
that did it. The cord that drew her was twisted of two strands, and her love to Naomi
melted into her love of Naomi’s God. Blessed they who are drawn to the knowledge
and love of the fountain of all love in heaven by the sweetness of the characters of His
representatives in their homes, and who feel that they have learned to know God by
seeing Him in dear ones, whose tenderness has revealed His, and whose gracious
words have spoken of His grace! If Ruth teaches us that we must give up all, in order
truly to follow the Lord, the way by which she came to her religion may teach us how
great are the possibilities, and consequently the duties, of Christians to the members
of their own families. If we had more elder women like Naomi, we should have more
younger women like Ruth.
The self-sacrifice which is possible and blessed, even to inferior natures, at the
bidding of love, is too precious to be squandered on earthly objects. Men’s capacities
for it, at the call of dear ones here, should be the rebuke of their grudging surrender
to God. He gave the capacity that it might find its true field of operation in our
154

155. relation to Him. But how much more ready we all are to give up everything for the
sake of our Naomis than for His sake: and how we may be our own accusers, if the
measure of our devotion to them be contrasted with the measure of our devotion to
God!
Finally, we may see, in Ruth’s entrance into the religion of Israel, a picture of what
was intended to be the effect of Israel’s relation with the Gentile world.
The household of Elimelech emigrated to Moab in a famine, and, whether that were
right or wrong, they were there among heathens as Jehovah worshippers. They were
meant to be missionaries, and, in Ruth’s case, the purpose was fulfilled. She became
the ‘first-fruits of the Gentiles’; and one aim of the book, no doubt, is to show how
the believing Gentile was to be incorporated into Israel. Boaz rejoices over her, and
especially over her conversion, and prays, ‘A full reward be given thee of Jehovah, the
God of Israel, under whose wings thou art come to trust.’ She is married to him, and
becomes the ancestress of David, and, through him, of the Messiah. All this is a
beautiful completion to the other side of the picture which the fierce fighting in
Judges makes prominent, and teaches that Israel’s relation to the nations around was
not to be one of mere antagonism, but that they had another mission than
destruction, and were set in their land, as the candlestick in the Tabernacle, that light
might stream out into the darkness of the desert. The story of the Moabitess, whose
blood flowed in David’s veins, was a standing protest against the later narrow
exclusiveness which called Gentiles ‘dogs,’ and prided itself on outward connection
with the nation, in the exact degree in which it lost real union with the nation’s God,
and real understanding of the nation’s mission.
We have left ourselves no space to speak of the remainder of this passage, which is of
less importance. It gives us a lively picture of the stir in the little town of Bethlehem,
as the two way-worn women came into it, in their strange attire, and attracting notice
by travelling alone. As we have observed, ‘they said,’ in Rth_1:19, is feminine. The
women of the village buzzed round the strangers, as they sat in silence, perhaps by
that well at the gate, of which, long after, David longed to drink. Wonder, curiosity,
and possibly a spice of malice, mingle in the question, ‘Is this Naomi?’ It is heartless,
at any rate; it had been better to have found them food and shelter than to have let
them sit, the mark for sharp tongues. Naomi’s bitter words seem to be moved partly
by a sense of the coldness of the reception. She realises that she has indeed come
back to a changed world, where there will be little sympathy except such as Ruth can
give. It is with almost passion that she abjures her name ‘Pleasant,’ as a satire on her
woful lot, and bids them call her ‘Bitter,’ as truer to fact now. The burst of sorrow is
natural, as she finds herself again where she had been a wife and mother, and
‘remembers happier things.’ Her faith wavers, and her words almost reproach God.
The exaggerations in which memory is apt to indulge colour them. ‘I went out full.’
She has forgotten that they ‘went out’ to seek for bread. She only remembers that
four went away, and three sleep in Moab. Possibly she thinks of their emigration as a
sin, and traces her dear ones’ deaths to God’s displeasure on its account. His
‘testifying’ against her probably means that His providence in bereaving her
witnessed to His disapprobation. But, whether that be so or not, her wild words are
not those of a patient sufferer, who bows to His will. But true faith may sometimes
break down, and Ruth’s ‘trusting under the wings of Jehovah’ is proof enough that, in
the long years of lonely sorrow, Naomi’s example had shown how peaceful and safe
was the shelter there.
BI 16-17, "Ruth said, Intreat me not to leave thee, or to return.
155

156. Ruth and Naomi
I. Every person is tested. Sooner or later, but certainly. The tests will vary in severity
with the cases. In every case they will be conclusive, determining the genuineness of
the life professed. They cannot be evaded. If one is for Christ, he will continue with
Him. The test of God cannot be too severe. The true follower cannot be driven away.
To the strongest appeals he replies: “Lord, to whom shall I go?”
II. When tested, an Orpah will go back. Why should she leave so much for so little?
Naomi was only her mother-in-law. There was her own mother standing and
beckoning in the doorway of the old home. She was not only leaving home and
country, she was leaving her God. With much depth of feeling, there was not depth
enough to bind her heart.
III. A ruth, when tested, goes on. What is the difference between her and Orpah,
leading to this different conduct?
1. Her devotion to Naomi. She was less impulsive, perhaps, than her sister, but
hers was a love which bore testing. The Greeks and Latins, among their fine
discriminations, distinguished between the emotional love of feeling and the
intelligent love of choice. Orpah’s love was the former; that of Ruth was the love
of choice. It grew out of careful reflection. It was a deep, undying attachment.
2. The religious foundation of her conduct. This is a trait, if not wholly wanting in
her sister, too weak for any mention—a trait beside which Ruth’s exceeding love
is wholly secondary. Ruth had chosen her mother’s God.
3. Her resolute exercise of will. She was moved by Naomi’s appeals. She thought
anew of what she was leaving. She heard tender voices calling her, of the living, of
the dead: “Come back, come back.” Her heart began to yield. When Orpah
returned, she could scarcely resist the impulse to go with her. Then “she
strengthened herself.” She summoned her soul. She put forth a supreme exercise
of will.
IV. Ruth received her reward. She became an ancestress of the world’s Redeemer.
(Sermons by the Monday Club.)
Ruth’s choice
All the elements of a true choice of God are here described.
1. It involves the surrender of a false belief. This quiet scene may be placed beside
that on Carmel. Ruth’s decision is mightier in its gentleness than Israel’s in its
terror. In manner the two are as unlike as the dawn to the earthquake; in results
as the clear ray of a planet to the flash of a meteor. In essence they are the same.
Our false god has no repulsive name, such as Baal or Chemosh; its real title is self,
its worship sin, its wages death. It must be surrendered.
2. True choice of God involves sacrifice. To start out with Naomi meant not
pleasantness, but bitterness. Ruth followed, as she thought, to loneliness,
homelessness, perpetual widowhood; against the desire of those she left, without
the wish of those to whom she was going; ready to work, to beg, to die if need be,
for the one who stood to her as representing God. To-day, Canaan in the Church
welcomes even Moab to its circle. Earthly advantages are largely on its side. But a
cross seems to wait somewhere in the way, if only that sore surrender of pride
and pleasure and will which prompt the soul’s real refusal.
3. God sends help to a right choice. Providences both of joy and of sorrow;
156

157. attractions and repulsions of heart; subtle influences of companionship; favour
and famine; marriage and mourning; our life is one long plea for Him.
4. A decision is forced. Somewhere in the way comes a test. On either side
example, desire, promise; we must hold to the one and forsake the other.
5. Right decision has its great rewards. What Ruth feared proved only
unsuspected blessings. Losing her life, she found it. Bishop Hall exclaims: “Oh,
the sure and beautiful payment of the Almighty! Who ever forsook the Moab of
this world for the true Israel, and did not at length rejoice in the change?”
(Charles M. Southgate.)
Conduct of Orpah and Ruth contrasted
It is the difference between feeling and principle in religion, between emotion and
consecration, kissing and cleaving.
I. Emotion has its large appointed place in life. It is the colour and fragrance of the
soul’s world. It gives both impulse and reward to action. Emotion has great play in
religion. God appeals to it. The character of God is so presented as to excite our
emotions. We tremble at His awfulness, adore His greatness. The story of Christ’s life
and death has power to move us beyond all else. The insensible heart is usually a
selfish heart. But—
II. Emotion will not take the place of consecration. Here distinguish between
sensuous and spiritual impressions. There is a peace, a rapture, which the Spirit
breathes into the believing soul, the promised manifestation of Christ to him “that
hath My commandments and keepeth them.” This is the reward of obedience, not its
substitute; is not of nature, but of grace. No degree of feeling about religious things is
religion. Natural fondness toward God, as toward parents, may be the mere delight of
an emotional nature, a snare to the soul and an affront to Him. What joy to Christ
that eyes which overflow for a novel or a play should moisten at the story of Calvary?
There is need of searchings of heart and stings of conscience in unsuspected places.
Orpah and Ruth feel alike, love alike, but part for ever at the test of following.
III. The true office of emotion is to draw to consecration. Feeling is for the sake of
following. The Church has still no realm of mightier influence than a consecrated
home. The heaviest condemnation of many in the day of judgment will be that they
resisted the influences and withstood the prayers of a godly home.
IV. Choosing God is proved by choosing, God’s people. The world estimates our
relation to Christ by our relation to His followers. Yet it often seems as if men must
be twice converted, first to Christ, and again to His Church. Do not let this woman’s
devotion shame us. She gave up, literally, all her world for God. True devotion to
Christ turns to His Church with Ruth’s matchless consecration. (Charles M.
Southgate.)
Ruth; or, decision for God
1. An impulsive religion is not always real religion; nay, is very often the reverse.
Better, far better, to be quiet and undemonstrative like Ruth, and to have the root
of the matter in us, than to be impulsive and demonstrative like Orpah, and in the
hour of trial to fail. A straw will show in what direction the stream is flowing. Ask
yourself, “How do I act in little things? Is self habitually postponed to God? And
157

158. this because the Lord is my joy?”
2. The importance of (nay, the necessity for) an entire surrender of ourselves to
God, if we would be Christians indeed. Let us ask ourselves, “Is it thus with me
and the Saviour? Have I thus taken Christ to be mine? Do I thus cleave to Him? Is
He supreme in my affections?”
3. The choice which we have been considering must be made with the full
determination to abide by it, come weal or come woe, for ever. (Aubrey C. Price,
B. A.)
Ruth’s trial and decision
It must have been a severe trial to Ruth’s constancy when she beheld her sister-in-
law, who had probably been the companion of her youth and the friend of her early
widowhood, turning away back to Moab and its idol-gods and leaving her alone with
Naomi; for we are greatly influenced for good or for evil by sympathy and numbers.
And had her steadfastness now depended on her human relations and affections
alone, and had her heart not stricken down and rooted itself in something that was
Divine, she would in all likelihood have returned after her sister-in-law. When one
flower in a garden is pulled up, it loosens the hold of all the other flowers near it,
unless they are much more deeply rooted. And Naomi’s words seemed to give a voice
to this temptation: “Behold, thy sister-in-law has gone back unto her people, and
unto her gods: return thou after thy sister-in-law.” This was like giving an increased
momentum to the stroke, or feathering the arrow and driving it to its mark. But let us
not misunderstand the venerable woman in her yearning interest and disguised love.
There was a hidden harmony between her treatment of Ruth and the rule to deal
gently with young converts as you would do with the early spring blossom or with the
new-born child. But she dreaded a choice made from mere temporary impulse or
secondary motives. The cable that is to connect the ship with the anchor needs to be
tested in every strand or link. One weak point makes all weak, and may be the
occasion of death to thousands. Suppose Ruth to go on to Bethlehem-judah, to be
brought face to face with the stern realities of penury, and then to regret her choice
and to steal away back to Moab, would not the most sacred interests suffer the most?
Here, then, was her “valley of decision.” Naomi had anticipated the maxim, “Try
before you trust”; but she was equally ready to obey the other part of it, “Trust after
you have tried.” (A. Thomson, D. D.)
Whither thou goest, I will go; . . . thy people shall be my people, and thy
God my God.
Ruth: Mind, its purposes and powers
1. That private families are as much under the providence of God as the houses of
kings.
2. That whilst religion does not secure from the ordinary trials of life, it does
secure their being overruled for good.
3. That a devout committal of our being to God in His providence will never fail
of its reward. In the text we have—
I. A deliberate resolution for the true.
1. The true in society.
158

159. 2. The true in worship.
II. A social influence for the true.
1. Naomi represented her country, and her people, and her God, to Ruth.
2. The representation which Naomi gave was most attractive.
(1) Every man’s conduct is a reflection both of his companions and his God.
(2) Heathens are able to identify our companions and our God.
(3) We may give such a view of both as will draw them into our circle.
III. An invincible energy for the time.
1. This force triumphed over all old associations.
2. This force overcame all the pleadings of Naomi.
3. This force changed her social condition and her destiny.
Away with the dogma that man is the creature of circumstances! The soul is a
mariner that can so pilot her barque as to make the most hostile winds waft her to
the shores on which her heart is set. She is an eagle that can rise above the darkest
thundercloud of circumstances, and bask in sunlight, whilst that cloud spends itself
in wild tempests beneath her buoyant wing. (Homilist.)
Ruth’s decision
I. The circumstances of her decision.
II. The extent of her decision. It comprehends the sum of all her actions, and reaches
to the utmost limit of her existence. Profession without principle is nothing.
III. The felicity of her decision. There is no substantial happiness apart from real
religion. Application:
1. Are we Christians? Then we have each a soul to save—a God to serve.
2. Are we yet undecided? Ruth is our pattern.
3. Are we indifferent? Then we resemble Orpah, Ruth’s sister-in-law. (F. Ellaby,
B. A.)
The faithful choice
1. It was an humble choice. She has nothing to offer but herself. She affects not to
bring anything which can make her of any worth. She pleads only for permission
to be to Naomi in her future life all that affection and fidelity can make her. She
has nothing else to offer. It matters not in what condition of life the child of earth
was born, when the Holy Spirit brings her heart to Jesus she comes as a beggar.
Parents and sisters may say she has been always the light and comfort of the
household. They are ready to think she has never sinned. And yet she feels the
burden of guilt, and weeps, and prays over the remembrance of her foolish,
wasted life. The preciousness of the faithful saying, that Jesus came into the
world to save sinners, is her only comfort. The assurance that the Son of Man has
come to seek and to save that which was lost is her single encouragement and
support.
159

160. 2. It was an affectionate choice. Her heart is with Naomi. Her desires all reach
forward to the land to which Naomi journeys, and thither, on whatever terms, she
must and she will go. It is just such a choice to which the Saviour would lead you
all.” My daughter, give Me thy heart,” is His tender appeal to you. And our
youthful, spiritual traveller freely and affectionately responds, “I give my heart to
Thee; Thy face will I seek; hide not Thy face from me.” Her choice is of the
Saviour, because she really loves Him. Infinite attractions are gathered around
Him. His service seems to her all that she can desire.
3. Ruth’s choice was an entire one. There was no hesitation in her mind about the
decision she should make. She manifested no remaining love for Moab, and no
lingering desire to carry something of Moab with her. And it was this entire
choice which made the happiness of her future course. She made the exchange,
the transfer of herself, freely, completely, and without reserve. And there was
nothing left to turn her back to Moab in her possible experience hereafter. When
the choice of a Saviour is thus entire, how completely it opens the way for future
duty! How it settles all future discussions and difficulties with a single decision!
The secret of happiness in religion is just here. Making it the entire, single choice
of the heart. The troubles and difficulties in the Saviour’s service habitually arise
from the vain attempt to serve two masters.
4. Ruth’s choice was a determined choice. Lovely and gentle as she appears, and
humbly and affectionately as she pleads, there was amazing dignity and firmness
in her stand. Some of the most triumphant and remarkable deaths in the history
of early martyrdom for Christ are of young and tender virgins who calmly and
boldly endured every conceivable torture without a moment’s faltering. “I am a
Christian,” was their gentle but firm reply to every solicitation to recant, until,
worn out with suffering, they departed to be with Christ. You may never be called
to the same sorrows. But you will be always summoned to the same decision.
Jesus will always require from you the same unshrinking, determined choice.
5. Ruth’s choice was an instant choice. She asked no time for consideration. Her
mind was made up. Her decision was settled. She staggered not in unbelief, nor
wavered amidst conflicting motives. Why should we ever hesitate a moment in
our acceptance of the Saviour’s offers? Surely when the Lord sets before us life
and death, a blessing and a curse, and bids us choose for ourselves which we will
have, we require no time for consideration. It has become a mere question of
personal voluntary choice. This can never be settled but by our own personal
decision and act. If it is to be settled, it must be finally, in a single moment of
time. Why should that moment be delayed? Why should that frank and
affectionate choice be postponed? Make an instant choice. Say, “When Thou
sayest, Seek ye My face, my heart replies, Thy face, Lord, will I seek.” Why should
any of you hesitate? All the arguments of truth, of interest, of duty, of happiness,
are on one side. (S. H. Tyng, D. D.)
The noble choice
Five choices Ruth made, and five choices must we all make if we ever want to get to
heaven.
1. In the first place, if we want to become Christians, we must, like Ruth in the
text, choose the Christian’s God—a loving God; a sympathetic God; a great
hearted God; an all-encompassing God; a God who flings Himself on this world
in a very abandonment of everlasting affection.
160

161. 2. Again, if we want to be Christians, like Ruth in the text we must take the
Christian’s path. “Where thou goest, I will go,” cried out the beautiful Moabitess
to Naomi. Dangerous promise that. There were deserts to be crossed. There were
jackals that came down through the wilderness. There were bandits. There was
the Dead Sea. Naomi says “Ruth, you must go back. You are too delicate to take
this journey. You will give out in the first five miles. You have not the physical
stamina, or the moral courage, to go with me.” Ruth responds: “Mother, I am
going, anyhow. If I stay in this land I will be overborne of the idolaters; if I go
along with you I shall serve God. Give me that bundle. Let me carry it. I am going
with you, mother, anyhow.”
3. Again, if we want to become Christians, like Ruth in the text we must choose
the Christian’s habitation. “Where thou lodgest, will I lodge,” cried Ruth to
Naomi. She knew that wherever Naomi stopped, whether it were hovel or
mansion, there would be a Christian home; and she wanted to be in it.
4. If we want to become Christians, like Ruth in the text we must choose
Christian associations. “Thy people shall be my people!” cried out Ruth to Naomi.
Oh, ye unconverted people, I know not how you can stand it down in that
moping, saturnine worldly association. Come up into the sunlight of Christian
society—those people for whom all things are working right now, and will work
right for ever. I tell you that the sweetest japonicas grow in the Lord’s garden;
that the largest grapes are from the vineyards of Canaan; that the most sparkling
floods break forth from the “Rock of Ages.” Do not too much pity this Ruth of my
text; for she is going to become joint-owner of the great harvest-fields of Boaz.
5. Once more, if we want to become Christians, we must, like Ruth in the text,
choose the Christian’s death and burial. She exclaimed: “Where thou diest will I
die, and there will I be buried.” I think we all, when leaving this world, would like
to be surrounded by Christian influences. You would not like to have your dying
pillow surrounded by caricaturists, and punsters, and wine-bibbers. How would
you like to have John Leech come with his London pictorials, and Christopher
North with his loose fun, and Tom Hood with his rhyming jokes, when you are
dying? No, no! What we want is radiation in the last moment. Yes; Christian
people on either side the bed, and Christian people at the foot of the bed, and
Christian people to close my eyes, and Christian people to carry me out, and
Christian people to look after those whom I leave behind, and Christian people to
remember me a little while after I am gone. (T. De Witt Talmage.)
Trueheartedness and the tests of true-heartedness
I. I observe that the conduct of Ruth assures us that there is such a thing as true-
heartedness, and thus teaches a lesson of trust in humanity. It reveals certain
elements in humanity that are reliable. Much heartlessness, much frivolity and sin,
will a wise and good man find as he goes about in the world, much to dissipate the
rosy credulousness of his youth, and to sadden his philanthropy; but, on the other
hand, something of his faith will be justified, and he will learn that, after all, there are
elements in human nature worthy of our trust and our love. As the chemist finds
some admixture in what seemed to be a simple element, so, doubtless, at the bottom
of the purest heart lurks some particle of self, some ingredient of our earthly
composition. And if one is disposed to turn a magnifying-glass upon this, it will
appear enormous; if he beholds it through the lens of a sad or a foul experience, it
will look grimy or distorted; or, if with nothing more than his naked eye he has a
mind to notice only the evil that exists among men, he can see plenty of it, and it will
161

162. look badly enough. But it is an equally correct theory of human nature, and a much
more agreeable one, which admits the conviction of some moral loyalty, extant even
in the obscurest places, and maintained under all trials.
II. But, having thus vindicated human nature as to the fact of true-heartedness, let us
proceed to consider its tests. By what signs or expressions may we be assured of its
presence? I reply that the very words of the text, the very ideas to which Ruth
referred, afford a sufficient indication of these tests. For consider what these ideas,
expressed in the language of Ruth, really are. They are the ideas of home, country,
God, and the end of our mortal life. And are there any ideas more vital than these?
Surely, if one cherishes any sacred and true thoughts at all, they must cluster around
these things.
1. Home, that has sheltered and nourished you, that encloses your most secret
life, that claims the first flow of your affections and their last throb.
2. Country, that organism which links your individual being to a public interest,
that gives you a share in history, a pride in great names, an influence in world-
wide issues, and, as a second home, inspires you with a more comprehensive
loyalty.
3. The grave, which bounds all earthly action, and limits every earthly condition,
that realm where distinctions of home and country melt away, the bed where all
must lie, “the relentless crucible” in which rags and splendour alike dissolve, the
gateway to a stupendous mystery.
4. And God, the Infinite Being to whom the instincts of our souls respond, to
whom in our highest consciousness we aspire, the Source and the Interpretation
of all existence, the Light that comprehends our darkness, the Strength that
sustains our weakness, the Presence to which in our guilt and our adoration we
lift our cry, the Nature in which we live and move and have our being—these are
great realities; and it appears to me that the words of Ruth are so eloquent, and
her devotion seems so great, because of the greatness of the things she spoke of.
Indeed, does not this ground of thought and action constitute a grand distinction
of our humanity? If in many points man is closely linked to the brute, is he not
largely separated by his thoughts concerning these things, and by his action upon
them? Ascribe to the animal such affections, such faculties, such power of
reasoning, as we may and as we must, surely no one will claim for him such
conceptions as man entertains concerning home and country and God and the
limitations of his earthly lot. These are manifestations of human nature which
project beyond the sphere of mere animal life, and indicate a larger scope of
being. They are marks of immortality. Start with any one of these ideas, and see
to what it leads. For instance, the relationships of home—is there not an
argument for immortality in these? Or start from the idea of country, and is not
the same conclusion unfolded? The duties, the achievements, the historical
problems, that pertain to nationality, do not they suggest it? And he upon whose
mind dawns some apprehension of the Infinite, he who feels assured that he
holds communion with the Eternal Spirit, and presses forward towards that
perfect excellence, never completely to attain, but always capable of larger
attainment—surely in essence he must be imperishable. And the grave itself, dark
and silent as it is, to such a conscious soul cannot seem the final barrier of
existence, but only the suggestive portal of new achievements. If, then, these
great realities, of which Ruth spoke, are associated with all that is deepest and
noblest in our humanity, he who proves faithful to even one of these ideas, who
holds it as a sacred conviction, and cherishes it with a pure love, has in him the
core of true-heartedness, the ground of a principle, and a possibility in which we
162

163. may trust. And permit me to add that these tests are personal and practical, tests
by which we may try not so much the trueheartedness of others, for which we
may have very little function, but by which each may try his own. A man can
hardly ask himself a more practical question than this: “What are my thoughts,
and what is my conduct, respecting home, country, God, and the limitations of
my mortal life?”
III. I remark, finally, that these four ideas are not only the tests of personal true-
heartedness—they also reveal the great bond of our common humanity. That which is
common to men abides in the hearts of men, is linked with the great facts expressed
in the text. They thus indicate the natural ground of human unity. And upon these
ideas it is the tendency of Christianity to develop a still nobler unity. (E. H. Chapin,
D. D.)
A good resolution
I. A resolution to pursue the journey to heaven.
1. It is a narrow way.
2. It sometimes proves a way of affliction.
3. It is nevertheless a very pleasant way.
II. A resolution to be satisfied with spiritual entertainments.
1. The Christian finds a sweet entertainment in communion with his God—in
praising Him, which is one of the most delightful exercises of the mind; and in
prayer, which is so necessary for the renewing of his spiritual strength.
2. In the Word of God he finds a delightful repast. He is made wise unto
salvation.
3. In the conversation of his fellow Christians, the believer finds delightful
refreshing.
4. The believer finds also times of refreshing from the presence of the Lord when
he takes up his abode in the house of God. He experiences the truth of the
promise,” they that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength.”
III. A resolution to cast in the lot with the people of God. Before you make a
resolution so to do, count the cost, and consider the nature of the step which you
propose to take.
1. The people of God have generally been a persecuted people.
2. The people of God are an afflicted people.
3. The people of God are a holy people.
4. We have said that the people of God are a persecuted and an afflicted people,
but they are nevertheless a people of the best prospects, so that they are truly
wise, and consult their own best interests, who cast in their lot among them.
IV. A resolution to choose the service of God. When a sinner is truly converted from
his sin he cleaves unto the Lord with purpose of heart. “Thy God shall be my God,” is
the resolution which he expresses to the Church of Christ; and in doing so—
1. He resolves to cast away his idols.
2. He who makes this resolution receives God in Christ as his God—God in the
163

164. person of the Mediator.
3. He who chooses God for his God resolves to devote himself to the active
service of God.
V. a resolution to be faithful unto death. What is necessary to faithfulness unto
death?
1. Begin aright.
2. Persevere as you begin, for Christ is not only the Door but the Way.
Often repair to the fountain of His blood for peace; constantly resort to His throne of
grace for spiritual strength; often sit at the feet of Jesus to learn the mysteries of the
kingdom of God. To conclude—
1. We admire the constancy and perseverance of Ruth.
2. We learn from this passage of Scripture that we ought to be faithful to those
who are inquiring the way to Zion with their faces thitherward.
3. The inquiring and anxious sinner should persevere whatever difficulties may
present themselves. If the difficulties and trials of the way were tenfold, it would
still be his interest as well as his duty to endure unto the end. (Essex
Remembrancer.)
Ruth the true-hearted
That strong and brave decision on the hills of her native Moab, where she resolves to
cling to her aged and sorrow-stricken mother-in-law, reveals a character of no
ordinary quality. There is in her what, for want of a better phrase, I must call depth of
nature. Her character is rooted in a deep, rich soil of true humanity. A woman whose
whole being is on the surface, who has no hidden deeps of feeling and thought and
aspiration and love—a tree decked with showy blossoms, but never hung with golden
fruit—is felt to be false to her true nature and Heaven-appointed mission. Ruth
reveals to us a character nourished and strengthened from the unseen depths of an
affluent nature which we love to associate with woman. The shallow woman exhibits
no such heroism as that of Ruth. Here, too, we discover in her that most essential
characteristic of a true woman—heart. She thinks and speaks and acts like one whose
inspiring life-force is a heart aglow with the fires of feeling, throbbing with the
pulsations of love and beneficence; and her whole outward life is but the spontaneous
outflow of this full, fresh fountain within. A nature thus endowed and animated is
rich in its own resources, and bestows its abundant benefactions upon all who come
within its charmed sphere. The heart is the true regulator and benefactor of life.
Sometimes neither art nor intellect predominates, but the throne which the heart
should occupy is held by the ungracious goddess of Stoicism—a stolid form, which no
prayer can move to sympathy, and from which no loving word ever proceeds. How
desolate is the nature over which either of these three false powers presides! How
impoverished is every life encompassed by the chilling atmosphere of such a nature!
On the other hand, how enriched are all they who breathe the genial air which
surrounds one with a nature like that of Ruth, in which the heart sits queen on her
rightful throne, and dispenses her regal gifts to all. Hence the importance of true
heart-culture in education. The neglect of this essential part of genuine culture, and
the giving of exclusive attention to the intellect is one of the most perilous tendencies
of this age. Such a process may produce a Lucretia Borgia in one sphere, and a
George Eliot in another; but a Madame Guyon, a Mary Lyon, and an Elizabeth Fry
will seldom or never come forth to bless mankind under its false reign. It is Madame
164

165. De Stael who wisely says that “life is valuable only so far as it serves for the religious
education of the heart.” Let us note another feature in the character of Ruth. Devoted
affection like that of this young Moabitess to her aged mother-in-law deserves our
highest tribute. There is an utter unselfishness in this devotion that is beautiful to
con- template. A selfish, exacting, suspicious passion, misnamed love, is the curse of
its possessor; a love pure and unselfish is the perpetual joy of the heart in which it
glows, and of all who feel its Divine warmth. Orpah can speak loving words; Ruth can
do heroic deeds. A selfish person cannot interpret unselfish love. Two hearts must be
in happy accord to read the meaning of each aright. Blessed are they who can discern
and feel true goodness. Blessed are those homes where true-hearted Ruths preside
and Love reigns, goddess of the happy home circle. Yes, it is heart-power, and not
any other force, that is most impressive and most enduring even in this
unappreciative world. Courage pays its devotion at the shrine of suffering love;
physical force surrenders to the higher power of the heart.” Alexander, Caesar,
Charlemagne, and myself founded empires; but upon what foundations did we rest
the creations of our genius? Upon force. Jesus Christ alone founded His empire upon
love, and at this hour millions of men would die for Him.” We must rear monuments
in human hearts, by true love and devotion to humanity, if we would live through
succeeding ages. The crowning grace of Ruth’s character, as it is that of every other
human being, is her piety. Love to man is crowned and glorified by love to God. (C.
H. Payne, D. D.)
True decision
We have just stood at the line which separates Moab from Judah. Orpah has gone.
We shall trace her course no longer. We would gladly never see her example followed
by others. We must now confine ourselves to the beautiful decision and faithful
choice of Ruth. She stands before us a sincere youthful convert to the Lord’s service.
She has decided the question for her soul by gratefully accepting the offers of a
Saviour’s love. She sets out upon an untried journey alone. Naomi, indeed, is with
her. And her heart is affectionately bound to her mother-in-law. But Ruth has many
cares, trials, and remembrances of which Naomi is not conscious. To Naomi the
journey is a well-known return. To Ruth every step is untried and new. She was born
in Moab. She knows nothing of Judah. Thus is it with every youthful convert. The
experienced and aged Christian has much acquaintance with the way in which you
go. The new-born child of grace takes every step on ground unknown and untried.
This is the way in which all must go who would walk with God. “This people shall
dwell alone.” Each one, be the multitude ever so great, is a hidden one with God.
Multitudes may be travelling in the same direction, but the feelings and experience of
each are solitary. Ruth must make her decision in her own secret heart, and make it
for herself alone. Her earthly friends must all be left. They are in Moab, from whence
she takes now her final departure. This separation is not to be made without a trial of
her faith. The more affectionate she is in her real choice, the more she will feel the
separation from those whom she leaves behind. Religion cannot destroy our earthly
affections, our interest in those who are dear to us in natural ties. Nay, it much
increases the warmth and power of our love. This decision may often meet with much
opposition from those with whom you dwell. Your dearest earthly connections may
oppose. They love you. But they do not love your religion. You must follow the Lord
fully though you follow Him alone among your earthly connections; and He will
make those who oppose at peace with you. Be faithful to Him, and your fidelity shall
be the source of increased confidence and respect, even from the worldly who appear
to reject and despise you. As we trace the history of Ruth, we find her meeting with
165

166. new trials of her faith and decision after she sets out alone. Orpah has gone. But still
Naomi proves the spirit of Ruth. Your sister has gone back to her people and her
gods. If you mean ever to go back, now is your best time to go. Remember, I have
nothing to offer you. If you go with me it must be to be a partner of my griefs and
wants. Thus God often proves the young disciple with new trials. He sends His east
wind upon the young trees of His planting; not to weaken or destroy, but to give
greater strength and endurance for the time to come. Our real conversion to Him is
an hour of peace and blessedness; but it is not an end of trial. Nay, it is the very
beginning of new contests; and our fidelity in the decision we have made is to be
proved at once, and to be proved constantly, by new dispensations of the will of God.
Be really faithful and sincere, and God will prove your faith, to strengthen, settle, and
stablish you for ever. Be truly gold, and then the refiner’s fire will only purify and
make you bright. This faithful decision Ruth was obliged to make in the face of
backsliding in others. She sees Orpah go back, yet she perseveres. When a child of the
world comes out on the side of Christ, and pursues, in the midst of the evil examples
of many, a course of simple, faithful devotion to the Saviour, how it honours His
truth! How it strengthens His cause! How it impresses even those who oppose! How
such faithfulness is owned and prospered by the Lord, to whom it is offered, in the
usefulness to others of the life which is adorned by it. (S.H.Tyng, D. D.)
Ruth deciding for God
I. Affection for the godly should influence us to godliness. Many forces combine to
effect this.
1. There is the influence of companionship.
2. The influence of admiration. Let us therefore copy the saints.
3. The influence of instruction. When we learn from a teacher we are affected by
him in many ways. Instruction is a kind of formation.
4. The influence of reverence. Those who are older, wiser, and better than we are
create in us a profound respect, and lead us to follow their example.
5. The influence of desire to cheer them.
6. The influence of fear of separation. It will be an awful thing to be eternally
divided from the dear ones who seek our salvation.
II. Resolves to godliness will be tested.
1. By the poverty of the godly and their other trials.
2. By counting the cost.
3. By the drawing back of others.
4. By the duties involved in religion. Ruth must work in the fields. Some proud
people will not submit to the rules of Christ’s house, nor to the regulations which
govern the daily lives of believers.
5. By the apparent coldness of believers. Naomi does not persuade her to keep
with her, but the reverse. She was a prudent woman, and did not wish Ruth to
come with her by persuasion, but by conviction.
6. By the silent sorrow of some Christians. Naomi said, “Call me not Naomi, but
call me Bitterness.” Persons of a sorrowful spirit there always will be; but this
must not hinder us from following the Lord.
166

167. III. Such Godliness must mainly lie in the choice of God.
1. This is the believer’s distinguishing possession: “Thy God shall be my God.”
2. His great article of belief: “I believe in God.”
3. His ruler and lawgiver: “Make me to go in the path of Thy commandments”
(Psa_119:38).
4. His instructor: “Teach me Thy way, O Lord” (Psa_28:2).
5. His trust and stay (see Rth_2:12): “This God is our God for ever and ever, He
will be our guide even unto death” (Psa_48:14).
IV. But it should involve the choice of His people: “Thy people shall be my people.”
They are ill spoken of by the other kingdom. Not all we could wish them to be. Not a
people out of whom much is to be gained. But Jehovah is their God, and they are His
people. Our eternal inheritance is part and parcel of theirs. Let us make deliberate,
humble, firm, joyful, immediate choice for God and His saints; accepting their
lodging in this world, and going with them whither they are going. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
The influence of friends
It is not improbable that Ruth was in heart a Jewess, and that, for reasons which
looked beyond the mere temporalities of life, she desired to cast in her lot with the
descendants of Abraham. It may be that the religion which her mother-in-law
brought with her into Moab had become the daughter’s hope; and, discerning in it
those elements of truth which were wanting in the faith of her own fathers, she
naturally concluded that the people who were guided by its promises and commands
would have power and blessing from above. When we add to this the fact that this
woman was to be one in that line of generation through which passed the seed of the
Shiloh, that the child yet to be born to her was to be the father of David’s sire, we may
see how direct is the conclusion that this heathen woman did, in her conduct, obey
not merely the impulses of nature, but the influences of grace. It does not appear
probable that God, having such a work for her to do, would leave her to herself; that
He would trust to her unguided will and emotion the part which He designed her to
act in His great scheme of love. The decision of Ruth, then, supplies us with this
proposition: those who are striving to serve the Lord should cling to those who are
the disciples of the same Master. The law of dependence, as it acts upon this world of
human beings, and resolves itself into the other laws of influence and of sympathy, is
found in all the relations of man. In itself it is a beautiful thing, this leaning of one
upon another, this clasping of hand to hand in the great circle of human
brotherhood, and feeling the electric spark as the touch of a single finger sends a
thrill through the multitude. Man was born for this thing, even when he was born
without sin; and that would be a high life where this law of sympathy was at work,
with no power but the power of doing good. With us, however, the kindest laws of
heaven have felt the disturbing force of sin; and sin has so perverted them that they
act against their design, and in opposition to themselves. The influences, then, of one
upon another may be for evil, as well as for good; the best intentions may be
counteracted, and the best efforts frustrated, by those with whom we stand
connected under the laws of social life. If we desire to serve God and be the sincere
followers of our Lord we must break away from those who are serving other gods,
and seek the companionship of those who serve the God of Israel. If, in times past,
our associations have been with worldly persons, if we have moved in that circle of
life where there is no God save the passions, and no law save the will, we must break
out from this circle and enter another where life takes a higher form. We must
167

168. surround ourselves with those whose thoughts and aims are upward, like our own,
that thus our strivings may be aided, and our efforts sustained, by those with whom
we have to do. This counsel touches some of the most delicate points in the social
state. It enters into the family circle, and draws its lines between those who have a
common interest in the things which concern the body. It sweeps through all our
connections, from the highest to the lowest, and demands that everywhere, and
under every form, its authority be acknowledged and its injunctions obeyed. Now, of
these ties of nature, some are voluntary, and others are not. Of the latter I will not
now speak; while concerning the former I have something more to say. The tie of
marriage is a voluntary tie, and I here confess my amazement at the readiness with
which Christians yoke themselves with unbelievers. I know of few greater hindrances
to a consistent walking with God than an irreligious husband or an irreligious wife.
We say, and the remark is applied to religious things, that the husband can go his
way, and the wife her way; but this proves, in the trial, to be about as practicable as
for the parts of the body to separate and move off in opposite directions. The tie
forbids this independence; and there is not a Christian wife or husband in the world
who can so overcome the law which holds them as to act with entire freedom in the
face of indifference or opposition. It is time for some one to tell the people that
marriage is an institution of the Most High God, and that in its laws it touches the
interests which are eternal as well as those which are temporal. (S. Cooke, D. D.)
Ruth’s spiritual affinity with Naomi
This family feeling reigns among all the true sons of God under every dispensation. It
operates with all the steadiness of an instinct. Apart altogether from Divine
commands, believers exercise mutual attraction like planets that move round the
same central orb. They are conscious of “the unity of the Spirit.” Under the Old
Testament, “they that feared the Lord spake often one to another”; under the New
Testament, “they that believed were together.” There is not an instance recorded in
the whole inspired history of Christians preferring to live in isolation from their
brethren. If there were only two believers in the same city, they would be irresistibly
drawn to each other just in the degree in which they were believers. And those who
are thus mutually attracted shed many mutual blessings, like flowers growing
contiguous to each other in a garden that drop the dew around each other’s roots.
And now her God-inspired resolution strengthening and glowing as she proceeds,
culminates in a solemn vow of undying constancy, in which she imprecates Heaven’s
righteous retribution upon herself should she fail to keep it: “The Lord do so to me,
and more also, if ought but death part thee and me.” (A. Thomson, D. D.)
Influence
The Bible affirms that no man liveth to himself. Each life has an influence. What is
influence? It is that subtle something which resides in our deeds, words, spirit, and
character. It is a shadow of ourselves, our impersonal self. It is to us relatively what
the fragrance is to the flowers, what light is to the star. We are all sensitive to
influence: our hearts are open to goodness, beauty, genius. There is never a day when
perhaps unconsciously we do not receive and reflect a thousand shadowy forms.
Some are more receptive of influences than others, just as there are certain soils that
drink in more greedily sunshine and shower; and as there are certain bodily
conditions more open to disease, so there are certain mental and moral dispositions
more open to good and evil, truth and error. There are men like clay—you can mould
them as you will; others are like rock—you must chisel them as you can. Naomi was
168

169. not perfect, but she exerted a great influence upon her daughters-in-law.
I. Some of the lines along which her influence was transmitted.
1. There was relation ship. Naomi was mother-in-law to Ruth. This link was
sanctified to the salvation of Ruth. Relationship is to-day one of the most
powerful aids to moral influence. See it in the Gospels: Andrew first finds his own
brother Simon; Philip findeth Nathanael. Most children are open to maternal
influences. Native missionaries are the best. Influence follows love.
2. There was sorrow. These women had shared a common grief: they had
watched at the same bed of death; participated in the same hopes and fears.
Naomi would comfort Ruth with her Jewish hope and consolation. Sorrow fits for
influence. The heart is plastic. The wax is melted and receives the impress of the
seal. The mind is filled for the teaching. Such opportunities for transmission of
holy influence are constantly occurring.
3. There was humanity. Relationship and sorrow are accidental; humanity is the
essential fact, and binds the world together. Angelic influence is impeded by
difference in nature. Our hands fit into each other’s palm, our faces reflect similar
features. We have common wants and ways. Influence runs along the lines of our
human brotherhood.
II. Some of the impediments that might have interrupted her influence. There were
considerations adverse to her influence.
1. Nationality. Ruth was a Moabitess. Israel and Moab were ancient enemies. The
Turk will not readily yield to the English influence. Yet so great is the power of
moral influence that it overcame this barrier.
2. Education. Ruth had grown up to womanhood before she came under the
influence of Naomi; her habits were formed. She was a devout idolatress. Here
was a strong impediment for moral influence to overcome. Virgin soil may be
easily cultivated as we wish; not so the land long covered with weeds. When the
whole man is overrun with noxious principles it is not easy to exterminate and
implant new ideas and habits. This the good life of Naomi accomplished in Ruth.
3. Adverse example. Orpah went back to Moab. The good influence may fail even
where its power has been felt strongly. Who can estimate the power of adverse
example to-day! How many are turned by it from the ways of religion! Naomi
may be counteracted by Orpah.
III. The success of the good influence. The success was not absolute. Orpah returned,
Ruth continued. See her wisdom. She in her turn becomes influential and useful—a
help to Naomi. She becomes a permanent factor in the redemptive history. See the
wisdom of yielding to high moral influences. (E. Biscombe.)
The power of Christian character
shining through the life of a Christian man is strikingly illustrated in the following
incident: “An Afghan once spent an hour in the company of Dr. William Marsh, of
England. When he heard that Dr. Marsh was dead, he said: ‘His religion shall now be
my religion; his God shall be my God; for I must go where he is and see his face
again.’”
If ought but death part thee and me.—
Religion a powerful bond
169

170. 1. Such and so powerful is the bond of religion that it makes the saints of God not
only desirous, but even resolute also, both to live and die together.
2. All persons and people should so live as those that do expect that they and
their relations may die. So Ruth did here expect it, both for her mother and for
herself. “Alas, I never thought of his death.” So there be others that live so
licentiously as if they should never die, never come to judgment, as if they were to
have an eternity of pleasure of sin in this world (as Psa_49:10-13).
3. As burial is one of the dues of the dead, so dear friends desire to be buried
together. Ruth desires to be buried with her godly mother. It is very observable
that the first purchase of possession mentioned in Scripture history was a place
to bury in, not to build in (Gen_23:9).
4. Death is the final dissolution of all bonds of duty, whether natural, civil, or
religious. The wife is no longer bound to her husband (Rom_7:1-4), children to
parents, subjects to princes, and people to pastors. (C. Ness.)
17 Where you die I will die, and there I will be
buried. May the Lord deal with me, be it ever so
severely, if even death separates you and me.”
CLARKE, "The Lord do so to me, and more - May he inflict any of those
punishments on me, and any worse punishment, if I part from thee till death. And it
appears that she was true to her engagement; for Naomi was nourished in the house
of Boaz in her old age, and became the fosterer and nurse of their son Obed, Rth_
4:15, Rth_4:16.
GILL, "Where thou diest will I die, and there will I be buried,.... She was
determined to abide with her unto death, and not only was desirous to die as she did,
but where she should die; in the same country, cottage, and bed, and be laid in the
same grave, in hope of rising together at the resurrection of the just; having no
regard at all to the sepulchres of her fathers, which people in all ages and countries
have been fond of being laid in, as an honour and happiness. So with the Greeks and
Romans, not only relations, but intimate friends, and such as had a strong affection
for each other, were sometimes buried in the same grave, as Crates and Polemon (i),
Paris and Oenome (k), and others (l); see Gal_2:20,
the Lord do so to me, and more also, if ought but death part thee and me;
this is the form of oath she used for confirmation of what she had said, and to put an
end to the debate on this subject; what she imprecates upon herself is not expressed,
should she otherwise do than what she swears to; leaving Naomi to supply it in her
170

171. own mind, and as being what was not fit to be named, and the greatest evil that could
be thought to befall a perjured person.
PULPIT, "Where thou diest, will I die, and there will I be buried. She wished to
be naturalized for life in Naomi's fatherland. Nor did she wish her remains to be
conveyed back for burial to the land of her nativity. So may Yahveh do to me,
and still more, but death only shall part me and thee. She appeals to the God of
the Israelites, the one universal God. She puts herself on oath, and invokes his
severest penal displeasure if she should suffer anything less uncontrollable than
death to part her from her mother-in-law. "So may Yahveh do to me." It was
thus that the Hebrews made their most awful appeals to Yahveh. They signified
their willingness to suffer some dire calamity if they should either do the evil
deed repudiated or fail to do the good deed promised. So stands in misty
indefiniteness; not, as Fuller supposes, by way of "leaving it to the discretion of
God Almighty to choose that arrow out of his quiver which he shall think it most
fit to shoot," but as a kind of euphemism, or cloudy veil, two-thirds concealing,
and one-third revealing, whatever horrid infliction could by dramatic sign be
represented or hinted. And still more—a thoroughly Semitic idiom, and so may
he add (to do) There was first of all a full imprecation, and then an additional
'bittock,' to lend intensity to the asseveration. "But death only shall sever
between me and thee!" Ruth's language is broken. Two formulas of imprecation
are flung together. One, if complete, would have been to this effect: "So may
Yahveh do to me, and so may he add to do, if ( ‫ם‬ ִ‫א‬ ) aught but death sever
between me and thee!" The other, if complete, would have run thus: "I swear by
Yahveh 'that' ( ‫י‬ ִ‫כּ‬ ) death, death only, shall part thee and me. In the original the
word death has the article, death emphatically. It is as if she had said death, the
great divider. The full idea is in substance death alone. This divider alone, says
Ruth, "shall sever between me and thee;" literally, "between me and between
thee," a Hebrew idiom, repeating for emphasis' sake the two-sided relationship,
but taking the repetition in reverse order, between me (and thee) and between
thee (and me).
18 When Naomi realized that Ruth was
determined to go with her, she stopped urging
her.
171

172. GILL, "When she saw that she was steadfastly minded to go with her,....
That she was strong in her resolutions, and steadfast in her determinations not to go
back to her own country, but to go forward with her; and nothing could move her
from the firm purpose of her mind, which was what Naomi wanted to make trial of:
then she left speaking unto her: that is, upon that head of returning home;
otherwise, no doubt, upon this a close, comfortable, religious conversation ensued,
which made their journey the more pleasant and agreeable.
HENRY, "8. Naomi is hereby silenced (Rth_1:18): When she saw that Ruth was
stedfastly minded to go with her (which was the very thing she aimed at in all that
she had said, to make her of a stedfast mind in going with her), when she saw that
she had gained her point, she was well satisfied, and left off speaking to her. She
could desire no more than that solemn protestation which Ruth had just now made.
See the power of resolution, how it puts temptation to silence. Those that are
unresolved, and go in religious ways without a stedfast mind, tempt the tempter, and
stand like a door half open, which invites a thief; but resolution shuts and bolts the
door, resists the devil, and forces him to flee.
The Chaldee paraphrase thus relates the debate between Naomi and Ruth: - Ruth
said, Entreat me not to leave thee, for I will be a proselyte. Naomi said, We are
commanded to keep sabbaths and good days, on which we may not travel above
2000 cubits - a sabbath-day's journey. Well, said Ruth, whither thou goest I will go.
Naomi said, We are commanded not to tarry all night with Gentiles. Well, said
Ruth, where thou lodgest I will lodge. Naomi said, We are commanded to keep 613
precepts. Well, said Ruth, whatever thy people keep I will keep, for they shall be my
people. Naomi said, We are forbidden to worship any strange god. Well, said Ruth,
thy God shall be my God. Naomi said, We have four sorts of deaths for malefactors,
stoning, burning, strangling, and slaying with the sword. Well, said Ruth, where
thou diest I will die. We have, said Naomi, houses of sepulchre. And there, said Ruth,
will I be buried.
BI, "When she saw that she was stedfastly minded to go with her, then she left
speaking unto her.
Trust after testing
After proof and trial made of their fidelity we are to trust our brethren, without any
further suspicion. Not to try before we trust is want of wisdom; not to trust after we
have tried is want of charity. The goldsmith must purify the dross and ore from the
gold, but he must be wary lest he makes waste of good metal if over-curious in too
often refining. We may search and sound the sincerity of our brethren, but after good
experience made of their uprightness we must take heed lest by continual sifting and
proving them we offend a weak Christian. (T. Fuller, B. D.)
Benefit of a thorough decision
Those who appear half-hearted in their self-consecration expose themselves to a
legion of tempters. Lingering on the border-land, they keep within the arrow mark of
Satan. Keeping in the suburbs of Sodom, they are in danger of coming within the
172

173. sweep of its consuming fires. The world hopes that it shall get them back again to its
ranks. They resemble persons walking in a crowd with flowing robes, which afford
those who wish them evil an easy means of pulling them back and laying them in the
dust. When it becomes clearly seen that our heart is fixed, the world gives us up in
despair and “leaves off speaking unto us.” And how that choice ennobled the young
Moabitess! What pure human love! What high devotion! What sublime self-
renunciation! What true wisdom introducing among the elements that should
determine her choice eternity as well as time! Decision of character gives full play to a
man’s powers whatever they be, and makes them his own. (A. Thomson, D. D.)
Decision a safeguard
If a man is seen to be decided in his stand for Christ, antagonists will give over
assailing him. There is nothing in the use of which men are more discriminating than
entreaty, argument, or influence. So long as the object of their solicitude is wavering,
they will bring all their batteries to bear upon him, for there is still the hope that he
will yield. But when he comes openly and determinedly out for Christ, they will waste
no more ammunition on him. They leave him thenceforth alone, and attack some one
else. Thus decision, while it may require an effort to make it, is, after it is made, a
safeguard against assault, So long as a vessel has no flag at her mast-head, the sea-
robber may think it safe to attack her; but let her hoist the flag of this nation, and
that will make the assailant pause. In like manner, the hoisting over us of the banner
of the Cross, being a symbol of decision, is also an assurance of protection. (W.M.
Taylor, D. D.)
BENSON, "Ruth 1:18. That she was steadfastly minded to go with her, &c. —
Was not this the very thing that Naomi aimed at in all she said, namely, to bring
Ruth to be of this steadfast mind? Then she left off speaking — Having gained
her point. For she could desire no further confirmation of it than that solemn
protestation which Ruth had just now made. See the power of resolution, how it
puts temptation to silence! Those that are but half resolved, and go on in the
ways of religion without a steadfast mind, stand like a door ajar, which invites a
thief. But resolution shuts and bolts the door, and then the devil flees from us.
PULPIT, "And she perceived. In our idiom we should have introduced the
proper name, "And Naomi perceived." That she was determined to go with her.
She saw that Ruth was fixed in her resolution. And she left off speaking to her.
She "gave in." Ruth, as Fuller has it, was "a fixed star."
PULPIT, "Moral steadfastness.
"When she saw that she was steadfastly minded." "Then she left speaking." The
test had done a true work, and we see the heroine who could stand fast. Yes;
"having done all, to stand," is something in the great emergencies and
temptations of life. There are times when to stand in the rush of the stream, as
the river breaks into spray around us, is as much for the hour as we can do, and
173

174. God knows and honors that.
I. THE STEADFAST MIND GIVES THE STEADFAST STEP. A double-
minded man is unstable in all his ways. Veering here and there like the wind,
there is no dependence on the direction he may take. The man or the woman is
made by something within them invisible to the world. When Christ was led as a
lamb to the slaughter, the great conflict had been fought out in Gethsemane, and
then the steps were calm and steadfast. What an hour is that in which, in
common parlance, "the mind is made up," the resolution taken. This is firmness,
as opposed to obstinacy, which acts with out reasons, and often in the teeth of
them. The misery caused in this world by obstinate people is to be seen
sometimes in the home, where sulkiness of temper makes the lives of others
miserable Firmness is the result of the thoughtful decision of an enlightened
mind and a consecrated heart.
II. THE STEADFAST MIND MAKES THE REST COMPANION. Ruth was
ready for the companion journey back to Bethlehem. And in all our life journeys
nothing is so precious as a steadfast heart. There are times of misinterpretation
in all lives—times of disheartenment, times of shadow and darkness. In such
hours a steadfast companion is God's richest gift to us. What consolation it is to
know that even humanly every support will not give way, that there will always
be one eye to brighten, one hand to help, one heart to love, one mind to
appreciate. The fickle and irresolute may have a transient beauty and a winning
manner, but these are poor endowments without a steadfast mind.
III. THE STEADFAST MIND IS FREED FROM THE INFINITUDE OF
LESSER WORRIES. It is made up. It is not open to every solicitation. It is
negative to doubt and distrust. This is the right way, and naught can move it.
The feeble and irresolute have a restless life. They are constantly balancing
expediences and advantages. Christ our Divine Lord set his face steadfastly to go
to Jerusalem. The hardest journey of all to the shame and spitting, the awful
darkness and the cruel cross. If we are firm and decided in our purposes we shall
not be wasting either time or strength upon the solicitations of the popular or
profitable. A voice within will say, "This is the way, walk ye in it."—W.M.S.
LANGE, "Ruth 1:18. And when she saw that she was firmly resolved. Older
expositors have imagined that Naomi’s efforts to persuade her daughters-in-law
to return homeward, were not altogether seriously meant. She only wished to test
them. They take this view in order to free Naomi from the reproach of being too
174

175. little anxious to introduce her daughters into Israel and the true faith (Rambach:
Quœrunt hic interpretes an recte fecerit Noomia, etc.).[FN31] But this whole
exposition is a dogmatic anachronism. Naomi could entertain no thoughts of
missionary work as understood in modern times, and for that she is not to be
reproached. The great love on which the blessing of the whole narrative rests,
shows itself precisely in this, that Naomi and her daughters-in-law were persons
of different nationality and religion. This contrast—which a marriage of ten
years has only affectionately covered up—it Isaiah, that also engenders the
conflict of separation. During more then ten years the marriage of Naomi’s sons
to Moabitesses was and continued to be wrong in principle, although, in the
happy issue of their choice, its unlawfulness was lost sight of. What she had not
done then in the spring-tide of their happiness, Naomi could not think of doing
now. Her generous love shows itself now rather in dissuading her daughters-in-
law from going with her to Israel. For they surely would have gone along, if their
deceased husbands, instead of remaining in Moab, had returned to Israel. But
their death had in reality dissolved every external bond with Naomi. No doubt,
Naomi now feels the grief which the unlawful actions of her husband and sons
have entailed. Had her daughters-in-law been of Israel, there would naturally be
no necessity of her returning solitary and forsaken. She feels that “the hand of
Jehovah is against her.” How indelicate would it be now, nay how unbecoming
the sacredness of the relations involved, if Naomi, at this moment, when she is
herself poor, and with no prospect in the future, were to propose to her
daughters-in-law to leave not merely the land but also the god of Moab, that thus
they might accompany her. If she had ever wished, at this moment she would
scarcely dare, to do it. It is one of the symptoms of the conflict, that she could not
do it. The appearance of self interest would have cast a blot on the purity of their
mutual love. Naomi might now feel or believe what she had never before thought
of,—she could do nothing but dissuade. Anything else would have rudely
destroyed the grace and elevation of the whole beautiful scene. The great
difference between Orpah and Ruth shows itself in the very fact that the one
yields to the dissuasion, the other withstands. Ruth had the tenderly sensitive
heart to understand that Naomi must dissuade; and to all Naomi’s unuttered
reasons for feeling obliged to dissuade, she answers with her vow. Naomi
dissuades on the ground that she is poor,—“where thou abidest, I will abide,” is
the answer; that she is about to live among another people,—“thy people is my
people;” that she worships another God,—“thy God is my God;” that she has no
husband for her,—“only death shall part me from thee.” Under no other
circumstances could the conflict have found an end so beautiful. Naomi must
dissuade in order that Ruth might freely, under no pressure but that of her own
love, accept Israel’s God and people. Only after this is done, and she holds firmly
to her decision, does Naomi consent and “cease to dissuade her.”
175

176. 19 So the two women went on until they came to
Bethlehem. When they arrived in Bethlehem,
the whole town was stirred because of them, and
the women exclaimed, “Can this be Naomi?”
BARNES, "And they said - i. e. the women of Bethlehem said. “They” in the
Hebrew is feminine.
CLARKE, "All the city was moved about them - It appears that Naomi was
not only well known, but highly respected also at Bethlehem; a proof that Elimelech
was of high consideration in that place.
GILL, "So they two went until they came to Bethlehem,.... Went on their way
directly till they came to it, without lingering or staying by the way, at least not
unnecessarily, and not for any time; and they kept together, though Ruth was a
younger woman, and could have gone faster, yet she kept company with her ancient
mother, and was no doubt very much edified and instructed by her pious
conversation; and it seems that they were alone, only they two; for as they had no
camels nor asses to ride on, but were obliged to travel on foot, so they had no
servants to wait upon them, and assist them in their journey, such were their mean
circumstances:
and it came to pass, when they were come to Bethlehem; had entered the
city, and were seen by some that formerly had known Naomi, or at least to whom she
made herself known:
that all the city was moved about them; the news of their arrival was soon
spread throughout the place, and the whole city rang of it; so the Septuagint version,
"all the city sounded"; it was all the talk every where, it was in everybody's mouth,
that Naomi, who had been so long out of the land, and thought to be dead, and it was
not expected she would never return again, was now come; and this drew a great
concourse of people in a tumultuous manner, as the word signifies, to see her; and as
it may denote a corporeal motion of them, so the inward moving and working of their
passions about her; some having pity and compassion on her to see such a change in
her person and circumstances; others treating her with scorn and contempt, and
upbraiding her for leaving her native place, and not content to share the common
affliction of her people, intimating that she was rightly treated for going out of the
176

177. land at such a time into a strange country; and others were glad to see their old
neighbour again, who had always behaved well among them; so the Syriac and Arabic
versions, "all the city rejoiced"; many no doubt knew her not, and would be asking
questions about her, and others answering them, which is commonly the case of a
crowd of people on such an occasion:
and they said, is this Naomi? that is, the women of the place said so, for the word
is feminine; and perhaps they were chiefly women that gathered about her, and put
this question in a way of admiration; is this Naomi that was so beautiful, and used to
look so pleasant and comely, and now so wrinkled and sorrowful, who used to dress
so well, and now in so mean an habit! that used to be attended with maidens to wait
on her, and now alone! for, as Aben Ezra observes, this shows that Elimelech and
Naomi were great personages in Bethlehem formerly, people of rank and figure, or
otherwise there would not have been such a concourse of people upon her coming,
and such inquiries made and questions put, had she been formerly a poor woman.
HENRY, "
Naomi and Ruth, after many a weary step (the fatigue of the journey, we may
suppose, being somewhat relieved by the good instructions Naomi gave to her
proselyte and the good discourse they had together), came at last to Bethlehem. And
they came very seasonably, in the beginning of the barley-harvest, which was the
first of their harvests, that of wheat following after. Now Naomi's own eyes might
convince her of the truth of what she had heard in the country of Moab, that the Lord
had visited his people in giving them bread, and Ruth might see this good land in its
best state; and now they had opportunity to provide for winter. Our times are in
God's hand, both the events and the time of them. Notice is here taken,
I. Of the discomposure of the neighbours upon this occasion (Rth_1:19): All the
city was moved about them. Her old acquaintance gathered about her, to enquire
concerning her state, and to bid her welcome to Bethlehem again. Or perhaps they
were moved about her, lest she should be a charge to the town, she looked so bare.
By this it appears that she had formerly lived respectably, else there would not have
been so much notice taken of her. If those that have been in a high and prosperous
condition break, or fall into poverty or disgrace, their fall is the more remarkable.
And they said, Is this Naomi? The women of the city said it, for the word is feminine.
Those with whom she had formerly been intimate were surprised to see her in this
condition; she was so much broken and altered with her afflictions that they could
scarcely believe their own eyes, nor think that this was the same person whom they
had formerly seen, so fresh, and fair, and gay: Is this Naomi? So unlike is the rose
when it is withered to what it was when it was blooming. What a poor figure does
Naomi make now, compared with what she made in her prosperity! If any asked this
question in contempt, upbraiding her with her miseries (“is this she that could not be
content to fare as her neighbours did, but must ramble to a strange country? see
what she has got by it!”), their temper was very base and sordid. Nothing more
barbarous than to triumph over those that are fallen. But we may suppose that the
generality asked it in compassion and commiseration: “Is this she that lived so
plentifully, and kept so good a house, and was so charitable to the poor? How has the
gold become dim!” Those that had seen the magnificence of the first temple wept
when they saw the meanness of the second; so these here. Note, Afflictions will make
great and surprising changes in a little time. When we see how sickness and old age
alter people, change their countenance and temper, we may think of what the
Bethlehemites said: “Is this Naomi? One would not take it to be the same person.”
God, by his grace, fit us for all such changes, especially the great change!
177

178. JAMISON, "Rth_1:19-22. They come to Beth-lehem.
all the city was moved about them — The present condition of Naomi, a
forlorn and desolate widow, presented so painful a contrast to the flourishing state of
prosperity and domestic bliss in which she had been at her departure.
COFFMAN, "NAOMI AND RUTH ARRIVE IN BETHLEHEM
"So they two went until they came to Bethlehem. And it came to pass that when
they were come to Bethlehem, that all the city was moved about them, and the
women said, Is this Naomi? And she said unto them, call me not Naomi, call me
Mara; for the Almighty hath dealt very bitterly with me. I went out full, and
Jehovah hath brought me home again empty; why call ye me Naomi? seeing
Jehovah hath testified against me, and the Almighty hath afflicted me. So Naomi
returned, and Ruth the Moabitess, her daughter-in-law, with her, who returned
out of the country of Moab; and they came to Bethlehem in the beginning of the
barley harvest."
"All the city was moved" (Ruth 1:19). "It appears from this that Naomi was not
only well known, but highly respected in Bethlehem. This is proof that Elimelech
was of high consideration in that place."[28]
"And the women said, Is this Naomi?" (Ruth 1:19). This emphasis upon the
women came about, in all probability, because all of the able-bodied men were
busy in the barley harvest.
"Call me not Naomi, call me Mara" (Ruth 1:20). Naomi (sweet) and Mara
(bitter) were contrasting names that illustrated the disastrous changes that had
come in the life of Naomi. Significantly, the bitter waters of Mara, encountered
by Israel during the wilderness wanderings, were again brought into memory by
the use of this name (Exodus 15:22ff). Naomi's thoughts of what she believed that
God had done unto her were by no means correct, but she knew of none other
upon whom she could fasten the responsibility, and she had not learned the great
lesson that Christ brought to mankind at a later time, namely, that the saints of
God frequently SUFFER, sustained by the marvelous promise, that, "If we suffer
with him, we shall also reign with him."
In the dramatic events of this Book, God was in the process of founding the
family among the children of Israel who would eventually bring about the birth
of the Holy Messiah unto the redemption of all mankind who would receive him.
This family came from a BLENDING of both Jews and Gentiles - Ruth the
Moabitess appearing here as one of its mothers, and her husband Boaz also
having come of the Gentile Rahab, the harlot of Jericho!
178

179. "Jehovah hath testified against me" (Ruth 1:21). Joyce G. Baldwin has noted
that the RSV rendition here, "The Lord has afflicted me" is, "an emendation
that changes the construction and alters the form of the verb."[29] Like many
other `emendations,' which are merely human changes from what God's Word
says into what men think it SHOULD have said, this one also should be taken
with a grain of salt!
"They came to Bethlehem in the beginning of the barley harvest." (Ruth 1:22).
The time indicated by this was "during the last of the month of April."[30] The
skill of the narrator appears in the introduction of this fact just here in the story,
because the barley harvest was the occasion for all of the dramatic developments
that came quickly afterward.
PETT, "The impression given is that they now proceeded alone (they two went)
as they made their way towards Bethlehem. It would not be a pleasant journey
for two women on their own. And when they arrived in the small town of
Bethlehem word got around that Naomi was coming. Workers in the fields would
have seen these two helpless women and had seemingly thought that they
recognised Naomi. The result was that when the women entered the town the
majority of its inhabitants were showing a deep interest in them, and were
indeed asking whether this could possibly be Naomi, who had been away for so
long.
BENSON, "Ruth 1:19-21. Is this Naomi? — Is this she that formerly lived in so
much plenty and honour? How marvellously is her condition changed! Call me
not Naomi — Which signifies pleasant, and cheerful. Call me Mara — Which
signifies bitter, or sorrowful. I went out full — With my husband and sons, and a
plentiful estate for our support. Testified — That is, hath borne witness, as it
were, in judgment, and given sentence against me. Thus she acknowledges that
the affliction came from God, and that God was contending with and correcting
her; and she is willing to accommodate herself to the afflictive and bitter
dispensation; and as a token thereof to have her name changed from Naomi to
Mara. “It well becomes us,” says Henry, “to have our hearts humbled under
humbling providences. When our condition is brought down, our spirits should
be brought down with it. And then our troubles are sanctified to us, when we
thus comport with them: for it is not an affliction in itself, but an affliction
rightly borne, that doth us good.”
LANGE, "Ruth 1:19. So they two went. Naomi said nothing more. She ceased to
dissuade. She allowed Ruth to go with her, and the latter was as good as her
words. She actually accompanied her mother-in-law; and so it came to pass, that
Naomi did not return home alone, that is to say, entirely forsaken and helpless.
The whole city was moved about them. Naomi’s return was an uncommon
occurrence. The city, and especially the women, were thrown into a peaceable
179

180. uproar. Everybody ran, told the news, and wondered. For more than ten years
had passed since she had left Bethlehem. Then there had doubtless been talk
enough, as Naomi went away with her husband, in far different and better
circumstances. It may be taken for granted that even then her character had
awakened sympathy and affection in Bethlehem. Her husband, we know,
belonged to a prominent family of the city. All this renders it natural that the
news that Naomi had returned to Bethlehem, poor and sorrowful, spread like
wildfire, and created what to her was an unpleasant sensation.[FN35] “Is that
Naomi!” is the universal exclamation.
WHEDON, "19. They came to Beth-lehem — The journey must have occupied
several days. They knew not what awaited them. The future seemed full of
darkness and sorrow, and they then little dreamed of the honours that were to
crown their memory in the history of the chosen people.
All the city was moved about them — The Beth-lehemites beheld with emotion
their grief and loneliness, and heard with sorrow the story of their sad
bereavement. Their sad history, we may suppose, was for a time on every lip, and
even a matter of interesting conversation among the elders and most honourable
of the city. Ruth 2:11-12.
Is this Naomi — As though they had said, Has the once cheerful and pleasant
wife of the honoured Elimelech come to this state of sorrow?
PULPIT, "And they two went—they trudged along, the two of them—until they
came to Bethlehem. In the expression "the two of them" the masculine pronoun
( ‫ם‬ֶ‫ה‬ for ‫ן‬ֶ‫)ה‬ occurs, as in Ruth 1:8 and Ruth 1:9. It mirrors in language the actual
facts of relationship in life. The masculine is some- times assumptively
representative of both itself and the feminine. And sometimes, even apart from
the representative element, it is the overlapping and overbearing gender. And it
came to pass, as they entered Bethlehem, that the whole city got into commotion
concerning them, and they said, Is this Naomi? Naomi, though greatly altered in
appearance, besides being travel-worn and weary, was recognized. But who was
that pensive and beautiful companion by her side? Where was Elimelech? Where
was Machne and Chillon? Why are they not with ir mother? Such would be
some of the questions started, and keenly talked about and discussed. Then on
both the wayfarers the finger-marks of poverty, involuntary signals of distress,
would be unconcealable. Interest, sympathy, gossip would be alive throughout
the little town, especially among the female portion of the population, and loud
would be their exclamations of surprise. The verb they said is feminine in
Hebrew, ‫ָה‬‫נ‬ ְ‫ר‬ ַ‫מ‬ֹ‫ַתּא‬‫ו‬ a nicety which cannot be reproduced in English without
obtruding too prominently the sex referred to, as m Michaelis's version—"and
all the women said." So the Vulgate. The verb which we have rendered got into
commotion is found in 1 Samuel 4:5—"the earth rail again;" and in 1 Kings
180

181. 1:45—"the city rang again."
ELLICOTT, "(19) They went.—The journey for two women apparently alone
was long and toilsome, and not free from danger. Two rivers, Arnon and Jordan,
had to be forded or otherwise crossed; and the distance of actual journeying
cannot have been less than fifty miles. Thus, weary and travel-stained, they reach
Bethlehem, and neighbours, doubtless never looking to see Naomi again, are all
astir with excitement. It would seem that though the news of the end of the
famine had reached Naomi in Moab, news of her had not reached Bethlehem.
They said . . .—The Bethlehemite women, that is, for the verb is feminine. Grief
and toil had doubtless made her look aged and worn.
PULPIT, "Ruth 1:19-21
Heart wounds reopened.
Return after long absence to scenes of youth always affecting; he who returns is
changed; they who receive him are changed too. Observe the reception which
Naomi met from her former neighbors at Bethlehem. Their question, "Is this
Naomi?" evinces—
1. Surprise. She is living! We see her again! Yet how is she changed!
2. Interest. How varied has been her experience whilst absent! And she loves
Bethlehem so that she returns to it in her sorrow!
3. Compassion. "All the city was moved about them." How could those who
remembered her fail to be affected by the calamities she had passed through?
Consider the sentiments expressed by Naomi upon her return.
I. HER GRIEF WAS NATURAL AND BLAMELESS. "I went out full," i.e. in
health, in youth, with some earthly property; above all, with husband and sons.
"The Lord hath brought me home again empty," i.e. aged, broken down in
health and spirits, poor, without kindred or supporters. "Call me not Naomi,"
181

182. i.e. pleasant; "call me Mara," i.e. bitter. Her lot was sad. Religion does not
question the fact of human trouble and sorrow. And she was not wrong in
feeling, in the circumstances, the peculiar pressure of grief and distress. We
remember that "Jesus wept."
II. HER RECOGNITION OF GOD'S PROVIDENCE WAS RIGHT; WAS A
SIGN OF PIETY. She attributes all to the Almighty, to the Lord. Observe that in
two verses this acknowledgment is made four times. In a world over which God
rules we should acknowledge his presence and reign in all human experience. If
trouble comes to us by means of natural laws, those laws are ordered by his
wisdom. If by human agency, that agency is the result of the constitution with
which he has endowed man. If as the result of our own action, he connects
actions with their consequences. Therefore, let us reverently recognize his hand
in all that happens to us!
III. HER INTERPRETATION OF GOD'S PROVIDENCE WAS MISTAKEN.
"The Lord," said Naomi, "hath testified against me." Men frequently imagine
that if God could prevent afflictions, and yet permits them, he cannot regard the
afflicted in a favorable and friendly light. But this is not so. "Whom he loveth he
chasteneth." The Book of Job warns us against misunderstanding the meaning of
calamity. Christ has also warned us against supposing that Divine anger is the
explanation of human griefs and sufferings. "All things work together for good
unto those who love God." How often is it true, as the poet Cowper knew and
sang—
"Behind a frowning providence
God hides a smiling face!"
PULPIT, ""So they two went till they came to Bethlehem." "They two!"
Sometimes it is husband and wife. Sometimes it is two sisters commencing life
together in the great city where they have to earn their bread. Sometimes it is
two lovers who have large affection and little means, and who have to wait and
work and hope on. Sometimes it is widow and child. "They two!" What
unrecorded histories of heroism there are written in God's book all unknown to
us.
182

183. I. HERE IS THE COMMENCEMENT AND CLOSE OF A PILGRIMAGE.
They went. They came. So is it of the life history itself. All is enfolded in these
brief words. What a multitude of figures in Scripture suggest the brevity of life.
A tale that is told. A post. A weaver's shuttle. The morning flower. So indeed it
is. What a multitude of incidents would be included even in this brief journey of
Naomi's; but these are the two clasps of the volume of life. They went. They
came. "Every beginning holds in it the end, as the acorn does the oak."
II. HERE IS THE SIGHT OF A CITY. Bethlehem. Cities with them were not
like cities with us. Even Bethlehem was called a city. But the old dwelling-places,
after ten years, have a mute eloquence about them. Other feet come to the well.
Little children who gathered flowers on the wild hills are now bearing pitchers to
the well. But after a weary journey how refreshing to the Easterns was the
glimpse of the white houses on the hills. We look for a city. A city which hath
foundations. A city where our beloved are; for God is not the God of the dead,
but of the living. We do not think of it in health and strength and excitement of
human interest, but one day we shall look with quiet longing for the city gates.
The evening of life will come upon us, and we shall pray, "Let me go, for the day
breaketh."
III. HERE IS A PILGRIMAGE ENDED. Better is the end of a thing than the
beginning, said the wise man. And so it is. "I have finished my course." How
much is included in that. When the battered ship comes into harbor we take
more interest in her than the spick and span new vessel with trim decks, and
untorn sails, and scarless masts. When the battle is over we think more of the
shot-pierced flag than of the new banner borne out by the troops with martial
music. We like to see the pilgrim start. But some pilgrims turn back. We like to
hear Ruth's resolve. How much better is it to see the resolve written in letters of
living history. We can call no man hero, no woman heroine, till the march is over
and the victory won.—W.M.S.
Ruth 1:19
Never seemed there a sadder contrast. Naomi left Bethlehem in the full bloom of
womanhood, with a husband and two sons. Elimelech, her husband, died, we
read, "and she was left and her two sons." They took them wives, and, as
mothers do, she lived in the hopes and honors of their new homes; but, after
dwelling in Moab about ten years, we read Mahlon and Chillon died also, both of
183

184. them, and the woman was left of her two sons and her husband, A strange land is
not so strange when we carry home with us; but it is strange when all that made
home, is gone. We need not wonder, therefore, that not alone for the bread of
harvest, but for the bread of love, she and her daughters-in-law "went on the
way to return to the land of Judah." But, with a fine instinct, Naomi felt that
what would be home again for her would be an alien land to them; and the
tender narrative tells us how she suggested they should remain, and find rest,
each of them, in the place of their people. We well know the sequel to the words
of Naomi, "Turn again my daughters;" for Ruth has become with us all a
beautiful picture of truehearted womanhood, and a very household name. But it
is with the question, "Is this Naomi?" that we now have to deal. She went out
full. Not wealthy, perhaps,—though love is always wealthy, for it alone gives that
which worlds want wealth to buy. She is coming home "empty," as many have
done since Naomi did, in all the generations. Bent, and sad, and gray, her worn
dress tells of her poverty, her garb bespeaks the widow. All in a few years; all
crowded into these few opening verses. The pathway of the past is an avenue
now, along which she looks to the opening days, when the light flooded her steps,
and she walked in the warm glow of companionship and love. Is this Naomi?
And have not we had this to say again and again concerning those whose early
days we knew? There we heard the merry shout of children, and there we saw
manhood in its strength and prime. Naomi it cannot be: that the face we knew as
a bride and as a mother! Never! Yet so it is. They went out full and came home
empty. Yet not empty, if, like Naomi, they keep their fellowship with God.
I. NAOMI IS A RETURNING PILGRIM. Home has been but a tent life, and the
curtains have been rent by sorrow and death. She tells us the old, old story. Here
have we no continuing city. Beautiful was the land to which she returned, and in
that dear land of promise there never was a fairer time than barley-harvest.
Many and many a harvest-time had come and gone since Naomi went forth, and
many a reaper's song was silent evermore. As she passed the vines and the
oleanders fringing the broad fields, bronzed and bright-eyed faces were directed
towards her; and here, in the distance, was Bethlehem, its little white houses
dotting the green slopes, its well by the wayside. Bethlehem—home! Oh! that
strange longing to live through the closing years in the country places where we
were born l It is a common instinct. The Chinese have it, and will be buried
nowhere else. It is a beautiful instinct too—to look with the reverent eyes of age
on the tombstones we used to spell out in the village, to hear the old rush of the
river, the old murmur of the sea. Strange thoughts fill this woman's mind, as the
old picture is there with a new peopling of forms and faces. Yet not all new. The
workers turn to the passing figure, and a gleam of recognition, doubtful at first,
lights up their eyes. And then the word passes from one to the other, Is this
184

185. Naomi? It is the same world in which we live today. There is also something to
remind us that we are pilgrims and strangers, that unresting time will not wait
one hour for us. The unseen angels hurry us on through love and grief and
death. Happy for us if we say plainly that we seek a country, for the only escape
from the ennui of life is the satisfaction of the immortal thirst within us by the
gospel revelation of eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
II. NAOMI IS A GODLY PILGRIM. Travel-worn and weary, with sandaled
feet, she is coming to a city sanctified by the faith of her fathers. She had lived in
a heathen country so devoutly, that Ruth could say, "Thy God shall be my
God"—a beautiful testimony to Naomi's fidelity, to her victory over idolatrous
usages, to her own personal influence over others. Thy God l How serious the
eye, how sober the mien, of this woman as she comes into the city. She has had a
battle of life to fight, and she has fought it well. How brave and noble and
faithful a woman she is! Is this Naomi? If there is not so much of what the world
calls beauty in her face, there is character there, experience there. The young
Christian starting on his pilgrimage is cheerful enough. His armor is bright and
new, his enthusiasm is fresh and keen. He goes forth full of enterprise and hope.
Do not be surprised if in the after years you ask, Is this Naomi? How careful,
how anxious, how dependent on God alone! What bright visions once filled his
soul, how ready he was to criticize Christian character, how determined and
unflinching he looked! Well, it was a noble promise, and where would the world
be without the enthusiasm of youth? Be not surprised now if he looks worn and
weary. He has had battles to fight that the world knows not of. He has made
strange discoveries in the continent of his own heart; he has been well-nigh
overcome, and casting himself entirely on his Lord, he says, "By the grace of
God I am what I am." Look at that weary heart. Is that Luther? Look at that
faithless spirit. Is that Peter? Look at that worn soldier. Is that Paul? But the
Lord is with them I Empty, indeed, in a human sense was Naomi. Call me not
Naomi, she said; it has lost its meaning. Life is no longer pleasant. Call me Mara,
for life is bitter. True-hearted soul I She knew that it was bitter, indeed, though
it was God's will; "for the Almighty hath dealt very bitterly with me." Very
bitterly! And are we to cover over that? Can we sing—
"Thy will is sweetest to me when
It triumphs at my cost?"
185

186. We may sing it; but it is hard to live it. It is glorious to believe in God at such
times at all, and to bow with the pain all through our hearts, and to say, "My
God."—W.M.S.
BI, 'So they two went until they came to Bethlehem.
Constancy
I. That they are to be admitted into our fellowship whom we find to be constant in a
good course, and true lovers of goodness, whatsoever they were before. Naomi thus
admits of Ruth, no doubt, with great comfort. Thus Paul alloweth of Mark (2Ti_4:11),
though before he had refused him (Act_15:38), and willeth others to entertain him
(Col_4:10-11).
II. That God leaveth not His in distress, or altogether comfortless. Naomi went out
with husband and children, and lost them; she returneth not alone, but God sent her
one to accompany her and to comfort her.
III. That a true resolution will show itself in a full execution. She resolved to go with
Naomi, and so she did, till she came to Bethlehem. By this may we learn to know the
difference between solid resolutions and sudden flashes, raw and undigested
purposes, between true resolutions and such as be made in show, but in substance
prove nothing so, never seen in the effects.
IV. In this their travel to Canaan, and therein to Bethlehem, note three things: their
unity, fervency, and constancy. They went together lovingly, they ceased not to go on,
they did not linger, they took no by-paths, neither forgat they whither they were
going, till they came unto Bethlehem in Canaan. As these thus went to Canaan, so
should we unto the spiritual Canaan and heavenly Bethlehem; we must go in unity
(1Co_1:10), and be of one heart (Act_1:14; Act_2:1; Act_2:46; Act_4:24), in a godly
fervency (Rom_12:11; Tit_2:14; Eze_3:14), as Elijah, Nehemiah, the angel of
Ephesus (Rev_2:1-2), and as our Saviour, whom the zeal of God’s house had eaten
up. And we must go in a constant spirit, and not be weary of well-doing, for “he that
continueth to the end shall be saved.” (B. Bernard.)
True friendship
1. Such is the faithfulness of our heavenly Father to all His children, that He
never fails nor forsakes them; but when one comfort faileth them, He findeth out
another for them. The loss of one relation is made up out of God’s fulness by
raising up another.
2. There be but few friends that are true friends. Here be but two together.
3. Such are fast and faithful friends indeed that accompany each other to the
worship of God—to Bethlehem. Many there be that do accompany each other to
Bethaven, or house of wickedness, to play-houses, and places of revelling, etc.
This is rather a betraying than a befriending one another. A carnal friend is but a
spiritual enemy, who advised the ruin of his soul for the recovery of his body
(2Sa_13:3). The truest friendship is to save and deliver a friend from the greatest
evil, which is sin; but to tempt any to it, and to tolerate them in it, is not the part
of a true friend, but of a real enemy.
4. ‘Tis matter of astonishing admiration to hear of, and be eye-witnesses of, the
great afflictions that do befall some persons, both great and good.
5. God works wonderful changes in persons, families, cities, countries and
186

187. kingdoms. (C. Ness.)
The backslider’s return
Naomi had wandered. But Naomi might return. God had not cast her away. He will
never cast away those who truly love Him. He calls them back again to true
repentance. He heals their backslidings and loves them freely. Then, like Peter, they
may strengthen their brethren. They have an experience of human infirmity which
they had not before. They know the dangers and temptations which surround the
Christian’s path. They can comfort others with the consolations wherewith they are
comforted of God. But the backslider must return with total self-renunciation. Thus
Naomi even renounces her right to her former name. “Call me not Naomi, call me
Mara: for the Almighty hath dealt very bitterly with me.” They said, “Is this Naomi?”
“Yes, I was Naomi when I was contented and happy in the house, and among the
people of God. I was Naomi when we took sweet counsel together, and walked to the
house of God in company. How foolish was I thus to wander from His holy ways! Call
me not Naomi now. I have no right to that name. All was pleasant then. But the
remembrance is bitterness now. Call me Mara. Let me come back as the poorest of
the poor, sorrowful, and self-condemned.” The backslider feels no claim to a former
Christian character. He is compelled to say, “Call me not a Christian. I have forfeited
that blessed name. Call me a sinner, the chief of sinners. But as such, suffer me to
return again to God. ‘I am no more worthy to be called a son; make me as one of Thy
hired servants.’” The backslider must come back with conscious emptiness. He has
nothing to bring; nothing to offer. Naomi says, “I went out full, and the Lord hath
brought me home again empty.” How true is this! What can you bring back from
your wanderings in Moab but the bitter remembrance of your folly? Nothing but
sadness can come from a careless backsliding from God. And so far as your own acts
and conduct are concerned, you must return to Him with perfect emptiness. If Divine
grace and long-suffering shall receive you—if the Holy Spirit shall consent to restore
you, and lead you back to the mercy-seat, once more accepted—it will be all as a free
gift to the chief of sinners. Yet how precious is the expression, “The Lord hath
brought me back”! Yes, though I am empty, and have nothing; though I am vile in
His sight, and “mine own clothes abhor me,” though I was worthy of His rejection
and His wrath, yet He did not leave me in my sin, nor suffer me, unpardoned, to
perish. But I come back empty. Everything has failed me except the loving-kindness
and mercy of my God. No condition can be more humbling than this. Let this work of
the Holy Spirit have free course in you. Do not attempt the least justification of
yourselves. Speak not, think not, of any temptation that led you astray, or of the
influence of any companions, or of the want of watchfulness of any friends, or of the
unfaithfulness of others in instructing and warning you, or of the example and habits
of others in the social circle in which you live, as the least extenuation of your own
guilt. Oh, no! You have no one to blame but yourself. You have been tempted only
because you were drawn away by your own lust. Yet, while the backslider himself
mourns, others rejoice over him. “It came to pass, when they were come to
Bethlehem, that all the city was moved about them; and they said, Is this Naomi?”
Her friends had not forgotten her. They gather around her again with delight. All
Bethlehem rejoices; Naomi’s poverty and wanderings are forgotten. She has herself
returned, and this is enough. The poor prodigal had hardly time to say, “Father, I
have sinned,” before his father buries his voice in his own bosom, and lifts up a
sound of joy which completely drowns the accents of the wanderer’s grief. Oh, what a
song of praise does his restoration awaken! Heaven and earth unite to say, over the
returning wanderer, “Is this Naomi?” Is this the wanderer? This the captive that we
187

188. thought was lost? This the giddy child that was bent to backsliding, and fled from all
restraint? Sing, O heavens, for the Lord hath done it. Shout, ye lower parts of the
earth, for the Lord hath blotted out as a thick cloud their transgressions, and as a
cloud their sins! (S. H. Tyng, D. D.)
All the city was moved about them, and they said, Is this Naomi?—
The changes wrought by time
Ten years ago she left, but is not forgotten. The story of her battle with poverty and
consequent emigration are well remembered. But what a change! This bent form and
aspect of despair tell a pitiful tale. Time and sorrow have wrought their cruel work.
Ten years, and such troubles as hers leave terrible marks behind at her time of life.
Wrinkles, grey hairs, and feebleness of body soon reveal themselves. Care makes men
and women grow old very fast. We look twice—thrice, at the acquaintance of former
years, before we believe our eyes. “Is this Naomi?” That means, where are the
husband and the sons? It is no vulgar curiosity that prompts the inquiry. Women
who knew Naomi well, and attended her wedding, are there; men, too, who were
intimate friends of Elimelech; young men also, who as boys often played with the
dead lads Mahlon and Chillon, all eagerly repeat the question to each other as they
cluster round the two poor, travel-stained, weeping women. It is a bitter hour. The
wounds are opened afresh. For no questions cut so keenly as those which remind us
of beloved ones who have passed into the shadow of death. (Wm. Braden.)
The changes of life
I. Here is a returning pilgrim. Home has been but a tent life, and the curtains have
been rent by sorrow and death. She tells us the old, old story. Here have we no
continuing city. Bethlehem—home! Oh! that strange longing to live through the
closing years in the country places where we were born! It is a common instinct.
II. Here is a godly pilgrim. Travel-worn and weary, with sandled feet, she is coming
to a city sanctified by the faith of her fathers. “Is this Naomi?” If there is not so much
of what the world calls beauty in her face, there is character there, experience there.
The young Christian starting on his pilgrimage is cheerful enough. He goes forth full
of enterprise and hope. Do not be surprised if in after-years you ask, “Is this Naomi?”
How careful, how anxious, how dependent on God alone!
III. Here is an ancestral pilgrim. Ancestor of whom? Turn to Mat_1:5, and you will
find in the genealogy of our Lord the name of Ruth. Do you see in the blue distance
One coming from the judgment hall? Do you hear the wild cry of the mob, “Away
with Him! away with Him! Crucify Him! crucify Him”? Come near and gaze. Behold
the Man! As the reapers asked, “Is this Naomi?” so we ask, “Is this Jesus?” Is this He
whose sweet face lay in the manger? Is this He who passed the angels at heaven’s
high gate, and came to earth, saying “Lo! I come to do Thy will, O God”? Yes I Bowed,
bruised, broken for us. The same Saviour, who now endures the Cross, despising the
shame. Well may we wonder and adore!
IV. Here is a provided-for pilgrim. Back to Bethlehem, but how to live? how to find
the roof-tree that should shelter again? She knew the Eternal’s name, “Jehovah-
jireh,” the Lord will provide. So it ever is. Trust in the Lord and you shall never want
any good thing. Believe still in your Saviour, and provided for you will be all weapons
of fence, all means of consolation, all prosperity that shall not harm your soul. As the
snows hide flowers even in the Alps, so beneath all our separations and sorrows there
188

189. are still plants of the Lord, peace and hope, and joy and rest, in Him. Blessed indeed
shall we be if we can rest in the Lord, and wait patiently for Him. (W. M. Statham.)
SIMEON, "THE CHANGES MADE BY TIME AND CIRCUMSTANCES
Ruth 1:19. It came to pass, when they were come to Bethlehem, that all the city was
moved about them, and they said, Is this Naomi?
TO seek the applause of man is wrong: but to merit it, is most desirable. A man of
worthless character creates no respect in the minds of others; so that, if ill befall him,
he finds but little sympathy in the bosoms of those around him: whereas a good man
under misfortune, excites a general commiseration; and every one takes a lively
interest in his affairs. This is beautifully exemplified in the history before us. Naomi
was certainly a woman of piety, and much esteemed. In a season of dearth she had
left her country with her husband and sons; and, after ten years’ absence, she
returned in a bereaved and destitute condition, having lost her husband and her two
sons, and having no attendant but a daughter-in-law, as poor and destitute as herself.
Yet, behold, she no sooner reaches the place of her former abode, than the whole city
is moved with her misfortunes, every one feeling for her as for a sister, and with
tender concern exclaiming, “Is this Naomi?”
The circumstance here recorded will lead me to shew you,
I. What changes take place in life—
This is altogether a changing scene; every day bringing with it something new, to
elevate or depress our minds. Some changes are of a favourable nature, such as the
growth of our children in wisdom and stature; the advancement of our friends in
wealth and honour; and, above all, the conversion of the gay and dissipated to the
knowledge of our God and Saviour, Jesus Christ. These things sometimes occur so
suddenly and beyond our expectation, that we scarcely know how to credit them; and
we are ready to ask, with pleasing surprise, Is this Naomi, whom I remember not
long since under such different circumstances?
But it is rather of afflictive changes that our text leads us to speak: and we shall
notice them,
1. In relation to temporal matters—
[What effects are wrought by disease or accident in the space of only a few days, we
all are well aware. The person who but as yesterday was flourishing in health, vigour,
beauty, is become enfeebled, emaciated, yea, a mass of deformity, so that you
exclaim, with almost incredulous surprise, Is this Naomi? Nor are changes less
quickly made in the outward circumstances of men, one day living in affluence and all
the splendour of wealth; the next, reduced to penury and shame. The age in which we
189

190. live has been fruitful in such examples, princes and nobles having taken refuge, and
found subsistence from the hands of charity, in our happy isle [Note: During the
French Revolution.]; and, since that period, multitudes of our most opulent
merchants having fallen from the highest pinnacle of grandeur to insignificance and
want. Nor is it uncommon to behold a man, who by his talents has commanded
universal admiration, brought, through disorder or through age, to a state of more
than infantine fatuity; so that he can be no longer recognised but as a wreck and ruin
of the former man.
The circumstances of Naomi lead me to mention yet another change, namely, that of
family bereavements. We have seen persons in the full enjoyment of domestic
happiness, with children, numerous, healthy, playful, the joy and delight of their
parents, by successive strokes brought to a state of widowhood and desolation.
Behold the disconsolate widow, “weeping for her children, and refusing to be
comforted, because they are not;” and because the husband, who was her stay and
her support, is either languishing on a bed of sickness, or wrested from her by
resistless death! In a word, see Job encircled with his family, and in the fullest
possession of all that the world could give him: Ah! how fallen! how destitute! What a
complete picture of human misery, and of the vanity of all sublunary good!]
2. In relation to spiritual concerns—
[The most distressing sight is that of one who once was hopeful as to the concerns of
his soul, but has “left off to behave himself wisely,” and launched forth into all
manner of dissipation: or, if a more pitiable object can present itself to our view, it is
that of one, who, after attaining an eminence in the Christian life, has fallen into a
state of wilful and habitual sin, and brought public disgrace upon his holy profession.
David will here naturally occur to our minds. Look at him: “Is this David?” the man
so abhorrent of evil, that he would not suffer a person who should utter a falsehood
to dwell in his sight? Ah! how fallen! how unlike this murderer is to “the sweet singer
of Israel,” “the man after God’s own heart!” And Solomon, too; Is this Solomon? that
perfection of wisdom, whom all proclaimed as the wisest of the human race, now so
infatuated, as to seek his happiness in a number of wives and concubines; and so
impious, as both to gratify them, and to unite with them, in the most abominable
idolatries [Note: 1 Kings 11:1-10]? Is this Solomon? I say: Who can believe it?
But must we go back to those distant ages for instances of human frailty and
depravity? Would to God that they were of such rare occurrence, that none had ever
arisen in our own remembrance. But wherever the Gospel is preached, instances will
be found of persons who “ran well for a season only,” and who, though they “began in
the Spirit, have ended in the flesh.” Look at any such persons now, and see how
unlike they are to their former selves! “How is the gold become dim, and the most
fine gold changed!”]
But, that we may duly improve these occurrences, let us consider,
II. What feelings the contemplation of them should inspire—
190

191. We should not be uninterested spectators of such events: they should excite in us,
1. Sympathy—
[In no case should we exult over fallen greatness. We read, indeed, of the triumphant
utterance of joy at the fall of the Babylonish monarch, agreeably to the predictions
respecting him [Note: Isaiah 14:4-11. Almost this whole passage should be
cited.] — — — And similar exultation was felt at the destruction of Jerusalem; as it is
said: “All that pass by clap their hands at thee; they hiss and wag their head at the
daughter of Jerusalem, saying, Is this the city that men call the perfection of beauty,
the joy of the whole earth [Note: Lamentations 2:15.]?” But though these gloryings
were permitted by God for the punishment of his enemies, they are not recorded for
our imitation. We, like our blessed Lord, should weep over the desolations even of
our bitterest enemies [Note: Luke 19:41-42.]. We should “bear one another’s
burthens, and so fulfil the law of Christ [Note: Galatians 6:2.].” The sight of misery,
wheresoever it is found, should call forth our tenderest sympathy, and cause us to
“weep with them that weep [Note: Romans 12:15.].” This is particularly suggested by
the conduct of the people at Bethlehem: “The whole city was moved” at the sight of
this poor widow, whom they had not seen for the space of ten years; and one
sentiment of compassion filled all ranks of people, saying, “Is this Naomi?” So let it
be with us, whether we be able to relieve the sufferer, or not. The very feeling of
compassion will be pleasing to our God; and will assimilate us to that blessed
Saviour, who pitied us in our low estate, and “who, though he was rich, yet for our
sakes became poor, that we, through his poverty, might be rich [Note: 2 Corinthians
8:9.].”]
2. Contentment—
[In such a changeable world as this, what is there for us to covet? Shall we desire
riches? How soon do “they make themselves wings, and fly away [Note: Proverbs
23:5.]!” Shall we affect honour? How soon may our Hosannahs be turned into,
“Crucify him, crucify him!” As for pleasure, of whatever land, so vain is it all, that
“even in laughter the heart is sorrowful, and the end of that mirth is heaviness [Note:
Proverbs 14:13.].” Indeed, the whole world, even if we could possess it all, is but
“vanity and vexation of spirit.” If we “have wives, our true wisdom is to be as though
we had none; if we weep, to be as though we wept not; or, if we rejoice, as though we
rejoiced not: if we buy, to be as though we possessed not; and, if we use this world, as
not abusing it: because the fashion of this world passeth away [Note: 1 Corinthians
7:29-31.].” If changes of the most calamitous nature occur, we should remember, that
“nothing has happened to us but what is common to man,” and nothing but what
may issue either in our temporal or eternal good. There are not wanting instances of
the deepest reverses being themselves reversed: for Job’s prosperity, after his
distresses, far exceeded any thing that he had enjoyed in his earlier life [Note: Job
42:10-16.]. Naomi, too, found, in the issue, that she had no reason to “adopt the
name of Mara [Note: ver. 20.]:” for her subsequent connexion with Boaz soon
dissipated all her sorrows, so that she could “put off her sackcloth and gird her with
gladness.” But, if this should not be the case, we may well be satisfied that
“tribulation worketh patience, and experience and hope,” and that our light and
191

192. momentary afflictions work out “for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of
glory [Note: 2 Corinthians 4:17-18.].” In the view, then, of all these things, we should
“learn, in whatsoever state we are, therewith to be content: we should be equally
ready to be abased or to abound, and to be instructed everywhere, and in all things,
both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need [Note:
Philippians 4:11-12.].”]
3. Piety—
[This will never fail us. If we have much, it will sanctify our prosperity, and keep it
from injuring our souls. If we have little, it will supply the lack of every thing. View
the rich man in all his abundance, and Lazarus in all his destitution. The eye of sense
will look with envy on the one that is revelling in plenty: the eye of faith will form a
far different estimate, and congratulate the sufferer in the midst of all his distresses.
The wealth of this world brings with it many cares and troubles: but “the blessing of
God maketh rich, and addeth no sorrow with it [Note: Proverbs 10:22.].” Even whilst
the two were here in this world, no doubt the poorer was the happier man. But at the
moment of their departure hence, what different feelings would have been expressed,
if they had still been subjected to the sight of man! Is this the rich man—now
destitute of a drop of water to cool his tongue? Is this Lazarus—now in the bosom of
Abraham, at the banquet of the Lord? So, then, shall it ere long be said of you, ye
sons and daughters of affliction, if only ye improve your trials for the furtherance of
your spiritual welfare. How soon shall all “your tears be wiped away from your eyes!”
How soon shall “joy and gladness come forth to meet you; and sorrow and sighing
flee away for ever!” “Be patient, then, unto the coming of your Lord:” and you shall
soon find, that “the sufferings of this present life were not worthy to be compared
with the glory that shall be revealed in us [Note: Romans 8:18.].”]
20 “Don’t call me Naomi,[b]” she told them.
“Call me Mara,[c] because the Almighty[d] has
made my life very bitter.
BARNES, "See the margin. Similar allusions to the meaning of names are seen in
Gen_27:36; Jer_20:3.
The Almighty - ‫שׁדי‬ shadday (see the Gen_17:1 note). The name “Almighty” is
almost unique to the Pentateuch and to the Book of Job. It occurs twice in the
Psalms, and four times in the Prophets.
CLARKE, "Call me not Naomi - That is, beautiful or pleasant.
192

193. Call me Mara - That is, bitter; one whose life is grievous to her.
The Almighty - ‫שדי‬ Shaddai, He who is self-sufficient, has taken away the props
and supports of my life.
GILL, "And she said, call me not Naomi, call me Mara,.... The one signifying
"prosperity", according to Josephus (m), and the other "grief"; but he is not always
correct in his interpretation of Hebrew words, or to be depended on; by this indeed
her different states are well enough expressed, and he rightly observes, that she
might more justly be called the one than the other; but the words signify, the one
"sweet" and pleasant, and the other "bitter", see Exo_15:23, and the reason she gives
confirms it:
for the Almighty hath dealt very bitterly with me; had wrote bitter things
against her, brought bitter afflictions on her, which were very disagreeable to the
flesh, as the loss of her husband, her children, and her substance; see Lam_3:15.
HENRY, "II. Of the composure of Naomi's spirit. If some upbraided her with her
poverty, she was not moved against them, as she would have been if she had been
poor and proud; but, with a great deal of pious patience, bore that and all the other
melancholy effects of her affliction (Rth_1:20, Rth_1:21): Call me not Naomi, call me
Mara, etc. “Naomi signifies pleasant or amiable; but all my pleasant things are laid
waste; call me Mara, bitter or bitterness, for I am now a woman of a sorrowful
spirit.” Thus does she bring her mind to her condition, which we all ought to do when
our condition is not in every thing to our mind. Observe,
1. The change of her state, and how it is described, with a pious regard to the divine
providence, and without any passionate murmurings or complaints. (1.) It was a very
sad and melancholy change. She went out full; so she thought herself when she had
her husband with her and two sons. Much of the fulness of our comfort in this world
arises from agreeable relations. But she now came home again empty, a widow and
childless, and probably had sold her goods, and of all the effects she took with her
brought home no more than the clothes on her back. So uncertain is all that which we
call fulness in the creature, 1Sa_2:5. Even in the fulness of that sufficiency we may be
in straits. But there is a fulness, a spiritual and divine fulness, which we can never be
emptied of, a good part which shall not be taken from those that have it. (2.) She
acknowledges the hand of God, his mighty hand, in the affliction. “It is the Lord that
has brought me home again empty; it is the Almighty that has afflicted me.” Note,
Nothing conduces more to satisfy a gracious soul under an affliction than the
consideration of the hand of God in it. It is the Lord, 1Sa_3:18; Job_1:21. Especially
to consider that he who afflicts us is Shaddai, the Almighty, with whom it is folly to
contend and to whom it is our duty and interest to submit. It is that name of God by
which he enters into covenant with his people: I am God Almighty, God All-
sufficient, Gen_17:1. He afflicts as a God in covenant, and his all-sufficiency may be
our support and supply under all our afflictions. He that empties us of the creature
knows how to fill us with himself. (3.) She speaks very feelingly of the impression
which the affliction had made upon her: He has dealt very bitterly with me. The cup
of affliction is a bitter cup, and even that which afterwards yields the peaceable fruit
of righteousness, yet, for the present, is not joyous, but grievous, Heb_12:11. Job
complains, Thou writest bitter things against me, Job_13:26. (4.) She owns the
affliction to come from God as a controversy: The Lord hath testified against me.
Note, When God corrects us he testifies against us and contends with us (Job_
193

194. 10:17), intimating that he is displeased with us. Every rod has a voice, the voice of a
witness.
2. The compliance of her spirit with this change: “Call me not Naomi, for I am no
more pleasant, either to myself or to my friends; but call me Mara, a name more
agreeable to my present state.” Many that are debased and impoverished yet affect to
be called by the empty names and titles of honour they have formerly enjoyed. Naomi
did not so. Her humility regards not a glorious name in a dejected state. If God deal
bitterly with her, she will accommodate herself to the dispensation, and is willing to
be called Mara, bitter. Note, It well becomes us to have our hearts humbled under
humbling providences. When our condition is brought down our spirits should be
brought down with it. And then our troubles are sanctified to us when we thus
comport with them; for it is not an affliction itself, but an affliction rightly borne,
that does us good. Perdidisti tot mala, si nondum misera esse didicisti - So many
calamities have been lost upon you if you have not yet learned how to suffer. Sen. ad
Helv. Tribulation works patience.
PETT, "But as Naomi heard her name being spoken it brought home to her the
significance of her name, ‘sweetness’ or ‘delight’. And it made her feel very
bitter. She called on them not to speak of her as Naomi, but as Mara (bitterness),
because Shaddai had dealt very bitterly with her. Note the use of Shaddai rather
than YHWH. LXX translates as ‘the Almighty’. It was not the covenant name,
but more a title which indicated His world-wide rule as God of the nations
(Genesis 17:1 with Genesis 17:4-5, ‘a multitude of nations’; Genesis 28:3, ‘a
company of peoples’; Genesis 35:11, a company of peoples). Naomi recognised
that it was God in His world-wide sovereignty who had so dealt with her as she
had, as it were, ‘dwelt among the nations’. Compare how it was as ‘El Shaddai’
that God had ‘made Himself known to the patriarchs’ (Exodus 6:3), that is,
brought out the fullness of what the name signified by means of His activity as
Lord over all nations, as he watched over them among the nations in a land that
was not theirs, whereas it was not until His deliverance of His people at the
Exodus that He had demonstrated the full significance of His Name as YHWH
their covenant God and thus ‘made known’ His Name to them by what He
accomplished. His making known of Himself essentially as YHWH by means of
His activity is a theme of Exodus. See Exodus 5:2; Exodus 6:3; Exodus 6:7;
Exodus 7:5; Exodus 7:17; Exodus 8:22; Exodus 10:2; Exodus 14:4; Exodus
14:18; Exodus 16:12; Exodus 29:46; Exodus 31:13; compare Exodus 9:14;
Exodus 9:29. Note also Deuteronomy 29:6; Joshua 24:31; 1 Samuel 3:7).
PULPIT, "And she said to them, Call me not Naomi, call me Mara: for the
Almighty hath dealt very bitterly with me. Salutations were respectfully
addressed to her as she walked along in quest of some humble abode. And when
thus spoken to by the sympathetic townspeople, she was called, of course, by her
old sweet name. But as it fell in its own rich music on her ears, its original import
flashed vividly upon her mind. Her heart "filled" at the contrast which her
circumstances represented, and she said, "Address me not as Naomi, call not to
194

195. me ( ‫ֵי‬‫ל‬ ) Naomi: address me as Mara,"—that is, bitter,—"for the Almighty has
caused bitterness to me exceedingly" (see on Ruth 1:2). The Almighty, or ‫י‬ ַ‫דּ‬ ַ‫,שׁ‬ an
ancient polytheistic name that had at length—like ‫ים‬ ִ‫ֱיה‬‫ל‬ and ‫ָי‬‫נ‬ֹ‫ד‬ֲ‫א‬ dna ֱ‫ל‬—been
reclaimed in all its fullness for the one living and true God. It had become a
thorough proper name, and hence it is used without the article. In the Septuagint
it is sometimes rendered, as here, ̔‫ן‬ é̔ êáíḯò, the Sufficient; in Job, where it
frequently occurs, ï̔ ðáíôïêñá́ôùñ, the Omnipotent. But it is one of those peculiar
nouns that never can be fully reproduced in any Aryan language, Naomi's
theology as indicated in the expression, "the Almighty hath caused bitterness to
me exceedingly," need not be to its minutest jot endorsed. God was not the only
agent with whom she had had to do. Much of the bitterness of her lot may have
been attributable to her husband or to herself, and perhaps to forefathers and
foremothers. It is not fair to ascribe all the embittering element of things to God.
Much rather might the sweetness, which had so often relieved the bitterness, be
traced to the band of him who is "the Lord God, merciful and gracious,
abundant in goodness."
ELLICOTT, "(20) Call me not Naomi, call me Mara.—Here we have one of the
constant plays on words and names found in the Hebrew Bible. Naomi, we have
already said, means pleasant, or, perhaps, strictly, my pleasantness. Mara is
bitter, as in Exodus 15:23. The latter word has no connection with Miriam or
Mary, which is from a different root.
The Almighty.—Heb., Shaddai. According to one derivation of the word, “He
who is All Sufficient,” all sufficing; the God who gives all things in abundance is
He who takes back (see Note on Genesis 17:1).
Hath dealt very bitterly.—Heb., hemar, referring to the preceding Mara. The
pleasantness and joys of life are at an end for me, my dear ones passed away,
bitterness and sadness are now my lot.
LANGE, "Ruth 1:20. Call me not Naomi, call me Mara. Undoubtedly, the
general astonishment over such a return, gave rise to many reflections which a
woman especially would feel deeply. Not merely the external comparison of
“then” and “now,” but also the motives of the former departure are brought to
mind. Then, Naomi’s life and circum stances corresponded with the amiable and
joyous name she bore. Now, she were better named Mara, the bitter, sorrowful
one. It is evident that names were still preserved with conscious reference to their
meaning. Naomi manifestly intends, by these and the following words, to inform
the inhabitants of Bethlehem of her fortunes. I am no longer the old Naomi; for
what of happiness I possessed, I have lost. I have no more anything that is
pleasant about me: my life, like a salty, bitter spring, is without flavor or relish.
For the Almighty (Shaddai) hath inflicted bitter sorrow upon me. Why Shaddai?
The use of this divine surname must here also be connected with its pregnant,
195

196. proper signification. The explanation which must necessarily be given to it, is not
consistent with its derivation from ‫ד‬ ַ‫ד‬ ָ‫,שׁ‬ which always appears in a bad sense.
What this explanation Isaiah, will become apparent when the passages are
considered in which the name is first, and with emphasis, employed. We select,
therefore, those of Genesis, in which book the name Shaddai occurs more
frequently than in any other except Job, and always as designative of the
gracious, fertile God, by whom the propagation of mankind is guaranteed. Thus,
it is assumed by God in Genesis 17:1 ff. where he says to Abram, “I make thee
exceedingly fruitful,—to a father of a multitude of nations,” etc. So likewise, it
occurs Genesis 28:3 : “El Shaddai will bless thee and make thee fruitful.”
Genesis 35:11 : “I am El Shaddai, be fruitful, and multiply.” Genesis 48:3 : “El
Shaddai appeared unto me—and said, Behold, I make thee fruitful and multiply
thee.” Genesis 49:25 : “Shaddai shall bless thee—with blessings of the breasts
(‫ם‬ִ‫י‬ ַ‫ד‬ ָ‫)שׁ‬ and of the womb.” For the same reason it is used at Genesis 43:14, where
the fate of the children of Jacob is in question. This gracious God, the source of
fruitfulness and life, gives his blessing to his chosen saints, but from sinners, and
from those whom He tries, He takes away what to others He gives. Hence the
frequent use of the name in Job, who is chastened in his children, cf. Job 8:3 :
“Will Shaddai pervert justice? If thy children sinned against Him, He gave them
over into the hand of their transgressions.” And in this sense Naomi also uses the
name Shaddai, in speaking of her misery. For the death of her husband and her
sons has rendered her family desolate and unfruitful. The word must therefore
unquestionably be referred to a root ‫ה‬ ָ‫ד‬ ָ‫,שׁ‬ still in use in Arabic, in the sense “to
water, to fertilize.” For that all fertility comes from water, by which aridity is
removed and thirst assuaged, is a deeply rooted conception, especially in oriental
antiquity. Numerous mythical pictures of heathenism represent their heroes as
conquering drought and unfruitfulness by liberating the rain and the streams.
The name of the Indian god Indra is derived from Ind = und, to flow, and is
therefore equivalent to “the rain-giver,” who frees the clouds so that they can
dispense their showers (cf. E. Meier, Ind. Liederb, p147 f.). The true Rain-giver,
the dispenser and increaser of fertility, of the earth and among beasts and men,
is the living, personal God, as Shaddai. The root ‫ה‬ ָ‫ד‬ ָ‫שׁ‬ must also explain ‫ד‬ ַ‫,שׁ‬
mamma, properly the fountain of rain and blessings for man and beast, as
Gellius (12:1) calls it, fontem sanctissimum corporis, and the bringer up of the
human race. Hence we are enabled to recognize the wide-spread philological root
to which shadah, to water, shad (Aram tad), mamma, belong; for it is connected
with the Sanskrit dhe, Greek èῆóáé, Gothic daddjan (Old German, tutta, etc, cf.
Benfey, Gr. Gram. ii270), in all which forms the idea of giving drink, suckling, is
present. From the Greek word, the name of the goddess Thetis is derived, as
“Nurse of the Human Race” (cf. Welcker, Gr. Mythol, 1:618). That Artemis of
Ephesus was represented as a multimammia, is known not only from antique
sculptures, but also from the writings of the church fathers; cf. the words of
Jerome (in Proœm Ep. Pauli ad Ephes.): omnium bestiarum et viventium esse
196

197. nutricem mentiuntur. Naomi was rightly named when, with a flourishing family,
she went to Moab—but now Shaddai, who gave the blessing, has taken it away.
LANGE, "“Call me not Naomi, but Mara.” Naomi does not conceal her
condition when she reaches her native place. Usually, the natural Prayer of
Manasseh, even as a beggar, still desires to shine. She has lost everything; and
what she had gained, the companionship of Ruth, is not yet able to console her.
Her very love fills her with anxiety for this daughter. Recollections are very
bitter, and the future is full of care. It Isaiah, however, only because she is empty
of all joys, that she wishes to be called Mara. But it was made evident even in her
misery that whatever she had lost, she had found the grace of God; for then too
she was not only named, but truly was, Naomi. Nor will one who in sorrow does
not cease to be lovely, retain the name of Mara. Pope Gregory the Great, when
praised (by Leander) replied: “Call me not Naomi, i. e. beautiful, but call me
Mara, since I am full of bitter grief. For I am no more the same person you
knew: outwardly I have advanced, inwardly I have fallen. And I fear to be
among those of whom it is said: Thou castedst them down when they were lifted
up. For when one is lifted up, he is cast down; he advances in honors and falls in
morals.”
Thomas a Kempis: “It is good at times to be in distress; for it reminds us that we
are in exile.”
Bengel: “If God have loved thee, thou canst have had no lack of trouble.”
“For Shaddai hath afflicted me.” Naomi did not go to Moab of her own accord,
for she followed her husband. Her stay also in the strange land was prolonged
only because her sons had married there. After their death, although poor and
empty, she returned home again, albeit she had but little to hope for. And yet in
the judgment she perceives only her own guilt. Her loving heart takes all God’s
judgments on itself. The more she loved, the more ready she was to repent. Being
a Naomi, she did not accuse those she loved. The sign of true love is
unselfishness, which ascribes ills to self, blessings to others. As long as she was in
misery, she took the anger of God upon herself; but as soon as she perceived the
favor of God, she praised Him as the God who showed kindness to the living and
the dead.
[Fuller: “And all the city was moved,” etc. See here, Naomi was formerly a
woman of good quality and fashion, of good rank and repute: otherwise her
return in poverty had not been so generally taken notice of. Shrubs may be
grubbed to the ground, and none miss them; but every one marks the felling of a
cedar. Grovelling cottages may be evened to the earth, and none observe them;
but every traveller takes notice of the fall of a steeple. Let this comfort those to
whom God hath given small possessions. Should He visit them with poverty, and
take from them that little they have, yet their grief and shame would be the less:
197

198. they should not have so many fingers pointed at them, so many eyes staring on
them, so many words spoken of them; they might lurk in obscurity: it must be a
Naomi, a person of eminency and estate, whose poverty must move a whole
city.—The same: “Seeing the Lord hath testified against me, and the Almighty
hath afflicted me.” Who then is able to hold out suit with God in the court of
heaven? For God himself is both judge and witness, and also the executor and
inflicter of punishments.
Bp. Hall: Ten years have turned Naomi into Mara. What assurance is there of
these earthly things whereof one hour may strip us? What man can say of the
years to come, thus will I be?—Tr.]
BI, "Call me not Naomi, call me Mara.
Naomi
I. Incidents in her life. This world is to all, in some measure, “a vale of tears.” The
pilgrimage of the true Christian is not through verdant plains and flowery fields, but
through a “waste howling wilderness,” where much toil is exercised, many troubles
undergone, many perils encountered, and many severe privations endured. God is a
Sovereign in the distribution of sufferings and tribulations. His own people have
frequently the greatest share of troubles in this life—that their souls, which are too
full of earthly attachments, may be weaned from the world. We should learn hence
not to murmur nor charge God foolishly under our trials, for if we compare them
with those of many of God’s people who were more gracious in their dispositions and
tempers than we are they will appear “light” indeed. We find this bereaved and
distressed individual returning towards her native land. She acted wisely, for she was
more likely to fare well in her own country—among her relatives and acquaintance,
and where the knowledge and fear of God prevailed, than among strangers and
idolaters in a foreign land. It would be well if we imitated Naomi in a spiritual point
of view. At length we find Naomi in Canaan. When she returned her former
acquaintance were greatly astonished at her appearance. Her affluence was gone, her
earthly glory had faded away, and her circumstances were mean and narrow. God,
however, in mercy, calmed the evening of her day. The troubles of the Christian are
not only to end, but to end blessedly—even in bliss and honour!
II. Moral excellences which stood prominently forth in the conduct of naomi under
the weight of her tribulations.
1. Her benevolence. Behold it delightfully displayed towards both her daughters-
in-law. See how ardently she wished their prosperity, how fervently she prayed
for it. Herein she, and all who are under the governance of the same superhuman
principle, resemble their Divine Master. He also felt intensely for others—even
when He was Himself involved in dangers.
2. Her acknowledgment of God in her troubles. See how piously she develops this
feeling (Rth_1:13; Rth_1:20-21). Nothing enables a man to behave as he should
in the day of adversity, nothing enables him to keep down an envious and
impatient spirit, but the viewing his troubles as the allotments of Heaven, the all-
wise appointments of his Father and of his God.
3. Her gratitude both to God and man.
(1) Her gratitude to God. If a few handfuls of corn excited Naomi to offer to
her heavenly Father a sacrifice of such fervent praise, how fervent should our
198

199. praise be for abundance of spiritual food, for Christ Himself to be the
strength and joy of our souls? If a little earthly food is a mercy to be
acknowledged in songs of adoring praise, how much warmer should our
affection be for endless and unmingled felicity for the whole man in the land
of everlasting life?
(2) Her gratitude to man. Inasmuch as Ruth had shown kindness to her in
Moab, she showed her all possible kindness in Judah. (John Hughes.)
The Almighty hath dealt very bitterly with me.
Unfinished providences not to be rashly judged
How unfit are we to judge of an unfinished providence, and how necessary it is, if we
would understand aright the reasons of God’s ways, that we should wait and see the
web with its many colours woven out! Three short months, during which those dark
providences were suddenly to blossom into prosperity and joy, would give to that
sorrowful woman another interpretation of her long exile in Moab. And one Gentile
proselyte was thereby to be brought to the feet of Israel’s God, who was not only to be
the ancestress of Israel’s illustrious line of kings, but of that Divine Seed in whom “all
the nations of the earth were to be Blessed.” When the night seems at the darkest we
are often nearest the dawn. Begin to tune thy harp, O weeping saint and weary
pilgrim! “The night is far spent, the day is at hand.” Learn to wait. When the great
drama of our earth’s history is ended; when Christ’s glorious redemption-work is
seen in all its wondrous issues and ripened fruits; when order has evolved itself out of
confusion, and light has come out of the bosom of darkness, and the evil passions of
wicked men and the malignant devices of evil spirits have been so overruled as to
work out the sovereign will of Heaven; when all the enemies of Christ have been put
in subjection under His feet, and death itself has died then shall the words spoken at
the creation be repeated at the consummation of the higher work of a lost world’s
redemption, and God will again pronounce all to be “very good.” (A. Thomson, D.D.)
Naomi’s error
Naomi began to err when she ceased to believe in the wisdom and benignity of all
those dark events, when she looked upon them, not as expressive of paternal
discipline, but of Divine indifference and desertion, when they appeared to her
distressed soul as the arrows of judgment rather than the strokes of love; like those
affrighted disciples on the Galilean lake who failed to recognize Jesus in Him who
was walking in such calm majesty on the tossing waves. She was also wrong in this
morbid concentration of her thoughts upon her trials, and in not realizing the many
blessings and comforts that yet remained to her. Elimelech and her two sons had
been taken, but this lovely and devoted Ruth had been raised up. She was now poor,
but she had health; and God had brought her back to those altars and courts of the
Lord after which “her soul had longed, yea, even fainted.” And then there were
blessings which she could not lose, and which were of more value to her than a
thousand worlds. Besides, how greatly did she err, as devout persons in a despondent
mood are so apt to do, in measuring God’s providence, as it were, by her human line,
and imagining that the cloud which had hung over her like a shadow of death could
not possibly be turned into the morning; just as we may imagine the people near the
pole, with their many months of unbroken night, beginning at length to doubt
whether the sun will ever rise again. An eloquent writer on astronomy imagines the
different aspect in which our earth would appear to us could we be projected from its
199

200. surface and permitted to look on it from one of the nearest planets, or from the
moon. And how different would the afflictions of God’s people often look could they
only be projected a few years into the future, and permitted to regard them even in
some of their earliest explanations and consequences. Lift up thy head. O thou
bruised reed, thou too desponding woman, for lo, the winter of thine adversity is
past! Cease to clothe everything in sackcloth. Take down thy long silent harp from
the willows, and tune it anew for notes of loudest praise. Thou hast long exercised the
duty of self-denial; it is time for thee now to exhibit the duty of delight. (A. Thomson,
D.D.)
No bitterness in God’s dealings
Naomi was not wrong in tracing all her changes in condition to God, but she erred in
ascribing any bitterness to God in His treatment of her. The father loves the child as
really when he administers the disagreeable medicine which is to recover him from
disease as when he is dandling him upon his knees. The only difference is in the
manner in which the love is shown, and that is accounted for by the differences in the
circumstances of the child. In like manner adversity, how bitter soever it may be, is a
manifestation of God’s love to us, designed for our ultimate and highest welfare. Now
this may well reconcile us to trial. It will not make the trial less, but it will help us to
bear it, just as the wounded man is braced for the amputation of a limb when he is
told that it is indispensable if his life is to be preserved. (W. M. Taylor, D. D.)
The different effects of affliction
How different are summer storms from winter ones! In winter they rush over the
earth with their violence; and if any poor remnants of foliage or flowers have lingered
behind, these are swept along at one gust. Nothing is left but desolation; and long
after the rain has ceased, pools of water and mud bear tokens of what has been. But
when the clouds have poured out their torrents in summer, when the winds have
spent their fury, and the sun breaks forth again in glory, all things seem to rise with
renewed loveliness from their refreshing bath. The flowers, glistening with rainbows,
smell sweeter than before; the air, too, which may previously have been oppressive, is
become clear, and soft, and fresh. Such, too, is the difference, when the storms of
affliction fall on hearts unrenewed by Christian faith, and on those who abide in
Christ. In the former they bring out the dreariness and desolation which may before
have been unapparent. But in the true Christian soul, “though weeping may endure
for a night, joy cometh in the morning,” and tribulation itself is turned into the chief
of blessings. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
21 I went away full, but the Lord has brought
me back empty. Why call me Naomi? The Lord
has afflicted[e] me; the Almighty has brought
200

201. misfortune upon me.”
BARNES, "The Lord hath testified against me - The phrase is very
commonly applied to a man who gives witness concerning (usually against) another
in a court of justice Exo_20:16; 2Sa_1:16; Isa_3:9. Naomi in the bitterness of her
spirit complains that the Lord Himself turned against her, and was bringing her sins
up for judgment.
CLARKE, "I went out full - Having a husband and two sons.
The Lord hath brought me home again empty - Having lost all three by
death. It is also likely that Elimelech took considerable property with him into the
land of Moab; for as he fled from the face of the famine, he would naturally take his
property with him; and on this Naomi subsisted till her return to Bethlehem, which
she might not have thought of till all was spent.
GILL, "I went out full,.... Of my husband and children, as the Targum; of children
and riches, as Aben Ezra and Jarchi; wherefore some Jewish writers blame her and
her husband for going abroad at such a time, and ascribe it to a covetous disposition,
and an unwillingness to relieve the poor that came to them in their distress, and
therefore got out of the way of them, on account of which they were punished, so
Jarchi on Rth_1:1, see Jdg_2:15 but this is said without any just cause or reason that
appears:
and the Lord hath brought me home again empty: deprived of her husband,
children, and substance; she acknowledges the hand of God in it, and seems not to
murmur at it, but to submit to it quietly, and bear it patiently:
why then call ye me Naomi; when there is nothing pleasant and agreeable in me,
nor in my circumstances:
seeing the Almighty hath testified against me, and the Almighty hath
afflicted me? had bore witness that that was not a name suitable for her; or that she
had sinned, and had not done what was well pleasing in his sight, as appeared by his
afflicting her; she seemed therefore to be humbled under a sense of sin, and to
consider afflictions as coming from the Lord on account of it, and submitted to his
sovereign will; the affliction she means was the loss of her husband, children, and
substance; see Job_10:17.
PULPIT, "I went forth full, and Yahveh has caused me to return in emptiness.
Why should you call me Naomi, and Yahveh has testified against me, and the
Almighty has brought evil upon me? She went forth "full," with husband and
sons, not to speak of goods. She was under the necessity of returning in
emptiness, or with empty hands. The Hebrew word ‫ם‬ָ‫יק‬ ֵ‫ר‬ does not exactly mean
empty, as it is rendered in the Septuagint, the Vulgate, and King James's version.
201

202. It is not an adjective, but an adverb, emptily. This lamentable change of
circumstances she attributed to the action of Yahveh. He had, she believed, been
testifying against her by means of the trials through which she had passed. She
was right in a certain conditional acceptation of her language; but only on
condition of that condition. And, let us condition her declarations as we may, she
was probably in danger of making the same mistake concerning herself and her
trials which was made by Job's comforters in reference to the calamities by
which he was overwhelmed. In so far as penal evil is concerned, it may be traced
directly or circuitously to the will and government of God. "Shall there be evil—
that is, penal evil—in a city, and the Lord hath not done it?" (Amos 3:6). But
there are many sufferings that are not penal. The evil that is penal is only one
segment of physical evil; and then there is besides, metaphysical evil, or the evil
that consists in the inevitable imperfection of finite being. It is noteworthy that
the participle of the Hiphilic verb ‫ע‬ ַ‫ר‬ֵ‫ה‬ employed by Naomi is always translated in
King James s version evil doer, or wicked doer, or evil, or wicked, Naomi, in
using such a term, and applying it to Yahveh, was walking on a theological
precipice, where it is not needful that we should accompany her. Instead of the
literal expression, 'and' Yahveh, we may, with our English wealth of
conjunctions freely say, 'when' Yahveh. There is a charm in the original
simplicity. There is likewise a charm in the more complex structure of the free
translation.
LANGE, "Ruth 1:21. I went out full, and Jehovah hath brought me home again
empty. Full of family happiness, of joy in her sons, and of hope of a cheerful old
age surrounded by children and children’s children; but empty now of all these,
without possessions and without hope. A penitent feeling pervades her
lamentation. I went away notwithstanding my fullness, and because I went full,
do I return empty. For this reason she says: “I went away, and Jehovah has
brought me home again.” I went because it was my will to go, not God’s; now,
God’s judgment has sent me back. With that one word she gives vent to her
sorrow that in those times of famine she forsook her people, although she herself
was happy. What an evil thing it is to follow one’s own will, when that will is not
directed by the commandments of God! Man goes, but God brings home. But
beside this penitential feeling, there is another feature indicative of Naomi’s
beautiful character, which must not be overlooked. She says, I went, me hath
God afflicted; not, We went—my husband took me with him,—after all, I only
followed as in duty bound. She utters not a breath of accusation against
Elimelech or of excuse for herself. Properly speaking, the fault did lay with her
husband and sons. They were the originators of the undertaking that ended so
disastrously; but of this she has no memory. She neither accuses, nor yet does she
commiserate and bewail them. Of the evils which they experienced, she does not
speak. I went, and me has God brought home again, empty and bereft of
husband and child. Therefore, she repeats, call me not Naomi! That name, when
202

203. she hears it, suggests the entire contrast between what she was and what she now
is.
For Jehovah hath testified against me, ‫י‬ ִ‫ב‬ ‫ָה‬‫נ‬ָ‫.ﬠ‬ The internal connection with the
preceding thoughts confirms the correctness of the Masoretic pointing. The
reading of the LXX, “he humbled me,” was justly departed from, for it is only a
paraphrase of the sense.[FN36] That which Bertheau considers to be the
difficulty of the passage, that it makes God to testify against a person, while
elsewhere only men bear testimony, is precisely the special thought of Naomi: “I
went,” she says, “and God has testified that this going was a sin. Through the
issue of my emigration God has testified that its inception was not rooted in Him,
but in ourselves.” It is a peculiarity of piety that it ascribes the issue of all the
affairs of life to God. “Was it right or not, that I (namely, Elimelech and she)
went away to Moab?” Men might be in doubt about it. But the end, she says,
bears witness against us, who followed our own inclinations. God testified
against her, for “Shaddai hath afflicted me.” In other words, in that God, as
Shaddai, made sorrow my portion, He testified against me. The two clauses, ‫ָה‬‫וֹ‬‫ה‬ְ‫י‬
‫י‬ ִ‫ב‬ ‫ָה‬‫נ‬ָ‫,ﬠ‬ and ‫י‬ִ‫ע־ל‬ ַ‫ר‬ֵ‫ה‬ ‫י‬ ַ‫דּ‬ ַ‫,שׁ‬ are not so much parallel as mutually explanatory. In the
loss of my children and family, says Naomi, I perceive that He “declares me
guilty,” as the Targum also excellently renders ‫י‬ ִ‫ב‬ ‫ָה‬‫נ‬ָ‫.ﬠ‬ At the same time, the
meaning of Shaddai comes here again clearly to view. For it is He who inflicts
sorrow upon her, only in that her children are taken from her. That which God,
as Shaddai, the giver of fruitful ness, did to her when he caused her sons to
wither away, proves that God testifies against her. ‫ע‬ ַ‫ר‬ֵ‫ה‬ is here used just as it is in
Joshua 24:20 : “If ye forsake Jehovah—he will do you hurt (‫ֶם‬‫כ‬ָ‫ל‬ ‫ע‬ ַ‫ר‬ֵ‫)ה‬ and utterly
destroy you.”
PULPIT, ""I went out full, and the Lord hath brought me home again empty."
It seemed, indeed, a via dolorosa, this path homeward. How expressive the
words.
I. LOVE MAKES LIFE FULL. Why, I thought they went out poor? Yes. Seeking
bread? Yes. Yet Naomi's description is true and beautiful. We are "full" when
we have that which makes home, home indeed, and we are poor if, having all
wealth of means, we have not love. Well, indeed, has it been said that "the golden
moments in the stream of life rush past us, and we see nothing but sand; the
angels come to visit us, and we only know them when they are gone." We never
know how empty life is till the loved are lost to us.
203

204. II. THE LORD IS THE DISPOSER OF ALL EVENTS. "The Lord hath brought
me home." We talk of Providence when all goes well with us, when the harvests
are ripened, and the fruits hang on the wall. But we must not limit Providence to
the pleasant. The Lord "takes away" as well as gives. It is said that, in the order
of reading at the family altar, when the late John Angell James was about to
conduct worship after a severe bereavement, the Psalm to be read was the
hundred and third. The good man stopped, tears rolled down his face; and then,
gathering up his strength, he said, "Why not? It is the Father!" and he read on,
"Bless the Lord, O my soul!"
III. THE FULLEST HOME MAY SOON BE EMPTIED. Yes! We too should
feel it so. A husband and two sons gone! What converse there had been! what
interest in each other's pursuits I what affectionate concern for each other's weal
and happiness! and what a wealth of love for Naomi, the center of all I We feel at
such seasons that death would be blessed relief for us. The thought comes across
us, "I have got to live;" to live on from day to day, attending to the minutiae of
duty, and coming here and there so often on the little relics of the dead. Home
again! That has music inb it for the school-children, who come back to the bright
home; but to the widow, oh, how different! Home again, but how empty! Yet we
may learn, even from Naomi, that rest and refreshment come to hearts that trust
in God their Savior; and we may learn too what mistakes we make. Naomi said,
"Why call ye me Naomi, seeing that the Lord hath testified against me?" Natural
enough; but life was still to have a pleasant side for her.—W.M.S.
PETT, "And now God had made Himself know to Naomi as YHWH. While in
the foreign land He had acted towards her as Shaddai, but He was now acting
towards her as YHWH. She had gone out full (having a husband and two sons)
into a foreign land, and there God had afflicted her as Shaddai and by that
means, as the covenant God YHWH, had testified against her as one who had
departed from the sphere of the covenant, but it was as YHWH that He had now
brought her home again empty (having no husband and no sons) because she
had previously removed herself from within the sphere of the covenant.
Note how Naomi equates Shaddai with YHWH in the Hebrew parallelism. It was
as Shaddai that He had afflicted her in a foreign land, but it was as YHWH that
he had testified against her by this action because with her husband she had
removed herself from within the sphere of the covenant. And it was as YHWH,
the covenant God, that He had brought her home within the sphere of the
covenant, into the land where He had ‘visited His people by giving them bread’
(Ruth 1:6). By His affliction in the foreign land she had ‘known Him’ as
Shaddai; by His bringing of her home within the sphere of the covenant she now
204

205. ‘knew Him’ as YHWH and she recognised that that it was because of what they
had done by leaving the sphere of the covenant that she and her family had
suffered.
22 So Naomi returned from Moab accompanied
by Ruth the Moabite, her daughter-in-law,
arriving in Bethlehem as the barley harvest was
beginning.
CLARKE, "In the beginning of barley harvest - This was in the beginning of
spring, for the barley harvest began immediately after the passover, and that feast
was held on the 15th of the month Nisan, which corresponds nearly with our March.
The Targum says, “They came to Beth-lehem on that day in which the children of
Israel began to mow the sheaf of barley which was to be waved before the Lord.” This
circumstance is the more distinctly marked, because of Ruth’s gleaning, mentioned
in the succeeding chapter.
1. The native, the amiable simplicity, in which the story of the preceding chapter is
told, is a proof of its genuineness. There are several sympathetic circumstances
recorded here which no forger could have invented. There is too much of nature to
admit any thing of art.
2. On the marriage of Orpah and Ruth, and the wish of Naomi that they might find
rest in the house of their husbands, there are some pious and sensible observations
in Mr. Ness’s History and Mystery of the Book of Ruth, from which I shall lay the
following extract before my readers: -
“A married estate is a state of rest; so it is called here, and in Rth_
3:1. Hence marriage is called portus juventutis, the port or haven of
young people; whose affections, while unmarried, are continually
floating or tossed to and fro, like a ship upon the waters, till they come
into this happy harbour. There is a natural propension in most
persons towards nuptial communion, as all created beings have a
natural tendency towards their proper center, (leve sursum, et grave
deorsum), and are restless out of it, so the rabbins say, Requiret vir
costam suam, et requiret femina sedem suam, ‘The man is restless
while he misses his rib that was taken out of his side; and the woman
is restless till she get under the man’s arm, from whence she was
taken.’ O! look up to God then, ye unmarried ones, and cry with good
Naomi, The Lord grant me rest for my roving affections in the house
of some good consort, that I may live in peace and plenty, with content
and comfort all my days. Know that your marriage is, of all your civil
affairs, of the greatest importance, having an influence upon your
205

206. whole life. It is either your making or marring in this world; ‘tis like a
stratagem in war, wherein a miscarriage cannot be recalled when we
will, for we marry for life. I am thine, and thou art mine, brevis
quidem cantiuncula est, ‘is a short song;’ sed longum habet
epiphonema, ‘but it hath a long undersong.’ So an error here is
irrecoverable; you have need of Argus’s hundred eyes to look withal
before you leap.”
This is good advice; but who among the persons concerned will have grace enough
to take it?
GILL, "So Naomi returned,.... Aben, Ezra thinks this is to be understood of her
returning at another time; but it is only an observation of the writer of this history, to
excite the attention of the reader to this remarkable event, and particularly to what
follows:
and Ruth the Moabitess her daughter in law with her, which returned out
of the country of Moab; to Bethlehem, the birth place of the Messiah, and who
was to spring from her a Gentile; and which, that it might be the more carefully
remarked, she is called a Moabitess, and said to return out of the country of Moab:
and they came to Bethlehem in the beginning of barley harvest; which
began on the second day of the feast of unleavened bread, on the "sixteenth" of
Nisan, which answers to our March, and part of April, when they offered the sheaf of
the firstfruits to the Lord, and then, and not till then, might they begin their harvest;
see Gill on Lev_23:10; see Gill on Lev_23:14, hence the Targum here is,"they came to
Bethlehem at the beginning of the day of the passover, and on that day the children
of Israel began to reap the wave sheaf, which was of barley.''So the Egyptians and
Phoenicians, near neighbours of the Jews, went about cutting down their barley as
soon as the cuckoo was heard, which was the same time of the year; hence the
comedian (n) calls that bird the king of Egypt and Phoenicia. This circumstance is
observed for the sake of the following account in the next chapter.
JAMISON, "in the beginning of barley harvest — corresponding to the end
of our March.
PETT, "Verse 22
‘So Naomi returned, and Ruth the Moabitess, her daughter-in-law, with her,
who returned out of the country of Moab, and they came to Beth-lehem in the
beginning of the barley harvest.’
Naomi had, with her husband, deserted from within the sphere of the covenant,
because there had been famine in the land, But now when she returned it was to
discover a plentiful barley harvest, while she herself was empty. No wonder that
in the bitterness of the experience she wanted to change her name. But what she
did not as yet realise was the treasure that she had brought with her, Ruth the
Moabitess from whose descendants would be born Israel’s greatest king, (and
206

207. whose even greater ‘son’ would be the Saviour of the world).
“Ruth the Moabitess.” This is the first time that this description has been applied
to Ruth and it will occur fairly regularly from now on (Ruth 2:2; Ruth 2:21;
Ruth 4:5; Ruth 4:10. Compare also Ruth 2:6; Ruth 2:11). The author is stressing
her Moabite ancestry in spite of the fact that she had become a part of an
Israelite family and a Yahwist. This suggests that one of his aims is to bring out
how such a foreigner who converts to YHWH can find acceptance in the
covenant community to such an extent that YHWH will use her to produce
Israel’s great king, David.
ELLICOTT, "(22) Barley-harvest.—God had restored plenty to His people, and
the wayfarers thus arrive to witness and receive their share of the blessing. The
barley harvest was the earliest (Exodus 9:31-32), and would ordinarily fall about
the end of April.
COKE, "Ruth 1:22. They came to Beth-lehem in the beginning of barley-
harvest— The Chaldee paraphrast thus explains these words: "They came to
Bethlehem at the beginning of the passover, on the day that the children of Israel
began to mow the sheaf which was to be waved, which was of barley." See
Leviticus 23:10-11.
REFLECTIONS.—On now they travelled, and sweetly, no doubt, beguiled the
tedious way in such discourse as might confirm Ruth's holy purpose, and
comfort them together, in hope of God's blessing upon them. On their arrival at
Beth-lehem notice is taken,
1. Of the reception they met with. Collecting together on the rumour of her
return, the women, who remembered her former beauty and affluence, and now
beheld her wrinkles and poverty, some perhaps in pity, some in scorn and
upbraiding, and some in surprise, said, Is this Naomi? Note; (1.) Age and
wrinkles make strange alterations in the fairest face. It is a silly thing to be vain
of what is so fading. (2.) They who have any feelings of humanity, and much
more those who have the bowels of Christ, will seek compassionately to alleviate
the sorrows of the miserable. (3.) They, who have carried themselves most
humbly in prosperity, will be most regarded in adversity.
2. Her name reminded her of her former condition; she wishes, therefore, for one
more befitting her circumstances: Call me Mara, bitterness. She went out full of
earthly comforts, with husband and children; but now returns a childless widow:
yet, not murmuring at the afflictive providence, she sees and acknowledges God's
hand, receives the correction, and submits to his will, as holy, just, and good.
Note; (1.) It is a blessed sign of a soul devoted to God, when, in humbling
providences, the spirit is brought down to the condition. (2.) Though, under
affliction, God permits us to complain, he forbids us to murmur. (3.) When God
207

208. afflicts us, it is not only no more than we deserve, but he knows it is what we
need; and therefore whom he loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son
whom he receiveth.
3. The harvest was just begun, Providence so ordering it for the sake of the
events which were to follow. Note; The most minute circumstances of our lives
are directed by an over-ruling wisdom.
LANGE, "Ruth 1:22. So Naomi returned and Ruth with her. The curiosity of the
inhabitants of Bethlehem is satisfied; they have also heard the history of Ruth;
but with this their sympathy has likewise come to an end. Naomi was poor and
God-forsaken,—at least according to the pious and penitential feeling of the good
woman herself. How natural, that in her native place, too, she should stand
alone. But Ruth was with her. She had continued firm on the road, and she
remained faithful in Bethlehem. Since there also no one assisted her mother-in-
law, she continued to be her only stay and the sole sharer of her lot. Her presence
is once more expressly indicated: “and Ruth, the Moabitess, with her, on her
departure from the fields of Moab.” No one was with her but Ruth,—who made
the journey from Moab with her, in order to take care of her mother-in-law.
What had become of Naomi, if Ruth, like Orpah, had forsaken her! She had
sunk into poverty and humiliation more bitter than death. It is true, she too, with
her husband, had left Israel in times of distress. But for this she could not be held
responsible, although her generous spirit accused herself and no one else. On the
other hand, she had been sufficiently punished, and had confessed her guilt. But
in Bethlehem poor Naomi was made to feel that she now bore the name of Mara.
Only Ruth had respect to neither before nor after. She reflected on neither
happy nor sorrowful days. As she had loved in prosperity, so she remained true
in adversity. Naomi, in her native place and among kindred, in Israel, had been
alone and in want, had not the stranger, the widow of her Song of Solomon,
accompanied her from her distant land. While such love was hers, Naomi was
not yet wholly miserable; for God has respect to such fidelity.
And they came to Bethlehem in the beginning of barley-harvest. Consequently,
in the beginning of the harvest season in general. This statement is made in order
to intimate that the help of God did not tarry long. The harvest itself afforded
the opportunity to prepare consolation and reward for both women in their
highest need.
PULPIT, "So Naomi returned. The narrator pauses to recapitulate his narrative
of the return, and hence the recapitulatory so is, in English, very much to be
preferred to the merely additive and of the original. And Ruth the Moabitess,
her daughter-in-law, with her, who returned out of the land of Moab. The
cumulative and apparently redundant expression, "who returned out of the land
of Moab," is remarkable, at once for its simplicity and for its inexactitude. Ruth,
208

209. strictly speaking, had not returned, but she took part in' Naomi's return. And
they arrived in Bethlehem at the commencement of barley-harvest. Barley
ripened before wheat, and began to be reaped sometimes as early as March, but
generally in April, or Abib. By the time that the barley-harvest was finished the
wheat crop would be ready for the sickle.
PULPIT, "Ruth 1:22; Ruth 2:1-3
Naomi's history may now be carried on in the light of these texts.
I. NAOMI IS AN ANCESTRAL PILGRIM. Ancestor of whom? Turn to
Matthew 1:5, and you will find in the genealogy of our Lord the name of Ruth.
The earlier part of that Divine life, how fresh and beautiful it is—the advent, the
angels, the shepherds' songs! The mother, the first visit to the temple, the
doctors! And beautiful ministry too. Power wedded to mercy, miracles of
healing, mighty deeds of love, sermons amid the mountains and the cities. True!
But stand here a moment. It is an early evening of life, I admit; but it s evening.
Do you see in the blue distance One coming from the judgment hall? Do you hear
the wild cry of the mob, "Away with him! Away with him! Crucify him! Crucify
him!"? Do you mark the crush of the crowd round one fallen form, who fainted
beneath the burden of that cross which he bore for us all? Follow him on to the
slopes, while Simon, the Cyrenian, helps to bear his cross. The soldiers mock
him. The crowd insult him. They spat upon him, they smote him with their
hands, they buffeted him. And now his hands and feet are nailed; his pale face is
bowed. Come nearer and gaze. Behold the man I As the reapers asked, "Is this
Naomi?" so we ask, "Is this Jesus?" Is this he whose sweet face lay in the
manger? Is this he whose bright inquisitive face was in the temple? Is this he who
passed the angels at heaven's high gate, and came to earth, saying, "Lo! I come
to do thy will, O God." Yes! Bowed, bruised, broken for us. The same Savior,
who now endures the cross, despising the shame. Well may we wonder and
adore! He saved others, himself he cannot—will not—save! More beautiful now
than in the stainless infancy of the Holy Child. More beautiful now than when by
the shores of Galilee's lake, he spake words which mirrored heaven more purely
and clearly than those waters the gold and crimson of the sky. It is the bowed,
broken, forsaken, suffering, dying Lord that moves the world's heart. He knew it
all. In that hour, when his soul was made an offering for sin, he, being lifted up,
had power to draw all hearts unto him. Is this Naomi? Well might angels ask, Is
this the eternal Son of the Father? Is this he of whom the Almighty said, "He is
my fellow." Is this he to whom command was given, Let all the angels of God
worship him? Yes! It is he. It is finished. "Lift up your heads, O ye gates, and be
209

210. ye lift up, ye everlasting doors, and the King of glory shall come in."
II. NAOMI IS A PROVIDED-FOR PILGRIM. Back to Bethlehem; but how to
live? how to find the roof-tree that should shelter again? She knew the Eternal's
name, "Jehovah-Jireh," the Lord will provide. A kinsman of her husband's, a
mighty man Of wealth, lived there: of the family of Elimelech; his name was
Boaz. We must not mind criticism when we talk of chance, or happening. The
Bible does. It is simply one way of stating what seems to us accidental; although
in reality we know that the least secrets are in the good hand of him "to whom is
nothing trivial." Ruth wants to glean! And Naomi says, Go, my daughter; "and
her hap—her chance—was to light on the part of a field belonging unto Boaz?'
We know that the same old love story, which is new in every generation begins
again; so Boaz took Ruth, and she was his wife. So that a new home begins, and a
smile plays through the tears of the lonely widow. Naomi has some human light
again in her landscape; she will see the children's children, and take them by the
hand into the coming barley-harvests; she will have some appropriate hopes and
joys and interests still. Life to her will not be desolate, because she has still a God
above her and a world around her to call forth interest and hope. Her sorrow
was not greater than she could bear, and the summer over, even autumn had its
tender beauties before life's winter came. So it ever is. Trust in the Lord, and you
shall never want any good thing. Believe still in your Savior, and provided for
you will be with all weapons of fence, all means of consolation, all prosperity that
shall not harm your soul. So true, then, is the Bible to the real facts of human
life. It is not a book of gaiety, for life is real and earnest, and its associations are
mortal and mutable. It consecrates home joy, and yet reminds us that every
garden has its grave, every dear union its separation. But, on the other hand,
there are no utterances of unbearable grief, or unmitigated woe. It says ever to
us, Jehovah-Jireh, the Lord will provide. And the facts of experience in every age
endorse its truth. As the snows bide flowers even in the Alps, so beneath all our
separations and sorrows there are still plants of the Lord, peace, and hope, and
joy, and rest in him. Blessed, indeed, shall we be if we can rest in the Lord, and
wait patiently for him. We, too, shall all change. Time and sorrow will write their
experiences on our brow. There will be hours in which we feel like Naomi,
empty, oh I so empty. The cup of affection poured out on the ground, the forest
without its songsters, the garden without its flowers, the home without its
familiar faces. We shall see these pictures every day, and wonder, more and
more, how any hearts can do without a Brother and a Savior in Jesus Christ. But
if character be enriched and trained, all is well; for this very end have we bad
Divine discipline, and the Lord will perfect that which concerneth us for the
highest ends of eternal life in him. The baptism with which our Lord was
baptized changed his face, altered his mien, enlarged even his Divine experience.
210

211. He was made "perfect through suffering," and became the Author of eternal
salvation to all who trust in him. Coming back even to Bethlehem is only for a
season. As Naomi returns, nature alone remains the same; the blue roller-bird
would flash for a moment across her path, the music of the turtle-dove remind
her of the melody of nature in her childhood;—the peasant garb would tell her of
the old unchanged ways; and the line of hills against the sky would remind her
that the earth abideth forever. But for her there was a still more abiding country,
where Elimelech, like Abraham, lived, and where Mahlon and Chillon waited for
the familiar face that had made their boyhood blessed. And so we wait. The
redemption we celebrate here is a passover, a memorial of deliverance and a
prophecy of home. Home where sorrow and sighing, night and death, will flee
away; where, no longer pilgrims, we shall no more go out, and where the worn
face and the weary heart shall be transfigured into the immortal life.—W.M.S.
BI, "So Naomi returned, and Ruth.
The young convert
Little was Naomi aware of the treasure she was bringing to Israel or of the honour
which was in store for Ruth. She says, “The Lord hath brought me back empty.” And
it was so, so far as she was herself concerned. But the Lord had brought back with
her one whom all generations should call blessed; one who was to be a mother of the
promised Messiah, the anointed Saviour of Israel. We are now to contemplate her
admission to Israel. The young convert’s entrance among the people of God. We
cannot enter upon such a view without stopping for a moment to think of the
happiness of Naomi in such a companion. How great was the privilege to her to bring
back with her own return so precious a soul to the Lord of hosts! What an
unspeakable joy it is to a Christian parent to be attended by his children in the
heavenly path! “So they two went together until they came to Bethlehem.” I cannot
conceive a greater blessing in social life than when we can say this of father and son,
of mother and daughter. This is a bond which must long outlast every other one; and
a treasure of enjoyment which must remain when every other one has failed. How
such companionship in religion relieves the sorrows of the road! How it multiplies
the joys of the way ! The mother and the daughter take sweet counsel together on
their journey. Naomi has much to tell, Ruth has much to ask, in reference to the new
home to which they are returning together. Their mutual prayers and
encouragements are full of advantage. The blending of the varied experience of the
two becomes helpful to both. The despondency of age is animated by the joyful
anticipations of youth. The effervescence of youth is moderated by the experience
and soberness of age. “So they went together.” Unity of feeling, unity of interest,
unity of hope, bind them together. They have fellowship one with another. But while
Ruth took sweet counsel with Naomi her thoughts and feelings were still in a great
degree peculiar to herself and completely her own. To her every prospect is hopeful,
and her imagination loves to stray through all the anticipations which are presented
to her youthful mind. The young Christian truly living and walking in Christ rejoices
in the hopes which a Saviour gives; is encouraged, ardent, and delighted in looking
forward over the way in which the great Captain of salvation is leading the sons of
God. “I see no trials or sorrows in it.” Thus would Ruth have said. She could have no
feeling but unmingled pleasure in the prospect of the journey she had undertaken.
Delightful encouragements arise in her mind which overwhelm all possible regrets or
fears. How many hopes and plans cluster around Bethlehem and Judah! She knows
211

212. not what the Lord has prepared for her. It has not entered into her youthful heart to
conceive the actual blessings which are laid up in store for her there. But she knows
that all must be well and happy for her under the shadow of His wings in whom she
has come to put her trust. Nothing is in your way. You may do all things through
Christ that strengtheneth you, and be made more than conquerors in Him. She
comes with a deep sense of her own unworthiness. But this is silenced by her
conscious desire and choice. The young convert knows and feels his guilt. But he
needs not, and does not, stop to sit clown under the mere dominion of grief for the
past. He has his new work to do. He must press forward in it. And the cloud will pass
away and leave him in the sunshine of his Saviour’s love, to finish and perfect it. But
the perseverance of Ruth furnishes us with another most important example. “They
went together until they came to Bethlehem.” There is no fact which gives the Church
more peculiar joy in the coming of young converts to Christ than their habitual
perseverance. They are the ones who “hold fast the beginning of their confidence
steadfast unto the end.” The most fruitful, faithful Christians are habitually those
who begin the earliest. The time of Ruth’s arrival at Bethlehem was most significant.”
They came to Bethlehem in the beginning of barley harvest.” The barley harvest of
Palestine was in the early spring. The barley was sown after the autumnal rains, in
the month of October, and the harvest was in the month of April. It was a time of
special joy, the first spring-gathering of their annual fruits. The harvest is always
employed as an illustration of satisfaction and joy. “They joy before Thee, according
to the joy of harvest.” And is it not always a scene of rejoicing when the sinner
returns? The harvest was a time of opening abundance. No wants or poverty were
pressing now. There is thus bread enough and to spare in the Saviour’s house. And
when the sinner finds a shelter there he finds all his needs supplied. His soul has
abundance of all things which it desireth. No more encouraging time could there
have been for Ruth’s first acquaintance with Israel. Every aspect of the land was
promising and prosperous. The sight of plenty crowned every prospect. And she sees
her new home clothed with every attraction. Is it not always so when we first come to
the feet of Jesus and find our peace and acceptance there? Now we seem to live for
the first time. There is reality, happiness, satisfaction here. We have found Him
whom our soul loveth, and we have found everything we want in Him. The barley
harvest was the time of the Passover. Thus this young convert from the Gentiles
comes as the first-fruits of a Gentile harvest to be gathered, and is welcomed with
Israel as a partaker of the paschal feast. Happy are we in welcoming our youthful
friends giving evidence of their new birth for God and their living faith in Jesus to the
table of the Lord. Happy is the house the first-fruits of which are thus consecrated
and sanctified to be the Lord’s for ever. (S. H. Tyng, D. D.).
Footnotes:
Ruth 1:1 Traditionally judged
Ruth 1:20 Naomi means pleasant.
Ruth 1:20 Mara means bitter.
212

213. Ruth 1:20 Hebrew Shaddai; also in verse 21
Ruth 1:21 Or has testified against
213