Ruth of Moab met and married Mahlon of Bethlehem after his family moved to Moab during a famine in Israel. Mahlon’s brother Chilion married Orpah of Moab. After Mahlon’s and Chilion’s father Elimelech died soon after the move, Ruth developed a close bond with her widowed mother-in-law Naomi. After 10 years, Mahlon and Chilion both died, leaving Ruth, Orpah and Naomi widowed and without heirs. Show Ruth and Orpah walked beside Naomi as she returned to Bethlehem. When they reached the border, Naomi released Ruth and Orpah to their Moabite families. Orpah went back, but Ruth refused to leave Naomi. She vowed, “Where you go, I will go … your people will be my people, and your God my God.” In Bethlehem, Ruth went to the fields to glean barley for Naomi and herself. As it happened, she gleaned in the fields of Naomi’s relative Boaz, who admired Ruth’s devotion to Naomi and was very kind to her. From Naomi, Ruth learned about the family-redeemer law: Ruth had the right to ask their nearest male relative to marry her to preserve her deceased husband’s name, legacy and land. Land was a sacred trust passed from generation to generation. Without children to inherit one’s land, God’s eternal promises and blessings were believed to be lost, and one’s legacy was as lost as if one had never lived. At Naomi’s urging, Ruth went to Boaz and asked him to buy Naomi’s land and become their family-redeemer. After consulting with a closer relative who declined, Boaz sealed the land transfer at the city gates in the presence of the elders. Ruth and Boaz were married. With the birth of baby Obed they redeemed the family’s name, legacy and inheritance in the promised land. Obed became the father of Jesse and grandfather of King David. Ruth could not have foreseen the far-reaching consequences of her actions. But with her tenacity, everyday devotion and self-giving love, she wrote her legacy as a family-redeemer along with Boaz in the culture in which they lived. Ruth of Moab is remembered today as the great-grandmother of King David and is listed in Jesus’ genealogy. Ruth’s place in the royal ancestry shows the vastness of God’s love and mercy which includes all nations and all peoples. Ruth 1:2 The name of the man was Elimelech, and the name of his wife, Naomi; and the names of his two sons were Mahlon and Chilion, Ephrathites of Bethlehem in Judah. Now they entered the land of Moab and remained there. (NASB: Lockman)
THE NAME OF THE MAN WAS ELIMELECH:
MY GOD IS Shakespeare asks, "What’s in a name? A rose by any other name would smell as sweet." In fact Shakespeare might be surprised that Biblical names are often very instructive but in Elimelech's case can be sadly ironic. Elimelech means "my God is king" When his friends called to him, they didn't say, "Elimelech," in English. They said, "My God is King," or, "God is my King." What a wonderful name to have---his very name a testimony of the sovereignty (a king is often called a sovereign) of His God. But remember these were the days of judges when there was no king in Israel, so his name is ironic for sure. It is sad that he had such a name and yet sought solace in Moab rather than in the sovereign sufficiency of Jehovah Who is "I Am"… "I Am… anything and everything you will ever need"! Elimelech seems to have forgotten that "The name of the LORD is a strong tower. The righteous runs into it and is safe (sagab = "set on high", safe)" (Pr 18:10+) (see the Name of the LORD is a Strong Tower) Elimelech's actions belie not only his name but more significantly his trust in what that Name represents. John Trapp - My God is King: an excellent name, and such as might yield great comfort in those calamitous times.
QUESTION - Who was Elimelech in the Bible? ANSWER - Elimelech (also spelled Elimelek) was the husband of Naomi and the father of two sons, Mahlon and Kilion. Elimelech was of the tribe of Judah. He lived in Bethlehem during the time of the judges. A famine was ravaging the land, and so Elimelech moved his family away from Israel to the country of Moab so they would be fed (Ruth 1:1–2). While this was a decision made out of a desire for survival, Moab was not the best place for Elimelech to take his family. He was leaving the Promised Land that God had given him, and the Moabites did not worship the Lord. The danger was that Israelites living among other nations might begin to assimilate into the foreign culture and imitate its religious practices, thus breaking the Law of God. While in Moab, Elimelech died, leaving his wife with their two sons (verse 3). The sons married Moabite women, which was something else God wanted His people to avoid. However, God ended up blessing Elimelech’s family anyway, although not through his sons. God instead chose to work through Naomi and one of her Moabite daughters-in-law, Ruth. After only ten years in Moab, Elimelech’s sons also died. The Bible did not say how this happened, but the household was now comprised of three widows. Naomi heard that the famine in Judah had ended and food was now available in Bethlehem (Ruth 1:6), so she determined to return. She urged her daughters-in-law to stay in Moab, but Ruth refused, proclaiming that Naomi’s God was now her own God (verse 16). The two women went to Bethlehem and began to make a living for themselves. One of Elimelech’s relatives, a man named Boaz, owned a field in Bethlehem, so Ruth went to his field to glean the leftover grain in order to feed herself and Naomi (Ruth 2:1–2). Ruth caught Boaz’s eye, and the two eventually married. In spite of the fact that Elimelech’s family intermarried with pagans, God used the situation for His glory. Ruth and Boaz became the parents of Obed, who would become the father of Jesse, the father of David (Ruth 4:17). As the Messiah was descended from David (Romans 1:3; see also Matthew 1:1-25), Elimelech’s family was blessed to be a part of Jesus’ line. GotQuestions.org AND THE NAME OF HIS WIFE NAOMI AND THE NAMES OF HIS TWO SONS WERE MAHLON AND CHILION:
ELIMELECH'S And the name of his wife, Naomi; and the names of his two sons were Mahlon and Chilion - One needs to be cautious attaching too much significance to some of these Hebrew names because there is not a clear consensus on the original meaning. With that as a caveat, most sources state that "Naomi" means "pleasant one". Mahlon (''sickly or unhealthy") became the husband of Ruth the Moabitess (as we discover - Ru 4:9, 10+). Boaz, a distant relative to Mahlon, married the dead man's widow, Ruth. Chilion means "weakness, wasting away, puny, failing" and the root word for his name means ''consumption'' ( tuberculosis). McGee sums up their names as "Unhealthy and Puny!" Naomi is apparently derived from naem which means to be pleasant, delightful, lovely. While Naomi protests her name in Ru 1:20 by the end of the story her name is indeed pleasant and delightful in Bethlehem (Ru 4:14-17)! David Atkinson on Mahlon and Chilion - Mahlon and Chilion, Naomi’s sons, apparently had old Canaanite names, but they are mentioned here because of their significance in setting the scene for the tears and pain of the rest of Ruth 1. ‘Mahlon’ seems to be linked to a root meaning ‘to be sick’, and ‘Chilion’ signifies something like ‘failing’, or ‘pining’, even ‘annihilation’. (See context in The Message of Ruth: The Wings of Refuge) John Trapp says Naomi means "My sweet or pleasant one: a fit name for a wife, who should be to her husband "as the loving hind and pleasant roe." {Pr 5:19} Loving appellations serve to increase love betwixt married couples, as well as to express it." Naomi is clearly a key character in Ruth as her name occurs 21x in 20v - Ruth 1:2; Ruth 1:3; Ruth 1:8; Ruth 1:11; Ruth 1:19; Ruth 1:20; Ruth 1:21; Ruth 1:22; Ruth 2:1; Ruth 2:2; Ruth 2:6; Ruth 2:20; Ruth 2:22; Ruth 3:1; Ruth 4:3; Ruth 4:5; Ruth 4:9; Ruth 4:14; Ruth 4:16; Ruth 4:17
QUESTION - Who was Naomi in the Bible? ANSWER - The story of Naomi appears in the Bible in the book of Ruth. Naomi lived during the time of the judges. She was the wife of a man named Elimelech, and they lived in Bethlehem with their two sons, Mahlon and Kilion. Naomi’s life illustrates the power of God to bring something good out of bitter circumstances. When a famine hits Judea, Elimelech and Naomi and their two boys relocate to Moab (Ruth 1:1). There, Mahlon and Kilion marry two Moabite women, Orpah and Ruth. After about ten years, tragedy strikes. Elimelech dies, and both of Naomi’s sons also die, leaving Naomi, Ruth, and Orpah widows (Ruth 1:3–5). Naomi, hearing that the famine in Judea was over, decides to return home (Ruth 1:6). Orpah stays in Moab, but Ruth chooses to move to the land of Israel with Naomi. The book of Ruth is the story of Naomi and Ruth returning to Bethlehem and how Ruth married a man named Boaz and bore a son, Obed, who became the grandfather of David and the ancestor of Jesus Christ. The name Naomi means “sweet, pleasant,” which gives us an idea of Naomi’s basic character. We see her giving her blessing to Ruth and Orpah when she tells them to return to their mothers’ homes so that they might find new husbands: she kisses them and asks that the Lord deal kindly with them (Ruth 1:8–14). But her heartache in Moab was more than Naomi could bear. When she and Ruth arrive in Bethlehem, the women of the town greet Naomi by name, but she cries, “Don’t call me Naomi. . . . Call me Mara, because the Almighty has made my life very bitter. I went away full, but the Lord has brought me back empty. Why call me Naomi? The Lord has afflicted me; the Almighty has brought misfortune upon me” (Ruth 1:20–21). The name Mara means “bitter.” The cup of affliction is a bitter cup, but Naomi understood that the affliction came from the God who is sovereign in all things. Little did she know that from this bitter sorrow great blessings would come to her, her descendants, and the world through Jesus Christ. Ruth meets a local landowner, Boaz, who is very kind to her. Naomi again recognizes the providence of God in providing a kinsman-redeemer for Ruth. Naomi declares that the Lord “has not stopped showing his kindness to the living and the dead" (Ruth 2:20) Seeing God’s hand in these events, Naomi encourages Ruth to go to Boaz as he slept in the threshing floor in order to request that he redeem her and her property. Naomi’s concern was for Ruth’s future, that Ruth would gain a husband and provider (Ruth 3). Naomi’s bitterness is turned to joy. In the end, she gains a son-in-law who would provide for both her and Ruth. She also becomes a grandmother to Ruth’s son, Obed. Then the women of Bethlehem say to Naomi, “Praise be to the Lord, who this day has not left you without a guardian-redeemer. May he become famous throughout Israel! He will renew your life and sustain you in your old age. For your daughter-in-law, who loves you and who is better to you than seven sons, has given him birth” (Ruth 4:14–15). Naomi was no longer Mara. Her life again became sweet and pleasant, blessed by God. GotQuestions.org EPHRATHITES OF BETHLEHEM IN JUDAH
Related Passages:
Ephrathites of Bethlehem in Judah - Ephrata or Ephrathah ("fruitful") was another name for Bethlehem. The town was originally called Ephrath (Ge 35:16, 19, 48:7) or Ephrathah (Ru 4:11, Mic 5:2). It was evidently named after Ephrath, the wife of Caleb (1Chr 2:19). Note that this does not refer to Ephrathites of the tribe of Ephraim, as 1Ki 11:26. They were of the tribe of Judah.
NET NOTE - Heb “[They were] Ephrathites.” Ephrathah is a small village (Ps 132:6) in the vicinity of Bethlehem (Gen 35:16), so close in proximity that it is often identified with the larger town of Bethlehem (Gen 35:19; 48:7; Ruth 4:11; Mic 5:2 [MT 5:1]; HALOT 81 s.v. אֶפְרָתָה); see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther (WBC), 64. The designation “Ephrathites” might indicate that they were residents of Ephrathah. However, the adjectival form אֶפְרָתִים (ephratim, “Ephrathites”) used here elsewhere refers to someone from the clan of Ephrath (cf. 1 Chr 4:4) which lived in the region of Bethlehem: “Now David was the son of an Ephrathite from Bethlehem in Judah whose name was Jesse” (1 Sam 17:12; cf. Mic 5:2 [MT 5:1]). So it is more likely that the virtually identical expression here—“Ephrathites from Bethlehem in Judah”—refers to the clan of Ephrath in Bethlehem (see R. L. Hubbard, Jr., borrow commentary on The book of Ruth [NICOT], 91). Bethlehem-Ephrata was thus an appropriate "place for the LORD, an habitation for the mighty God of Jacob. Lo, we heard of it at Ephratah: we found it in the fields of the wood" (Psalm 132:5, 6+). Judah (3063) (yehuda) means celebrated, praised or praise Jehovah and in context describes a territory. We first encounter the name Judah (Judah 1; Judah 2) as given to one of Jacob's sons by his wife Leah in Ge 29:35
Ephrathite (0673) (Ephrathi) means a descendent of Ephraim. This is a member of the tribe of Ephraim, Judg. 12:5. Elkanah, the father of Samuel, was an Ephraimite, 1 Sam. 1:1, as was Jeroboam I, the first king of the Northern Kingdom of Israel, 1 Kings 11:26.This word is also a clan of Judah in Bethlehem. This was a subdivision of the Calebites from the Bethlehem region. David's father, Jesse, was a member, 1 Sam. 17:12. The term is used in the plural of Ruth's in-laws (Ruth 1:2).
ENTERED THE LAND OF MOAB AND REMAINED THERE:
Related Passage:
Now they entered the land of Moab and remained there - Observe the picture above. Would this have been an easy trek into Moab? They would have to traverse those mountains and in those days thieves often lurked in the mountains. John Trapp quips "There is food in Moab when famine in Israel. "Wicked men have their portion in this life"; (Ps 17:14) but David neither coveteth their cates, nor envieth their happiness. {Ps 17:15). Moab (4124) may mean "of my father" and is the name of a man (a son of Lot by an incestuous union with his older daughter) and as used in this book, the name of a nation, situated along the eastern border of the southern half of the Dead Sea, on a high plateau (see picture below) between the Dead Sea and the Arabian desert. Moab was about 35 miles in length and 25 miles in width. Remained (1961) (hayah) means to exist, to be or to come to pass. They were "existing" in Moab. What began as just a "sojourn" (temporary) turned into a settled existence and even more so after the death of Elimelech (Ru 1:5).
Ruth 1:3 Then Elimelech, Naomi's husband, died; and she was left with her two sons. (NASB: Lockman)
Then (note) Elimelech, Naomi's husband, died - This is a abrupt otherwise unexplained declaration! Why did he die? Was this part of God's providential plan? (That's rhetorical because since God is sovereign, every sparrow that falls to the ground is part of His providential plan -- we just may not see they why or how as Dt 29:29+ alludes to) What irony - in fleeing famine to seek life, they instead found death. Nevertheless, it is hard to say that this was the direct hand of God’s judgment against them although this is the emphatic conclusion of many commentaries. If we are honest, it is sometimes difficult to discern why tragic things happen. What is certain is that the change of scenery did not improve the circumstances of Elimelech's family (at least not in Ruth 1!). Block comments that "Naomi’s new position as the head of this household is reflected in the reversal of roles in the text; she is no longer Elimelech’s wife (v. 2); he is her husband (v. 3). And the sons are no longer Elimelech’s children but hers." (Borrow Judges, Ruth. Vol. 6: New American Commentary - page 627) ' David Atkinson has an interesting short "excursus" on names in Ruth - To our author, names are significant. There are some characters in the book whose names we are not told, such as the important ‘next of kin’ who features in Ruth 4:1. So we must assume that when the writer tells us names, they carry a special significance in his purpose. To the Hebrew way of thinking, to know a person’s name is to know his character, to know him. The name is the person. When Abram becomes a new person, he receives a new name. When a person’s name is destroyed or cut off the person is extinguished from human memory, is as though he had never been. It was a terrible thing to be left with neither name nor remnant. Supremely when God tells his name, he tells his character, and shares himself with those to whom he speaks. ‘Yahweh’ is his personal name, the name of the covenant God. Elimelech means ‘My God is King’. Some commentators, like Matthew Henry whom we quoted earlier, wonder if there is not some rebuke implied in telling us this name. Should such a name not express trust and confidence in God? We may certainly remind ourselves that for all for whom ‘My God is King’, while there is no promise of a trouble-free life, there is always the promise of daily bread, and the assurance that there is no need to be morbidly anxious about tomorrow. Part of the meaning of faith may be expressed by saying that faith is what God gives us to help us cope with uncertainties. Did Elimelech live up to his name? (See context in The Message of Ruth: The Wings of Refuge) Hubbard comments that "As famine shattered the solidarity between man and land (v. 1), now death destroys the harmony between man and woman." (See context in The Book of Ruth or Borrow The book of Ruth)
John Trapp on Elimelech, Naomi's husband, died - Her head was cut off, her root uncovered. Jason Driesbach makes an interesting observation on Elimelech, Naomi's husband, which would be easy to miss - Naomi was introduced as "his wife" (Ru 1:2), but after his death, Elimelech is reduced to "Naomi's husband." In ancient literature, it is rare to find a man named in terms of his relationship to a woman. With this phrase, the narrator subtly signals that Naomi will be the main character—not Elimelech or his sons as one might have otherwise supposed. (See context in Joshua, Judges, Ruth) And she was left (sha'ar/sa'ar; Lxx = kataleipo) with her two sons - NET = "she and her two sons were left alone." A widow in ancient times was in dire straits but at least Naomi had her two sons. Sha'ar speaks of bereavement at the death of another as in Ge 42:38 and Ru 1:5+ ("bereft"). Selwyn Hughes writes that "These circumstances reinforce the point we made yesterday about the folly of making decisions based on expediency rather than on the will of God. How prone we are to allow materialistic or economic values to influence our judgment. A man and his family emigrated, lured by the appeal of financial security. He wrote: "Would to God I had thought of the spiritual implications before I made the move. My life and family are in ruins." This is why it is always wise to pray over a move to another town, city or country, as there may be unseen dangers that are revealed only through prayer. A change of circumstances will not necessarily solve our problems. We think if we had a new home, a new church, a new husband or wife, a new minister, or a new job, that all our difficulties would be over. As Christians, every major decision we make ought to be set against God's perfect will. We owe it to God to bring Him into our decision making. Otherwise we may find we have gained economically but lost out spiritually." (Ruth 1)
Left (07604) sha'ar/sa'ar means to remain, be left over, to leave, to let remain. The first Biblical use of sha'ar is in the context of judgement, Moses recording that after the worldwide flood "only Noah was left" and was in essence a "remnant." (Ge 7:23; Lxx = kataleipo from kata = intensifies meaning + leipo = leave behind, forsake). The second use also describes God's judgment, this time on Sodom and Gomorrah stating that "those who survived fled to the hill country." (Ge 14:10; Lxx = kataleipo). Sha'ar describes Pharaoh's army = "not even one of them remained." (Ex 14:28; Lxx = kataleipo) See Study of Related Hebrew Verb - (07611) sheerith = Remnant. Sha'ar is used twice in Ruth - Ruth 1:3 and Ruth 1:5 and both are translated in the Greek or Lxx with kataleipo which means to leave behind, to abandon. (cf Mt 19:5). Sha'ar often refers to those who have survived the judgment of God (see Lev 26:36, 39; Dt 4:27; Dt 28:62; 2Chr 34:21; Ezek 6:12; Ezek 9:8; Zech 11:9). Ruth 1:4 They took for themselves Moabite women as wives; the name of the one was Orpah and the name of the other Ruth. And they lived there about ten years. (NASB: Lockman)
Related Passages:
1 Kings 11:1-2 Now King Solomon loved many foreign women along with the daughter of Pharaoh: Moabite, Ammonite, Edomite, Sidonian, and Hittite women, 2 from the nations concerning which the LORD had said to the sons of Israel, “You shall not associate with them, nor shall they associate with you, for (TERM OF EXPLANATION) they will surely turn your heart away after their gods.” Solomon held fast to these in love. They took for themselves Moabite women as wives - Weren't they guilty of transgressing the instruction to "not intermarry with" pagan women who God said would "turn your sons away from following Me to serve other gods"? Solomon learned the truth of God's warning (see above)! However the Moabite women are not listed with the 7 Canaanite nations in (Dt 7:1+). Therefore some say that Dt 7:1-3+ only prohibits Canaanite marriage and that marriages to Moabites were not condemned. While this is true it is notable that after return from the Babylonian exile, both Ezra and especially Nehemiah state that Moabite wives were not to taken by Israelites (Ezra 9:1-2; Neh. 13:23-25). So it is a moot point as to whether they were committing transgression in taking Moabite wives. Ruth, a Moabite, sought the living God (Ru 1:14+) and married an Israelite man. The treatment of Ruth by Boaz along with other Israelites of Bethlehem demonstrates that this law was never meant to exclude one who said ”Your people will be my people and your God my God“ (Ru 1:16+). Not till Ru 4:10+ does the reader learn that it was Mahlon who married Ruth. MacArthur addresses the question of their marriage to Moabite women asking "was not marriage to a Moabitess strictly forbidden by the law? The nations or people to whom marriage was prohibited were those possessing the land that Israel would enter (Ex. 34:16; Deut. 7:1–3; Josh. 23:12) which did not include Moab (cf. Deut. 7:1). Further, Boaz married Ruth, a devout proselyte to Jehovah (1:16–17) not a pagan worshiper of Chemosh—Moab’s chief deity (cf. later problems in Ezra 9:1, 2 and Neh. 13:23–25). (See context in The MacArthur Bible Commentary) John Trapp on Moabite wifes - Which haply they had not been suffered to do if their father had lived: their mother, it may be, could as little hinder it, as Rebekah Esau’s marrying those daughters of Heth. But God had a holy hand in it: He orders the disorders of men to His own glory. NET NOTE on they took for themselves - Heb “and they lifted up for themselves Moabite wives.” When used with the noun “wife,” the verb נָשָׂא (nasa’, “to lift up, carry, take”) forms the idiom “to take a wife,” that is, to marry (BDB 673 s.v. Qal.3.d; 2 Chr 11:21; 13:21; 24:3; Ezra 9:2, 12; 10:44; Neh 13:25). Solomon’s experience later showed that the greatest problem in a mixed marriage is the temptation to serve the gods of one’s foreign wife (1Ki 11:1-6). Thus there is a striking difference in Ruth's marriage to Boaz which was in the line of Messiah and Solomon's marriages which resulted in introduction of flagrant idolatry into Solomon's court for which God tore the kingdom apart (10 northern tribes and 2 southern tribes in Judah and Jerusalem) in 931 BC. Ruth sought after the One True God in contrast to the polytheistic idol worshipers in her native land. The name of the one was Orpah and the name of the other Ruth. And they lived there about ten years - Orpah may mean "Forelock" or "fawn". Ruth means "friendship" which is so fitting as this book contains one of the most touching examples of friendship in the Bible.
About ten years - Recall Ru 1:1 where they initially went to Moab to "sojourn", which presumably suggested the stay was to be temporary. There is a Jewish tradition that a woman who has been widowed for ten years will not have a child again. Whether this tradition stems from Ru 1:4 or predates it is not known Ruth had both reputation and character as we see this story unfold. Reputation is what other people say about you. Character is what God knows to be true of you (cp 1Sa 16:7 as Samuel anoints one of Jesse's sons. Cp God's viewpoint Isa 55:8, 9. Ps 147:10, 11, Pr 31:30 - Surely Ruth was a woman who "feared the LORD", Pr 31:10-30 - see brief study of The Fear of the Lord). Ruth was both a woman of reputation and character. For women Ruth stands out as an example to be followed. For men Ruth is the model of a woman to be pursued. Ruth is a woman with a wrong beginning who makes a right turn which brings her the right ending as we see in Matthew 1:5+ where we read "Salmon was the father of Boaz by Rahab, Boaz was the father of Obed by Ruth, and Obed the father of Jesse." How paradoxical that in Judges the chosen people forsook God (Jdg 2:11-15, Jdg 10:6, 10, 13) for idols (cp Jdg 17:5, 18:14, 17-20) but Ruth forsakes idols for the living God (cf 1Th 1:9-10+)! Ruth (like another Gentile woman Rahab the harlot - Josh 2:1-3+, Josh 6:17-25+, Mt 1:5+ = Rahab in the line of the Messiah, Heb 11:31+ = Rahab's faith in action, James 2:25+ = an example of genuine faith) chose to believe God when most around her (including her sister-in-law Orpah) rejected Him. Ruth is a paradox from beginning to end… Ruth begins with a famine in the land and Regarding the transition of a sojourn (Ru 1:1) into a ten year stay, someone has written a proverbial word that may be applicable to the beginning scene in Ruth... SIN will take you further than you ever meant to STRAY, TORREY'S TOPIC MOABITES
CALLED
DESCRIBED AS
ISRAELITES
PROPHECIES RESPECTING MOAB
Ruth 1:5 Then both Mahlon and Chilion also died and the woman was bereft of her two children and her husband. (NASB: Lockman)
THE DISMAL PICTURE: Then - Whenever you see a "then" (see notes on importance of expressions of time in inductive Bible study) stop (observe) and ask questions like "What happened then?", "When is then?", "What sequence being explained?" (interrogate with the 5W'S & H). Then, although a small word, is very important in narratives to establish the sequence of events. Similarly "then" is vitally important to recognize in prophetic passages where the Holy Spirit uses it to lay out the sequence of or timing of the prophetic events (eg, see Jesus' Olivet discourse describing the end of this age [Mt 24:3, cp this "age", the church age, which will be followed by the 1000 year Messianic age {Lk 18:30} - cp Da 12:13+, Mt 12:32+, Mt 13:39, 40, 49+, Mt 28:20, regarding "this age" and the "age to come" see also Lk 20:34, 35+, Mk 10:30+, 1Co 2:6-8+, 1Co 3:18+, Gal 1:4+, Ep 1:21+, Titus 2:12+, He 6:5+] - Mt 24:14, 15, 16, 21, 23, 30+ describing the timing of events in the Great Tribulation). Then both Mahlon and Chilion also died and the woman was bereft (sha'ar/sa'ar) of her two children and her husband It is notable that the two sons lived with their wives for up to ten years but both Orpah and Ruth remain barren! (God's providence). So now there was no male remnant and three childless widows - Naomi and her two daughters-in-law, Orpah and Ruth. To be a childless widow was to be among the lowest, most disadvantaged classes in the ancient world. There was no one to support you, and you had to live on the generosity of strangers. Naomi had no natural family in Moab, and no one else to help her. Clearly the narrative is sketching the picture of an utterly hopeless, desperate situation! Just the kind of impossible situation the Almighty (Shaddai, the Sufficient One - see Ru 1:20, 21+) specializes in. The psalmist affirms that "The LORD protects the strangers; He supports the fatherless and the widow; but He thwarts the way of the wicked. (Ps 146:9+) Naomi was both a "stranger" and a "widow". Subsequent events prove that God is true to His Word. If you're a widow, you will find great encouragement in the book of Ruth. As someone has well said He will be your heart's sure comfort, "God's comfort compensates for life's losses."
J Vernon McGee on Mahlon and Chilion also died - Now I was expecting that, by the way. I didn't think that they'd make it through another hard winter, and they didn't. And these two boys, Unhealthy and Puny, died. Now she has lost her entire family, and all she has left are two little daughters-in-law, foreign girls. That's all she has. I tell you, trouble did come. And the prodigal family, like the prodigal son, got their whipping in the far country. (See context in Thru the Bible) David Atkinson on the significance of the death of Naomi's two sons - The name of the man must not be forgotten. His name would live on in his inheritance. How important for him, then, that he should have a son (Ru 4:5, 10). How devastating, therefore, for Naomi that not only has she lost the three men of her household, but there is no heir by which their names will be continued and their inheritance guaranteed. Her men had died, and so had their names! The author is here piling up one disaster on another in Naomi’s life, giving us his readers a real sense of shock that one person should be called on to suffer so much. Surely it was undeserved; surely unexpected. Are we not introduced here to the dark side of God’s providence—that some of our pains seem unbearable; some of our circumstances so unjust; some of our questions stay without answers? Faith, we are to learn from Naomi, sometimes means a willingness to leave such questions in the mystery of God, in the confidence that in the brighter days he has shown himself trustworthy. (See context in The Message of Ruth: The Wings of Refuge) Traditionally many if not most Jewish and Christian commentators have presumed that the death of these men was a matter of divine judgment. After all Elimelech had removed his family to pagan country, and Mahlon and Chilion had married pagan women. In fairness to the text, one must observe that the writer neither explains the deaths nor criticizes Elimelech. The reality is that for the women, it does not matter why their husbands have died but that all the men are gone. John Trapp - Crosses seldom come single. This excellent woman was left desolate and disconsolate, only she "comforted herself in the Lord her God," as David in like distress did. {1Sa 30:6} To sum it up Naomi's emptiness is complete: She was old. She was barren. She had neither husband nor sons. She had only two young daughters-in-law, both foreigners and both barren. She is running on empty and all seems lost but as the story unfolds, God hand of providence is shown to clearly be in control and is ordering Naomi's steps to meet her need, the need of Ruth but eventually the need of the entire world of empty humanity by orchestrating the human lineage through which the Messiah, our Kinsman-Redeemer will come! What a story! Widows from the human perspective would seem to be very unlikely candidates for playing out the Lord’s grand drama of redemption. And yet over and over we see that God's ways are not our ways, Paul explaining that "God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are strong, and the base things of the world and the despised, God has chosen, the things that are not, that He might nullify the things that are, that no man should boast before God." (1Cor 1:27-29+) John Angell James (1841) writes of the benefits of affliction (see notes on Ruth 1:1) summarized as follows (Read his full discussion) 1. Affliction quickens DEVOTION. 2. Affliction discloses, mortifies, and prevents SIN. 3. Affliction tends to exercise, improve and quicken our GRACES. 4. Afflictions tend to wean us from the world, and to fix our affections on things above. The phrase her two children is the Hebrew word for very young children but in context would refer to young adults. This designation however would seem to point to the fact that both sons died at a relatively young age even for the ancient near east.
Although God's Name is not mentioned in this verse, the events clearly illustration His sovereignty for by His own testimony "there is no god besides Me. It is I who put to death and give life. I have wounded, and it is I who heal and there is no one who can deliver from My hand." (Dt 32:39) And as Hannah declared, even in the face of her barrenness, that "Jehovah kills and makes alive. He brings down to Sheol and raises up." (1Sa 2:6) Clearly God is in control of the circumstances of Naomi, Ruth and Orpah. The clouds may temporarily hide His face but not His lovingkindness and His sovereign working of all things out together for good, as the subsequent chapters so eloquently and masterfully prove.
|