Naomi said, “Go back, my daughters. Why do you want to go with me? Do I still have sons in my womb, that they may be your husbands? Go back, 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 you then wait until they were grown? Would you then refrain from having husbands? No, my daughters, for it grieves me seriously for your sakes, for Yahweh’s hand has gone out against me.”
They lifted up their voices and wept again; then Orpah kissed her mother-in-law, but Ruth stayed with her. She said, “Behold, your sister-in-law has gone back to her people and to her god. Follow your sister-in-law.”
Ruth said, “Don’t urge me to leave you, and to return from following you, for where you go, I will go; and where you stay, I will stay. Your people will be my people, and your God my God. Where you die, I will die, and there I will be buried. May Yahweh do so to me, and more also, if anything but death parts you and me.”
When Naomi saw that she was determined to go with her, she stopped urging her.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv13–15 Or, more than you.
Or, more than you.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv11–18 Rth 1:11 And Naomi said, Turn again, my daughters:…
Rth 1:11 And 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?
Ver. 11. Turn again, my daughters.] Though she were but their step-mother, yet, as one stepped in to be instead of a natural mother, she calleth them her daughters. It is good policy to preserve an opinion of our love in the hearts of those whom we would persuade to any good, and to speak them fair.
Read full note →
Why will ye go with me?] q.d., Go not, unless ye be first of a well-knit resolution, lest all too late ye come in with a fool’s, Had I known. Those that intend for heaven must not dream of a delicacy: but, being to build the tower of godliness, let them consider first, and cast up what it will cost them, lest they with shame give over in the midst, and "lose the things that they have wrought": but that they may "receive a full reward." {2Jn 1:8}
Are there yet any more sons in my womb?] If you aim at worldly advantage, or are acted by sinful selflove in this your enterprise, I have not for you, nor am likely to accommodate you. See Luk 9:57. Sed vix diligitur Iesus propter Iesum, saith a father. Poor Christ is slighted.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On vv11–16 According to the ancient custom, Ge 38, and the…
According to the ancient custom, Ge 38, and the express law of God, Deu 25:5, which doubtless she had acquainted them with before, among other branches of the Jewish religion, wherein she did instruct them.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv11–18 And Naomi said, turn again, my daughters,.... Supposing this…
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 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:
Read full note →
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.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv11, 13, 14, 15, 17 Your husbands - According to the ancient custom, Gen.…
Your husbands - According to the ancient custom, Gen. xxxviii, 8, and the express law of God, Deut. xxv, 5, which doubtless she had acquainted them with before, among other branches of the Jewish religion.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv11, 14, 15, 16, 17 Verse 11. Are there yet any more sons] This…
Verse 11. 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.
Read full note →
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.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On vv13, 14, 15, 16, 18 Rth 1:13. It grieveth me — That you are…
Rth 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.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain On vv11, 14 See marginal references and notes. The Levirate law probably…
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.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On vv11, 13, 14, 15, 17 Of me. Hence it appears that the Rabbins are…
Of me. Hence it appears that the Rabbins are under a mistake, when they say that those children who are born after the death of their brothers, are not obliged to take their widows.
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv11–13 are there yet any more sons in my womb,…
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.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On vv11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17 11. Why will ye go with me — What…
11. Why will ye go with me — What purpose will it serve for you to accompany me further? What object of self-interest can ye have?
Are there yet any more sons — This is said in allusion to the levirate law, which made it the duty of a person to marry his deceased brother’s widow and thus preserve his brother’s name and family. See the law, as detailed in Deu_25:5-10, and note at the beginning of chap. 3. Naomi here reminds Ruth and Orpah, in the spirit of her age and country, that she has no more sons for them.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17 11. have I yet sons … that they may…
11. have I yet sons … that they may be your husbands?] Alluding to the custom of levirate marriage, i. e. marriage with a brother in law (Lat. levir) after the husband’s death. The law on the subject is given in Deu_25:5-10; cf. St Mat_22:24.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On vv11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 (11) The advice of Naomi thus far is insufficient…
(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.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 And Naomi said, Turn back, my daughters. To what…
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 Deu_25:5-9 Mat_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 Ge 38) 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 ver. 1).
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain On vv11, 14, 15, 16, 18 It grieveth me much for your sakes that the…
Rth_1:11-13
It grieveth me much for your sakes that the hand of the Lord is gone out against me.
Read full note →
Naomis 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 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 Gods displeasure upon our families. Gods 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 Gods 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 Naomis 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.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Expositor's Bible 1887 · Public Domain On v14 WE journey along with others for a time, enjoying…
THE PARTING OF THE WAYS
Rth_1:14-19
Read full note →
WE journey along with others for a time, enjoying their fellowship and sharing their hopes, yet with thoughts and dreams of our own that must sooner or later send us on a separate path. But decision is so difficult to many that they are glad of an excuse for self-surrender and are only too willing to be led by some authority, deferring personal choice as long as possible. Let an ecclesiastic or a strong-minded companion lay down for them the law of right and wrong and point the path of duty and they will obey, welcoming the relief from moral effort. Not seeing clearly, not disciplined in judgment, they crave external human guidance. The teachers of submission find many disciples not because they speak truth but because they meet the indolence of the human will with a crutch instead of a stimulus; they succeed by pampering weakness and making ignorance a virtue. A time comes, however, when the method will not serve. There are moments when the will must be exercised in choosing between one path and another, advance and retreat; and the alternative is too sharp to allow any escape. If the person is to live at all as a human being he has to decide whether he will go on in such a company or turn back; he has to declare what or who has the strongest hold upon his mind. Such an occasion came to Ruth and Orpah when they reached the border of Moab.
To Orpah the arguments of Naomi were persuasive. Her mother lived in Moab, and to her mothers house she could return. There the customs prevailed which from childhood she had followed. She would have liked to go with Naomi, but her interest in the Hebrew woman and the land and law of Jehovah did not suffice to draw her forward. Orpah saw the future as Naomi painted it, not indeed very attractive if she returned to her native place, but with far more uncertainty and possible humiliation if she crossed the dividing river. She kissed Naomi and Ruth and took the southward road alone, weeping as she went, often turning for yet another sight of her friends, passing at every step into an existence that could never be the old life simply taken up again, but would be coloured in all its experience by what she had learned from Naomi and that parting which was her own choice.
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 mothers house she was guilty of despising truth and love 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.
And Ruth:-memorable forever is her decision, charming forever the words in which it is expressed. "Behold," said Naomi, "thy sister-in-law is gone back unto her people, and unto her god: return thou after thy sister-in-law." But Ruth replied, "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." Like Davids lament over Jonathan these words have sunk deep into the human heart. As an expression of the tenderest and most faithful friendship they are unrivalled. The simple dignity of the iteration in varying phrase till the climax is reached beyond which no promise could go, the quiet fervour of the feeling, the thought which seems to have almost a Christian depth-all are beautiful, pathetic, noble. From this moment a charm lingers about Ruth and she becomes dearer to us than any woman of whom the Hebrew records tell.
Dignified and warm affection is the first characteristic of Ruth and close beside it we find the strength of a firm conclusion as to duty. It is good to be capable of clear resolve, parting between this and that of opposing considerations and differing claims. Not to rush at decisions and act in mere wilfulness, for wilfulness is the extreme of weakness, but to judge soundly and on this side or that to say, Here I see the path for me to follow: along this and no other I conclude to go. Unreason decides by taste, by momentary feeling, often out of mere spite or antipathy. But the resolve of a wise thoughtful person, even though it bring temporal disadvantage, is a moral gain, a step towards salvation. It is the exercise of individuality, of the soul.
One may act in error, as perhaps Elimelech and Orpah acted, yet the life be the stronger for the mistaken decision; only there must be no repentance for having exercised the power of judgment and of choice. Women are particularly prone to go back on themselves in false repentance. They did what they could not but think to be duty; they carefully decided on a path in loyalty to conscience; yet too often they will reproach themselves because what they desired and hoped has not come about. We cannot imagine Ruth in after years, even though her lot had remained that of the poor gleaner and labourer, returning upon her decision and weeping in secret as if the event had proved her high choice a foolish one. Her mind was too firm and clear for that. Yet this is what numbers of women are doing., burdening their souls, making that a crime in which they should rather practise themselves. Our decisions, even when they are made with all the wisdom and information we can command in thorough sanity and sincerity, maybe, often are, very faulty; and do we expect that Providence will perpetually interfere to bring a perfect result out of the imperfect? Only in the perfect order of God, through the perfect work of Christ and the perfect operation of the Holy Spirit is the glorious consummation of human history and divine purpose to come. As for us, we are to learn of God in Christ, to judge and act our best; thereafter, leaving the result to Providence, never go back on that of which the Spirit of the Almighty made us capable in the hour of trial.
"Then welcome each rebuff
That turns earths smoothness rough,
Each sting that bids nor sit nor stand but go!
Be our joys three parts pain!
Strive, and hold cheap the strain;
Learn, nor account the pang; dare, never grudge the throe!"
In religion there is no escape from personal decision; no one can drift to salvation with companions or with a church. In art, in literature, in ordinary morality it is possible to possess something without any special effort. The atmosphere of cultured society, for instance, holds in solution the knowledge and taste which have been gained by a few and may pass in some measure to those who associate with them, though personally these have studied and acquired very little. Anyone who observes how a new book is talked of will see the process. But the supreme nature of religion and its unique part in human development are seen here, that it demands high and sustained personal effort, the constant action of the will; that indeed every spiritual gain must result from the vital activity of the individual mind choosing to enter and enter yet farther the kingdom of divine revelation and grace. As it is expressed in the Epistle to the Hebrews: "We desire that every one of you do show the same diligence to the full assurance of hope unto the end: that ye be not slothful but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises." The training in resoluteness, therefore, finds highest value and significance in view of the religious life. Those who live by habit and dependence in other matters are not prepared for the strenuous calling of faith, and many a one is kept from the freedom and joy of Christianity not because they are undesired, not because the call of Christ is unheeded, but for want of the power of decision, strength to go forward on a personal quest. Thousands are in the way of saying, Will you go to an evangelistic meeting? Then I will go. Will you take the Sacrament? Then I will. Will you teach in the Sunday school? Then I will. So far something is gained; there is a half decision. But the spiritual life is sure at some point to demand more than this. Even Naomis advice must not deter Ruth from taking the way to Bethlehem.
Like many women Ruth was moved greatly by love. Was her love justified? Did it rightly govern her to the extent her words imply? "Whither thou goest, I will go: thy people shall be my people: where thou diest I will die, and there will I be buried." It is beautiful to see such love: but how was it earned?
Surely by years of patient faithful help; not by a few cheap words and caresses, a few facile promises; not by beauty of face, gaiety of temper. The love that has nothing but these to found upon is not enough for a life companionship. But if there is honour, clear sincerity of soul, generosity of nature; if there is brave devotion to duty, there love can rest without fear, reproach, or hazard. When these cast their light on your way, love then, love freely and strongly; you are safe. It is indeed called love where these are not-but only in ignorance and lightness: the heart has been caught by a word, ensnared by a look. How pathetic are the errors into which we see our friends and neighbours fall, errors that call for a life-long repentance because reason and serious purpose had nothing to do with the loving. No law of God is written against human affection, nor has He any jealousy of the devotion we show to worthy fellow creatures; but there are divine laws of love to restrain our weak fancy and uplift our emotions; and if we disdain or cast aside these laws we must suffer, however ardent and self-sacrificing affection may be. Egotistical wilfulness in serving some one who engages our admiration and passionate devotion is not, properly speaking, love. It is rather an offence against that divine grace which bears the noble name. Of course we are not here speaking of Christian charity towards our neighbours, interest in them, and care for their well being, which are always our duty and must not be limited. The story we are following is one of an intimate and personal affection.
Lastly and chiefly, the answer of Ruth implies a religious change-conversion. She renounces Chemosh and turns in faith and hope to the God of Israel, and this is the striking feature of her choice. Dimly seen, the grace and righteousness of the Most High touched her soul, commanded her reverence, drew her to follow one who was His servant and could recount the wonderful story of His people. Surely it is a supreme event in any life when this vision of the Best allures the mind and engages the will, even though knowledge of God be as yet very imperfect. And the reliance of Ruth upon the little she felt and knew of God, her clear resolution to seek rest under His wings appear in striking contrast with the reluctance, the unconcern, the hard unfaith of many today. How is it that they to whom the Word speaks and the life is revealed, whose portion is at every moment enriched by that Word and that life are so blind to the grace that encompasses and deaf to the love that entreats? Again and again we see them on the banks of some Jordan, with the land of God clear in view, with the promise of devotion trembling on their tips; but they turn back to Moab and Chemosh, to paganism, unrest, and despair.
Ruths life properly began when at Naomis side she passed through the waters, the very waters of baptism to her. There, with the purple mountains of Moab and the precipices of the Dead Sea shore behind, she sent her last look to Orpah and the past, and saw before her the steep narrow ascent through the Judaean hills. With rising faith, with growing love she moved to the fulfilment of womanhood in realising the souls highest power and privilege. The upward path was hard to weary feet and all was not to be easy for Ruth in the Bethlehem of which she had dreamed; but fully committed and pledged to the new life she went forward. How much is missed when the choice to serve God is not unreservedly made, and there is not that full consecration of which Ruths decision may be a type.
Of this loss we see examples on every side. To remain in the low ground by the river, still within reach of some paganism that fascinates even after profession and baptism-this is the end of religious feeling with many. Where the narrow way of discipleship leads they will not adventure; it is too bare, confining, and severe. They will not believe that freedom for the human soul is found by that path alone; they refuse to be bound and therefore never discover the inheritance of Gods children to which they are called. When He who alone can guide, quicken, redeem is accepted solemnly and finally as the Lord of life, then at last the weak and entangled spirit knows the beginning of liberty and strength. Sad is the reckoning in our time of those who refuse to pledge themselves to the Saviour Whose claim they do feel to be divine and urgent. Not yet may the preacher cease to speak of conversion as the necessity in every life. Rather because it is easy to be in touch with Christianity at some point, because gospel influences are widely diffused, and church connection can be lightly held, the personal pledge to Christ must be insisted upon in the pulpit and kept in view as the end to which all the work of the church is directed.
Life has many partings, and we have all had our experience of some which without fault on either side separate those well fitted to serve and bless each other. Over matters of faith, questions of political order and even social morality separations will occur. There may be no lack of faithfulness on either side when at a certain point widely divergent views of duty are taken by two who have been friends. One standing only a little apart from the other sees the same light reflected from a different facet of the crystal, streaming out in a different direction. As it would be altogether a mistake to say that Orpah took the way of worldly selfishness, Ruth only going in the way of duty, so it is entirely a mistake to accuse those who part with us on some question of faith or conduct and think of them as finally estranged. A little more knowledge and we would see with them or they with us. Some day they and we shall reach the truth and agree in our conclusions. Separations there must be for a time, for as the character leans to love or justice, the mind to reasoning or emotion, there is a difference in the vision of the good for which a man should strive. And if it comes to this that the paths chosen by those who were once dear friends divide them to the end of earthly days, they should retain the recollection not so much of the single point that separated, as of the many on which there was agreement. Even though they have to fight on opposite sides, it should be as those who were brothers once and shall be brothers again. Indeed, are they not brothers still, if they fight for the same Master?
Yet one difference between men reaches to the roots of life. The company of those who keep the straight way and press on towards the light have the most sorrowful recollection of some partings. They have had to leave comrades and brethren behind who despised the quest of holiness and immortality and had nothing but mockery for the Friend and Saviour of man. The shadows of estrangement falling between those who are of Christs company are nothing compared with the dense cloud which divides them from men pledged to what is earthly and ignoble; and so the reproach of sectarian division coming from irreligious persons needs not trouble those who have as Christians an eternal brotherhood.
There are divisions sharp and dreadful, not always at some river which clearly separates land from land. They may be made in the street where parting seems temporary and casual. They may be made in the very house of God. While some members of a family are responding with joy to a divine appeal, one may be resolutely turning from it to a base idolatry. Of three who went together to a place of prayer two may from that hour keep company in the heavenward journey, while the third moves every day towards the shadow of self-chosen reprobation. Christ has spoken of tremendous separations which men make by their acceptance or rejection of Him. "These shall go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into life eternal."
William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain On vv11, 14, 15, 16 CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL NOTES.—Are there yet sons? etc. In…
CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL NOTES.—Are there yet sons? etc. In allusion to the custom of a man raising posterity to his deceased brother by taking his widow (Adam Clarke, Jarci, Wright, Keil). Probably this custom obtained among other nations (Patrick, Scott). Known among the Gentiles before it was given to Israel (Gill, Speaker’s Com.) (cf. Gen_38:8; Gen_38:26; Deu_25:5). That law respects a brother by the father’s side, and not by the mother’s only (Aben Ezra, Carpzov). Not binding on a brother as yet unborn (Gill, Carpzov, etc.). Evidently, however, extended beyond the brother in the strict sense, and applied to the nearest relative, Boaz (Speaker’s Com.) Deu_25:5, probably to be understood in this wider sense. Turn again [return] go [to your own people] (Targum). If I should say. Rather, suppose that I should say I have hope that I were even to be married this very night, and were even to bear children (Bishop Horsley). In English we might imitate the sentence thus: For (let us suppose) I say I have hope; I have a husband; I have children; will you, etc. (Lange). Another reference to a Levirate marriage, possibly. So Keil, Wright, etc. Not so Rosenmuller, Carpzov. (See on Rth_1:11.) If I should have an husband, etc. If I were with an husband, etc. And should also bear sons. Shall I yet have any more sons that I may give them to you? (Syriac.) Perhaps you think that I will marry, and that sons will be born to me (Arabic).
Rth_1:13. Would ye tarry. For לָחֵן read the masculine לחֹם (Houbigant, Bishop Horsley). Rather to be taken adverbially, as “therefore.” “Would you therefore wait,” etc. (Maurer, Rosen., Gesen., Bertheau, Wright). The rendering of the English version (after Sept., Vulg.), “for them” is very improbable (Lange). Omit “for them,” and translate “under these circumstances,” or briefly “then” (Lange). Would ye tarry on these accounts, for these reasons? (Wordsworth.) Would you stay [for them (omit)] from having? etc. Would you therefore shut yourself up, so as not to have an husband? (Wright.) עָגַן From the Chaldean, “to keep back,” “to shut up” (Wright). Does not occur elsewhere in Hebrew. As virgins before their marriage lived in seclusion, so widows who were betrothed to children, while waiting for their coming of age, should keep themselves at home, lest any suspicion should attach to them (Le Clere). And will you be hindered from being married? (Syriac.) Will you be kept back by them from marrying? (LXX.) It grieveth me much. It is much more (Lange), far more bitter to me than to you (Wright, etc.). For it has gone much more bitterly with me than with you (Keil). As in the Authorized Version (Gesen., Bertheau). It may be a trial to you to leave me, but it is a still greater trial to me to be deprived of you; but it must be done, since, etc. (Tremellius, Junius). The LXX. has υπερ υμας, not υπερ υμων; and so Syriac, Arabic (comp. Gen_19:9). You may have husbands and children, but I can never expect to have either (Wordsworth). The hand of the Lord. Generally signifies the means whereby He accomplishes His counsels (Topsell).
Read full note →
Rth_1:11-13
Theme—THE SECOND TRIAL OF AFFECTION
“I have lived long enough: my way of life
Is fallen into the scar, the yellow leaf:
And that which should accompany old age,
As honour, love, obedience, troops of friends,
I must not look to have.”—Shakespeare.
“Our voluntary service He requires,
Not our necessitated; such with Him
Finds no acceptance, nor can find; for how
Can hearts not free be tried whether they serve
Willing or no?”—Milton.
Rth_1:11.—And Naomi said, Turn again, my daughters, etc.
Rth_1:12.—Turn again … go; for I am too old, etc.
Rth_1:13.—Would ye tarry for them [Heb. therefore,] etc.?
Here we see in Naomi the same non-proselytising spirit which characterizes her descendants down to the present day (Anon.). Scarcely so. Rather the spirit which would convince before it converts, which loves too well to persuade unwisely, which knows that a conversion made outwardly and in seeming only, is but the beginning of a future apostacy.
Note. (a) To decide any important question on wrong issues or false expectations is inevitably to find the ground hollow under our feet by-and-by.
(b) Love which deals faithfully with us in such moments is likely to prove faithful to us hereafter. It may wound, but it does so with good reasons (Pro_27:6).
(c) Love can say “no” sometimes, even when no means “separation.”
With Naomi, in fairness to them, she says “return,”—but in her affection she calls them “daughters.” She can do the latter, but she can do nothing more. They could enter into her house, but not into Israel’s national life (Lange). This the key to what follows. In her own mind, if they go forward with her, the prospect, humanly speaking, is hopeless.
Notice. Grief often says many really unnecessary things in order to conceal others which it dares not say (Lange). When she says that there is no hope for them in herself [i.e., in husbands being born them through her], she implies there will be none elsewhere in Israel. At best they could only be as widows shut up (see Crit. Notes), waiting for a husband never to be born. A dreary prospect even to Naomi. The climax of grief shows itself in the climax of impossibilities adduced (Lange).
We have—
I. A test of true love. If they go forward,
(1) They must die to their own interests. Do not indulge romantic hopes—visionary expectation which can only end in disappointment (Lawson). What her sons had done in Moab was not customary in Israel (Lange). She loves them too much to deceive them,—would rather part with them than do this, or even allow them to deceive themselves; if they go with her, they must go forward with a similar and kindred spirit of self-denial. Note. Thoughts ripened into resolves by serious consideration are likely to be kept (M. Henry).
So Christ dealt with His disciples. He said, “Foxes have holes,” etc. (cf. Luk_9:23-24; Luk_9:58). So a faithful pastor will deal with young converts.
The test here plain, sincerely meant, and founded, as the issue shews, upon good reasons. Naomi’s words follow, and are in agreement with the outward circumstances. We see, too, that they follow the leadings of Divine Providence. To do the one is often, and if we could rightly read the outward circumstances would always be, to do the other.
Note. (a) God sometimes hedges up the path so that there is nothing before us but the strait gate of self-denial. Especially is this true of the spiritual life. Stript of all, we enter the kingdom of God. The gate strait, the way narrow.
“Heaven’s gates are not so highly arched
As princes’ palaces. They that enter there
Must enter on their knees.”
(b) To be joined to the hope of the true Israel of God, we must be ready to deny ourselves of everything else. Esau sold his hope for a mess of pottage. So Orpah.
Again,
(2) If these young women are to go forward with Naomi, love itself must bring its own and only reward. Not a single inducement is held out, not a single promise made. Naomi would be theirs, nothing more. It is this that sends Orpah back, but suffers Ruth to go onward. And why? Orpah saw herself, while Ruth saw only the beloved one (Lange). She went with Naomi, though alone, because she loved Naomi alone.
How true all this is of a real affection for Christ! In love as in life He will be the first and the last. (Comp. Mat_6:24, with Mat_23:10; Joh_21:15; Joh_21:22.)
We love not Christ at all, unless we love Him above all (Augustine). Compare the Saviour’s description of the stony-ground hearer (Mat_13:20-21), as seen in the conduct of the Jews (Joh_6:60-66), with the words of Simon Peter on that occasion (Joh_6:67-69).
We have—
II. A test of character and motives. Free will is essential to virtue; and that free will may be fairly exercised, there must be no concealment. It must be able to sit down and count the cost. One test is not sufficient. Naomi’s words search Orpah through and through, from many sides and in many ways. Did she desire “rest in the house of a husband”? (Rth_1:9.) Hitherto this may have seemed possible to her in going forward. Not so now, and she must see it! A dreary blank hopelessness in this direction, the secret of Orpah’s return to Moab.
Of this return notice—
(1) Persuasions which fall in with our own desires are readily accepted.
(2) And that until these come we have not been truly and really tested.
(3) The strongest and purest motives are the only enduring ones.
So in Christian life. Time, and circumstances, and the unfolding of events around us, must and will come in to test the momentary decision for Christ.
Note. This is God’s ordinary and deliberate plan in dealing with men in life.
If heaven could be won by a single struggle, by a single determination, the work would be easy. But experience does for us what Naomi did for these. The test possibly not very severe at first,—the victory on our side (cf. Rth_1:8-10). Sooner or later we are met by a prospect as blank on the human side as this (Luk_9:23; Mar_10:21). What then of our better resolutions and vows?
We have here—
III. A test involving the deepest and most solemn issues.
(1) Decisive between God and Chemosh. So Orpah understood it, for she went back “to her gods.” So Ruth understood it (Rth_1:16).
Note. (a) The human love is made the pivot on which a higher affection turns and hangs—the human selfishness or unselfishness decisive of more lasting questions. A principle connected with this, love for the creature leading to and shewing a capacity for, love to the Creator (cf. 1Jn_4:20). More particularly must this be seen in a lasting and unselfish affection for the godly.
Note. (b) We may love the image of Christ in His servants, though we have not yet understood the full meaning of our affection. This Ruth’s position. Her affections leaned in that direction, and she was ready to embrace all it involved (Rth_1:16-17). Another extreme of character shrinks from all contact with Christ’s disciples. A third type exists, in those who love God’s people but merely on the human side. This Orpah’s danger. Note. Earthly affections are frail at best, and often mingled unconsciously with much that is selfish. Such characters fail ignominiously in moments like these.
(2) Decisive seemingly for time and eternity. A choice of mere outward circumstances may involve issues which are to last throughout eternity. Opah took Moab and all that Moab implied and included; Ruth, Israel. This last test seems at first a trifling one; judge it by its results! So always in spiritual things. When we choose the lower path, what is it but that we turn our back upon a higher? The momentary action decisive, the tendency fatal. Christ would give to the world the kingdom of heaven, but they will have the kingdom of earth, and here they part (Luther).
Bernard on this—
I. That in giving counsel to or fro, it is good so to speak as may declare love and respect to the parties.
II. That it was a custom among the Jews, for parents and children to speak most commonly one to another in the nearest and dearest terms of love.
III. That it is a point of wisdom to ask ourselves, Why we will do this or that thing, before we undertake it, or resolve upon it.
IV. That the true, honest-hearted, and such as fear God, in the kind offers of their friends, deal truly with them, and will not lead them into vain hopes.
V. That worldly respects are not the motives which should induce any to join themselves with God’s people.
VI. That the wise will not make promises rashly for others, nor persuade to more than they well know.
On the point of marriage, as taught here—
I. That while a woman hath hope of children she may marry.
II. The marriage is for them that are grown up for it and are marriageable.
III. That it is not good for such as intend to marry to defer off too long.
IV. That a godly and wise mother-in-law cannot only be willing, but also will persuade her children-in-law should marry again.
“Till this advice was given, the soundness and sincerity of Ruth’s religion did not appear; nor did the rottenness of Orpah’s profession discover itself.”—Macgowan.
“Naomi would not willingly leave her widowed daughters-in-law in Moab. Though she apparently discourages them, it is with the manifest design that they should go with her upon motives that should be permanent and not disappointing.”—Tyng.
“She discharges her difficult task with infinite delicacy. They, of course, had no thought of marrying any sons that might be born to the widowed Naomi. Such a thought could not possibly have entered into their minds. Why then does Naomi lay such emphasis on the utter unlikelihood of her having sons, and of their waiting for them even if she should have them? Simply to convey to them that, if they went with her, they mould have no hope but in herself.”—Cox.
“The surprising delicacy with which this is done is such as to shew clearly how truly a religious love educates and refines. The ultimate cause of the grief occasioned by the 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.”—Lange.
“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 as 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 nut 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 deardanghters-in-law, whether in Israel or in Moab, but other prospects have you none. She heaps up improbabilities in order to indicate in this veiled manner that this was nevertheless the only possible ground of hope for them in Israel.”—Lange (condensed).
“We see these young travellers meet with many discouragements to their return. How earnestly Naomi argues with them to search what manner of spirit they were of! How kindly she presses them to go back and find their shelter and their rest among the friends they were leaving! How she presses upon their remembrance that she has nothing to offer them, no hopes, no promises to hold out of present or prospective worldly gain! How she mingles the expressions of her gratitude and her grief in order the more effectually to impress them with a conviction of the earthly poverty of her journey! Again and again she kissed them in token of farewell. Again and again they wept in protestation of their fidelity and determination. How affecting and how promising seems such an interview! Read again these pathetic verses. Did Naomi really wish to discourage them? Did she really desire them to go back? Was she willing to leave them in Moab? Did Orpah gratify her more than Ruth? Far from this. She would try their faith and affection. She would know what was in their heart. She would see how long and how truly she might trust them hereafter. And therefore she lays before them the sorrows of the journey and the barrenness of the earthly prospect.”—Tyng.
“We cannot [but] notice here what seems an interesting fact—the thorough tolerance of Naomi. She indicates not the slightest shadow of intolerant dictation or overbearing advice, the most obnoxious form that advice can take. She recognizes in the two, when then say they will return with her, their indefeasible right, though her own children by marriage, at least to think and to decide for themselves. She felt her business was to give them clear and trustworthy information, but not to exercise even maternal influence in precipitating what they might blame her for when they came to taste the possible bitterness of her position, and to experience poverty, it might be, with the knowledge of the true and living God. She sets to us a most righteous example. Never try to coerce the judgment, or to force the conscience, even of the nearest and dearest; a victory gained at such expense is worse than a defeat. Respect the intellect, revere the conscience; say what you would like, urge what you would prefer, but leave to each individual connected with you perfect liberty to decide and act for themselves. To tempt, to coerce, or compel by fear, or by reward, or by force, is to intrude your hand into the holy place which the human conscience is, even in its aberration,—to lay a rude hand, as it were, upon the ark of God, and to assume prerogatives for yourself which God alone is exclusively competent to exercise.
“As there was to be no coercion or violence on the part of Naomi, there was on the other hand to be no concealment. There are two ways of bringing another over to what we like; we may either coerce the person, which is most criminal, or we may conceal—which is most dishonest—the actual state of things, and draw over to us unawares one who will afterwards, on discovering facts as they are, repent and regret the step. Naomi was candid. She shews them that there was no earthly prospect whatever of bettering their condition.”—Dr. Cumming.
“I cannot think very highly of Naomi’s character when I see the advice 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. Should not the advice of Moses to Hobab have been hers to both of them, “Come with me, and God will do you good”? (Num_10:29-32.) Naomi, thou hast given us a picture too often realized in the present day: in her we see a mother more anxious about the providing of husbands for her daughters than the saving of their souls.”—Simeon.
“A Jesuit might raise the question, is it wise to tell the whole truth under circumstances like these? The Christian conscience is satisfied in knowing that it cannot be sinful.”—B.
Theme.—RESIGNATION IN SUFFERING
“Oh, ’Tis good
To wait submissive at Thy holy throne,
To leave petitions at Thy feet, and bear
Thy frowns and silence with a patient soul.”—WATTS.
Nay, my daughters; for it grieveth me … that the hand of the Lord is gone out against me.
Three widows remaining, the solemn and affecting monuments that God will not be forgotten. Here is the end of all the wanderings of the past! Naomi’s sorrow, bitter as it is, intensified by the helplessness of those who have shared her calamities with her, her afflictions finding an increasing heaviness because of her unselfish desires for their welfare. [Some translate, “It is far more bitter to me than to you,” or, “It has gone much more bitterly with me than with you.”] God has reduced me to such mean services that I can do nothing for you (Gill). Note. (a) To a gracious spirit it is an increase of sorrow to see others involved in the fruit of our sins. The heaviest burden of many a parent’s heart explained in this (cf. 2Sa_12:15-23). Even a monarch’s crown brings no exemption from the law (2Sa_24:17). (b) True love takes to heart a friend’s afflictions in its own troubles (Bernard). Human life, alas! shews too often the other extreme, a hardness and callousness of heart to all the expressions of Divine displeasure as they concern ourselves, and a total insensibility to the result of our sin, as it may affect others. (c) Calamities like these not only bring sorrow for the dead, but grief for the living.
Notice,
I. The source of this affliction. Men generally see in details like these (Rth_1:1-5) the natural and ordinary sequence of events. Naomi saw something else beyond and behind, infinitely more worthy of note. Her loss proceeded from no other by-causes, but from the hand of God (Fuller). As the showers come from the clouds, so her afflictions from the Lord (Topsell). Why doubt this, though they had stolen upon her a thousand times more naturally, gently, and insensibly, were that possible? Stoics ascribe calamities to inevitable fate; Epicureans and atheists, to blind fate; Philistines, to chance; Christians, to that One by whom the very hairs of our head are all numbered (Macgowan). Note. This is one of the distinguishing marks of God’s children in all ages. Afflictions come of the Divine hand. Their measure, their continuance, their purpose, all appointed of Him “with whom we have to do.”
A caution necessary here. God’s people may sometimes without good reason think that the hand of the Lord is gone forth against them (Lawson). Job thought so when the hand of Satan had despoiled him of his substance and his children (Job_1:12; Job_1:21; Job_2:6; Job_2:10). So also there is a slothful way of giving assent to Divine judgments. We say it is His hand when it is the hand of our own sloth and folly. Eli, with a resignation which would have been beautiful under other circumstances, said, “It is the hand of the Lord” (1Sa_3:18). Note. This a common phrase in the mouth of the wicked. Under this covert we often hide our impatience as well as our sinful carelessness.
II. The spirit in which afflictions should be borne. (a) With resignation. Naomi does not complain. Seems to bow to the inevitable future. Doubtless found comfort in the fact that it was the hand of the Lord—that God, with whom is mercy, and not another, had wounded her heart. Note. Every other way of receiving chastisement folly and madness (Act_9:5; Isa_1:5; Rom_2:4-5). (b) With candour. She acknowledged evidently the sinful cause of all the discipline through which she has passed as in herself—“the hand of the Lord has gone out against me.” Otherwise the passage reads like an accusation against God. Note. Some have even represented life in this way as a conflict with God (cf. Job_9:34; Job_13:21; Job_16:12-21, etc.). A terrible thought, if true, and there is a sense in which it is true of the wicked. Naomi, however, looked upon her afflictions as a judgment for lingering in the country of Moab (M. Henry). (c) With wise thought-fulness. She obeys and returns (M. Henry). (d) With unselfish care and regret for the evil estate of others. Grief too often hardens the heart to all other sorrow outside our own. It is not so here. Naomi’s gentle unselfish spirit shines out conspicuous among the Old Testament saints. It grieveth me much for your sakes.
Topsell on this:—
First, that all our afflictions come from the Lord, that He might chastise His own, and confound the ungodly (Job 34, 36). Neither the godly escape, nor the wicked go scot-free (Deu_31:18). This the confession of Moses and of David, a man more exercised in trouble than all the world beside (Psa_119:71).
Secondly, that the godly are so patient in all their tribulations, even from this consideration, that the Lord’s hand afflicteth them (2Sa_16:10-12; Job_2:10).
Bernard on this:—
I. The most godly sometimes take their afflictions very heavily (Job 3; Jer_20:9-12).
II. Afflictions are the more grievous for friends wrapped therein, so as one cannot help another.
III. That all afflictions come by the power and providence of God—as by a hand upon us (Lam_1:12-17; Amo_3:6; Amo_4:6-11; 2Ch_15:6).
IV. That the godly in common calamities take themselves to be especially chastised. This good woman applied the whole cross to herself. They think upon their own sins, and not upon other men’s misdeeds.
“And if there be some things which we believe to be inflicted by the Lord, to whom can we render our patience better than to the Lord? Nay, He teacheth us to rejoice moreover, and to be glad in that we are thought worthy of Divine chastisement. As many as I love, saith He, I chastise. Oh, blessed is that servant on whose amendment the Lord is bent; with whom He deigneth to be angry; whom He deceiveth not by hiding His admonitions from him!”—Tertullian.
“Patience … adorneth the woman, approveth the man; is loved in the boy, praised in the young man, respected in the old; is beautiful in every sex, in every age. Come now, let us describe her form and her demeanour. She hath a countenance serene and placid; a forehead smooth, contracted with no wrinkle of grief or of anger, her brows evenly and cheerfully relaxed, her eyes cast down in humility, not in melancholy. Her mouth beareth the seal of honourable silence. Her colour is such as those have who are free from care and crime.”—Tertullian.
“God Almighty in mercy makes this world unpleasing to good men by affliction, that they may set the less value upon it. This is the voice of the rod, and of Him that hath appointed it, which every wise man ought to hear and answer with all obedience, submission, and thankfulness; and when affliction hath wrought this effect, its business is in a good measure ended, and for the most part it is thereupon eased or removed.”—Hale.
“ ‘Oh,’ saith the people, ‘God hath justly sent this plague for the corruption of the magistrates.’ ‘It is justly inflicted,’ saith the magistrate, ‘for the disobedience of the people.’ ‘Herein,’ saith the poor man, ‘God hath met with the oppression and extortion of the rich. ‘Herein,’ saith the rich man, ‘God hath paid home the muttering and the repining of the poor.’ ‘Now,’ saith the prodigal, ‘God punisheth the covetousness of old men.’ ‘Now,’ saith the old man, ‘He scourgeth the prodigality of such as be young.’ Far otherwise Naomi, who, though the arrows of God did glance and rebound, to the wounding of Orpah and Ruth, yet she thought herself was the mark at which God did level His shafts. ‘the hand of the Lord is gone out against me.’ ”—Fuller.
“We are never nearer to God than when we are lowest in our own estimation; and never more pleasing to Him than when we abhor ourselves, and repent in dust and ashes.”—Charles.
“To be dejected is natural; but to be overcome by dejection is madness, and folly, and unmanly weakness. You may grieve and weep, but give not way to despondency, nor indulge in complaints. Weep as wept your master over Lazarus, observing the just limits of sorrow which it is not proper to pass.”—Chrysostom.
“He who possesses religion finds a providence not more truly in the history of the world than in his own family history; the rainbow which hangs a glistening circle in the heights of heaven is also formed by the same sun in the dewdrop of a lowly flower.”—Jean Paul Richter.
“Disappointments meet us at every turn; where we expected we should be particularly favoured with helps and advantages.… we behold ourselves left destitute; so that we have no more a place of refuge upon earth, no more a dear counsellor or friend who is as our own soul. By this means we are compelled, as Noah’s dove was, by the wide watery waste which did not afford a single resting-place, to fly to the Ark, and to take shelter there.”—Venn.
“Be still in sorrow! As God wills!
Let that thy motto be;
Submissive ’neath His strokes receive
His image stamped on thee.
Be still in God! Who rests on Him,
Enduring peace shall know,
And with a spirit glad and free,
Through night and grief shall go.”
Sturm.
“And if in our unworthiness
Thy sacrificial wine we press;
If from Thy ordeal’s heated bars,
Our feet are seamed with crimson scars,
Thy will be done!
Strike, Thou the Master, we Thy keys,
The anthem of the destinies,
The minor of Thy loftier strain,
Our hearts shall breathe the old refrain.
Thy will be done!”
Whittier.
“The good we have enjoyed from Heaven’s free will;
And shall we murmur to endure the ill?”
Dryden.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.
Alexander MacLaren 1905 · Public Domain On v16 Rth 1:16 - Rth 1:22.
Ruth
A GENTLE HEROINE, A GENTILE CONVERT
Read full note →
Rth 1:16 - Rth 1:22.
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-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 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 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.
Alexander MacLaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture (1904–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv11, 14, 16 Why will you go with me?
Why will you go with me?
This is a rhetorical question. AT: "It does not make sense for you to go with me." or "You should not go with me." (See: Rhetorical Question)
Read full note →
Do I still have sons in my womb for you, so that they may become your husbands?
Naomi uses this question to say she cannot have other sons for them to marry. AT: "Obviously it is not possible for me to have any more sons who could become your husbands." (See: Rhetorical Question)
too old to have a husband
The reason a husband would be important can be stated clearly. AT: "too old to marry again and bear more children" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)
give birth to sons
"bear children" or "deliver baby boys"
would you therefore wait until they were grown? Would you choose not to marry a husband?
These are rhetorical questions, which do not expect an answer. AT: "you would not wait until they were grown up so that you could marry them. You would choose to marry a husband now." (See: Rhetorical Question)
It is exceedingly bitter to me
Bitterness is a metaphor for grief, and what grieves her can be stated clearly. AT: "It greatly grieves me that you have no husbands" (See: Metaphor or Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)
the hand of Yahweh has gone out against me
The word "hand" refers to Yahweh's power or influence. AT: "Yahweh has caused terrible things to happen to me" (See: Metonymy)
translationWords
son
Yahweh
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv14–16 1:14 Ruth clung tightly to Naomi: The Hebrew verb…
1:14 Ruth clung tightly to Naomi: The Hebrew verb used here emphasizes the strength of Ruth’s love for her mother-in-law; it is the same word used to describe a man being “joined to” his wife (Gen 2:24) and to describe a person staying faithful to the Lord (Deut 4:4; 10:20; Josh 22:5).
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.