The Bond between Naomi and Ruth - Comments on Ruth Chapter 1

Even if it was written at a later date, this story is set around the 12th century (before the time of Christ). Elimelech, his wife Naomi, and sons Mahlon and Chilion, left their home in Bethlehem in Judah, and headed south east (to the other side of the Dead Sea) for the country of Moab (present day Jordan). This was because of the drought and famine in their home country.

Although Moab offered much better agricultural opportunities, this was still a particularly radical move, because Moab was not a particularly favoured country in the minds of Jews. For any Israelite, the very mention of Moab would have brought up very negative thoughts, and thus they were very resistant to any association with them. [Lot’s descendants had intermarried with the existing population there; and many political and military differences followed over the centuries.] Such was their view of their own position, certain Israelites would have considered the people of Moab to even be outside the sphere of God’s interest and care.

Perhaps Elimelech felt differently to this, or perhaps it was a case of desperate times producing a desperate decision. Either way, there would without doubt have been much criticism of such a move into foreign territory; criticism that would have lingered on back home.

But, we should also sense God’s hand being upon this family, and although we won’t understand everything that happens, we can still recognise God’s love and direction for the characters we encounter in this story.

At some stage in their time in Moab, Naomi’s husband Elimelech died. Naomi, with no opportunity yet to return home to Judah, stayed in Moab with her two sons; not only staying, but also seeing her sons both marry Moabite women – whose names were Orpah and Ruth. Tragically though Naomi then lost both her sons, and she was left with just her two daughters-in-law. {Due to the lack of any mention of children, it seems that these marriages were very short, and must have occurred towards the end of the ten years spent in Moab.}

In later reflection, Naomi was not so complimentary about how God had treated her, but here (v.6) she reflects the view that God had blessed His people by breaking the drought and famine back in Judah. Now given what happens at verse 8, it is curious that Naomi starts out taking her daughters-in-law with her (v.7)! Why did she do this?
• Maybe this was natural due to the strong family bonds that had been formed;
• Maybe Naomi really wanted to take both Orpah and Ruth back to Judah, and couldn’t yet bear the thought of separation;
• Clearly Naomi had great affection for her daughters-in-law, which was obviously reciprocated.

Whatever Naomi wanted for herself personally, it is clear that she was heroic here in wanting – more so – the best for her daughters-in-law. They had been kind and caring to her and her sons, and deserved the opportunity to be happy themselves. [And as we can see from the prayerful words expressed in verses 8b-9a (beginning “May the Lord …”), contrary to popular belief, Naomi also felt that Orpah and Ruth could also be blessed by God, even if they stayed in Moab. Yahweh was the only God Naomi knew, and she certainly wanted to attest to her God’s ability to even enhance the well-being of Moabites despite their country’s adherence to their own ‘gods’. Naomi’s God Yahweh would help Orpah and Ruth to find appropriate husbands.]

In the world of the time, marriage was assumed to be the only respectable way for a woman to achieve social and economic security; and this security (through future marriage with Moabite men) is what Naomi desired for Orpah and Ruth. In Judah (or Moab) there were very few jobs for women especially in rural areas. And there would be far less chance of Moabite women finding husbands in Judah, thereby being at risk of living in poverty if they went there.

Here is a woman who could see beyond her own need, and express real concern and love for others. In one way the deep affection she held for her daughters-in-law prompted Naomi to keep them by her side; however in another way that same deep affection compelled Naomi to seek to cut them loose.

However, in such esteem did Orpah and Ruth hold Naomi, that they refused her request and sought to continue to travel with her, albeit into (for them) a foreign land. But Naomi’s mind was made up – these women would need husbands, Naomi pressing this point by stating that she herself was too old to produce husbands for them (through having sons), and even if she could the age disparity would be far too great.

At this point, Orpah, obviously with great regret, complied with Naomi’s wishes and returned to her family home; but Ruth continued to persist with the notion of travelling to Judah with Naomi. Should we be critical of either Orpah or Ruth? Should Orpah have persisted like Ruth did and similarly won Naomi over? Should Ruth have been more obedient and done what she was asked?? I don’t think the text is critical of either one!! It was to be Ruth and Ruth alone, who would accompany Naomi back to Judah – Ruth seeing beyond Naomi’s request to a greater good – this was clearly the way God would have it! It was Ruth’s calling to become part of the life of Naomi’s home country, whilst Orpah was destined to pursue her future in Moab. Orpah, for her part, was submissively obedient – correctly persuaded by the sensible counsel of her loving mother-in-law.

In verse 14, we read that Ruth “clung” to Naomi. This is the same word used in Genesis 2:24 to describe a man leaving his father and mother and clinging to his
wife – the two becoming one flesh. So, despite further exhortations to withdraw,
from Ruth’s perspective the relationship between Ruth and Naomi has become indissolvable.

Naomi had first shown loving-kindness by being willing to release Ruth, Ruth responds with a loving-kindness that cannot desert the desolate Naomi. Ruth was neither legally nor customarily required to remain with the mother of her deceased husband. Thus the declaration of solidarity we read in verses 16-17 represents an act of love and loyalty above and beyond what would ever be expected or considered normal.

This would also be an act of sacrifice and courage. What was involved in Ruth’s promise?
• A commitment to live in a foreign land, with its different culture & religion (never to see home again); a place where she may not be easily accepted;
• A life-long commitment to Naomi – initially sharing in Naomi’s sorrow out of the reality of her own sorrow, probably involving supporting Naomi through periods of depression, and possibly significant care in Naomi’s elderly years;
• A completely unknown future; as opposed to remaining in the safety of Moab, with the probability of a new marriage, comfortable home, and children.

This overwhelming sense of devotion toward her mother-in-law has stirred from deep within Ruth, making it impossible to do anything other than “cling” to Naomi. As Naomi recognises Ruth’s wholehearted determination and depth of feeling within
the context of Naomi’s own need for companionship, the issue is finally decided!

We see Naomi’s distress kicking in at verse 13, the point at which she is seeking to say goodbye to her beloved daughters-in-law (something she really doesn’t want to do), where she interprets what has happened to her:
• with the loss of her husband, sons and now daughters-in-law (who will now become part of other family units in Moab),
• not being able to bear replacement husbands for Orpah and Ruth,
• even the whole ten-year away-from-home Moab experience … in terms of God turning against her.

According to Naomi herself, all this has been “far more bitter” for Naomi than for Orpah and Ruth; for at least Orpah and Ruth have youth on their sides to rebuild
their lives. {However we might ask whether this was a fair comment to young women who had just lost their husbands?}

Naomi’s feelings of desolation persist as she and Ruth arrive in Bethlehem. It’s hard to know exactly what the townsfolk had in mind when they asked “Is this Naomi?”
Did she look dramatically different from 10 years earlier, or were they being more sarcastic regarding her ‘dalliance’ with foreigners.

In any case, all the Israelites in town would have known that the name “Naomi” sounded like the Hebrew word meaning: ‘pleasant’, ‘delightful’. Such was the depth of Naomi’s depression, that she no longer wanted to be known in terms of ‘lovely’ or ‘sweet’, but rather by the name “Mara”, which sounded like the Hebrew word for ‘bitter’!

Naomi goes on to say that “[God] has dealt bitterly (v.20) [and] harshly (v.21b) with [her]”, and speaks about the Lord bringing her back to Bethlehem “empty” (v.21a).

We could perhaps understand the level of Naomi’s grief. However, we might like to ask questions as to whether it was fair to attribute all this heartache to God?? After all, the world has been constantly affected by drought and famine, people die every day, all women get older beyond child-bearing years – these are just the stages that life takes! Naomi had not really returned “empty”, considering the intimate kindness and companionship she had received from Ruth!

However, how Naomi feels is how she feels!! Anyone seeking to help Naomi, especially in terms of her faith, would have to first empathise with her deep sense of loss. One of the clichés often offered to people who are grieving is: ‘[Just] Count your blessings’ – and this advice could have been easily offered to Naomi. However, in her state of mind, Naomi may not have been able to see past her pain, anger and feelings of emptiness. Another of those clichés that might have been offered to Naomi is: ‘Keep your chin up’ – which is difficult for someone who just wants to cry, and scream at the injustice they feel.

People will move through the stages of grief at their own pace. [But like Naomi, we, especially as people of faith, would have to guard against allowing bitterness to get the better of us, as this will certainly compromise God’s ability to bring forth new possibilities for the future!]

We shall try to note any changes in Naomi’s feelings about life as the story progresses.

God has been able to raise up and use a woman by the name of Ruth, who was from an ethnic group that was despised and rejected in Israelite tradition. Ruth’s capacity for extraordinary faithfulness is the instrument that God uses to both touch the life of Naomi and continue the line of descent toward David and then on further to Jesus.

God must have been working in the life of Ruth well in advance of her marriage into Naomi’s family. Then God was able to use Naomi’s example of Godliness and kindness to further prepare Ruth for the great challenges ahead. Ruth may not have had much background in the Hebrew religion, but it is clearly evident that there was a vital goodness rooted within her (and operating through her), and she was now prepared to build an allegiance with the God of Naomi’s people. However, it wasn’t that Ruth had to find God in Israel, because God had already found Ruth in Moab.

We should not limit the possibilities of how Almighty God will work – in the most unexpected of places and people – to bring about His purposes, and to offer blessing to His loved ones and promote re-creation in the world community. We need to be ready to interpret where God raises up a Ruth from out of left field, to become a friend to the desolate, and a vital link between God’s past and God’s future!