Ruth 1:2
Ruth 1:1 Now it came about in the days when the judges judged, that there was a famine in the land. And a certain man of Bethlehem in Judah went to sojourn in the fields of Moab with his wife and his two sons.
2 And the name of the man was Elimelech,
and the name of his wife was Naomi;
and the names of his two sons were Mahlon and Chilion,
They were Ephrathites from Bethlehem in Judah.
Now they entered the fields of Moab and remained there.
Introduction
Our text this morning continues our study of the book of Ruth.
Now, remember last week we saw that the purpose of the book of Ruth is to show God’s support and choice of the Davidic kingship. However, the book of Ruth is not about grandiose notions such as monarchy and kingship. Instead, the focus of the book is on the small and seemingly inconsequential acts of faithfulness through which God works His extraordinary plan. Thus, right away, Ruth is a book that speaks to you and me right where most of live (not in the palaces of kings but amid the details of everyday life).
Not only that, last week, verse 1 told us that the account of Ruth takes place in a time much like our own. It takes place in the spiritual wild west of the time of the Judges. In fact, the book opens with God’s displeasure towards His people’s unfaithfulness. In verse 1 we learned that there is a famine in the land. However, instead of repentance and returning to God, we find a certain man picking up and moving his family to the pagan fields of Moab.
In our text this morning, verses 2 continues the book’s introductory material. Importance: the first 5 verses of Ruth establish the situation and the spiritual dynamics that set the course for the entire work.
Verse 1:2
Notice at once that verse 2 introduces us to the man from verse 1 and his family. That is, verse 2 tells us their names, their family clan, and where they are from. Importance: immediately verse 2 engages us with the notion of names. The book of Ruth is all about names. Why? First, throughout Ruth names provide an important backdrop of meaning. That is, they alert us to the underlying spiritual conditions at work in a situation. Not only that, they clue us in to the attitude the author wishes us to adopt at a particular point in the narrative. But that’s not all. These names also point us to the theme of Future that is central to the book of Ruth. That is, they underscore God’s plan and the believer’s ongoing part in that plan/future. Simply put, verse 2 alerts us that we need to pay attention to the names in the book of Ruth FN#1.
Notice then verse 2 tells us that the name of the man from verse 1 is Elimelech. Now in Hebrew Elimelech means “My God is King” (Eli- My God + Melech- is King). Importance: notice the irony and the author’s play on the meaning of the very first name in the book FN#2: Remember, the whole point of the book of Ruth is to make the case for David’s kingship. However, as “My God is King” reminds us God was to be King over His people (I Sam 8:5-7). Unfortunately, the book of Judges demonstrates that without a central shepherd of God’s own choosing, God’s people go astray (Jdg 21:25). Notice then Elimelech embodies this sad truth: the Book of Ruth opens with “My God is King” taking his family and leaving his King’s land to seek provisions among the pagans. That is, instead of repentance and faith (the whole point of correction), his response is one of pragmatics and compromise. Simply put, when the author tells us that “My God is King” is heading to a pagan land, we know something is off. That is, we are alerted to a spiritual condition at work and to the fact that we should be leery of it.
Next, notice verse 2 tells us that the name of the man’s wife is Naomi.
Now in Hebrew the name Naomi means “My Pleasant One” FN#3. Importance: while Naomi may have been pleasant to her parents who named her, to her husband who wed her, and to her friends and family, it is clear that that the author utilizes her name throughout the book to alert us that it is YHWH who finds Naomi pleasant FN#4. As such, Naomi’s name prepares us to see her quiet faithfulness in the face of difficulty and poor leadership. In fact, it is her quiet faithfulness that is the spiritual bridge/key to the entire account. In other words, it is her pleasing faithfulness to God that is the very means that God uses to deliver Naomi, her family, and later the entire nation and world. Again, the author is intentionally utilizing the names in the book to give us a heads up on the spiritual content of the book FN#5.
Last, verse 2 tells us that the names of the man’s sons were Mahlon and Chilion. In Hebrew Mahlon means “Sick” and Chilion means “Frail” FN#6. Now this brings us to what should be an obvious question: who in the world names their sons “Sick” and “Frail”? FN#7. The answer is no one. Instead, it seems very likely that the auxiliary names in the book (that is, the non-genealogical names) are nick-names provided by the author to underscore the underling spiritual factors at work in the account FN#8. Notice the result: the author’s use of these nicknames immediately orients us to the people who bear them and thus draw us into the account (think the black cloak of a villain or the white hat of the good guy). Importance: these nicknames point to the author’s playfulness/intentionality and provide us with an important clue to how we are to approach the book. Ruth is not a dry sterile math problem. Instead, it is a book that is meant to delight and engage its readers and draw them into the account. Notice then, the names “Sick” and “Frail” prepare us to see the disaster that their unfaithfulness brings. Their actions are week and frail and like all such actions, they lead only to the destruction/harm of God’s people FN#9.
Next, notice verse two tells us that Elimelech (My God is King) and his family were Ephrathites from Bethlehem FN#10. Importance: if the designation “from Bethlehem” tells us where they lived, then the designation “Ephrathites” tells us who they were. That is, the designation “Ephrathites” informs us that Elimelech and his family were from the clan (family line) of Ephrath FN#11. Importance: verse 2 provides this information in order to quietly but directly tie the account of Ruth to the line of David. Listen to the almost identical language in I Sam 17:12
1 Samuel 17:12 Now David was the son of the Ephrathite from Bethlehem in Judah, whose name was Jesse
In other words, quietly and behind the scene God is working His purpose through the ordinary, everyday events of this book FN#12.
Finally, verse 2 tells us that the man and his family entered the fields of Moab and remained there. Importance: notice the sad foreshadowing in the change of verbs: verse 1 tells us that the family left Israel only to sojourn in Moab. However, by the time we reach the end of verse 2 we hear that they remained in Moab and settled in. In other words, the text moves from a verb that expresses a temporary sojourn to one that is indefinite in its duration. It is this indefiniteness and open-endedness at the end of verse 2 that foreshadows the eventual change in plans to come.
Bottom line: trouble is brewing in Moab. What began as a pragmatic compromise to find food, is poised to slide into permanence and utter darkness (as all such compromises tend to do). In turn, everybody is about to live up to their name.
Footnotes
1] Notice the literary devise at work in the first two verses: there is a tease and then a resolve. Thus in verse 1 we hear of a certain man and his family. But conspicuously we don’t know who they are or anything about them. In verse 2 we learn their names and background. Importance this tease and resolve builds suspense and grabs our attention. In turn, it places emphasis on the resolve once we have it. In other words, the author has underscored the notion of names in the very way he goes about telling the story.
2] We have seen the Hebrew meaning of the name Elimelech; but now we want to look at the way the author approaches, utilizes and plays on the meaning of these names to further the point of his story.
3] The root of Naomi’s name is נָעִים (Pleasant). Thus My (ִי) + Pleasant one (נָעֳמִ) = My Pleasant One. That said, נָעִים (Pleasant), can point to one’s demeanor, their beauty, or to the act of doing what is right/faithful
Psalm 147:1 Praise the LORD! For it is good to sing praises to our God; For it is pleasant (נָעִים) and praise is becoming.
It is this sense of doing what is right/faithful that come to the forefront in Naomi.
4] Notice in 1:20-21 Naomi complains that she is not pleasant to God. Instead, God has dealt bitterly with her. In other words, the “My” in “my pleasant one” has direct reference to God.
5] Note: we see this playfulness and use of the meaning of names throughout Scripture. For example, the name Benjamin means “Son of the right hand” Therefore, when the author of Judges goes out of his way to point out that Ehud the Benjamite (the son of the right hand), the one who God sends to deliver His people, is in fact left handed, there is delight, irony, and a sense that the whole thing is a bit off.
Judges 3:15 But when the sons of Israel cried to the LORD, the LORD raised up a deliverer for them, Ehud the son of Gera, the Benjamite, a left-handed man.
In fact, this playfulness with name throughout both Judges and Ruth is a pretty good indicator of Samuel’s (the author of Judges) influence in the Book of Ruth.
6] Mahlon means “Sick/Diseased” from the Hebrew מחֲלָה (sickness).
Chilion means “Frail/Failing” from the Hebrew כּלָּיוֹן which means frail/failing leading destruction.
7] Now there are commentaries that will tell you that these names probably reflect the conditions in the land at the time of the boys’ birth. However, this is purely speculative and a highly unlikely stretch: first, it assumes that the famine mentioned in verse 1 had already been well underway at the boys’ birth, which would make for an incredibly long famine. Otherwise, it must completely fabricate some other hardship not even mentioned in the book. Second, it overlooks the fact that, whatever the reason, the parents have still chosen to tag their children with defeat rather than with the hope of faith and triumph in the face of adversity.
8] First, the entire weight of the book suggests that the author is providing poignant nick-names to some of the people. How? Over and again we find that the auxiliary names in the book of Ruth precisely fit the character and actions of those who bear them with uncanny exactness. Now while it is certainly possible that God in His providence brought all of this about, the flavor and tone of the book seems to indicate that the author is using these nick-names to draw his readers in, engage them in what they are reading, and to alert them to the significance of what is going on. As such, these nicknames points to a playfulness and provides an important clue to how we are to approach the book. Ruth is a book that is meant to delight and engage its readers and draw them into the account.
Second, these nicknames replace the actual non-genealogical names on the grounds that the actual names were either removed from the genealogies because their bearer’s unfaithfulness had removed them for God people (as in the case of Mahlon and Chilion- who died childless in a foreign land), or these names were simply forgotten (as is possible with Mahlon and Chilion), or the names were known at the time the book was written and thus the significance of the nickname would be immediately evident to the original readers. Regardless, the author uses these nicknames to describe the characters and point out their spiritual significance to the account.
Third, this practice of giving nickname is something we see in other places in Scripture: for example in the book of Judges (remember Ruth takes place in the days of Judges) Gideon is given the nickname, Jerubbaal by which he is known throughout the account because he pulled down Baal’s altar. The name Jerubbaal means let Baal fight/defend himself (Judges 6:31-32)
Judges 7:1 Then Jerubbaal (that is, Gideon) and all the people who were with him, rose early and camped beside the spring of Harod;
Again, in the same book we hear of Gaal the son of Ebed who dealt treacherously with Gideon’s Son, Abimelech (Judges 9:28). The name Gaal means “loathsome one” and Ebed, his father means “servant”. Thus Gaal’s name might well be translated, “loathsome one, the son of a servant.” It seems likely that this is a nickname given to him because of his immoral character and lowly social status.
Finally, the author’s intentionality is seen in his use of both the genealogical and non-genealogical name: Notice then, the author uses the genealogical name (e.g. Elimelech, Naomi) to point out important spiritual factors at work in the account. In them he sees and thus draws out a significance that is at work in the account. In the same way, he provides nicknames to other non-genealogical characters to make the spiritual factors surrounding them clear and evident to the reader.
Note the genealogical names in the Book are:
· Elimelech
· Naomi
· Ruth
· Boaz
The non-genealogical nicknames are:
· Mahlon
· Chilion
· Orpah
· The unnamed relative in 4:1ff
9] It is no coincidence then that it is Elimelech’s name (not the names of his apostate sons) that is provided for and continues. Thus, while Elimelech compromised and acted unfaithfully, his son’s embraced unfaithfulness and forsook the Lord.
10] Ephrathah is a small village in the vicinity of Bethlehem. In fact, it is so small that it is often identified with the larger town of Bethlehem. Notice we see this paring of Ephrath (also spelled Ephrathah) with Bethlehem throughout Scripture. For example:
Genesis 35:19 So Rachel died and was buried on the way to Ephrath (that is, Bethlehem).
Micah 5:2 “But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Too little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity.”
11] The point of the further designation “from Bethlehem” is to tell us where they are from, while the designation “Ephrathites” tells us who they are (to which clan/family they belong). Notice then the adjectival form אֶפְרָתִים (“Ephrathites”) that is used here in verse 2 is used elsewhere in Scripture to refer to someone from the clan of Ephrath (cf. 1Ch 4:4). Thus while it is possible that the designation “Ephrathites” might tell us that the family lived in Ephrathah, the further designation “from Bethlehem” together with the adjectival use of “Ephrathites” indicate that it is better to understand this as a designation of clan.
12] Over and again throughout the book of Ruth we see an important spiritual principle at work (one which is at work and remains true for each of us today). It is this: God always inhabits and always uses our faithfulness to His glory. We might not always see it. It may be years or even never before we realize it. But our faithfulness is never pointless or in vain. God always uses it. (I Cor 15:58)