Behind a Frowning Providence (Ruth 1:1–22) | Redeeming Love (Part 1)

Transcript

JROT 38
11/9/2025
Redeeming Love (Part 1) Behind a Frowning Providence
Ruth 1:1-22
Jesse Randolph

“God moves in a mysterious way, His wonders to perform; He plants His footsteps in the sea, and rides upon the storm. Deep in unfathomable mines, of never-failing skill; He fashions up His bright designs and works His sovereign will. Ye fearful saints fresh courage take, the clouds that you much dread, are big with mercy and will break in blessings on your head. Judge not the Lord by feeble sense but trust Him for His grace; behind a frowning providence, He hides a smiling face.”

Those words come from the hymn, “God Moves in a Mysterious Way.” Written by a man named William Cowper, a mid-1700s English hymnwriter who is probably best known for penning another hymn, “There is a Fountain Filled with Blood.” Cowper’s story is a fascinating one. Though he got saved in his early 20’s, and though his heart had been made new by the grace of Jesus Christ. He was, by all accounts, still quite the melancholy soul. Though he embraced the truth of the Gospel by faith. He found himself regularly being in a state of being downcast. He was this perennially bruised reed. One of his biographers wrote of him, “Heartache was his handmaiden virtually from birth.” It was in the midst of one of those times, when Cowper, as he was going through another one of these waves of despairing and feeling like he was circling the drain, wrote those lyrics to “God Moves in a Mysterious Way.” Listen again, to just this line: “. . . behind a frowning providence, He hides a smiling face.”

What an apt description wouldn’t you say, of life in a fallen, sin cursed, broken world? Life in this fallen world, even for believers in the Lord Jesus Christ, can be hard. The check-engine light comes on when the funds are low. A text message pops up that’s like a dagger to the heart. A roof leaks. A favorite item of clothing tears. A bone breaks. A friendship ends. A marriage sours. The whole creation groans and we groan along with it and yet God is there.

We remember, as the Apostle Paul says in Romans 8:28, “That for those who love God all things work together for good for those who are called according to His purpose.” We remember, as it says in Isaiah 55, that God’s ways are higher than our ways and His thoughts are higher than our thoughts. We remember, as we’re told in Psalm 145:17, that God is righteous in all His ways and holy in all His works. But yet we find ourselves wishing, hoping, praying that God might prove the reality of those truths in some other way in some less-painful way some easier-to-swallow way.

We’re starting a new series this morning in an Old Testament book, the Book of Ruth. In fact, you can go ahead and turn there with me, to the Book of Ruth. It’s the eighth book of the Old Testament. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth. And Ruth, as we’re going to see here momentarily, is a book that is set in an especially dark time in Israel’s history. This dreary moral haze had fallen upon was polluting God’s original covenant people, the Israelites. Dark clouds of God’s disapproval and judgment were swirling and gathering. And yet, it’s against this dark backdrop, as we’re going to see, that Ruth actually records this beautiful story of redemptive love. As God, “. . . behind that frowning providence” was all along, concealing His “smiling face.”
I’m getting ahead of myself.

Since we’re going to be jumping into the book of Ruth this morning a brand-new study for these six weeks. It is important that we get into some of the context and the background of this text. We are going to try, at least, to get through the entire first chapter this morning. Pray for me!

But what do we need to know about the book of Ruth, background wise?
Well, let’s start with:
Authorship – Who wrote the book of Ruth? Well, of course, in one sense, God did. II Timothy 3:16, “All scripture [including Ruth] is [breathed out by God]. But who is the human author? The book is actually anonymous in terms of its human authorship. But Jewish tradition would indicate that the prophet Samuel wrote it. That’s at least a plausible explanation. Because we do know that Samuel lived after the events recorded in the book of Ruth. So, he could have been the author. But it’s not a matter of over which we can be dogmatic. Ruth might have been written by Samuel in human terms it might have been written by someone else. What matters is that this is divinely inspired scripture and has all the marks of a God-breathed book.

In fact, there’s this great story involving Benjamin Franklin. You know, one of our founder fathers, who happened to be an ambassador to France, for America. He went over to France from 1776 until 1785 and while he was there, in Paris, he interacted with this group that was known as the “Infidels’ Club.” Sounds like a shady bunch. But the “Infidels’ Club” was this group of philosophers who rejected the Bible. And they were known for scoffing at the Bible. And what this group of infidels – the “Infidels’ Club”, what they really liked to do, was to do what intellectual types do which is to search and read anything but the Bible and soak up a lot of human wisdom. So, for his amusement, what Franklin did, is he went to one of these “Infidels’ Club” meetings, and he told them that he had found this ancient manuscript that was worthy of their consideration. They said, “Oh tell us about this manuscript, we want to hear about this manuscript, read this manuscript to us.” Well, guess what Franklin read them? The book of Ruth. But what he did, he changed all the Hebrew names and the Hebrew locations to French names and French locations, to mask what the book actually was. As he read this book, they were fascinated! They were unanimous in their approval. They were heaping praise upon praise for what Franklin had read them. And one of the members of the “Infidels’ Club” said, “You must tell us where you found this book!” It’s pretty easy to imagine Franklin’s wry smile, kind of that smile like he has on the $100 dollar bill. As he told them that what he had just read them, was the book of Ruth. A book straight out of the Bible the very source of their ridicule and disapproval.

I tell that story, to highlight the fact that Ruth is God breathed. It has all the marks of divine inspiration. It is stitched together magnificently. Its divine nature is obvious not only to the follower of Christ or to a deist like Franklin but even to a pagan Parisian philosopher.

So, that’s a bit about the authorship of Ruth. It was breathed out by God.
Next, let’s talk about the date of Ruth’s authorship. When was it written? Well, the fact that David is mentioned in the book, turn with me over to the last chapter of Ruth 4. The fact that David’s name is mentioned in the genealogy here, both in verse 17 and in verse 22. Look at verse 17, it says,
“A son has been born to Naomi, so they named him Obed. He is the father of Jesse, the father of David.” And then down in verse 22, it tells us “. . . Obed became the father of Jesse, and Jesse became the father of David.”
Now, what those indicate is that because David is mentioned there and it doesn’t go so far as Soloman, who is David’s son, we know. This would seem to indicate that this book of Ruth, was written either during David’s reign as the king in Israel or soon thereafter, but not so far as Solomon’s reign later. So that would place the dating of this book, somewhere around 1000 B.C. That would put us right in the heart of king David’s reign in Israel.

Now, how about some of the themes of the book of Ruth? What is going on in the book of Ruth? What is the book of Ruth all about?
Well, there are a number of things going on in this short little gem of a book.

For starters, we’re going to see, over and over God’s sovereign and providential hand over seemingly unimportant people at apparently insignificant times which later, will prove to be critical pieces in what God was doing, as He wrote His story for history as His will over time would be accomplished. Along those lines, we’re going to see how Ruth alongside women like Tamar, in Genesis 38, and Rahab in Joshua 2, and Bathsheba in II Samuel 11, they all stand in the genealogy of the Messiah. They’re in the family tree of Jesus.

We’re also going to see certain concepts and themes regularly recurring in the book of Ruth. Words like returning, repentance, and redemption will pop up all over and over in this book. That last one, “redemption” and the redeeming love we see portrayed in this story, is one we can relate to in a distinct way, if we are followers here this morning, of the Lord Jesus Christ. Because we, who have believed upon Christ, have been shown the greatest example of redeeming love that has ever been shown. As we who have put our faith in the name of Christ, have been purchased and redeemed through the shed blood of the Savior of the world.

Last, the book of Ruth forces us to wrestle with certain questions. Questions, I’m sure many, if not all of us have wrestled with before. Questions like:
Is God really good? Does God really care about each of His children? Where is God when life hurts? Did God mean it when He said in Psalm 46:1, that He is our “refuge and strength” and a “very present help in times of trouble”?

There’s a lot packed in, in other words, into these 85 verses in the book of Ruth. So, we need to get into it, lest I keep you here until lunch, or past lunch or dinner, I should say.

Look at verse 1of Ruth 1, Ruth 1:1, it says,
“Now it happened in the days when the judges judged that there was a famine in the land.”
So, here we have this direct statement from scripture itself, revealing the setting and the timeline of this book. The human author of this book, maybe Samuel, maybe not opens this narrative, with these words, “Now it happened.” That’s the equivalent of our expression: “Once upon a time . . .” And then the author gives us this divinely inspired time stamp, when he says, “. . . in the days when the judges judged.” That’s a reference to the book of Judges. That book of the Bible which immediately precedes the book of Ruth in the canon of Old Testament scripture. In fact, if you look up the page one verse, to the final verse of the book of Judges 21:25, it says, “In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes.”
So, the days of the Judges, the days in which the book of Ruth is set, were this unique period of wickedness and idolatry in Israel and boiled down to its essence, the book of Judges is a history book. It summarizes this repeated cycle of sin and wickedness and idolatry, that the people of Israel found themselves in over and over again, right after they entered the Promised Land. Though God had told them in literally His first commandment that they were to worship Him alone and not worship the idols of the false “gods” of the people surrounding them. But they regularly found themselves doing just that. Worshiping these pagan, false idolatrous “gods” of the surrounding people groups. They did so, rather than worshiping the God who had made them, and the God how had delivered them, and the God who had spoken audibly to them. Instead, they worshiped these false “gods” of wood and metal and stone. And it caught up with them. In each of these “cycles” that are recorded in the book of Judges what happened was they would get into this pattern of sin, and then God would allow this wicked ruler to overtake them. He would allow them to be oppressed, as a consequence for their sin. Then He would deliver them into the hands of a Judge, another flawed leader. Then that cycle would repeat itself, over and over and over. Sin and wickedness and then conquest and new judge, more sin etc., etc., etc.

But the tone of the book of Judges, this really lays out the spiritual tenor of the day. Which was that of gross moral decay in Israel. These days of the Judges lasted about 400 years, and they were full of moral chaos and corruption. Hence that statement in Judges 21:25, “In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes.”

Now, the events of our text, the book of Ruth, are describing this very setting the days of the book of Judges. Look again at Ruth 1:1, “Now it happened in the days when the judges judged.” In those days, the end of this first verse tells us that, “. . . there was a famine in the land.” This famine wasn’t a mere coincidence; it wasn’t an act of nature. This was no accident. This famine wasn’t a result of global warming, or global cooling, or negligent practices engaged in by an incompetent farmer. No. This was a famine sent straight from God. As an act of judgment against the people. An act of judgment against His people, who had sinned so grievously against Him. It was as if God were saying, by sending this famine to the land, “You want to worship your idols, Israel? Fine, let’s see them feed you.” That’s the context here. But make no mistake. As this book opens, there is this sense, here in Ruth, of this “frowning providence” hanging over all that is about to be revealed. God has not yet allowed His “smiling face” to peek through. Instead, He’s allowed this famine to come upon the land. So that crops are in short supply. Stomachs are growling and people are starting to go hungry. God’s heavy hand of judgment is weighing heavily upon them.

It is against that bleak backdrop, that we’re introduced to the first character in this account, in verse 1. In the middle of the verse, it says, “And a certain man of Bethlehem in Judah went to sojourn in the fields of Moab with his wife and his two sons.” Now, this man will be named soon. In fact, in the next verse he’ll be named. But note what we’re told about him right away. He was from “Bethlehem in Judah” it says. Now, we’re familiar with that place, “Bethlehem in Judah” because we know looking backwards through the New Testament lens that a young girl named Mary would give birth to a Child named Jesus in that city, many, many, many years later. But these events in Ruth, are recorded a full 1,000 years before the Bethlehem account that we all think of. Ruth was also written some 200 years before the prophet Micah would write his book, where he would prophecy in Micah 5:2, that the Messiah of Israel would be born in Bethlehem. Ruth also took place before the birth of King David, who we know hailed from Bethlehem. Which is why Bethlehem would later be called the “City of David.”

I mention all that to point out, that as of the days of the Judges, where the time stamp is in our book the days recorded in the book of Ruth. Bethlehem was simply known for being this small farming town in the southern territory of Judah, some six miles south of Jerusalem. The name “Bethlehem”, in Hebrew, literally means “house of bread.” You pick up on the irony there? Bethlehem is known as the “house of bread.” There’s a famine going on in the “house of bread.” The house of bread no longer has bread. The breadbasket, you could say, is now empty. These inhabitants of Bethlehem find themselves suffering in the days of the Judges through this God-sent famine. It was because of this famine, that this “man” we read of here in verse 1, reading on, “went to sojourn in the fields of Moab with his wife and his two sons.”

Now, “Moab” is another geographic reference that we have to spend some time with, and tackle. Moab sat about 50 miles east of Bethlehem, on the other side of the Dead Sea and Moab had some history of its own. Moab was the perennial enemy of Israel. The country’s very origins are traced back to the days of Lot who fathered a son, named Moab. Who was conceived through an incestuous union he had with his own daughter. The details of that are laid out in Genesis 19. In light of their unsavory beginnings, going back to the days of the giving of the Law of Moses the Moabites were considered to be unclean. Deuteronomy 23:3 declares that “No Moabite shall enter the assembly of Yahweh.” And as you keep moving down the track, chronologically, we learn things like the Israelites engaging opposition from Balak, the king of Moab, in Numbers 22 through 25.

Then in Judges 3, we learn that Moab oppressed Israel during the days of the Judges. We learn that because of Moab’s wickedness, later, because of their worship of certain false “gods” that they were bowing down to, as we read in the books of 1st and 2nd Kings. That God would ultimately curse Moab. We see curses against Moab declared in Isaiah 15, Isaiah 16, Jeremiah 48, Ezekiel 25.

And then, get this. This is my favorite. In Psalm 60:8 the Lord referrers to Moab as a “washbowl.” He says: “Moab is My washbowl.” Now, the word for “washbowl” there, is seer, which can also mean “tub” or “pot.” A “seer” is a tub or a pot that was used in these times to wash dirty feet. That’s what’s meant by that expression that “Moab is a washbowl.” He’s calling this place unsavory. He’s calling it a dump. He’s calling it, to use our expression, a “trash can” or even a “toilet bowl.” Meaning, this “man” that we meet here in Ruth 1:1, was moving his family from the breadbasket of this region to the “toilet bowl” of the region. It’d be like moving one’s family from, let’s say, Nebraska to California. (laughter) I can say that I’m from there.

Verse 1, “And a certain man of Bethlehem in Judah went to sojourn in the fields of Moab with this wife and his two sons.” Now note there, that his man was on a “sojourn.”
That word is specific in its meaning. It means a temporary pilgrimage. He was designing to go there for a short period. But why? Well, to extract, not only himself, but “his wife and his two sons” from the jaws of this famine which had clamped down on Bethlehem. So, as the story of Ruth begins the mood is somber. It’s foreboding. This famine had forced this family in Bethlehem to move to this foreign land. And now, in verse 2, the leader of this family, the “man” mentioned in verse 1, is identified.

Verse 2, “The name of the man was Elimelech, and the name of his wife, Naomi; and the names of his two sons were Mahlon and Chilion, Ephrathites of Bethlehem in Judah. Now they came to the fields of Moab and remained there.”
So, the name of this man, the head of this household was “Elimelech” which literally means, in Hebrew, “my God is king.” Now, whether this man lived up to that name of God being his king we’re not told. We are also told here that he had these “two sons”, “Mahlon” and “Chilion.” And we’re told that they were “Ephrathites of Bethlehem in Judah.” Meaning, they were “inhabitants of Ephrath.” Which is another name for Bethlehem. But this author here states that this family was from Bethlehem. They’re from this “house of bread”. But this “house of bread” no longer has any bread. Now, they are sojourning, they’re moving on to the toilet-bowl territory of Moab.

It doesn’t take too long for tragedy to strike. Look at verse 3, it says:
“Then Elimelech, Naomi’s husband, died; and she was left with her two sons.”
Just like that Elimelech passes off the scene. This man whose name meant “my God is king.” The man who had let his family out of the famine-ridden Promised Land and into the “wash bowl” of the cursed Moabites he kicked the bucket. He “died.” For Elimelech, the “greener grass” of Moab, actually proved to be his graveyard. He left his widow, Naomi, with a problem on her hands. Look at the end of verse 3, it says, “. . . and she was left with her two sons.” Now, how long it was into their sojourn into Moab, that Elimelech died leaving his wife, Naomi, as a widow, it doesn’t say. We’re not told. What we are told is what we have. And what we are told is that Naomi was widowed in a foreign land. Surely sorrowing. Surely stressed out. Wondering what would become of her and her two sons.

We’re told what happens as we read on in verse 4, it says, “They took for themselves Moabite women as wives; the name on the one was Orpah and the name of the other Ruth and they lived there about ten years.” Now, we’re going to learn later, when we get to Ruth 4, specifically verse 10, that it was Mahlon who married Ruth because there, Ruth is referred to as the “widow of Mahlon.” So that means it was Chilion that married “Orpah.” But the big picture idea here, is that these two Israelite boys married these two Moabite girls.

Now, right away, if we’ve done any sort of study of the Old Testament, our antennae ought to start to be going up here. If we’re familiar with the other accounts in the Old Testament. We know that, for instance, the story of King Solomon. Who had many foreign wives. We know that the scriptures contained warnings to the Israelites about taking foreign wives, as King Solomon would do lest those wives draw their Israelite husbands away to worship the false gods of the land. But was it against the Law in Israel? Specifically, the Law of Moses, for these two young men, Mahlon and Chilion, the sons of Naomi to marry these Moabite women? Was it illegal? Was it unlawful? Well, actually, no. Technically not. The Law of Moses did prohibit Israelites, specifically from marrying Canaanites. Deuteronomy 7:3, speaking of Canaanites says to the people of Israel, “You shall not intermarry with them; you shall not give your daughters to their sons, nor shall you take their daughters for your sons.”

I quoted earlier, Deuteronomy 23:3, which says, “No Moabite shall enter the assembly of Yahweh; even to the tenth generation, none of their seed shall ever enter the assembly of Yahweh.” Meaning, the seed of a Moabite man would not be allowed to enter the assembly of God’s people whether in the tabernacle, or later the temple, for ten generations. But neither of those principles that I just sighted from Deuteronomy expressly barred a man in Israel, from marrying a Moabite woman. Now, it wasn’t wise to do so. It would still be highly frowned upon, sighting the example of Solomon and foreign wives. But here in marrying Orpah and Ruth, Mahlon and Chilion, Naoimi’s sons they weren’t acting unlawfully. By definition, they were not acting sinfully. So, these two men of Israel, married these two Moabite women. And “they” . . . meaning, Elimelech’s whole clan ended up sojourning in Moab, it says, end of verse 4, for “about ten years.” They lived there for about ten years.

Well, as we come to verse 5, we get to another twist in the account. It says,
“Then both Mahlon and Chilion also died, and the woman was left without her two children and her husband.” So, two more graves had to be dug, alongside the one already holding her husband, Elimelech. And so, now Naomi was there in Moab, all alone. Each of her blood relatives, her husband, her two sons, Mahlon and Chilion, were now dead. Now, how did they die? Why did they die? We don’t know. No explanation is given.

According to some early Jewish traditions the three men died as punishment for Elimelech taking his family out of Bethlehem in the first place. And taking them to a “toilet bowl” like Moab. Another set of traditions says that Mahlon and Chilion, the two sons, specifically, they died because they failed to convert their Moabite wives to the God of Abraham and they folded themselves into the culture of Moab, a little too much. Maybe. They’re possibilities. The only problem, yet again, is that the text doesn’t tell us that. There’s no medical diagnosis for these men, given in this text. There’s no coroner’s report attached as an appendix to the book of Ruth. Rather, the emphasis of the text, the text itself is that this woman, Naomi, was now husband-less and childless. All three of members, all three male members of her family had died before their time.

And Naomi’s plight in these days, in this time, in this part of the world this would have been a big deal. See, in these times, a woman’s resources, her security, her heritage it was all tied in with the men in her life. So, as a woman’s highest priority was to marry and have sons not only through whom the family line could be carried out. But through which she would have her support in this life. Naomi, at one point, had been blessed to have it all. She had a husband, and she had these two sons but now, they’re gone. Now they’re dead. When they died, not only did her family’s future linage die out but so too did her source of provision, from a husband or from her sons. She’d really lost it all. Without a husband. Without sons her circumstances were bleak. Yes, she did have these two Moabite daughters-in-law, but they wouldn’t be able to support her. And they wouldn’t be able to produce an heir for her.

So, Naomi, along with her two Moabite daughters-in-law, were at a crossroads. What was she supposed to do? Well, the story picks up in verse 6, it says,
“Then she arose with her daughters-in-law and returned from the fields of Moab, for she had heard in the fields of Moab that Yahweh had visited His people to give them food. [and then, verse 7] So she went forth from the place where she was, and her two daughters-in-law with her; and they went on the way to return to the land of Judah.”
Now, note, in these two verses we have the first reference to God – Yahweh – in the book of Ruth. But we also have this key word we need to zero in on for a moment here. And that’s the Hebrew word shub. It means “to return” “to repent” to change one’s course, to change one’s direction. We see it in verse 6, where Naomi and her daughters-in-law, we’re told, “returned from the fields of Moab.” Then, we see the word again in verse 7, where we’re told that “they went on the way to return to the land of Judah.” Ten years earlier, Naomi and her husband, Elimelich, had left Bethlehem, left the house of bread to go find bread in Moab. But now, Naomi had reversed her direction, reversed the direction her husband had taken. She turned her back on Moab. And now, she was heading back to Judah. Back to Bethlehem, her homeland.

See, word had reached Naomi as she was out there in the fields of Moab. The famine in her homeland, it says in verse 6, was over. Bethlehem once again had bread. So, she’s now at this fork in the road. She could stay in Moab where she had settled in and developed some sort of life. She could stay in Moab, she could stay and mourn. But perhaps, without a husband, and perhaps without sons there, she could starve to death in doing so. Or she could head home to Bethlehem, where there was at least food now.

Well, her choice was clear, verse 7 says she “went forth from the place where she was” there in Moab. And it wasn’t just Naomi who went it was also “her two daughters-in-law with her” and it says, “they went on the way to return to the land of Judah.”

Now, to fill in some of the details of what’s going on here. In this part of the world, at this time, I can picture certain wartime movies that are filling in some of the details for me right now. But it was normal, during this time in history, for a host to accompany their departing guests some distance down the road, before they said farewell to them. They would walk down the path or walk down the road to go a certain distance, and then they would say goodbye. That seems to be what’s going on here. These three widows are walking down the road. They’d left “the place where [Naomi] was.” And now, they’re, I think, at this literal fork in the road. This point of departure where it is now time to say farewell and its now time to say goodbye.

And we see the scene play out at this fork in the road in verses 8 and 9, it says, “And Naomi said to her two daughters-in-law, ‘Go, return each of you to her mother’s house. May Yahweh show lovingkindness with you as you have shown with the dead and with me. May Yahweh grant that you may find rest, each in the house of her husband.’ Then she kissed them, and they lifted up their voices and wept.”

Now, considering that ancient Israel was this patriarchal society. It might sound a bit strange to hear Naomi here encouraging these two daughters-in-law not to return to their father’s house but instead to their mother’s house. Well, no surprise here, there’s actually great meaning and great significance to those words. No word is ever wasted in God’s scriptures, God’s precious holy word. And so, in using that expression – “mother’s house” Naomi was actually communicating something very specific to these young women. Her words here actually refer to a mother’s chamber; that part of the family compound, during this time in history, in Israel, this part of the world where marriages would be planed and arranged.

In other words, Naomi was trying to get these young women to go back to Moab. To go back to their families’ homes. Back to their mother’s chambers specifically. So that they could start making plans for another wedding. So that they could start making plans for remarriage. With these words, Naomi is actually encouraging her two daughters-in-law to go start families. To go get married. To go start having babies. It wasn’t too late for them to start over.

She then offers these beautiful words of blessing at the end of verse 8, she says,
“May Yahweh show lovingkindness with you as you have shown with the dead and with me.”
That word, “lovingkindness” hesed in Hebrew, is a very important word in the book of Ruth. It shows up in a few other places in Ruth. The word refers to God’s covenant loyalty to His people. It refers to that grace that’s extended even when it’s not deserved. It speaks of the grace and loyalty that God showed His original covenant people the Israelites even though they continually disobeyed Him. The word runs in parallel to the grace and the loyalty, the patience, even – that God has shown us, especially before we came to faith in His Son.

We remember the passage in II Peter 3:9 that -
“The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some consider slowness, but is patient toward you, not willing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.”

Here, in verse 8, Naomi was commending Orpah and Ruth, her two daughters-in-law, for showing that same grace and loyalty, not only to her, but to her now deceased sons. Because these young women had been gracious to Namoi, and gracious to her sons they were worthy in Naomi’s eyes. Though they were foreigners. Though these young women were Moabites, of all people. Naomi wanted to be good to them. She wanted to be kind to them. And so, she asked God’s blessing upon them when she said to them, verse 8, “May Yahweh show lovingkindness with you as you have shown with the dead and with me.”

And not only that. As Naomi prepared to send these young women home, back to Moab. She prayed that the Lord would bless them specifically, with husbands. Look at verse 9:
“May Yahweh grant that you may find rest, each in the house of her husband.”
And this was a sweet gesture. One accompanied, we see here, by a kiss. One which brought Orpah and Ruth to tears. It says, “. . . they lifted up their voices and wept.” Having come out of this season of loss and grief and sadness. And now staring into this unsure future these three women, understandably “wept.” It’s this tender and heartbreaking scene.

Well, Orpah and Ruth not only “wept”, but they also spoke up. Though Naomi’s kisses had this part of the story were meant to be parting kisses, farewell kisses. Initially, at least, neither Orpah nor Ruth were not having any of it. Look at verse 10,
“And they said to her, ‘No, but we will return with you to your people.”
I mean, there was plenty of life yet to live for these two young women, Orpah and Ruth. There was still the possibility of marriage, and childbearing, and heirs and all of it back in their homeland of Moab. Still, though, they wanted to stay with Naomi. But Naomi was insistent. And she was repeatedly insistent, as we go on through this account, that they return.
Look at verse 11, “But Naomi said, ‘Return, my daughters. Why should you go with me? Have I yet sons in my womb, that they may be your husbands?”
Now, Naomi here is referring to this practice called Levirate marriage. We find it in Deuteronomy 25. Under this process, or this practice of Levirate marriage. A man, when his brother died, was responsible for marrying the wife of the deceased brother. And this was to be done, so that a son could be conceived through that new union, which would then carry on the deceased brother’s name beyond that. So again, Levirate marriage is what’s being referred to.

But here, Naomi, aware of the process at the time, and aware of the procedure at the time. What she’s saying to Orpah and Ruth is that there is no way that can happen here. Since Naomi had no more sons. There was no surviving brother of either Mahlon or Chilion who could have a child with Orpah or Ruth and carry on the family line. What Naomi was really saying, in this culture and this time, which placed such a high value on continuing one’s lineage was that there was no reason to follow her any longer. There’s no reason to stay with her. She’s an old woman, she’s communicating here. She’s most likely, post-menopausal, unable to conceive children. So, to hitch their wagons to her, so to speak, was a losing proposition. While, on the one hand, the way that Naomi was reasoning here with Orpah and Ruth made sense. It made sense from a logical perspective. It made sense from a biological perspective. It even made sense from a theological perspective. As we’re about to see, as we read on in this account there was this detectable streak of self-pity that was undergirding Naomi’s words. See, Naomi had somehow convinced herself by this point that God was no longer “for” her. She’d convinced herself in some way that God was no longer “with” her. So, she’s here trying to persuade both Orpha and Ruth, that they didn’t need to go “with” her, either.

Well, what started really as a dialogue, with two parties talking. Now, turns into this mini monologue, where Naomi keeps on talking. Look at verses 12-13, this is still Naomi, as she says,
“Return, my daughters! Go, for I am too old to have a husband. If I said I have hope, if I should even have a husband tonight and also bear sons, would you therefore wait until they were grown? Would you therefore refrain from marrying? No, my daughters; for it is more bitter for me than for you, for the hand of Yahweh has gone forth against me.”
Now, the first part of what Naomi is saying here is straightforward enough. Essentially, she’s saying it’s ludicrous to think that now that she’s past the age of childbearing, that even if she did remarry, and then go on to have additional sons that Orpah and Ruth were going to wait for those sons to grow up just to marry those sons, and have children with those sons to carry on the family line.

But then, what had actually been brewing in Naomi’s heart starts to come out in verse 13. First, there’s this insensitive remark. She says, “. . . for it is more bitter for me than for you.” Really? What a terrible way to offer counsel or encouragement to someone. To sidestep or ignore their problems, and to make it about you. To try to “one-up” them, by suggesting that because you think that your problems are worse than theirs that theirs aren’t all that bad. What an amazing way to make someone feel absolutely small and potentially ruin a relationship. That’s what Naomi did here she made it about herself. She made it about God, in her estimation, being against her. And look at how her statement in verse 13 ends she says, “. . . for the hand of Yahweh has gone forth against me.”

Naomi was seeing her situation as being all about God afflicting her, and she was bitter. Though in a moment, we’re going to see she would acknowledge God’s authority and God’s power. She would acknowledge Him in verses 20 and 21 as “the Almighty”, El Shadi. What she failed to recognize, and what she failed to see was that God’s sovereign hand was working in each of these events in her life. Because of that, and this wrong view she had of her situation. Because of this incorrect assessment of her situation. With this incorrect view of God’s sovereignty informing her. She was very “quick to speak” with her daughters-in-law here, warning them to get as far away from her as they could, even if it meant going back to the pagan land, the toilet bowl, of Moab.

Well, one of her daughters-in-law accepted her reasoning and accepted her counsel. And the other did not. We see the reactions of the two women, Orpah and Ruth, in verse 14, it says,
“And they lifted up their voices and wept again; and Orpah kissed her mother-in-law, but Ruth clung to her.” Now, when it says that “Orpah kissed her mother-in-law”, it means at that point Orpah bid Naomi farewell. She was gone. Orpah received Naomi’s message. She obeyed the wishes of her mother-in-law, and she departed from her, returning back to her dark homeland in Moab. Now, what Orpah did from there whether she remarried, which “gods” she worshiped at that point we don’t know. Nothing more is said about her in Ruth, or in the scriptures.

But look at what is said of Ruth. Still in verse 14, it says, “. . . but Ruth clung to her.” Ruth did the unexpected. Orpah chose to seek a husband but Ruth “clung” to Naomi. That word “clung” is the same word that we see in Genesis 2:24, when it speaks of a man cleaving to, joining his wife.
“Therefore, a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.” So, rather than seeking a husband in Moab, Ruth, instead, chose to follow and serve her widowed mother-in-law she “clung” to Naomi.

But Naomi was persistent, verse 15, with Orpah now headed back to Moab. Naomi again insists here that Ruth goes back too. Verse 15, “Then she said, [this is Naomi speaking] “Behold, your sister-in-law has returned to her people and her gods; return after your sister-in-law.’” So, Naomi again is urging Ruth to go home. This time, she’s citing the example of Orpah. Note how Naomi, in making her appeal to Ruth, is not only appealing to Orpah returning to “her people”, the Moabites, but to “her gods.” Sort of an odd thing for a woman of faith in Israel to say. To urge a Moabite like Ruth, to go back to Moab and appeal to false idol worship, false worship, as a grounds for doing so. Naomi, you could say, was not making it easy for Ruth to come to faith in the true God, the God of the Bible. She was willing to sacrifice some of her own scruples to get Ruth to go back.

Well, yet again, Ruth wasn’t having it. And she begins getting even more forceful in saying so. Look at verse 16, it says, “But Ruth said, ‘Do not press me to forsake you in turning back from following you . . .’” “Do not press me.” Then come these words, which are some of the most moving, and memorable words recorded in all of scripture. These are some of the most beautiful words of commitment that you’ll ever hear. This is why they’re used, often in wedding ceremonies. Where Ruth says to Naomi, verse 16, “. . . for where you go, I will go, and where you lodge, I will lodge.”

It didn’t matter that Naomi had repeatedly given her the stiff arm. It didn’t matter that clinging to Naomi meant embracing a life of uncertainty. It didn’t matter that Ruth had nothing to gain by going along with Naomi and everything to lose in doing so. It didn’t matter that, in following Naomi Ruth would be giving up her citizenship in Moab, her family, her country, her religion, her security, and literally her future. Ruth wasn’t going to leave Naomi’s side period.

Not only that. Ruth was ready to make a complete break with her past. She was ready to leave the idolatrous land of her ancestors. To tie herself to Naomi and not just Naomi; but to Naomi’s people, the Israelites and not just the Israelites, but to the God of Israel Yahweh. Look at the rest of verse 16, this is still Ruth speaking, where she says,
“Your people shall be my people, and your God, my God.”
So, Ruth was not only clinging to Naomi, then. Rather, through this whole dark series of events, the loss of her own husband, and the prospect now of this uncertain future of going out to this foreign land, to her, of Bethlehem. Ruth was not clinging to Yahweh, to God, in faith. The God of Israel was now her God. The God of Israel, Yahweh, was the One that she was now believing in and trusting in, for her future.

Her faith in Yahweh was what now anchored Ruth’s commitment to Naomi which we see in verse 17, she says, “Where you die, [this is still Ruth speaking to Naomi] I will die, and there I will be buried. Thus, may Yahweh do to me, and more, if anything but death separates you and me.”
See, at this point, Ruth is doing a whole lot more than just going up the road a bit with Naomi. She is making a lifelong commitment to her and the commitment that she is making is cemented and sealed in the faith that these two women now share in the same God. Ruth was committing here, to staying with Naomi until her last breath. So serious was she about her pledge, that she invoked judgment from the God she now worshiped Yahweh, if she were to break that commitment of loyalty to her mother-in-law. That’s why she says, “’Thus, may Yahweh do to me, and more, if anything but death separates you and me.’” Now, with a commitment like that what was Naomi supposed to say?

Nothing. Which is what she does say in verse 18, she says, there’s nothing left to say. “So, she saw that she was determined to go with her. . .” This is Naomi who saw that Ruth was determined to go with her, “. . . and she said no more to her.” Naomi was done trying to urge Ruth to go back to Moab. So, she acquiesced. No more responses, no more words of insistence, there’s nothing more to say. Ruth was going to cling to her . . . and that was that.

Now, not just Naomi, but Naomi and Ruth, were preparing to make their journey to Bethlehem. Look at verse 19, it says, “Then they both went until they came to Bethlehem.” Now, a trip from Moab to Bethlehem, was approximately 50 miles. On foot, it would have taken, give or take, about seven days during this time to go from Moab back to Bethlehem would have involved descending about 4,500 feet in elevation from Moab into the Jordan Valley. Then ascending another 3,500 feet through the hills of Judea, to get up to Bethlehem. It would have been a long journey and a taxing journey, for two women in making their way through this part of the land, in this part of history. But they made it, still in verse 19, it says:
“Now it happened, when they had come to Bethlehem, all the city was stirred because of them, and the women said, ‘Is this Naomi?’”

Now, remember, ten years have passed between what we see in verse 1 and what we see now in verse 19. But apparently the people in Bethlehem, the women, specifically, they still knew who Naomi was. They remembered her, they welcomed her back, as one would welcome back an old friend. Now, the way the question is phrased there, at the end of verse 19, “Is this Naomi?” Suggests that Naomi had undergone some noticeable changes in her physical appearance over the span of ten years, and no doubt for the worse. The ten years of sojourning in Moab the ten years of working out in the sun in the fields the more recent events of grief, which had surely warned some lines in her face they took their toll. The hard life she had lived over the past decade had taken its toll, and the people in Bethlehem noticed that it was her, but she looked different.

Well, she replies to her fellow Bethlehemites in verse 20. And as she does so, we note that she’s revealing some of her deep-seated hurts, which had taken deep root in her heart. Verse 20:
“She said to them, ‘Do no call me Naomi; call me Mara, for the Almighty has dealt very bitterly with me.”
So, Naomi’s bitterness and grief, which we saw back in verse 13, had reared its ugly head, was still there. It had never gone away. Though her name, Naomi, literally in Hebrew, means “pleasant”, which was fitting of a former time for her that name didn’t fit her anymore. Now, she’s presented here as this bitter old woman, who was, not only bitter, but is now blaming God for these feelings of bitterness. In fact, she outright accuses God, at the end of verse 20, where she says, “. . . the Almighty has dealt very bitterly with me.”

But she wasn’t done. She continues on and says in verse 21:
“I went out full, but Yahweh has caused me to return empty.”
Now, here what she’s referring to is how when she left Bethlehem to go to Moab in the first place, she had a husband, and she had two sons. They all left Bethlehem with her, to go to Moab. But in Moab, she lost all three of them to death. So, she’s now believing herself to be empty-handed. But was that true? Was that actually the case? Was Naomi returning to Bethlehem with empty hands? Had not God’s spared her? Had not God spared her of death and calamity, beyond the death of her family members? Naomi was still there. She still had life and breath and movement and being. Wasn’t Ruth standing right there next to Naomi, in this scene? Who had declared this lifelong covenant and pledge to Naomi? Wasn’t God still there? Wasn’t God still good? Wasn’t He, in fact, still Yahweh, the very God who had brought Naomi out of her homeland, to Moab, but now back to her homeland, where there was no longer any famine, but there was now food? Well, Naomi wasn’t able to see it. She couldn’t see past her own feelings of loneliness and helplessness, and bitterness. Her bitterness continued to bubble over in the rest of verse 21, where in speaking to her fellow Bethlehemites, she says:
“Why do you call me Naomi? Yahweh has answered against me, and the Almighty has brought calamity against me.” So, her complaint here in verses 20 and 21 both begins and ends with this reference to “the Almighty.” El Shaddai, the name of the all-powerful God of heaven and earth. The God who she worshiped. Although she rightfully acknowledged God here, as “the Almighty” two different times. At best, she didn’t seem to believe that He actually was Almighty. At worst, she seemed to believe that God was channeling His might and His power and His strength against her. She really seemed to believe that God had it out for her.

Now, as believers today, we regularly repeat that expression of Paul, in Romans 8:3, “. . . if God is for us, who is against us?”
That is like an anchor, a ballast of our hope. But for Naomi, as least in this moment, she had this very warped view of God and His love. For her, it was almost as though God had played some sort of mean trick on her. That He had pulled out the rug from underneath her. Perhaps, in her view, because she didn’t think He loved her anymore. Well, as we’ll soon see we know that wasn’t the case. We know, and this is a transcendent truth, spanning generations, spanning testaments, that God loves those whom He has called. He loves them to the very end, and He allows those whom He loves to be afflicted at different times, to sharpen them and mold them into His image, for His glory.

Well, the chapter concludes this way, in verse 22, it says:
“So, Naomi returned, and with her Ruth the Moabitess, her daughter-in-law, who returned from the fields of Moab. Now they came to Bethlehem at the beginning of barley harvest.”
Now, Naomi had originally left Bethlehem, recall, along with her husband Elimelech because of a famine, because of a shortage in food. But here in verse 22, we’re already receiving this divine signal that the fortunes of these two women were about to reverse. They were about to turn. While Naomi thought that she was returning to Bethlehem empty-handed in reality, she wasn’t. She had her life. She had Ruth, right there alongside her. She had God, whether she wanted to acknowledge Him or not. Her ever-present God, right there with her. And as she returned to Bethlehem, we see here this interesting detail, at the end of verse 22, that there are these grains of barley now ripe and ready to pluck. Signaling the fact that there was hope.

Recall how we started this morning, with that hymn by William Cowper “God Moves in a Mysterious Way.” As we wind down our study of Ruth 1 today, and prepare next week, to go into Ruth 2. I think it’d be appropriate to finish where we started:

“God moves in a mysterious way, His wonders to perform; he plants his footsteps in the sea, and rides upon the storm.”
“Deep in unfathomable mines, of never-failing skill; he fashions up his bright designs and works his sovereign will.”
“Ye fearful saints fresh courage take, the clouds that you much dread, are big with mercy and will break in blessings on your head.”
“Judge not the Lord by feeble sense but trust him for his grace; behind a frowning providence, he hides a smiling face.”
Amen.
Next week, we’ll see more of God’s smile, than we will the frown.
Let’s pray.

Father, we thank You for this chance this morning, to get into the book of Ruth, and see how You worked at a specific time, with a specific people, and a specific group of people in a way that might buck conventional wisdom. But You, through Your providential dealings and Your providential hand, caused all things to work for good. We look at this text, and we look through the lens, of course, of the cross, and we see how You would bring events to their appointed end, with the death and the resurrection of Jesus. But, God, I praise You for putting this story here for us to consider. Because it’s one that does have truth, that we can take home with us, as we think about the hidden hand of God in our lives. In dark times. In troubling times. In trying times. Help us to take this account, this biblical account of Naomi and Elimelech and Ruth and the rest. And apply it to our lives, as we remember how You do work sovereignly. You do work providentially through details and circumstances that we may be overlooking. But ultimately, what it does, is it magnifies Your power, Your strength, Your mercy and Your grace in our lives. May we come away, be comforted and encouraged by the truths we learned today and bring You glory in our lives this week. We pray in Jesus’ name. Amen