The Return to Bethlehem: God’s Unfailing Loving-Kindness Displayed

By Nathan Harlan

Introduction

When we left Naomi last, she had lost her husband and her sons in judgment for Elimelech’s faithless decision to move his family to Moab from Israel. She was left an impoverished widow with only her barren Moabite daughter-in-laws to comfort her in a foreign land. Her story should have ended there, but it did not. By the gracious hand of God the famine had ended in Israel, and so to would He, by His unfailing loving-kindness, soon bring an end to Naomi’s emptiness.

With meager hope Naomi arises, her daughters-in-law in tow, to return the Promised Land, the land of famine now made fruitful by the grace of God. Hear the Word of the Lord. [read Ruth 1:7-22]

I.)Return to the homes of your mothers (vv. 7-11)

In this passage the author changes the pace of the story, from the rather abrupt account of verses 1-6, to a far more detailed description and careful consideration of what followed. Up until now, we’ve been told very little about Naomi, Ruth, or Orpah; it is on the road back to Bethlehem that we shall see how very different all three are.

v. 7: So she set out… with her two daughters-in-law… to return to the land of Judah.

For Naomi, the choice to return to Israel would have been an easy one. She was desperate, and what little hope she had was to be found in Israel and Israel alone.

The same was not true for Ruth and Orpah. Moab was their home, and there was hope there for them. They were yet young and could have easily found husbands and led comfortable, prosperous lives in the land of Chemosh. The road to Israel – Naomi’s path – was filled with uncertainty and the threat of lasting poverty.

Even so, Ruth and Orpah, at least at the beginning, remain by Naomi’s side, determined to stay with her in spite of the uncertainties before them.

v. 8: …Go, return each of you to her mother’s house. May the LORD deal kindly with you, as you have dealt with the dead and with me…

Naomi recognizes the great kindness that Ruth and Orpah have shown she and her sons (the dead), and calls upon the Lord to show them the same hesed they have shown her. If you recall from last week, the Hebrew word hesed, in this context, refers to an act of unfailing loving-kindness. As Dr. K. Lawson Younger puts it, hesed refers to “an act performed for the benefit of a person in real and desperate need, in the context of a deep and enduring commitment between the parties concerned” (394).

Though she appreciated their kindness, Naomi also recognized that Ruth and Orpah would be better off in the homes of their respective mothers, rather than to wander in poverty with their destitute mother-in-law. With their mothers, they would have protection, provision, and the promise of a future; with Naomi, the only promise would be that of poverty.

v. 9: The LORD grant that you may find rest, each of you in the house of her husband!” Then she kissed them, and they lifted up their voices and wept.

Naomi adds another blessing to her first one, that Ruth and Orpah would be blessed with husbands. Her blessings are a disguised plea, even an argument, intended to discourage her daughters-in-law from staying with her. She has essentially told them to go home to their mothers and find husbands – an option that Naomi did not have, nor that she could offer to Ruth and Orpah - she had neither a house nor sons to marry them.

By kissing her daughters-in-law, Naomi was bidding them farewell, as was the custom in that day. We see how close the three have truly become over the last decade, as they weep over the prospect of leaving each other. The years of barrenness, the death of her sons, the threat of impoverishment – all of these things had brought these three women together, and cemented a deep love for each other in their hearts. Now, after all they had been through together, they would finally say good-bye forever? It is no wonder they wept.

v. 10: And they said to her, “No, we will return with you to your people.”

Ruth and Naomi here show the depth of their love for Naomi; even in the face of unending poverty, they insisted on remaining with her. As one commentator notes: “For Orpah and Ruth, going with Naomi would be choosing the road to nowhere, embracing the path that led to emptiness” (Duguid, p. 141).

v. 11: Turn back, my daughters… Have I yet sons in my womb?

And Naomi was determined to prevent Ruth and Orpah from walking that path. In vv. 11-13, she offers an impassioned argument intended to turn her daughters-in-law away; she is determined to return to Israel alone.

First, she points out that she has no more sons to marry; she cannot give Ruth and Orpah that one element so critical to their futures: husbands.

vv. 12-13a: Turn back… for I am too old to have a husband…

As her second argument, Naomi emphasizes the depth of her own desperation – even she does not have a husband, and she is too old to remarry! In order to make sure that her reasoning really ‘hits home,’ she goes one step further – even if, against all odds, she did remarry – even that very night! – and conceived sons, would Ruth and Orpah wait for them to grow into men? Of course not, for by then, Ruth and Orpah would themselves be “too old to marry.”

v. 13b: …it is exceedingly bitter to me for your sake that the hand of the LORD has gone out against me.”

Finally, Naomi appeals to the judgment that has befallen her family. It is the hand of God that has brought calamity upon her, and to stick with her would be to “doom oneself to her fate” (Younger, p. 422). It is almost as if Naomi is saying, “if you stay with me, worse things yet may happen, because God is against me.” She did not wish for Ruth and Orpah to suffer her fate.

While Naomi’s concern for her daughters-in-law is certainly praiseworthy, her lack of understanding at this point is not. It seems as if she still does not understand why God’s judgment fell upon her family. It was not as if the Lord was ‘out to get’ her, though it may have seemed that way at the time.

So we begin to see Naomi’s response to the Lord’s correction; it has not resulted in a broken and contrite heart, but in bitterness. This would have been an opportune place for her to confess the sin of moving to Moab, and yet she places the blame squarely on God’s shoulders, as if her family had not earned His judgment.

Neither is the hand of the Lord against her; He is actually with her, preserving her by His grace. In spite of Naomi’s apparent blindness to her Lord’s unfailing loving-kindness, He is still faithful to her, as the very next verse proves.

v. 14: Then they lifted up their voices and wept again. And Orpah kissed her mother-in-law, but Ruth clung to her.

Ruth and Orpah weep as the seamless logic of Naomi’s argument weighs upon them; the only sensible thing to do is to remain in Moab. In Moab there was the promise of marriage, children, and prosperity; in Israel, only the threat of perpetual widowhood, barrenness, and poverty.

In an odd irony, the tables are now in a sense turned for Naomi, Ruth, and Orpah. Whereas Naomi and her family were faced with the choice of remaining in the Promised Land during a time of famine or of moving to Moab, Ruth and Orpah are now instead faced with the opposite choice: remain in a land of promise, or leave for a land that promised nothing.

For Orpah, the choice was clear: she finally returns Naomi’s kiss, bidding her farewell, and departs. Like Elimelech, Orpah chose to do the sensible thing: she would not sacrifice the prosperity of Moab for the uncertainty of Israel. And it is here that Orpah’s story ends, with her sensible, seemingly wise decision to leave Naomi and to return to her mother’s house – and her gods.

The text does not condemn Orpah for her decision, but neither does it tell us any more about Orpah, the ‘sensible’ one who chose prosperity over poverty, Moab over Israel, and Chemosh over the One True God. As Dr. Iain Duguid comments, “The world’s wise choice to avoid emptiness leads in the end to a different kind of oblivion” (142).

There are echoes of another story, a much later story, heard within the very short story of Orpah. Do you recall the account of the rich young ruler, who in the Gospels, was called upon by our Lord to sell all in his possession, give it to the poor, and then follow Christ? How did that young man respond? He went away sad, because he had great wealth! And it was with his turning away from our Lord that his story forever ended, as Orpah’s story ends with her turning away from Naomi – and Naomi’s God.

How foolish does Ruth’s choice seem compared to the sensibility of Orpah! Not only does she remain with Naomi in the face of hopelessness, she clings to her.

In order to appreciate the magnitude of Ruth’s love for Naomi, and of her faith, we must understand the nature of this word “cling.”

In Hebrew, it is pronounced as davaq. This same word is used in Gen. 2:24, along with its opposite, to convey how a man’s relationship with his parents changes once he becomes a husband: Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

Thus, to “cling” implies abandoning one thing or group in order to become permanently enjoined to another. In clinging to Naomi, Ruth has abandoned Moab – and hope of a future there. It was not as if remaining with Naomi would have held any promise for Ruth – that was made clear by Naomi herself in the previous verses. As K. Lawson Younger notes: “Ruth’s faith defies human logic and wisdom” (425).

Ruth’s choice to remain with Naomi was grounded in selfless, sacrificial love – a love that could not be shaken by even the prospect of a life lived in complete impoverishment and childlessness.

v. 15: And she said, “See, your sister-in-law has gone back to her people and to her gods; return after your sister-in-law.”

Though Naomi’s exhortation to return to Moab seems to be in Ruth’s best interest, in truth, it reveals that Naomi is still reasoning according to the same logic as that of Elimelech and Orpah. She thought it would be better for Ruth to return to her people and her gods… such as the idol Chemosh.

How could Naomi advise Ruth, who desired to return to Israel with her, to return to her worship of idols? Because she yet failed to see that true blessing and lasting significance do not reside in having a husband and a future, but in being in a right relationship – in covenant – with the Living God.

Elimelech reasoned that it was better to live in the green fields of Moab than to go hungry in the Promised Land. Mahlon and Chilion reasoned that it was better to marry and remain in Moab than to return to Israel. Orpah thought it better to have a husband among the people of Chemosh than to be a widow among the people of the Living God. They all made the ‘sensible’ choice, and they all demonstrated great unbelief. In choosing prosperity and ease over obedience to the One True God, they brought their stories to an end.

And now Naomi urges Ruth to do the same, to return to the worship of Chemosh. It would seem, at this point, that Naomi was still following suit with Israel, “doing what was right” in her “own eyes.” Had Ruth taken Naomi’s advice, had she done what seemed right in her own eyes, her story would have ended as well, and Scripture never should have mentioned the women Naomi and Ruth.

But Ruth did not do what was right in her own eyes. It must have been a hard decision for her, and she must have looked long and hard at the fields of Moab, her mind filled with thoughts of what they promised. The uncertainty that lay ahead in Israel must have weighed heavily upon her heart, causing at least some part of her deep within to agree with Naomi. One can imagine that Ruth felt incredibly torn, especially at this point, with Orpah having just departed and Naomi encouraging her to return.

Two paths lay before Ruth; one, the path of prosperity, the sensible path – the path taken by Elimelech, Mahlon, Chilion, and Orpah; the other, the path of uncertainty, of hardship.

vv. 16-17: Do not urge me to leave you or to return from following you… Your people shall be my people, and your God my God…

Often following Christ means enduring hardship and uncertainty, of continuing to proclaim the goodness of God even in the midst of devastation. To do so is the way of true faith, the way of the cross. Here Ruth, the Moabitess, a former worshipper of Chemosh, in the midst of devastating loss and faithlessness, turns to the Living God, and entrusts herself to Him.

It is undeniable that saving faith had been born in the heart of Ruth at this point, for not only does she pledge that the God of Israel shall become her God, she reveals that He already is indeed her God.

This is apparent because she seals her commitment to Naomi in the name of the Lord, and in so doing demonstrated that she acknowledged the One True God as her Lord.

In the selfless act of Ruth, the unfailing loving-kindness of God toward Naomi is strikingly evident; His hand had not gone out against her, but was holding her up in grace – she was not alone, but was blessed with Ruth, whose sacrifice was no small thing.

As Dr. Duguid notes in regard to the great degree of Ruth’s sacrifice: “Given the intimate connection between land and deity in the ancient Near East, and the importance of proper burial for a restful afterlife, this was the ultimate commitment in the ancient world. She further binds herself to do this with an oath of self-imprecation. If she reneges on her promise, she invites the Lord – Naomi’s God – to stretch out his hand to strike her down. Here is an astonishing act of surrender and self-sacrifice. Ruth was laying her life down her entire life to serve Naomi” (142-43).

v. 18: And Naomi saw that she was determined to go with her, she said no more.

The Hebrew literally says that Naomi “stopped talking” to Ruth. No words of thanks, no praise offered to God in recognition of His unfailing loving-kindness. Naomi’s response to Ruth’s self-sacrifice, to her conversion, is mere silence.

Naomi’s silence reflects ingratitude on her part, and an embittered heart, as the following verses will reveal.

vv. 19-20: So the two of them went on until they came to Bethlehem… the whole town was stirred because of them. And the women said, “Is this Naomi?”

The people of Bethlehem are surprised to see Naomi return after being gone for so long. Notice that the “women” make no mention of Ruth, but ask only about Naomi. Ruth was undoubtedly recognized as a foreigner (Naomi had no daughters when she left Bethlehem), and would have depended totally upon Naomi for gaining acceptance in the eyes of the people of Bethlehem.

vv. 20-21: Do not call me Naomi; call me Mara… I went away full, and the LORD has brought me back empty.

Naomi offers no introduction of Ruth, nor does any praise to God escape her lips; her response to the women of Bethlehem is that of complaint against the Lord.

It is easy to see why Naomi would feel embittered after suffering the loss she had endured. One can understand why she felt that the Lord had testified against her, and left her a bitter old widow. This is why she called herself Mara.

In Exodus 15:22-27, following the Exodus from Egypt, Israel came to the bitter well by the name of Marah. It was there that they grumbled against Moses, just as here Naomi is grumbling against God. And how did the Lord respond to Israel’s grumbling, even after He had delivered them from Egypt by His mighty power? He responded with an act of hesed – He made the water sweet.

So it was with Naomi, though she grumbled against God, still He showed her His unfailing loving-kindness in giving her Ruth, who would turn out to be a source of blessing not only for Naomi, but for the entire world.

The Lord was indeed not bringing calamity upon Naomi, but great blessing! But the pain of her loss yet blinded her to His great loving-kindness, and so she grumbled. She could not see beyond her own pain, her own emptiness, and understand that through her devastation, the Lord was bringing forth redemption.

The same can be true for us as well. After suffering a great loss or disappointment, it can become very difficult to look beyond our pain to see what redemptive purposes our Lord is accomplishing through our suffering.

As Iain Duguid comments: “Like Naomi, we may be so busy complaining about our emptiness that we miss the fact that God has emptied our hands only in order to fill them with something so much better. Without Naomi’s emptiness, she would never have left Moab behind and returned to the land of promise. Had she stayed contentedly ‘full’ (as she thought) in Moab, Naomi would have missed out on the far greater blessing of a prime place in the history of redemption” (149).

Israel grumbled about the bitterness of the waters of Marah, though eventually God would bring them to Elim, “where there were twelve springs of water and seventy palm trees.” Naomi grumbled about the emptiness of her own life, though from the ruin of her family the Lord would eventually bring forth the Messiah.

There are times when our lives may seem bitter and empty, especially after suffering a painful hardship. It is at those dark times we may be tempted to grumble against the Lord, to claim that He has “testified against” us.

But we must remember that, like Naomi, we do not stand alone at those times. Just as the Lord provided Ruth for Naomi, so too has He given us One who stands with us, who, like Ruth, has pledged to remain with us, who said in Matt. 28:20, “behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.” And His body still bears the marks of His faithfulness.

It is during such times that we must take seriously the promise of Rom. 8:28 – a verse that has been made into a cliché by misapplication, and yet it is very true, as is proven in Ruth: And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to His purpose.

Something else that is encouraging about Naomi’s example is that though she was bitter and grumbled against God, He still maintained His loving-kindness toward her. Though she was for all intents and purposes faithless, He remained faithful to her. While this does not give us license to be faithless in the midst of suffering, it does remind us that though we may fall to the darkest depths of despair, the Lord will maintain His loving-kindness toward His people.

v. 22: So Naomi returned, and Ruth the Moabite her daughter-in-law with law… And they came to Bethlehem at the beginning of barley harvest.

Naomi and Ruth return at the beginning of the barley harvest, the beginning of the end of the famine, the beginning of a time of blessing in Israel. So would it mark the beginning of the end of Naomi’s bitter emptiness and Ruth’s barrenness. The house of Elimelech had been faithless unto God, and now the Lord would show His great loving-kindness by restoring a family that had been faithless to Him, not through merit, but by a redeemer.

Conclusion

As we’ve seen in the example of Ruth and Orpah, faithfully following God requires sacrifice; the path of obedience is the path of the cross. As we walk this path of obedience, we may suffer loss, face uncertainty, and risk our future. Despair may press upon us, and all hope may at times seem to be lost.

As we follow Christ, leaving Moab for the Promised Land, we must remember that we do not walk alone; just as Ruth remained with Naomi, so does our Lord remain with us. And no matter how desperate our circumstances may seem to us at the time, though the Lord may have ‘emptied’ us, it is only so that He may fill us all the more with His grace, and demonstrate His hesed – His unfailing loving-kindness – toward us.