CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL NOTES.—
Ruth 1:1. Now] Heb. ו vau, and. The same introcopula between all the books of the O. T. so far, except in the opening of Deuteronomy, which begins abruptly. Keil (1 Kings 1:1) says the use of this conjunction at the beginning of a writing is a sure sign of its connection with another book. It came to pass in the days when the judges ruled (judged). וֵיְהִי The imperfect with van consec, simply attaches itself to a completed action, which has either been mentioned before, or is supposed to be well known (Ewald). Assigns a particular period. Shows also a different state of things [monarchy] existed around the writer. Time of the judges generally a troubled time. Spent to a large extent under the usurpation of neighbouring nations. Towards its end Israel had fearfully degenerated (Judges 21:25). Does not necessarily imply a judge ruled when Elimelech left the country (Lawson). A famine in the land] Threatened, Leviticus 26:19-20; Deuteronomy 28:23-24 Recognised as a Divine instrument of punishment, 2 Samuel 24:13-14; Ezekiel 5:16; Amos 4:6-7. That it did not extend to Moab favours this idea. Said by some to have been caused by an incursion of the Midianites (see Judges 6:3-4) by the Philistines (Cox). Josephus says it was in the days of Eli (see Intro., par. 10–12). Solomon’s prayer concerning famine (1 Kings 8:35-37). Christians’ duty during (Acts 11:28). A more terrible famine (Amos 8:11), when men shall seek the word of God, and shall not find it. And a certain man (Heb. And a man) of Bethlehem-Judah] To distinguish it from another Bethlehem in Zebulon. Means, House of Bread. Ancient name Ephrata (fruitful), though this may have applied to the district as far as Jerusalem. Now called Beit-Lahm, or Beit-el-ham (Mansford). Rachel died here. David and Christ born here. Hepworth Dixon advances the theory that both may have been born in the house which is mentioned Ruth 3:3. (See note on that verse; also Dixon’s “Holy Land.”) References to Bethlehem in the book of Judges mournful ones (Judges 17:7; Judges 19:1-2). The turn of the narrative here same as in the former (Speaker’s Commentary). Favours the idea that the writer was the same. Went to sojourn] Expresses correctly the meaning of the Heb., which signifies “to tarry as a stranger in a place.” Isaac was forbidden this method of relief from famine (Genesis 26:2), when he would have followed the example of Abraham in going down to Egypt (Genesis 12:10). Israelites generally much attached to their own land. In the country (field or fields) of Moab] Bertheau maintains, we have in שְׂדְי only another way of writing שִׂדְה the singular (Ruth 1:6). Keil, Gesenius, Fürst, look upon it as a form of the plural. The same style of expression used of Moab (Genesis 36:35; Numbers 21:20; 1 Chronicles 1:46). Moab connected with Israelites in the days of Ehud (Judges 3:12-20). Continued to be an asylum for them (comp. 1 Samuel 22:3-4; Isaiah 16:14; Jeremiah 40:11-12). Israelites held places of trust there (1 Chronicles 4:22-23). David sent his father and mother there. Moabites descendants of Lot (Genesis 19:37), and worshippers of Chemosh. Their inheritance spared to them by command of God, when Israel entered into the land. This may account for the friendship with Israel, and in favour of the earlier date ascribed by Lightfoot and others to book of Ruth (see Intro., par. 10, 12). Moabites not admitted into the congregation of the Lord until the tenth generation, on account of their disgraceful origin. For description, etc., see Intro., par. 13. He, and his wife, and his two sons] Sarah went with Abraham (Genesis 12:18) into Egypt. Rachel and Leah left their country with Jacob. The family of importance (Ruth 2:3), well known in Bethlehem (ch Ruth 1:19, and Ruth 4:1). See notes on Ruth 1:2.
HOMILIES AND OUTLINES
CHAPTER 1— Ruth 1:1
Theme—THE FAMINE AND EXILE
Now [and] it came to pass. Simple phrases bear the marks of a nation’s way of thinking. Language has been called fossil thought, poetry. Here the Hebrew faith in an overruling hand. Not by chance, but by the orderly unfolding of events. A common scriptural form of introduction; simple, dignified, yet how much it may express.
I. View it simply as a statement of facts. (a) These things happened. The phrase introductory to a remarkable life; singled out from many others. Much not considered worthy of record. Lives of which the Scripture takes no note, written in the record kept until the last great day. Events which have dropped even from the pages of inspired history. Note: When God is silent, it is not wise to speak (Welsh Proverb).
But these things come within the scope of revelation—(α) for wise purposes. God saw fit to transmit the knowledge of them for our edification (2 Timothy 3:16). Paul bids us look to Christ, yet learn of those who through faith and patience, etc. (Hebrews 6:12). (β) For gracious purposes. Here are links in the chain, and the end is Christ. The way leads through Moab back again to Bethlehem.
(b) These things happened by the hand and providence of God. The theocratic aspect is not prominent in the book of Ruth (Davidson). But it is there. A special hand of God in all this business, beyond man’s purpose and thought (R. Bernard). The story of Ruth is an impertinence in Scripture, unless we believe in a special providence. This everywhere taken for granted in the Divine word. God in profane history, much more then in sacred. God in every life. The very absence of what is called the religious element has its significance. The book beautifully enforces what Wordsworth calls “natural piety.” But more particularly amid these seemingly commonplace events a Divine purpose and plan. “While the judges were ruling, some one city, and some another, Providence takes particular cognizance of Bethlehem, and has an eye to a King, to Messiah Himself” (M. Henry).
II. See in it a subtle connection between cause and effects.
In those days of ungodliness this happened. The judges ruled, but every man did right in his own eyes (Judges 21:25). Religion corrupted, worship decayed, idolatry common; and here are the results. When sin is ripe, vengeance is ready.
Notice (a) National life affects individual history. We cannot separate ourselves from our surroundings; are members one of another in many senses. We prosper or we suffer together in times of Divine visitation.
(b) Life as it stands towards God influences life as it stands towards men. All life an unfolding, a coming to pass. But how? Look for the seeds within, around, in the past; but look above for the hand overruling and bringing to pass. God of His most dear justice hath decreed the sum of all discipline (Cyprian). Divine law in the natural world immutable, so in the spiritual. The world of morals sways the sceptre over the world of circumstances. Every other view of life practical atheism. Do we believe it? rather, do we live as though we believed it? In prosperity we are commonly like hogs feeding on the mast, not minding his hand that shaketh it down; in adversity, like dogs biting the stone, not marking the hand that threw it (Fuller).
IMPROVEMENT. By-and-by our life will be summed up in this short sentence, “It came to pass;” the pilgrimage a road with many turnings, but all mapped out. The “to be” will be the “has been.” And to what issues? Doubtless a link in some chain or other. Ruth’s is joined to Israel’s, to David’s, to Christ’s. A Gentile from the outer darkness brought within the hope of Israel. Gospel mercy foreshadowed so far back in the unfolding of events. In God’s time, “it came to pass.” Fuller says, “To typify the calling of the Gentiles, as He took of the blood of a Gentile into His body, so He should shed His blood out of His body for the Gentiles, that there might be one Shepherd and one sheepfold”—a quaint conceit, but enshrining precious truth. The ingathering had begun to work itself out in this “coming to pass.” The ingathering is going on now. How do we stand as towards it? Linked with Israel’s hope, or—? What is the life unfolding? A history of one whom God has chosen, and who has chosen God? or the sad story of one who has wandered into strange lands, leaving behind him the home and the sanctuary of his fathers—wandered to die amid his wanderings? or the story of one who did run well for awhile like Orpah? Which is it?
“It is our fault that we look upon God’s ways and works by halves and pieces; and so we see often nothing but the black side.… We see Him bleeding His people, scattering parliaments, chasing away nobles and prelates, as not willing they should have a finger in laying one stone of His house; yet do we not see that in this dispensation the other half of God’s work makes it a fair piece?”—Rutherford.
“Life is all one unfolding, as of some quaint manuscript which now we may not be able to decipher, but which by-and-by will prove itself to the righteous a new Scripture full of the benedictions of God.”—B.
“The curtains of yesterday drop down, the curtains of to-morrow roll up, but yesterday and to-morrow both are. Time and space are not God, but creations of God. With God, as it is a universal HERE, so is it an everlasting NOW.”—Carlyle.
Theme—THE BEGINNING OF SORROWS
In the days when the judges ruled [judged], a famine, etc.
God takes the events into His own hands. While the judges are judging, God too is holding the balances. The times were evil. Six long servitudes, at least, mark the Divine displeasure at Israel’s sin. Sin deprived angels of heaven, Adam of Paradise, Cain of his honour, Reuben of his birthright, thousands of the land of Canaan (R. Bernard). Now it deprives Israel of food. A blessing promised on their land, their basket and their store, as long as they walked in His law (Leviticus 26:3-5; Deuteronomy 28:5). Evidently they had departed from that law. And now the presence of the godly in the land cannot avert the evil, as at Sodom. The fact that there are children in the households of Israel does not stay the Divine hand as at Nineveh. No place is exempt, not even Bethlehem. The rich suffer with the poor, for Elimelech belonged to a wealthy and honourable family.
See in this,
I. Designed punishment. Shall there be evil in a city, and the Lord hath not done it? God has many arrows in His quiver; the land may have rest, but it has not plenty (M. Henry). Famine, the peculiar instrument used—a very terrible one. David preferred the pestilence (2 Samuel 24:14). But no choice is given here.
Notice (a) God’s judgments come in a very natural way. The wonted streams dry up possibly from very apparent causes—easy to understand, easy to explain. A drought or an inroad of the enemy may have caused this. But beyond natural causes, another reason—behind Nature, GOD. He turns a fruitful land into barrenness, because of the wickedness of them that dwell therein (Psalms 107:34).
(b) There is always something special in them worthy our attention. Esau, despising his birthright, lost it. Lot, led of his lust into Sodom, had to leave behind all for which he lusted. Judas perished “in the midst” of the field he had purchased with the price of blood. (See Alford on Acts 1:8.) A sad irony often in the history of sinners and their sins. So here, a famine in the land flowing with milk and honey! No bread in Bethlehem, the house of bread! And more, Moab has plenty while Israel is pinched with penury.
(c) There is always a reason which stands out in connection with them. God had said expressly He would deal with Israel after this fashion. Famine was to be to them one especial mark of His displeasure (Leviticus 26:19-20). Moab may have ease, not so Israel (Jeremiah 15:11; Jeremiah 48:11); for Moab is as the unregenerate, his taste for earthly enjoyment and sensual gratification unchanged. The wicked have their portion in this life, but Christ says woe to them (Luke 6:25; Amos 6:1). And Paul reasons of such, “Then are ye bastards, and not sons.”
See in this,
II. Necessary discipline. Chastisement meant discipline with Israel. Jehovah explains the weary wilderness privations as intended “to prove thee, to know what was in thine heart.” This famine has a like explanation (Judges 2:20-22), if it resulted either from a Midianitish or Philistine invasion, as is probable. (See Notes and Introduction.) The prodigal child was brought from the keeping of harlots to the keeping of hogs (Fuller). And why? The “I will arise” explains and justifies “the hungering in a far country.” So always. Christ for mere trial sometimes, for sin at other times, doth cover Himself with a cloud (Rutherford). Whatever the reason, the Divine purpose the same—discipline.
(a) Notice the different forms this discipline may take, as illustrated by the narrative. Want, scarcity of provisions, possibly hunger, and these leading to loss of worldly possessions and the family patrimony, absence from the sanctuary, wanderings in strange lands, years of exile, death to most of them in a foreign land. A similar epitome might be made of many a family history—
“They grew in beauty side by side,
They filled one home with glee;
Their graves are scattered far and wide,
By mount and stream and sea.”—Mrs. Hemans.
(b) Notice the severity of this particular form. Hunger a most trying test. Any kind of deprivation is. The same cause sent Abraham and Jacob into Egypt, Isaac to Gerah. Even Christ must feel its pangs when He is led into the wilderness to be tempted.
IMPROVEMENT. The dispensations of Providence strange—sovereign, even punitive. Can we see this other thing, that they are disciplinary (“Whom the Lord loveth,” etc., Hebrews 12:6), and may be beneficial? This last aspect depends largely upon ourselves. He is dealing with us in one way or other. If not by famine, then by our very abundance; if not by plenty, then perhaps by penury. And to what effect? Driving us towards Moab; away from the sanctuary; away from all that links us with the people of God? There is this sad possibility, and the narrative which follows may warn us of this. Or ripening us for that land where there is no hunger? tribulation working patience, etc. (Romans 5:3).
Topsell treats the passage—
I.
That the corruption of religion and the neglect of the worship of God is the cause of all His judgments.
II.
That the Lord is true in His judgments as in His mercies (Deuteronomy 28:23-24; Psalms 145:17; 2 Thessalonians 1:6).
Bernard—
I.
That people deprive themselves by their sins, of that which God had given, and they enjoyed, according to His promise.
II.
That a fruitful land is made barren for the sins of the inhabitants thereof.
III.
That judgment begins at the house of the Lord.
Fuller derives the following uses [lessons]:—
I.
Let us practise that precept, “Babes, keep yourselves from idols” (1 John 5:21).
II.
Let us be heartily thankful to God for our plenty.
III.
Let us pray with David, “Deliver us from blood-guiltiness.”
IV.
Let us be pitiful and liberal to relieve the distresses of the poor.
“Burckhardt states that in Nejd in Arabia famines like these recur at intervals of from ten to fifteen years.”—Wordsworth.
“The Athenian women had a custom to make a picture of famine every year, and to drive it out of their city with these words: ‘Out famine, in food; out penury, in plenty!’ But let us say in word, and second it in deed. ‘Out sin, in sanctity; out profaneness, in piety:’ and then we shall see that as long as our king reigneth, there shall be no famine in our land.… Is this the land whereof it is said, ‘Asher his bread shall be fat, and afford dainties for a king’ (Genesis 49:20), which is called ‘a good land of wheat and barley, vineyards and fig trees, oil, olive, and honey’ (Deuteronomy 8:7); which is commended (Ezekiel 20:6) to be ‘a land flowing with milk and honey, the glory of all lands’?… The people’s hard hearts were rebellious to God, and the hard earth proved unprofitable to them; their flinty eyes would afford no tears to bemoan their sins, and the churlish heavens would afford no moisture to wake their earth; man proved unfaithful to God his Maker; the earth proved unfaithful to man her manurer.”—Fuller.
“Think not that the fertility of a land is able to secure its inhabitants against famine, or that any earthly advantage is suflicient to secure us against any calamity whatsoever. All things are in the hands of God, and His creatures change their qualities or effects at His pleasure.”—Lawson.
“A clear and striking proof that here is no continuing city or place of abode, and shews the necessity of our seeking a city which hath foundations, the builder and maker of which is God. For if a man be ever so agreeably situated in the midst of plenty, Divine Providence can soon drive him from his rest, and reduce him to the disagreeable necessity of depending upon the bounty of even the wicked themselves, who are. like Moab, for ever shut out from the sanctuary of Jenovah.”—Macgowan.
“When afflictions fail to have their due effect, the case is desperate.”—Bolingbroke.
“Suffering seasons have generally been sifting seasons, in which the Christian has lost his chaff, and the hypocrite his courage.”—Secker.
“There is a deep truth contained in the fabled story of old, where a mother, wishing to render her son invulnerable, plunged him into the Styx, but forgot to dip in his heel, by which she held him. We are baptized in the blood and fire of sorrow, that temptation may make us invulnerable; but let us remember that trials will assail us in our most vulnerable part, be it the head, or heart, or heel.”—Robertson.
Theme—THE DEPARTURE FROM HOME
“Some natural tears they dropped, but wiped them soon;
The world was all before them, where to choose
Their place of rest, and Providence their guide.”—Milton.
And a certain man of Bethlehem went to sojourn in the country [fields] of Moab.
An exile leaving Bethlehem, like Dante leaving his beloved Florence. To this man also nunquam revocare. He dies in exile. God’s providences often unexplained in this life—await the clearer light of eternity. Some blame Elimelech’s going to Moab. Possibly self-exiled. But no man ought to be condemned without proofs of guilt, and no certain proofs appear in the present case (Lawson). Israelites were not prohibited sojourning in a strange land. David dwelt in Gath. Sent his father and mother for protection into Moab. What if a kindred necessity impelled Elimelech?
I. Suggests the mutability of human affairs. (a) We must expect changes in this world, changes which make life Mara (Ruth 1:20). While Moab is at ease, Israel is to be poured from vessel to vessel. Elimelech an Israelite, and they were much attached to their land—dwelt in the most fertile part of the country, probably a rich man (see notes), and yet in his old age he must become a wanderer. No condition of life, no circumstances, no experience, can exempt us. (b) We cannot always dwell where we wish. David must sojourn in the tents of Kedar, leave city and palace behind, and flee to the wilderness. El must go down to Moab, Joseph to Egypt. Nay, touches the holiest: Christ Himself a wanderer, “not having where to lay His head.”
II. Presents a picture of restlessness under affliction.
Sight, not faith, guides Elimelech. The sublime trust which waits upon God in these hours of peril seemingly absent. The promise to Israel, “Thou shalt eat bread without scarceness” (Deuteronomy 8:9). To us, “Rest in the Lord; wait patiently for Him; verily thou shalt be fed” (Psalms 37:3; Psalms 37:7). “In the days of famine thou shalt be satisfied” (Ruth 1:19).
Outward appearances against the promises. Faith weak—he went down to Moab. Some suggest desire after gain led him. Dr. Cumming thinks that he fled from the sight of poverty and want around him. He went out “full.” Certainly strong reasons demanded for a change like this. Otherwise God says to such, “Why gaddest thou about so much to change thy ways?” (Jeremiah 2:36.)
Restlessness a very common sin. At the first approach of trial men grow impatient; seek a change in outward circumstances, or in doctrine; become offended even with Christ Himself (John 6:66).
Note.—One single restraint made Adam a wanderer from God. (See outlines on Ruth 1:2.)
And
III. May illustrate spiritual declension.
Elimelech a wealthier man than many of his neighbours, who bore the brunt of famine rather than expose their children to the seductions of heathen license (Cox). If all should do as he did, Canaan would be dispeopled (M. Henry). What was the cause in his case? Did he value the sanctuary privileges less, or the good things of this world more than they?
Note a principle in this. Men go down to Moab,
(a) Because the promised land itself seems to yield them scanty supplies. The narrow way not attractive in itself. A gospel that says by the mouth of its Master, “Sell all that thou hast,” and by one of its chief apostles, “Silver and gold have I none”—a service which demands honesty, though honesty should prove to be other than the best policy—truthfulness, though truth be an offence—must seem meagre in its rewards, alas to how many! They follow for awhile, charmed by the novelty of Christ’s kingdom. Sooner or later He is seen as “one not having where to lay His head,” a “root out of a dry ground.” Human nature asks large things (2 Kings 5:13). His gospel has chosen the weak things and things which are not (1 Corinthians 12:27-28). Scanty supplies a great secret of spiritual declension.
(b) Because of the rich abundance inviting them there. Possibly pinched by famine, and in all probability fearing to lose his flocks and herds, the rich grass lands on the other side of the Dead Sea proved irresistible to this man. Lot went down to dwell among the wicked cities of the plain for similar reasons—led of his own spirit and of his own judgment. To both men the journey was as disastrous as it was tempting. So Judas, Demas. Abundance is not everything. The world may seem to have it, does seem to have it even to the righteous (see Psalms 37:35; Psalms 73:5; Psalms 73:7; Psalms 73:12). A blight always upon it when the righteous seek it. Elimelech goes down to Moab to die there. Lot has to escape from Sodom “as by fire.” The young man who came to our Lord went away “sorrowful.”
Fuller observes: “It is lawful for men to leave their native soil, and to travel into a foreign country; as—
I.
For merchants, provided always that, while they seek to make gainful adventures for their estates, they make not ‘shipwreck of a good conscience.’
II.
For ambassadors, that are sent to see the practices and negotiations in foreign courts.
III.
For private persons that travel with an intent to accomplish themselves with a better sufficiency to serve their king and country.”
Bernard observes:
I.
No place is exempt from punishment, where sin is suffered to reign.
II.
God can remove, by one means or another, men out of their homes and harbour. No man may think himself securely settled.
III.
Fear of corporal wants will make men leave their homes, their native soil, their friends and kindred. How much more, then, for the love of eternal life, should we be willing to forsake all!”
Topsell—We note,
I.
It is lawful for the godly, in the time of necessity, to crave help or relief of the very enemies of God, so they be not polluted with their superstitions.
II.
That the Lord doth ever provide for His faithful servants in all their miseries. Joseph sent beforehand to provide for his brethren (Genesis 41:45); Obadiah, who hid fifty of the prophets, and fed them in a cave (1 Kings 18:13); Elijah provided for (1 Kings 17:4-10; see also 2 Corinthians 4:8-9).
“When we go from home, it depends entirely on the will of God whether we shall arrive at the place of our destination. When we are in it, it depends no less on the Divine pleasure whether we shall ever again see the place from which we went out. ‘A man’s heart deviseth his way, but the Lord directeth his steps.’ Beware of bringing upon yourselves the punishment that came upon the proud King of Babylon, because he did not glorify that God in whose hand his breath was, and whose were all his ways. Do not say that to-morrow you will go into such a city, and buy, and sell, and get gain. Say rather if the Lord will.”—Lawson.
“It is an evidence of a discontented, distrustful, unstable spirit, to be weary of the place in which God has set us, and to be for leaving it immediately whenever we meet with any uneasiness or inconvenience in it. It is a folly to think of escaping that cross which, being laid in our way, we ought to take up. It is our wisdom to make the best of that which is, for it is seldom that changing our place is mending it.”—Matt. Henry.
“Now if any do demand of me my opinion concerning our brethren, which of late left this kingdom to advance a plantation in New England, surely I think as St. Paul said concerning virgins, he had ‘received no commandment of the Lord;’ so I cannot find any just warrant to encourage men to undertake this removal; but think rather the counsel best that King Joash prescribed to Amaziah, ‘Tarry at home.’ Yet, as for those that are already gone, far be it from us to conceive them to be such to whom we may not say God speed.’ I conclude, therefore, of the two Englands, what our Saviour saith of the two wines (Luke 5:39). ‘No man having tasted of the old presently desireth the new; for he saith, The old is better.’ ”—Fuller.
“The merchant, having obtained his bank, promiseth rest and security to himself; the husbandman, having gathered his fruits, never doubteth but he shall spend them, and provideth for more; the gentleman coming to his lands, thinketh his revenues and pleasant life will endure alway, like the apostles when Christ was transfigured in the Mount, presently they would build tabernacles of residence; but as the cloud came betwixt them and heaven, and bereaved them of their purpose, even so suddenly will death come and deprive you of your profits, call the merchant from his bank, the husbandman from his farm, the gentleman from his land, the prince from his kingdom.”—Topsell.
“Sometimes it dimly dawns upon us, when we see other men’s mischiefs and wrongs, that we are in the same category with them, and that perhaps the storms which have overtaken them will overtake us also. But it is only for a moment; for we are artful to cover the ear, and not listen to the voice that warns us of our danger,”—Beecher.
“What is this passing scene?
A peevish April day!
A little sun, a little rain,
And then night sweeps along the plain,
And all things fade away.
Man (soon discussed)
Yields up his trust,
And all his hopes and fears lie with him in the dust.
Then since this world is vain,
And volatile and fleet,
Why should I lay up earthly joys,
Where dust corrupts, and moth destroys,
And cares and sorrows eat?
Why fly from ill
With anxious skill,
When soon this hand will freeze, this throbbing heart be still?”
Kirke White.
“There are evils worse than famine. What is the real misfortune of life? sin or want of food? sickness or selfishness? And when I see Isaac (Genesis 26) gaining from his want of food the heart to bear up and bear right onward, I can understand that the land of famine may be the land of promise, and just because it is the land of famine.”—Robertson.
“People do not leave their country for a mere whim. To forsake the homestead where the boys were born, to bid farewell to familiar well-tried friends, to leave the spot made sacred by religious worship, for a heathen country—it is hard! very hard! Elimelech and Naomi must have felt this.… These involuntary emigrants hoped to return speedily—when times were better. Little did they dream that three out of the four would be lying in their graves before ten years had passed. Their farewell was a final one. Oh! these plans of ours, what folly they appear to us when we look back to see how one touch has ruined them all! Our designs always need ‘if the Lord will’ written right across the face of them.”—Braden.
“One month in the school of affliction will teach thee more than the great precepts of Aristotle in seven years; for thou canst never judge rightly of human affairs, unless thou hast first felt the blows and found out the deceits of fortune.”—Fuller.
“Probably this family held on, trusting that prosperity would again smile; but it came not, and hope faded away. What were they to do? Terrible question! Crops gone, cattle gone; starvation stared them in the face.”—Braden.
Theme—FAMILY CHANGES
“Urged by remembrance sad, and decent pride,
Far from those scenes which knew their better days.”
He, and his wife, and his two sons
Touches the whole household. The children bear the burden as well as their parents. In times of scarcity, the family a heavy burden. Christ uses this as an extreme case, “Woe to them that are with child and give suck in those days!” (Matthew 24:19.)
We have here,
I. An important step in the family history. Not lawful unless there had been a public calamity or some great private necessity (Maimonides). Nothing but necessity can dispense with a local relinquishing of God’s church, not pleasure, nor profit, nor curiosity (Bishop Hall). In moments like these, go not before God and Providence, but follow Him (Rutherford).
II. A united household in these trying times. Domestic union in the midst of the greatest distresses. Nothing can separate those whom God has joined. Grace finds its most appropriate sphere in the family life. Husbands and wives who aim at separate interests reproved here. Naomi willing to go even to a strange land. Saw the necessity. She was one of those wives whose law is their husband’s will in all things wherein the laws of God leave them at liberty (Lawson). A man and his wife should be like the two wheels of a chariot (Hindoo Proverb).
III. A parent’s responsibility in these critical changes. The results of Elimelech’s conduct were not confined to himself. His children either gained or suffered by it. No man lives to himself, sins to himself.
His care for his wife and children to be commended (1 Timothy 5:8). Did not leave them as the ostrich, to care for themselves (Job 39:16). He acted kindly, did he act wisely? One thing certain, his responsibility was increased by going down to Moab, where temptation was sure to assail his children. Possible to live like Joseph in Pharaoh’s court, but how difficult!
“All worship not at idol feasts,
Whose lot it is to live in idol lands.”
David in his exile. Daniel and the three Hebrew children in Babylon. But how few come out untainted! Lot’s children seem to have carried the defilement with them when they left Sodom (Genesis 19).
This man went to sojourn, not to stay. God did not forsake him. The wanderers were fed. Josephus speaks of his “happy prosperity” in the land of Moab. There is a law of compensation, however, in connection with all this. He died there. His children married Moabitish women, and then died in exile. His wife returned empty to that place she had left (Ruth 1:21).
“The religious man may be considered in his family as the key-stone to the arch.”—Salter.
“Is such a man a Christian?” was asked of Whitefield. “How should I know?” was the answer; “I never lived with him.”
“The very tigress fostereth her young, and the helpless hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and exerts the full extent of her feeble powers in their defence.”—Macgowan.
“The godly in old time knew that their wives and children were as themselves; and as they were careful to cherish their own bodies, so they were mindful to nourish their own families.”—Topsell.
“An honest man careth for his wife and children as well as for himself.”—Bernard.
“We see the flesh of fishes remaineth fresh, though they always swim in the brackish waters.”—Fuller.
“If Elimelech had made inquiry, it is probable he would have found plenty in some of the tribes of Israel; and if he had had that zeal for God and His worship, and that affection for his brethren which became an Israelite, he would not have persuaded himself so easily to go and sojourn in Moab.”—M. Henry.
“Life is the first thing. God wishes no man to starve; and if his circumstances are such that, by remaining in them, he must suffer want and death, his path is clear—he must depart. Bishop Hall quaintly says, ‘the Creator and Possessor of the earth hath not confined any man to his necessary destruction.’ It may be our duty, in order to save ourselves from pecuniary difficulties, to sever the dearest ties.”—Braden.
“Now the devil knoweth that this is a blow at the root, and a ready way to prevent the succession of churches; if he can subvert families, other societies and communities will not long flourish and subsist with any power and vigour; for there is the stock from whence they are supplied both for the present and future.”—Manton.
“Families are societies that must be sanctified to God, as well as churches; and the governors of them have as truly a charge of the souls that are therein, as pastors have of churches. But, alas! how little is this considered or regarded! But while negligent ministers are (deservedly) cast out of their places, the negligent masters of families take themselves to be almost blameless. They offer their children to God in baptism, and there they promise to teach them the doctrine of the gospel, and bring them up in the nurture of the Lord; but they easily promise and easily break it; and educate their children for the world and the flesh, although they have renounced these, and dedicated them to God. This covenant-breaking with God, and betraying the souls of their children to the devil, must lie heavy on them here and hereafter. They beget children and keep families merely for the world and the flesh; but little consider what a charge is committed to them, and what it is to bring up a child for God, and govern a family as a sanctified society.”—Westminster Confession of Faith.
“Home is the chief school of human virtue. Its responsibilities, joys, sorrows, smiles, tears, hopes, and solicitudes form the chief interest of human life.”—Channing.