TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Public-domain commentary
Matthew Henry
From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry comments on passages, not single verses — this entry covers Ruth 1:1–5. His two-level outline is real structure in the source text, so it is rendered as structure.
The first words give all the date we have of this story. It was in the days when the judges ruled (Rut 1:1), not in those disorderly times when there was no king in Israel; but under which of the judges these things happened we are not told, and the conjectures of the learned are very uncertain. It must have been towards the beginning of the judges' time, for Boaz, who married Ruth, was born of Rahab, who received the spies in Joshua's time. Some think it was in the days of Ehud, others of Deborah; the learned bishop Patrick inclines to think it was in the days of Gideon, because in his days only we read of a famine by the Midianites' invasion, Jdg 6:3, Jdg 6:4. 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, who should descend from two Gentile mothers, Rahab and Ruth. Here is,
I.A famine in the land, in the land of Canaan, that land flowing with milk and honey.
This was one of the judgments which God had threatened to bring upon them for their sins, Lev 26:19, Lev 26:20. He has many arrows in his quiver. In the days of the judges they were oppressed by their enemies; and, when by that judgment they were not reformed, God tried this, for when he judges he will overcome. When the land had rest, yet it had not plenty; even in Bethlehem, which signifies the house of bread, there was scarcity. A fruitful land is turned into barrenness, to correct and restrain the luxury and wantonness of those that dwell therein.
II.An account of one particular family distressed in the famine; it is that of Elimelech.
His name signifies my God a king, agreeable to the state of Israel when the judges ruled, for the Lord was their King, and comfortable to him and his family in their affliction, that God was theirs and that he reigns for ever. His wife was Naomi, which signifies my amiable or pleasant one. But his sons' names were Mahlon and Chilion, sickness and consumption, perhaps because weakly children, and not likely to be long-lived. Such are the productions of our pleasant things, weak and infirm, fading and dying.
III.The removal of this family from Bethlehem into the country of Moab on the other side Jordan, for subsistence, because of the famine, Rut 1:1, Rut 1:2. It seems there was plenty in the country of Moab when there was scarcity of bread in the land of Israel. Common gifts of providence are often bestowed in greater plenty upon those that are strangers to God than upon those that know and worship him. Moab is at ease from his youth, while Israel is emptied from vessel to vessel (Jer 48:11), not because God loves Moabites better, but because they have their portion in this life. Thither Elimelech goes, not to settle for ever, but to sojourn for a time, during the dearth, as Abraham, on a similar occasion, went into Egypt, and Isaac into the land of the Philistines. Now here,
1.Elimelech's care to provide for his family, and his taking his wife and children with him, were without doubt commendable. If any provide not for his own, he hath denied the faith, Ti1 5:8. When he was in his straits he did not forsake his house, go seek his fortune himself, and leave his wife and children to shift for their own maintenance; but, as became a tender husband and a loving father, where he went he took them with him, not as the ostrich, Job 39:16. But,
2.I see not how his removal into the country of Moab, upon this occasion, could be justified. Abraham and Isaac were only sojourners in Canaan, and it was agreeable to their condition to remove; but the seed of Israel were now fixed, and ought not to remove into the territories of the heathen. What reason had Elimelech to go more than any of his neighbours? If by any ill husbandry he had wasted his patrimony, and sold his land or mortgaged it (as it should seem, Rut 4:3, Rut 4:4), which brought him into a more necessitous condition than others, the law of God would have obliged his neighbours to relieve him (Lev 25:35); but that was not his case, for he went out full, Rut 1:21. By those who tarried at home it appears that the famine was not so extreme but that there was sufficient to keep life and soul together; and his charge was but small, only two sons. But if he could not be content with the short allowance that his neighbours took up with, and in the day of famine could not be satisfied unless he kept as plentiful a table as he had done formerly, if he could not live in hope that there would come years of plenty again in due time, or could not with patience wait for those years, it was his fault, and he did by it dishonour God and the good land he had given them, weaken the hands of his brethren, with whom he should have been willing to take his lot, and set an ill example to others. If all should do as he did Canaan would be dispeopled. Note, It is an evidence of a discontented, distrustful, unstable spirit, to be weary of the place in which God hath set us, and to be for leaving it immediately whenever we meet with any uneasiness or inconvenience in it. It is 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. Or, if he would remove, why to the country of Moab? If he had made enquiry, it is probable he would have found plenty in some of the tribes of Israel, those, for instance, on the other side Jordan, that bordered on the land of Moab; 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 among Moabites.
IV.The marriage of his two sons to two of the daughters of Moab after his death, Rut 1:4.
All agree that this was ill done. The Chaldee says, They transgressed the decree of the word of the Lord in taking strange wives. If they would not stay unmarried till their return to the land of Israel, they were not so far off but that they might have fetched themselves wives thence. Little did Elimelech think, when he went to sojourn in Moab, that ever his sons would thus join in affinity with Moabites. But those that bring young people into bad acquaintance, and take them out of the way of public ordinances, though they may think them well-principled and armed against temptation, know not what they do, nor what will be the end thereof. It does not appear that the women they married were proselyted to the Jewish religion, for Orpah is said to return to her gods (Rut 1:15); the gods of Moab were hers still. It is a groundless tradition of the Jews that Ruth was the daughter of Eglon king of Moab, yet the Chaldee paraphrast inserts it; but this and their other tradition, which he inserts likewise, cannot agree, that Boaz who married Ruth was the same with Ibzan, who judged Israel 200 years after Eglon's death, Jdg 12:1-15.
V.The death of Elimelech and his two sons, and the disconsolate condition Naomi was thereby reduced to.
Her husband died (Rut 1:3) and her two sons (Rut 1:5) soon after their marriage, and the Chaldee says, Their days were shortened, because they transgressed the law in marrying strange wives. See here,
1.That wherever we go we cannot out-run death, whose fatal arrows fly in all places.
2.That we cannot expect to prosper when we go out of the way of our duty. He that will save his life by any indirect course shall lose it.
3.That death, when it comes into a family, often makes breach upon breach. One is taken away to prepare another to follow soon after; one is taken away, and that affliction is not duly improved, and therefore God sends another of the same kind. When Naomi had lost her husband she took so much the more complacency and put so much the more confidence in her sons. Under the shadow of these surviving comforts she thinks she shall live among the heathen, and exceedingly glad she was of these gourds; but behold they wither presently, green and growing up in the morning, cut down and dried up before night, buried soon after they were married, for neither of them left any children. So uncertain and transient are all our enjoyments here. It is therefore our wisdom to make sure of those comforts that will be made sure and of which death cannot rob us. But how desolate was the condition, and how disconsolate the spirit, of poor Naomi, when the woman was left of her two sons and her husband! When these two things, loss of children and widowhood, come upon her in a moment, come upon her in their perfection, by whom shall she be comforted? Isa 47:9; Isa 51:19. It is God alone who has wherewithal to comfort those who are thus cast down.
Historical interpretation
Historical Reception
3 surviving comments on this verse. Each one is dated, so this reads as a timeline rather than a list.
Select a marker to jump to its quote. Markers stagger vertically where authors wrote within a few decades of each other.
Therefore, if we acknowledge that Thamar is described in the genealogies on account of a mystery in the Lord's generations, we must also certainly not consider Ruth to be overlooked for the same reason: about whom the holy Apostle seems to have had an understanding, when he foresaw through the Spirit that the calling of the Gentiles was to be celebrated by the Gospel, saying that the Law is not made for the just, but for the unjust (1 Timothy 1:9). For how did Ruth, being a foreigner, marry a Jew? And by what reasoning did the evangelist think that the mention of a union should be made in the birth of Christ, which was forbidden by the series of laws? Therefore, did the Savior not originate from a legitimate generation (Deut. XXIII, 3)? It seems to be contrary unless we adhere to the apostolic belief, for the law was not established for the righteous, but for the unrighteous. And since she is a foreigner and a Moabite (especially since the law of Moses prohibited these marriages, and the Moabites were excluded from the Church; for it is written: Moabites shall not enter the Church of the Lord even to the third and fourth generation, and forever), how then did she enter into the Church if not because she was holy and blameless in her conduct, above the law? For if the Law was given to the impious and sinners, certainly Ruth, who surpassed the definition of the Law, and entered into the Church, and became an Israelite, and deserved to be counted among the greater ones of the Lord's family, because of the choice of her mind and not her body, is a great example for us, because in her the figure of our entrance into the Church of the Lord, who are gathered from the nations, preceded. Let us therefore imitate her; so that because she deserved this prerogative of being admitted into her society by her manners, as history teaches: we also, because of the choice of our manners, may be counted among the Church of the Lord, with the support of our merits.
For when the Israelites were afflicted by famine in the earlier days of the Judges, a man named Elimelech from the city of Bethlehem in Judah, where Christ was born, went to live in the land of Moab with his wife and two sons. His sons took Moabite wives, one named Orpah and the other named Ruth, and they lived there for about ten years before they died. But after her husband and sons died, the woman, left alone and without her own family, heard that God had visited Israel and she decided to return home. She urged her daughters-in-law to go back to their families as well. One concession: but Ruth stayed with her mother-in-law. When her mother-in-law said to her, 'Look, your sister-in-law has gone back to her people and her gods; go back with her,' Ruth replied, 'Do not press me to leave you and to turn back from following you. Where you go, I will go; where you lodge, I will lodge. Your people shall be my people, and your God my God. Where you die, I will die—there will I be buried.' (Ruth 1:15, 17). And so the two arrived at Bethlehem. Therefore, when Boaz, the great-grandfather of David, learned of these customs, as well as the respect towards the mother-in-law, the devotion towards the deceased, and the religiousness towards God, according to the law of Moses, in order to raise up the offspring of the deceased, he chose her as his wife.
You call to mind Blaesilla’s companionship, her conversation and her endearing ways; and you cannot endure the thought that you have lost them all. I pardon you the tears of a mother, but I ask you to restrain your grief. When I think of the parent, I cannot blame you for weeping, but when I think of the Christian and the recluse, the mother disappears from my view. Your wound is still fresh, and any touch of mine, however gentle, is more likely to inflame than to heal it. Yet why do you not try to overcome by reason a grief which time must inevitably assuage? Naomi, fleeing because of famine to the land of Moab, there lost her husband and her sons. Yet when she was thus deprived of her natural protectors, Ruth, a stranger, never left her side. And see what a great thing it is to comfort a lonely woman: Ruth, for her reward, is made an ancestor of Christ. Consider the great trials which Job endured, and you will see that you are over-delicate. Amid the ruins of his house, the pains of his sores, his countless bereavements, and, last of all, the snares laid for him by his wife, he still lifted up his eyes to heaven and maintained his patience unbroken. I know what you are going to say “All this befell him as a righteous man, to try his righteousness.” Well, choose which alternative you please. Either you are holy, in which case God is putting your holiness to the proof; or else you are a sinner, in which case you have no right to complain. For if so, you endure far less than your deserts.
The Hebrews’ tradition is that this is he in whose time the sun stood still, on account of those who did not keep the law, so that, when they had seen such a miracle, they should turn to the Lord God. And because they scorned to do such a thing, therefore the famine grew worse, and he who seemed foremost in the tribe of Judah not only was expelled from his native land with his wife and sons, made helpless by famine, but even continued in that same exile with his sons.
Continue studying Ruth 1:1 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
SefariaThe Hebrew text with Rashi and centuries of Jewish commentary.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
Summary
Ruth 1:1 serves as the foundational opening to a profound biblical narrative, immediately establishing a critical historical setting and initiating a crisis that propels the entire story. It places the events within the turbulent and often chaotic era of the Judges, highlighting a severe famine in the land of Judah. This dire circumstance compels a family from Bethlehem—a man, his wife, and their two sons—to undertake a desperate journey, leaving their homeland to seek refuge and sustenance in the foreign and historically antagonistic country of Moab. This verse thus meticulously sets the stage for a compelling story of hardship, displacement, divine providence, and ultimately, redemption and the unexpected continuation of a vital lineage.
Context
Literary Context
Ruth 1:1 functions as a crucial narrative prologue, immediately grounding the story in a specific historical period and introducing the initial catalyst for the entire plot. It smoothly transitions from a broad historical marker ("in the days when the judges ruled") to the specific plight of a single family, setting both the emotional and theological tone for the book. This verse establishes the "problem"—a devastating famine and subsequent displacement—that the rest of the narrative will address, ultimately leading to restoration, hope, and the continuation of a vital lineage that culminates in King David. The subsequent verses will quickly introduce the specific names of the family members and detail the unfolding tragedy that necessitates Ruth's eventual journey back to Bethlehem.
Historical & Cultural Context
The phrase "in the days when the judges ruled" situates the story within a period of profound spiritual and moral decline in Israel, roughly spanning from the conquest of Canaan to the establishment of the monarchy. This era, vividly summarized in the closing verse of Judges as a time when "every man did that which was right in his own eyes," lacked central leadership and was marked by cycles of apostasy, oppression, and deliverance. Famine, such as the one described, was a devastating reality in ancient agrarian societies, often viewed as a consequence of disobedience to God's covenant (as warned in Deuteronomy 28) or a test of faith. The family's origin, "Bethlehemjudah," meaning "house of bread" in Judah, adds a layer of poignant irony to the famine. Their decision to "sojourn in the country of Moab" was a desperate and culturally fraught choice, as Moab was a long-standing adversary of Israel, known for its pagan practices and historical conflicts, notably recounted in Numbers 22-25.
Key Themes
This opening verse immediately introduces several foundational themes that permeate the Book of Ruth. Firstly, it highlights hardship and human vulnerability, as a severe famine forces a family to abandon their home and heritage in search of survival. This echoes the struggles faced by many during the chaotic period of the Judges. Secondly, it subtly introduces the theme of divine sovereignty and providence, as this initial crisis, though seemingly negative, becomes the very mechanism through which God orchestrates the larger narrative of redemption and the preservation of the Davidic line. Thirdly, the geographical contrast between "Bethlehemjudah" (Israel) and "Moab" (a foreign, often hostile land) establishes the theme of displacement and the crossing of cultural boundaries, which will be central to Ruth's journey and her eventual integration into Israel, foreshadowing the inclusion of Gentiles into God's plan. Finally, the setting within the chaotic Judges period underscores the theme of faithfulness amidst apostasy, presenting a beacon of hope and God's continued work even in times of widespread spiritual decline, contrasting with the prevailing moral decay described in the Book of Judges.
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
Translated as "days," this word refers to a period of time, often used adverbially to denote a specific era. In Ruth 1:1, "in the days" sets a historical marker, situating the narrative within the broader epoch of the Judges, indicating that the events unfolded over a duration rather than being an isolated incident, and connecting this personal story to a significant national period.
This primitive root, translated here as "ruled" (referring to the judges), means "to judge," "to pronounce sentence," or by implication, "to govern" or "to vindicate." The mention of "judges ruling" immediately evokes the political and spiritual landscape of Israel during a time when charismatic leaders were raised up by God to deliver His people, yet also a period marked by a lack of consistent, centralized authority and widespread moral relativism.
This compound name, "Bethlehem," literally means "house of bread." Its appearance in Ruth 1:1, coupled with the immediate mention of "famine in the land," creates a profound and poignant irony. The very "house of bread" is devoid of sustenance, highlighting the severity of the crisis and perhaps hinting at a deeper spiritual hunger in the land. This place also holds immense prophetic significance as the future birthplace of King David and, ultimately, the Messiah.
Verse Breakdown
"¶ Now it came to pass in the days when the judges ruled"
This opening clause establishes the historical context of the story, placing it within a period of significant spiritual and political instability in Israel, characterized by a lack of central authority and widespread moral relativism. It sets a somber tone, contrasting with the eventual hope and order that the Book of Ruth will present through divine providence and human faithfulness.
"that there was a famine in the land"
This phrase introduces the immediate catalyst for the family's actions. A severe agricultural famine, often a sign of divine judgment or a test of faith in biblical narratives, creates an existential crisis, forcing difficult decisions for survival. It underscores the vulnerability of human life in the ancient world and the desperate measures people would take to sustain themselves.
"And a certain man of Bethlehemjudah went to sojourn in the country of Moab"
This identifies the family's origin—Bethlehem, a place whose name ironically means "house of bread"—and their destination—Moab, a neighboring, often hostile, pagan nation. The term "sojourn" (Hebrew: גּוּר, gûwr) implies a temporary residence, highlighting the family's intention to return once conditions improved, though their journey would lead to unforeseen and permanent changes for the surviving members.
"he, and his wife, and his two sons"
This final clause specifies the family unit, emphasizing their collective vulnerability and the shared nature of their desperate migration. While the man (later identified as Elimelech) is the head of the household, the inclusion of his wife and sons immediately establishes the familial focus of the narrative and the profound impact of the famine on their entire lives, setting the stage for the personal tragedies that will unfold.
Literary Devices
Ruth 1:1 skillfully employs several literary devices to set the stage for its profound narrative. The most striking is Irony, as a severe famine strikes "Bethlehemjudah," which literally means "house of bread of Judah." This stark contrast immediately highlights the dire circumstances and implicitly points to a divine hand in the unfolding events, suggesting that even in desolation, God's purposes are at work. The mention of the family's migration to Moab functions as subtle Foreshadowing, hinting at the crucial role a Moabitess (Ruth) will play in the story, challenging conventional Israelite-Moabite relations and foreshadowing the eventual inclusion of Gentiles into God's redemptive plan. The verse also utilizes an In Medias Res opening, dropping the reader directly into a crisis ("there was a famine"), which creates immediate narrative tension and prompts curiosity about the characters' fate. Finally, the phrase "in the days when the judges ruled" serves as a precise Historical Marker, grounding the story in a specific, well-known period of Israelite history characterized by chaos, providing a significant backdrop for a narrative of faithfulness, order, and divine intervention.
Theological and Thematic Connections
Ruth 1:1, while seemingly a simple historical introduction, carries profound theological weight. It underscores the biblical principle that even in periods of national decline and personal hardship, God remains sovereignly at work, orchestrating events for His ultimate redemptive purposes. The famine, though a natural disaster, is presented as the catalyst for a series of events that will ultimately lead to the preservation of the Davidic line and the inclusion of a Gentile into the covenant community. This initial displacement foreshadows a larger spiritual truth: that God often uses our most challenging circumstances and desperate decisions to guide us toward His intended path, revealing His unseen hand even when life seems chaotic and devoid of hope. The story of Ruth, beginning with this crisis, stands as a testament to God's faithfulness amidst human suffering and His unwavering commitment to His covenant people, even during the "dark ages" of the Judges.
Reflection and Application
Ruth 1:1 offers a poignant reminder that life's most significant stories often begin not with prosperity, but with profound hardship and unexpected journeys. The famine forced Elimelech's family out of their familiar comfort zone in Bethlehem, compelling them to venture into a foreign land where they would face further trials, yet also where God's unseen hand was actively at work to bring about His eternal purposes. For us today, this verse highlights that difficult circumstances are not necessarily deviations from God's plan, but can often be integral parts of it. What appears to be a setback, a loss, or a tragedy can, in God's sovereign design, be a necessary step toward a greater good that He is orchestrating. Our faith is frequently tested in times of scarcity, uncertainty, and displacement, mirroring the family's migration. The Book of Ruth, beginning in such bleakness, ultimately blossoms into a narrative of profound hope and redemption, encouraging us to trust God's providence even when our immediate circumstances seem desperate and His path unclear. It calls us to consider how God might be using our own "famines" or periods of discomfort to move us towards His ultimate design for our lives and for the advancement of His kingdom.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Why does the story begin during the time of the Judges?
The opening phrase "in the days when the judges ruled" is crucial for setting the socio-spiritual backdrop of the narrative. This period, as described in the Book of Judges (e.g., Judges 21:25), was characterized by moral decay, spiritual apostasy, and political instability due to the absence of a king and a lack of adherence to God's law. By placing the story in this chaotic era, the Book of Ruth highlights a stark contrast: amidst widespread unfaithfulness, God continues to work through the faithfulness of ordinary individuals, demonstrating His unwavering commitment to His redemptive plan and providing a beacon of hope and order in a turbulent time.
What is the significance of the famine mentioned in this verse?
The "famine in the land" serves as the immediate catalyst for the entire narrative of the Book of Ruth. Beyond being a natural disaster, famines in biblical narratives often carry theological significance, sometimes indicating divine judgment or a test of faith (Deuteronomy 28:23-24). Here, it is the initial hardship that compels Elimelech's family to leave Bethlehem. This forced displacement, though tragic, is divinely orchestrated to set in motion the events that will lead to Ruth's integration into Israel, her marriage to Boaz, and her pivotal role in the lineage of King David and ultimately, the Messiah. It underscores that God can use even adverse circumstances to advance His sovereign purposes.
Why was going to Moab a risky decision for an Israelite family?
Migrating to "the country of Moab" was a highly risky and culturally fraught decision for an Israelite family. Moab was a long-standing historical adversary of Israel, with a history of conflict (e.g., Numbers 22-25). Furthermore, Moabites were excluded from the assembly of the Lord for ten generations due to their lack of hospitality and hiring of Balaam against Israel (Deuteronomy 23:3-6). Their pagan worship and foreign customs presented significant spiritual and social challenges for an Israelite family, underscoring the desperation caused by the famine and the extreme measures taken for survival. This desperate choice, however, becomes the very means through which God brings a Moabitess into the Messianic lineage.
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
Ruth 1:1, though set in a time of hardship and seemingly far removed from the New Testament, profoundly foreshadows the person and work of Jesus Christ. The "famine in the land" in Bethlehem, the "house of bread," ironically points to a deeper spiritual hunger in a world devoid of true sustenance. Centuries later, from this very Bethlehem, Jesus would be born, declaring Himself to be the "Bread of Life" who satisfies all spiritual hunger (John 6:35). The family's desperate journey to Moab, a foreign and hostile land, tragically leads to the death of the Israelite men but ultimately brings Ruth, a Moabitess, into the lineage of David and, by extension, into the very line of Christ. This remarkable inclusion of a Gentile into the Messianic genealogy powerfully foreshadows the expansive nature of Christ's redemption, breaking down the dividing wall between Jew and Gentile and uniting all believers into one body through His blood (Ephesians 2:11-13). Thus, the initial crisis of Ruth 1:1, orchestrated by divine providence, sets the stage for the ultimate Kinsman-Redeemer, Jesus, who would come from Bethlehem to bring life out of death, abundance out of famine, and inclusion out of alienation, fulfilling God's redemptive plan for all humanity.