Ruth 1:4-5 Commentary: Moabite Wives and Naomi's Loss

The famine that drove Elimelech and his family from Bethlehem to Moab likely occurred during the period of the judges, a time of recurring political and economic upheaval. The Moabites were descended from Lot (Gen 19:37) and were traditional enemies of Israel, yet the land east of the Dead Sea had known fertility (Isaiah 16). Israelites were forbidden to marry Canaanites (Deut 7:3), but the law was less clear about Moabites. Deuteronomy 23:3 excludes Moabites from the assembly “to the tenth generation,” a ban Nehemiah later applied to forbid mixed marriages (Neh 13:1-3). However, during the judges era, the legal boundaries may have been more fluid, especially for families living in Moab itself.

The period of ten years is significant. It suggests a settled life, not a brief sojourn. The names of the sons, Mahlon (“sick”) and Chilion (“pining”), may be symbolic of their fate, as the Midrash suggests, though the writer could have drawn them from tradition regardless of meaning. The women’s names also carry possible meanings: Orpah may mean “stiff-necked” or “gazelle”, and Ruth may mean “friendship”. The narrative does not depend on these meanings, but they add texture. The double death, “both Mahlon and Chilion also died”, mirrors the earlier death of Elimelech (v.3), leaving Naomi in a foreign land with nothing but two daughters-in-law.

The consulted sources note no significant textual variants for Ruth 1:4-5. The construction “took them wives” (וַיִּשְׂאוּ לָהֶם נָשִׁים) is a late Hebrew idiom found also in 2 Chronicles 11:21 and Ezra 9:2, but contributes no textual uncertainty. The names Orpah and Ruth are consistently spelled across manuscripts. The chronological marker “about ten years” appears without variation in the major traditions.

Jewish interpretation, represented by the Targum and the Midrash Rabbah, reads these verses as a narrative of transgression and judgment: the marriages violated God’s decree, and the deaths were the direct consequence. The Targum adds that the sons “transgressed the decree of the word of the Lord” by joining with “strange people.” Early Christian interpretation, from at least the time of Matthew’s genealogy (Matt 1:5), sees the inclusion of Ruth as a type of Gentile inclusion in God’s plan. Matthew Henry (1710) wrote that the conversion of Ruth and her entry into the Messiah’s lineage prefigures “the calling of the Gentiles.” Later Western commentators often debated the legal question, whether the marriages were sin or permissible, without resolving it. Modern readers tend to focus less on the legal issue and more on the emotional weight of Naomi’s loss and the quiet providence that will unfold through the Moabite daughter-in-law.

Three-point outline

1. The ambiguity of Moabite marriages, The sons of Elimelech took Moabite wives in a legal grey zone, showing that even believers make choices that are debated by later generations. The text does not pronounce judgment, leaving room for both mercy and consequence.
2. Loss upon loss, Naomi loses her husband, then her two sons within a short span. The repetition “she was left of her two sons and her husband” highlights the completeness of her bereavement, a theme that resonates with anyone who has endured compounded grief.
3. The silence that precedes redemption, The narrative records the deaths without comment, but the following verses show Naomi arising with intention to return. God’s work often begins in the quiet aftermath of devastation.

Five-point outline

1. The setting, Ten years in Moab, a foreign land with mixed legal and cultural expectations.
2. The marriages, Mahlon marries Ruth, Chilion marries Orpah. The text gives equal weight to both, though only Ruth will later prove central to the story.
3. The double death, The verb “died” is used in quick succession (v.5), echoing the earlier death of Elimelech. The repetition creates a rhythm of finality.
4. Naomi left, The phrase “the woman was left” uses the Niphal of sha’ar (to remain), suggesting a survivor scraped bare. She is literally “left from” her sons and husband.
5. Open door, The deaths clear the way for the return to Bethlehem, where God’s provision through Ruth and Boaz will unfold.

Illustration hooks

• The family decision in a recession: A couple loses their jobs and moves to another country for work, their children marry locals with different faiths, and then tragedy strikes. How do we evaluate such decisions later?
• The “grey area” rule: A church member makes a choice that is not explicitly sinful but sits in a legal grey area; the outcome is painful. The congregation debates whether the pain was punishment or circumstance.
• Grief that skips generations: A widow loses her adult children in quick succession and is left with in-laws she barely knows. The story of Naomi becomes a mirror for unexpected caregiving patterns.

Questions your congregation is asking

• Was it wrong for the sons to marry Moabite women? If so, does that mean their death was God’s judgment?
• Why would a good God allow Naomi to lose her entire immediate family while living in a foreign land?
• If Ruth was a Moabite, how does she end up in the line of Christ (Matthew 1:5)? Doesn’t that contradict the law?

These two verses drop us into the middle of a family tragedy. Before discussing, read Ruth 1:1-5 aloud. Notice how quickly the story moves from emigration to bereavement. The marriages to Moabite women are recorded without direct praise or blame, the text trusts you to feel the weight.

Discussion questions

1. Observation: What are the key facts we learn about the family in verses 4-5? List every loss mentioned.
2. Interpretation: Why do you think the author includes the exact names of the Moabite wives? What effect does naming them have on the reader?
3. Interpretation: Deuteronomy 7:3 forbids intermarriage with Canaanites, but Moabites are not in that list. Deuteronomy 23:3 excludes Moabites from the assembly. How might a family living in Moab have understood these laws?
4. Application: Naomi is described as “bereft of her two children and of her husband.” What does this phrase tell us about the completeness of her grief? How can a church community support someone in that kind of loss?
5. Bridge: Read Matthew 1:5, where Ruth appears in the genealogy of Jesus. What does it mean that God included a Moabite woman in the line of the Messiah, especially given the law’s restrictions?
6. Application: The commentator Wesley says the sons were “punished with short life” because they sinned in marrying Moabites. Another commentator Barnes says the marriages were probably justified by necessity. How do we handle situations where faithful Christians disagree on whether a particular action was sinful?
7. Application: Have you ever experienced a season of compounded loss (like Naomi) where it felt like one death after another? Share if comfortable, how did you (or someone you know) begin to move forward?