Ruth 1
1 In the days when the judges ruled there was a famine in the land (Ruth 1:1, ESV Bible)
Famine as Covenant Condition
Within the larger backdrop of Judges, we are looking at a period of deep covenant fracture, when Israel was not living faithfully before God. Consequently, the nation was experiencing covenant curses. The famine at the start of Ruth should be understood in that light — not merely as an economic hardship, but as a covenant condition. It is this famine that drives Elimelech and Naomi’s family into an exile-like departure from the land.
6 Then she arose with her daughters-in-law to return from the country of Moab, for she had heard in the fields of Moab that the LORD had visited his people and given them food. (Ruth 1:6, ESV Bible)
When the LORD “Visits” His People
This moment becomes the first signal in the book that the covenant cycle may be shifting direction. Up to this point, everything in the narrative reads like covenant-curse conditions — famine, loss, displacement, and death. But now we are given a subtle yet decisive indicator that something is beginning to change.
The text says that the LORD had “visited” His people. The Hebrew verb paqad is covenantally loaded. It does not imply casual observation or distant awareness. Rather, it carries the sense of divine intervention — God turning His attention toward His people in order to act on their behalf.
Throughout Scripture, this verb appears at key redemptive moments:
God “visits” Sarah, resulting in conception.
God “visits” Israel, leading to their deliverance in the Exodus.
God “visits” in contexts of both judgment and salvation.
So when Ruth tells us that the LORD has “visited” His people, the narrator is signaling that God has turned His face back toward covenant blessing activity. The evidence of this renewed favor is seen in the restoration of food.
Within covenant theology, food provision is never merely agricultural — it is theological. In Deuteronomic logic, agricultural conditions reflect covenant standing:
Obedience leads to abundance and provision.
Disobedience results in famine and scarcity.
So the return of food to the land is not just an economic improvement — it is a sign that covenant mercy is beginning to reemerge.
16 But Ruth said, “Do not urge me to leave you or to return from following you. For where you go I will go, and where you lodge I will lodge. Your people shall be my people, and your God my God. 17 Where you die I will die, and there will I be buried. May the LORD do so to me and more also if anything but death parts me from you.” (Ruth 1:16-17, ESV Bible)
Why Ruth Clings: Covenant Loyalty in a Time of Drift
What compels Ruth to make this decision?
From one perspective, her choice appears to be a movement from security into uncertainty. By all practical measures, Ruth is abandoning stability for vulnerability. Staying in Moab would have meant familiarity, family support, and the possibility of remarriage. Going with Naomi meant entering a foreign land with no husband, no inheritance, and no guaranteed provision.
Ruth is not choosing the easier path — she is choosing covenant alignment over survival logic. But why?
Ruth 1:14 tells us:
“But Ruth clung to her.”
The Hebrew verb dabaq (“clung”) is covenantally loaded. It is used in covenant contexts such as:
“A man shall leave his father and mother and cling to his wife.”
Israel being called to cling to the LORD.
It describes covenant attachment — not casual affection, but binding loyalty. So again we ask: what compels such a response?
One compelling layer is what we might call covenant attraction. Through Naomi’s family, Ruth has encountered the God of Israel. Even though Naomi herself feels abandoned and bitter, Ruth has perceived something worth clinging to. She chooses covenant belonging over national belonging. What stands out powerfully is the contrast this creates.
In a time when:
Israel is drifting
Covenant loyalty is weak
Torah faithfulness is inconsistent
A foreign woman displays covenant fidelity exceeding that of many within Israel itself. Ruth’s declaration reveals that belonging to Israel is not merely biological — it can be covenantal. She enters Israel not by blood, but by allegiance.
This dynamic even anticipates later theological reflections — such as when Paul describes Gentiles relating to the God of Israel through faith. While historically and contextually distinct, the underlying principle of covenant allegiance transcending ethnicity is already present in Ruth.
Yet we still wrestle with the question: Did Ruth really feel that loyal to the God of Israel at this point?
The text of Ruth 1 does not fully explain her inner psychology — and that silence appears intentional. The narrator gives us her words and actions, but not her internal backstory.
If Ruth encountered the God of Israel, she did not do so through Torah scrolls, priests, or temple worship. She encountered Him embodied in a family.
Her theological formation would have come through:
Household life
Observed covenant practices
Naomi’s worldview
Shared suffering
It does not seem to be only about her relationship with Naomi personally. She is not merely attaching herself to Naomi — she is attaching herself to Naomi’s covenant world.
Ruth’s allegiance likely emerges from several converging influences:
Deep relational loyalty to Naomi
Exposure to Israel’s God
Observed covenant life
Shared grief and suffering
A personal conviction that is forming, even if not fully articulated
In this sense, Ruth trusts Naomi’s God before she fully understands Him.
Here is something especially striking: Naomi is not spiritually triumphant in Chapter 1. She says:
“The Almighty has dealt bitterly with me.” “I went away full, and the LORD has brought me back empty.”
Naomi interprets her life through bitterness — yet Ruth still chooses Naomi’s God. This means Ruth’s faith is not built on Naomi’s optimism or blessing, but on something deeper she has perceived about the God Naomi serves — even through Naomi’s pain.
In many ways, this strengthens the authenticity of Ruth’s conviction. So while the text never tells us exactly why Ruth felt so compelled to go, we can reasonably see the contours of her decision.
Naomi had become family, mentor, and identity anchor. Through Naomi’s household, Ruth encountered the God of Israel in lived form.
Yet her vow goes beyond Naomi personally. She binds herself to Naomi’s people, Naomi’s land, and Naomi’s God — invoking covenant oath language. Her allegiance is therefore both relational and theological.
Her faith may not yet be fully formed or deeply informed — but it is genuine enough to abandon homeland, gods, and future security. And in a time when Israel itself struggles to cling to God, Ruth chooses to cling — even without full clarity about what lies ahead.
20 She said to them, “Do not call me Naomi; call me Mara, for the Almighty has dealt very bitterly with me. 21 I went away full, and the LORD has brought me back empty. Why call me Naomi, when the LORD has testified against me and the Almighty has brought calamity upon me?” (Ruth 1:20-21, ESV Bible)
From Naomi to Mara: Interpreting Suffering Through Covenant
This is a particularly striking moment in Chapter 1. Naomi asks to be called Mara (מָרָא), a name that means “bitter.” It comes from the Hebrew root marar, which carries the sense of bitterness, harshness, or deep grief.
In doing this, Naomi is not simply expressing emotion — she is redefining her identity around her suffering. She interprets what has happened to her not as random misfortune, but as covenant discipline. In her mind, the Almighty has dealt bitterly with her, moving her life from fullness to emptiness.
There is also a powerful narrative echo here from Israel’s earlier story in Exodus 15, where the waters of Marah were bitter before God made them sweet. It is details like this that make the biblical narrative so rich and interconnected.
In Exodus 15 we read that Israel arrives at waters called Marah — named so because the waters were bitter and undrinkable:
22 Then Moses made Israel set out from the Red Sea, and they went into the wilderness of Shur. They went three days in the wilderness and found no water. 23 When they came to Marah, they could not drink the water of Marah because it was bitter; therefore it was named Marah. 24 And the people grumbled against Moses, saying, “What shall we drink?” 25 And he cried to the LORD, and the LORD showed him a log, and he threw it into the water, and the water became sweet. (Exodus 15:22-25, ESV Bible)
This moment comes shortly after their deliverance from Egypt, placing them in a space of testing in the wilderness. Yet God intervenes and makes the bitter waters sweet.
Because of this, “Marah” in Israel’s collective memory comes to represent bitterness after deliverance — a season of hardship that awaits divine reversal.
When Naomi renames herself Mara, she is subtly aligning her personal story with Israel’s national story. She sees her life as having entered its own wilderness moment — marked by loss, grief, and bitterness.
And yet, even in her pain, she still believes that God is governing her life. She does not see her suffering as random, but as occurring under the hand of the Almighty.
What is especially striking is that while Naomi believes she has returned empty, the reader can already see that God has begun a work of preservation through Ruth.
Naomi’s “Marah moment” is real — but it is not the end of her story. As we continue reading in the coming weeks, we will begin to see how God moves from bitterness toward restoration.
22 So Naomi returned, and Ruth the Moabite her daughter-in-law with her, who returned from the country of Moab. And they came to Bethlehem at the beginning of barley harvest. (Ruth 1:22, ESV Bible)
The Harvest Backdrop of Ruth
Barley is the first major harvest of the year — the beginning of the grain season. Ruth and Naomi arrive in Bethlehem at the very start of this barley harvest (Ruth 1:22), and the events of the book unfold across the harvest period. In fact, the narrative spans the very season leading up to Shavuot, also known as the Feast of Weeks — a festival celebrating God’s provision and covenant faithfulness through the harvest.
This is one of the primary reasons the book of Ruth is traditionally read at Shavuot.
Jewish tradition associates Ruth with this festival for several interconnected reasons. Shavuot celebrates:
God’s provision from the land
Covenant blessing expressed through harvest
Ruth’s story beautifully embodies these themes. She herself becomes a kind of “firstfruit” of restoration — appearing at the very moment the harvest begins and serving as the first sign that covenant blessing is returning.
Shavuot also later becomes associated with the giving of the Torah at Sinai. In this light, Ruth is often seen as embodying Torah faithfulness — and remembering that Torah faithfulness is ultimately covenant faithfulness, her actions reflect lived obedience to the covenant way of life.
There is also a genealogical connection. Jewish tradition holds that King David was both born and died on Shavuot. Since Ruth is David’s great-grandmother — a reality we will see unfold as the story progresses — her narrative becomes directly linked to the festival. Reading Ruth at Shavuot therefore also anticipates the emergence of Davidic kingship.
And it is significant where the story begins: Naomi arrives bitter, believing herself empty. Yet she arrives precisely as the harvest is beginning. The timing itself signals a shift — from famine to provision, from curse conditions toward the first signs of restoration.