Numbers 10:29-32

The Appeal to Hobab

10:29 ¹ Moses said to Hobab son of Reuel, the Midianite, Moses’ father-in-law, ²  “We are journeying to the place about which the Lord said, ‘I will give it to you.’ Come with us and we will treat you well, ³  for the Lord has promised good things ⁴  for Israel.” 10:30 But Hobab ⁵  said to him, “I will not go, but I will go instead to my own land and to my kindred.” 10:31 Moses ⁶  said, “Do not leave us, ⁷  because you know places for us to camp in the wilderness, and you could be our guide. ⁸  10:32 And if you come with us, it is certain ⁹  that whatever good things the Lord will favor us with, we will share with you as well.”

Ruth 1:16-17

1:16 But Ruth replied,

“Stop urging me to abandon you! ¹⁰ 

For wherever you go, I will go.

Wherever you live, I will live.

Your people will become my people,

and your God will become my God.

1:17 Wherever you die, I will die – and there I will be buried.

May the Lord punish me severely if I do not keep my promise! ¹¹ 

Only death will be able to separate me from you!” ¹² 

Ruth 1:2

1:2 (Now the man’s name was Elimelech, ¹³  his wife was Naomi, ¹⁴  and his two sons were Mahlon and Kilion. ¹⁵  They were of the clan of Ephrath ¹⁶  from Bethlehem in Judah.) They entered the region of Moab and settled there. ¹⁷ 

Ruth 1:19-22

1:19 So the two of them ¹⁸  journeyed together until they arrived in Bethlehem. ¹⁹ 

Naomi and Ruth Arrive in Bethlehem

When they entered ²⁰  Bethlehem, ²¹  the whole village was excited about their arrival. ²²  The women of the village said, ²³  “Can this be Naomi?” ²⁴  1:20 But she replied ²⁵  to them, ²⁶  “Don’t call me ‘Naomi’! ²⁷  Call me ‘Mara’ ²⁸  because the Sovereign One ²⁹  has treated me very harshly. ³⁰  1:21 I left here full, ³¹  but the Lord has caused me to return empty-handed. ³²  Why do you call me ‘Naomi,’ seeing that ³³  the Lord has opposed me, ³⁴  and the Sovereign One ³⁵  has caused me to suffer?” ³⁶  1:22 So Naomi returned, accompanied by her Moabite daughter-in-law Ruth, who came back with her from the region of Moab. ³⁷  (Now they ³⁸  arrived in Bethlehem at the beginning of the barley harvest.) ³⁹ 

Ruth 1:2

1:2 (Now the man’s name was Elimelech, ⁴⁰  his wife was Naomi, ⁴¹  and his two sons were Mahlon and Kilion. ⁴²  They were of the clan of Ephrath ⁴³  from Bethlehem in Judah.) They entered the region of Moab and settled there. ⁴⁴ 

Ruth 2:6

2:6 The servant in charge of the harvesters replied, “She’s the young Moabite woman who came back with Naomi from the region of Moab.

Ruth 2:1

Ruth Works in the Field of Boaz

2:1 Now Naomi ⁴⁵  had a relative ⁴⁶  on her husband’s side of the family named Boaz. He was a wealthy, prominent man from the clan of Elimelech. ⁴⁷ 

Ruth 1:18

1:18 When Naomi ⁴⁸  realized that Ruth ⁴⁹  was determined to go with her, she stopped trying to dissuade her. ⁵⁰ 

Isaiah 55:5

55:5 Look, you will summon nations ⁵¹  you did not previously know;

nations ⁵²  that did not previously know you will run to you,

because of the Lord your God,

the Holy One of Israel, ⁵³ 

for he bestows honor on you.

Isaiah 60:3

60:3 Nations come to your light,

kings to your bright light.

Acts 13:47-48

13:47 For this ⁵⁴  is what the Lord has commanded us: ‘I have appointed ⁵⁵  you to be a light ⁵⁶  for the Gentiles, to bring salvation ⁵⁷  to the ends of the earth.’” ⁵⁸  13:48 When the Gentiles heard this, they began to rejoice ⁵⁹  and praise ⁶⁰  the word of the Lord, and all who had been appointed for eternal life ⁶¹  believed.

[10:29]  ¹ sn For additional bibliography for this short section, see W. F. Albright, “Jethro, Hobab, and Reuel in Early Hebrew Tradition,” CBQ 25 (1963): 1-11; G. W. Coats, “Moses in Midian,” JBL 92 (1973): 3-10; B. Mazar, “The Sanctuary of Arad and the Family of Hobab the Kenite,” JNES 24 (1965): 297-303; and T. C. Mitchell, “The Meaning of the Noun h£tn in the Old Testament,” VT 19 (1969): 93-112.

[10:29]  ² sn There is a problem with the identity of Hobab. The MT says that he is the son of Reuel, making him the brother-in-law of Moses. But Judg 4:11 says he is the father-in-law. In Judg 1:16; 4:11 Hobab is traced to the Kenites, but in Exod 3:1 and 18:1 Jethro (Reuel) is priest of Midian. Jethro is identified with Reuel on the basis of Exod 2:18 and 3:1, and so Hobab becomes Moses’ חֹתֵן (khoten), a relative by marriage and perhaps brother-in-law. There is not enough information to decide on the identity and relationships involved here. Some suggest that there is one person with the three names (G. B. Gray, Numbers [ICC], 93); others suggest Hobab is a family name (R. F. Johnson, IDB 2:615), and some suggest that the expression “the son of Reuel the Midianite” had dropped out of the genealogy of Judges, leading to the conflict (J. Crichton, ISBE 2:1055). If Hobab is the same as Jethro, then Exod 18:27 does not make much sense, for Jethro did go home. On this basis many conclude Hobab is a brother-in-law. This would mean that after Jethro returned home, Moses conversed with Hobab, his brother-in-law. For more discussion, see the articles and the commentaries.

[10:29]  ³ tn The verb is the Hiphil of the root “to be good” (יָטַב, yatav); it may be translated “treat well, deal favorably, generously with.” Here it is a perfect tense with vav (ו) following the imperative, showing a sequence in the verbal ideas.

[10:29]  ⁴ tn The Hebrew text simply has “has spoken good” for Israel.

[10:30]  ⁵ tn Heb “he”; the referent (Hobab) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[10:31]  ⁶ tn Heb “he”; the referent (Moses) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[10:31]  ⁷ tn The form with אַל־נָא (’al-na’) is a jussive; negated it stresses a more immediate request, as if Hobab is starting to leave, or at least determined to leave.

[10:31]  ⁸ tn In the Hebrew text the expression is more graphic: “you will be for us for eyes.” Hobab was familiar with the entire Sinai region, and he could certainly direct the people where they were to go. The text does not record Hobab’s response. But the fact that Kenites were in Canaan as allies of Judah (Judg 1:16) would indicate that he gave in and came with Moses. The first refusal may simply be the polite Semitic practice of declining first so that the appeal might be made more urgently.

[10:32]  ⁹ tn Heb “and it shall be.”

[1:16]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “do not urge me to abandon you to turn back from after you.” Most English versions, following the lead of the KJV, use “leave” here. The use of עזב (“abandon”) reflects Ruth’s perspective. To return to Moab would be to abandon Naomi and to leave her even more vulnerable than she already is.

[1:17]  ¹¹ tn Heb “Thus may the Lord do to me and thus may he add…” The construction וְכֹה יֹסִיף…כֹּה יַעֲשֶׂה (koh ya’aseh...vÿkhoh yosif, “May he do thus…and may he do even more so…!”) is an oath formula of self-imprecation (e.g., 1 Sam 3:17; 14:44; 20:13; 25:22; 2 Sam 3:9,35; 19:14; 1 Kgs 2:23; 2 Kgs 6:31). In this formula the exact curse is understood but not expressed (GKC 472 §149.d; BDB 462 s.v. כֹּה 1.b). In ancient Near Eastern imprecations, when the curse was so extreme, it was not uttered because it was unspeakably awful: “In the twelve uses of this formula, the calamity which the speaker invokes is never named, since OT culture (in keeping with the rest of the ancient Near East) accorded such power to the spoken word” (F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 82). Ruth here pronounces a curse upon herself, elevating the preceding promise to a formal, unconditional level. If she is not faithful to her promise, she agrees to become an object of divine judgment. As in other occurrences of this oath/curse formula, the specific punishment is not mentioned. As Bush explains, the particle כִּי (ki) here is probably asseverative (“indeed, certainly”) and the statement that follows expresses what underscores the seriousness of her promise by invoking divine judgment, as it were, if she does otherwise. Of course, the Lord would not have been obligated to judge her if she had abandoned Naomi – this is simply an ancient idiomatic way of expressing her commitment to her promise.

[1:17]  ¹² tn Heb “certainly death will separate me and you.” Ruth’s vow has been interpreted two ways: (1) Not even death will separate her from Naomi – because they will be buried next to one another (e.g., NRSV, NCV; see E. F. Campbell, Ruth [AB], 74-75). However, for the statement to mean, “Not even death will separate me and you,” it would probably need to be introduced by אִם (’im, “if”) or negated by לֹא (lo’, “not”; see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 83). (2) Nothing except death will separate her from Naomi (e.g., KJV, ASV, RSV, NASB, NIV, TEV, NJPS, REB, NLT, GW; see Bush, 83). The particle כִּי introduces the content of the vow, which – if violated – would bring about the curse uttered in the preceding oath (BDB 472 s.v. כִּי 1.c; e.g., Gen 42:16; Num 14:22; 1 Sam 20:3; 26:16; 29:6; 2 Sam 3:35; 1 Kgs 2:23; Isa 49:18). Some suggest that כּי is functioning as an asseverative (“indeed, certainly”) to express what the speaker is determined will happen (Bush, 83; see 1 Sam 14:44; 2 Sam 3:9; 1 Kgs 2:23; 19:2). Here כִּי probably functions in a conditional sense: “if” or “if…except, unless” (BDB 473 s.v. כִּי2.b). So her vow may essentially mean “if anything except death should separate me from you!” The most likely view is (2): Ruth is swearing that death alone will separate her from Naomi.

[1:2]  ¹³ sn The name “Elimelech” literally means “My God [is] king.” The narrator’s explicit identification of his name seems to cast him in a positive light.

[1:2]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “and the name of his wife [was] Naomi.” This has been simplified in the translation for stylistic reasons.

[1:2]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “and the name[s] of his two sons [were] Mahlon and Kilion.”

[1:2]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “[They were] Ephrathites.” Ephrathah is a small village (Ps 132:6) in the vicinity of Bethlehem (Gen 35:16), so close in proximity that it is often identified with the larger town of Bethlehem (Gen 35:19; 48:7; Ruth 4:11; Mic 5:2 [MT 5:1]; HALOT 81 s.v. אֶפְרָתָה); see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther (WBC), 64. The designation “Ephrathites” might indicate that they were residents of Ephrathah. However, the adjectival form אֶפְרָתִים (ephratim, “Ephrathites”) used here elsewhere refers to someone from the clan of Ephrath (cf. 1 Chr 4:4) which lived in the region of Bethlehem: “Now David was the son of an Ephrathite from Bethlehem in Judah whose name was Jesse” (1 Sam 17:12; cf. Mic 5:2 [MT 5:1]). So it is more likely that the virtually identical expression here – “Ephrathites from Bethlehem in Judah” – refers to the clan of Ephrath in Bethlehem (see R. L. Hubbard, Jr., Ruth [NICOT], 91).

[1:2]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “and were there”; KJV “continued there”; NRSV “remained there”; TEV “were living there.”

[1:19]  ¹⁸ tn The suffix “them” appears to be masculine, but it is probably an archaic dual form (E. F. Campbell, Ruth [AB], 65; F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 75-76).

[1:19]  ¹⁹ map For location see Map5 B1; Map7 E2; Map8 E2; Map10 B4.

[1:19]  ²⁰ tn The temporal indicator וַיְהִי (vayÿhi, “and it was”) here introduces a new scene.

[1:19]  ²¹ map For location see Map5 B1; Map7 E2; Map8 E2; Map10 B4.

[1:19]  ²² tn Heb “because of them” (so NASB, NIV, NRSV); CEV “excited to see them.”

[1:19]  ²³ tn Heb “they said,” but the verb form is third person feminine plural, indicating that the women of the village are the subject.

[1:19]  ²⁴ tn Heb “Is this Naomi?” (so KJV, NASB, NRSV). The question here expresses surprise and delight because of the way Naomi reacts to it (F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 92).

[1:20]  ²⁵ tn Heb “said.” For stylistic reasons the present translation employs “replied” here.

[1:20]  ²⁶ tn The third person feminine plural form of the pronominal suffix indicates the women of the village (see v. 19) are the addressees.

[1:20]  ²⁷ sn The name Naomi means “pleasant.”

[1:20]  ²⁸ sn The name Mara means “bitter.”

[1:20]  ²⁹ tn Heb “Shaddai”; traditionally “the Almighty.” The etymology and meaning of this divine name is uncertain. It may be derived from: (1) שָׁדַד (shadad, “to be strong”), cognate to Arabic sdd, meaning “The Strong One” or “Almighty”; (2) שָׁדָה (shadah, “mountain”), cognate to Akkadian shadu, meaning “The Mountain Dweller” or “God of the Mountains”; (3) שָׁדַד (shadad, “to devastate”) and שַׁד (shad, “destroyer”), Akkadian Shedum, meaning “The Destroyer” or “The Malevolent One”; or (4) שֶׁ (she, “who”) plus דִּי (diy, “sufficient”), meaning “The One Who is Sufficient” or “All-Sufficient One” (HALOT 1420-22 s.v. שַׁדַּי, שַׁדָּי). In terms of use, Shaddai (or El Shaddai) is presented as the sovereign king/judge of the world who grants life/blesses and kills/judges. In Genesis he blesses the patriarchs with fertility and promises numerous descendants. Outside Genesis he blesses/protects and also takes away life/happiness. In light of Naomi’s emphasis on God’s sovereign, malevolent deprivation of her family, one can understand her use of this name for God. For discussion of this divine name, see T. N. D. Mettinger, In Search of God, 69-72.

[1:20]  ³⁰ tn Or “caused me to be very bitter”; NAB “has made it very bitter for me.”

[1:21]  ³¹ sn I left here full. That is, with a husband and two sons.

[1:21]  ³² tn Heb “but empty the Lord has brought me back.” The disjunctive clause structure (vav + adverb + verb + subject) highlights the contrast between her former condition and present situation. Cf. TEV “has brought me back without a thing.”

[1:21]  ³³ tn The disjunctive clause structure (vav [ו] + subject + verb) here introduces either an attendant circumstance (“when the Lord has opposed me”) or an explanation (“seeing that the Lord has opposed me”).

[1:21]  ³⁴ tc The LXX reads “humbled me” here, apparently understanding the verb as a Piel (עָנָה, ’anah) from a homonymic root meaning “afflict.” However, עָנָה (“afflict”) never introduces its object with בְּ (bet); when the preposition בְּ is used with this verb, it is always adverbial (“in, with, through”). To defend the LXX reading one would have to eliminate the preposition.

[1:21]  ³⁵ sn The divine name translated Sovereign One is שַׁדַּי (shadday, “Shaddai”). See further the note on this term in Ruth 1:20.

[1:21]  ³⁶ tn Or “brought disaster upon me”; NIV “brought misfortune (calamity NRSV) upon me”; NLT “has sent such tragedy.”

[1:22]  ³⁷ tn Heb “and Naomi returned, and Ruth the Moabitess, her daughter-in-law, with her, the one who returned from the region of Moab.”

[1:22]  ³⁸ tn The pronoun appears to be third person masculine plural in form, but it is probably an archaic third person dual form (see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 94).

[1:22]  ³⁹ tn This statement, introduced with a disjunctive structure (vav [ו] + subject + verb) provides closure for the previous scene, while at the same time making a transition to the next scene, which takes place in the barley field. The reference to the harvest also reminds the reader that God has been merciful to his people by replacing the famine with fertility. In the flow of the narrative the question is now, “Will he do the same for Naomi and Ruth?”

[1:2]  ⁴⁰ sn The name “Elimelech” literally means “My God [is] king.” The narrator’s explicit identification of his name seems to cast him in a positive light.

[1:2]  ⁴¹ tn Heb “and the name of his wife [was] Naomi.” This has been simplified in the translation for stylistic reasons.

[1:2]  ⁴² tn Heb “and the name[s] of his two sons [were] Mahlon and Kilion.”

[1:2]  ⁴³ tn Heb “[They were] Ephrathites.” Ephrathah is a small village (Ps 132:6) in the vicinity of Bethlehem (Gen 35:16), so close in proximity that it is often identified with the larger town of Bethlehem (Gen 35:19; 48:7; Ruth 4:11; Mic 5:2 [MT 5:1]; HALOT 81 s.v. אֶפְרָתָה); see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther (WBC), 64. The designation “Ephrathites” might indicate that they were residents of Ephrathah. However, the adjectival form אֶפְרָתִים (ephratim, “Ephrathites”) used here elsewhere refers to someone from the clan of Ephrath (cf. 1 Chr 4:4) which lived in the region of Bethlehem: “Now David was the son of an Ephrathite from Bethlehem in Judah whose name was Jesse” (1 Sam 17:12; cf. Mic 5:2 [MT 5:1]). So it is more likely that the virtually identical expression here – “Ephrathites from Bethlehem in Judah” – refers to the clan of Ephrath in Bethlehem (see R. L. Hubbard, Jr., Ruth [NICOT], 91).

[1:2]  ⁴⁴ tn Heb “and were there”; KJV “continued there”; NRSV “remained there”; TEV “were living there.”

[2:1]  ⁴⁵ tn The disjunctive clause (note the vav [ו] + prepositional phrase structure) provides background information essential to the following narrative.

[2:1]  ⁴⁶ tc The marginal reading (Qere) is מוֹדַע (moda’, “relative”), while the consonantal text (Kethib) has מְיֻדָּע (miyudda’, “friend”). The textual variant was probably caused by orthographic confusion between consonantal מְיֻדָּע and מוֹדַע. Virtually all English versions follow the marginal reading (Qere), e.g., KJV, NAB, NASB, NRSV “kinsman”; NIV, NCV, NLT “relative.”

[2:1]  ⁴⁷ tn Heb “and [there was] to Naomi a relative, to her husband, a man mighty in substance, from the clan of Elimelech, and his name [was] Boaz.”

[1:18]  ⁴⁸ tn Heb “she”; the referent (Naomi) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[1:18]  ⁴⁹ tn Heb “she”; the referent (Ruth) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[1:18]  ⁵⁰ tn Heb “she ceased speaking to her.” This does not imply that Naomi was completely silent toward Ruth. It simply means that Naomi stopped trying to convince her to go back to Moab (see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 84-85).

[55:5]  ⁵¹ tn Heb “a nation,” but the singular is collective here, as the plural verbs in the next line indicate (note that both “know” and “run” are third plural forms).

[55:5]  ⁵² tn Heb “a nation,” but the singular is collective here, as the plural verbs that follow indicate.

[55:5]  ⁵³ sn See the note on the phrase “the Holy One of Israel” in 1:4.

[13:47]  ⁵⁴ tn Here οὕτως (Joutws) is taken to refer to what follows, the content of the quotation, as given for this verse by BDAG 742 s.v. οὕτω/οὕτως 2.

[13:47]  ⁵⁵ tn BDAG 1004 s.v. τίθημι 3.a has “τιθέναι τινὰ εἴς τι place/appoint someone to or for (to function as) someth….Ac 13:47.” This is a double accusative construction of object (“you”) and complement (“a light”).

[13:47]  ⁵⁶ sn Paul alludes here to the language of the Servant in Isaiah, pointing to Isa 42:6; 49:6. He and Barnabas do the work of the Servant in Isaiah.

[13:47]  ⁵⁷ tn Grk “that you should be for salvation,” but more simply “to bring salvation.”

[13:47]  ⁵⁸ sn An allusion to Isa 42:6 and 49:6. The expression the ends of the earth recalls Luke 3:6 and Acts 1:8. Paul sees himself and Barnabas as carrying out the commission of Luke 24:27. (See 2 Cor 6:2, where servant imagery also appears concerning Paul’s message.)

[13:48]  ⁵⁹ tn The imperfect verb ἔχαιρον (ecairon) and the following ἐδόξαζον (edoxazon) are translated as ingressive imperfects.

[13:48]  ⁶⁰ tn Or “glorify.” Although “honor” is given by BDAG 258 s.v. δοξάζω as a translation, it would be misleading here, because the meaning is “to honor in the sense of attributing worth to something,” while in contemporary English usage one speaks of “honoring” a contract in the sense of keeping its stipulations. It is not a synonym for “obey” in this context (“obey the word of the Lord”), but that is how many English readers would understand it.

[13:48]  ⁶¹ sn Note the contrast to v. 46 in regard to eternal life.