Ruth 2:22

2:22 Naomi then said to her daughter-in-law Ruth, “It is good, my daughter, that you should go out to work with his female servants. ¹  That way you will not be harmed, which could happen in another field.” ² 

Ruth 3:1

Naomi Instructs Ruth

3:1 At that time, ³  Naomi, her mother-in-law, said to her, “My daughter, I must find a home for you so you will be secure. ⁴ 

Ruth 3:16

3:16 and she returned to her mother-in-law.

Ruth Returns to Naomi

When Ruth returned to her mother-in-law, Naomi ⁵  asked, ⁶  “How did things turn out for you, ⁷  my daughter?” Ruth ⁸  told her about all the man had done for her. ⁹ 

Ruth 3:18

3:18 Then Naomi ¹⁰  said, “Stay put, ¹¹  my daughter, until you know how the matter turns out. For the man will not rest until he has taken care of the matter today.”

Ruth 1:11

1:11 But Naomi replied, “Go back home, my daughters! There is no reason for you to return to Judah with me! ¹²  I am no longer capable of giving birth to sons who might become your husbands! ¹³ 

Ruth 2:8

2:8 So Boaz said to Ruth, “Listen carefully, ¹⁴  my dear! ¹⁵  Do not leave to gather grain in another field. You need not ¹⁶  go beyond the limits of this field. You may go along beside ¹⁷  my female workers. ¹⁸ 

Ruth 3:11

3:11 Now, my dear, don’t worry! ¹⁹  I intend to do for you everything you propose, ²⁰  for everyone in the village ²¹  knows that you are a worthy woman. ²² 

Ruth 1:7

Ruth Returns with Naomi

1:7 Now as she and her two daughters-in-law began to leave the place where she had been living to return to the land of Judah, ²³ 

Ruth 1:22

1:22 So Naomi returned, accompanied by her Moabite daughter-in-law Ruth, who came back with her from the region of Moab. ²⁴  (Now they ²⁵  arrived in Bethlehem at the beginning of the barley harvest.) ²⁶ 

Ruth 1:12-13

1:12 Go back home, my daughters! For I am too old to get married again. ²⁷  Even if I thought that there was hope that I could get married tonight and conceive sons, ²⁸  1:13 surely you would not want to wait until they were old enough to marry! ²⁹  Surely you would not remain unmarried all that time! ³⁰  No, ³¹  my daughters, you must not return with me. ³²  For my intense suffering ³³  is too much for you to bear. ³⁴  For the Lord is afflicting me!” ³⁵ 

Ruth 2:2

2:2 One day Ruth the Moabite said to Naomi, “Let me go ³⁶  to the fields so I can gather ³⁷  grain behind whoever permits me to do so.” ³⁸  Naomi ³⁹  replied, “You may go, my daughter.”

Ruth 3:10

3:10 He said, “May you be rewarded ⁴⁰  by the Lord, my dear! ⁴¹  This act of devotion ⁴²  is greater than what you did before. ⁴³  For you have not sought to marry ⁴⁴  one of the young men, whether rich or poor. ⁴⁵ 

Ruth 1:6

1:6 So she decided to return home from the region of Moab, accompanied by her daughters-in-law, ⁴⁶  because while she was living in Moab ⁴⁷  she had heard that the Lord had shown concern ⁴⁸  for his people, reversing the famine by providing abundant crops. ⁴⁹ 

Ruth 1:8

1:8 Naomi said to her two daughters-in-law, “Listen to me! Each of you should return to your mother’s home! ⁵⁰  May the Lord show ⁵¹  you ⁵²  the same kind of devotion that you have shown to your deceased husbands ⁵³  and to me! ⁵⁴ 

Ruth 4:15

4:15 He will encourage you and provide for you when you are old, ⁵⁵  for your daughter-in-law, who loves you, has given him birth. She ⁵⁶  is better to you than seven sons!”

Ruth 2:20

2:20 Naomi said to her daughter-in-law, “May he be rewarded by the Lord because he ⁵⁷  has shown loyalty to the living on behalf of the dead!” ⁵⁸  Then Naomi said to her, “This man is a close relative of ours; he is our guardian.” ⁵⁹ 

[2:22]  ¹ tn Naomi uses the feminine form of the word “servant” (as Boaz did earlier, see v. 8), in contrast to Ruth’s use of the masculine form in the preceding verse. Since she is concerned for Ruth’s safety, she may be subtly reminding Ruth to stay with the female workers and not get too close to the men.

[2:22]  ² tn Heb “and they will not harm you in another field”; NRSV “otherwise you might be bothered in another field.”

[3:1]  ³ tn The phrase “sometime later” does not appear in Hebrew but is supplied to mark the implicit shift in time from the events in chapter 2.

[3:1]  ⁴ tn Heb “My daughter, should I not seek for you a resting place so that it may go well for you [or which will be good for you]?” The idiomatic, negated rhetorical question is equivalent to an affirmation (see 2:8-9) and has thus been translated in the affirmative (so also NAB, NCV, NRSV, TEV, CEV, NLT).

[3:16]  ⁵ tn Heb “she”; the referent (Naomi) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[3:16]  ⁶ tn Heb “said.” Since what follows is a question, the present translation uses “asked” here.

[3:16]  ⁷ tn Heb “Who are you?” In this context Naomi is clearly not asking for Ruth’s identity. Here the question has the semantic force “Are you his wife?” See R. L. Hubbard, Jr., Ruth (NICOT), 223-24, and F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther (WBC), 184-85.

[3:16]  ⁸ tn Heb “she”; the referent (Ruth) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[3:16]  ⁹ sn All that the man had done. This would have included his promise to marry her and his gift of barley.

[3:18]  ⁷ tn Heb “she”; the referent (Naomi) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[3:18]  ⁸ tn Heb “sit”; KJV “Sit still”; NAB “Wait here”; NLT “Just be patient.”

[1:11]  ⁹ tn Heb “Why would you want to come with me?” Naomi’s rhetorical question expects a negative answer. The phrase “to Judah” is added in the translation for clarification.

[1:11]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “Do I still have sons in my inner parts that they might become your husbands?” Again Naomi’s rhetorical question expects a negative answer.

[2:8]  ¹¹ tn Heb “Have you not heard?” The idiomatic, negated rhetorical question is equivalent to an affirmation (see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 119, and GKC 474 §150.e).

[2:8]  ¹² tn Heb “my daughter.” This form of address is a mild form of endearment, perhaps merely rhetorical. It might suggest that Boaz is older than Ruth, but not necessarily significantly so. A few English versions omit it entirely (e.g., TEV, CEV).

[2:8]  ¹³ tn The switch from the negative particle אַל (’al, see the preceding statement, “do not leave”) to לֹא (lo’) may make this statement more emphatic. It may indicate that the statement is a policy applicable for the rest of the harvest (see v. 21).

[2:8]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “and thus you may stay close with.” The imperfect has a permissive nuance here.

[2:8]  ¹⁵ sn The female workers would come along behind those who cut the grain and bundle it up. Staying close to the female workers allowed Ruth to collect more grain than would normally be the case (see O. Borowski, Agriculture in Iron Age Israel, 61, and F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 121).

[3:11]  ¹³ tn Heb “do not fear” (so NASB); NRSV “do not be afraid.”

[3:11]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “everything which you are saying I will do for you.” The Hebrew word order emphasizes Boaz’s intention to fulfill Ruth’s request. As in v. 5, the Hebrew imperfect is used (note “you are saying”), even though Ruth’s request appears to be concluded. According to GKC 316 §107.h, the imperfect can sometimes “express actions, etc., which although, strictly speaking, they are already finished, are regarded as still lasting on into the present time, or continuing to operate in it.” The imperfect אֶעֱשֶׂה (’e’eseh) could be translated “I will do” (so NAB, NIV, NRSV, NLT), but since there are legal complications which must first be resolved, it is better to take the form as indicating Boaz’s desire or intention, if the legal matters can be worked out.

[3:11]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “all the gate of the town,” which by metonymy could refer to everyone in town (NIV “All my fellow townsmen”; NLT “everyone in town”), or only to the leaders and prominent citizens of the community (Boaz’s peers) who transacted business and made legal decisions at the town gate (NRSV “all the assembly of my people”).

[3:11]  ¹⁶ tn Or “woman of strong character” (cf. NIV “woman of noble character”). The same phrase is used in Prov 31:10 to describe the ideal wife. Prov 31 emphasizes the ideal wife’s industry, her devotion to her family, and her concern for others, characteristics which Ruth had demonstrated.

[1:7]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “and she went out from the place she had been, and her two daughters-in-law with her, and they went on the way to return to the land of Judah.”

[1:22]  ¹⁷ 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]  ¹⁸ 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]  ¹⁹ 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?”

[1:12]  ¹⁹ sn Too old to get married again. Naomi may be exaggerating for the sake of emphasis. Her point is clear, though: It is too late to roll back the clock.

[1:12]  ²⁰ tn Verse 12b contains the protasis (“if” clause) of a conditional sentence, which is completed by the rhetorical questions in v. 13. For a detailed syntactical analysis, see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther (WBC), 78-79.

[1:13]  ²¹ tn Heb “For them would you wait until they were grown?” Some understand הֲלָהֵן (halahen) as an interrogative he (ה) with an Aramaic particle meaning “therefore” (see GKC 301 §103.b.2 [n. 4]; cf. ASV, NASB), while others understand the form to consist of an interrogative he, the preposition ל (lamed, “for”), and an apparent third person feminine plural pronominal suffix (CEV, NLT “for them”). The feminine suffix is problematic, for its antecedent is the hypothetical “sons” mentioned at the end of v. 12. For this reason some emend the form to הלתם (“for them,” a third person masculine plural suffix). R. L. Hubbard raises the possibility that the nunated suffix is an archaic Moabite masculine dual form (Ruth [NICOT], 111, n. 31). In any case, Naomi’s rhetorical question expects a negative answer.

[1:13]  ²² tn Heb “For them would you hold yourselves back so as not to be for a man?” Again Naomi’s rhetorical question expects a negative answer. The verb עָגַן (’agan, “hold back”; cf. KJV, ASV “stay”; NRSV “refrain”) occurs only here in the OT. For discussion of its etymology and meaning, see HALOT 785-86 s.v. עגן, and F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther (WBC), 79-80.

[1:13]  ²³ tn The negative is used here in an elliptical manner for emphasis (see HALOT 48 s.v. I אַל; GKC 479-80 §152.g).

[1:13]  ²⁴ tn Heb “No, my daughters.” Naomi is not answering the rhetorical questions she has just asked. In light of the explanatory clause that follows, it seems more likely that she is urging them to give up the idea of returning with her. In other words, the words “no, my daughters” complement the earlier exhortation to “go back.” To clarify this, the words “you must not return with me” are added in the translation.

[1:13]  ²⁵ tn Heb “bitterness to me.” The term מָרַר (marar) can refer to emotional bitterness: “to feel bitter” (1 Sam 30:6; 2 Kgs 4:27; Lam 1:4) or a grievous situation: “to be in bitter circumstances” (Jer 4:18) (BDB 600 s.v.; HALOT 638 s.v. I מרר). So the expression מַר־לִי (mar-li) can refer to emotional bitterness (KJV, NKJV, ASV, RSV, NASB, NIV, NJPS, CEV, NLT) or a grievous situation (cf. NRSV, NAB, NCV, CEV margin). Although Naomi and her daughters-in-law had reason for emotional grief, the issue at hand was Naomi’s lamentable situation, which she did not want them to experience: being a poor widow in a foreign land.

[1:13]  ²⁶ tn Heb “for there is bitterness to me exceedingly from you.” The clause כִּי־מַר־לִי מְאֹד מִכֶּם (ki-mar-li me’od mikkem) is notoriously difficult to interpret. It has been taken in three different ways: (1) “For I am very bitter for me because of you,” that is, because of your widowed condition (cf. KJV, NKJV, ASV, RSV, NJB, REB, JB, TEV). This does not fit well, however, with the following statement (“for the LORD has attacked me”) nor with the preceding statement (“You must not return with me”). (2) “For I am far more bitter than for you” (cf. NASB, NIV, NJPS, NEB, CEV, NLT). This does not provide an adequate basis, however, for the preceding statement (“You must not return with me”). (3) “For my bitterness is too much for you [to bear]” (cf. NAB, NRSV, NCV, CEV margin). This is preferable because it fits well with both the preceding and following statements. These three options reflect the three ways the preposition מן may be taken here: (1) causal: “because of, on account of” (BDB 580 s.v. מִן 2.f; HALOT 598 s.v. מִן 6), not that Orpah and Ruth were the cause of her calamity, but that Naomi was grieved because they had become widows; (2) comparative: “more [bitter] than you” (BDB 581 s.v. 6.a; HALOT 598 s.v. 5b), meaning that Naomi’s situation was more grievous than theirs – while they could remarry, her prospects were much more bleak; and (3) elative, describing a situation that is too much for a person to bear: “too [bitter] for you” (BDB 581 s.v. 6.d; HALOT 598 s.v. 5a; IBHS 267 §14.4f; e.g., Gen 4:13; Exod 18:18; Deut 17:8; 1 Kgs 19:17), meaning that Naomi’s plight was too bitter for her daughters-in-law to share. While all three options are viable, the meaning adopted must fit two criteria: (1) The meaning of this clause (1:13b) must provide the grounds for Naomi’s emphatic rejection of the young women’s refusal to separate themselves from her (1:13a); and (2) it must fit the following clause: “for the hand of the LORD has gone out against me” (1:13c). The first and second options do not provide adequate reasons for sending her daughters-in-law back home, nor do they fit her lament that the LORD had attached her (not them); however, the third option (elative sense) fits both criteria. Naomi did not want her daughters-in-law to share her sad situation, that is, to be poor, childless widows in a foreign land with no prospect for marriage. If they accompanied her back to Judah, they would be in the same kind of situation in which she found herself in Moab. If they were to find the “rest” (security of home and husband) she wished for them, it would be in Moab, not in Judah. The Lord had already deprived her of husband and sons. She could do nothing for them in this regard because she had no more sons to give them as husbands, and she was past the age of child-bearing to raise up new husbands for them in the future – as if they could wait that long anyway (1:13a). For a discussion of these three options and defense of the approach adopted here, see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther (WBC), 80-81.

[1:13]  ²⁷ tn Heb “for the hand of the Lord has gone out against me” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NIV all similar). The expression suggests opposition and hostility, perhaps picturing the Lord as the Divine Warrior who is bringing calamity upon Naomi. See R. L. Hubbard, Jr., Ruth (NICOT), 113.

[2:2]  ²³ tn The cohortative here (“Let me go”) expresses Ruth’s request. Note Naomi’s response, in which she gives Ruth permission to go to the field.

[2:2]  ²⁴ tn Following the preceding cohortative, the cohortative with vav conjunctive indicates purpose/result.

[2:2]  ²⁵ tn Heb “anyone in whose eyes I may find favor” (ASV, NIV similar). The expression אֶמְצָא־חֵן בְּעֵינָיו (’emtsa’-khen bÿ’enayv, “to find favor in the eyes of [someone]”) appears in Ruth 2:2, 10, 13. It is most often used when a subordinate or servant requests permission for something from a superior (BDB 336 s.v. חֵן). Ruth will play the role of the subordinate servant, seeking permission from a landowner, who then could show benevolence by granting her request to glean in his field behind the harvest workers.

[2:2]  ²⁶ tn Heb “she”; the referent (Naomi) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[3:10]  ²⁵ tn Or “blessed” (so NASB, NRSV).

[3:10]  ²⁶ tn Heb “my daughter.” This form of address is a mild form of endearment, perhaps merely rhetorical. A few English versions omit it entirely (e.g., TEV, CEV). The same expression occurs in v. 11.

[3:10]  ²⁷ tn Heb “latter [act of] devotion”; NRSV “this last instance of your loyalty.”

[3:10]  ²⁸ tn Heb “you have made the latter act of devotion better than the former”; NIV “than that which you showed earlier.”

[3:10]  ²⁹ tn Heb “by not going after the young men” (NASB similar); TEV “You might have gone looking for a young man.”

[3:10]  ³⁰ tn Heb “whether poor or rich” (so KJV, NAB, NASB, NRSV); the more common English idiom reverses the order (“rich or poor”; cf. NIV, NCV, TEV, CEV, NLT).

[1:6]  ²⁷ tn Heb “and she arose, along with her daughters-in-law, and she returned from the region of Moab.”

[1:6]  ²⁸ tn Heb “in the region of Moab”; KJV, NRSV “in the country of Moab.” Since this is a repetition of the phrase found earlier in the verse, it has been shortened to “in Moab” in the present translation for stylistic reasons.

[1:6]  ²⁹ tn Heb “had visited” or “taken note of.” The basic meaning of פָּקַד (paqad) is “observe, examine, take note of” (T. F. Williams, NIDOTTE 3:658), so it sometimes appears with זָכַר (zakhar, “to remember”; Pss 8:4 [MT 5]; 106:4; Jer 14:10; 15:15; Hos 8:13; 9:9) and רָאָה (ra’ah, “to see”; Exod 4:31; Ps 80:14 [MT 15]; NIDOTTE 3:659). It often emphasizes the cause/effect response to what is seen (NIDOTTE 3:659). When God observes people in need, it is glossed “be concerned about, care for, attend to, help” (Gen 21:1; 50:24, 25; Exod 4:31; Ruth 1:6; 1 Sam 2:21; Jer 15:15; Zeph 2:7; Zech 10:3b; NIDOTTE 3:661). When humans are the subject, it sometimes means “to visit” needy people to bestow a gift (Judg 15:1; 1 Sam 17:18). Because it has such a broad range of meanings, its use here has been translated variously: (1) “had visited” (KJV, ASV, NASV, RSV; so BDB 823-24 s.v. פָּקַד); (2) “had considered” (NRSV) and “had taken note of” (TNK; so HALOT 955-57 s.v. פקד); and (3) “had come to the aid of” (NIV), “had blessed” (TEV), and “had given” (CEV; so NIDOTTE 3:657). When God observed the plight of his people, he demonstrated his concern by benevolently giving them food.

[1:6]  ³⁰ tn Heb “by giving to them food.” The translation “reversing the famine and providing abundant crops” attempts to clarify the referent of לֶחֶם (lekhem, “food”) as “crops” and highlights the reversal of the famine that began in v. 1. The infinitive construct לָתֵת לָהֶם לָחֶם (latet lahem lakhem) may denote (1) purpose: “[he visited his people] to give them food” or (2) complementary sense explaining the action of the main verb: “[he visited his people] by giving them food.” The term לֶחֶם (lakhem) here refers to agricultural fertility, the reversal of the famine in v. 1.

[1:8]  ²⁹ tn Heb “each to the house of her mother.” Naomi’s words imply that it is more appropriate for the two widows to go home to their mothers, rather than stay with their mother-in-law (see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 75).

[1:8]  ³⁰ tc The MT (Kethib) has the imperfect יַעֲשֶׂה (ya’aseh, “[the Lord] will do”), but the marginal reading (Qere) has the shortened jussive form יַעַשׂ (ya’as, “may [the Lord] do”), which is more probable in this prayer of blessing. Most English versions adopt the jussive form (KJV, ASV, NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV, JPS, TEV, CEV, NLT).

[1:8]  ³¹ tn Heb “do with you”; NRSV “deal kindly with you”; NLT “reward you for your kindness.” The pronominal suffix “you” appears to be a masculine form, but this is likely a preservation of an archaic dual form (see E. F. Campbell, Ruth [AB], 65; F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 75-76).

[1:8]  ³² tn Heb “the dead” (so KJV, NRSV); NLT “your husbands.” This refers to their deceased husbands.

[1:8]  ³³ tn Heb “devotion as you have done with the dead and with me.” The noun חֶסֶד (khesed, “devotion”) is a key thematic term in the book of Ruth (see 2:20; 3:10). G. R. Clark suggests that חֶסֶד “is not merely an attitude or an emotion; it is an emotion that leads to an activity beneficial to the recipient”; an act of חֶסֶד is “a beneficent action performed, in the context of a deep and enduring commitment between two persons or parties, by one who is able to render assistance to the needy party who in the circumstances is unable to help him – or herself” (The Word Hesed in the Hebrew Bible [JSOTSup], 267). HALOT 336-37 s.v. II חֶסֶד defines the word as “loyalty” or “faithfulness.” Other appropriate glosses might be “commitment” and “devotion.”

[4:15]  ³¹ tn Heb “and he will become for you a restorer of life and a sustainer of your old age” (NASB similar).

[4:15]  ³² tn Heb “who, she”; KJV “which is better to thee.”

[2:20]  ³³ tn Many English versions translate this statement, “May he [Boaz] be blessed by the Lord, who has not abandoned his loyalty to the living and dead.” In this case the antecedent of אֲשֶׁר (’asher, “who”) would be the immediately preceding “the Lord.” However, this understanding of the construction is not accurate. The antecedent of אֲשֶׁר is Boaz, not the Lord. Elsewhere when אֲשֶׁר follows the blessing formula בָּרוּךְ (barukh, Qal passive participle) + proper name/pronoun, it always introduces the reason the recipient of the blessing deserves a reward. (For this reason one could analyze אֲשֶׁר as a causal conjunction in this construction.) If אֲשֶׁר refers to the Lord here, then this verse, unlike others using the construction, gives no such reason for the recipient being blessed. 2 Sam 2:5, which provides the closest structural parallel to Ruth 2:20, supports this interpretation: בְּרֻכִים אַתֶּם לַיהוָה אֲשֶׁר עֲשִׂיתֶם הַחֶסֶד הַזֶּה עִם־אֲדֹנֵיכֶם עִם־שָׁאוּל, “May you [plural] be blessed by the Lord, you who [plural]/because you [plural] have extended such kindness to your master Saul.” Here אֲשֶׁר refers back to the second plural pronoun אַתֶּם (’atem, “you”) in the formula, as the second plural verb עֲשִׂיתֶם(’asitem) after אֲשֶׁר indicates. Though יְהוָה (yÿhvah) is in closer proximity to אֲשֶׁר, it is not the antecedent. The evidence suggests that Ruth 2:20 should be translated and interpreted as follows: “May he [Boaz] be blessed by the Lord, he who [i.e., Boaz]/because he [i.e., Boaz] has not abandoned his loyalty to the living and dead.” Cf. NIV, NCV, CEV, NLT. See B. A. Rebera, “Yahweh or Boaz? Ruth 2.20 Reconsidered,” BT 36 (1985): 317-27, and F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther (WBC), 134-36. By caring for the impoverished widows’ physical needs, Boaz had demonstrated loyalty to both the living (the impoverished widows) and the dead (their late husbands). See R. B. Chisholm, From Exegesis to Exposition, 72.

[2:20]  ³⁴ tn Heb “to the living and the dead” (so KJV, NASB).

[2:20]  ³⁵ tn The Hebrew term גָּאַל (ga’al) is sometimes translated “redeemer” here (NIV “one of our kinsman-redeemers”; NLT “one of our family redeemers”). In this context Boaz, as a “redeemer,” functions as a guardian of the family interests who has responsibility for caring for the widows of his deceased kinsmen.