Names\u2014Rth_1:2<\/p>\n
It is worthy of remark that Bethlehem, which is connected with both the histories which form the appendix to the book of Judges, is also the scene of the history of Ruth, which is another appendix to that book, and seems to have anciently formed part of it. By virtue of these various intimations we are more familiar with the name, and perhaps better acquainted with the condition, of Bethlehem, than of any other place mentioned in the early Scriptures. This knowledge is kept up\u2014the place is kept before us by various subsequent historical intimations\u2014until at last the heavenly host hail there the hour in which the Son of God became man within its walls.<\/p>\n
In a time of severe famine, a man belonging to this place withdrew, with his wife and two sons, into the land of Moab for a subsistence. The names of all these persons are particularly given. The names of the father, Elimelech (my God is king), and of the mother, Naomi (pleasant, happy), indicate Divine favor and worldly prosperity; the names of the sons, Mahlon (weakness, sickness), Chilion (consumption, decay), imply the very reverse of health and comfort. Some old writers speculate curiously upon these names. Indeed, many of the Hebrew names are so remarkably appropriate to the persons who bear them, that it has been much questioned how this conformity was produced. Some have supposed that the names were changed as circumstances arose to render the old names inappropriate. In proof of this we are referred to this very book of Ruth, in which Naomi, in the sequel of the history, says, \u201cCall me not Naomi, but call me Mara (bitter), for the Lord hath dealt very bitterly with me.\u201d Yet this seems rather a mode in which she expressed the sense of her condition, than an intention or wish for an actual change; and in fact there was no change, for she continued to be called Naomi. Instances of change of name do indeed occur; but the very instances are such as to show that the practice was not common, the chance being generally mentioned as a memorable circumstance, and as imposed by God himself, or by some great public authority, mostly by a foreign king or conqueror, who imposes or confers a name proper to his own nation upon the person. Of the former kind, is the change of Abram\u2019s name to Abraham, Sarai\u2019s to Sarah, Jacob\u2019s to Israel; and in the New Testament, of Simon to Cephas (in Greek, Peter)\u2014and of the latter, the change of Joseph\u2019s name to Zaphnath-paaneah, of Daniel\u2019s to Belteshazzar, and of those of his companions Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, to Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego. In all the latter class of changes, and in some of the former, the original name still remains, not withstanding, the common name by which the person is known; and in the exceptional cases of even the first class of changes\u2014those made by Divine authority\u2014the old and new names remain in concurrent use, save only in the case of Abraham and Sarah, in regard to which it is probable that the slightness of the oral change led to the exclusive adoption of the new name. There is no example of a change of name by private or paternal authority, and certainly not any of a man making such a change himself. Indeed, as names are intended to identify men, and to distinguish them from each other, all the use and purpose of proper names would be lost were they to be frequently changed. Such cases occur among ourselves by change of titles used as proper names. The rarity of this case prevents the inconvenience from being very sensibly felt; but the degree of inconvenience which is experienced when, for instance, a Gower becomes an Egerton, and then an Ellesmere, and has a public reputation under each of these names, may show what confusion would arise were such a practice common among any people.<\/p>\n
We find, in fact, from various instances, that the names which people use all their lives, were imposed at the time of birth, and were founded upon peculiarity of personal appearance\u2014as Esau, from his redness; upon some circumstance attending the birth\u2014as in the case of Jacob; or upon some hope or expectation which the parents entertained, or upon some sentiment or idea that was then prominent in the paternal mind\u2014as in the case of Cain, Seth, Noah, and the twelve founders of the tribes of Israel, not to mention later instances.<\/p>\n
As to the question of appropriateness, it may appear that the point has been too much pressed by some writers. Most of the names of which we know the origin are appropriate to the occasions in which they originated; but not many of these, or of others, bear any special appropriateness to the character or career of the men by whom they were borne. Some of the names are manifestly inappropriate to the history of the persons who bore them. Thus even the wise Solomon was mistaken in giving the name of Rehoboam (an enlarger), to his son; for that son, instead of enlarging the dominions of the house of David, reduced it from the dominion over twelve tribes to two. So David gave the name of Absalom (father of peace, or, as some make it, father\u2019s peace) to the son who proved the greatest disturber of his peace and happiness. So also Jehu signifies . constant man, yet the king who bore it proved inconstant in his latter days, and \u201cregarded not to walk in the ways of the Lord God of Israel,\u201d 2Ki_10:31. Naomi felt her name to be inappropriate, as it certainly was during ten years of her life; and such is the course of human life that there is no name, whether of pleasant or unpleasant import, which will not be suitable in some portion of any man\u2019s life, and unsuitable at another. Still there is a degree of appropriateness in many of the Scripture names considerably beyond what might be expected, and sufficient to justify surprise. Some go so far as to suppose that parents were often inspired to bestow names upon their children predatorily indicative of their future state and career. A pious and intelligent writer Note: Bush, in his Notes on Judges. remarks, on the very case before us, \u201cPerhaps the names were respectively given by the suggestion of the Holy Spirit to indicate the mournful contrast between the once flourishing condition of the hopeful pair, and the subsequent sore adversity and blighting desolation of the family.\u201d That this was sometimes the case we know. How far it was so in this particular case we know not; but it is quite possible that both Chilion and Mahlon were such weakly children as to suggest a difficulty in rearing them, and to indicate the probability of that early death which actually befell both of them. In a learned American writer Note: Hughes\u2019s Female Characters of Holy Writ, ii. 26. 1846. we find a remark on the general subject which well deserves consideration. He is speaking with regard to the name of Gideon\u2019s aspiring son, Abimelech, which means \u201cmy father a king,\u201d and hints that the name may have prompted to the ambitious course he pursued, by reflecting upon the import of the name. \u201cThe influence of names,\u201d he adds, \u201cin the formation of character, is probably much greater than is usually imagined, and deserves the especial attention of parents in their bestowment. Children should be taught that the circumstance of their bearing the names of good men or women who have lived before them, constitutes an obligation upon them to imitate or perpetuate their virtues.\u201d This observation has peculiar force in America, where the people are prone to give the surnames of noted persons as first names to their children.<\/p>\n
To the same effect an old writer Note: Richard Bernard, \u201cPreacher of God\u2019s Word at Batcombe in Somersetshire,\u201d in his Ruth\u2019s Recompense. London, 1628. observes on the place before us: \u201cAnd here note, in all their names, how significant they be, which the Hebrews did ever observe in naming their children. True it is, that good names have no virtue in them to make men better, nor names without significance to make any worse; yet, for reverence of our holy profession let us give our children good names, significant and comely\u2014not absurd, ridiculous, and impious, as some have done, out of the spirit of profaneness.\u201d<\/p>\n
Christopher Ness makes substantially the same remark, adding, \u201cOur very names should mind us of our duty.\u201d He pleasantly applies this view of the use of names to the case of Elimelech: \u201cA good name (in its sense and signification) may be of great comfort to a man in an evil day. Thus it was to this man, whose name signified, My God is king. He might make a believing use thereof, pondering in his mind after this manner\u2014\u2018Although there be a famine in the land of promise, whereby I am driven out of my native country, and constrained to dwell in idolatrous Moab\u2014yet my God is king over all\u2014over all persons, over all nations. He hath an uncontrollable sovereignty over all men and matters, and is not bound to give an account of any matter to any man. Note: Job_33:13. \u2019Tis good for me to be where my God, who is my king, will have me to be. I am, wherever I am, evermore upon my Father\u2019s ground; for the earth is the Lord\u2019s, and the fulness thereof.\u2019\u201d Note: Psa_24:1.<\/p>\n
Let us recollect that these names, which are to us abstract and unintelligible proper names, were to those persons apparent in their full meaning whenever used. This is rarely the case with us; for although most of the names we employ are significant, their significance lies hid in the foreign languages from which they are derived; and even if we use the very same names the Hebrews employed, they would not appear to us, unless specially instructed, in the same force and meaning which they had to them. Yet we are disposed to regret the increasing disuse into which names consciously significant\u2014at least to those who give and to those who receive them\u2014have fallen. They are even treated with something like disrespect. We have lived to hear the use of one of the most touching and beautifully significant names of Scripture received, as a name merely\u2014and merely from its unusual sound\u2014with coarse merriment in one of the highest assemblies of our nation. Let the scorners refer to 1Ch_4:9-10, and \u201claugh\u201d no more. And Jabez was more honorable than his brethren; and his mother called his name Jabez (sorrowful), saying, Because I bare him with sorrow. And Jabez called on the God of Israel, saying, Oh that thou wouldest bless me indeed, and enlarge my coast, and that thine hand might be with me, and that thou wouldest keep me from evil, that it may not grieve me. And God granted him that which he requested.\u201d This is in fact an illustration of the use the Hebrews made of their significant names; and precisely of the kind which is suggested by Ness, although he takes no account of this proof. The application in which the name originated we see clearly enough; but the interesting recognition of it in the last words of his prayer escape notice in a translation. In the original, the word grieve (\u201cthat it may not grieve me\u201d), is the verb from which his own name (sorrowful) is derived.<\/p>\n
Autor: JOHN KITTO<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Names\u2014Rth_1:2 It is worthy of remark that Bethlehem, which is connected with both the histories which form the appendix to the book of Judges, is also the scene of the history of Ruth, which is another appendix to that book, and seems to have anciently formed part of it. By virtue of these various intimations … Continue reading ““214. NAMES\u2014RUTH 1:2””<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-16566","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-sermons"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16566","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=16566"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16566\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=16566"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=16566"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=16566"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}