[Seven_0]

But....you know...people are still going to call me a crackpot because I think that this prohibition included Boaz marrying a woman of the "Kingdom of Moab" also! That's why Ruth was not of that kingdom....but an Israelite of either the tribe of Gad, Rueben or Mannesah! Why....do I believe this? Because I'm using my God given brain!

You have written an excellent post; up to the last sentence. Don’t let your attitude detract from your debating skills. It is no accident that there is evidence for both sides of this argument.

So far, you have not convinced me that Ruth was an Israelite.

Ruth 4:5-6 Then said Boaz, What day thou buyest the field of the hand of Naomi, thou must buy it also of Ruth the Moabitess, the wife of the dead, to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance. And the kinsman said, I cannot redeem it for myself, lest I mar mine own inheritance: redeem thou my right to thyself; for I cannot redeem it.

It seems that the kinsman did not realize that Ruth was part of the deal. If Ruth was an Israelite, then you need to give a reason why the kinsman was prevented from marrying her. It was his duty and his right. If Ruth was a Moabitess, then I need to show why Boaz could redeem her when the kinsman could not.

This discussion will not end here, so I will continue first. The kinsman was probably Boaz’s older brother as was Elimelech(Ruth 4:3) We have another example of the rule from 1 Corinthians 15:46, first natural then spiritual. The elder brother secures his Earthly inheritance while the younger brother looks for his spiritual inheritance.

Gal 3:17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.

I don’t like to say that the promise superceded the law, but rather, the law contains the provision for grace.

Matt 19:25-26 When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved? But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.

To be continued

Respectfully submitted

Seven

[Diego1618]

It seems that the kinsman did not realize that Ruth was part of the deal. If Ruth was an Israelite, then you need to give a reason why the kinsman was prevented from marrying her. It was his duty and his right. If Ruth was a Moabitess, then I need to show why Boaz could redeem her when the kinsman could not.

It seems somewhat bizarre that you would be a stickler on the Levirate Law (Kinsman Redeemer) [Deuteronomy 25:5-10] and so easily dismiss the commands given to not marry Moabite women: [Deuteronomy 23:3][I Kings 11:1-2][Ezra 9:1-2][Nehemiah 13:1]. You seem to think that Naomi and family would cavalierly disregard the command in Deuteronomy given just a couple of hundred years prior....but then turn around and follow commands to the letter....about the Levirate Law....ten years later....back in Judah.

If you stop and think about it you would realize that the reason the law was carefully being followed by Boaz, Naomi and Ruth was because Ruth was recognized as an Israelite. The Law that they were following expressly forbid marriage with foreign women. All offspring of these marriages were to be treated as outcasts in Israel!

If Mahlon had married a foreign women then there would be no requirement for any relative (Kinsman) to perpetuate the act. Naomi would be able to have her land redeemed but in no way could observance of the Law be made to include procreating with a foreign woman. The kinsman who refused the deal and relinquished his rights would have been the first to say: "Hey, no law exists here....and I don't have to raise up any outcast children!" [Deuteronomy 23:2] But, he doesn't say that...he just says, "You do it"... further proving that Ruth was indeed an Israelite.

The Hebrew word used in the above scripture is : Strong's #4464 mamzer (mam-zare')from an unused root meaning to alienate; a mongrel, i.e. born of a Jewish father and a heathen mother; bastard.

The Levirate Law did not require the first in line to be the Kinsman Redeemer.....only that a brother accept the responsibility. Notice that Boaz says in verse 13 of Chapter 3 that the first Kinsman Redeemer may not want to accept. In other words...he may have accepted a younger, more fertile Naomi....but having to accept the responsibility of the daughter-in-law also.....no way! He told Boaz....Go for it! The first Kinsman was not prevented from taking Ruth...he just opted out.

This is a good example of translators reading something into scripture that is simply not there. They all praise Ruth for being a Heathen Moabitess, a descendant of a people abhorrent to God and proclaim her to be a saintly ancestor of Our Lord. But Ruth could not have been a racial descendant of Moab because the "Levirate Law" would then not apply to her.

Finally....700/800 years later when Ezra brings the folks back from Babylon he tore his hair and his beard, lamenting of the crime committed of intermarriage with Heathens. Read these two chapters of Ezra (9&10) and then ask yourself why the Holy Spirit caused these words to be written if it was O.K. for Boaz to marry a foreign women and set the stage for the Davidic line down through Christ.

Bottom line....there is too much in scripture commanding the Israelites not to marry foreign women to even consider that Ruth, an ancestor of Our Lord, could ever be one.