Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Buggman

A different time in history is important, but that doesn’t change the issue of openness versus closedness. In a time of nation-states and borders and tight control, there are laws about the movement of one people into the territory of another.

Moreover, Ruth had marriage rights in a land not her own by virtue of her marriage to Naomi’s son. Those rights were honored even though she were a foreigner.


156 posted on 10/24/2011 8:34:54 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True Supporters of our Troops PRAY for their VICTORY!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies ]


To: xzins
Those rights were honored even though she were a foreigner.

Ruth didn't cross the border with a few thousand Moabites claiming such "rights" in Israel, so I think your analogy begins to break down. The equivalent situation would be if an American family moved to Mexico, the sons got married but died, and one of the widows came back into America legally with her mother-in-law to assist her in her old age, adopted into the culture ("Your people will be my people and your God my God.") and later earned her citizenship legally after marrying an American.

I don't think we'd be having this conversation if that were the situation.

Shalom

159 posted on 10/24/2011 11:30:50 AM PDT by Buggman (returnofbenjamin.wordpress.com - Baruch haBa b'Shem ADONAI!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson