Which does not support your argument since your claim is that the land of Moab was under Israeli rule.
For some reason you do not believe Moses when he said multiple times that Gad, Reuben and Manasseh would take control of the Plains of Moab?
[Numbers 22:1] And the children of Israel set forward, and pitched in the plains of Moab on this side Jordan by
[Numbers 26:3] And Moses and Eleazar the priest spake with them in the plains of Moab by Jordan near
[Numbers 26:63] These are
they that were numbered by Moses and Eleazar the priest, who numbered the children of Israel in the plains of Moab by Jordan near
[Numbers 31:12] And they brought the captives, and the prey, and the spoil, unto Moses, and Eleazar the priest, and unto the congregation of the children of Israel, unto the camp at the plains of Moab, which are
by Jordan near
[Numbers 33:48-49] And they departed from the mountains of Abarim, and pitched in the plains of Moab by Jordan near
Jericho. And they pitched by Jordan, from Bethjesimoth even
unto Abelshittim in the plains of Moab.
[Numbers 33:50] And the LORD spake unto Moses in the plains of Moab by Jordan near
[Numbers 35:1] And the LORD spake unto Moses in the plains of Moab by Jordan near
[Numbers 36:13] These are
the commandments and the judgments, which the LORD commanded by the hand of Moses unto the children of Israel in the plains of Moab by Jordan near
And..............that's just the Book of Numbers1 There are forty more Old Testament references to the Plains of Moab and the Israelite conquest and control of that area for the next 700 years or so. The date of the Exodus is estimated to be around 1400/1450 B.C. Ruth would have been born to one of the tribes 0f Gad, Rueben or Manasseh sometime about 200 years later.
Vs 1... Now it came to pass in the days when the judges ruled, that there was a famine in the land. And a certain man of Bethlehemjudah went to sojourn in the country of Moab, he, and his wife, and his two sons.
See here the translators used the word judges to refer to judges... A certain man went to another country because there was a famine in his country...
The Hebrew does not say....Nation of Moab. The word is Sadeh. Here is the Literal Translation from the Hebrew: Young's Literal Translation
[Ruth 1: 1] And it cometh to pass, in the days of the judging of the judges, that there is a famine in the land, and there goeth a man from Beth-Lehem-Judah to sojourn in the fields
of Moab, he, and his wife, and his two sons.
The definition of Sadeh is: field, land
- cultivated field
- of home of wild beasts
- plain (opposed to mountain)
- land (opposed to sea)
If it were the "Nation" of Moab it would be neɪʃən/, ˈneɪ·ʃn, ˈneɪ·ʃnz;
Here is the transliterated Hebrew:
[Ruth ;] wayəhî bîmê šəfōṭ haššōfəṭîm wayəhî rā‘āḇ bā’āreṣ wayyēleḵə ’îš mibêṯ leḥem yəhûḏâ lāḡûr biśəḏê
mwō’āḇ hû’ wə’išətwō ûšənê ḇānāyw:
They had one chief god depicted by idols which can be numerous...what is your point?
The point being.....she did not return to her gods. She returned to her judges. Elohim does not necessarily refer to gods.
What is your point here if Yeshua is the son of Yahweh?
And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
He is also the Son of Mary who was the descendant of Nathan and He was pure Israelite. The bloodline was not contaminated by the mother of Rehoboam who could not enter the congregation for ten generations [Deuteronomy 23:3]. Why do you think scripture gives us two different genealogies?
There is no reason why Ruth could not be a Moabitess except that you don't believe the scripture and have to find a way around what it says...
Actually.....the reason I do believe she was an Israelite is because I have discarded phony Christian Fairy tales which attempt to tell us a "touchie Feelie" story which has no basis in fact. That is.....when you read the literal Hebrew and Greek and not some made up tale by dark ages translators that did not have a very good understanding of these ancient languages. When you do that...... most English contradictions in scripture just go away.
which is not an argument since his seed was not in Mary to make Yeshua
You've made my point! Joseph's seed was not in Mary......Nathan and his Father David had seeded the bloodline....Rehoboam had not. But Joseph....as a legal step father could.....and did pass on to Yeshua the legal birthright to the throne of David which came down from King Solomon.
Which has nothing to do with Ruth since Ruth cannot pass on seed to make boys
No....you're right....but she can pass on blood....and did.
How can he do it when Yeshua did not come from his loins?
Already explained. He (Joseph) was the legal step Father and since Yeshua was the eldest of His brothers.....the birthright was his.
I agree but only her half....she does not have the gene to make boys...she is born with all her eggs...These things have no bearing on Ruth being A Moabite...
Now this is ridiculous. Ruth's blood was in the veins of David, Nathan, Heli and Mary.
You have to do better than that, women do not have the gene to make boys. So your argument about Ruth has no bearing on Jesus
Good grief.....admit it. You've lost............