Your misunderstanding of the scripture does not refute anything'
My response was to a specific point that Ruth is not a Moabite.
Was Ruth an Israelite?
- Thread starter Bob Dobbalina
- Start date
Yeshua is not a direct descendant of Ruth he is a direct descendant of David. Only the male carries the gene to make males. The Y chromosome is present in males, who have one X and one Y chromosome, while females have two X chromosomes. Women can only pass on the x chromosome which is the feminine part of the human makeup.
Hawkeye
Active member
Can you give me a specific example of my misunderstanding?
Can you give me a "proof" text that verifies she is a citizen, "Born and raised" of the Nation of Moab?
I will promise to change my opinion of the question and agree with you..... if you can do these things.
The answer is the same ...what are the consequences that you are talking about? We are still talking about Ruth and we know for sure that she is not an Israelite. Because she is not of the same people as her mother in law.
Hawkeye
Active member
So....are we to understand that Yeshua is not a descendant of Mary?
Hawkeye
Active member
Where do you find that in scripture?
Moab is not a tribe of Israel therefore Ruth cannot be an Israelite by birth. 4 And they took them wives of the women of Moab; the name of the one was Orpah, and the name of the other Ruth: and they dwelled there about ten years.
Israelites are not called women of Moab.
4 And they took them wives of the women of Moab; the name of the one was Orpah, and the name of the other Ruth: and they dwelled there about ten years.
You will promise but you won't concede.
He is the son of Mary. Mary is not the progenitor of a tribe. Jesus is a descendant of David from the tribe of Judah. Women don't have the capacity to pass on a Y chromosome that produces male children, women have two X chromosomes. When we use the term descendant we are talking lineage. Men pass on their lineage through the Y chromosome.
14 And they lifted up their voice, and wept again: and Orpah kissed her mother in law; but Ruth clave unto her.
15 And she said, Behold, thy sister in law is gone back unto her people, and unto her gods: return thou after thy sister in law.
16 And Ruth said, Intreat me not to leave thee, or to return from following after thee: for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God:
vs 16 is clear she and her mother in law did not have the same God.
Hawkeye
Active member
I never said it was...........
If they were born and raised on the "Plains of Moab" which Israel held for over 500 years it would be natural to call them that. What would you call a woman of "Russian" descent who has lived in Texas all of her life? Would it be O.K. to call her a "Texan"? Or....would you call her a "Mexican" because they used to own Texas?
Do you know what the Hebrew word "Sadeh" means? It is translated as Country in the King James' and other works. Here is the literal translation of that passage:
Young's Literal [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" (sadeh) of Moab, he, and his wife, and his two sons.
Are you aware that this is just another name for the "Plains of Moab" which Israel possessed at the time of Ruth?
Yes I will. I've been wrong many times about many things and find it gratifying if folks can correct me in my errors. This is how we learn.
Hawkeye
Active member
Many believe that the "lineage" in Luke 3 is that of Mary and her father, Heli....but we won't get into that right now.
It's another thread.
you asked for evidence of your misunderstanding of the scripture. Ruth was a woman of Moab. You seem to believe that she was a woman of Israel.
An Israelite born anywhere is called an Israelite. Because they belong to one of the 12 tribes of Israel. Are you saying that women of Moab are Israelites?
How does that change a woman of Moab into an Israelite?
I doubt it sir. because your argument does not prove what you are supposing. here is one of your questions...Can you give me a "proof" text that verifies she is a citizen, "Born and raised" of the Nation of Moab?
You have not given me a proof text that verifies that she was not "Born and raised" of the Nation of Moab
That is not my argument...you are not addressing my argument
Hawkeye
Active member
The Hebrew for gods in verse 15 is "Elohiym" which can also be translated.....Judges; Magistrates; Rulers etc. The Moabites had one god, Chemosh...singular!
Ruth lived during the time that Israel was ruled by Judges....before Yahweh allowed them a King.
Here is the King James for your passage as that's what most are familiar with:
[Ruth 1:16] And Ruth said, Intreat me not to leave thee, or to return from following after thee: for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God:
The Italics have been added to scripture. Those words are not in the manuscripts....so, Ruth is actually saying this:
And Ruth said, Intreat me not to leave thee, to return from following after thee: for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people my people, and thy God my God:
If she was born on the Plains of Moab to one of the three tribes given that land by Moses....then this would be a correct statement.
Thy people....my people; Thy God my God.
Hawkeye
Active member
The "Plains of Moab" was a territory held by Israel.....not Moab. Moab held it at one time but lost it to a King that Israel defeated.....and Israel became the new owners. Moses gave that land (East of Jordan) to three Israelite tribes. Ruth was born there about 150 years later....during the time of the Judges.
No. I'm saying that Ruth was an Israelite of either the tribe of Gad, Asher or Manesseh..... because they inhabited that area called the "Plains of Moab" at the time Ruth was alive.
The Nation of Moab is south of there.
There was no change. She was Israelite from birth!
I have given you scripture that shows the added words that try to define her as a Moabite woman.
I have shown you what the area where Naomi went is called "FIelds of Moab".....not the Nation of Moab.
I have shown you that Ruth's sister went back to her Elohiym which are not necessarily dieties...but can be men.
I have shown you the added words to scripture that try and make her say....."I will become your people and will worship your God." She doesn't say that at all.
[Ruth 1:17] Where thou diest, will I die, and there will I be buried: the LORD do so to me, and more also, if ought but death part thee and me.
If Ruth was a Moabite she would probably be unaware of this name for Yahweh. The Hebrew calls it Jehovah in the literal.
[Exodus 6:3] and I appear unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, as God Almighty; as to My name Jehovah, I have not been known to them;
Moses was told the Name of the Lord. Even the Patriarchs did not know it. By the time of Ruth it was known to most Israelites but rarely spoken out of respect. If she had been of the Nation of Moab she would not know this name....Jehovah.
Bob Dobbalina
Active member
Ruth is not a Moabite, your misunderstanding of scripture notwithstanding.
Bob Dobbalina
Active member
You know for sure because you're in thrall to fables passed down by tradition and mistranslation.
Bob Dobbalina
Active member
Nevermind.
Last edited:
but what is your point exactly? Ruth gave up her God to follow the God of her mother in law.
16 And Ruth said, Intreat me not to leave thee, or to return from following after thee: for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God:
What does that have to do with anything?... Ruth gave up her god whoever he was to follow Yahweh her mother-in-law's God.
https://biblehub.com/lexicon/ruth/1-16.htm I don't see a difference It is obvious that they were not the same people/tribe or worshipped the same God. You seem to be insinuating that they were of the same tribe and worshipped the same God. If they were why would Niomi send her back to her god and why would she want to follow Naiomi and be a part of Naiomi's people if she already was?
I already know that but it does not change anything... it was added to make reading easier
nothing changes
No, it wouldn't because she was a Moabite woman. That statement was made after rejecting her own people. https://biblehub.com/lexicon/ruth/1-22.htm
22 So Naomi returned, and Ruth the Moabitess, her daughter in law, with her, which returned out of the country of Moab: and they came to Bethlehem in the beginning of barley harvest.
So the word used for Moabite in this verse in the Hebrew means a descendant of Moab not a descendant of Israel.
You can use the lexicon and Strongs concordance. That should satisfy your quest. Moabites are not descendants of Israel
you have to support that claim else it is baseless sir
22 So Naomi returned, and Ruth the Moabitess, her daughter in law, with her, which returned out of the country of Moab: and they came to Bethlehem in the beginning of barley harvest. https://biblehub.com/lexicon/ruth/1-22.htm