|
||
|
I was therefore obliged to relate this history of Ruth, because I had a mind to demonstrate the power of God, who, without difficulty, can raise those that are of ordinary parentage to dignity and splendor, to which he advanced David, though he were born of such mean parents.
|
Links and references:
Semitic race: Josephus did not relate in the context concerning the marriage of Ruth as inter-racial in the sense of physical difference; even though, the non-Israelite neighbors were perhaps perceived by the Israelites as different because of their general wayward tradition noted as "ordinary", or perhaps "mean".
It seems it may be deduced that Ruth was Semitic and a descendant of Lot. "Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father. And the firstborn bare a son, and called his name Moab: the same is the father of the Moabites unto this day." (Gn. 19:36, 37 KJV) Lot and Abraham were related. (Gn. 13:8) Even though the Moabites were not Israeli, they were Semitic.
Patrilineal inheritance of posterity: Ruth being a progenitor (great grandmother) of King David was a famous exception [deviation] to the intra-family (intra-subrace) law, not the norm. However, inheritance was determined patrilineally and David was an heir of Israel through Booz, his great grandfather, the husband of Ruth. ( Mt. 1: 5, 6) Joseph, the husband of Mary, the mother of the Lord Jesus Christ, descended from the lineage of Booz. (Mt. 1: 16) Nevertheless, keep in mind Ruth's marriage was many generations and events before the restoration of the subracial law conflict in Ezra, wherein a covenant was made (see Romans 9:4).
Illegitimacy of modern, matrilineal, cultural inheritance: Also, note today the so called “Jewish”--not genetic or patrilineal Jews--determine their cultural (not racial!) descendancy matrilineally. The Jewish are actually land frauds due to their mockery of the law of Moses (Nu. 36:5-13) and the written Torah; while occupying Israel, they have no Torah legitimacy or real (patrilineal) inheritance in the land.
Understanding dispensations and
close-relative law:
"For instruction and guidance in
this area of philosophy (segregation) we need true and pure, divine
authority: The Old Testament gives us guidelines (I Tim. 1:8-11).
Marital segregation was instituted among the tribes within the race
of Israel (Nu. 36:5-13). (In order to understand what is Biblically
acceptable concerning the close relative law of marriage, you must
realize that God's commandments were given in dispensations. From the
beginning, Adam and Eve were the progenitors of the whole earth.
Thus, hypothetically, through regeneration, the earth could not have
been filled with people without one of their sons having sex with one
of their daughters. The close relative law was not in effect at that
time. Even later on, as the world passed, what was once permitted in
Jacob's time was incriminated in Lv. 18:18. As time continued, God's
laws were increased and written. Eventually and finally, the New
Testament books were written. So, even with a brief recalling, the
marriage between cousins may seem surprisingly close today; however,
it did not violate the close relative law of Lv. 18:6- 18).
Nevertheless, and relative to the point, these laws and commandments
(Nu. 36:5-13) protected the inheritance of the people of Israel. From
this, it can be deduced that a righteous nation should protect the
inheritance of its people even to the extent of intratribal
segregation." More
details
Zero-Tolerance, Racial and Cultural Segregation Constitution
Ruth was not an anti-Semite
Video
Visit the ISRAELI POVERTY REFORM CENTER
|
Download Now!
Sermons
Videos
|