Whose Who in the Neighborhood
Deuteronomy 23:4
Do not ‘ADMIT’ - the Moabites and Ammonites for all generations are excluded, and then the Egyptians and the Edomites for 3 generations only.
Interesting the contrast when setting rules for exclusion.
And it isn’t completely clear what they are excluded from.
And why those often mentioned enemies ‘the Amalek’ are not mentioned here.
More questions to dig into that seem to be part of political and/or marriage laws.
Clues to why Ammonites & Moabites may have been noted here: These are descendants of Ammon & Moab, the sons of Lot by his daughter (Gen 19:38) and fall under the ‘momzer’ definition, children of those who cannot marry within the law. .
On the other hand, the story of Ruth, shows the existence of friendly relations between Moabites and Israelites. And there also is the relation to Ruth and David to understand. King David was a descendent of Ruth and might have had Moabite blood. Yet there was a terrible war between David and the Moabites which also may have some connection.
Interesting link about this: Moabite Find
*** How is it that Ruth, a Moabite, married an Israelite when it was seemingly forbidden? The 'law' applies only to men and not to women. It was ok for an Israelite man to marry a Moabite woman... nice that the language clearly has masculine and feminie forms of the words to make that distinction. *** Later the Rabbis set up the rules of conversion - just to be sure.
There are other conflicts to this law; just back in Deut 2:26 when Moses recounts the history and mentions an episode with the Moabites and again in chapter 37 it relates to the Ammonites.
The Edomites are the descendents of Esau the brother of Jacob – they are mishpacha, ‘family’.
The Egyptians were the ones who enslaved the Israelites but then again earlier they offered them a haven and saved them from dire conditions.
And then there is the conflict with the repetitive commandment to ‘love the stranger’.
This just keeps on getting more complex to sort out. . . more to come.
Do not ‘ADMIT’ - the Moabites and Ammonites for all generations are excluded, and then the Egyptians and the Edomites for 3 generations only.
Interesting the contrast when setting rules for exclusion.
And it isn’t completely clear what they are excluded from.
And why those often mentioned enemies ‘the Amalek’ are not mentioned here.
More questions to dig into that seem to be part of political and/or marriage laws.
Clues to why Ammonites & Moabites may have been noted here: These are descendants of Ammon & Moab, the sons of Lot by his daughter (Gen 19:38) and fall under the ‘momzer’ definition, children of those who cannot marry within the law. .
On the other hand, the story of Ruth, shows the existence of friendly relations between Moabites and Israelites. And there also is the relation to Ruth and David to understand. King David was a descendent of Ruth and might have had Moabite blood. Yet there was a terrible war between David and the Moabites which also may have some connection.
Interesting link about this: Moabite Find
*** How is it that Ruth, a Moabite, married an Israelite when it was seemingly forbidden? The 'law' applies only to men and not to women. It was ok for an Israelite man to marry a Moabite woman... nice that the language clearly has masculine and feminie forms of the words to make that distinction. *** Later the Rabbis set up the rules of conversion - just to be sure.
There are other conflicts to this law; just back in Deut 2:26 when Moses recounts the history and mentions an episode with the Moabites and again in chapter 37 it relates to the Ammonites.
The Edomites are the descendents of Esau the brother of Jacob – they are mishpacha, ‘family’.
The Egyptians were the ones who enslaved the Israelites but then again earlier they offered them a haven and saved them from dire conditions.
And then there is the conflict with the repetitive commandment to ‘love the stranger’.
This just keeps on getting more complex to sort out. . . more to come.
posted by Chavarah @ 8:32 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home