Ruth was not a Moabite Sunday Night Lesson:

George Orwell famously said. “The further a society drifts away from the truth. The more it will hate those who speak it.”

Paul put it like this:

Galatians 4:16

16 Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?

One of the first things you learn in Bible college is this. Don’t get your theology off the internet. Get your theology from the bible. Don’t get your theology from commentaries. You can consult them but don’t get your theology from them. And don’t get your theology from books about the bible. Get your theology from the bible. THAT is what it is for.

So, in order to understand whether or not Ruth was a Moabite we must get our answer from the word of God. And we will do so this morning. In order to understand the Bible we must have a basic understanding of geography time period and the culture of bible times. This is why our bibles have dates and maps.

The bible is not a simple book, the 100s of denominations prove this. But we are commanded to study.

Ruth was an Israelite.

The territory of the Moabites was originally east and northeast of the dead sea. Extending from the Arnon on the south and to the Javik river in the north. Then from the dead sea to the west and to the mountains to the east.

The area was called Moab for centuries. Even long after the Moabites were gone from it. When the Israelites entered the promised land, after wandering in the wilderness. The first people they conquered was the Moabites.

God commanded Israel to completely destroy all the occupants of Moab. And Israel did so.

At 1450 BC Sihon King of the Amorites. Conquered and occupied the area of Moab and was its ruler when Israel came in.

Numbers 21:26-29

26 For Heshbon was the city of Sihon the king of the Amorites, who had fought against the former king of Moab, and taken all his land out of his hand, even unto Arnon.

27 Wherefore they that speak in proverbs say, Come into Heshbon, let the city of Sihon be built and prepared:

28 For there is a fire gone out of Heshbon, a flame from the city of Sihon: it hath consumed ar of Moab, and the lords of the high places of Arnon.

29 Woe to thee, Moab! thou art undone, O people of Chemosh: he hath given his sons that escaped, and his daughters, into captivity unto Sihon king of the Amorites.

So the Israelites conquered the land of Moab killing all the people found there as God commanded.

Deuteronomy 2:32-34

King James Version

32 Then Sihon came out against us, he and all his people, to fight at Jahaz.

33 And the Lord our God delivered him before us; and we smote him, and his sons, and all his people.

34 And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain:

Then the Israelites went northward.Some Moabites escaped into other lands.

From here Israel went to the land of Amon.

Numbers 21:33

33 And they turned and went up by the way of Bashan: and og the king of bashan went out against them, he, and all his people, to the battle at edrei.

34 And the Lord said unto Moses, Fear him not: for I have delivered him into thy hand, and all his people, and his land; and thou shalt do to him as thou didst unto Sihon king of the Amorites, which dwelt at Heshbon.

35 So they smote him, and his sons, and all his people, until there was none left him alive: and they possessed his land.

This entire area east of the river Jordan was settled by Israel tribes. After all the Moabites or Amonites had been killed or driven out.

Deuteronomy 3:12

12 And this land, which we possessed at that time, from Aroer, which is by the river Arnon, and half mount Gilead, and the cities thereof, gave I unto the Reubenites and to the Gadites.

13 And the rest of Gilead, and all Bashan, being the kingdom of Og, gave I unto the half tribe of Manasseh; all the region of Argob, with all Bashan, which was called the land of giants.

14 Jair the son of Manasseh took all the country of Argob unto the coasts of Geshuri and Maachathi; and called them after his own name, Bashanhavothjair, unto this day.

15 And I gave Gilead unto Machir.

16 And unto the Reubenites and unto the Gadites I gave from Gilead even unto the river Arnon half the valley, and the border even unto the river Jabbok, which is the border of the children of Ammon;

Again this was around 1450 BC. This was Israelite territory. None of the original inhabitants were left alive in that area.

The Israelites had driven the Moabites out of the land of Moab hundreds of years before Ruth lived in Moab.

The proper understanding of the bible is that Ruth lived in Moab. And because of that was referred to as a Moabite. It is like saying I am from Arkansas, so I am an Arkansan. It is a geographic assignment and has nothing to do with her heritage. Which would have been an Israelite because Lott was Abraham’s nephew. And because both Abraham and his brother were descendants of Iber all of them would have been considered Hebrews.

The Israelites lived in the land of Moab for 300 years after destroying them all.

In 1143 BC Israel still owned the area called Moab and Ammon. As we find in: judges 11:12

12 And Jephthah sent messengers unto the king of the children of Ammon, saying, What hast thou to do with me, that thou art come against me to fight in my land?

13 And the king of the children of Ammon answered unto the messengers of Jephthah, Because Israel took away my land, when they came up out of Egypt, from Arnon even unto Jabbok, and unto Jordan: now therefore restore those lands again peaceably.

14 And Jephthah sent messengers again unto the king of the children of Ammon:

15 And said unto him, Thus saith Jephthah, Israel took not away the land of Moab, nor the land of the children of Ammon:

16 But when Israel came up from Egypt, and walked through the wilderness unto the Red sea, and came to Kadesh;

17 Then Israel sent messengers unto the king of Edom, saying, Let me, I pray thee, pass through thy land: but the king of Edom would not hearken thereto. And in like manner they sent unto the king of Moab: but he would not consent: and Israel abode in Kadesh.

18 Then they went along through the wilderness, and compassed the land of Edom, and the land of Moab, and came by the east side of the land of Moab, and pitched on the other side of Arnon, but came not within the border of Moab: for Arnon was the border of Moab.

19 And Israel sent messengers unto Sihon king of the Amorites, the king of Heshbon; and Israel said unto him, Let us pass, we pray thee, through thy land into my place.

20 But Sihon trusted not Israel to pass through his coast: but Sihon gathered all his people together, and pitched in Jahaz, and fought against Israel.

21 And the Lord God of Israel delivered Sihon and all his people into the hand of Israel, and they smote them: so Israel possessed all the land of the Amorites, the inhabitants of that country.

22 And they possessed all the coasts of the Amorites, from Arnon even unto Jabbok, and from the wilderness even unto Jordan.

23 So now the Lord God of Israel hath dispossessed the Amorites from before his people Israel, and shouldest thou possess it?

24 Wilt not thou possess that which Chemosh thy god giveth thee to possess? So whomsoever the Lord our God shall drive out from before us, them will we possess.

25 And now art thou any thing better than Balak the son of Zippor, king of Moab? did he ever strive against Israel, or did he ever fight against them,

26 While Israel dwelt in Heshbon and her towns, and in Aroer and her towns, and in all the cities that be along by the coasts of Arnon, three hundred years? why therefore did ye not recover them within that time?

So the Israelites had Moab and Amnon for 300 years.

In 1322 BC Amalek a man of Judah with his wife of Judah and his sons were driven out of Judah by famine and in Ruth one versus one the bible says this.

Ruth 1:1

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.

Notice it still refers to the area as the country of Moab. It doesn’t say that they went to live among the Moabites. It says they are in the country known as Moab. And there is a difference.

Only Israelites lived in Moab at this time. Ruth is an ancestor of David and therefore an ancestor of Jesus Christ. She could not have been an ancestor of the Moabites.

It could not have been any other way.

Deuteronomy 23:3

3 An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to their tenth generation shall they not enter into the congregation of the Lord for ever:

The Old Testament often refers to people by their geographical location rather than by their tribe:

A freshmen in bible college learns the following?

Did they have last names in biblical times? NO.

The Bible says nothing about last names: People in biblical times were not identified by their last names. Often times, people were characterized by where they lived (Mary Magdalene) or by their familial associations (Mary the mother of James and Joseph).

For example:

2 Samuel 23:8

8 These be the names of the mighty men whom David had: The Tachmonite that sat in the seat, chief among the captains; the same was Adino the Eznite: he lift up his spear against eight hundred, whom he slew at one time.

9 And after him was Eleazar the son of Dodo the Ahohite, one of the three mighty men with David, when they defied the Philistines that were there gathered together to battle, and the men of Israel were gone away:

10 He arose, and smote the Philistines until his hand was weary, and his hand clave unto the sword: and the Lord wrought a great victory that day; and the people returned after him only to spoil.

11 And after him was Shammah the son of Agee the Hararite. And the Philistines were gathered together into a troop, where was a piece of ground full of lentiles: and the people fled from the Philistines.

These men were all Israelites, but they were being identified in the bible by the lands in which they live. Not by their tribe. This is sometimes done in the OT. This is the same thing as calling Ruth a Moabite. It is a geographical reference and not a tribal one. In fact, the origins of our last names often has to do with geographical locations. Someone would be talking about John. And they would ask which John. Oh, you know John down by the river. And from that people would begin calling him John River. This and often a person’s occupation had a heavy influence on the development on last names. But this practice began in the bible.

But you say Ruth said your god will be my god. Again a persons religion says nothing about their biology. Even Solomon fell away.

It was the country of Moab but there were no Moabites in it. But it was still called Moab.

Ruth was an ancestor of David. So she had to be of Israel bc no one else lived there.

Now there was a country called Moab. Which was South of the River Arnon, Bordered by the land given to the tribe of Reuben. Which first belonged to the Moabites then when the Israelites came it was possessed by the Amorites and it was bordered by Edom in the South.

King David later conquered this small remnant of Moab. If David had been a Moabite the bible would have mentioned some kind of relationship. But it did not.

2 Samuel 8

8 And after this it came to pass that David smote the Philistines, and subdued them: and David took Methegammah out of the hand of the Philistines.

2 And he smote Moab, and measured them with a line, casting them down to the ground; even with two lines measured he to put to death, and with one full line to keep alive. And so the Moabites became David's servants, and brought gifts.

Why didn’t the bible record that David had a relationship through his grandmother Ruth? Because he didn’t. The historical record is obvious. David wasn’t killing his own cousins he was at war with the enemies of God, the Moabites.

1 Chronicles 2:5

5 The sons of Pharez; Hezron, and Hamul.

6 And the sons of Zerah; Zimri, and Ethan, and Heman, and Calcol, and Dara: five of them in all.

7 And the sons of Carmi; Achar, the troubler of Israel, who transgressed in the thing accursed.

8 And the sons of Ethan; Azariah.

9 The sons also of Hezron, that were born unto him; Jerahmeel, and Ram, and Chelubai.

10 And Ram begat Amminadab; and Amminadab begat Nahshon, prince of the children of Judah;

11 And Nahshon begat Salma, and Salma begat Boaz,

12 And Boaz begat Obed, and Obed begat Jesse,

13 And Jesse begat his firstborn Eliab, and Abinadab the second, and Shimma the third,

14 Nethaneel the fourth, Raddai the fifth,

15 Ozem the sixth, David the seventh:

So, Ruth was written in the time of David. 700 years later.

There are 5 generations between Nashan and David. A period of 400 years. The lifespans were considerably shorter than that of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Then the 400 years during the Judges years there are only 500 years recorded.

In proportion of the genealogy of Ruth to David is correct. Then Ruth is the great grandmother of David. And roughly lived up to 100 years before David lived.

And so I repeat:

Deuteronomy 23:3

3 An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to their tenth generation shall they not enter into the congregation of the Lord for ever:

So, Ruth could not have been a Moabite. Because there were not ten generations between David and Ruth. But of course 10th generation means forever.

But if you take it literally at most it was 3 generations. Which would mean that David could not enter into the congregation of the Lord.

But David delighted to do the will of God.

God is not a liar. He is consistent with his word. Zephaniah 2:9

9 Therefore as I live, saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, Surely Moab shall be as Sodom, and the children of Ammon as Gomorrah, even the breeding of nettles, and saltpits, and a perpetual desolation: the residue of my people shall spoil them, and the remnant of my people shall possess them.

Isaiah 25:10

10 For in this mountain shall the hand of the Lord rest, and Moab shall be trodden down under him, even as straw is trodden down for the dunghill.

Ruth was a pure Israelite who lived in Moab.

It is a dangerous thing to be in agreement with the Pharisees. To say that Jesus was of an impure line when the bible goes through tremendous detail to inform us that Jesus was pure. It is akin to denying the deity of Christ. And that is what this teaching that Ruth was a Moabite is designed to do. It was designed to teach the doctrine of the Pharisees in the house of God. To teach in a very sneaky and under handed way that the Pharisees were correct. It is a GROSS misinterpretation of the word of God and should NOT be taught in any true house of God.

Someone, anyone, tell me what Ruth’s last name is? Guess what? She didn’t have one. She was Ruth from Moab.

The teaching that Ruth was a Moabite is false. The early church knew she was from Moab is the meaning of these versus. Any other teaching is based completely in a LIE, One that ultimately denies that Jesus was the messiah. It is a very sneaky perversion of the word of God to deny Jesus Christ. And churches today eat it up and sit around waiting for what they think will be the real messiah coming to the third Temple in Israel. It is the indoctrination of Gods people into worshiping the Pharisees as Gods chosen. Rather than worshiping Jesus as King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

The NT covenant is very specific. Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. There is no special exemption for the Pharisees. No where does the bible say well if you are a Pharisee you don’t have to repent and have faith. No where in the bible does it say that Jesus will make a special second second coming for the Pharisees. Real bible prophecy is based around the church and Jesus Christ as you will see when we get into teaching real bible prophecy.

Jesus did come to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And who are they? Well, certainly not the Pharisees.

Gentile | Definition, History, & Usage 📷 Britannicahttps://www.britannica.com › ... › Religious Beliefs

“the Gentiles” means “the nations.” In postbiblical Hebrew, goy came to mean an individual non-Jew rather than a nation.

How sneaky of the Pharisees to change the meaning of words. They cannot take away your KJV so they will subvert the definition of words.

Think about this. Paul was a missionary to the gentiles. Now, if that word gentiles means nations. It means he did go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And where did he go? He went to Rome, he went to Greece he went to Europe. Not to the Pharisees. That is why they changed the definition of the word gentile. To destroy your understanding of the word of God. Jesus said clearly to the Jews that they were not his sheep in John 10.

If you don’t agree with the things I teach. Just come and talk to me. Asking hey Pastor can you explain this to me?

There is no need to holler and scream and act out in the house of God. There is no need to make false accusations against anyone in the house of God. This is not the way that Christians behave.

Before I close I want you to understand why the Pharisees have changed the definition of bible words in the last 100 years.

When the man of sin comes into this world. And some say he is already here. He will step into a world that has been prepared for him.

And all the religious people sitting in churches today have been taught lie after lie. They have been taught that Jews are Gods chosen people. But the new covenant says whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. I know our KJV says to the Jew first and also to the Gentile. But that is not what it means. It means to those in Judea and also to those who are in other nations.

In the eyes of God there is no such thing as a superior or chosen group of people. The bible says for God so loved the world. And that is what I teach here at Westside Baptist. None of this business about the Pharisees being superior should be taught anywhere.

God used the Hebrews in the Old Testament. And it doesn’t matter if the Hebrews were black or white or Asian. God used a donkey too. Do you go around worshiping donkeys as chosen?

Of course not.

Listen. When the man of sin comes onto the scene he is going to say that the Jews were right. After all they are Gods chosen. And people who don’t know any better will agree. Then he will say: The line of Jesus Christ was not pure because Ruth was a Moabite. And how many people will walk away from Jesus after seeing this Anti-Christ doing signs and wonders?

Paul said they went out from among us because they were never one of us.

Paul also said to be sober and to be vigilant because the devil goes about as a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour.

Don’t be fooled by the religion of the Pharisees. It has no place in any Christian church.

Jesus is the messiah. His line was absolutely pure. He came from the line the bible refers to as the sons of God in Luke 3:38. Not from the line Jesus referred to as tares. Tares were sown by the wicked one and are not of God. And are not a part of the line of Jesus Christ.

Pray; Dismiss