1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

The Moabite Connection

Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by Heavenly Pilgrim, Oct 1, 2006.

Top Posters
  1. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    9,295
    Likes Received:
    0
    It was mentioned in a post by Southern , evidently quoting Hodge in an attempt to substantiate imputed guilt or sin, that “The children of Moab and Ammon were excluded from the congregation of the Lord forever, because their ancestors opposed the Israelites when they came out of Egypt.”

    In light of the Scriptural facts surrounding this particular statement, I am compelled to start a thread concerning it.

    Rather than for me to just state my opinion, I would like for those on the list to do their own homework and arrive at their own conclusion as to Hodge’s conclusion.

    I will give you a clue, and allow you to follow the lineage trail and see where it ends. Your first clue is, who was Ruth?
     
    #1 Heavenly Pilgrim, Oct 1, 2006
  2. Scarlett O.

    Scarlett O. Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 22, 2002
    Messages:
    11,384
    Likes Received:
    944
    Faith:
    Baptist
    In my unsolicited opinion, I do not believe that the word, "congregation", as found in Deuteronomy 23 means the corporate body of believers or the followers of God.

    I believe that it means the assembly of the governing body of God's people.

    Deuteronomy 23:1...."No one who has been emasculated by crushing or cutting may enter the assembly of the LORD."

    This cannot mean the entire body of God's people. If that were so, then a man in an accident whose private area was damaged could not have been a follower of God. And what about a baby boy, who succombed to a horrible accident during circumcision that left him with permanent damage? He, too, could never have been part of God's people if you take the word "congregation" to mean the entire body of believers. These men would be doomed to hell because of an accident to their physical bodies. I don't believe that.

    I believe it meant that they could not be a part of the governing assembly.

    Deuteronomy 23:2......"No one born of a forbidden marriage nor any of his descendants may enter the assembly of the LORD, even down to the tenth generation."

    Again, if the word "congregation" means the body of believers as a whole, then if your parents weren't married when you were born, then you couldn't be one of God's people. And NONE of your own descendants could be either, even if they weren't b*******. This is also referring to the body "politic", not the body as a whole. If "congregation" is the entire body, then two unmarried people who had a child would doom at least 10 generations of people automatically to hell. That's ridiculous.

    It means that b******* couldn't serve as part of the governing assembly. And if it could be proved that you had an ancestor whose parents weren't married, you couldn't be either.

    Deuteronomy 23:3......"No Ammonite or Moabite of any of his descendants may enter the assembly of the LORD, even down to the tenth generation."

    Ruth, the great-grandmother of King David and the ancestor of Jesus Christ, was a Moabite woman.

    This verse in Deuteronomy doesn't mean that a Moabite person couldn't be a proselyte. Many, many foreign peoples in the Old Testament became converts to Judaism.

    It means that these people could not become part of the ruling assembly of the Jewish people.



     
    #2 Scarlett O., Oct 1, 2006
  3. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    9,295
    Likes Received:
    0


    HP: There is a lot we cannot understand about some of the passages, that is for sure. Take the case of David. I believe it is obvious that he was no b****** yet his mother, although a Jew, was seemingly married previously to an Ammonite king named Nahash. I believe that this is what precipitated David’s remarks concerning his conception in Palms 51:5 when he states that he was conceived in sin by his mother’s actions. David was obviously an illegitimate child as the Jews believed was the case, but again he was made King. Further evidence was the fact that David was conceived in sin, was the notion that David had two half sisters, Zeruiah and Abigal. It explains the animosity between David and his brothers for he was but a half brother to them. It certainly explains why Jesse did not take David to be anointed king when the prophet clearly told him to bring all his sons. Again David was no b******, but he was considered ‘defiled’ by Jewish law.



    HP: An interesting connection for sure. Would this not make David related both to Ammonnite and to a Moabite, one by marraige and one by blood?
     
    #3 Heavenly Pilgrim, Oct 1, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 1, 2006
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Loading...