MattY wrote: ↑Fri Jan 16, 2026 12:49 pm
We are not under the Old Testament law any more, but these things are there for our learning and admonition. They show God's heart and reflect His eternal law, and we would do well to adjust our thinking and actions accordingly. I do not necessarily agree that "there is a blessing for the nation that protects these groups, there is also divine judgment against those who exploit them" because just as there is no true prosperity gospel for individuals, neither is there such a prosperity gospel for nations; these warnings of judgment and blessings were under the OT Mosaic covenant with Israel, a covenant which has ended and does not apply to other nations. I do agree that "the spiritual and moral condition of a nation can be quite discerned by the way it treats these special groups," and I would add children and the unborn to these groups as well.
Would you agree that the OT commandments not to marry foreign wives, and for anyone who has, to divorce them and cast them out, also shows God’s heart for how we should live today?
Certainly not in the Book of Ruth. Or in Genesis 38. When we look at the Old Testament, we have to look at it as a whole, and through the eyes of Jesus.
The Genealogy of Jesus includes three foreign women: Tamar (Genesis 38; Matthew 1:3), Rahab (Joshua 2; Matthew 1:5), and Ruth (Matthew 1:5). The fact that this is mentioned so prominently in a genealogy is significant. It says something about identity.
Jesus' lineage is not ethnically pure. The Gospel did not come only to Jews.
0 x
1. Are we discussing the topic? Good.
2. Are we going around and around in a fight? Let's stop doing that.
3. Is there some serious wrongdoing or relational injury? Let's address that, probably not in public and certainly not for show.
Bootstrap wrote: ↑Fri Jan 16, 2026 2:18 pm
Certainly not in the Book of Ruth. Or in Genesis 38. When we look at the Old Testament, we have to look at it as a whole, and through the eyes of Jesus.
The Genealogy of Jesus includes three foreign women: Tamar (Genesis 38; Matthew 1:3), Rahab (Joshua 2; Matthew 1:5), and Ruth (Matthew 1:5).
But certainly the book of Ezra.
Then Ezra the priest stood up and said to them, “You have been unfaithful; you have married foreign women, adding to Israel’s guilt. Now honor a the Lord, the God of your ancestors, and do his will. Separate yourselves from the peoples around you and from your foreign wives.”
…
All these had married foreign women, and some of them had children by these wives.
.
Foreign wives is a common feature in the OT of a sign of unfaithfulness to God, ranging from Samson to Solomon.
In contrast, I don’t think God teaches us not to marry migrants in this day and age, and in fact such a marriage between two believers where one is a migrant would seem to be very much in order (and also is one of the few paths left for legal citizenship and avoiding deportation for someone who has overstayed a visa, entered the U.S. illegally, etc.)
So I view with great suspicion people who quote the OT about “foreigners” yet aren’t willing to apply the clear OT teaching not to marry “foreigners”.
Bootstrap wrote: ↑Fri Jan 16, 2026 2:18 pm
Certainly not in the Book of Ruth. Or in Genesis 38. When we look at the Old Testament, we have to look at it as a whole, and through the eyes of Jesus.
The Genealogy of Jesus includes three foreign women: Tamar (Genesis 38; Matthew 1:3), Rahab (Joshua 2; Matthew 1:5), and Ruth (Matthew 1:5).
But certainly the book of Ezra.
Ah, so what was different in the Book of Ezra? How does the context inform this?
Without looking at each statement in context, it's pretty baffling. But the context makes the patterns much clearer.
0 x
1. Are we discussing the topic? Good.
2. Are we going around and around in a fight? Let's stop doing that.
3. Is there some serious wrongdoing or relational injury? Let's address that, probably not in public and certainly not for show.
R7ehr wrote: ↑Fri Jan 16, 2026 10:34 am
My list would have said widows, orphans and the poor as top. I’d place poor as a higher category than foreigners. I imagine a wealthy foreigner doesn’t have a super special “top 3” privilege.
i’d add children, including the unborn. the disabled. no order in mind. as they present, probably.
0 x
i’m perfectly comfortable with an older, wiser, more docile Trump.
”Try hard not to offend. Try harder not to be offended.” Robert Martz
MattY wrote: ↑Fri Jan 16, 2026 12:49 pm
We are not under the Old Testament law any more, but these things are there for our learning and admonition. They show God's heart and reflect His eternal law, and we would do well to adjust our thinking and actions accordingly. I do not necessarily agree that "there is a blessing for the nation that protects these groups, there is also divine judgment against those who exploit them" because just as there is no true prosperity gospel for individuals, neither is there such a prosperity gospel for nations; these warnings of judgment and blessings were under the OT Mosaic covenant with Israel, a covenant which has ended and does not apply to other nations. I do agree that "the spiritual and moral condition of a nation can be quite discerned by the way it treats these special groups," and I would add children and the unborn to these groups as well.
Would you agree that the OT commandments not to marry foreign wives, and for anyone who has, to divorce them and cast them out, also shows God’s heart for how we should live today?
Yes, in the sense that they reflect God's heart for marriage: Not to be unequally yoked with unbelievers, but to marry someone who is a believer. The problem was not that they were foreigners, but that they were idol worshippers. (Side issue: As for Ezra and Nehemiah, I'm not convinced that the text tells us that they did the right thing at the end of their books (even though they thought their actions were justified). Not once in Ezra 10 or in Nehemiah 13 does God speak. There was a problem, for sure, and Ezra solved it by telling them to divorce their wives, at Shekaniah's suggestion. Nehemiah went around beating people up. Both books end up rather strangely on a bit of a low note, after all the faithful positives during the early parts of the book. This could be pointing to the continued need for a Redeemer.)
Adding to MattY, Ezra and Nehemiah are not prophetic but historical. It might be worth noting what God said through the prophet active in that time period (Malachi) about divorce.
What criteria is chosen to cherry pick which OT verses apparently are binding law in a Christian believers?
The verses used earlier also are in a context. I find it troubling to simply say Ezra’s words about foreigners aren’t inspired scripture and don’t apply today yet somehow Moses’s do.
In the context of the OT law, marriage to foreign women was forbidden.
JohnH wrote: ↑Sat Jan 17, 2026 9:04 am
What criteria is chosen to cherry pick which OT verses apparently are binding law in a Christian believers?
If we want to avoid cherry-picking, we need to read the entire Bible, in context.
But the New Testament clearly sees the Hebrew Bible as Scripture. Jesus came to fulfill the law. So you are essentially asking what Jesus meant by that. He didn't say the Hebrew Bible goes away. Paul certainly did not say that either. Both refer to the Hebrew Bible as Scripture.
JohnH wrote: ↑Sat Jan 17, 2026 9:04 amThe verses used earlier also are in a context. I find it troubling to simply say Ezra’s words about foreigners aren’t inspired scripture and don’t apply today yet somehow Moses’s do.
In the context of the OT law, marriage to foreign women was forbidden.
Only if you ignore the parts of the Hebrew Bible that you prefer to ignore. Which is the definition of cherry-picking. Single verses out of context, aren't a good way to avoid cherry-picking.
If you want to avoid cherry-picking, you have to take these other passages into account and interpret the whole, in light of the New Testament. That takes time, prayer, and openness.
1 x
1. Are we discussing the topic? Good.
2. Are we going around and around in a fight? Let's stop doing that.
3. Is there some serious wrongdoing or relational injury? Let's address that, probably not in public and certainly not for show.
JohnH wrote: ↑Fri Jan 16, 2026 2:10 pm
Would you agree that the OT commandments not to marry foreign wives, and for anyone who has, to divorce them and cast them out, also shows God’s heart for how we should live today?
Boaz married a foreign wife who became an ancestor, according to the flesh, of Jesus.
But more importantly, Israel was the people of God. Today, that's properly applied by saying Christians shouldn't marry non-Christians. Jesus explicitly changed the OT law on divorce.
JohnH wrote: ↑Fri Jan 16, 2026 2:10 pm
Would you agree that the OT commandments not to marry foreign wives, and for anyone who has, to divorce them and cast them out, also shows God’s heart for how we should live today?
Boaz married a foreign wife who became an ancestor, according to the flesh, of Jesus.
But more importantly, Israel was the people of God. Today, that's properly applied by saying Christians shouldn't marry non-Christians. Jesus explicitly changed the OT law on divorce.
The OT explicitly says not to marry foreign women and harshly condemns it.
Ruth is a rare example of a convert to Judaism and thus a marriage to her was no longer a “foreign wife”. Otherwise, marriages to foreign wives is roundly condemned.
