Ruth 4:17 marks the first time in the English Bible that David, son of Jesse and future King of Israel, is mentioned. The events in the book of Ruth took place several decades prior to David’s birth (Ruth 1:1), but the great-grandson of Ruth is mentioned twice at the end of the book (4:17,22) in order to highlight the lineage of the Messiah—from Judah’s son, Perez (Ruth 4:18; Genesis 38:29; cf. 49:10), to Obed (Ruth’s son), to David (to whom God promised an heir, Who would establish an eternal kingdom—2 Samuel 7:12-13; Psalm 89:3-4; Luke 1:31-33).

Many skeptics question how David could be a descendant of Ruth, a Moabite, and yet also become the divinely chosen King of Israel (1 Samuel 16:1-13). After all, Moses wrote: “An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter the assembly of the Lord; even to the tenth generation none of his descendants shall enter the assembly of the Lord forever” (Deuteronomy 23:3). So how could King David, the great-grandson of a Moabite woman, be allowed into the assembly of God?

First, one must consider the meaning of the phrase “shall not enter the assembly of the Lord.” Did Moses mean that Ammonites or Moabites (1) could not live within the borders of Israel, (2) could not become part of the Israelite community in general, (3) could not gather together and become part of an actual assembly of the Israelites (cf. Deuteronomy 5:22; 9:10; 10:4; 18:16), (4) could not become one of the elders or officials who often assembled together (cf. Deuteronomy 31:28,30), and/or (5) could not become part of the religious community (cf. Leviticus 21:17-21)—that is, were they forbidden “from participation in religious rites in the homes and at the tabernacle and later at the temple”1? While Moses and the original recipients of this command doubtlessly understood the precise meaning of Deuteronomy 23:3, those living 3,500 years this side of the giving of the Law of Moses (and who have never been accountable to that law), may never know for sure exactly what the Lord meant. And, if neither the Christian nor the skeptic can know for sure what the precise meaning of the “assembly of the Lord” is in Deuteronomy 23:3, then obviously no proven contradiction exists.

Second, different kinds of “outsiders” lived in and around the Israelites. With two-and-one-half tribes of Israel inhabiting the east side of the Jordan (Numbers 32), where the Moabites and Ammonites lived and where the Israelites were currently camping (Deuteronomy 1:5; 29:1) when Moses gave the Moabite/Ammonite restriction of Deuteronomy 23:3, he was referring to the non-converted, uncircumcised “alien” or “foreign” Moabite/Ammonite who was never to be allowed into the general Israelite community. Ruth may have been a Moabite ethnically, but religiously she was a dedicated follower of the LORD (Ruth 1:16-18), who participated in and abided by Mosaic law (Ruth 3:1-18; 4:1-12; Deuteronomy 25:5-10).2 Thus, she and her faithful descendants (including David) were rightly accepted in Israel.

Another reason Deuteronomy 23:3 would not have applied to Ruth and her offspring is simply because a non-Israelite mother in Israel (especially one who was a proselyte!) did not determine the nationality of her offspring. Joseph’s Egyptian wife did not make their sons Ephraim and Manasseh Egyptians (Genesis 41:50-52). Moses’ marriage to Zipporah, a Midianite (Exodus 2:11-25), did not disqualify their sons Gershom and Eliezer from being Israelites (Exodus 2:22; 18:1-4), nor did it make them Midianites. Salmon’s marriage to Rahab (the Jerichoan harlot) did not mean their son Boaz was a recognized Gentile of Jericho (Matthew 1:5). And the Moabitess Ruth, wife of Boaz, did not make their son Obed, their grandson Jesse, their great-grandson David, or their descendants Joseph and Mary (the earthly parents of Jesus) anything other than legitimate descendants of Abraham (Matthew 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38)—according to the standard reckoning of Israelite heritage. In the eyes of all of Israel, David was an Israelite of the tribe of Judah—and was no more a Moabite than he was a Jerichoan.3

Although Boaz, Ruth, and David were imperfect people (Romans 3:23), who broke various Old Testament commandments (cf. 2 Samuel 11-12), neither these three nor God (in appointing David as king over Israel) ignored or broke the law of Deuteronomy 23:3.

A common question arises regarding Jesus' lineage: how can Jesus be the Messiah when He has both Moabite and Ammonite ancestry listed in His genealogies (per Deuteronomy 23:3)? Furthermore, did the author of Deuteronomy 23:3–4 “forget” that in Numbers 22:7 it was Midian and not Ammon who with Moab hired Balaam to curse Israel?

First, let’s look at the Deuteronomy passage in question:

> "No Ammonite or Moabite may enter the assembly of the Lord. Even to the tenth generation, none of them may enter the assembly of the Lord forever, because they did not meet you with bread and with water on the way, when you came out of Egypt, and because they hired against you Balaam the son of Beor from Pethor of Mesopotamia, to curse you." (Deuteronomy 23:3–4)

Skeptics sometimes claim that since Jesus has both Moabite (direct) and Ammonite (by adoption) bloodlines, He cannot be the Messiah. However, this claim misinterprets the text. The text specifically states that an Ammonite or Moabite male is proscribed. The term used for each is male, not female. An Ammonite woman is called an Ammonitess (1 Kings 14:21; 2 Chronicles 12:13) and a Moabite woman is called a Moabitess (Ruth 1:22; 2 Chronicles 24:26). According to ancient tradition, such national exclusions typically followed the father. The meaning of the text is that any pagan Ammonite or Moabite male cannot enter the assembly of the Lord. Therefore, this text does not disqualify Jesus as the Messiah.

Furthermore, it refers to the Ammonite or Moabite man remaining pagan. Historically, even early commentaries interpreted the command of Deuteronomy 23:3 to apply to a male Moabite and Ammonite, but not to a Moabitess or Ammonitess.

Regarding the Ammonite bloodline, that was through Solomon’s son Rehoboam (1 Kings 14:21), and he is in Jesus’ legal bloodline through Joseph. In regard to the Moabite bloodline (from Ruth), a non-Israelite mother in Israel who was a proselyte did not determine the nationality of her offspring. The Moabitess Ruth, wife of Boaz, did not make their son Obed, their grandson Jesse, their great-grandson David, or their descendants Joseph and Mary anything other than legitimate descendants of Abraham.

Additionally, the Israelites were commanded to treat the sojourner well: "The stranger who dwells among you shall be to you as one born among you, and you shall love him as yourself" (Leviticus 19:34). People from other nations who worshipped the Lord were welcomed to participate in religious festivals.

The Role of Midian

Regarding the claim that the text confused Ammon, Moab, and Midian: Deuteronomy 23:4 lists two reasons for the curse on Ammon and Moab. The first is "because they did not meet you with bread and with water on the way." As descendants of Abraham’s nephew Lot, they should have been sympathetic to the Israelites. Instead, they were hostile.

Moab and Ammon are often viewed as one group in Scripture. What Moab does can be said of Ammon and vice versa. Numbers 22–24 shows how Midian was intertwined with Moab, and their elders were united under Balak of Moab. God often viewed Midian and Moab as one unit when they were in collusion against Israel.

It may also be that Midian was not specifically named in that generational curse because Moses had married a Midianite woman, his father-in-law was a Midianite priest to God, and his brother-in-law Hobab served as a scout for them. Yet Midian did not escape judgment for the Balaam incident; Numbers 31 records that Israel went to war against them. There was no need for a generational curse on their assembly participation because they were directly judged by God in battle.

Conclusion

Jesus’ Messianic status is not affected by His Moabitess ancestry (through Ruth), and time and again throughout Scripture, the people of Ammon, Moab, and Midian are equated as collaborating against Israel. There is no contradiction.

Ultimately, Jesus is the Messiah who breaks down all walls of hostility. As the Apostle Paul writes:

> "For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation... that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity." (Ephesians 2:14-16)

Christians understand that Jesus brings all nations near by His blood, fulfilling the Law and uniting all people in Himself.