Foreignness and Poverty in the Book of Ruth: A Legal Way for a Poor Foreign Woman to Be Integrated into Israel
Foreignness and Poverty in the Book of Ruth: A Legal Way for a Poor Foreign Woman to Be Integrated into Israel
复制标题
《路得记》中的异国情调和贫困：贫穷的外国妇女融入以色列的合法途径
DOI：
10.2307/25610195
复制
发表时间：
2009
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Agnethe Siquans
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Agnethe Siquans
（ProQuest：.表示省略的公式。）路得记中的两个重要主题是外邦性和犹太社会对外邦人的接受。为了使摩押妇女融入以色列，圣经作者引用了律法来保护穷人，特别是寡妇、孤儿和外侨，以及娶寡嫂制婚姻。这样，就有可能令人信服地为外国妇女融入以色列社会辩护。这篇文章将仔细研究路得的法律的地位，特别是关于申命记的法律。1它将表明路得作为“外国女人”，一个.取代了持有...身份的移民，在以色列的外国人她，作为一个女人对她自己，作为“死者的妻子，”实现了法律的地位，是不适用于任何其他妇女在OT。首先，我将讨论以利米勒及其家人在摩押的地位，然后分析路得在伯利恒的处境，重点是描述她地位的四个术语：摩押人，...，而且...最后，我将对犹大一个贫穷的外国寡妇的地位得出一些结论。I.以利米勒和他在摩押的家人在路得记中可以找到两个具有相反前提条件的平行情况：以利米勒和路得。2第一章讲述了一个以色列人以利米勒和他家人的故事。由于饥荒，这些人被迫住在外国-摩押。后来，露丝以外国人的身份来到了犹大的伯利恒。对这两种情况的描述是不同的。尽管以利米勒和路得的法律的地位并不相同，但本书的作者倾向于将这两种情况联系起来。可以肯定的是，路得记告诉我们的一切，关于以利米勒在摩押的地位，或者路得在犹大的地位，都是从以色列人的角度来看的。在古代近东的法律的法典中没有提到外国人。3路得记反映了一个完全内在的圣经讨论，涉及申命记的概念.在以色列，并使用术语来表示一个社会现实，这是没有设想在申命记。以利米勒的逗留在摩押是提出只有几句话（路得记1：1-3）。作者用希伯来语动词描述以利米勒在摩押的逗留. Jose Ramirez Kidd指出，在希伯来圣经中，这个动词最常指的是在其他国家作为陌生人生活的以色列人;也就是说，它指的是移民。因为这个名词只用于居住在以色列的移民。然而，以利米勒在摩押似乎有一个确定的地位。5这表明路得记的作者假定申命记对摩押的要求是.在以色列，这对在外国的以色列人同样有效。6以利米勒的两个儿子娶了摩押女子俄珥巴和路得为妻。这本书的作者并不认为这是有问题的，尽管这种结合在其他圣经文本中并非没有问题。正如Irmtraud Fischer（以及之前的其他人）所论证的那样，路得记是故意写来反对申命记的某种解释的，尤其是在以斯拉记和尼希米记中可以找到。申命记23：4排除了亚扪人和摩押人加入以色列的会众（.），申命记7：3禁止以色列男女与住在迦南的外邦人结婚。8这些婚姻正是以斯拉和尼希米所严格禁止的那种关系。9相反，路得记的作者没有评论这一事实，10这表明以色列家庭在摩押的处境似乎对他/她来说并不构成问题。妇女的丈夫和儿子为其提供法律的地位。然而，在男性家庭成员死亡后，情况发生了变化。没有男性家长，摩押以色列妇女的地位以及她的儿媳的地位就不再有保障。…
(ProQuest: ... denotes formulae omitted.) Two important topics in the book of Ruth are foreignness and the acceptance of foreigners by Judahite society. In order to integrate a Moabite woman into Israel, the biblical author refers to the laws of the Torah to protect the poor-especially widows, orphans, and aliens-as well as to levirate marriage. Thus, it becomes possible to argue convincingly for the integration of a foreign woman into Israel. This article will take a closer look at the legal status of Ruth, with particular regard to Deuteronomic law.1 It will show that Ruth as "foreign woman," a ..., takes the place of an immigrant holding the status of a ..., an alien, in Israel. She, as a woman on her own, as "the wife of the dead," achieves a legal status that is not applied to any other woman in the OT. First, I will discuss the status of Elimelech and his family in Moab and then analyze the situation of Ruth in Bethlehem, focusing on four terms that describe her status: Moabite, ..., and ... Finally, I will draw some conclusions about the status of a poor foreign widow in Judah. I. Elimelech and His Family in Moab Two parallel situations with opposite preconditions can be found in the book of Ruth: Elimelech's and Ruth's.2 The first chapter narrates the story of an Israelite, Elimelech, and his family. Owing to a famine, these people are forced to live in a foreign country-Moab. Later, Ruth arrives as a foreigner in Bethlehem in Judah. Both situations are described in different terms. Even though Elimelech's and Ruth's legal status are not the same, the author of the book tends to relate these two situations to each other. To be sure, everything the book of Ruth tells us about the status of Elimelech in Moab or that of Ruth in Judah is seen from an Israelite perspective. There is no reference to foreigners in ancient Near Eastern legal codes.3 The book of Ruth reflects an exclusively inner-biblical discussion that relates to the Deuteronomic concept of the ... in Israel and uses terminology to denote a social reality that is not envisaged in Deuteronomy. Elimelech's sojourn in Moab is presented in only a few sentences (Ruth 1:1-3). The author describes Elimelech's stay in Moab with the Hebrew verb ... Jose Ramirez Kidd points out that in the Hebrew Bible this verb most often refers to Israelites who live as strangers in other countries; that is, it refers to emigrants.4 Therefore Elimelech is not called a ..., because the noun is used only for immigrants who live in Israel. It seems, however, that Elimelech has an assured status in Moab.5 This suggests that the author of Ruth assumes that what Deuteronomy requires concerning the ... in Israel is equally valid for the Israelite in a foreign country. Obviously, Moab is hospitable.6 Elimelech's sons marry Moabite women, Orpah and Ruth. The author of the book does not consider this problematic, although such unions are not without problems in other biblical texts. As argued by Irmtraud Fischer (and others before), the book of Ruth is written deliberately against a certain interpretation of Deuteronomy that can be found especially in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah.7 Deuteronomy 23:4 rules out the incorporation of Ammonites and Moabites into the assembly of Israel (...), and Deut 7:3 forbids marriage between Israelite men or women and women or men of the nations who live in Canaan.8 These marriages are exactly the kind of relationship that is strictly forbidden by Ezra and Nehemiah.9 The author of the book of Ruth, in contrast, does not comment on this fact,10 which shows that the situation of the Israelite family in Moab does not seem to pose a problem for him/her.11 The men live as aliens in Moab. The women have husbands and sons who provide for their legal status. However, the situation changes after the death of the male family members. Without a male head of the family the status of the Israelite woman in Moab as well as the status of her daughters-in-law is no longer assured. …