Text -- Deuteronomy 22:1-17 (NET)

Laws Concerning Preservation of Life

22:1 When you see your neighbor’s ox or sheep going astray, do not ignore it; you must return it without fail to your neighbor. 22:2 If the owner does not live near you or you do not know who the owner is, then you must corral the animal at your house and let it stay with you until the owner looks for it; then you must return it to him. 22:3 You shall do the same to his donkey, his clothes, or anything else your neighbor has lost and you have found; you must not refuse to get involved. 22:4 When you see your neighbor’s donkey or ox fallen along the road, do not ignore it; instead, you must be sure to help him get the animal on its feet again. 22:5 A woman must not wear men’s clothing, nor should a man dress up in women’s clothing, for anyone who does this is offensive to the Lord your God. 22:6 If you happen to notice a bird’s nest along the road, whether in a tree or on the ground, and there are chicks or eggs with the mother bird sitting on them, you must not take the mother from the young. 22:7 You must be sure to let the mother go, but you may take the young for yourself. Do this so that it may go well with you and you may have a long life. 22:8 If you build a new house, you must construct a guard rail around your roof to avoid being culpable in the event someone should fall from it.

Illustrations of the Principle of Purity

22:9 You must not plant your vineyard with two kinds of seed; otherwise the entire yield, both of the seed you plant and the produce of the vineyard, will be defiled. 22:10 You must not plow with an ox and a donkey harnessed together. 22:11 You must not wear clothing made with wool and linen meshed together. 22:12 You shall make yourselves tassels for the four corners of the clothing you wear.

Purity in the Marriage Relationship

22:13 Suppose a man marries a woman, has sexual relations with her, and then rejects her, 22:14 accusing her of impropriety and defaming her reputation by saying, “I married this woman but when I had sexual relations with her I discovered she was not a virgin!” 22:15 Then the father and mother of the young woman must produce the evidence of virginity for the elders of the city at the gate. 22:16 The young woman’s father must say to the elders, “I gave my daughter to this man and he has rejected her. 22:17 Moreover, he has raised accusations of impropriety by saying, ‘I discovered your daughter was not a virgin,’ but this is the evidence of my daughter’s virginity!” The cloth must then be spread out before the city’s elders.

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Wesley: Deu 22:1

Any man's.

Wesley: Deu 22:1

Dissemble or pretend that thou dost not see them; or pass them by as if thou hadst not seen them.

Wesley: Deu 22:2

To be used like thine own cattle.

Wesley: Deu 22:3

Dissemble that thou hast found it. Or, hide it, that is, conceal the thing lost.

Wesley: Deu 22:5

Namely, ordinarily or unnecessarily, for in some cases this may be lawful, as to make an escape for one's life. Now this is forbidden, both for decency sake, that men might not confound those sexes which God hath distinguished, that all appearance of evil might be avoided, such change of garments carrying a manifest sign of effeminacy in the man, of arrogance in the woman, of lightness and petulancy in both; and also to cut off all suspicions and occasions of evil, which this practice opens a wide door to.

Wesley: Deu 22:7

Partly for the bird's sake, which suffered enough by the loss of its young; for God would not have cruelty exercised towards the brute creatures: and partly for mens sake, to refrain their greediness, that, they should not monopolize all to themselves, but leave the hopes of a future seed for others.

Wesley: Deu 22:8

A fence or breastwork, because the roofs of their houses were made flat, that men might walk on them.

Wesley: Deu 22:8

The guilt of blood, by a man's fall from the top of thy house, thro' thy neglect of this necessary provision. The Jew's say, that by the equity of this law, they are obliged, and so are we, to fence or remove every thing, whereby life may he endangered, as wells, or bridges, lest if any perish thro' our omission, their blood be required at our hand.

Wesley: Deu 22:9

Either With divers kinds of seed mixed and sowed together between the rows of vines in thy vineyard: which was forbidden to be done in the field, Lev 19:19, and here, in the vineyard. Or, With any kind of seed differing from that of the vine, which would produce either herbs, or corn, or fruit - bearing trees, whose fruit might be mingled with the fruit of the vines. Now this and the following precepts, tho' in themselves small and trivial, are given, according to that time and state of the church, for instructions in greater matters, and particularly to commend to them simplicity in all their carriage towards God and man, and to forbid all mixture of their inventions with God's institutions in doctrine or worship.

Wesley: Deu 22:9

Legally and morally, as being prohibited by God's law, and therefore made unclean; as on the contrary, things are sanctified by God's word, allowing and approving them, 1Ti 4:5.

Wesley: Deu 22:10

Because the one was a clean beast, the other unclean whereby God would teach men to avoid polluting themselves by the touch of unclean persons or things.

Wesley: Deu 22:12

Or laces, or strings, partly to bring the commands of God to their remembrance, as it is expressed, Num 15:38, and partly is a public profession of their nation and religion, whereby they might be distinguished from strangers, that so they might be more circumspect to behave as became the people of God, and that they should own their religion before all the world.

Wesley: Deu 22:12

These words seem restrictive to the upper garment wherewith the rest were covered.

Wesley: Deu 22:13

And afterward falsely accuse her - What the meaning of that evidence is, by which the accusation was proved false, the learned are not agreed. Nor is it necessary for us to know: they for whom this law was intended, undoubtedly understood it.

JFB: Deu 22:1

"Brother" is a term of extensive application, comprehending persons of every description; not a relative, neighbor, or fellow countryman only, but any human being, known or unknown, a foreigner, and even an enemy (Exo 23:4). The duty inculcated is an act of common justice and charity, which, while it was taught by the law of nature, was more clearly and forcibly enjoined in the law delivered by God to His people. Indifference or dissimulation in the circumstances supposed would not only be cruelty to the dumb animals, but a violation of the common rights of humanity; and therefore the dictates of natural feeling, and still more the authority of the divine law, enjoined that the lost or missing property of another should be taken care of by the finder, till a proper opportunity occurred of restoring it to the owner.

JFB: Deu 22:5

Though disguises were assumed at certain times in heathen temples, it is probable that a reference was made to unbecoming levities practised in common life. They were properly forbidden; for the adoption of the habiliments of the one sex by the other is an outrage on decency, obliterates the distinctions of nature by fostering softness and effeminacy in the man, impudence and boldness in the woman as well as levity and hypocrisy in both; and, in short, it opens the door to an influx of so many evils that all who wear the dress of another sex are pronounced "an abomination unto the Lord."

JFB: Deu 22:6-7

This is a beautiful instance of the humanizing spirit of the Mosaic law, in checking a tendency to wanton destructiveness and encouraging a spirit of kind and compassionate tenderness to the tiniest creatures. But there was wisdom as well as humanity in the precept; for, as birds are well known to serve important uses in the economy of nature, the extirpation of a species, whether of edible or ravenous birds, must in any country be productive of serious evils. But Palestine, in particular, was situated in a climate which produced poisonous snakes and scorpions; and the deserts and mountains would have been overrun with them as well as immense swarms of flies, locusts, mice, and vermin of various kinds if the birds which fed upon them were extirpated [MICHAELIS]. Accordingly, the counsel given in this passage was wise as well as humane, to leave the hen undisturbed for the propagation of the species, while the taking of the brood occasionally was permitted as a check to too rapid an increase.

JFB: Deu 22:8

The tops of houses in ancient Judea, as in the East still, were flat, being composed of branches or twigs laid across large beams, and covered with a cement of clay or strong plaster. They were surrounded by a parapet breast high. In summer the roof is a favorite resort for coolness, and accidents would frequently happen from persons incautiously approaching the edge and falling into the street or court; hence it was a wise and prudent precaution in the Jewish legislator to provide that a stone balustrade or timber railing round the roof should form an essential part of every new house.

JFB: Deu 22:9

(See on Lev 19:19).

JFB: Deu 22:10

Whether this association, like the mixture of seeds, had been dictated by superstitious motives and the prohibition was symbolical, designed to teach a moral lesson (2Co 6:14), may or may not have been the case. But the prohibition prevented a great inhumanity still occasionally practised by the poorer sort in Oriental countries. An ox and ass, being of different species and of very different characters, cannot associate comfortably, nor unite cheerfully in drawing a plough or a wagon. The ass being much smaller and his step shorter, there would be an unequal and irregular draft. Besides, the ass, from feeding on coarse and poisonous weeds, has a fetid breath, which its yoke fellow seeks to avoid, not only as poisonous and offensive, but producing leanness, or, if long continued, death; and hence, it has been observed always to hold away its head from the ass and to pull only with one shoulder.

JFB: Deu 22:11

The essence of the crime (Zep 1:8) consisted, not in wearing a woollen and a linen robe, but in the two stuffs being woven together, according to a favorite superstition of ancient idolaters (see on Lev 19:19).

JFB: Deu 22:12

Or, according to some eminent biblical interpreters, tassels on the coverlet of the bed. The precept is not the same as Num 15:38.|| 05484||1||18||0||@If a man take a wife, &c.==--The regulations that follow might be imperatively needful in the then situation of the Israelites; and yet, it is not necessary that we should curiously and impertinently inquire into them. So far was it from being unworthy of God to leave such things upon record, that the enactments must heighten our admiration of His wisdom and goodness in the management of a people so perverse and so given to irregular passions. Nor is it a better argument that the Scriptures were not written by inspiration of God to object that this passage, and others of a like nature, tend to corrupt the imagination and will be abused by evil-disposed readers, than it is to say that the sun was not created by God, because its light may be abused by wicked men as an assistant in committing crimes which they have meditated [HORNE].

Clarke: Deu 22:1

Thou shalt not see thy brother’ s ox or his sheep go astray - The same humane, merciful, and wise regulations which we met with before, Exo 23:4, Exo 23:5, well calculated to keep in remembrance the second grand branch of the law of God, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. A humane man cannot bear to see even an ass fall under his burden, and not endeavor to relieve him; and a man who loves his neighbor as himself cannot see his property in danger without endeavoring to preserve it. These comparatively small matters were tests and proofs of matters great in themselves, and in their consequences. See the note on Exo 23:4.

Clarke: Deu 22:3

Thou mayest not hide thyself - Thou shalt not keep out of the way of affording help, nor pretend thou didst not see occasion to render thy neighbor any service. The priest and the Levite, when they saw the wounded man, passed by on the other side of the way, Luk 10:31, Luk 10:32. This was a notorious breach of the merciful law mentioned above.

Clarke: Deu 22:5

The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man - כלי גבר keli geber , the instruments or arms of a man. As the word גבר geber is here used, which properly signifies a strong man or man of war, it is very probable that armor is here intended; especially as we know that in the worship of Venus, to which that of Astarte or Ashtaroth among the Canaanites bore a striking resemblance, the women were accustomed to appear in armor before her. It certainly cannot mean a simple change in dress, whereby the men might pass for women, and vice versa. This would have been impossible in those countries where the dress of the sexes had but little to distinguish it, and where every man wore a long beard. It is, however, a very good general precept understood literally, and applies particularly to those countries where the dress alone distinguishes between the male and the female. The close-shaved gentleman may at any time appear like a woman in the female dress, and the woman appear as a man in the male’ s attire. Were this to be tolerated in society, it would produce the greatest confusion. Clodius, who dressed himself like a woman that he might mingle with the Roman ladies in the feast of the Bona Dea, was universally execrated.

Clarke: Deu 22:7

Thou shalt - let the dam go, and take the young to thee; that it may be well with thee - This passage may be understood literally. If they destroyed both young and old, must not the breed soon fail, and would it not in the end be ill with them; and by thus cutting off the means of their continual support, must not their days be shortened on the land? But we may look for a humane precept in this law. The young never knew the sweets of liberty; the dam did: they might be taken and used for any lawful purpose, but the dam must not be brought into a state of captivity. They who can act otherwise must be either very inconsiderate or devoid of feeling; and such persons can never be objects of God’ s peculiar care and attention, and therefore need not expect that it shall be well with them, or that they shall prolong their days on the earth. Every thing contrary to the spirit of mercy and kindness the ever blessed God has in utter abhorrence. And we should remember a fact, that he who can exercise cruelty towards a sparrow or a wren, will, when circumstances are favorable, be cruel to his fellow creatures. The poet Phocylides has a maxim in his admonitory poem very similar to that in the sacred text: -

Μηδε τις ορυιθας καλιης ἁμα παντας ἑλεσθω·

Μητερα δ ’ εκπρολιπῃς, ἱν ’ < Phocyl. Ποιημα Νουθετ ., ver. 80

"Nor from a nest take all the birds away

The mother spare, she’ ll breed a future day."

Clarke: Deu 22:8

A battlement for thy roof - Houses in the East are in general built with flat roofs, and on them men walk to enjoy the fresh air, converse together, sleep, etc.; it was therefore necessary to have a sort of battlement or balustrade to prevent persons from falling off. If a man neglected to make a sufficient defense against such accidents, and the death of another was occasioned by it, the owner of the house must be considered in the light of a murderer.

Clarke: Deu 22:9

Divers seeds - See the note on Lev 19:19.

Clarke: Deu 22:10

Thou shalt not plough with an ox and an ass - It is generally supposed that mixtures of different sorts in seed, breed, etc., were employed for superstitious purposes, and therefore prohibited in this law. It is more likely, however, that there was a physical reason for this; two beasts of a different species cannot associate comfortably together, and on this ground never pull pleasantly either in cart or plough; and every farmer knows that it is of considerable consequence to the comfort of the cattle to put those together that have an affection for each other. This may be very frequently remarked in certain cattle, which, on this account, are termed true yoke-fellows. After all, it is very probable that the general design was to prevent improper alliances in civil and religious life. And to this St. Paul seems evidently to refer, 2Co 6:14 : Be ye not unequally yoked with unbelievers; which is simply to be understood as prohibiting all intercourse between Christians and idolaters in social, matrimonial, and religious life. And to teach the Jews the propriety of this, a variety of precepts relative to improper and heterogeneous mixtures were interspersed through their law, so that in civil and domestic life they might have them ever before their eyes.

Clarke: Deu 22:12

Fringes - See on Num 15:38 (note).

Clarke: Deu 22:15

Tokens of the damsel’ s virginity - This was a perfectly possible case in all places where girls were married at ten, twelve, and fourteen years of age, which is frequent in the East. I have known several instances of persons having had two or three children at separate births before they were fourteen years of age. Such tokens, therefore, as the text speaks of, must be infallibly exhibited by females so very young on the consummation of their marriage.

Clarke: Deu 22:17

They shall spread the cloth, etc. - A usage of this kind argues a roughness of manners which would ill comport with the refinement of European ideas on so delicate a subject. Attempts have been made to show that the law here is to be understood metaphorically; but they so perfectly fail to establish any thing like probability, that it would be wasting my own and my reader’ s time to detail them. A custom similar to that above is observed among the Mohammedans to the present day.

Calvin: Deu 22:5

5. This decree also commends modesty in general, and in it God anticipates the danger, lest women should harden themselves into forgetfulness of modesty, or men should degenerate into effeminacy unworthy of their nature. Garments are not in themselves of so much importance; but as it is disgraceful for men to become effeminate, and also for women to affect manliness in their dress and gestures, propriety and modesty are prescribed, not only for decency’s sake, but lest one kind of liberty should at length lead to something worse. The words of the heathen poet are very true: ⁹⁷

“What shame can she, who wears a helmet, show,
Her sex deserting?”

Wherefore, decency in the fashion of the clothes is an excellent preservative of modesty.

Calvin: Deu 22:6

Since by this precept God instructed His people in the, law of kindness, it is a Supplement to the Sixth Commandment. Regard was had, indeed, to the preservation of the breed; but, besides, when birds are sitting, as being very lean, it is certain that they are not wholesome food; still there is no question but that it was God’s intention to accustom His people to study humanity. For, if there be one drop of compassion in us, it will never enter into our minds to kill an unhappy little bird, which so burns either with the desire of offspring, or with love towards its little ones, as to be heedless of its life, and to prefer endangering itself to the desertion of its eggs, or its brood. Wherefore, it is not to be doubted but that in this elementary lesson, God prohibited His people from savageness and cruelty.

Calvin: Deu 22:8

This precept also has reference to the preservation of human life. We know that the roofs of the Jewish houses were fiat, so that they might freely walk upon them. If there were no railings round them, a fall would have been fatal; and every house would have often been a house of mourning. God, therefore, commands the edge to be fortified with battlements, or railings, or other inclosure, and accompanies the injunction with a severe denunciation; for He declares that the houses would be defiled with blood, if any one should fall from an uninclosed roof. Now, if guile were thus contracted by mere incautiousness, it hence appears how greatly He abominates deliberate cruelty; and, if it behooved everybody to be thus solicitous as to the lives of their brethren, it shows how criminal it is to injure them purposely and in enmity.

Calvin: Deu 22:9

Deu 22:9.Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard These four precepts, which all condemn strange medleys, I doubt not to be supplements of the First Commandment; and the reason, which is subjoined in Deuteronomy, directs us to this, where God declares that the produce of the seed and of the vineyard is polluted, if there be divers mixtures. Whence it appears that nothing else is demanded but that they should cultivate purity. The word indeed, which Moses uses, means to “ sanctify, ” קדש kadesh; but, by antiphrasis, it is taken for to “ contaminate. ” To the same effect is what follows, that they should not plough with an ox and an ass together; for this diversity is forbidden on no other account, but because men contract some defilement as soon as they depart from simplicity. Yet, if any one thinks otherwise, I shall not strongly contend with him. It might indeed be objected, that when God forbids animals to be used promiscuously, so that those of different kinds should not be mixed together, He has regard to chastity, ³⁰ and that, by forbidding the fields to be sown with divers seeds, and garments to be woven of divers materials, He would prevent frauds. But the more simple explanation is, that the people were thus retained in purity, lest they should accustom themselves to corrupt habits, and lest they should bring in strange rites from various quarters, or seek, with depraved curiosity, for mixtures which might at length invade the worship of God. For if animals of different species are joined together, the integrity of nature is corrupted, and an adulterine offspring is produced, which degenerates from the institution of God; but, if various kinds of seed should be mixed together, or if a garment should be woven of linen and wool, there would be no danger of deception or fraud in so manifest a matter. It is probable, therefore, that the end which, as I have said, was proposed by God was, that, by cultivating natural and simple habits all their life through, they should keep themselves pure and uncorrupted from every strange vice. On this account Scripture compares strange doctrines to leaven, since by their additions or curtailings they corrupt the pure word of God. (Mat 16:11.) And this was by no means a useless discipline; when, in trifles, and almost things of nought, the rein was applied to them, so that they should not decline from purity in the very least degree. It was a small matter to interweave a thin thread with a thicker one, and perchance such a process would have been profitable for their general advantage; in some fields, too, a better crop is grown, if the seed is compounded of pure wheat, and some other sort of grain ( siligine), as also the union of the horse and ass has been approved of, since thus mules are produced. But God would not allow these things amongst His ancient people, lest, sinking by degrees to greater license, they should at length addict themselves to the practice and customs of the heathen. He therefore uses this preface: “Ye shall keep my statutes,” (Lev 19:19;) from whence we gather that the people were surrounded with fixed barriers, lest they should defile themselves with foreign vices, and imitate the nations, from which they had been separated. Wherefore this is the sum, that they should abide in God’s statutes.

Calvin: Deu 22:12

12. This also was a part of, or accessory to, chastity, to have regard to modesty in dress; for since the thighs were then without covering, a door was thus opened to many improprieties, if the upper garments were not closed, and many, as if by accident, would have abused this, if it had been allowed, as an incentive to licentiousness; for we see that many rush into such excesses of lasciviousness, as to glory in their shame. God, therefore, would have the flaps of their gowns thus drawn together by ties or latchets, that not even by chance could those parts be uncovered, which cannot be decently or modestly looked upon. But if divine provisions were made even with respect to their garments, so that the elect people should cultivate decency, and diligently guard against everything immodest, it is abundantly clear that not only were adulteries condemned, but whatever is repugnant to purity and chastity. This passage is improperly referred to the fringes which were sewed to their garments to renew the recollection of the Law, since decency and delicacy are here alone regarded.

Calvin: Deu 22:13

13.If any man take a wife. This passage also tends to the exaltation of chastity. God provides against both cases, lest a husband should unjustly bring reproach upon a chaste and innocent young woman, and lest a young woman, having been defiled, should escape punishment, if she pretended to be a virgin. A third object is also to be remarked, viz., that parents were thus admonished to be more careful in watching over their children. This is, indeed, an act of gross brutality, that a husband, wittingly and willingly, should seek a false pretext for divorcing his wife by bringing reproach and infamy upon her; but, since it does not infrequently happen that the libidinous become disgusted with their vices, and then endeavor to rid themselves of them in every way, it was needful to correct this evil, and to prescribe a method whereby the integrity of the woman should be safe from the calumnies of an ungodly and cruel husband; whilst it was also just to give relief to an honest man, lest he should be compelled to cherish in his bosom a harlot, by whom he had been deceived; for it is a very bitter thing to ingenuous minds silently to endure so great an ignominy. An admirable precaution is here laid down, i e. , that if a woman were accused by her husband, it was in the power of her parents to produce the tokens of chastity which should acquit her; but if they did not, that the husband should not be obliged against his will to keep her in his house, after she had been defiled by another. It is plain from this passage, that the tokens of virginity were taken on a cloth, on the first night of marriage, as future proofs of chastity. It is also probable that the cloth was laid up before witnesses as a pledge, to be a sure defense for pure and modest young women; for it would have been giving too much scope to the parents if it had been believed simply on their evidence; but Moses speaks briefly as of a well-known custom.

Defender: Deu 22:5

Although this commandment, as a part of the Mosaic code, may no longer be legalistically binding in the Christian dispensation, it clearly indicates God's desire to maintain the distinctiveness of men and women. Each gender has a specific role to fulfill in the divine economy. The modern "unisex" fad - not to mention homosexuality and transvestitism - can only corrupt and confuse His revealed purposes for men and women in the ideal created order."

TSK: Deu 22:1

Thou shalt : Exo 23:4; Eze 34:4, Eze 34:16; Mat 10:6, Mat 15:24, Mat 18:12, Mat 18:13; Luk 15:4-6; Jam 5:19, Jam 5:20; 1Pe 2:25

hide thyself : Deu 22:3, Deu 22:4; Lev 20:4; Pro 24:11, Pro 28:27; Isa 8:17, Isa 58:7; Luk 10:31, Luk 10:32

TSK: Deu 22:2

thou shalt restore : Mat 7:12; 1Th 4:6

TSK: Deu 22:4

thou shalt surely : Exo 23:4, Exo 23:5; Mat 5:44; Luk 10:29-37; Rom 15:1; 2Co 12:15; Gal 6:1, Gal 6:2; 1Th 5:14; Heb 12:12, Heb 12:13

TSK: Deu 22:5

woman shall not : 1Co 11:4-15

abomination : Deu 18:12

TSK: Deu 22:6

young ones : Luk 12:6

thou shalt not : Gen 8:17, Gen 32:11; Lev 22:28; Pro 12:10; Hos 10:14

TSK: Deu 22:7

But thou shalt : The extirpation of any species of birds, whether edible or birds of prey, is often attended with serious consequences, and is always productive of evil; to prevent which was the object of this law. Palestine is situated in a climate producing poisonous snakes and scorpions, and between deserts and mountains, from which it would be inundated by them, as well as with immense swarms of flies, locusts, and mice, if the birds which feed upon them were extirpated. In a moral point of view, it may have been intended to inculcate a spirit of mercy and kindness, and to prevent the exercise of cruelty even towards a sparrow; for he who is guilty of such cruelty will, if circumstances be favourable, be cruel to his fellow-creatures.

that it may : Deu 4:40

thou mayest : Pro 22:4

TSK: Deu 22:8

then thou shalt : The eastern houses being built with flat roofs, which were used for various purposed, as walking, sleeping, etc., it was therefore necessary to have a sort of battlement, or balustrade, to prevent accidents, by people falling off. Exo 21:28-36, Exo 22:6; Rom 14:13; 1Co 10:32; Phi 1:10; 1Th 5:22

thy roof : 2Sa 11:2; Isa 22:1; Jer 19:13; Mat 10:27; Mar 2:4; Act 10:9

thou bring : Eze 3:18, Eze 3:20, Eze 32:2-9; Mat 18:6, Mat 18:7; Act 20:26, Act 20:27

TSK: Deu 22:9

shalt not sow : Lev 19:19; Mat 6:24, Mat 9:16; Rom 11:6; 2Co 1:12, 2Co 11:3; Jam 1:6-8, Jam 3:10

fruit of thy seed : Heb. fulness of thy seed

TSK: Deu 22:10

Two different species cannot associate comfortably together, nor pull pleasantly either in cart or plough; and the ass being lower than the ox, when yoked, he must bear the principal part of the weight.

2Co 6:14-16

TSK: Deu 22:11

Lev 19:19

TSK: Deu 22:12

fringes : Num 15:38, Num 15:39; Mat 23:5

quarters : Heb. wings

TSK: Deu 22:13

Gen 29:21, Gen 29:23, Gen 29:31; Jdg 15:1, Jdg 15:2; Eph 5:28, Eph 5:29

TSK: Deu 22:14

Deu 22:19; Exo 20:16, Exo 23:1; Pro 18:8, Pro 18:21; 1Ti 5:14

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: Deu 22:1

On the general character of the contents of this chapter see Deu 21:10 note.

Barnes: Deu 22:5

That which pertaineth unto a man - i. e. not only his dress but all that especially pertains distinctively to his sex; arms, domestic and other utensils, etc.

The distinction between the sexes is natural and divinely established, and cannot be neglected without indecorum and consequent danger to purity (compare 1Co 11:3-15).

Barnes: Deu 22:6-8

These precepts are designed to cultivate a spirit of humanity. Compare Deu 25:4; Lev 22:28; and 1Co 9:9-10.

Deu 22:8

The roofs of houses in Palestine were flat and used for various purposes. Compare Jos 2:6; 2Sa 11:2; Act 10:9, etc. A battlement was almost a necessary protection. It was to be, according to the rabbis, at least two cubits high (about 3 ft.).

Barnes: Deu 22:9-11

Compare the marginal reference. The prohibition of Deu 22:10 was also dictated by humanity. The ox and the donkey being of such different size and strength, it would be cruel to the latter to yoke them together. These two animals are named as being those ordinarily employed in agriculture; compare Isa 32:20.

Barnes: Deu 22:12

Compare Num 15:38 and its note.

Poole: Deu 22:1

Thy brother so called by communion not of religion, but of nature, as having one Father, even God, Mal 2:10 ; as appears,

1. Because the same law is given about their enemy’ s ox, &c., Exo 23:4 .

2. Because else the obligation of this law had been uncertain, seeing men could not ordinarily tell whether the straying ox or sheep belonged to a Jew or to a stranger.

3. Because this was a duty of common justice and charity, which the law of nature taught even heathens, and it is absurd to think that the law of God delivered to the Jews should have less charity in it than the law of nature given to the Gentiles.

Hide thyself from them i.e. dissemble or pretend that thou dost not seen them; or neglect or pass them by as if thou hadst not seen them.

Poole: Deu 22:2

If thy brother be not nigh unto thee which may make the duty more troublesome or chargeable.

If thou know him not which implies, that if they did know the owner, they should restore it to him.

Thou shalt bring it unto thine own house to be used like thine own cattle. Thou shalt restore it to him again, the owner, as it may be presumed, paying the charges.

Poole: Deu 22:3

i.e. Dissemble that thou hast found it. Or, hide it , i.e. conceal the thing lost.

Poole: Deu 22:4

Help him i.e. thy brother, the owner. Compare Exo 13:5 .

Poole: Deu 22:5

This shall not be done ordinarily or unnecessarily, for in some cases it may be lawful, as to make an escape for one’ s life. Now this is forbidden, partly for decency sake, that men might not confound, nor seem to confound, those sexes which God hath distinguished, that all appearance of evil might be avoided, such change of garments carrying a manifest umbrage or sign of softness and effeminacy in the man, of arrogance and impudency in the woman, of lightness and petulancy in both; and partly to cut off all suspicions and occasions of evil, which this practice opens a wide door unto.

Poole: Deu 22:7

Let the dam go partly for the bird’ s sake, which suffered enough by the loss of its young; for God would not have cruelty exercised towards the brute creatures; and partly for men’ s sake, to restrain their greediness and covetousness, that they should not monopolize all to themselves, but might leave the hopes of a future seed for others.

Poole: Deu 22:8

A battlement i.e. a fence or breastwork, because the roofs of their houses were made flat or plain, that men might walk on them. See Jud 16:27 1Sa 9:25 2Sa 11:2 Neh 8:16 Mat 10:27 .

Blood i.e. the guilt of blood, by a man’ s fall from the top of thy house, through thy neglect of this necessary provision.

Poole: Deu 22:9

With divers seeds either,

1. With divers kinds of seed mixed and sowed together between the rows of vines in thy vineyard; which was forbidden to be done in the field, Lev 19:19 , and here in the vineyard. Or,

2. With any kind of seed differing from that of the vine, which would produce either herbs, or corn, or fruit-bearing trees, whose fruit might be mingled with the fruit of the vines. Now this and the two following precepts, though in themselves small and trivial, are given, according to that time and state of the church, for documents or instructions in greater matters, and particularly to commend to them simplicity and sincerity in all their carriages towards God and men, and to forbid all mixture of their inventions with God’ s institutions, in doctrine or worship.

The fruit of thy seed Heb. the fulness of thy seed , i.e. that seed when it is ripe and full. See Exo 22:29 Num 18:27 .

Defiled either,

1. Naturally corrupted or marred, whilst one seed draws away the fat and nourishment of the earth from the other, and so both are starved and spoiled. Or rather,

2. Legally and morally, as being prohibited by God’ s law, and thereby made unclean; as, on the contrary, things are sanctified by God’ s word allowing and approving them, 1Ti 4:5 . Heb. be sanctified , or, be as a sanctified thing , by an ellipsis of the particle as , i.e. unlawful for the owner’ s use, as things sanctified were. Or, sanctifying is put for polluting , by a figure called euphemismus , which is frequent in Scripture, as when blessing is put for cursing , as Job 2:9 , and in other authors, as when they use sacred for execrable.

Poole: Deu 22:10

Either,

1. Because the one was a clean beast, the other unclean; whereby God would teach men to avoid polluting themselves by the touch of unclean persons or things, 2Co 6:14 . Or,

2. Because of their unequal strength, whereby the weaker, the ass, would be oppressed and overwrought. Or,

3. For mystical reasons, of which see on Deu 22:9 Lev 19:19 .

Poole: Deu 22:12

Fringes or laces , or strings ; partly to bring the commands of God to their remembrance, as it is expressed, Num 15:38 ; and partly as a public profession of their nation and religion, whereby they might be discerned and distinguished from strangers, that so they might be more circumspect to behave themselves as became the people of God, and that they should not be ashamed to own their God and religion before all the world. Wherewith thou coverest thyself: these words are either restrictive to the upper garment, wherewith the rest were covered; or argumentative, why they should use these things, because herewith they might possibly fasten their garments, and prevent the uncovering themselves, as might easily happen, when they wore no breeches, but only loose garments.

Poole: Deu 22:13

Go in unto her i.e. hath had carnal knowledge of her.

Poole: Deu 22:14

Of speech Heb. of words , i.e. of discourses or defamations.

Poole: Deu 22:15

i.e. The linen cloth or sheet, as is expressed, Deu 22:17 , which in the first congress was infected with blood, as is natural and usual. But because this is not now constant, the enemies of Scripture take occasion to quarrel with this law, as unreasonable and unjust, and such as might oppress the innocent, and hence take occasion to reject the Holy Scriptures. It were much more reasonable for these men either to expound this place metaphorically, of producing those proofs and testimonies of her virginity which should be as satisfactory as if that cloth were produced, as some of the Jews understand it; or modestly to acknowledge their own ignorance in this, as they are forced to do in many other things, and not impudently to conclude it is insoluble, because they cannot resolve it. But there is no need of such general answers, many things may be particularly said for the vindication of this law.

1. That it was necessary for that people, because of their hard-heartedness towards their wives, and their levity and desire of change of wives.

2. That either this trial, or at least the proof of her virginity, was to be taken presently after the day of marriage, and that proof was to be admitted afterwards upon occasion.

3. That this law was seldom or never put in execution, as the Jews note, and seems to be made for terror and caution to husbands and wives, as really other laws have been in like cases.

4. That that God who gave this law did by his providence govern all affairs, and rule the tongues and hearts of men, and therefore would doubtless take care so to order matters that the innocent should not suffer by this means, which he could prevent many ways.

5. That there is a great difference in times and climates. Who knows not that there are many things now by our moderns thought uncertain or false, by which by the ancient physicians were thought and affirmed to be true, and certain in their times and countries, and that many signs of diseases and other things do generally hold true in those more southerly and warmer parts of the world, which are many times deceitful in our northern and colder climates?

6. That this very way of trial of virginity hath been used not only by the Jews, but also by the Arabians and Egyptians, as is affirmed by divers learned writers, among whom yet it was more doubtful and hazardous than among the Jews, who might promise to themselves that God would guide the execution of his own law to a just and good issue.

7. That this sign, if it were uncertain in persons of riper years, yet it may be reasonably thought certain and constant in virgins of young and tender age, and that the Jews did ordinarily marry their daughters when they were about twelve or thirteen years old, as is confessed; as making haste to roll away that reproach which they thought to be in an unmarried state.

Haydock: Deu 22:1

Pass by. Hebrew, "hide thyself," pretending not to see it. ---

Brother. Any fellow creature, Exodus xxiii. 4., and Luke x. 30. (Calmet) ---

"We are very inhuman, not to shew as much concern for a man as the Jews do for a beast of burden." (St. Chrysostom, ser. 13.) (Du Hamel)

Haydock: Deu 22:2

Not nigh, either in blood or in place, (Calmet) though the latter signification seems more applicable; as, if the person lived at too great a distance, it would suffice to inform him where he might find what he had lost; and, if the owner was unknown, the thing must be taken care of by him who finds it till he be discovered. (Du Hamel)

Haydock: Deu 22:3

If, &c. Hebrew, "thou must not hide thyself," so as to pass it by, nor yet conceal it from the right owner. When a thing is certainly abandoned by him, it belongs to the person who seizes it first; but if it be only lost it, must surely be restored, if possible, (Grotius, Jur. ii. 10,) as nature forbids us to take advantage of another's misfortune. (Cicero) ---

The Rabbins have corrupted this law, like so many others, by their evil interpretations. They pretend that a Jew must restore what he has found belonging to another true believer, if it have certain marks by which it may be known, but not if it belonged to a prevaricator or infidel. In the former supposition, they got the thing cried on a high stone near Jerusalem four times, and if the owner did not then claim his property, the finder might keep it. (Selden, Jur. vi. 4.) ---

The inhabitants of Cumζ condemned the next neighbour to restore what had been lost; as Hesiod (op. 348,) very well remarks, that things would not easily be lost, if the neighbours were not ill-disposed.

Haydock: Deu 22:4

With him. Hebrew, "thou shalt not hide thyself, but help him to lift up," Exodus xxiii. 4.

Haydock: Deu 22:5

God. Some take this literally, as the contrary practice is contrary to decency, and might be attended with very pernicious consequences. All know what noise was occasioned by the action of Clodius, who put on women's apparel, that he might be present with the Roman ladies at the feast of the good goddess. Yet others think that Moses here forbids some superstitious practices. St. Ambrose (ep. 69,) remarks, that in some of the mysteries of the idols, it was requisite for those present to change clothes in this manner, sacrum putatur. Lucian testifies, that men put on women's clothes at the feasts of Bacchus. They did the like in those of Venus, while the women took men's clothes in the festivals of Mars. (Jul. Hirmic. c. 4.) (Maimonides) ---

In the East, people honoured the moon, to which they attributed both sexes, and Venus in like manner. Josephus ([Antiquities,?] iv.8,) believes that women are here prohibited to engage in warfare. Hebrew, "the vessels (armour) of man shall not be upon a woman." Semiramis gained a great name by her martial exploits, and commanded all her subjects to dress like herself. (Justin., i) ---

The Amazons were likewise very famous in war, and it is said that half the army of Bacchus was composed of women. Alb. Gentil maintains that Moses here condemns an abominable crime, which he did not wish to mention, at which the Book of Wisdom hints, (chap. xiv. 26,) and which St. Paul condemns more explicitly, Romans i. 26. Moses had already denounced death against the perpetrators of it; and surely the manner in which he now speaks, seems to forbid something more than simply putting on the garments of the other sex, for he, &c. (Calmet) ---

Yet that disorderly conduct deserved to be reprobated in strong terms, (Haydock) when it was not excused by some necessity or proper motive, such as actuated some holy virgins, St. Theodora, &c. (Tirinus)

Haydock: Deu 22:6

Thou shalt not take, &c. This was to shew them to exercise a certain mercy even to irrational creatures; and by that means to train them up to a horror of cruelty; and to the exercise of humanity, and mutual charity one to another. (Challoner) ---

Some were of opinion that the person who could take the old bird on the nest might assure himself of good fortune, fecundity, &c. (St. Thomas Aquinas, [Summa Theologiae] i. 2, q. 102, a. 6.) Such superstition is reprehensible. Phocilides advises not to take all the young ones, nor the hen, in consideration of one's having more birds. (Calmet)

Haydock: Deu 22:7

Time. Those who refrain from cruelty, even towards beasts, will be induced more easily to shew mercy to their fellow creatures, (Tertullian, contra Marc. ii.) and will draw down the blessings of God upon themselves. (Menochius)

Haydock: Deu 22:8

Battlement. This precaution was necessary, because all their houses had flat tops; and it was usual to walk and to converse together upon them. (Challoner) ---

King Ochozias had the misfortune to fall from the top of his house, (4 Kings i. 2,) and David saw Bethsabee when he was walking on the roof of his palace, 2 Kings xi. 2. Saul slept at the top of Samuel's house, 1 Kings ix. 25. See Josue ii. 6., and Matthew x. 27. (Haydock)

Haydock: Deu 22:9

Together. If wheat was sown in a vineyard, it would ripen much sooner than the grapes; and as the first-fruits of both were offered to the Lord, the owner would lose the profit which he had too greedily sought after, the place being esteemed both pure and impure at the same time. This mixture of seeds would also impoverish the land, so that it would be like a place defiled, and unfit for cultivation. (Jansenius in Leviticus xix. 19.) Maimonides supposes that the practice of the Zabians is here reprobated. They sowed the land with corn and dry grapes, in honour of Ceres and Bacchus, (More. Nev. p. 3. c. 37,) who presided over the harvest and vintage among the pagans. (Wm. of Paris. Leg. 13.) ---

Moses might also, by this symbolical language, condemn unnatural connexions, as he perhaps does, ver. 10.

Haydock: Deu 22:10

Plough. In Leviticus xix. 19, this law is expressed, so as to forbid the procreation of mongrels. See Judges xiv. 18. People who have treated on agriculture observe, that it is a pernicious practice to make animals of unequal size and speed work together. (Columella vi. 2.) ---

St. Paul explains to us the mystical sense of this passage. Bear not the yoke together with infidels, 2 Corinthians vi. 14. (Calmet) ---

Marry not with such. (Haydock) ---

Employ not in the sacred ministry the imprudent and wicked with those of a virtuous disposition. (St. Gregory, Mor. i. 16.)

Haydock: Deu 22:11

Together. This is now lawful. But a virgin consecrated to God, must not dress like a married woman: the different states of life must not be confounded. (St. Augustine, contra Faustus vi. 9.) (Du Hamel)

Haydock: Deu 22:12

Strings, Probably to gird the outer garment round the loins. See Numbers xv. 38.

Haydock: Deu 22:14

Name. Hebrew, "and occasion reports against her to bring an evil name upon her," (Haydock) that he may not have to return her dowry. For, according to many of the Rabbins, he might give her a bill of divorce, simply if he did not like her. (Selden, Uxor. iii. 1, &c.) ---

They allow the proof here specified, only with respect to a Hebrew woman between twelve and twelve and a half years old, during the period of her being espoused, but not taken home by her husband. The cause was to be tried before the 23 judges. Oftentimes only witnesses, probably matrons, were examined in defence of the woman. (Josephus, [Antiquities?] iv. 8.) St. Ambrose (ep. 8. 64. ad Syagr.) highly disapproves of such unsatisfactory methods. The marks assigned by the law were commonly observed in Syria, Persia, &c. The Arab physicians speak of them. See Valesius, c. xxv. The age in which women were then married, the climate, &c., caused these indications to be more clear, and deposed for or against the fidelity of the bride. The mother had them entrusted to her care by the friends of the husband, who had kept watch at the door on the wedding night. (M.[Menochius;?] Nachman, ap. Fagium.)

Haydock: Deu 22:15

Her. It does not appear that the woman was present at the trial: she remained at her father's, or rather at her husband's house, till sentence was passed. (Calmet) ---

Hebrew, "then shall the father of the damsel and her mother take and produce the damsel's virginity," or the tokens of it.

Gill: Deu 22:1

Thou shall not see thy brother's ox or his sheep go astray,.... Or "driven away" ^r; frightened and starved away from the herd or from the flock by a wolf or dog; and the ox and sheep are put for every other creature a man has, as camels, asses, &c. which last sort is after mentioned; and a brother means not one in the natural relation of kindred only, for it is supposed, in the next verse, that he might not only be at a distance, but unknown; nor by religion only, or one of the commonwealth or church of the Jews, for what is enjoined is a piece of humanity the law of nature requires and directs unto, and is even to be done to enemies, Exo 23:4 and hide thyself from them; make as if he did not see them, and so be entirely negligent of them, and takes no care and show no concern about them, but let them go on wandering from the herd and flock from whence they were driven, and to which they cannot find the way of themselves:

thou shalt in any case bring them again to thy brother: to his herd or flock, or to his house, and deliver them into his own hands, or to the care of his servants.

Gill: Deu 22:2

And if thy brother be not nigh unto thee,.... Does not live in the same neighbourhood, but at some considerable distance; so that he cannot soon and easily be informed of his cattle, or they be sent to him:

or if thou know him not; the owner of them, what is his name, or where he lives:

then thou shall bring it into thine house; not into his dwelling house, but some out house, barn, or stable:

and it shall be with thee; remain in his custody, and be taken care of by him; and, as the Targum of Jonathan says, "be fed and nourished by him"; for, according to the Jewish canon ^s, whatsoever could work and eat, that should work and eat, and whatsoever did not work and eat was to be sold; for which there was a set time, as the commentators say ^t, for large cattle, as oxen, twelve months; for lesser cattle, as sheep, goats, &c. three months, here it is fixed:

until thy brother seek after it; though in the mean while the finder was to make use of means, whereby the owner might be informed of it; for whatsoever was lost, in which were marks and signs by which inquiries might be made, were to be proclaimed ^u; (and it is asked) how long a man was obliged to proclaim? until it was known to his neighbours; same say (he must proclaim it) at three feasts, and seven days after the last feast, so that he may go home three days, and return three days, and proclaim one day; if (the owner) tells what is lost, but does not tell the marks or signs, he may not give it him; and a deceiver, though he tells the signs, he may not give it him, as it is said, "until thy brother seek after it"; until thou inquirest of thy brother whether he is a deceiver or not: and elsewhere it is said ^w, formerly if a man lost anything, and gave the signs or marks of it, he took it; but after deceivers increased, it was ordered to be said to him, bring witnesses that thou art not a deceiver, and take it; and in the same place it is observed, that there was at Jerusalem a stone, called Eben Toim, "the stone of strays", and whoever had lost or found anything repaired thither, and gave the signs and marks of it, and took it:

and thou shalt restore it to him again; he having made it fully to appear to be his, and having defrayed all expenses in advertising and keeping it; but if no owner appear to claim it, or not to satisfaction, the finder was to keep it as his own; but otherwise he was by all means to restore it, or, as in Deu 23:1 "in restoring thou shalt restore them" ^x, that is, certainly restore them; and continually wherever it so happens: the Jewish canon is ^y,"if he restores it, and afterwards it strays away, and he restores it again and it strays away, even though four or five times, he is bound to restore it; as it is said, "in restoring thou shalt restore them"; Maimonides says ^z, that even an hundred times he is bound to restore them.''

Gill: Deu 22:3

In like manner shall thou do with his ass,.... As with his ox or sheep when astray, and found, keep it until it is owned, and then restore it; this is expressly mentioned in Exo 23:4.

and so shalt thou do with his raiment; if that is lost and found, it must be restored to the owner, he describing it; a garment is particularly mentioned, it is said ^a, because in every garment there is a mark or sign by which the owners can inquire about it; for it is made by the hands of men, and does not come from anything common:

and with all lost things of thy brother's, which he hath lost, and thou hast found, shalt thou do likewise: this comprehends everything that is lost, that is properly so; it is asked ^b;"what is a lost thing? if a man finds an ox or a cow feeding in the way, this is not a lost thing; an ass whose instruments are inverted, and a cow running among the vineyards, this is a lost thing:"

thou mayest not hide thyself: from seeing it and taking care of it, in order to restore it to the right owner; or dissemble a sight of it, and pretend he never saw it, and so entirely neglect it. In some instances the Jews allow they were not obliged to take any notice or care of it, as,"if a man find a cow in a cow house (which is not shut), he is not obliged (to take care of it); if in a public place, he is obliged; if it is in a burying ground he may not defile himself for it ^c.''

Gill: Deu 22:4

Thou shall not see thy brother's ox or his ass fall down by the way,.... And lie under his burden, not being able to rise with it of himself, nor with all the assistance about it, without further help:

and hide thyself from them; cover thine eyes, or turn them another way, and make as if thou didst not see them in distress:

thou shalt surely help him to lift them up again; that is, help the brother and owner of it, the ox and ass; assist him in getting them up again, and lay on their burden, and fasten them aright, which either were rolled off by the fall, or were obliged to be taken off in order to raise them up; and if this was to be done for an enemy, then much more for a brother, as is required; see Gill on Exo 23:5, or "lifting up, thou shall lift them up with him" ^d; that is, most certainly do it, and lift with all his strength, and as often as there is occasion; if they fell down again after raised up, help is still to be continued, even, as Maimonides ^e says, though it was an hundred times.

Gill: Deu 22:5

The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man,.... It being very unseemly and impudent, and contrary to the modesty of her sex; or there shall not be upon her any "instrument of a man" ^f, any utensil of his which he makes use of in his trade and business; as if she was employed in it, when her business was not to do the work of men, but to take care of her house and family; and so this law may be opposed to the customs of the Egyptians, as is thought, from whom the Israelites were lately come; whose women, as Herodotus ^g relates, used to trade and merchandise abroad, while the men kept at home; and the word also signifies armour ^h, as Onkelos renders it; and so here forbids women putting on a military habit and going with men to war, as was usual with the eastern women; and so Maimonides ⁱ illustrates it, by putting a mitre or an helmet on her head, and clothing herself with a coat of mail; and in like manner Josephus ^k explains it,"take heed, especially in war, that a woman do not make use of the habit of a man, or a man that of a woman;''nor is he to be found fault with so much as he is by a learned writer ^l, since he does not restrain it wholly to war, though he thinks it may have a special regard to that; for no doubt the law respects the times of peace as well as war, in neither of which such a practice should obtain: but the Targum of Jonathan very wrongly limits it to the wearing fringed garments, and to phylacteries, which belonged to men:

neither shall a man put on a woman's garment; which would betray effeminacy and softness unbecoming men, and would lead the way to many impurities, by giving an opportunity of mixing with women, and so to commit fornication and adultery with them; to prevent which and to preserve chastity this law seems to be made; and since in nature a difference of sexes is made, it is proper and necessary that this should be known by difference of dress, or otherwise many evils might follow; and this precept is agreeably to the law and light of nature: it is observed by an Heathen writer ^m, that there is a twofold distribution of the law, the one written, the other not written; what we use in civil things is written, what is from nature and use is unwritten, as to walk naked in the market, or to put on a woman's garment: and change of the clothes of sexes was used among the Heathens by way of punishment, as of the soldiers that deserted, and of adulteresses ⁿ; so abominable was it accounted: indeed it may be lawful in some cases, where life is in danger, to escape that, and provided chastity is preserved:

for all that do so are an abomination to the Lord thy God; which is a reason sufficient why such a practice should not be used. Some from this clause have been led to conclude, that respect is had to some customs of this kind used in idolatrous worship, which are always abominable to the Lord. So Maimonides ^o observes, that in a book of the Zabians, called "Tomtom", it is commanded, that a man should wear a woman's garment coloured when he stood before the star of Venus, and likewise that a woman should put on a coat of mail and warlike armour when she stood before the star of Mars; which he takes to be one reason of this law, though besides that he gives another, because hereby concupiscence would be excited, and an occasion for whoredom given: that there was some such customs among the Heathens may be confirmed from Macrobius ^p, and Servius ^q as has been observed by Grotius; the former of which relates, that Philochorus affirmed that Venus is the moon, and that men sacrificed to her in women's garments, and women in men's; and for this reason, because she was thought to be both male and female; and the latter says, there was an image of Venus in Cyprus with a woman's body and garment, and with the sceptre and distinction of a man, to whom the men sacrificed in women's garments, and women in men's garments; and, as the above learned commentator observes, there were many colonies of the Phoenicians in Cyprus, from whom this custom might come; and to prevent it obtaining among the Israelites in any degree, who were now coming into their country, it is thought this law was made; for the priests of the Assyrian Venus made use of women's apparel ^r, and in the feasts of Bacchus men disguised themselves like women ^s.

Gill: Deu 22:6

If a bird's nest chance to be before thee in any tree, or on the ground,.... Which are the usual places in which birds build their nests; and this, as Jarchi observes, excepts such nests that are prepared, that is, that are purposely made for fowls kept at home; and with which agrees the Jewish canon, which says ^t"the letting go (the dam out of) the nest is not used but of a fowl, and it is not used but of what is not prepared; what is that which is not prepared? such as geese and hens, whose nest is in an orchard; but if their nest is in the house, and so doves kept at home, a man is free from letting (the dam) go;''that is, he is not obliged to let it go; and this is to be understood of clean birds only; so the Targum of Jonathan,"the nests of clean birds;''agreeably to the same canons and the explanation of them ^u,"an unclean bird is free from letting go; so an unclean bird, that sits upon the eggs of a clean bird, also a clean bird that sits upon the eggs of an unclean bird, are free from letting go,''or persons are not obliged to let such go:

whether they be young ones or eggs; that are in the nest; and the Jewish canon is ^w,"if there is but one young one, or one egg, a man is obliged to let go the dam, as it is said a nest: a nest is a word of a large sense:"

and the dam sitting upon the young or upon eggs, thou shalt not take the dam with the young; according to the above canon,"if she is flying at the time her wings reach the nest, a man is bound to let her go; but if her wings touch not the nest, he is free from letting her go--if the young ones are capable of flying, or the eggs rotten, he is free from letting her go, as it is said, and the dam sitting, &c. as the young are alive, so the eggs must be firm and sound, rotten ones are excepted; and as eggs have need of their dam, so the young have need of their dam; those (therefore) that can fly are excepted:''the dam is not to be taken with her young upon any account; yea, it is said ^x, not even to cleanse a leper; and whoever does take her is to be beaten: this law was made partly to preserve the species of birds, and prevent the decrease of them; for a dam let go might breed again, and to this purpose are the verses ascribed to Phocylides ^y, which contain the substance of this law, and this reason of it: and partly, as Maimonides observes ^z, that the dam might not be afflicted at the sight of the spoil of her young; for this law does not prohibit the taking of her in any other place but in her nest, nor after her young are taken, but not together; and, as the same writer remarks, if the law would have such care taken of beasts and birds, that they might be freed from sorrow and distress, how much more of man? Wherefore the intention of this law is to teach humanity, compassion, and pity in men to one another, and to forbid cruelty, covetousness, and such like vices; as also to instruct in the doctrine of Providence, which has a respect to birds; and our Lord may be thought to have this law in view, Luk 12:6.

Gill: Deu 22:7

But thou shall in any wise let the dam go, and take the young to thee,.... Or "in letting go, let go", or "in sending, send away" ^a; that is, willingly, certainly, entirely, frequently, always; so the Jewish canons ^b,"if anyone lets her go, and she returns, even four or five times, he is obliged to let her go, as it is said, "in letting go, let go";''nay, Maimonides says ^c, even a thousand times; the canon proceeds,"if anyone says, lo, I take the dam and let go the young, he is obliged to let her go; if he takes the young, and returns them again to the nest, and after that returns the dam to them, he is free from letting her go;"

that it may be well with thee, and that thou mayest prolong thy days; the Targum of Jonathan is,"that it may be well with thee in this world, and thou mayest prolong thy days in the world to come:''the same blessing that is promised to observers of the fifth command, which is one of the weightier matters of the law, is made to this; which the Jews say ^d is but as the value of a farthing, or of little account in comparison of others; wherefore, as Fagius rightly observes ^e, God, in bestowing such rewards, has regard not to the works of men, but to his own grace and kindness; for what merit can there be in letting go or preserving the life of a little bird?

Gill: Deu 22:8

When thou buildest a new house,.... Which is to be understood of a house to dwell in, not of a granary, barn, or stable, or such like, and every house that is not four cubits square, as Maimonides observes ^f:

then thou shalt make a battlement for thy roof; in the Talmud ^g it is asked, what is the meaning of, or why is it said, "thy roof?" to except synagogues and schools; the gloss upon which is, synagogues, &c. do not belong to any single person, and besides are no dwelling place. A battlement, as Jarrift describes it, was a fence round the roof; or, as more fully described by Kimchi ^h, it was an edifice made for a roof round about it, ten hands high, or more, that a person might not fall from it; so Ben Melech from him. The reason of this law was, because the roofs of houses in those countries were flat, on which they used to walk for diversion and recreation, or retire for devotion, meditation, prayer, and social conversation; such they were in the times of the Canaanites, Jos 2:6 and in the times of Saul and David, 1Sa 9:25 and in the times of the New Testament; See Gill on Mat 10:27; see Gill on Mat 24:17; see Gill on Mar 2:4; see Gill on Act 10:9, and so in later times, and to this day. Rauwolff ⁱ, traveller in those parts, relates, that at Tripoli in Phoenicia,"they have low houses, ill built, and flat at the top, as they are generally in the east; for they cover their houses with a flat roof or floor, so that you may walk about as far as the houses go, and the neighbours walk over the tops of their houses to visit one another; and sometimes in the summer they sleep on the top of them.''Now to prevent falling from thence, and mischief thereby, such a battlement as before described was ordered:

that thou bring not blood upon thy house; be not the occasion of blood being shed, or contract guilt of blood through negligence of such a provision the law directs to, the guilt of manslaughter, or of shedding innocent blood in thy house, as the Targums of Jonathan and Jerusalem; hence the Talmudists ^k extend this to other things, and by this law also they suppose men are bound to guard against all dangers in any other way; as if a man had a well or pit of water in his courtyard, he ought either to put a cover over it, or to make a fence round it as high as this battlement ^l:

if any man fall from thence; that is, if a man walking on the roof of an house should make a slip or a false step, and stumble and reel, and so be falling, and fall from thence; which might have been prevented, even his falling from thence or to the ground, if such a battlement had been made.

Gill: Deu 22:9

Thou shall not sow thy vineyards with divers seeds,.... As wheat and barley between the rows of the vines; and this is to be understood only of divers sorts of corn, and of divers sorts of herbs, but not of trees; hence we read of a fig tree in a vineyard, Luk 13:6, and this only respects what is sown with design, and not what is casual, as the Jews interpret it ^e;"if a man passes through a vineyard, and seeds fall from him, or they are carried out along with dung, or with water; or when a man is sowing, and a storm of wind carries it behind him (i.e. to a vineyard behind him), it is lawful;''that is, it may be let grow, and the fruit of it enjoyed; the same here is said of the vineyard as of the field in See Gill on Lev 19:19,

lest the fruit of thy seed which thou hast sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard; be defiled; that is, lest not only the increase of these divers seeds sown, but also the increase of the vines among which they are sown, become unlawful, and unfit for use, and so a loss of all be sustained: the Targum of Jonathan is,"lest it be condemned to burning;''or thou art obliged to burn it; for, according to the Jewish canons ^f, the mixtures of a vineyard, or the divers seeds of it, and the increase thereof, were to be burnt; and the commentators of the Misnah ^g frequently explain this phrase by "lest it be burnt".

Gill: Deu 22:10

Thou shalt not plough with an ox and an ass together,.... They might be used separately, but not together; nor was it uncommon in some countries for asses to be employed in ploughing as well as oxen. Pliny ^h makes mention of some fruitful land in Africa, which when it was dry weather could not be ploughed by oxen, but after showers of rain might be ploughed by a mean little ass; so Leo Africanus ⁱ says, the Africans only use horses and asses in ploughing. The reason why they were not to be put together was either (as some think) lest the law should be broken which forbids the gendering of cattle with a divers kind, Lev 19:19 but Aben Ezra thinks the reason is, because the strength of an ass is not equal to the strength of an ox; and therefore he supposes this law is made from the mercy and commiseration of God extended to all his creatures; though perhaps the better reason is, because the one was a clean creature, and the other an unclean, and this instance is put for all others; and with which agree the Jewish canons, which run thus,"cattle with cattle, wild beasts with wild beasts, unclean with unclean, clean with clean (i.e. these may be put together); but unclean with clean, and clean with unclean, are forbidden to plough with, to draw with, or to be led together ^k.''The mystery of this is, that godly and ungodly persons are not to be yoked together in religious fellowship: see 2Co 6:14.

Gill: Deu 22:11

Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts,.... The Jews say nothing is forbidden under the name of sorts but what is spun and wove, as it is said, "thou shalt not wear sheatnez", a thing that is carded, spun, and wove ^l; which Ainsworth translates "linsie woolsie", and is explained by what follows: as "of woollen and linen together"; of which See Gill on Lev 19:19, whereas Josephus ^m observes, this was granted to the priests only to wear such garments. Bochart ⁿ affirms it to be false; but that great man is mistaken; the blue, purple, and scarlet, in the priests' garments, were no other than dyed wool; and it is a sentiment in general received by the Jews, that the priests wore no other but woollen and linen in their service; see the note on the above place; otherwise this law is so strictly observed, as not, to sew a woollen garment with linen thread, and so on the contrary ^o.

Gill: Deu 22:12

Thou shalt make thee fringes,.... Though a different word is here used from that in Num 15:38, yet the same things are intended, and Onkelos translates both by one and the same word, and which is no other than a corruption of the Greek word used in Mat 23:5. Though there have been some, whom Aben Ezra takes notice of, who supposed that this is a law by itself, and to be observed in the night, as that in Num 15:38 was in the day; but these he warmly opposes, and calls them liars:

upon the four quarters of thy vesture, wherewith thou coverest thyself; upon the four skirts of the uppermost vesture, called Talith; See Gill on Num 15:38.

Gill: Deu 22:13

If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her. That is, marries a wife, and cohabits with her as man and wife, and after some time dislikes her, and is desirous of parting with her, and therefore takes the following wicked method to obtain it: this is to be understood of a virgin taken to wife, as the Targum of Jonathan explains it; and what follows confirms it.

Gill: Deu 22:14

And give occasions of speech against her,.... Among her neighbours, who by his behaviour towards her, and by what he says of her, will be led in all company and conversation to traduce her character, and speak of her as a very bad woman:

and bring up an evil name upon her; take away her good name, and give her a bad one; defame her, and make her appear scandalous and reproachful to all that know her: though the Jews understand this not of private slander, but of bringing an action against her in a public court of judicature, the substance of which follows: "and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid"; the sense is, that he had married her, and when he came to cohabit with her as man and wife, it appeared to him that she was vitiated, and not a pure virgin. This is the charge in court against her, the action laid by him; so Jarchi observes, a man might not say this but before a magistrate, in a court of judicature, which is thus represented by Maimonides ^p;"a man comes to the sanhedrim, and says, this young woman I married, and I did not find her virginities; and when I inquired into the matter, it appeared to me that she had played the whore under me, after I had betrothed her; and these are my witnesses that she played the whore before them.''

Gill: Deu 22:15

Then shall the father and the mother of the damsel take,.... Power from the court, according to the Targum of Jonathan; having leave and licence granted them to do what follows, these were to, and would, concern themselves in such an affair, partly for the credit and reputation of their child, and partly for their own honour, who were in danger, as Jarchi observes, of coming into contempt for their ill education of her:

and bring forth the tokens of the damsel's virginity; the sheet she lay in when she first bedded with her husband, in her parents' possession, and kept by them as a witness of her purity, should there ever be any occasion for it: and which were to be brought

unto the elders of the city in the gate; which sat in the gate of the city to try causes: the Targum of Jonathan calls it the gate of the sanhedrim, or court of judicature; and, according to Maimonides ^q, this court was the court of twenty three judges; for this was a capital crime accused of, a cause relating to life and death, which could not be heard and tried in a lesser court.

Gill: Deu 22:16

And the damsel's father shall say unto the elders,.... Not her mother; hence we learn, says Jarchi, that a woman has not power (or is not allowed) to speak before men; that is, in public see 1Co 14:34 and it was most proper for a father to appear in court for her, and defend her; and if she had no parents living then, those that brought her up, her guardians, that had the education of her, and placing her out in marriage, were to undertake her cause; or, as Josephus ^r says, those that were next akin to her; or, as, Aben Ezra, one appointed by the court:

I gave my daughter unto this man to wife; and, by the Jewish canons ^s, a man might give his daughter in marriage, but a woman might not:

and he hateth her; has taken a dislike to her, and wants to be rid of her, and therefore has brought this infamous action against her.

Gill: Deu 22:17

And, lo, he hath given occasion of speech against her,.... In the neighbourhood where they dwell; has been the cause of persons speaking reproachfully of her, as one of ill fame:

saying, l found not thy daughter a maid; so that it seems he said this not only to his neighbours, and before a court of judicature, but to the parents of the damsel:

and yet these are the tokens of my daughter's virginity; which were brought with him, and produced in open court:

and they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city; that they might have ocular proof and evidence of the truth of what he said, by having spread before them the sheet stained with the blood of her virginity upon her husband's first congress with her. It seems that the mother, as well as the father, were present and concerned in this action: for it is said, "they shall spread"; and though the mother might not speak, she was the proper person to bring this cloth and spread it; and indeed it was particularly in her care and keeping; for we are told ^t, that two persons, called שושבינים, "the friends" of the bride and bridegroom, went first into their bedchamber, and thoroughly examined the bed, whether there was anything relating to the sign of virginity, by which one might impose upon another; and they stood all night keeping watch with great joy and cheerfulness, as if they had been the guards of a king and queen; (to which is thought the allusion is in Joh 3:29) their business was, when the bridegroom and bride came out, to rush in immediately, and examine all things again; and knowing and owning the former linen sheets in which they had lain, took them and delivered them to the mother. Nor need spreading such a cloth before the court be thought unlikely because of the indecency of it, when it is observed that persons and things much more filthy came under the cognizance and examination of the priests, as leprous, menstruous, and profluvious persons, and their respective disorders; nor is it at all improbable that there should be such evident tokens as are said to be given, when it is observed, especially of the Jewish women, at what a tender age they were marriageable, and were frequently married, namely, when twelve years and one day old. And the Africans, as we are told ^u, have a custom with them similar to this at a wedding;"a feast is prepared, and a certain woman waits without, until the bride is lain with; and then a linen cloth, stained with blood, is reached out to her, which she carries in her hands, and shows to the guests, crying out with a loud voice that this was a virgin hitherto not corrupt; then she, with other women, are splendidly received, first by the parents of the bridegroom, and then of the bride; but if she does not appear to be a virgin, she is returned to her parents under the disgrace of all, and the marriage made null and void.''Indeed there are some Jewish writers, that interpret this cloth in a parabolical and allegorical sense, and understand by it witnesses that; would make the case as clear and plain as the spreading out a cloth or garment. They suppose that before the damsel was lain with she was examined by several matrons, who declaring her to be a virgin, gave it under their hands in writing to her parents, which they were capable of producing in court when there was occasion for it; so Jarchi says, this is a parable; the meaning is, they made things as clear and as plain as a new cloth; with which agrees the Talmud ^w he seems to have taken it from, where on these words, and they shall spread the cloth, this remark is made; but the literal sense seems best.

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: Deu 22:1

¹ tn Heb “you must not see,” but, if translated literally into English, the statement is misleading.

² tn Heb “brother’s” (also later in this verse). In this context it is not limited to one’s siblings, however; cf. NAB “your kinsman’s.”

³ tn Heb “hide yourself.”

⁴ tn The Hebrew text uses the infinitive absolute for emphasis, which the translation indicates with the words “without fail.”

NET Notes: Deu 22:2

¹ tn Heb “your brother” (also later in this verse).

² tn Heb “is not.” The idea of “residing” is implied.

³ tn Heb “and you do not know him.”

⁴ tn Heb “it”; the referent (the ox or sheep mentioned in v. 1) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

NET Notes: Deu 22:3

¹ tn Heb “your brother” (also in v. 4).

² tn Heb “you must not hide yourself.”

NET Notes: Deu 22:4

¹ tn Heb “you must not see.” See note at 22:1.

² tn Heb “and (must not) hide yourself from them.”

³ tn The Hebrew text uses the infinitive absolute for emphasis, which the translation indicates with “be sure.”

⁴ tn Heb “help him to lift them up.” In keeping with English style the singular is used in the translation, and the referent (“the animal”) has been specified for clarity.

NET Notes: Deu 22:5

¹ tn Heb “a man’s clothing.”

² tn The Hebrew term תּוֹעֵבָה (to’evah, “offense”) speaks of anything that runs counter to ritual or moral order, especially (in the OT) to divine standards. Cross-dressing in this covenant context may suggest homosexuality, fertility cult ritual, or some other forbidden practice.

NET Notes: Deu 22:6

¹ tn Heb “and the mother sitting upon the chicks or the eggs.”

² tn Heb “sons,” used here in a generic sense for offspring.

NET Notes: Deu 22:7

¹ tn The Hebrew text uses the infinitive absolute for emphasis, which the translation seeks to reflect with “be sure.”

NET Notes: Deu 22:8

¹ tn Or “a parapet” (so NAB, NIV, NRSV); KJV “a battlement”; NLT “a barrier.”

² tn Heb “that you not place bloodshed in your house.”

NET Notes: Deu 22:9

¹ tn Heb “set apart.” The verb קָדַשׁ (qadash) in the Qal verbal stem (as here) has the idea of being holy or being treated with special care. Some take the meaning as “be off-limits, forfeited,” i.e., the total produce of the vineyard, both crops and grapes, have to be forfeited to the sanctuary (cf. Exod 29:37; 30:29; Lev 6:18, 27; Num 16:37-38; Hag 2:12).

NET Notes: Deu 22:11

¹ tn The Hebrew term שַׁעַטְנֵז (sha’atnez) occurs only here and in Lev 19:19. HALOT 1610-11 s.v. takes it to be a contraction of words (שַׁשׁ [shash, “headdress”] + עַטְנַז [’atnaz, “strong”]). BDB 1043 s.v. שַׁעַטְנֵז offers the translation “mixed stuff” (cf. NEB “woven with two kinds of yarn”; NAB, NIV, NRSV, NLT “woven together”). The general meaning is clear even if the etymology is not.

NET Notes: Deu 22:12

¹ tn Heb “twisted threads” (גְּדִלִים, gÿdilim) appears to be synonymous with צִיצִת (tsitsit) which, in Num 15:38, occurs in a passage instructing Israel to remember the covenant. Perhaps that is the purpose of the tassels here as well. Cf. KJV, ASV “fringes”; NAB “twisted cords.”

NET Notes: Deu 22:13

¹ tn Heb “goes to her,” a Hebrew euphemistic idiom for sexual relations.

² tn Heb “hate.” See note on the word “other” in Deut 21:15. Cf. NAB “comes to dislike”; NASB “turns against”; TEV “decides he doesn’t want.”

NET Notes: Deu 22:14

¹ tn Heb “deeds of things”; NRSV “makes up charges against her”; NIV “slanders her.”

² tn Heb “brings against her a bad name”; NIV “gives her a bad name.”

³ tn Heb “drew near to her.” This is another Hebrew euphemism for having sexual relations.

NET Notes: Deu 22:15

¹ sn In light of v. 17 this would evidently be blood-stained sheets indicative of the first instance of intercourse. See E. H. Merrill, Deuteronomy (NAC), 302-3.

NET Notes: Deu 22:16

¹ tn Heb “hated.” See note on the word “other” in Deut 21:15.

NET Notes: Deu 22:17

¹ tn Heb “they will spread the garment.”

Geneva Bible: Deu 22:1

Thou shalt not see thy brother's ox or his sheep go astray, and ^{( a )} hide thyself from them: thou shalt in any case bring them again unto thy brother.

^{( a )} As though your did not see it.

Geneva Bible: Deu 22:2

And if thy brother [be] not ^{( b )} nigh unto thee, or if thou know him not, then thou shalt bring it unto thine own house, and it shall be with thee until thy brother seek after it, and thou shalt restore it to him again.

^{( b )} Showing that brotherly affection must be shown, not only to those who dwell near to us, but also to those who are far off.

Geneva Bible: Deu 22:3

In like manner shalt thou do with his ^{( c )} ass; and so shalt thou do with his raiment; and with all lost thing of thy brother's, which he hath lost, and thou hast found, shalt thou do likewise: thou mayest not hide thyself.

^{( c )} You are bound to do much more for your neighbour.

Geneva Bible: Deu 22:5

The ^{( d )} woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so [are] abomination unto the LORD thy God.

^{( d )} For that alters the order of nature, and shows that you despise God.

Geneva Bible: Deu 22:6

If a bird's nest chance to be before thee in the way in any tree, or on the ground, [whether they be] young ones, or eggs, and the dam sitting upon the young, or upon the eggs, ^{( e )} thou shalt not take the dam with the young:

^{( e )} If God detests cruelty done to little birds, how much more to man, made according to his image?

Geneva Bible: Deu 22:9

Thou shalt not ^{( f )} sow thy vineyard with divers seeds: lest the fruit of thy seed which thou hast sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard, be defiled.

^{( f )} The tenor of this law is to walk in simplicity and not to be curious about new fads.

Geneva Bible: Deu 22:14

And give ^{( g )} occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid:

^{( g )} That is, be an occasion that she is slandered.

Geneva Bible: Deu 22:17

And, lo, he hath given occasions of speech [against her], saying, I found not thy daughter a maid; and yet these [are the tokens of] my daughter's virginity. And they shall spread the ^{( h )} cloth before the elders of the city.

^{( h )} Meaning, the sheet, in which the signs of her virginity were.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: Deu 22:1-30

1 Of humanity towards brethren.

5 The sex is to be distinguished by apparel.

6 The dam is not to be taken with her young ones.

8 The house must have battlements.

9 Confusion is to be avoided.

12 Fringes upon the vesture.

13 The punishment of him that slanders his wife.

22 Of adultery;

23 of rape;

28 of fornication;

30 of incest.

MHCC: Deu 22:1-4

If we duly regard the golden rule of " doing to others as we would they should do unto us," many particular precepts might be omitted. We can have no property in any thing that we find. Religion teaches us to be neighbourly, and to be ready to do all good offices to all men. We know not how soon we may have occasion for help.

MHCC: Deu 22:5-12

God's providence extends itself to the smallest affairs, and his precepts do so, that even in them we may be in the fear of the Lord, as we are under his eye and care. Yet the tendency of these laws, which seem little, is such, that being found among the things of God's law, they are to be accounted great things. If we would prove ourselves to be God's people, we must have respect to his will and to his glory, and not to the vain fashions of the world. Even in putting on our garments, as in eating or in drinking, all must be done with a serious regard to preserve our own and others' purity in heart and actions. Our eye should be single, our heart simple, and our behaviour all of a piece.

MHCC: Deu 22:13-30

These and the like regulations might be needful then, and yet it is not necessary that we should curiously examine respecting them. The laws relate to the seventh commandment, laying a restraint upon fleshly lusts which war against the soul.

Matthew Henry: Deu 22:1-4

The kindness that was commanded to be shown in reference to an enemy (Exo 23:4, etc.) is here required to be much more done for a neighbour, though he were not an Israelite, for the law is consonant to natural equity. 1. That strayed cattle should be brought back, either to the owner or to the pasture out of which they had gone astray, Deu 22:1, Deu 22:2. This must be done in pity to the very cattle, which, while they wandered, were exposed; and in civility and respect to the owner, nay, and in justice to him, for it was doing as we would be done by, which is one of the fundamental laws of equity. Note, Religion teaches us to be neighbourly, and to be ready to do all good offices, as we have opportunity, to all men. In doing this, (1.) They must not mind trouble, but, if they knew who the owner was, must take it back themselves; for, if they should only send notice to the owner to come and look after it himself, some mischief might befal it ere he could reach it. (2.) They must not mind expense, but, if they knew not who the owner was, must take it home and feed it till the owner was found. If such care must be taken of a neighbour's ox or ass going astray, much more of himself going astray from God and his duty; we should do our utmost to convert him (Jam 5:19), and restore him, considering ourselves, Gal 6:1. 2. That lost goods should be brought to the owner, Deu 22:3. The Jews say, "He that found the lost goods was to give public notice of them by the common crier three or four times,"according to the usage with us; if the owner could not be found, he that found the goods might convert them to his own use; but (say some learned writers in this case) he would do very well to give the value of the goods to the poor. 3. That cattle in distress should be helped, Deu 22:4. This must be done both in compassion to the brute-creatures (for a merciful man regardeth the life of a beast, though it be not his own) and in love and friendship to our neighbour, not knowing how soon we may have occasion for his help. If one member may say to another, "I have at present no need of thee,"it cannot say, "I never shall."

Matthew Henry: Deu 22:5-12

Here are several laws in these verses which seem to stoop very low, and to take cognizance of things mean and minute. Men's laws commonly do not so: De minimis non curat lex - The law takes no cognizance of little things; but because God's providence extends itself to the smallest affairs, his precepts do so, that even in them we may be in the fear of the Lord, as we are under his eye and care. And yet the significancy and tendency of these statutes, which seem little, are such that, notwithstanding their minuteness, being fond among the things of God's law, which he has written to us, they are to be accounted great things.

I. The distinction of sexes by the apparel is to be kept up, for the preservation of our own and our neighbour's chastity, Deu 22:5. Nature itself teaches that a difference be made between them in their hair (1Co 11:14), and by the same rule in their clothes, which therefore ought not to be confounded, either in ordinary wear or occasionally. To befriend a lawful escape or concealment it may be done, but whether for sport or in the acting of plays is justly questionable. 1. Some think it refers to the idolatrous custom of the Gentiles: in the worship of Venus, women appeared in armour, and men in women's clothes; this, as other such superstitious usages, is here said to be an abomination to the Lord. 2. It forbids the confounding of the dispositions and affairs of the sexes: men must not be effeminate, nor do the women's work in the house, nor must women be viragos, pretend to teach, or usurp authority, 1Ti 2:11, 1Ti 2:12. Probably this confounding of garments had been used to gain opportunity of committing uncleanness, and is therefore forbidden; for those that would be kept from sin must keep themselves from all occasions of it and approaches to it.

II. In taking a bird's-nest, the dam must be let go, Deu 22:6, Deu 22:7. The Jews say, "This is the least of all the commandments of the law of Moses,"and yet the same promise is here made to the observance of it that is made to the keeping of the fifth commandment, which is one of the greatest, that it may be well with thee, and that thou mayest prolong thy days; for, as disobedience in a small matter shows a very great contempt of the law, so obedience in a small matter shows a very great regard to it. He that let go a bird out of his hand (which was worth two in the bush) purely because God bade him, in that made it to appear that he esteemed all God's precepts concerning all things to be right, and that he could deny himself rather than sin against God. But doth God take care for birds? 1Co 9:9. Yes, certainly; and perhaps to this law our Saviour alludes. Luk 12:6, Are not five sparrows sold for two farthings, and not one of them is forgotten before God? This law, 1. Forbids us to be cruel to the brute-creatures, or to take a pleasure in destroying them. Though God has made us wiser than the fowls of heaven, and given us dominion over them, yet we must not abuse them nor rule them with rigour. Let go the dam to breed again; destroy it not, for a blessing is in it, Isa 65:8. 2. It teaches us compassion to those of our own kind, and to abhor the thought of every thing that looks barbarous, and cruel, and ill-natured, especially towards those of the weaker and tender sex, which always ought to be treated with the utmost respect, in consideration of the sorrows wherein they bring forth children. It is spoken of as an instance of the most inhuman cruelty that the mother was dashed to pieces upon her children (Hos 10:14), and that the women with child were ripped open, Amo 1:13. 3. It further intimates that we must not take advantage against any, from their natural affection and the tenderness of their disposition, to do them an injury. The dam could not have been taken if her concern for her eggs or young (unlike to the ostrich) had not detained her upon the next when otherwise she could easily have secured herself by flight. Now, since it is a thousand pities that she should fare the worse for that which is her praise, the law takes care that she shall be let go. The remembrance of this may perhaps, some time or other, keep us from doing a hard or unkind thing to those whom we have at our mercy.

III. In building a house, care must be taken to make it safe, that none might receive mischief by falling from it, Deu 22:8. The roofs of their houses were flat for people to walk on, as appears by many scriptures; now lest any, through carelessness, should fall off them, they must compass them with battlements, which (the Jews say) must be three feet and a half high; if this were not done, and mischief followed, the owner, by his neglect, brought the guilt of blood upon his house. See here, 1. How precious men's lives are to God, who protects them, not only by his providence, but by his law. 2. How precious, therefore, they ought to be to us, and what care we should take to prevent hurt from coming to any person. The Jews say that by the equity of this law they were obliged (and so are we too) to fence, or remove, every thing by which life may be endangered, as to cover draw-wells, keep bridges in repair, and the like, lest, if any perish through our omission, their blood be required at our hand.

IV. Odd mixtures are here forbidden, Deu 22:9, Deu 22:10. Much of this we met with before, Lev 19:19. There appears not any thing at all of moral evil in these things, and therefore we now make no conscience of sowing wheat and rye together, ploughing with horses and oxen together, and of wearing linsey-woolsey garments; but hereby is forbidden either, 1. A conformity to some idolatrous customs of the heathen. Or, 2. That which is contrary to the plainness and purity of an Israelite. They must not gratify their own vanity and curiosity by putting those things together which the Creator in infinite wisdom had made asunder: they must not be unequally yoked with unbelievers, nor mingle themselves with the unclean, as an ox with an ass. Nor must their profession and appearance in the world be motley, or party-coloured, but all of a piece, all of a kind.

V. The law concerning fringes upon their garments, and memorandums of the commandments, which we had before (Num 15:38, Num 15:39), is here repeated, Deu 22:12. By these they were distinguished from other people, so that it might be said, upon the first sight There goes an Israelite, which taught them not to be ashamed of their country, nor the peculiarities of their religion, how much soever their neighbours looked upon them and it with contempt: and they were also put in mind of the precepts upon the particular occasions to which they had reference; and perhaps this law is repeated here because the precepts immediately foregoing seemed so minute that they were in danger of being overlooked and forgotten. The fringes will remind you not to make your garments of linen and woollen, Deu 22:11.

Matthew Henry: Deu 22:13-30

These laws relate to the seventh commandment, laying a restraint by laying a penalty upon those fleshly lusts which war against the soul.

I. If a man, lusting after another woman, to get rid of his wife slander her and falsely accuse her, as not having the virginity she pretended to when he married her, upon the disproof of his slander he must be punished, Deu 22:13-19. What the meaning of that evidence is by which the husband's accusation was to be proved false the learned are not agreed, nor is it at all necessary to enquire - those for whom this law was intended, no doubt, understood it: it is sufficient for us to know that this wicked husband, who had thus endeavoured to ruin the reputation of his own wife, was to be scourged, and fined, and bound out from ever divorcing the wife he had thus abused, Deu 22:18, Deu 22:19. Upon his dislike of her he might have divorced her if he had pleased, by the permission of the law (Deu 24:1), but then he must have given her her dowry: if therefore to save that, and to do her the greater mischief, he would thus destroy her good name, it was fit that he should be severely punished for it, and for ever after forfeit the permission to divorce her. Observe, 1. The nearer any are in relation to us the greater sin it is to belie them and blemish their reputation. It is spoken of as a crime of the highest nature to slander thy own mother's son (Psa 50:20), who is next to thyself, much more to slander thy own wife, or thy own husband, that is thyself: it is an ill bird indeed that defiles its own nest. 2. Chastity is honour as well as virtue, and that which gives occasion for the suspicion of it is as great a reproach and disgrace as any whatsoever: in this matter therefore, above any thing, we should be highly tender both of our own good name and that of others. 3. Parents must look upon themselves as concerned to vindicate the reputation of their children, for it is a branch of their own.

II. If the woman that was married as a virgin was not found to be one she was to be stoned to death at her father's door, Deu 22:20, Deu 22:21. If the uncleanness had been committed before she was betrothed it would not have been punished as a capital crime; but she must die for the abuse she put upon him whom she married, being conscious to herself of being defiled, while she made him believe her to be a chaste and modest woman. But some think that her uncleanness was punished with death only in case it was committed after she was betrothed, supposing there were few come to maturity but what were betrothed, though not yet married. Now, 1. This gave a powerful caution to young women to flee fornication, since, however concealed before, so as not to mar their marriage, it would very likely be discovered afterwards, to their perpetual infamy and utter ruin. 2. It is intimated to parents that they must by all means possible preserve their children's chastity, by giving them good advice and admonition, setting them good examples, keeping them from bad company, praying for them, and laying them under needful restraints, because, if the children committed lewdness, the parents must have the grief and shame of the execution at their own door. That phrase of folly wrought in Israel was used concerning this very crime in the case of Dinah, Gen 34:7. All sin is folly, uncleanness especially; but, above all, uncleanness in Israel, by profession a holy people.

III. If any man, single or married, lay with a married woman, they were both to be put to death, Deu 22:22. This law we had before, Lev 20:10. For a married man to lie with a single woman was not a crime of so high a nature, nor was it punished with death, because not introducing a spurious brood into families under the character of legitimate children.

IV. If a damsel were betrothed and not married, she was from under the eye of her intended husband, and therefore she and her chastity were taken under the special protection of the law. 1. If her chastity were violated by her own consent, she was to be put to death, and her adulterer with her, Deu 22:23, Deu 22:24. And it shall be presumed that she consented if it were done in the city, or in any place where, had she cried out, help might speedily have come in to prevent the injury offered her. Qui tacet, consentire videtur - Silence implies consent. Note, It may be presumed that those willingly yield to a temptation (whatever they pretend) who will not use the means and helps they might be furnished with to avoid and overcome it. Nay, her being found in the city, a place of company and diversion, when she should have kept under the protection of her father's house, was an evidence against her that she had not that dread of the sin and the danger of it which became a modest woman. Note, Those that needlessly expose themselves to temptation justly suffer for the same, if, ere they are aware, they be surprised and caught by it. Dinah lost her honour to gratify her curiosity with a sight of the daughters of the land. By this law the Virgin Mary was in danger of being made a public example, that is, of being stoned to death, but that God, by an angel, cleared the matter to Joseph. 2. If she were forced, and never consented, he that committed the rape was to be put to death, but the damsel was to be acquitted, Deu 22:24-27. Now if it were done in the field, out of the hearing of neighbours, it shall be presumed that she cried out, but there was none to save her; and, besides, her going into the field, a place of solitude, did not so much expose her. Now by this law it is intimated to us, (1.) That we shall suffer only for the wickedness we do, not for that which is done to us. That is no sin which has not more or less of the will in it. (2.) That we must presume the best concerning all persons, unless the contrary do appear; not only charity, but equity teaches us to do so. Though none heard her cry, yet, because none could hear it if she did, it shall be taken for granted that she did. This rule we should go by in judging of persons and actions: believe all things, and hope all things. (3.) That our chastity should be as dear to us as our life when that is assaulted, it is not at all improper to cry murder, murder, for, as when a man riseth against his neighbour and slayeth him, even so is this matter. (4.) By way of allusion to this, see what we are to do when Satan sets upon us with his temptations: wherever we are, let us cry aloud to heaven for help ( Succurre, Domine, vim patior - Help me, O Lord, for I suffer violence ), and there we may be sure to be heard, and answered, as Paul was, My grace is sufficient for thee.

V. If a damsel not betrothed were thus abused by violence, he that abused her should be fined, the father should have the fine, and, if he and the damsel did consent, he should be bound to marry her, and never to divorce her, how much soever she was below him, and how unpleasing soever she might afterwards be to him, as Tamar was to Amnon after he had forced her, Deu 22:28, Deu 22:29. This was to deter men from such vicious practices, which it is a shame that we are necessitated to read and write of.

VI. The law against a man's marrying his father's widow, or having any undue familiarity with his father's wife, is here repeated (Deu 22:30) from Lev 18:8. And, probably, it is intended (as bishop Patrick notes) for a short memorandum to them carefully to observe all the laws there made against incestuous marriages, that being specified which is the most detestable of all; it is that of which the apostle says, It is not so much as named among the Gentiles, 1Co 5:1.

Keil-Delitzsch: Deu 22:1-12

Going deeper and deeper into the manifold relations of the national life, Moses first of all explains in Deu 22:1-12 the attitude of an Israelite, on the one hand, towards a neighbour; and, on the other hand, towards the natural classification and arrangement of things, and shows how love should rule in the midst of all these relations. The different relations brought under consideration are selected rather by way of examples, and therefore follow one another without any link of connection, for the purpose of exhibiting the truth in certain concrete cases, and showing how the covenant people were to hold all the arrangement of God sacred, whether in nature or in social life.

Deu 22:1-3

In Deu 22:1-4 Moses shows, by a still further expansion of Exo 23:4-5, how the property of a neighbour was to be regarded and preserved. If any man saw an ox or a sheep of his brother's (fellow-countryman) going astray, he was not to draw back from it, but to bring it back to his brother; and if the owner lived at a distance, or was unknown, he was to take it into his own house or farm, till he came to seek it. He was also to do the same with an ass or any other property that another had lost.

Deu 22:4

A fallen animal belonging to another he was also to help up (as in Exo 23:5 : except that in this case, instead of a brother generally, an enemy or hater is mentioned).

Deu 22:5

As the property of a neighbour was to be sacred in the estimation of an Israelite, so also the divine distinction of the sexes, which was kept sacred in civil life by the clothing peculiar to each sex, was to be not less but even more sacredly observed. "There shall not be man's things upon a woman, and a man shall not put on a woman's clothes." כּלי does not signify clothing merely, nor arms only, but includes every kind of domestic and other utensils (as in Exo 22:6; Lev 11:32; Lev 13:49). The immediate design of this prohibition was not to prevent licentiousness, or to oppose idolatrous practices (the proofs which Spencer has adduced of the existence of such usages among heathen nations are very far-fetched); but to maintain the sanctity of that distinction of the sexes which was established by the creation of man and woman, and in relation to which Israel was not to sin. Every violation or wiping out of this distinction - such even, for example, as the emancipation of a woman - was unnatural, and therefore an abomination in the sight of God.

Deu 22:6-7

The affectionate relation of parents to their young, which God had established even in the animal world, was also to be kept just as sacred. If any one found a bird's nest by the road upon a tree, or upon the ground, with young ones or eggs, and the mother sitting upon them, he was not to take the mother with the young ones, but to let the mother fly, and only take the young. נקרא for נקרה , as in Exo 5:3. The command is related to the one in Lev 22:28 and Exo 23:19, and is placed upon a par with the commandment relating to parents, by the fact that obedience is urged upon the people by the same promise in both instances (vid., Deu 5:16; Exo 20:12).

Deu 22:8-12

Still less were they to expose human life to danger through carelessness. " If thou build a new house, make a rim ( maakeh ) - i.e., a balustrade - to thy roof, that thou bring not blood-guiltiness upon thy house, if any one fall from it ."The roofs of the Israelitish houses were flat, as they mostly are in the East, so that the inhabitants often lived upon them (Jos 2:6; 2Sa 11:2; Mat 10:27). - In Deu 22:9-11, there follow several prohibitions against mixing together the things which are separated in God's creation, consisting partly of a verbal repetition of Lev 19:19 (see the explanation of this passage). - To this there is appended in Deu 22:12 the law concerning the tassels upon the hem of the upper garment (Num 15:37.), which were to remind the Israelites of their calling, to walk before the Lord in faithful fulfilment of the commandments of God (see the commentary upon this passage).

Keil-Delitzsch: Deu 22:13-14

Laws of Chastity and Marriage. - Higher and still holier than the order of nature stands the moral order of marriage, upon which the well-being not only of domestic life, but also of the civil commonwealth of nations, depends. Marriage must be founded upon fidelity and chastity on the part of those who are married. To foster this, and secure it against outbreaks of malice and evil lust, was the design and object of the laws which follow. The first (Deu 22:13-21) relates to the chastity of a woman on entering into the married state, which might be called in question by her husband, either from malice or with justice. The former case is that which Moses treats of first of all. If a man took a wife, and came to her, and hated her, i.e., turned against her after gratifying his carnal desires (like Amnon, for example, 2Sa 13:15), and in order to get rid of her again, attributed "deeds or things of words"to her, i.e., things which give occasion for words or talk, and so brought an evil name upon her, saying, that on coming to her he did not find virginity in her. בּתוּלים , virginity, here the signs of it, viz., according to Deu 22:17, the marks of a first intercourse upon the bed-clothes or dress.

Keil-Delitzsch: Deu 22:15-17

In such a case the parents of the young woman ( הנּער for הנּערה , as in Gen 24:14, Gen 24:28, according to the earliest usage of the books of Moses, a virgin, then also a young woman, e.g., Rth 2:6; Rth 4:12) were to bring the matter before the elders of the town into the gate (the judicial forum; see Deu 21:19), and establish the chastity and innocence of their daughter by spreading the bed-clothes before them. It was not necessary to this end that the parents should have taken possession of the spotted bed-clothes directly after the marriage night, as in customarily done by the Bedouins and the lower classes of the Moslem in Egypt and Syria (cf. Niebuhr, Beschr. v. Arab. pp. 35ff.; Arvieux, merkw. Nachr. iii. p. 258; Burckhardt, Beduinen, p. 214, etc.). It was sufficient that the cloth should be kept, in case such a proof might be required.

Constable: Deu 5:1--26:19

IV. MOSES' SECOND MAJOR ADDRESS: AN EXPOSITION OF THE LAW chs. 5--26

". . . Deuteronomy contains the most comprehensive body of laws in the Pentateuch. It is clearly intended to be consulted for guidance on many aspects of daily life, in sharp contrast with the laws of Leviticus, which are very restricted in scope and mainly concern the functions of the priesthood."⁶⁸

"Two of the major elements [in ancient Near Eastern covenant texts] . . . are lists of stipulations, the first of a general, principal nature and the second of a more specific and applicational kind. That is, the first spelled out in broad strokes the kinds of actions and reactions the Great King expected of his vassal, and the other offered examples of how these general expectations could and should be worked out in everyday life within the relationship.

"While a general correspondence exists between Deuteronomy and the secular treaty texts, especially in form, there are significant differences as well. Among these are the narrative sections and the extensive parenesis [exhortation], both of which are lacking in the extrabiblical models. It is important to note here, moreover, that Deuteronomy, in addition to being a covenant text, is also a law code, or, more precisely, contains a law code. The general stipulation section (5:1-11:32) and the specific stipulation section (12:1-26:15) function as such a law code and thus serve both in this capacity and in that of covenant stipulation. To put it more succinctly, the stipulations of the Deuteronomic covenant constitute the law code for the nation Israel that was about to enter the new conditions and expectations of life in the land of promise. This is why the following principles resemble both legal statutes and covenant stipulations at one and the same time."⁶⁹

Constable: Deu 12:1--25:19

B. An exposition of selected covenant laws 12-25

Moses' homiletical exposition of the law of Israel that follows explains reasons for the covenant laws that arose from the Ten Commandments. This address concludes with directions for celebrating and confirming the covenant (26:1-15). The section contains a mixture of laws previously revealed to the Israelites and other laws not previously revealed in the code given at Sinai (Exod. 20:1-23:19). This is instruction preached rather than codified as comprehensive legislation.

"The specific laws in this section were given to help the people subordinate every area of their lives to the LORD, and to help them eradicate whatever might threaten that pure devotion."¹⁴³

"Placement of the instruction about worship at the sanctuary in first position indicates clearly its priority for Deuteronomy, which assumes that the starting point for the proper, full, and exclusive love of the Lord (the primary demand of the first and second commandments and the Shema) is found in the way Israel carries out the activities of worship."¹⁴⁴

There is an obvious general movement from laws dealing with Israel's religious life (12:1-16:17) to those affecting her civil life (16:18-22:8) and finally to those touching personal life (22:9-26:15).

Two writers suggested the following outlines for these chapters.¹⁴⁵

Commandment	Merrill	Kaufman	Description
1	12:1-31	ch. 12	Fidelity
2	12:32-13:18	ch. 12	Worship
3	14:1-21	13:1-14:27	Name of God
4	14:22-16:17	14:28-16:17	Sabbath
5	16:18-18:22	16:18-18:22	Authority
6	19:1-22:8	19:1-22:8	Murder
7	22:9-23:18	22:9-23:19	Adultery
8	23:19-24:7	23:20-24:7	Theft
9	24:8-25:4	24:8-25:4	False witness
10	25:5-19	25:5-16	Coveting

". . . the entire second discourse of Moses (Deut. 5-26) is a single literary unit that convincingly demonstrates that the moral law informs the statutes, judgments . . . and commands of God."¹⁴⁶

In contrast with the Book of the Covenant (Exod. 20-23), the Deuteronomic Code, as some scholars prefer to call this section (chs. 12-26), is a popular exposition rather than a formal legal code. Its purpose was to explain to the generation entering the land all the laws that needed clarification, emphasis, and application, in view of Israel's imminent entrance into Canaan. These laws reflect a centralized, monarchical society.

The value of this section of Scripture to the Christian today lies primarily in its revelation of the heart, mind, and will of God. The modern student of these chapters should look for this kind of insight here.

Constable: Deu 19:1--22:9

6. Laws arising from the sixth commandment 19:1-22:8

The sixth commandment is, "You shall not murder" (5:17). The representative laws in this chapter all protected people who were vulnerable for one reason or another. Civil law is in view.

Constable: Deu 21:22--22:9

Respect for life 21:22-22:8

This section opens and closes with references to death (21:22; 22:8) placing it within the legislation dealing with the sixth commandment.²³⁸

Constable: Deu 22:1-8

Preventing accidental death 22:1-8

Love for one's neighbor comes through in several concrete situations in verses 1-4. Failure to get involved and help a neighbor in need is also wrong under the New Covenant (James 2:15-16; 1 John 3:17).

Men appeared in women's clothing and vice versa (v. 5) in some of the worship rituals of Astarte.²⁴¹ Furthermore transvestism did and still does have associations with certain forms of homosexuality.²⁴² Perhaps for these reasons God gave the command to wear clothing appropriate to one's own sex as well as because God intended to keep the sexes distinct (v. 5). Homosexualism was punishable by death in Israel.

"There are positive values in preserving the differences between the sexes in matters of dress. The New Testament instruction in Galatians 3:28, that there is neither male nor female, but that Christians are all one in Christ Jesus, applies rather to status in God's sight than to such things as dress. Without being legalistic some attempt to recognize the relative difference of the sexes, within their common unity as persons, is a principle worth safeguarding."²⁴³

Verses 6-7 show that God cares for the least of His creatures, and He wanted His people to do the same. Israelites could not kill mother birds along with their young or vice versa.

"The affectionate relation of parents to their young which God had established even in the animal world, was to be kept just as sacred [among animals as among humans, vv. 6-7]."²⁴⁴

Another view is that this law taught the Israelites to protect this important source of food, namely, eggs.²⁴⁵ Building parapets on their flat-roofed houses reminded them of the value of human life and to love their neighbors (v. 8).

Constable: Deu 22:9--23:19

7. Laws arising from the seventh commandment 22:9-23:18

The seventh commandment is, "You shall not commit adultery" (5:18).

"Known elsewhere in the ancient Near East as the Great Sin,' adultery epitomizes all that impurity means, whether in family, social, political, or religious life."²⁴⁶

Constable: Deu 22:9-12

Illustrations of the principle 22:9-12

Adultery involves mixing people in a way that they should not mix, so the antithesis is keeping things properly apart separate. The prohibitions against mixing seed, animals in yoke, and fibers in clothing (vv. 9-11) seem to have had a double significance. They taught the Israelites the importance of purity and keeping things distinct ". . . because the order of the world must not be endangered."²⁴⁷ They also illustrated the importance of remaining separate from the Canaanites. God had told the Israelites not to mix their human seed with the seed of the Canaanites. The Israelites regarded the ox as a symbol of themselves and the ass as a symbol of the Canaanites. Wool was the fiber from which the Israelites made their clothing. However the Canaanites, especially the Canaanite priests, dressed in linen.²⁴⁸ Tassels (v. 12) were also visual aids (cf. Num. 15:37-41).

"One of the ways the purity of the people is to be maintained, one that sounds rather strange in the contemporary world, is the insistence that things be kept in order and not mixed up inappropriately."²⁴⁹

Constable: Deu 22:13-30

The marriage relationship 22:13-30

Moses considered seven types of cases in these verses.

The first case (vv. 13-19) is of a man who marries a woman and then falsely charges her with being a harlot (not being a virgin when he married her). If the girl could prove her virginity, her husband would have to pay a large fine (cf. 2 Sam. 24:24) to her father and remain married to the girl.²⁵⁰ The evidence of the girl's virginity was the blood on her dress or bedclothes on the wedding night. Some Bedouin and Moslem parents still retrieve and keep these to prove virginity if necessary.²⁵¹

The second case (vv. 20-21) involved a similar case, but in this instance the girl was not a virgin. She would suffer stoning for being a harlot, a capital offense in Israel. These verses reveal that sex before marriage was sinful and serious in God's sight (cf. 1 Cor. 7:1-2). Premarital sex presumes to seize the highest privilege in marriage (i.e., intimacy through sexual union that results in the "one flesh" relationship). It does so without shouldering the responsibility, namely, permanent commitment to one another (expressed as "cleaving" in Gen. 2:24). It therefore perverts marriage, the basic institution of society. It presumes to dictate to God by altering His plan. Not everyone who has engaged in premarital sex has thought this through, but this is the basic reason premarital sex is wrong. To the engaged couple committed to one another and tempted to have sex before their marriage I would say postpone sex until the marriage has taken place. Scripture regards sex as the consummation of marriage, what takes place after the couple has completed everything else involved in the establishment of marriage (cf. Gen. 2:24).²⁵²

The third case (v. 22) decreed that a man who committed adultery with a married woman would die with the woman.

The fourth case (vv. 23-24) dealt with a man who had intercourse with an engaged girl in a city. Both individuals would die by stoning. Israelites regarded engaged girls as virtually married and even called them wives (v. 24). Thus they treated the man as having committed adultery, as in case three. The girl died because she did not cry out for help. She consented to the act. Apparently Moses was assuming that if she had cried out someone in the city would have rescued her.

The fifth case (vv. 25-27) involved a situation similar to case four, but the intercourse took place in an isolated field. In this instance only the man died assuming the girl cried for help but no one heard her. Presumably if it was clear that she did not cry out she would have died too.

The sixth case (vv. 28-29) had to do with a man and a virgin who had intercourse before they became engaged. In this case they had to marry and could not divorce. The man had to pay a penalty to his father-in-law too (cf. Exod. 22:16-17).

The seventh case (v. 30) Moses stated in terms of a general principle. God forbade incest in Israel. "Uncovering the skirt" is a euphemism for sexual intercourse. To uncover means to encroach on another person's marital rights. To cover in this sense represents committing to marry (cf. Ruth 3:9).

"One of the most important and difficult tasks in the interpretation of the Scriptures in general and of the passages that deal with women and marriage in particular, is the need to discern which elements are cultural, temporary, and variable, and which ones are transcultural, timeless, and universal."²⁵³

God designed these laws to stress the importance of monogamy in a polygamous culture.

Marital ". . . purity and fidelity are essential to the well-being of society."²⁵⁴

God's people need to keep sex in its proper place in relation to marriage (cf. Heb. 13:4). The focus of this entire chapter is how to apply love.

Guzik: Deu 22:1-30

Deuteronomy 22 - Various Laws

A. Laws to demonstrate kindness and purity.

1. (1-4) Kindness to your brother regarding his animals.

You shall not see your brother's ox or his sheep going astray, and hide yourself from them; you shall certainly bring them back to your brother. And if your brother is not near you, or if you do not know him, then you shall bring it to your own house, and it shall remain with you until your brother seeks it; then you shall restore it to him. You shall do the same with his donkey, and so shall you do with his garment; with any lost thing of your brother's, which he has lost and you have found, you shall do likewise; you must not hide yourself. You shall not see your brother's donkey or his ox fall down along the road, and hide yourself from them; you shall surely help him lift them up again.

a. You shall not see . . . and hide yourself: God here condemned the sin of doing nothing. To see your brother in need, and to do nothing, is to do evil. When one has the opportunity to good, you must not hide yourself.

b. Until your brother seeks it; then you shall restore it to him: Simply put, when something is lost, a finder cannot claim it as theirs without taking all due diligence to restore it to the owner. If the owner seeks the missing object, it must be restored to him.

i. Exodus 23:4-5 commands Israel to also help stray animals, but extends the obligation to the stray animals of an enemy, not just a brother.

c. You shall surely help him left them up again: Also, if someone's donkey falls down, and you can help them, then you must. To pass by your brother in need and to hide yourself from them is to sin against your brother and against God.

2. (5) A command to keep distinction between the sexes in clothing.

A woman shall not wear anything that pertains to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman's garment, for all who do so are an abomination to the LORD your God.

a. Anything that pertains to a man: In Old Testament times, men and women wore clothing that was superficially similar - long robes and wrapping garments were common for both sexes. Yet, the specific types of garments and the way in which they were worn made a clear distinction between the sexes, and this command instructs God's people to respect those distinctions.

i. Some have taken this command to be the "proof-text" against women wearing pants and some Christian groups command that women wear only dresses. Yet, this is not a command against women wearing a garment that in some ways might be common between men and women; it is a command against dressing in a manner which deliberately blurs the lines between the sexes.

b. Nor shall a man put on a woman's garment: This does not prohibit a man from wearing a kilt; yet it clearly prohibits a man dressing like a woman, as is all too common - and all too accepted - in our modern culture.

i. The dramatic rise in cross-dressing, transvestitism, androgynous behavior, and "gender-bender" behavior in our culture is a shocking trampling of this command, and will reap a bitter harvest in more perversion and more gender confusion in our culture.

c. All who do so are an abomination to the LORD your God: This command to observe the distinction between the sexes is so important, those who fail to observe it are called an abomination to the LORD. This was not only because cross-dressing was a feature of pagan, idolatrous worship in the ancient world, but also because of the terrible cultural price that is paid when it is pretended that there is no difference between men and women.

i. "Later writers, such as Lucian of Samosata and Eusebius, speak of the practice of masquerading in the worship of Astarte. Apparently women appeared in men's garments and men in women's garments." (Thompson)

3. (6-7) A command to show kindness to animals.

If a bird's nest happens to be before you along the way, in any tree or on the ground, with young ones or eggs, with the mother sitting on the young or on the eggs, you shall not take the mother with the young; you shall surely let the mother go, and take the young for yourself, that it may be well with you and that you may prolong your days.

a. If a bird's nest happens to be before you along the way: God simply and plainly commanded kindness to animals. Even a bird's nest was to be given special consideration and care.

i. Some Jewish commentators say that this is the smallest, or least of all the commandments; yet even it has a promise of blessing for the obedient attached to it: That it may be well with you and that you may prolong your days.

b. You shall surely let the mother go: Puritan commentator Matthew Poole wrote on this, "Partly for the bird's sake, which suffered enough by the loss of its young; for God would not have cruelty exercised towards the brute creatures; and partly for men's sake, to restrain their greediness and covetousness, that they should not monopolize all to themselves, but might leave the hopes of a future seed for others."

c. That it may be well with you and that you may prolong your days. If Israel would obey this commandment, they would find blessing and long life, both as individuals and as a nation. What possible connection can there be between showing kindness to bird's nests and eggs and little baby birds and national survival?

i. First, because obedience to the smallest of God's commands brings blessing. It puts us into a properly submissive relationship to Him, that this always brings blessing to us.

ii. Second, because kindness and gentleness in the small things often (but not always) speaks to our ability to be kind and gentle in weightier matters. If someone is cruel to animals, not only is that sin in itself, but they are also much more likely to be cruel to people. If Israel allowed such cruelty to flourish, it would harm the nation.

4. (8) Liability and building codes.

When you build a new house, then you shall make a parapet for your roof, that you may not bring guilt of bloodshed on your household if anyone falls from it.

a. You shall make a parapet for your roof: God commanded that a railing be made for the rooftop, so someone were protected against falling.

b. That you may not bring bloodguiltiness on your house: Failure to build in a safe way would bring guilt (liability) on the owner or builder of the home. They were responsible for the safety of those who would use the home.

i. In his sermon on Deuteronomy 22:8, titled "Battlements," Charles Spurgeon shows how just as there was to be a railing for the protection of people on the roofs of Israel's homes, there are also spiritual railings for our protection. Many people, in regard to sin, get too close to the edge and fall off. Then it's too late! We need to have "railings" protecting us from the edge. Such railings will not only protect us, but others also.

5. (9-12) Four laws of separation.

You shall not sow your vineyard with different kinds of seed, lest the yield of the seed which you have sown and the fruit of your vineyard be defiled. You shall not plow with an ox and a donkey together. You shall not wear a garment of different sorts, such as wool and linen mixed together. You shall make tassels on the four corners of the clothing with which you cover yourself.

a. You shall not sow your vineyard with different kinds of seed: Each of these laws was meant to separate Israel from her pagan neighbors, who would commonly combine unlike things to achieve what was thought to be a "magical" combination.

b. You shall not plow with an ox and a donkey together: So, in pagan cultures it was common to combine different kinds of seed in a vineyard; or to plow with an ox and a donkey together; or to wear a garment of wool and linen mixed together. When God commands Israel to not do these things, it isn't so much for the sake of the combinations themselves, but so Israel would not imitate the pagan, occultic customs of their neighbors.

i. There is a spiritual application of this principle; the commands forbidding unholy combinations, "though in themselves small and trivial, are given . . . to forbid all mixture of their inventions with God's institutions, in doctrine or worship." (Poole)

ii. As Paul says, Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness? (2 Corinthians 6:14)

iii. One commentator believes that these laws were also given, in part, to protect other animals from the bad breath of donkeys: "Besides, the donkey, from feeding on coarse and poisonous weed, has a fetid breath, which its yoke-fellow seeks to avoid, not only as poisonous and offensive, but producing leanness, or, if long continued, death." (Jameison-Fauset-Brown, page 673)

c. You shall make tassels on the four corners of the clothing: This command was also to distinguish Israel from their pagan neighbors; in this way, an Israelite man was immediately known by the clothes he wore.

i. i. "A symbolic meaning is given to these tassels in Numbers 15:37-41, namely that they are a reminder to Israel to keep God's law." (Thompson)

ii. Like most good commands of God, men have the capability to twist and corrupt this command. In Jesus' day, He had to condemn the Pharisees in Matthew 23:5, saying they enlarge the borders of their garments. In other words, they made the tasseled portion of their garments larger and more prominent to show how spiritual they were.

B. Laws of sexual morality.

1. (13-21) Resolving an accusation of marital deception.

If any man takes a wife, and goes in to her, and detests her, and charges her with shameful conduct, and brings a bad name on her, and says, "I took this woman, and when I came to her I found she was not a virgin," then the father and mother of the young woman shall take and bring out the evidence of the young woman's virginity to the elders of the city at the gate. And the young woman's father shall say to the elders, "I gave my daughter to this man as wife, and he detests her. Now he has charged her with shameful conduct, saying, 'I found your daughter was not a virgin,' and yet these are the evidences of my daughter's virginity." And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city. Then the elders of that city shall take that man and punish him; and they shall fine him one hundred shekels of silver and give them to the father of the young woman, because he has brought a bad name on a virgin of Israel. And she shall be his wife; he cannot divorce her all his days. But if the thing is true, and evidences of virginity are not found for the young woman, then they shall bring out the young woman to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death with stones, because she has done a disgraceful thing in Israel, to play the harlot in her father's house. So you shall put away the evil from among you.

a. Charges her with shameful conduct: The idea is that the man accused his wife of not being a virgin when they were married. Apparently, this was discovered on their wedding night, when they first had intimate relations (when I came into her I found she was not a virgin).

i. It is important to understand that in ancient Israel virginity was valued. It was seen as a great loss to give up one's virginity before marriage, and if a woman was known to have lost her virginity, it greatly reduced her chances of getting married.

ii. By the same principle, if a husband believed that his wife had lied about her virginity, he felt cheated. What follows is an attempt to resolve the issue.

b. Then the father and mother . . . bring out the evidence of the young woman's virginity . . . they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city: according to custom, a Jewish woman would first be intimate with her husband upon a special cloth, which would collect the small drops of blood which were accepted as evidence of the young woman's virginity. This blood-stained cloth would then become the property of the married woman's parents, who kept it as the evidence of the young woman's virginity.

i. Many people argue that this custom of proving a woman's virginity is absurd, because it doesn't always work. Some have answered by saying it does "work" when ladies are given in marriage at twelve or thirteen years of age, as was the custom in Old Testament times.

ii. Nonetheless, for whatever reasons, the custom did "work" - and is still practiced in some parts of the world. "The proofs of virginity, the blood-spotted bedclothes or garments, which, though not infallible, were widely accepted in the ancient Near East as indications of prior virginity, are still accepted among some peoples today" (Kalland). Clarke also adds: "A custom similar to that above is observed among the Mohamedans to the present day."

iii. Clarke on they shall spread the cloth: "A usage of this kind argues a roughness of manners which would ill comport with the refinement of European ideas on so delicate a subject."

c. The elders of the city shall take that man and punish him: If the parents could produce the evidence, then the man was found to have made false accusation against his wife and it was commanded that with a fine to be paid to the father of his bride.

i. Additionally, the man had forfeited his future right to divorce this wife: he cannot divorce her all his days.

ii. The strong penalty against a man who made a false accusation (one hundred shekels of silver was a significant fine), and the loss of his right to divorce his wife in the future was an effective deterrent against wild, false accusations by a husband against his wife.

d. But if the thing is true, and evidences of virginity are not found for the young woman: If this were the case, the woman was to be executed by stoning. This was not only for her sexual promiscuity (to play the harlot), but for her attempt to deceive her husband.

i. This law must be seen in connection with the command in Exodus 22:16-17, which commands that a man who entices a virgin must surely pay the bride-price for her to be his wife. This law in Deuteronomy is directed against the truly wanton woman, who has given up her virginity, yet not claimed her rights under Exodus 22:16-17. She did not value her virginity at the time she gave it up, yet she wanted to claim the benefits of it by deceiving her husband.

ii. All this simply reinforces the principle that virginity was valued, highly valued, in Israel. Today, far too many people - especially women - sell themselves cheaply by easily giving away their virginity. A man illustrated this with a true story about a friend who owned an antique store and had a table for sale. The table was worth $600, but was marked down to $300. A man tried to bargain her down to $200, and not only did she refuse, but she realized the true value of the table, and upped the price to its true worth - even when offered $300. The man finally bought the table for $600, and certainly treated it like a $600 table - because its worth had been fought for. Many women who know they are being treated shabbily by men have contributed to the problem by selling themselves cheaply.

2. (22) The penalty for adultery.

If a man is found lying with a woman married to a husband, then both of them shall die; the man that lay with the woman, and the woman; so you shall put away the evil from Israel.

a. Both of them shall die: God commanded the death penalty for adultery. This was primarily because of the exceedingly great social consequences of this sin. Therefore, God commanded the ultimate penalty against it.

i. God also specifically instructs: both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman. Adultery was not to be condemned with a double-standard; if it was wrong for the woman, it was wrong for the man, and vice-versa.

b. Then both of them shall die: As a practical matter, this death penalty was rarely carried out, as is the case in most of these situation where capital punishment is commanded. This is because any capital crime required two or three witnesses, and the witnesses had to be so sure of what they saw that they were willing to "cast the first stone" - that is, initiate the execution (Deuteronomy 17:6-7).

i. So, particularly in a case of adultery (or other sexual sins) there would rarely be two eyewitnesses willing to initiate the execution - and so capital punishment would not be carried out.

ii. This also helps us to understand what Jesus was doing when confronting the crowd who brought to Him the woman taken in adultery. By their presence and words, they claimed to have caught the woman in the act - but why then did they not bring the guilty man as well? And who was willing to cast the first stone - that is, initiate the execution? (John 8:1-12)

c. So you shall put away the evil from Israel: Though the death penalty for adultery was carried out rarely, it still had value. It communicated loudly and clearly an ideal that Israel was to live up to, and it made people regard their sin much more seriously. Today, we have done away with this ideal, and people don't care much about adultery - and society suffers greatly as a result.

3. (23-29) Laws concerning rape.

If a young woman who is a virgin is betrothed to a husband, and a man finds her in the city and lies with her, then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city, and you shall stone them to death with stones, the young woman because she did not cry out in the city, and the man because he humbled his neighbor's wife; so you shall put away the evil from among you. But if a man finds a betrothed young woman in the countryside, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man who lay with her shall die. But you shall do nothing to the young woman; there is in the young woman no sin deserving of death, for just as when a man rises against his neighbor and kills him, even so is this matter. For he found her in the countryside, and the betrothed young woman cried out, but there was no one to save her. If a man finds a young woman who is a virgin, who is not betrothed, and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are found out, then the man who lay with her shall give to the young woman's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife because he has humbled her; he shall not be permitted to divorce her all his days.

a. If a young woman who is a virgin is betrothed to a husband: If a man had intimate relations with a virgin who was betrothed to a husband, and it happened in the city (and no one immediately hears the woman cry out in an attempt to stop the man), then both were to be executed.

i. The woman was to be executed for disgracing her virginity; the man was to be executed because he humbled his neighbor's wife. Interestingly, the woman was considered the wife of another man, even though she was only betrothed, and was still a virgin, having not yet consummated the marriage.

b. But if a man finds a betrothed young woman in the countryside: If a man had intimate relations with a virgin who was betrothed, and it happened in the countryside (where no one could hear the woman, even if she should cry out), then only the man was to be executed, because the woman was presumed to be the victim of rape.

i. Significantly, the woman was not blamed for the rape, and it was presumed that she was innocent in this circumstance.

c. If a man finds a young woman who is a virgin, who is not betrothed: If a man had intimate relations with a virgin who is not betrothed, then he must pay a fine and was obligated to marry the woman (presumably, if she will have him), and he forfeited his right to divorce her in the future.

i. Some Jewish commentators note that the fifty shekels of silver were to be paid in addition to the dowry.

4. (30) A law concerning incest.

A man shall not take his father's wife, nor uncover his father's bed.

a. A man shall not take his father's wife: This probably described the case of a son marrying his stepmother after his father had died. This was considered incest, even though there was not a blood relation, because he was considered to have had uncovered his father's bed.

b. Nor uncover his father's bed: Significantly, this was exactly the same kind of immoral relationship that the Corinthian church accepted, and Paul had to rebuke them about - that a man has his father's wife! (1 Corinthians 5:1-2)

© 2006 David Guzik - No distribution beyond personal use without permission

Commentary -- Other

Critics Ask: Deu 22:5

DEUTERONOMY 22:5 —Why did God call it an abomination for men to dress like women and vice versa?

PROBLEM: What is wrong with wearing the clothes of the opposite sex? Isn’t this just a matter of cultural preference, with nothing intrinsically immoral about it?

SOLUTION: God’s design here was apparently to make it possible to distinguish one sex from the other. Without distinctive clothes and length of hair (see comments on 1 Cor. 11:14 ), the sexes could be more easily confused and the bounds of social and moral impropriety would have been more easily transgressed. Of course, which clothes are masculine and which are feminine will be determined in large part by the culture. But whatever the case, transvestites were hereby excluded.   

Critics Ask: Deu 22:13

DEUTERONOMY 22:13-21 —Why is the method of testing chastity different here than in Numbers 5 ?

PROBLEM: The Numbers text instructed that chastity be tested by drinking bitter water and seeing if the woman’s stomach would swell (see comments on Numbers 5:13-22 ). But, Deuteronomy 22 provides the blood stained sheet from the wedding night as evidence of virginity (cf. vv. 14-17 ).

SOLUTION: The two situations are different. The Numbers passage is a test for alleged unchastity after marriage. And the Deuteronomy text deals with alleged unfaithfulness before marriage.   

Critics Ask: Deu 22:14

DEUTERONOMY 22:13-21 —Why is the method of testing chastity different here than in Numbers 5 ?

PROBLEM: The Numbers text instructed that chastity be tested by drinking bitter water and seeing if the woman’s stomach would swell (see comments on Numbers 5:13-22 ). But, Deuteronomy 22 provides the blood stained sheet from the wedding night as evidence of virginity (cf. vv. 14-17 ).

SOLUTION: The two situations are different. The Numbers passage is a test for alleged unchastity after marriage. And the Deuteronomy text deals with alleged unfaithfulness before marriage.   

Critics Ask: Deu 22:15

DEUTERONOMY 22:13-21 —Why is the method of testing chastity different here than in Numbers 5 ?

PROBLEM: The Numbers text instructed that chastity be tested by drinking bitter water and seeing if the woman’s stomach would swell (see comments on Numbers 5:13-22 ). But, Deuteronomy 22 provides the blood stained sheet from the wedding night as evidence of virginity (cf. vv. 14-17 ).

SOLUTION: The two situations are different. The Numbers passage is a test for alleged unchastity after marriage. And the Deuteronomy text deals with alleged unfaithfulness before marriage.   

Critics Ask: Deu 22:16

DEUTERONOMY 22:13-21 —Why is the method of testing chastity different here than in Numbers 5 ?

PROBLEM: The Numbers text instructed that chastity be tested by drinking bitter water and seeing if the woman’s stomach would swell (see comments on Numbers 5:13-22 ). But, Deuteronomy 22 provides the blood stained sheet from the wedding night as evidence of virginity (cf. vv. 14-17 ).

SOLUTION: The two situations are different. The Numbers passage is a test for alleged unchastity after marriage. And the Deuteronomy text deals with alleged unfaithfulness before marriage.   

Critics Ask: Deu 22:17

DEUTERONOMY 22:13-21 —Why is the method of testing chastity different here than in Numbers 5 ?

PROBLEM: The Numbers text instructed that chastity be tested by drinking bitter water and seeing if the woman’s stomach would swell (see comments on Numbers 5:13-22 ). But, Deuteronomy 22 provides the blood stained sheet from the wedding night as evidence of virginity (cf. vv. 14-17 ).

SOLUTION: The two situations are different. The Numbers passage is a test for alleged unchastity after marriage. And the Deuteronomy text deals with alleged unfaithfulness before marriage.   

Introduction / Outline

JFB: Deuteronomy (Book Introduction)

DEUTERONOMY, the second law, a title which plainly shows what is the object of this book, namely, a recapitulation of the law. It was given in the form of public addresses to the people; and as Moses spoke in the prospect of his speedy removal, he enforced obedience to it by many forcible appeals to the Israelites, concerning their long and varied experience both of the mercies and the judgments of God. The minute notices of the heathen people with whom they had come in contact, but who afterward disappeared from the pages of history, as well as the accounts of the fertility and products of Canaan, and the counsels respecting the conquest of that country, fix the date of this book and the time of its composition by the hand of Moses. The close, however, must have been added by another; and, indeed, it is supposed by some to have formed the original preface to the Book of Joshua.

JFB: Deuteronomy (Outline)

• MOSES' SPEECH AT THE END OF THE FORTIETH YEAR. (Deu. 1:1-46)
• THE STORY IS CONTINUED. (Deu. 2:1-37)
• CONQUEST OF OG, KING OF BASHAN. (Deu. 3:1-20)
• AN EXHORTATION TO OBEDIENCE. (Deu 4:1-13)
• A PARTICULAR DISSUASIVE AGAINST IDOLATRY. (Deu. 4:14-40)
• A COMMEMORATION OF THE COVENANT IN HOREB. (Deu. 5:1-29)
• MOSES EXHORTS ISRAEL TO HEAR GOD AND TO KEEP HIS COMMANDMENTS. (Deu. 6:1-25)
• ALL COMMUNION WITH THE NATIONS FORBIDDEN. (Deu. 7:1-26)
• AN EXHORTATION TO OBEDIENCE. (Deu. 8:1-20)
• MOSES DISSUADES THEM FROM THE OPINION OF THEIR OWN RIGHTEOUSNESS. (Deu. 9:1-25)
• GOD'S MERCY IN RESTORING THE TWO TABLES. (Deu. 10:1-22)
• AN EXHORTATION TO OBEDIENCE. (Deu. 11:1-32)
• MONUMENTS OF IDOLATRY TO BE DESTROYED. (Deu 12:1-15)
• BLOOD PROHIBITED. (Deu 12:16-25)
• HOLY THINGS TO BE EATEN IN THE HOLY PLACE. (Deu 12:26-32)
• ENTICERS TO IDOLATRY TO BE PUT TO DEATH. (Deu 13:1-5)
• WITHOUT REGARD TO NEARNESS OF RELATION. (Deu 13:6-18)
• GOD'S PEOPLE MUST NOT DISFIGURE THEMSELVES IN MOURNING. (Deu 14:1-2)
• WHAT MAY BE EATEN, AND WHAT NOT. (Deu. 14:3-21)
• OF BEASTS. (Deu 14:4-8)
• THE SEVENTH YEAR, A YEAR OF RELEASE FOR THE POOR. (Deu 15:1-11)
• HEBREW SERVANTS' FREEDOM. (Deu 15:12-19)
• THE FEAST OF THE PASSOVER. (Deu. 16:1-22)
• THINGS SACRIFICED MUST BE SOUND. (Deu 17:1)
• IDOLATERS MUST BE SLAIN. (Deu 17:2-7)
• THE PRIESTS AND JUDGES TO DETERMINE CONTROVERSIES. (Deu 17:8-13)
• THE ELECTION AND DUTY OF A KING. (Deu 17:14-20)
• THE LORD IS THE PRIESTS' AND THE LEVITES' INHERITANCE. (Deu 18:1-8)
• THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE NATIONS ARE TO BE AVOIDED. (Deu 18:9-14)
• CHRIST THE PROPHET IS TO BE HEARD. (Deu 18:15-19)
• OF THE CITIES OF REFUGE. (Deu 19:1-13)
• THE LANDMARK IS NOT TO BE REMOVED. (Deu 19:14)
• TWO WITNESSES REQUIRED. (Deu 19:15)
• PUNISHMENT OF A FALSE WITNESS. (Deu 19:16-21) But if convicted of perjury, it will be sufficient for his own condemnation, and his punishment shall be exactly the same as would have overtaken the object of his malignant prosecution. (See on Exo 21:23; see also Lev 24:20).
• THE PRIESTS' EXHORTATION TO ENCOURAGE THE PEOPLE TO BATTLE. (Deu. 20:1-20)
• EXPIATION OF UNCERTAIN MURDER. (Deu 21:1-9)
• THE TREATMENT OF A CAPTIVE TAKEN TO WIFE. (Deu 21:10-23)
• OF HUMANITY TOWARD BRETHREN. (Deu 22:1-4)
• THE SEX TO BE DISTINGUISHED BY APPAREL. (Deu 22:5-12)
• WHO MAY AND WHO MAY NOT ENTER INTO THE CONGREGATION. (Deu. 23:1-25)
• OF DIVORCES. (Deu. 24:1-22)
• STRIPES MUST NOT EXCEED FORTY. (Deu. 25:1-19)
• THE CONFESSION OF HIM THAT OFFERS THE BASKET OF FIRST FRUITS. (Deu 26:1-15)
• THE PEOPLE ARE TO WRITE THE LAW UPON STONES. (Deu 27:1-10)
• THE TRIBES DIVIDED ON GERIZIM AND EBAL. (Deu 27:11-13)
• THE BLESSINGS FOR OBEDIENCE. (Deu. 28:1-68)
• AN EXHORTATION TO OBEDIENCE. (Deu. 29:1-29)
• THE COMMANDMENT IS MANIFEST. (Deu 30:11-14)
• DEATH AND LIFE ARE SET BEFORE THE ISRAELITES. (Deu 30:15-20)
• MOSES ENCOURAGES THE PEOPLE AND JOSHUA. (Deu 31:1-8)
• HE DELIVERS THE LAW TO THE PRIESTS, TO READ IT EVERY SEVENTH YEAR TO THE PEOPLE. (Deu 31:9-13)
• MOSES' SONG, WHICH SETS FORTH THE PERFECTIONS OF GOD. (Deu. 32:1-43)
• THE MAJESTY OF GOD. (Deu. 33:1-28)
• MOSES FROM MOUNT NEBO VIEWS THE LAND. (Deu 34:1-12)

TSK: Deuteronomy (Book Introduction)

The book of Deuteronomy marks the end of the Pentateuch, commonly called the Law of Moses; a work every way worthy of God its author, and only less than the New Testament, the Law and Gospel of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Its antiquity places it at the head of all the writings in the world; and the various subjects it embraces render it of the utmost importance to every part of the civilized world. Its philosophy, history, geography, and chronology entitle it to the respect of the whole human race; while its system of theology and religion demonstrably proves it to be a revelation from God. The Law of Moses is more properly the Law of Jehovah, יהוה [Strong’s 03068] תורה [Strong’s 08451], torah yehowah , the grand title of the Pentateuch. Could we conceive Moses to have been the author of this system, we must consider him more than mortal - no wisdom of man has ever yet invented such a Code of Laws. His merit, however, has been disputed, and his laws severely criticised, by persons whose interest it was to prove religion a cheat, because they had none themselves. To some, whose mental taste and feeling are strangely perverted, everything in heathenism wears not only the most fascinating aspect, but appears to lay claim to and possess every excellence; and hence they have called up Confucius, Menu, Zoraster, and Mohammed himself, to dispute the palm with Moses! On this subject in general, it may be just necessary to add, that the utmost that can be said of all laws, merely human, is, that they restrain vices, through the terror of punishment. God’s law not only restrains vice, but it infuses virtue. It alone brings man to the footstool of his Maker; and keeps him dependent on the strong for strength, on the wise for wisdom, and on the merciful for grace. It abounds with promises of support, and salvation for the present life, which no false system dared ever to propose. every where, Moses, in the most confident manner, pledges his God for the fulfilment of all the exceeding great and precious promises, with which his laws are so plentifully interspersed; and while they were obedient they could say, " Not one word hath failed us, of all the good things which the Lord our God spake concerning us." Who that dispassionately reads the Pentateuch, that considers it in itself and in its reference to that glorious Gospel which it was intended to introduce, can for a moment deny it the palm of infinite superiority over all the systems ever framed or imagined by man? Well might the Israelitish people triumphantly exclaim, " There is none like the God of Jeshurun!" and with what striking propriety does the glorious legislator add, " Happy art thou, O Israel! who is like unto thee? O people, saved of the Lord!" Finally, the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, which are amassed in these five books, have enriched the whole civilized earth, and, indeed, greatly promoted that very civilization. They have been a kind of text-book to almost every writer on geology, geography, chronology, astronomy, natural history, ethics, jurisprudence, political economy, theology, poetry, and criticism, from the time of Moses to the present day - books to which the choicest writers and philosophers in Pagan antiquity, have been deeply indebted; and which were the text-books to all the prophets - books from which the flimsy writers against Divine Revelation have derived their natural religion, and all their moral excellence - books written in all the energy, and purity, of the incomparable language in which they are composed; and lastly, books, which for importance of matter, variety of information, dignity of sentiment, accuracy of facts, impartiality, simplicity, and sublimity of narration, tending to improve and ennoble the intellect and ameliorate the physical and moral condition of man, have never been equalled, and can only be paralleled by the Gospel of the Son of God! Fountain of endless mercy, justice, truth, and beneficence! How much are thy gifts and bounties neglected by those who do not read this law; and by those who having read it, are not morally improved by it, and made wise unto salvation!

TSK: Deuteronomy 22 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

Deu 22:1, Of humanity towards brethren; Deu 22:5, The sex is to be distinguished by apparel; Deu 22:6, The dam is not to be taken with her young ones; Deu 22:8, The house must have battlements; Deu 22:9, Confusion is to be avoided; Deu 22:12, Fringes upon the vesture; Deu 22:13, The punishment of him that slanders his wife; Deu 22:22, Of adultery; Deu 22:23, of rape; Deu 22:28, of fornication; Deu 22:30, of incest.

Poole: Deuteronomy (Book Introduction)

FIFTH BOOK of MOSES, CALLED DEUTERONOMY

THE ARGUMENT

Moses, in the two last months of his life, rehearseth what God had done for them, and their frequent murmurings, rebellions, and constant ingratitude. He begs to enter into the land, but is permitted only to see it. He forbiddeth any communion with the nations for several reasons, De 8 . He gives a short repetition of those sundry laws, moral, ceremonial, judicial, and military, which he had given them, from whence this book is called DEUTERONOMY. Then, after many exhortations, he prophesieth of Christ; afterwards he shows how matters of war are to be managed, and, giving many other particular directions with reference to duties, conditions, and persons of both sexes, he pronounceth blessings on the obedient, and curses on the disobedient: he then gives a charge for laying up and reading of the law at certain times, and every seven years to be solemnly read before all the people; he composeth a song for common use, comprising the wonderful things here mentioned: he prophesieth of Christ’ s coming, and the calling of the Gentiles, seeth the land, and dieth, leaving Joshua, after he had consecrated him, to succeed.

Poole: Deuteronomy 22 (Chapter Introduction)

CHAPTER 22

Laws about stray cattle, Deu 22:1-3 . About thy neighbor’ s ox fallen in the way, Deu 22:4 . Woman’ s wearing of apparel distinct from man’ s, Deu 22:5 . Of birds caught, Deu 22:6,7 . Of battlements for houses, Deu 22:8 . Of divers seeds sown, Deu 22:9 . Of ploughing with an ox and ass, Deu 22:10 . Of garments of divers colours, Deu 22:11 . Of fringes upon the four quarters of a garment, Deu 22:12 . The punishment of him that slandereth his wife. Deu 22:13-19 . Her punishment if the scandal be true, Deu 22:20,21 . The punishment of adultery, Deu 22:22-24 ; of rape, Deu 22:25-27 ; of fornication, Deu 22:28,29 . Against incest, Deu 22:30 .

MHCC: Deuteronomy (Book Introduction)

This book repeats much of the history and of the laws contained in the three foregoing books: Moses delivered it to Israel a little before his death, both by word of mouth, that it might affect, and by writing, that it might abide. The men of that generation to which the law was first given were all dead, and a new generation was sprung up, to whom God would have it repeated by Moses himself, now they were going to possess the land of Canaan. The wonderful love of God to his church is set forth in this book; how he ever preserved his church for his own mercies sake, and would still have his name called upon among them. Such are the general outlines of this book, the whole of which shows Moses' love for Israel, and marks him an eminent type of the Lord Jesus Christ. Let us apply the exhortations and persuasions to our own consciences, to excite our minds to a believing, grateful obedience to the commands of God.

MHCC: Deuteronomy 22 (Chapter Introduction)

(Deu 22:1-4) Of humanity towards brethren.

(Deu 22:5-12) Various precepts.

(v. 13-30) Against impurity.

Matthew Henry: Deuteronomy (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The Fifth Book of Moses, Called Deuteronomy

This book is a repetition of very much both of the history and of the laws contained in the three foregoing books, which repetition Moses delivered to Israel (both by word of mouth, that it might affect, and by writing, that it might abide) a little before his death. There is no new history in it but that of the death of Moses in the last chapter, nor any new revelation to Moses, for aught that appears, and therefore the style here is not, as before, The Lord spoke unto Moses, saying. But the former laws are repeated and commented upon, explained and enlarged, and some particular precepts added to them, with copius reasonings for the enforcing of them: in this Moses was divinely inspired and assisted, so that this is as truly the word of the Lord by Moses as that which was spoken to him with an audible voice out of the tabernacle of the congregation , Lev 1:1. The Greek interpreters call it Deuteronomy, which signifies the second law, or a second edition of the law, not with amendments, for there needed none, but with additions, for the further direction of the people in divers cases not mentioned before. Now, I. It was much for the honour of the divine law that it should be thus repeated; how great were the things of that law which was thus inculcated, and how inexcusable would those be by whom they were counted as a strange thing! Hos 8:12. II. There might be a particular reason for the repeating of it now; the men of that generation to which the law was first given were all dead, and a new generation had sprung up, to whom God would have it repeated by Moses himself, that, if possible, it might make a lasting impression upon them. Now that they were just going to take possession of the land of Canaan, Moses must read the articles of agreement to them, that they might know upon what terms and conditions they were to hold and enjoy that land, and might understand that they were upon their good behaviour in it. III. It would be of great use to the people to have those parts of the law thus gathered up and put together which did more immediately concern them and their practice; for the laws which concerned the priests and Levites, and the execution of their offices, are not repeated: it was enough for them that they were once delivered. But, in compassion to the infirmities of the people, the laws of more common concern are delivered a second time. Precept must be upon precept, and line upon line, Isa 28:10. The great and needful truths of the gospel should be often pressed upon people by the ministers of Christ. To write the same things (says Paul, Phi 3:1) to me indeed is not grievous, but for you it is safe. What God has spoken once we have need to hear twice, to hear many times, and it is well if, after all, it be duly perceived and regarded. In three ways this book of Deuteronomy was magnified and made honourable: - 1. The king was to write a copy of it with his own hand, and to read therein all the days of his life, ch. 17, 18, 19. 2. It was to be written upon great stones plastered, at their passing over Jordan, Deu 27:2, Deu 27:3. 3. It was to be read publicly every seventh year, at the feast of tabernacles, by the priests, in the audience of all Israel, Deu 31:9, etc. The gospel is a kind of Deuteronomy, a second law, a remedial law, a spiritual law, a law of faith; by it we are under the law of Christ, and it is a law that makes the comers thereunto perfect.

This book of Deuteronomy begins with a brief rehearsal of the most remarkable events that had befallen the Israelites since they came from Mount Sinai. In the fourth chapter we have a most pathetic exhortation to obedience. In the twelfth chapter, and so on to the twenty-seventh, are repeated many particular laws, which are enforced (ch. 27 and 28) with promises and threatenings, blessings and curses, formed into a covenant, ch. 29 and 30. Care is taken to perpetuate the remembrance of these things among them (ch. 31), particularly by a song (ch. 32), and so Moses concludes with a blessing, ch. 33. All this was delivered by Moses to Israel in the last month of his life. The whole book contains the history but of two months; compare Deu 1:3 with Jos 4:19, the latter of which was the thirty days of Israel's mourning for Moses; see how busy that great and good man was to do good when he knew that his time was short, how quick his motion when he drew near his rest. Thus we have more recorded of what our blessed Saviour said and did in the last week of his life than in any other. The last words of eminent persons make or should make deep impressions. Observe, for the honour of this book, that when our Saviour would answer the devil's temptations with, It is written, he fetched all his quotations out of this book, Mat 4:4, Mat 4:7, Mat 4:10.

Matthew Henry: Deuteronomy 22 (Chapter Introduction)

The laws of this chapter provide, I. For the preservation of charity and good neighbourship, in the care of strayed or fallen cattle (Deu 22:1-4). II. For the preservation of order and distinction, that men and women should not wear one another's clothes (Deu 22:5), and that other needless mixtures should be avoided (Deu 22:9-11). III. For the preservation of birds (Deu 22:6, Deu 22:7). IV. Of life (Deu 22:8). V. Of the commandments (Deu 22:12). VI. Of the reputation of a wife abused, if she were innocent (Deu 22:13-19), but for her punishment if guilty (Deu 22:20, Deu 22:21). VII. For the preservation of the chastity of wives (Deu 22:22). Virgins betrothed (Deu 22:23-27), or not betrothed (Deu 22:28, Deu 22:29). And, lastly, against incest (Deu 22:30).

Constable: Deuteronomy (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Title

The title of this book in the Hebrew Bible was its first two words, elleh haddebarim, which translate into English as "these are the words" (1:1). Ancient Near Eastern suzerainty treaties began with exactly the same words.¹ So the Jewish title gives a strong clue to the literary character of Deuteronomy.

The English title comes from the Septuagint (Greek) translation. "Deuteronomy" means "second law" in Greek. We might suppose that this title arose from the idea that Deuteronomy records the law as Moses repeated it to the new generation of Israelites who were preparing to enter the land. This is not the case. It came from a mistranslation of a phrase in 17:18. There God commanded Israel's kings to prepare "a copy of this law" for themselves. The Septuagint translators mistakenly rendered this phrase "this second [repeated] law." The Vulgate (Latin) translation, influenced by the Septuagint, translated the phrase "second law" as deuteronomium from which Deuteronomy is a transliteration. Deuteronomy is to some extent, however, a repetition to the new generation of the Law God gave at Mt. Sinai. Thus God overruled the translators' error and gave us a title for the book in English that is appropriate in view of the contents of the book.

Date and Writer

Moses evidently wrote this book on the plains of Moab shortly before his death, which occurred about 1406 B.C.

The Mosaic authorship of this book is quite easy to establish. The book claims to be the words of Moses (1:5, 9; 5:1; 27:1, 8; 29:2; 31:1, 30; 33:1, 29) and his writing (31:9, 22, 24). Other Old Testament books also assert the Mosaic authorship of Deuteronomy (1 Kings 2:3; 8:53; 2 Kings 14:6; 18:6, 12). Jesus Christ believed Moses wrote Deuteronomy (Matt. 19:7-8; Mark 10:3-5; 12:19; John 5:46-47) as did the Apostle Peter (Acts 3:22), Stephen (Acts 7:37-38), Paul (Rom. 10:19; 1 Cor. 9:9), and the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Heb. 10:28).

"The authorship of no other book in the Old Testament is so explicitly emphasized."²

The form in which Moses wrote Deuteronomy is very similar to that of ancient Near Eastern suzerainty-vassal treaties dating before and during the Mosaic era. This structural evidence confirms an early date of composition.³

Most conservative commentators prefer to regard the record of Moses' death and a few editorial comments as the work of a later writer or writers. Of course, Moses could have written these verses too.

In spite of such conclusive evidence some scholars prefer a later date for Deuteronomy. The critics favor a post-Mosaic but pre-seventh century date, a seventh century date in King Josiah's era, or a postexilic date.⁴

Scope

Deuteronomy is similar to Leviticus in that both books contain a record of instructions and speeches almost exclusively. Deuteronomy is not so much a book of history, as Genesis, Exodus, and Numbers are, as it is a book of law. In contrast to Leviticus, however, Moses addressed Deuteronomy to all the Israelites more than to the priests and Levites.

The scope of history covered in Deuteronomy is very brief. All the events recorded took place on the plains of Moab probably within a few weeks just before Israel's entrance into Canaan.

"According to the Index locorum of Nestle's Novum Testamentum Graece Deuteronomy is quoted or otherwise cited at least 95 times in the New Testament (compared to 103 for Genesis, 113 for Exodus, 35 for Leviticus, and 20 for Numbers), making it one of the favorite Old Testament books of Jesus and the apostles."⁵

Character

"The book of Deuteronomy is the document prepared by Moses as a witness to the dynastic covenant which the Lord gave to Israel in the plains of Moab (cf. 31:26)."⁶

Theology

"In line with the general correspondence of the form of a thing to its function, it is safe to say that one cannot understand the theology of Deuteronomy without reference to its covenant form and structure . . . It is no exaggeration to maintain that the concept of covenant lies at the very heart of the book and may be said to be the center of its theology.

"Covenant by its very definition demands at least three elements--the two contracting parties and the document that describes and outlines the purpose, nature, and requirements of the relationship. Thus the three major rubrics of the theology of Deuteronomy are (1) Yahweh, the Great King and covenant initiator; (2) Israel, the vassal and covenant recipient; and (3) the book itself, the covenant organ, complete with the essentials of standard treaty documents. This means, moreover, that all the revelation of the book must be seen through the prism of covenant and not abstractly removed from the peculiar historical and ideological context in which it originated."⁷

"The theological values of Deuteronomy can hardly be exaggerated. It stands as the wellspring of biblical historical revelation. It is a prime source for both OT and NT theology. Whether the covenant, the holiness of God, or the concept of the people of God is the unifying factor of OT theology, each finds emphasis and remarkable definition in Deuteronomy."⁸

Message⁹

Let me share with you a couple of quotations that point out the importance of this book.

"Deuteronomy is one of the greatest books of the Old Testament. Its significance on the domestic and personal religion of all ages has not been surpassed by any other book in the Bible. It is quoted over eighty times in the New Testament . . . in all but six books . . . and thus it belongs to a small group of four Old Testaments books (Genesis, Deuteronomy, Psalms, and Isaiah) to which the early Christians made frequent reference."¹⁰

"The book of Deuteronomy is the most important book in the Old Testament from the standpoint of God's revelation to man."¹¹

Deuteronomy is not just a recapitulation of things previously revealed in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers. It is a selective digest of matters most important to the average Israelite in his or her relationship with God. Moses spoke as an aged father to his children. These are the parting words of the man who communed with God face to face. His words in Deuteronomy spring from a personal and intimate knowledge of God that had matured over 120 years.

One of the striking features of this book is the frequent references to love that recur throughout it. God's love for the patriarchs and later the whole nation of Israel is obvious in the previous four books of the Pentateuch, but Moses never articulated it directly. In Deuteronomy for the first time Moses revealed that it was God's love for Israel that motivated Him to deal with the Israelites as He had.

One of the great revelations of this book is the motivation of God. God's love for people moved Him to bless. Moses referred to God's love for people as the motivation of His government in three of the book's major sections.

It constitutes the climax of Moses' first address to the people (1:6-4:40) in which he reviewed God's faithfulness to the Israelites. It was because God loved them that He had treated them as He had (4:32-40, esp. v. 37).

In the second address, which is an exposition of the Mosaic Law (chs. 5-26), Moses explained that God's love motivated His laws (7:7-11; 10:12-22, esp. v. 15; 15:16; 23:5; et al.).

In the conclusion of the book, which records Moses' blessing of the nation (ch. 33), he again reminded the people of God's love for them (33:2-5, esp. v. 3a).

Not only does Deuteronomy reveal that God's love is what motivates Him to govern His people as He does. It also emphasizes that man's love for God should be what motivates us to obey God (cf. 1 John 4:19). This theme too recurs throughout the book.

In Moses' review of the law (chs. 5-26) he called on the Israelites to love God (5:9-10; 6:4-5; 7:9; 10:12-13; 11:1, 13-14, 22-23; 13:1-13, esp. vv. 1-3; 19:8-9). The Israelites' obedience to God's laws expressed their love for God. Love is the most proper and adequate motivation for obedience and service.

We hear this theme again in Moses' third address (chs. 29-30) in which Moses exhorted the new generation of Israelites to obey their covenant, the Mosaic Covenant (30:6, 15-20).

The message of the book then is that God's love for man is the motivation of His government, and man's love for God should be the motivation of his obedience.

This emphasis on love appears even more striking in comparison with other ancient Near Eastern suzerain-vassal treaties. The ancient Near Eastern kings delineated clearly the rights of the ruler and the responsibilities of the subjects in these documents. However the motivation was self-interest, the opposite of love. Concern for others was present, but self-interest predominated.

Since Moses set Deuteronomy in the form of a suzerain-vassal treaty we can learn much about how he viewed Israel's relationship to God.

To quote Thompson again, "Both the literary shape of Deuteronomy and its underlying central concept provide an important clue to the basic theology of the book. Yahweh, the God of Israel, appears in a strong covenantal setting. He is the great King, the Lord of the covenant. From this central concept Israel's finest theological ideas derived."¹²

These "ideas" include the fact that Yahweh is the Lord of the covenant and the God of history.

Obedience to God and His covenant brings blessing whereas disobedience incurs curses. Israel was the people of the covenant.

The people were to worship their Lord by loving Him with their hearts and remembering Him and His acts with their minds.

There are perhaps four basic implications of this revelation and these correspond to four major sections of the book.

1. It is important to remember God's past faithfulness to appreciate His love (1:6-4:40). God commanded the Israelites to remember. Forgetfulness was a sin that would lead them to ingratitude and ultimately to apostasy. To forget was to rebel against God. Remembering the past would remind the people of God's love and rekindle their love for Him. Love as well as trust rests on confidence. We can love God only when we have confidence in Him.

2. God's laws are an expression of His love (chs. 5-26). Because man is a sinner he needs divine laws. God's provision of these laws is an expression of His love for mankind. The specific laws in the Mosaic Code expressed God's love because God intended them to result in Israel's blessing and welfare. Often we think laws are undesirable because they curb our freedom. However, God curbs our freedom to keep us from evil, not to keep us from good.

3. Only love for God will adequately motivate a person to be obedient to God's laws (chs. 27-28). These laws in Israel were so severe that the only motive strong enough to produce consistent obedience was love. Moses urged the Israelites to cultivate their love for God as they prepared to renew the covenant. Self-confidence had failed their fathers, and it would fail them too. Obedience to God can be a joyful or a bitter experience depending on one's motivation.

When we know God we love Him, and when we love God we will want to obey Him.

4. Obedience to God demonstrates love for Him (chs. 29-30). While it is possible to obey God with lesser motives, it is impossible to be consistently obedient without love for God. Consistent obedience is not the same as sinless perfection. The measure of one's love for God is the measure of his or her obedience to the revealed will of God (1 John 5:3). The degree of our commitment to do the will of God is the true measure of our love for God. The real test of our love for God is what we do more than how we feel.

Constable: Deuteronomy (Outline)

Outline

I. Introduction: the covenant setting 1:1-5

II. Moses' first major address: a review of God's faithfulness 1:6-4:40

A. God's past dealings with Israel 1:6-3:29

1. God's guidance from Sinai to Kadesh 1:6-46

2. The march from Kadesh to the Amorite frontier 2:1-23

3. The conquest of the kingdom of Sihon 2:24-37

4. The conquest of the kingdom of Og 3:1-11

5. A review of the distribution of the conquered land 3:12-20

6. Moses' anticipation of future blessing 3:21-29

B. An exhortation to observe the law faithfully 4:1-40

1. The appeal to hearken and obey 4:1-8

2. God's appearance at Mt. Horeb 4:9-14

3. The prohibition of idolatry 4:15-24

4. The consequences of idolatry 4:25-31

5. The uniqueness of Yahweh and Israel 4:32-40

III. Historical interlude: preparation for the covenant text 4:41-49

A. The appointment of cities of refuge in Transjordan 4:41-43

B. Introduction to the second address 4:44-49

IV. Moses' second major address: an exposition of the law chs. 5-26

A. The essence of the law and its fulfillment ch. 5-11

1. Exposition of the Decalogue and its promulgation ch. 5

2. Exhortation to love Yahweh ch. 6

3. Examples of the application of the principles chs. 7-11

B. An exposition of selected covenant laws 12-25

1. Laws arising from the first commandment 12:1-31

2. Laws arising from the second commandment 12:32-13:18

3. Laws arising from the third commandment 14:1-21

4. Laws arising from the fourth commandment 14:22-16:17

5. Laws arising from the fifth commandment 16:18-18:22

6. Laws arising from the sixth commandment 19:1-22:8

7. Laws arising from the seventh commandment 22:9-23:18

8. Laws arising from the eighth commandment 23:19-24:7

9. Laws arising from the ninth commandment 24:8-25:4

10. Laws arising from the tenth commandment 25:5-19

C. Covenant celebration, confirmation, and conclusion ch. 26

1. Laws of covenant celebration and confirmation 26:1-15

2. Summary exhortation 26:16-19

V. Preparations for renewing the covenant chs. 27:1-29:1

A. The ceremony at Shechem 27:1-13

B. The curses that follow disobedience to specific stipulations 27:14-26

C. The blessings that follow obedience 28:1-14

D. The curses that follow disobedience to general stipulations 28:15-68

E. Narrative interlude 29:1

VI. Moses' third major address: an exhortation to obedience chs. 29:2-30:20

A. An appeal for faithfulness 29:2-29

1. Historical review 29:2-8

2. The purpose of the assembly 29:9-15

3. The consequences of disobedience 29:16-29

B. A call to decision ch. 30

1. The possibility of restoration 30:1-10

2. The importance of obedience 30:11-20

VII. Moses' last acts chs. 31-34

A. The duties of Israel's future leaders 31:1-29

1. The presentation of Joshua 31:1-8

2. The seventh year covenant renewal ceremony 31:9-13

3. The commissioning of Joshua 31:14-23

4. The preservation of God's words 31:24-29

B. The Song of Moses 31:30-32:44

1. The introduction to the song 31:30

2. The song itself 32:1-43

3. The conclusion to the song 32:44

C. Narrative interlude 32:45-52

1. Moses' exhortation to obedience 32:45-47

2. The announcement of Moses' death 32:48-52

D. Moses' blessing of the tribes ch. 33

E. Moses' death and burial: narrative epilogue ch. 34

You will notice that there is a general alternation between narrative (sections I, III, V, and VII) and didactic (sections II, IV, and VI) material. However there is some mixture of narrative and didactic material in sections V and VII.

We can also divide the revelation in this book according to the general arrangement of the typical form of a suzerain-vassal treaty that was common in the ancient Near East.¹³

I. Preamble: Covenant mediator 1:1-5

II. Historical prologue: Covenant history 1:6-4:49

III. Stipulations: Covenant life chs. 5-26

A. The Great Commandment chs. 5-11

B. Ancillary commandments chs. 12-26

IV. Sanctions: Covenant ratification chs. 27-30

V. Dynastic disposition: Covenant continuity chs. 31-34

Constable: Deuteronomy

Deuteronomy

Bibliography

Adams, Jay. Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible. Phillipsburg, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1980.

Albright, William Foxwell. The Archaeology of Palestine. 1949. Revised ed. Pelican Archaeology series. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books, 1956.

_____. "Some Remarks on the Song of Moses in Deuteronomy XXXII." Vetus Testamentum 9 (1959):339-46.

Aharoni, Yohanan, and Michael Avi-Yonah. The Macmillan Bible Atlas. Revised ed. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1977.

"Annotated Bibliography on Deuteronomy." Biblical Viewpoint 19:2 (November 1985):78-89.

Ap-Thomas, D. R. "All the King's Horses." In Proclamation and Presence, pp. 135-151. Edited by J. I. Durham and J. R. Porter. Richmond: John Knox, 1970.

Ashley, Timothy R. The Book of Numbers. New International Commentary on the Old Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1993.

Baker, John Austin. "Deuteronomy and World Problems." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 29 (1984):3-17.

Baltzer, Klaus. The Covenant Formulary. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1971.

Baly, Dennis. "Elath, Ezion-geber, and the Red Sea." Biblical Illustrator 9:3 (Spring 1983):66-69.

_____. The Geography of the Bible. New York: Harper, 1957.

Barrett, Michael P. V. "True Religion: A Matter of the Heart." Biblical Perspective 19:2 (November 1985):21-28.

Beitzel, Barry J. "The Right of the Firstborn (Pi Snayim) in the Old Testament." In A Tribute to Gleason Archer, pp. 179-90. Edited by Walter C. Kaiser Jr. and Ronald F. Youngblood. Chicago: Moody Press, 1986.

Bell, Robert D. "The Cures for Self-Righteousness." Biblical Viewpoint 19:2 (November 1985):16-20.

Bellefontaine, Elizabeth. "Deuteronomy 21:18-21: Reviewing the Case of the Rebellious Son." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 13 (July 1979):12-31.

Betlyon, John Wilson. "The Cult of Aserah/Elat at Sidon." Journal of Near Eastern Studies 44:1 (January 1985):53-56.

Blenkinsopp, J. A History of Prophecy in Israel. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1983.

Block, Daniel I. "Recovering the Voice of Moses: The Genesis of Deuteronomy." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 44:3 (September 2001):385-408.

Boston, James R. "The Wisdom Influence upon the Song of Moses." Journal of Biblical Literature 87 (1968):198-202.

Bralik, Georg. "Law as Gospel: Justification and Pardon According to the Deuteronomic Torah." Interpretation 38 (January 1984):5-14.

Cairns, I. Word and Presence: A Commentary on the Book of Deuteronomy. International Theological Commentary series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1992.

Carmichael, Calum M. "Forbidden Mixtures." Vetus Testamentum 32:4 (1982):394-415.

Carroll, R. P. "The Elijah-Elisha Sagas: Some Remarks on Prophetic Succession in Ancient Israel." Vetus Testamentum 19:4 (October 1969):408-14.

Chafer, Lewis Sperry. Systematic Theology. 8 vols. Dallas: Dallas Seminary Press, 1948.

Chan, Kim-Kwong. "You Shall Not Eat These Abominable Things: An Examination Of Different Interpretations On Deuteronomy 14:3-20." East Asia Journal of Theology 3:1 (1985):88-106.

Chirichigno, Greg. "A Theological Investigation of Motivation in Old Testament Law." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 24:4 (December 1981):303-13.

Chisholm, Robert B., Jr. "Divine Hardening in the Old Testament." Bibliotheca Sacra 153:612 (October-December 1996):410-34.

Cole, Mary M. "Transmitting Values to New Generations." Studies in Formative Spirituality 7:1 (February 1986):21-32.

Collier, Gary D. "The Problem of Deuteronomy: In Search of a Perspective." Restoration Quarterly 26:4 (1983):215-33.

Craigie, Peter C. The Book of Deuteronomy. New International Commentary on the Old Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1976.

_____. The Problem of War in the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1978.

_____. Ugarit and the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1983.

Crater, Tim. "Bill Gothard's View of the Exception Clause." Journal of Pastoral Practice 4 (1980):5-12.

Cross, Frank Moore, Jr. and David Noel Freedman. "The Blessing of Moses." Journal of Biblical Literature 67 (1948):191-210.

Darby, John Nelson. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. Revised ed. 5 vols. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Davies, Eryl W. "The Meaning of Pi Senayim in Deuteronomy XXI 17." Vetus Testamentum 36:3 (July 1986):341-47.

Day, John. "Asherah in the Hebrew Bible and Northwest Semitic Literature." Journal of Biblical Literature 105:3 (September 1986):385-408.

de Boer, Pieter A. H. "Some Observations on Deuteronomy VI 4 and 5." In Von Kanaan bis Kerala, pp. 45-52. Edited by W. C. Delssman, et al. Kevelaer, Germany: Verlag Butzer and Bercker, 1982.

Deere, Jack S. "Deuteronomy." In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament, pp. 259-324. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1985.

Dillow, Joseph C. The Reign of the Servant Kings. Miami Springs, Fla.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1992.

Dion, Paul E. "Early Evidence for the Ritual Significance of the Base of the Altar' around Deut. 12:27 LXX." Journal of Biblical Literature 106:4 (1987):487-92.

Doron, Pinchas. "Motive Clauses in the Laws of Deuteronomy: Their Forms, Functions and Contents." Hebrew Annual Review 2 (1978):61-77.

Douglas, Mary. Purity and Danger. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1966.

Driver, Samuel R. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Deuteronomy. 3rd. ed. International Critical Commentary series. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1902.

Duke, Rodney K. "The Portion of the Levite: Another Reading of Deuteronomy 18:6-8." Journal of Biblical Literature 106:2 (1987):193-201.

Dumbrell, William. J. Covenant and Creation. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1984.

Duncan, Dan. "Berachoth and Taanith." Exegesis and Exposition 3:1 (Fall 1988):55-57.

Elayi, Josette. "Name of Deuteronomy's Author Found on Seal Ring." Biblical Archaeology Review 13:5 (September-October 1987):54-56.

Eliade, M. The Sacred and the Profane. New York: Harper & Row, 1978.

Epstein, Isidore. Judaism. Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1959.

Eslinger, L. "Watering Egypt (Deuteronomy XI 10-11)." Vetus Testamentum 37:1 (January 1987):85-90.

Fawver, Jay D., and R. Larry Overstreet. "Moses and Preventive Medicine." Bibliotheca Sacra 147:587 (July-September):270-85.

Fisch, Harold. Poetry with a Purpose: Biblical Poetics and Interpretation. Indiana Studies in Biblical Literature series. Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press, 1988.

Fisher, Eugene J. "Lex Talionis in the Bible and Rabbinic Tradition." Journal of Ecumenical Studies 19:3 (Summer 1982):582-87.

Fitzmyer, Joseph A. "The Matthean Divorce Texts and Some New Palestinian Evidence." Theological Studies 37:2 (June 1976):197-226.

Fruchtenbaum, Arnold G. "Israel and the Church" In Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 113-30. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

Gaster, Theodor H. "An Ancient Eulogy on Israel: Deuteronomy 33 3-5, 26-29." Journal of Biblical Literature 66 (1947):53-62.

Geldard, Mark. "Jesus' Teaching on Divorce: Thoughts on the Meaning of porneia in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9." Churchman 92:2 (1978):134-43.

Goldberg, Michael L. "The Story of the Moral: Gifts or Bribes in Deuteronomy?" Interpretation 38:1 (January 1984):15-25.

Gordis, Robert. "The Text and Meaning of Deuteronomy 33 27." Journal of Biblical Literature 67 (1947):69-72.

Gray, John. The Legacy of Canaan. Vol. 5 of Supplements to Vetus Testamentum series. 2nd revised edition. Leidon, Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 1965.

Haffner, Al. The High Cost of Free Love. San Bernardino, Calif.: Here's Life Publishers, 1989.

Harrison, R. K. Introduction to the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1969.

Harton, George M. "Fulfillment of Deuteronomy 28-30 in History and in Eschatology." Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1981.

Hasel, Gerhard F. "The Sabbath in the Pentateuch." In The Sabbath in Scripture and History, pp. 21-43. Edited by Kenneth A. Strand. Washington: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1982.

Hays, J. Daniel. "Applying the Old Testament Law Today." Bibliotheca Sacra 158:629 (January-March 2001):21-35.

Heiser, Michael S. "Deuteronomy 32:8 and the Sons of God." Bibliotheca Sacra 158:629 (January-March 2001):52-74.

Heth, William A., and Gordon J Wenham. Jesus and Divorce. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1984.

Hoftijzer, J., and G. van der Kooij. Aramaic Texts from Deir Alla. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 1976.

Hoppe, Leslie J. "Deuteronomy and the Poor." The Bible Today 24:6 (November 1986):371-75.

_____. "Elders and Deuteronomy." Eglise et Theologie 14 (1983):259-72.

Houtman, C. "Another Look at Forbidden Mixtures." Vetus Testamentum 24:2 (1984):226-28.

Hurley, James B. Man and Woman in Biblical Perspective. Contemporary Evangelical Perspectives series. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981.

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. 1939 ed., S.v. "Deuteronomy," by George L. Robinson.

Isaksson, Abel. "Marriage and Ministry in the New Temple." Translated by Neil Tomkinson. Th.D. dissertation, University of Uppsala, 1965.

Janzen, J. Gerald. "On the Most Important Word in the Shema (Deuteronomy VI 4-5)." Vetus Testamentum 37:3 (July 1987):280-300.

Johnson, John E. "The Old Testament Offices as Paradigm for Pastoral Identity." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:606 (April-June 1995):182-200.

Johnston, Robert M. "The Least of the Commandments': Deuteronomy 22:6-7 in Rabbinic Judaism and Early Christianity." Andrews University Seminary Studies 20:3 (Autumn 1982):205-15.

Josephus, Flavius. The Works of Flavius Josephus. Translated by William Whiston. Antiquities of the Jews. London: T. Nelson and Sons, 1866.

Kaiser, Walter C., Jr. Toward Old Testament Ethics. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1983.

Kalland, Earl S. "Deuteronomy." In Deuteronomy-2 Samuel. Vol. 3 of The Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and Richard P. Polcyn. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

Kaufman, Stephen A. "The Stucture of the Deuteronomic Law." MAARAV 1 (1978-79):105-58.

Keil, C.F., and Franz Delitzsch. The Pentateuch, 3 vols. Translated by James Martin. Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament. N.p., reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., n.d.

Kitchen, Kenneth A. Ancient Orient and Old Testament. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1966.

_____. "The Old Testament in its Context: 2 From Egypt to the Jordan." Theological Students' Fellowship Bulletin 60 (1971):3-11.

Kline, Meredith G. "Deuteronomy." In The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 155-204. Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F. Harrison. Chicago: Moody Press, 1962.

_____. Treaty of the Great King. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1963.

Laney, J. Carl. "Deuteronomy 24:1-4 and the Issue of Divorce." Bibliotheca Sacra 149:593 (January-March 1992):9-13

_____. The Divorce Myth. Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 1981.

Hartley, J. E. Leviticus. Word Biblical Commentary series. Dallas: Word Books, 1992.

Lemaire, Andre. "Who or What Was Yahweh's Asherah?" Biblical Archaeology Review 10:6 (November-December 1984):42-51.

Lemche, N. P. "The Manumission of Slaves--The Fallow Year--The Sabbatical Year--The Jobel Year." Vetus Testamentum 26 (January 1976):38-59.

Livingston, G. Herbert. The Pentateuch in Its Cultural Environment. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1974.

Longman, Tremper, III. "The Divine Warrior: The New Testament Use of an Old Testament Motif." Westminster Theological Journal 44 (Fall 1982):290-307.

Manor, Dale W. "A Brief History of Levirate Marriage as It Relates to the Bible." Near Eastern Archaeological Society Bulletin NS20 (Fall 1982):33-52.

Marcus, David. "Juvenile Delinquency in the Bible and the Ancient Near East." Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society of Columbia University 13 (1981):31-52.

Mattill, A. J., Jr. "Representative Universalism and the Conquest of Canaan." Concordia Theological Monthly 35:1 (1967):8-17.

Mayes, A. D. H. Deuteronomy. New Century Bible Commentary series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.; and London: Marshall, Morgan, and Scott; 1981.

McBride, S. Dean, Jr. "Polity of the Covenant People." Interpretation 41:3 (July 1987):229-44.

McCarthy, Dennis J. "Notes on the Love of God in Deuteronomy and the Father-Son Relationship between Yahweh and Israel." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 27 (1965):144-47.

_____. Treaty and Covenant. 2nd ed. Analecta Biblica. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1978.

McKeating, Henry. "Sanctions Against Adultery in Ancient Israelite Society." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 11 (1979):57-72.

Merrill, Eugene H. Deuteronomy. New American Commentary series. N.c.: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994.

_____. "Deuteronomy, New Testament Faith, and the Christian Life." In Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 19-33. Edited by Charles H. Dyer and Roy B. Zuck. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1994.

_____. Kingdom of Priests. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1987.

_____. "Remembering: A Central Theme in Biblical Worship." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 43:1 (March 2000):27-36.

_____. "A Theology of the Pentateuch." In A Biblical Theology of the Old Testament, pp. 7-87. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1991.

Millard, Alan R. "King Og's Iron Bed: Fact or Fancy?" Bible Review 6:2 (April 1990):16-21, 44.

_____ "The Question of Israelite Literacy." Bible Review 3:3 (Fall 1987):22-31.

Miller, Patrick D. Deuteronomy. Interpretation series. Louisville: John Knox Press, 1990.

_____. "The Human Sabbath: A Study in Deuteronomic Theology." Princeton Seminary Bulletin NS6:2 (1985):81-97.

Minnick, Mark. "The Lesson of the Dietary Laws." Biblical Viewpoint 19:2 (November 1985):29-37.

Moessner, David P. "Luke 9:1-50: Luke's Preview of the Journey of the Prophet Like Moses of Deuteronomy." Journal of Biblical Literature 102:4 (December 1983):575-605.

Monson, James M. The Land Between. By the Author, P.O. Box 1276, Jerusalem, 1983.

Moran, William L. "The Ancient Near Eastern Background of the Love of God in Deuteronomy." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 35 (1963):77-87.

Morgan, G. Campbell. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Morgan, J. P. "The Morality of Suicide: Issues and Options." Bibliotheca Sacra 148:590 (April-June 1991):214-30.

Morris, Leon. The Epistle to the Romans. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1988.

Murray, John. Divorce. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1972.

Neal, Marshall. "A God Who Desires to Communicate." Biblical Viewpoint 19:2 (November 1985):38-47.

Nestle, D. Eberhard, ed. Novum Testamentum Graece. 21st ed. Stuttgart: Privileg. Wurtt. Bibelanstalt, 1952.

New Scofield Reference Bible. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein, William Culbertson, Charles L. Feinberg, Allan A. MacRae, Clarence Mason, Alva J. McClain, Wilbur M. Smith, and John F. Walvoord. New York: Oxford University Press, 1967.

Nicholson, E. W. Deuteronomy and Tradition. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1967.

Noth, Martin. The Deuteronomistic History. 1943. English translation of the 2nd ed. Vol. 15 of the Supplement series. Sheffield, England: Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 1981.

Payne, David F. Deuteronomy. Daily Study Bible series. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1985.

Pentecost, J. Dwight. Things to Come. Findlay, Ohio: Dunham Publishing Co., 1958.

_____. Thy Kingdom Come. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1990.

Rofe, Alexander. "The Monotheistic Argumentation in Deuteronomy IV 32-40: Contents, Composition and Text." Vetus Testamentum 35:4 (October 1985):434-45.

Rowley, Harold H. "Moses and the Decalogue." Bulletin of the John Rylands Library of the University of Manchester 34:1 (September 1951):81-118.

Rude, Terry. "The Theological Apex." Biblical Viewpoint 19:2 (November 1985):48-53.

_____. "The Theology of Deuteronomy." Biblical Viewpoint 19:2 (November 1985):62-72.

Ryrie, Charles C. "Biblical Teaching on Divorce and Remarriage." N.c.: By the Author, 1981.

_____. Dispensationalism. Chicago: Moody Press, 1995.

_____. Dispensationalism Today. Chicago: Moody Press, 1965.

_____. "The Doctrine of Capital Punishment." Bibliotheca Sacra 129:515 (July-September 1972):211-17.

_____. You Mean the Bible Teaches That . . .. Chicago: Moody Press, 1974.

Sailhamer, John H. "Exegetical Notes: Genesis 1:1-2:4a." Trinity Journal 5 NS (Spring 1984):73-82.

_____. The Pentateuch as Narrative. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

Scalise, Pamela J. "The Significance of Curses and Blessings." Biblical Illustrator 13:1 (Fall 1986):57-59.

Schulte, John Andrew. "Vows." Exegesis and Exposition 3:1 (Fall 1988):48-51.

Schultz, Samuel J. Deuteronomy. Everyman's Bible Commentary series. Chicago: Moody Press, 1971.

Schwantes, Siegfried J. A Short History of the Ancient Near East. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1965.

Seeligmann, I. L. "A Psalm from Pre-Regal Times." Vetus Testamentum 14 (1964):75-92.

Skehan, Patrick W. "The Structure of the Song of Moses in Deuteronomy (Deut. 32:1-43)." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 13:2 (April 1951):153-63.

Smedes, Lewis B. "An Introduction to Mission Beyond the Mission'." Theology, News and Notes 30:3 (October 1983):2-3.

Sprinkle, Joe M. "Old Testament Perspectives on Divorce and Remarriage." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40:4 (December 1997):529-50.

Stevens, David E. "Does Deuteronomy 32:8 Refer to Sons of God' or Sons of Israel'?" Bibliotheca Sacra 154:614 (April-June 1997):131-41.

Steveson, Pete. "The Law: God's Standard for Life." Biblical Viewpoint 19:2 (November 1985):10-15.

Strauss, Lehman. The Eleven Commandments. 2nd ed. Neptune, N.J.: Loizeaux Brothers, 1975.

Student Map Manual. Jerusalem: Pictorical Archive (Near Eastern History) Est., 1979.

Terrien, Samuel. The Elusive Presence. New York: Harper & Row, 1978.

Thompson, J. A. Deuteronomy. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries series. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1974.

Townsend, Jeffrey L. "Fulfillment of the Land Promise in the Old Testament." Bibliotheca Sacra 142:568 (October-December 1985):320-37.

Van Leeuwen, Raymond C. "What Comes out of God's Mouth: Theological Wordplay in Deuteronomy 8." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 47 (January 1985):55-57.

von Rad, Gerhard. Deuteronomy. London: SCM, 1966.

Walton, John H. "Deuteronomy: An Exposition of the Spirit of the Law." Grace Theological Journal 8:2 (Fall 1987):213-25.

Watson, Thomas. The Ten Commandments. 1692; reprint ed., Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1976.

Weinfeld, Moshe. Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic School. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972.

Wenham, Gordon J. The Book of Leviticus. New International Commentary on the Old Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1979.

_____. "The date of Deuteronomy: linch-pin of Old Testament Criticism." Themelios 10:3 (April 1985):15-20; 11:1 (September 1985):15-18.

_____. "The Structure and Date of Deuteronomy." Ph.D. dissertation, University of London, 1969.

Wisdom, Thurman. "The Message of the Song of Moses." Biblical Viewpoint 19:2 (November 1985):54-61.

Wood, Leon. A Survey of Israel's History. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1970.

Wright, Chris. "Principles of Punishment in Deuteronomy." Third Way 6:7 (July-August 1983):15-16.

Wright, Christopher J. H. "What Happened Every Seven Years in Israel?" Evangelical Quarterly 56:3 (July 1984):129-38; 56:4 (October 1984):193-201.

Wright, David P. "Deuteronomy 21:1-9 as a Rite of Elimination." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 49:3 (July 1987):387-403.

Wright, G. Ernest. "The Lawsuit of God: A Form-Critical Study of Deuteronomy 32." In Israel's Prophetic Heritage, pp. 26-67. Edited by Bernhard W. Anderson and Walter Harrelson. London: SCM Press, 1962.

Wright, G. Ernest, and Reginald H Fuller. The Book of the Acts of God. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1960.

Wright, Logan S. "MKR in 2 Kings XII 5-17 and Deuteronomy XVIII 8." Vetus Testamentum 39:4 (October 1989):438-48.

Yamauchi, Edwin M. "Cultural Aspects of Marriage in the Ancient World." Bibliotheca Sacra 135:539 (July-September 1978):241-52.

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: Deuteronomy (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION.

THE BOOK OF DEUTERONOMY.

This Book is called Deuteronomy, which signifies a second law , because it repeats and inculcates the ordinances formerly given on Mount Sinai, with other precepts not expressed before. The Hebrews, from the first words in the Book, call it Elle Haddebarim . (Challoner) --- It may be divided into many discourses, which Moses made to the people during the last two months of his life. (Haydock) --- The first was delivered by him on the first day of the eleventh month of the fortieth year, since the deliverance of the Hebrews out of Egypt, and relates various particulars which had occurred to them. In chap. iv. 41, and following, and a supplement from the Book of Numbers is given to this discourse. Chap. v., a fresh exhortation to the people commences, which continues until chap. xxii., where the famous blessings and maledictions, from the mountains of Garizim and Hebal, are related. In the following chapters, Moses exhorts the people, in the most pathetic manner, to be faithful to the Lord, adding the strongest threats and promises to enforce their compliance; and having appointed Josue to succeed him, and repeated that beautiful canticle which God ordered them to write, (chap. xxxi. 19,) he gives the Book of Deuteronomy, to be kept with care, (ver. 9,) blesses the tribes like a good and tender father, and gives up his soul to God on Mount Nebo in the 120th year of his age. (Calmet) --- There can be no doubt but that Moses was the author of this book, as well as of the four preceding ones; though the last chapter may, perhaps, form a part of the Book of Josue, which formerly was written immediately after the works of Moses, without any such marks of distinction as we find at present. The whole Bible seemed to make but one verse. How easily, therefore, might the account of the death of Moses be taken in, as forming a part of the Pentateuch, when the different books came to be distinguished by separate titles! Such an insertion cannot hurt the general claim of Moses to be the author of the Pentateuch; or, if it should be thought to do so, no absolute proof can be brought to shew that he did not write this chapter also, by the spirit of prophecy. All the people spoke to Esdras, the scribe, to bring the book of the law of Moses, which the Lord had commanded, to Israel. The whole nation of the Jews has all along maintained, that Moses wrote these books: and he himself repeatedly asserts that he was ordered to leave on record many things of importance. Hence both internal and external evidence concur to establish his title to them; and if we be not disposed to cavil with all other authors, and to deny that Demosthenes, for example, Cæsar, and others, have written the works which bear their names, we must confess that the Pentateuch is to be attributed to the Jewish legislator. Yet if this were a matter of doubt, the things contained in these books could not, on that account, be controverted. How many anonymous works have been published which are of unquestionable authority! Many of the books of Scripture are of this nature. But as we have every reason to believe, that they have come down to us without any material corruption, and were written by people of veracity, by divine inspiration, they deserve to be regarded as authentic records. This is true, whether we speak of the originals or of the versions authorized by the Church; though it should suffice to stop the mouths of infidels, if we can procure an authentic history of the Bible by the collation of the different copies which are extant. Thus, where the Hebrew editions appear to be incorrect, they may receive great light from the Samaritan copy of the Pentateuch, and from the versions of the Septuagint, and of other respectable authors on the whole Bible. The variations, which we may discover, are not of such moment, but that, if the very worst copy were selected, we should find the same great outlines of Scripture history, the same precepts of faith and morality. The laws of Moses, which are scattered through his five books, may be seen all together in their natural order, collected by Cornelius a Lapide and Calmet. But the spirit of God was pleased to intersperse historical facts among them, which both shew the occasion on which they were given, and enable us to read them with greater pleasure and satisfaction. The four preceding books might be compared to the four Gospels; Deuteronomy represents the whole, (Ven. Bede) and may be styled a Diatessaron, as it recalls to our mind the great Creator of all things, who was about to fulfil the promises which he had made to the Patriarchs. Almost all those to whom Moses addresses himself, had been unborn or very young, when their parents received God's commands at Sinai, and wandered in the desert. He therefore gives them an account of what had happened during the last eventful period of forty years. He shews what had brought on so many disasters, and cautions his hearers, that if they imitate the perfidy of their fathers, as he foresees, with sorrow, that they will, (chap. xxxi.) they must expect to be treated with no less severity. This prediction we behold verified, at the present day, in the persons of the scattered remnants of Israel. How sublime! how terrifying are the truths which Moses enforces with so much earnestness! The same threats which he denounces against the perfidious Jews, regard us in some measure. If we feel not their effects at present, in being driven out from our country, we have more reason to fear lest we should be excluded from our heavenly inheritance, if we do not repent. (Haydock)

Gill: Deuteronomy (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO DEUTERONOMY

This book is sometimes called "Elleh hadebarim", from the words with which it begins; and sometimes by the Jews "Mishneh Torah", the repetition of the law; and so in the Syriac version, with which agrees the Arabic title of it; and when the Greeks, and we after them, call it "Deuteronomy", it is not to be understood of a second, a new, or another law, but of the law formerly delivered, but now repeated, and also more largely explained; to which are likewise added several particular laws, instructions, and directions; all which were necessary, on account of the people of Israel, who were now a new generation, that either were not born, or not at an age to hear and understand the law when given on Mount Sinai; the men that heard it there being all dead, excepting a very few; and these people were also now about to enter into the land of Canaan, which they were to enjoy as long as they kept the law of God, and no longer, and therefore it was proper they should be reminded of it; and besides, Moses was now about to leave them, and having an hearty desire after their welfare, spends the little time he had to be with them, by inculcating into them and impressing on them the laws of God, and in opening and explaining them to them, and enforcing them on them, which were to be the rule of their obedience, and on which their civil happiness depended. And sometimes the Jews call this book "the book of reproofs", because there are in it several sharp reproofs of the people of Israel for their rebellion and disobedience; and so the Targums of Jonathan and Jerusalem begin it by calling it the words of reproof which Moses spake, &c. That this book was written by Moses there can be no doubt, from Deu 1:1, only the eight last verses, which give an account of his death, and of his character, were wrote by another hand, equally inspired by God, as either Eleazar the priest, as some, or Samuel the prophet, as others; or, as it is the more commonly received opinion of the Jews, Ezra; though it is highly probable they were wrote by Joshua his successor. This book was written and delivered by Moses, at certain times in the last month of his life, and towards the close of the fortieth year of the children of Israel's coming out of Egypt. And that it is of divine authority need not be questioned, when the several quotations out of it are observed, as made by the apostles of Christ, in Act 3:22, Heb 10:30 out of Deu 18:15 and by our Lord himself, Mat 18:16 from Deu 19:15. Yea, it is remarkable, that all the passages of Scripture produced by Christ, to repel the temptations of Satan, are all taken out of this book, Mat 4:7 compared with Deu 8:3, and the voice from heaven, directing the apostles to hearken to him, refers to a prophecy of him in Deu 18:15.

Gill: Deuteronomy 22 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO DEUTERONOMY 22

In this chapter are various laws, concerning care of a neighbour's cattle gone astray or in distress, and of anything lost by him, Deu 22:1, forbidding one sex to wear the apparel, of another, Deu 22:5 and the taking away of the dam with the young found in a bird's nest, Deu 22:6, ordering battlements to be made in a new house, Deu 22:8, prohibiting mixtures in sowing, ploughing, and in garments, Deu 22:9, requiring fringes on the four quarters of a garment, Deu 22:12, fining a man that slanders his wife, upon producing the tokens of her virginity, Deu 22:13 but if these cannot be produced, then orders are given that she be put to death, Deu 22:20, then follow other laws, punishing with death the adulterer and adulteress, and one that hath ravished a betrothed damsel, Deu 22:22, amercing a person that lies with a virgin not betrothed and she consenting, and obliging him to marry her, and not suffering him to divorce her, Deu 22:28 and another against a man's lying with his father's wife, Deu 22:30.