Text -- Deuteronomy 24:1-12 (NET)

24:1 If a man marries a woman and she does not please him because he has found something offensive in her, then he may draw up a divorce document, give it to her, and evict her from his house. 24:2 When she has left him she may go and become someone else’s wife. 24:3 If the second husband rejects her and then divorces her, gives her the papers, and evicts her from his house, or if the second husband who married her dies, 24:4 her first husband who divorced her is not permitted to remarry her after she has become ritually impure, for that is offensive to the Lord. You must not bring guilt on the land which the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance. 24:5 When a man is newly married, he need not go into the army nor be obligated in any way; he must be free to stay at home for a full year and bring joy to the wife he has married. 24:6 One must not take either lower or upper millstones as security on a loan, for that is like taking a life itself as security. 24:7 If a man is found kidnapping a person from among his fellow Israelites, and regards him as mere property and sells him, that kidnapper must die. In this way you will purge evil from among you.

Respect for Human Dignity

24:8 Be careful during an outbreak of leprosy to follow precisely all that the Levitical priests instruct you; as I have commanded them, so you should do. 24:9 Remember what the Lord your God did to Miriam along the way after you left Egypt. 24:10 When you make any kind of loan to your neighbor, you may not go into his house to claim what he is offering as security. 24:11 You must stand outside and the person to whom you are making the loan will bring out to you what he is offering as security. 24:12 If the person is poor you may not use what he gives you as security for a covering.

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Wesley: Deu 24:1

Some hateful thing, some distemper of body or quality of mind not observed before marriage: or some light carriage, as this phrase commonly signifies, but not amounting to adultery.

Wesley: Deu 24:1

This is not a command as some of the Jews understood it, nor an allowance and approbation, but merely a permission of that practice for prevention of greater mischiefs, and this only until the time of reformation, till the coming of the Messiah when things were to return to their first institution and purest condition.

Wesley: Deu 24:4

This is the punishment of his levity and injustice in putting her away without sufficient cause, which by this offer he now acknowledgeth.

Wesley: Deu 24:4

Not absolutely, as if her second marriage were a sin, but with respect to her first husband, to whom she is as a defiled or unclean woman, that is, forbidden things; forbidden are accounted and called unclean, Jdg 13:7, because they may no more be touched or used than an unclean thing.

Wesley: Deu 24:4

Thou shalt not suffer such lightness to be practised, lest the people be polluted, and the land defiled and accursed by that means.

Wesley: Deu 24:5

Any publick office or employment, which may cause an absence from or neglect of his wife.

Wesley: Deu 24:5

That their affections may be firmly settled, so as there may be no occasions for the divorces last mentioned.

Wesley: Deu 24:6

stone - Used in their hand - mills. Under this, he understands all other things necessary to get a livelihood, the taking away whereof is against the laws both of charity and prudence, seeing by those things alone he can be enabled both to subsist and to pay his debts.

Wesley: Deu 24:6

His livelihood, the necessary support of his life.

Wesley: Deu 24:10

To prevent both the poor man's reproach by having his wants exposed, and the creditor's greediness which might be occasioned by the sight of something which he desired, and the debtor could not spare.

Wesley: Deu 24:11

He shall chuse what pledge he pleases, provided it be sufficient for the purpose.

Wesley: Deu 24:12

But restore it before night, which intimates that he should take no such thing for pledge, without which a man cannot sleep.

JFB: Deu 24:1-4

It appears that the practice of divorces was at this early period very prevalent amongst the Israelites, who had in all probability become familiar with it in Egypt [LANE]. The usage, being too deep-rooted to be soon or easily abolished, was tolerated by Moses (Mat 19:8). But it was accompanied under the law with two conditions, which were calculated greatly to prevent the evils incident to the permitted system; namely: (1) The act of divorcement was to be certified on a written document, the preparation of which, with legal formality, would afford time for reflection and repentance; and (2) In the event of the divorced wife being married to another husband, she could not, on the termination of that second marriage, be restored to her first husband, however desirous he might be to receive her.

JFB: Deu 24:5

This law of exemption was founded on good policy and was favorable to matrimony, as it afforded a full opportunity for the affections of the newly married pair being more firmly rooted, and it diminished or removed occasions for the divorces just mentioned.

JFB: Deu 24:6

The "upper" stone being concave, covers the "nether" like a lid; and it has a small aperture, through which the corn is poured, as well as a handle by which it is turned. The propriety of the law was founded on the custom of grinding corn every morning for daily consumption. If either of the stones, therefore, which composed the handmill was wanting, a person would be deprived of his necessary provision.

JFB: Deu 24:7

(See Exo 21:16).

JFB: Deu 24:8-9

(See Lev 13:14).

JFB: Deu 24:10-13

The course recommended was, in kind and considerate regard, to spare the borrower's feelings. In the case of a poor man who had pledged his cloak, it was to be restored before night, as the poor in Eastern countries have commonly no other covering for wrapping themselves in when they go to sleep than the garment they have worn during the day.

Clarke: Deu 24:1

Some uncleanness - Any cause of dislike, for this great latitude of meaning the fact itself authorizes us to adopt, for it is certain that a Jew might put away his wife for any cause that seemed good to himself; and so hard were their hearts, that Moses suffered this; and we find they continued this practice even to the time of our Lord, who strongly reprehended them on the account, and showed that such license was wholly inconsistent with the original design of marriage; see Mat 5:31 (note), etc.; Mat 19:3 (note), etc., and the notes there.

Clarke: Deu 24:3

And write her a bill of divorcement - These bills, though varying in expression, are the same in substance among the Jews in all places. The following, collected from Maimonides and others, is a general form, and contains all the particulars of such instruments. The reader who is curious may find a full account of divorces in the Biblioth. Rab. of Bartolocci, and the following form in that work, vol. iv., p. 550

"In - day of the week, or day - of the month A., in - year from the creation of the world, or from the supputation (of Alexander) after the account that we are accustomed to count by, here, in the place B., I, C., the son of D., of the place B., (or if there be any other name which I have, or my father hath had, or which my place or my father’ s place hath had), have voluntarily, and with the willingness of my soul, without constraint, dismissed, and left, and put away thee, even thee, E., the daughter of F., of the city G., (or if thou have any other name or surname, thou or thy father, or thy place or thy father’ s place), who hast been my wife heretofore; but now I dismiss thee, and leave thee, and put thee away, that thou mayest be free, and have power over thy own life, to go away to be married to any man whom thou wilt; and that no man be refused of thine hand, for my name, from this day and for ever. And thus thou art lawful for any man; and this is unto thee, from me, a writing of divorcement, and book (instrument) of dismission, and an epistle of putting away; according to the Law of Moses and Israel

A., son of B., witness.
C., son of D., witness."

Clarke: Deu 24:4

She is defiled - Does not this refer to her having been divorced, and married in consequence to another? Though God, for the hardness of their hearts, suffered them to put away their wives, yet he considered all after-marriages in that case to be pollution and defilement; and it is on this ground that our Lord argues in the places referred to above, that whoever marries the woman that is put away is an adulterer: now this could not have been the case if God had allowed the divorce to be a legal and proper separation of the man from his wife; but in the sight of God nothing can be a legal cause of separation but adultery on either side. In such a case, according to the law of God, a man may put away his wife, and a wife may put away her husband; (see Mat 19:9); for it appears that the wife had as much right to put away her husband as the husband had to put away his wife, see Mar 10:12.

Clarke: Deu 24:5

When a man hath taken a new wife - Other people made a similar provision for such circumstances. Alexander ordered those of his soldiers who had married that year to spend the winter with their wives, while the army was in winter quarters. See Arrian, lib. i.

Clarke: Deu 24:6

The nether or the upper mill-stone - Small hand-mills which can be worked by a single person were formerly in use among the Jews, and are still used in many parts of the East. As therefore the day’ s meal was generally ground for each day, they keeping no stock beforehand, hence they were forbidden to take either of the stones to pledge, because in such a case the family must be without bread. On this account the text terms the millstone the man’ s life.

Clarke: Deu 24:8-9

The plague of leprosy - See on Leviticus 13 (note), and Leviticus 14 (note).

Clarke: Deu 24:12

And if the man be poor, etc. - Did not this law preclude pledging entirely, especially in case of the abjectly poor? For who would take a pledge in the morning which he knew, if not redeemed, he must restore at night? However, he might resume his claim in the morning, and have the pledge daily returned, and thus keep up his property in it till the debt was discharged; see the note on Exo 22:26. The Jews in several cases did act contrary to this rule, and we find them cuttingly reproved for it by the Prophet Amos, Amo 2:8.

Calvin: Deu 24:1

Although what relates to divorce was granted in indulgence to the Jews, yet Christ pronounces that it was never in accordance with the Law, because it is directly repugnant to the first institution of God, from whence a perpetual and inviolable rule is to be sought. It is proverbially said that the laws of nature are indissoluble; and God has declared once for all, that the bond of union between husband and wife is closer than that of parent and child; wherefore, if a son cannot shake off the paternal yoke, no cause can permit the dissolution of the connection which a man has with his wife. Hence it appears how great was the perverseness of that nation, which could not be restrained from dissolving a most sacred and inviolable tie. Meanwhile the Jews improperly concluded from their impunity that that was lawful, which God did not punish because of the hardness of their hearts; whereas they ought rather to have considered, agreeably to the answer of Christ, that man is not at liberty to separate those whom God hath joined together. (Mat 19:6.) Still, God chose to make a provision for women who were cruelly oppressed, and for whom it was better that they should at once be set free, than that they should groan beneath a cruel tyranny during their whole lives. Thus, in Malachi, divorce is preferred to polygamy, since it would be a more tolerable condition to be divorced than to bear with a harlot and a rival. (Mal 2:14.) And undoubtedly the bill or scroll of divorce, whilst it cleared the woman from all disgrace, cast some reproach on the husband; for he who confesses that he puts away his wife, because she does not please him, brings himself under the accusation both of moroseness and inconstancy. For what gross levity and disgraceful inconstancy it shows, that a husband should be so offended with some imperfection or disease in his wife, as to east away from him half of himself! We see, then, that husbands were indirectly condemned by the writing of divorce, since they thus committed an injury against their wives who were chaste, and in other respects what they should be. On these grounds, God in Isaiah, in order that He might take away from the Jews all subject of complaint, bids them produce the bill of divorce, if He had given any to their mother, (Isa 1:1;) as much as to say, that His cause for rejecting them was just, because they had treacherously revolted to ungodliness.

Some interpreters do not read these three verses continuously, but suppose the sense to be complete at the end of the first, wherein the husband testifies that he divorces his wife for no offense, but because her beauty does not satisfy his lust. If, however, we give more close attention, we shall see that it is only one provision of the Law, viz., that when a man has divorced his wife, it is not lawful for him to marry her again if she have married another. The reason of the law is, that, by prostituting his wife, he would be, as far as in him lay, acting like a procurer. In this view, it is said that she was defiled, because he had contaminated her body, for the liberty which he gave her could not abolish the first institution of God, but rather, as Christ teaches, gave cause for adultery. (Mat 5:31, and 19:9.) Thus, the Israelites were reminded that, although they divorced their wives with impunity, still this license was by no means excused before God.

Calvin: Deu 24:5

The immunity here given has for its object the awakening of that mutual love which may preserve the conjugal fidelity of husband and wife; for there is danger lest, if a husband departs from his wife immediately after marriage, the bride, before she has become thoroughly accustomed to him, should be too prone to fall in love with some one else. A similar danger affects the husband; for in war, and other expeditions, many things occur which tempt men to sin. God, therefore, would have the love of husband and wife fostered by their association for a whole year, that thus mutual confidence may be established between them, and they may afterwards continually beware of all incontinency.

But that God should permit a bride to enjoy herself with her husband, affords no trifling proof of His indulgence. Assuredly, it cannot be but that the lust of the flesh must affect the connection of husband and wife with some amount of sin; yet God not only pardons it, but covers it with the veil of holy matrimony, lest that which is sinful in itself should be so imputed; nay, He spontaneously allows them to enjoy themselves. With this injunction corresponds what Paul says,

“Let the husband render unto his wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer.” (1Co 7:3.)

Calvin: Deu 24:6

Deu 24:6No man shall take the nether. God now enforces another principle of equity in relation to loans, (not to be too strict ¹⁰⁷) in requiring pledges, whereby the poor are often exceedingly distressed. In the first place, He prohibits the taking of anything in pledge which is necessary to the poor for the support of existence; for by the words which I have translated meta and catillus, i e. , the upper and nether millstone, He designates by synecdoche all other instruments, which workmen cannot do without in earning their daily bread. As if any one should forcibly deprive a husbandman of his plough, or his spade, or harrow, or other tools, or should empty a shoemaker’s, or potter’s, or other person’s shop, who could not exercise his trade when deprived of its implements; and this is sufficiently clear from the context, where it is said, “He taketh a man’s life to pledge,” together with his millstones. He, then, is as cruel, whosoever takes in pledge what supports a poor man’s life, as if he should take away bread from a starving man, and thus his life itself, which, as it is sustained by labor, so, when its means of subsistence are cut off, is, as it were, itself destroyed.

Calvin: Deu 24:7

The same punishment is here deservedly denounced against man-stealers as against murderers; for, so wretched was the condition of slaves, that liberty was more than half of life; and hence to deprive a man of such a great blessing, was almost to destroy him. Besides, it is not man-stealing only which is here condemned, but the accompanying evils of cruelty and fraud, i. e. , if he, who had stolen a man, had likewise sold him. Now, such a sale could hardly be made among the people themselves, without the crime being immediately detected; and nothing could be more hateful than that God’s children should be alienated from the Church, and delivered over to heathen nations.

Calvin: Deu 24:8

8.Take heed in the plague of leprosy. I am aware how greatly interpreters differ from each other and how variously they twist whatever Moses has written about Leprosy. Some are too eagerly devoted to allegories; some think that God, as a prudent Legislator, merely gave a commandment of a sanitary, nature, in order that a contagious disease should not, spread among the people. This notion, however, is very. poor, and almost unmeaning; and is briefly. refuted by Moses himself, both where he recounts the history of Miriam’s leprosy, and also where he assigns the cause why lepers should be put out of the camp, viz that they might not defile the camp in which God dwelt, whilst he ranks them with those that have an issue, and that they are defiled by the dead. Wherefore, I have thought it well, previous to attempting the full elucidation of the matter, to adduce two passages, by way of preface, from whence the design of God may more fully appear. When, in this passage from Deuteronomy, He commands the people to “take heed” and “observe diligently” the plague of leprosy, there can be no question but that He thus ratifies what He had before set forth at greater length in Leviticus. And, first of all, He refers the judgment of the matter to the priests, that what they pronounce should be firm and unalterable; and secondly, He would have the priests, lest they should pronounce rashly, and according to their own wishes, to follow simply what He prescribed to them, so that they may only be the ministers, or heralds; whilst, as to the sovereign authority, He alone should be the Judge. He confirms the law which He imposes by a special example; because He had cast out Miriam, the sister of Moses, for a time, lest her uncleanness during her leprosy should defile the camp. For the view which some take, that He exhorts the people lest, through sin, they should bring upon themselves the same evil as Miriam, is not to the purpose. But that which I have stated makes excellent sense, viz., that God’s command, whereby He prohibited Miriam from entering the camp, was to have the force and weight of a perpetual law; because He thus ordained what He would always have done.

Calvin: Deu 24:10

10.When thou dost lend thy brother anything He provides against another iniquity in reclaiming a pledge, viz., that the creditor should ransack the house and furniture of his brother, in order to pick out the pledge at his pleasure. For, if this option were given to the avaricious rich, they would be satisfied with no moderation, but would seize upon all that was best, as if making an assault on the very entrails of the poor: in a word, they would ransack men’s houses, or at any rate, whilst they contemptuously refused this or that, they would fill the wretched with rebuke and shame. God, therefore, will have no pledge reclaimed, except what the debtor of his own accord, and at his own convenience, shall bring out of his house, lie even proceeds further, that the creditor shall not take back any pledge which he knows to be necessary for the poor: for example, if he should pledge the bed on which he sleeps, or his counterpane, or cloak, or mantle. For it is not just that lie should be stripped, so as to suffer from cold, or to be deprived of other aids, the use of which he could not forego without loss or inconvenience. A promise, therefore, is added, that this act of humanity will be pleasing to God, when the poor shall sleep in the garment which is restored to him. He speaks even more distinctly, and says: The poor will bless thee, and it shall be accounted to thee for righteousness. For God indicates that He hears the prayers of the poor and needy, lest the rich man should think the bounty thrown away which lie confers upon a lowly individual. We must, indeed, be more than iron-hearted, unless we are disposed to such liberality as this, when we understand that, although the poor have not the means of repaying us in this world, still they have the power of recompensing us before God, i e. , by obtaining grace for us through their prayers. An implied threat is also conveyed, that if the poor man should sleep inconveniently, or catch cold through our fault, God. will hear his groans, so that our cruelty will not be unpunished. But if the poor man, upon whom we have had compassion, should be ungrateful, yet, even though he is silent, our kindness will cry out to God; whilst, on the other hand, our tyrannical harshness will suffice to provoke God’s vengeance, although he who has been treated unkindly should patiently swallow his wrong. To be unto righteousness ¹⁰⁸ is equivalent to being approved by God, or being an acceptable act; for since the keeping of the Law is true righteousness, this praise is extended to particular acts of obedience. Although it must be observed that this righteousness fails and vanishes, unless we universally fulfill whatever God enjoins. It is, indeed, a part of righteousness to restore a poor man’s pledge; but if a mall be only beneficent in this respect., whilst in other matters he robs his brethren; or if, whilst free from avarice, he exercises violence, is given to lust or gluttony, the particular righteousness, although pleasing in itself to God, will not come into account. In fact, we must hold fast the axiom, that no work is accounted righteous before God, unless il, proceeds from a man of purity and integrity; whereas there is none such to be found. Consequently, no works are imputed unto righteousness, except because God deigns to bestow His gratuitous favor on believers. In itself, indeed, it would be true, that whatever act of obedience to God we perform, it is accounted for righteousness, i e. , if the whole course of our life corresponded to it, whereas no work proceeds from us which is not corrupted by some defect. Thus, we must fly to God’s mercy, in order that, being reconciled to us, He may also accept our work.

What he had previously prescribed respecting the poor, lie afterwards applies to widows alone, yet so as to recommend all poor persons to us under their name; and this we gather both from the beginning of the verse (17,) in which lie instructs them to deal fairly and justly with strangers and orphans, and also from the reason which is added, viz., that they should reflect that they were bondmen in the land of Egypt; for their condition there did not suffer them proudly to insult the miserable; and it is natural that he should be the more affected with the ills of others who has experienced the same. Since, then, this reason is a general one, it is evident also that the precept is general, that we should be humane towards all that are in want.

Defender: Deu 24:2

Although divorce and remarriage were permitted in the Mosaic laws, Christ has reminded us that this is contrary to God's creative will for believers, except under very special circumstances (Mat 19:3-9)."

TSK: Deu 24:1

hath taken : Deu 21:15, Deu 22:13; Exo 21:10

uncleanness : Heb. matter of nakedness

then let him : Deu 24:3; Jer 3:8; Mat 5:31, Mat 5:32, Mat 19:7-9; Mar 10:4-12

divorcement : Heb. cutting off, Isa 50:1

send her : Deu 22:19, Deu 22:29; Mal 2:16; Mat 1:19; Luk 16:18; 1Co 7:11, 1Co 7:12

TSK: Deu 24:2

she may go : Lev 21:7, Lev 21:14, Lev 22:13; Num 30:9; Eze 44:22; Mat 5:32; Mar 10:11; 1Co 7:15

TSK: Deu 24:4

Her former : Jer 3:1

thou shalt : Lev 18:24-28; Jos 22:17, Jos 22:18

TSK: Deu 24:5

a man : Deu 20:7; Gen 2:24; Mat 19:4-6; Mar 10:6-9; 1Co 7:10-15; Eph 5:28, Eph 5:29; Tit 2:4, Tit 2:5

neither : etc. Heb. not anything shall pass upon him

cheer up : Pro 5:18; Ecc 9:9; 1Co 7:29

TSK: Deu 24:6

shall take : Small hand-mills, which ground at one time only a sufficient quantity for a day’ s consumption; hence they were forbidden to take either of the stones to pledge, because if they did, they would be deprived of the means of preparing their necessary food, and the family be without bread. On this account they are called in the text, a man’ s life. The same reason holds good against receiving in pledge, or distraining for debt, any instrument of labour, by which men earn their livelihood. Exo 22:26, Exo 22:27; Rev 18:22

life : Deu 20:19; Gen 44:30; Luk 12:15

TSK: Deu 24:7

found : Exo 21:16; Eze 27:13; 1Ti 1:10; Rev 18:13

then that : Exo 21:16, Exo 22:1-4

and thou shalt : Deu 19:19

TSK: Deu 24:8

Lev. 13:1-14:57; Mat 8:4; Mar 1:44; Luk 5:14, Luk 17:14

TSK: Deu 24:9

Remember : Luk 17:32; 1Co 10:6, 1Co 10:11

Miriam : Num 5:2, Num 12:10-15; 2Ki 7:3; 2Ch 26:20, 2Ch 26:21

TSK: Deu 24:10

When : Deu 15:8

lend thy brother any thing : Heb. lend the loan of anything to thy brother

TSK: Deu 24:12

Deu 24:17; Job 22:6, Job 24:3, Job 24:9

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: Deu 24:1-4

In this and the next chapter certain particular rights and duties, domestic, social, and civil, are treated. The cases brought forward have often no definite connection, and seem selected in order to illustrate the application of the great principles of the Law in certain important events and circumstances.

These four verses contain only one sentence, and should be rendered thus: If a man hath taken a wife, etc., and given her a bill of divorcement and Deu 24:2 if she has departed out of his house and become another man’ s wife; and Deu 24:3 if the latter husband hates her, then Deu 24:4 her former husband, etc.

Moses neither institutes nor enjoins divorce. The exact spirit of the passage is given in our Lord’ s words to the Jews’ , "Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives"Mat 19:8. Not only does the original institution of marriage as recorded by Moses Gen 2:24 set forth the perpetuity of the bond, but the verses before us plainly intimate that divorce, while tolerated for the time, contravenes the order of nature and of God. The divorced woman who marries again is "defiled"Deu 24:4, and is grouped in this particular with the adulteress (compare Lev 18:20). Our Lord then was speaking according to the spirit of the law of Moses when he declared, "Whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery"Mat 19:9. He was speaking too not less according to the mind of the prophets (compare Mal 2:14-16). But Moses could not absolutely put an end to a practice which was traditional, and common to the Jews with other Oriental nations. His aim is therefore to regulate and thus to mitigate an evil which he could not extirpate.

Barnes: Deu 24:6

Compare Exo 22:25-26.

Barnes: Deu 24:7

Compare Deu 21:14; and Exo 21:16.

Barnes: Deu 24:10-13

Compare Exo 22:25-27.

Deu 24:13

Righteousness unto thee - Compare Deu 6:25 note.

Poole: Deu 24:1

That she find no favour in his eyes i.e. he dislike and loathe her. It is a figure called meiosis , whereby more is understood than is expressed, as Pro 10:2 17:21 24:23 .

Uncleanness Heb. nakedness , or shamefulness , or filthiness of a thing , i.e. some filthy or hateful thing, some loathsome distemper of body or quality of mind, not observed before marriage; or some light and unchaste carriage, as this or the like phrase commonly signifies, but not amounting to adultery, which was not punished with divorce, but with death.

Send her out of his house which is not a command to divorce them, as some of the Jews understood it, nor an allowance and approbation, as plainly appears, not only from the New Testament, Mat 5:31,32 19:8,9 , but also from the Old Testament, Gen 2:24 Mal 2:16 ; but merely a permission or toleration of that practice for prevention of greater mischiefs and cruelties of that hard-hearted people towards their wives, and this only for a season, even until the time of reformation , as it is called Heb 9:10 , i.e. till the coming of the Messias, when things were to return to their first institution and purest condition. The husband is not here commanded to put her away, but if he do put her away, he is commanded

to write and give her a bill of divorcement , before he send her out of his house . And though it be true, as our Saviour observes, that Moses did suffer these divorces, to wit, without punishing them, which also is here implied, yet it must be acknowledged, that if we consult the Hebrew words, those three first verses may seem to be only a supposition, and the words rendered, then let him write her in the Hebrew run thus, and hath written her , and so it follows, Deu 24:2 . And she be departed out of his house, and be gone and become another man’ s wife ; then follows Deu 24:3 , which even according to our translation carries on the supposition, And if the latter husband hate her & c. Then follows the position or prohibition, Deu 24:4 .

Poole: Deu 24:2

For although he could not causelessly put her away without sin, yet she being put away, and forsaken by her husband, might marry another without sin, as is determined in the same or a like case, 1Co 7:15 .

Poole: Deu 24:4

This is the punishment of his levity and injustice in putting her away without sufficient cause, which by this offer he now acknowledgeth.

After that she is defiled not simply and absolutely, as if her second marriage were a sin, but respectively, or as to her first husband, to whom she is as a defiled or unclean woman, that is, forbidden; for things forbidden are accounted and called unclean, Jud 13:7 , because they may no more be touched or used than an unclean thing.

Thou shalt not cause the land to sin i.e. thou shalt not suffer such abominable lightness and lewdness to be practised, lest the people be polluted, and the land defiled and accursed by that means.

Poole: Deu 24:5

Any business i.e. any public office or employment, which may cause an absence from or neglect of his wife.

He shall be free at home one year that their affections newly engaged may be firmly settled, so as there may be no occasions for the divorces last mentioned.

Poole: Deu 24:6

The nether or the upper millstone used in their handmills; of which see Exo 11:5 Num 11:8 Jer 25:10 . Under this one kind he understands all other things necessary to get a livelihood, the taking away whereof is against the laws both of charity and prudence, seeing by those things alone he can be enabled both to subsist and to pay his debts.

A man’ s life i.e. his livelihood, or the necessary supports of his life.

Poole: Deu 24:7

See Poole "Exo 21:16" .

Poole: Deu 24:8

By which words he plainly intimates, that they were not only to have an eye to the Levites’ instructions, but also and especially unto the word and command of God, and that if the Levites’ sentence were manifestly contrary to the command of God, it were not to be obeyed. As now if a Levite or priest should, for fear, or favour, or gain, pronounce a person to be clean, who were really and manifestly unclean, and had the unquestionable marks of leprosy upon him, I suppose no man in his wits will question but every man that saw and knew this were bound to avoid the touching of him, and that if he did touch him he should be defiled by it.

Poole: Deu 24:9

God smote Miriam with leprosy for her contempt of Moses, and therefore thou mayst expect the same or like punishment, if thou dost despise the counsel and direction of the Levites, which I have set over thee, and commanded thee to observe in this and the like matters.

Poole: Deu 24:10

To prevent both the poor man’ s reproach, by having his wants exposed to view, and the creditor’ s insolence and greediness, which might be occasioned by the sight of something which he desired, and the debtor could not spare.

Poole: Deu 24:11

He shall choose what pledge he please, provided only it be sufficient for the purpose.

Poole: Deu 24:12

But restore it before night, which intimates that he should take no such thing for pledge, without which a man cannot sleep, since it were an idle thing to fetch it and carry it every day. See Poole "Exo 22:26,27" .

Haydock: Deu 24:1

Uncleanness. Tertullian (contra Marc. iv.) reads, "if she be found guilty of any impurity," negotium impudicum. Septuagint, "unseemly action;" and many learned commentators suppose that Moses only allows a divorce in cases of adultery, or in those which render the woman dangerous to a family, as if she had the leprosy, or some other infectious disorder, or was likely to corrupt the morals of her children, or if she were barren. The Pharisees were divided among themselves in determining the sense of this law, (Calmet) and they endeavoured to inveigle our Saviour, by proposing the question to him, If it were lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause, quacumque ex causa, or for any reason whatsoever, Matthew xix. 3. (Haydock) ---

Our Lord does not take notice of the limitation here added by Moses; (Matthew v. 31) nor do the Pharisees, when he asks them, What did Moses command you? (Mark x. 3.) Whence it seems, that the liberty which was taken was very great, and that the limitation was not regarded. Our Saviour, nonetheless, alludes to it, when he admits that Moses permitted a divorce, in case of adultery. But he recalls them to the institution of marriage, and will no longer allow people to marry again, even in this case, as Moses had been forced to permit the Jews, on account of the hardness of their heart. (Calmet) ---

Before this permission, the Jews were therefore, it seems, much addicted to this practice. ---

Bill. The law does not command divorces; but in case the parties come to such a determination, it requires a bill to be given to the woman. The Jews require the greatest formality in drawing it up, and witnessing it, and they say the divorce must take place upon a fountain or river. (Schikard. Jur. iii. 9.) ---

Munster gives this form of a bill: "The 4th day of the month of Sivan, of the year 5293 from the creation of the world, in this place and in this city of N, T.[I,?] N, son of N, had a mind to divorce, and has divorced N, daughter of N, who hitherto has been my wife; and I grant her leave to go whither she has a mind, and to marry whomsoever she pleases, so that no one shall hinder her. In witness whereof, I have given her this bill of divorce, according to the ordinances of Moses and of Israel." The Jews still assert their right to put away their wives. (Buxtorf, Syn. xxix.) (Calmet) ---

But it is sinful for them, or for any other, to marry the woman divorced till the first husband be dead. If they do they are guilty of adultery, as our Saviour and St. Paul repeatedly inculcate. (St. Augustine, de Adult. Conj. i. 11.) (Worthington)

Haydock: Deu 24:4

Defiled. This insinuates that the second marriage was a real adultery, (Calmet) and only tolerated by the law to prevent greater evils. (Haydock) ---

It might be said indeed that the woman was defiled, with regard to her former husband, who could not take her back without condemning his former proceeding (Calmet); as he would seem to have only lent her for some mean consideration. (Menochius) ---

Domitian took the privilege of a judge from a Roman knight, who had resumed his wife after he had divorced her for adultery. (Suetonius, viii.) But how then is the woman abominable before the Lord? Some say the thing itself is extremely dishonourable, as the Hebrew intimates, thought the woman have done nothing but what the law allows. Grotius believes that the man might take back his wife, at any time, before she was married to another. But the Rabbins limit this privilege to three months after the date of separation. God forbids his priests to marry with those who had been divorced, as it is to be presumed that they have not been rejected by their former husbands without good reason, Leviticus xxi. 7. The an who cohabits with an adulteress, is deemed a fool; (Proverbs xviii. 22,) and some have believed, that it was necessary to put such away. But St. Paul advises a reconciliation, 1 Corinthians vii. 11. ---

To sin, or to incur the punishment due to it. (Calmet) ---

If the state connived at the transgression of the law, the judgments of God would fall upon the people.

Haydock: Deu 24:5

Wife. This indulgence was granted to those who had married a widow also. Hebrew, "a new wife," as she was new to him, (Haydock) which right he could not claim, if he only resumed the one whom he had divorced. (R. Salom.; Drusius) See chap. xx. 7.

Haydock: Deu 24:6

Life, or the means of supporting himself. (Haydock) ---

The upper millstone was deemed the lest necessary. In more ancient times it was customary to dry the wheat by fire, and afterwards to pound it in a mortar. Then millstones were invented, which slaves of the meanest condition had to turn. Pliny ([Natural History?] xviii. 10,) mentions, that some few water-mills were used in his time. But this useful invention had been neglected, till Belisarius restored it again in the fifth century, when he was besieged in Rome by the Goths. (Procopius) ---

Jonathan, and the paraphrast of Jerusalem, explain this quite in a different sense: "Thou shalt not use any enchantment for the consummation of marriage, since it would be to destroy the lives of the children to be born."

Haydock: Deu 24:7

Soliciting. Hebrew, "stealing a soul;" (Menochius) or decoying one to a distance from home, where he may have an opportunity of selling him for a slave. (Haydock) (Exodus xxi. 16.)

Haydock: Deu 24:8

Leprosy. Do nothing which may expose you to the danger of being infected, and if you have the misfortune to contract it, obey the directions of the priests. (Calmet) ---

It seems from this and the following verse that God frequently punished disobedience to his ministers, as he did Mary [Miriam], (Numbers xii.,) by inflicting upon them this shameful disorder. (Haydock) ---

So he punished king Ozias, 2 Paralipomenon xxvi. (Menochius) ---

The design of this precept is, therefore, not so much to order people not to contract a disease, which they cannot perhaps always avoid, as to caution them against pride and rebellion. (Haydock)

Haydock: Deu 24:10

Pledge. This was left to the choice of the debtor, provided he gave sufficient. The Athenian and Roman laws allowed a person to search his neighbour's house, for what he had lost: but he was to enter covered only with a short garment round his middle, (Calmet) to prevent his taking away any thing which did not belong to him.

Haydock: Deu 24:12

Night, if it be a garment or bed covering, which may be necessary for the poor man. (Haydock) ---

By allowing the creditor to keep the pledge such a short time, God wished to discourage the taking of any from such as were in real distress. (Menochius) ---

The same regulation required, that if a necessary implement for labour, during the day time, was pledged, it should be returned in the morning. (Calmet) ---

This was done every day, to admonish the creditor and the debtor to exercise mercy and justice in their respective situations. The debtor was to remember to do his utmost in order to pay his debts. (St. Augustine, q. 41.) ---

These daily debts were not remitted in the sabbatic years, according to the Rabbins, whose opinion seems very hard and inconsistent. (Haydock) ---

Solomon advises not to stand bond for another's debts, Proverbs xx. 16., and xxii. 26. Many nations in the Indies allowed no action at law to recover debts, as the creditor ought to have taken his precautions before he parted with his money or merchandize. (Stobœus.; Strabo, xv.) (Calmet)

Gill: Deu 24:1

When a man hath taken a wife and married her,.... That is, when a man has made choice of a woman for his wife, and has obtained her consent, and the consent of her parents; and has not only betrothed her, but taken her home, and consummated the marriage:

and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes; is not agreeable to him, he takes no delight in her person, nor pleasure in her company and conversation; but, on the contrary, his affections are alienated from her, and he cannot bear the sight of her:

because he hath found some uncleanness in her; something that he disliked, and was disagreeable to him, and which made their continuance together in the marriage state very uncomfortable; which led him on to be very ill-natured, severe, and cruel to her; so that her life was exposed to danger, or at least become very uneasy; in which case a divorce was permitted, both for the badness of the man's heart, and in favour of the woman, that she might be freed from such rigorous usage. This word "uncleanness" does not signify adultery, or any of the uncleannesses forbidden in Lev 18:6; because that was punishable with death, when it could be proved; and where there was only a suspicion of it, the husband might make use of the bitter water: though the house of Shammai seem to take it in this sense; for they say a man might not divorce his wife unless he found her in some unclean thing, something dishonest and wicked, and which they ground upon these words; but the house of Hillell say, if she burnt his food, or spoiled it by over salting, or over roasting it; and Akiba says, even if he found another woman more beautiful than her or more agreeable to him. But neither his sense, nor that of the house of Shammai, are approved of by the Jews in general, but that of the house of Hillell ^m; and they suppose a man might divorce his wife for any ill qualities of mind in her, or for any ill or impudent behaviour of hers; as if her husband saw her go abroad with her head uncovered, and spinning in the streets, and so showing her naked arms to men; or having her garments slit on both sides; or washing in a bath with men, or where men use to wash, and talking with every man, and joking with young men; or her voice is sonorous and noisy; or any disease of body, as the leprosy, and the like; or any blemishes, as warts, are upon her; or any disagreeable smell that might arise from any parts of the body, from sweat, or a stinking breath ⁿ:

then let him write her a bill of divorcement; Jarchi says, this is a command upon him to divorce her, because she finds not favour in his eyes; and so the Jews ^o generally understand it, and so they did in the time of Christ, Mat 19:7; whereas it was no more than a permission, for reasons before given. A man might not dismiss his wife by word of mouth, which might be done hastily, in a passion, of which he might soon repent; but by writing, which was to be drawn up in form; and, as the Targum of Jonathan, before the sanhedrim, in a court of judicature, which required time, during which he might think more of it, and either recede from his purpose before the case was finished, or do it upon mature deliberation; and a firm resolution. The Jews say ^p many things of the witnesses before whom it was to be written and sealed, and at what time, and upon what, and with what it was to be written, and who were proper persons to write it or not, in a treatise of theirs, called Gittin, or divorces. In the Hebrew text this bill is called "a bill of cutting off" ^q; because the marriage was rescinded, and man and wife were cut off and separated from one another for ever; of the form of such a bill; see Gill on Mat 5:31,

and give it in her hand; which was to be done before witnesses, and which is one of the ten things requisite to a divorce ^r; though it made no difference whether it was delivered by himself, or by a messenger; or whether to her, or to her deputy, appointed by her before witnesses; or whether it was put into her hand, or in her bosom, so be it that she was but possessed of it; with which agrees the Jewish canon,"if he casts a bill to his wife, and she is within the house, or within the court, she is divorced; if he casts it into her bosom, or into her work basket, she is divorced ^s:"

and send her out of his house; which was a visible token and public declaration of her divorce; besides, were she to be continued in his house afterwards, it would give suspicion of cohabitation, which after a divorce was not lawful.

Gill: Deu 24:2

And when she is departed out of his house,.... With her bill of divorce, by which departure out of his house it is notified to all:

she may go and be other man's wife; it was permitted her to marry another man, she being by her divorce freed from the law of her former husband; and who indeed, in express words contained in the divorce, gave her leave so to do; which ran thus,"thou art in thine own hand, and hast power over thyself to go and marry any other man whom thou pleasest; and let no man hinder thee in my name, from this day forward and for ever; and, lo, thou art free to any man;''See Gill on Mat 5:31.

Gill: Deu 24:3

And if the latter husband hate her,.... Or less loves her than another woman, and she is disliked by him as she was by her former husband:

and write her a bill off divorcement, and giveth it into her hand,

and sendeth her out of his house: as he had by this law a permission, in like manner as her former husband had; See Gill on Deu 24:1,

or if her latter husband die, which took her to be his wife; and she survives him; as she is then by death loosed from the law of an husband, she may lawfully marry another man, but not her former husband, as follows.

Gill: Deu 24:4

Her former husband which sent her away may not take her again to be his wife,.... Though ever so desirous of it, and having heartily repented that he had put her away: this is the punishment of his fickleness and inconstancy, and was ordered to make men cautious how they put away their wives; since when they had so done, and they had been married to another, they could not enjoy them again even on the death of the second husband; yea, though she was only espoused to him, and he had never lain with her, as Ben Melech observes, it was forbidden the former husband to marry her; though if she had only played the whore, according to the same writer, and others ^a, she might return to him:

after that she is defiled; not by whoredom, for in that case she was not forbidden, as it is interpreted, but by her being married to another man; when she was defiled, not by him, or with respect to him, nor with regard to any other man, whom she might lawfully marry after the decease of her latter husband; but with respect to her first husband, being by her divorce from him, and by her marriage to another, entirely alienated and separated from him, and so prohibited to him; and thus R. Joseph Kimchi interprets this defilement of prohibition, things prohibited being reckoned unclean, or not lawful to be used:

for that is abomination before the Lord; for a man to take his wife again, after she had been divorced by him, and married to another man; and yet, such is the grace and goodness of God to his backsliding people, that he receives them when they return unto him their first husband, and forsake other lovers, Jer 3:1,

and thou shalt not cause the land to sin which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance; since if this was allowed, that men might put away their wives, and take them again at pleasure, and change them as often as they thought fit, no order could be observed, and the utmost confusion in families introduced, and lewdness encouraged, and which would subject the land and the inhabitants of it to many evils and calamities, as the just punishment thereof.

Gill: Deu 24:5

When a man hath taken a new wife,.... A wife he has lately married, new to him, though a widow, as Jarchi observes; but the Targum of Jonathan says a virgin; however this is opposed to his old wife, and divorced; for this, as Jarchi and Ben Melech say, excepts the return of a divorced wife, who cannot be said to be a new one:

he shall not go out to war; this is to be understood of a man that had not only betrothed, but married a wife; a man that had betrothed a wife, and not married her, who went out to war, might return if he would, Deu 20:7; but one that had married a wife was not to go out to war:

neither shall be charged with any business; as betrothed ones were; they, though they had a liberty of returning, yet they were to provide food and drink for the army, and to prepare or mend the highways, as Jarchi observes; but these were not obliged to such things, nor even to keep watch on the walls of the city, or to pay taxes, as Maimonides ^b writes:

but he shall be free at home one year; not only from all tributes and taxes, and everything relative to the affairs of war, but from public offices and employments, which might occasion absence from home. Jarchi remarks, that his house or home comprehends his vineyard; and so he thinks that this respects his house and his vineyard, that if he had built a house and dedicated it, or planted a vineyard and made it common, yet was not to remove from his house because of the necessities of war:

and shall cheer up his wife which he hath taken; or rejoice with his wife which he hath taken, and solace themselves with love; and thereby not only endear himself to her, but settle his affections on her, and be so confirmed in conjugal love, that hereafter no jealousies may arise, or any cause of divorce, which this law seems to be made to guard against. So it is said ^c, that Alexander after the battle of Granicus sent home to Macedonia his newly married soldiers, to winter with their wives, and return at spring; which his master Aristotle had taught him, and as he was taught by a Jew.

Gill: Deu 24:6

No man shall take the nether or the upper millstone to pledge,.... The first word being of the dual number takes in both stones, wherefore Vatablus renders the words,"ye shall not take for a pledge both the millstones, nor indeed the uppermost;''which is the least; so far should they be from taking both, that they were not allowed to take the uppermost, which was the shortest, meanest, and lightest; and indeed if anyone of them was taken, the other became useless, so that neither was to be taken:

for he taketh a man's life to pledge; or with which his life is supported, and the life of his family; for if he has corn to supply them with, yet if his mill or millstones are pawned, he cannot grind his corn, and so he and his family must starve: and in those times and countries they did, as the Arabs do to this day, as Dr. Shaw ^d relates,"most families grind their wheat and barley at home, having two portable millstones for that purpose; the uppermost whereof is turned round by a small handle of wood or iron, that is placed in the rim;''and these millstones being portable, might be the more easily taken for pledges, which is here forbidden, for the above reason; and this takes in any other thing whatever, on which a man's living depends, or by which he gets his bread ^e.

Gill: Deu 24:7

If a man be found stealing any of his brethren of the children of Israel,.... Whether grown up or little, male or female, an Israelite or a proselyte, or a freed servant; all, as Maimonides ^f says, are included in this general word "brethren"; though Aben Ezra observes, that it is added, "of the children of Israel", for explanation, since an Edomite is called a "brother". Now, a man must be "found" committing this fact; that is, it must plainly appear, there must be full proof of it by witnesses, as Jarchi explains this word:

and maketh merchandise of him; or rather uses him as a servant, and employs him in any service to the least profit and advantage by him, even to the value of a farthing; yea, if he does but lean upon him, and he supports him, though he is an old man that is stolen; this is serving a man's self by him, as Maimonides ^g, which is what is forbidden as distinct from selling him, as follows:

or selleth him: to others; and both these, according to the above writer ^h, using him for service, and selling him, are necessary to make him guilty of death; not the one without the other; but reading them disjunctively, as we do, gives the better sense of the words:

then that thief shall die; by strangling with a napkin, as the Targum of Jonathan; and so Maimonides ⁱ says, his death is by strangling:

and thou shall put evil away from among you; both him that does evil, as the Targum of Jonathan, and the guilt of it by inflicting due punishment for it; and so deter from such practices, and prevent evil coming upon the body of the people, should such a sin be connived at; see Exo 21:16.

Gill: Deu 24:8

Take heed, in the plague of leprosy,.... Whether in the bodies of men, or in houses, or in garments, not to hide and conceal it; or, as Jarchi, weaken the signs of it, or cut out the bright spot; so the Targum of Jonathan:

that thou observe diligently, and do according to all the priests the Levites shall teach you: according to the laws and rules given in such cases, whether they order to shut up persons, houses, or clothes, or pronounce unclean or clean; in all things they were to do as they directed, which appeared to be agreeably to the said rules; for the judgment, management, and ordering of these things, belonged to the priests: of which see Lev 13:1,

as I commanded them, so shall ye observe to do: which shows the they were not to comply with their orders, and conform to them, any further than they agreed with the commands of God, and the instructions he had given them in the places referred to.

Gill: Deu 24:9

Remember what the Lord thy God did unto Miriam,.... Who was stricken with leprosy for speaking against Moses, and was shut up seven days; and they are reminded of this instance, partly to warn them against entertaining evil suspicions, and surmises of persons in power and authority, and speaking evil of them; and partly to expect that punishment would certainly be inflicted on them, should they be guilty of the same crime; nor should they think it hard, either to be smitten with leprosy, or to be shut up for it; since Miriam, a prophetess, and the sister of Moses, was so used; and that when

by the way, after that ye were come out of Egypt: when upon their journey, and were retarded in it, and obliged to stay at least seven days before they could proceed on in it; see Num 12:14.

Gill: Deu 24:10

When thou dost lend thy brother anything,.... Any sum of money he stands in need of, or demanded a debt of him, as Jarchi; money he is indebted to thee, which is the sense of the Septuagint version; and he is not able to pay it, but offers something: in pawn till he can pay it:

thou shall not go into his house to fetch his pledge; which would be an exercise of too much power and authority, to go into a neighbour's house, and take what was liked; and besides, as no doubt he would take the best, so he might take that which the poor man could not spare: and indeed, according to the Jewish canons ^k, he could not take any pledge at all, but with the knowledge, and by the leave, of the sanhedrim, or court of judicature.

Gill: Deu 24:11

Thou shall stand abroad,.... Without doors, in the street, as the Targum of Jonathan, while the borrower or debtor looks out, and brings forth what he can best spare as a pledge:

and the man to whom thou dost lend shall bring out the pledge abroad unto thee; now as, on the one hand, if the lender or creditor had been allowed to go in and take what he pleased for a pledge, he would choose the best; so, on the other hand, the borrower or debtor would be apt to bring the worst, what was of the least value and use; wherefore the Jews made it a rule that it should be of a middling sort, between both, lest it should be a discouragement and hinderance to lend upon pledges ^l.

Gill: Deu 24:12

And if the man be poor,.... Which may be thought to be the case of everyone that gives pledges for a debt he owes, or a sum of money he borrows; yet there might be a difference: some might be so very destitute of goods and raiment in their houses, that whatever they parted with was distressing to them, and they could not well do without it:

thou shalt not sleep with his pledge; nor keep it a night; but deliver it to him, before he went to bed, and laid himself down to sleep.

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: Deu 24:1

¹ tn Heb “nakedness of a thing.” The Hebrew phrase עֶרְוַת דָּבָר (’ervat davar) refers here to some gross sexual impropriety (see note on “indecent” in Deut 23:14). Though the term usually has to do only with indecent exposure of the genitals, it can also include such behavior as adultery (cf. Lev 18:6-18; 20:11, 17, 20-21; Ezek 22:10; 23:29; Hos 2:10).

NET Notes: Deu 24:2

¹ tn Heb “his house.”

NET Notes: Deu 24:3

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

² tn Heb “writes her a document of divorce.”

NET Notes: Deu 24:4

¹ tn Heb “to return to take her to be his wife.”

² sn The issue here is not divorce and its grounds per se but prohibition of remarriage to a mate whom one has previously divorced.

³ tn Heb “cause the land to sin” (so KJV, ASV).

NET Notes: Deu 24:5

¹ tn Heb “go out with.”

² tc For the MT’s reading Piel שִׂמַּח (simmakh, “bring joy to”), the Syriac and others read שָׂמַח (samakh, “enjoy”).

NET Notes: Deu 24:6

¹ sn Taking millstones as security on a loan would amount to taking the owner’s own life in pledge, since the millstones were the owner’s means of earning a living and supporting his family.

NET Notes: Deu 24:7

¹ tn Heb “from his brothers, from the sons of Israel.” The terms “brothers” and “sons of Israel” are in apposition; the second defines the first more specifically.

² tn Or “and enslaves him.”

³ tn Heb “that thief.”

⁴ tn Heb “burn.” See note on the word “purge” in Deut 19:19.

NET Notes: Deu 24:8

¹ tn Heb “to watch carefully and to do.”

NET Notes: Deu 24:9

¹ sn What the Lord your God did to Miriam. The reference is to Miriam’s having contracted leprosy because of her intemperate challenge to Moses’ leadership (Num 12:1-15). The purpose for the allusion here appears to be the assertion of the theocratic leadership of the priests who, like Moses, should not be despised.

NET Notes: Deu 24:10

¹ tn Heb “his pledge.” This refers to something offered as pledge of repayment, i.e., as security for the debt.

NET Notes: Deu 24:11

¹ tn Heb “his pledge.”

NET Notes: Deu 24:12

¹ tn Heb “may not lie down in his pledge.” What is in view is the use of clothing as guarantee for the repayment of loans, a matter already addressed elsewhere (Deut 23:19-20; 24:6; cf. Exod 22:25-26; Lev 25:35-37). Cf. NAB “you shall not sleep in the mantle he gives as a pledge”; NRSV “in the garment given you as the pledge.”

Geneva Bible: Deu 24:1

When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: ^{( a )} then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give [it] in her hand, and send her out of his house.

^{( a )} By this God does not approve light divorcement, but permits it to avoid further inconvenience; (Mat 19:7).

Geneva Bible: Deu 24:4

Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is ^{( b )} defiled; for that [is] abomination before the LORD: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the LORD thy God giveth thee [for] an inheritance.

^{( b )} Seeing that by divorcing her he judged her to be unclean and defiled.

Geneva Bible: Deu 24:5

When a man hath taken a new wife, he shall not go out to war, ^{( c )} neither shall he be charged with any business: [but] he shall be free at home one year, and shall cheer up his wife which he hath taken.

^{( c )} That they might learn to know one another's conditions, and so afterward live in godly peace.

Geneva Bible: Deu 24:6

No man shall take the nether or the upper ^{( d )} millstone to pledge: for he taketh [a man's] life to pledge.

^{( d )} Not anything by which a man gets his living.

Geneva Bible: Deu 24:10

When thou dost lend thy brother any thing, thou shalt not go ^{( e )} into his house to fetch his pledge.

^{( e )} As though you would appoint what to have, but shall receive what be may spare.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: Deu 24:1-22

1 Of divorce.

5 A new married man goes not to war.

6 Of pledges.

7 Of man-stealers.

8 Of leprosy.

10 Of pledges.

14 The hire is to be given.

16 Of justice.

19 Of charity.

MHCC: Deu 24:1-4

Where the providence of God, or his own wrong choice in marriage, has allotted to a Christian a trial instead of a help meet; he will from his heart prefer bearing the cross, to such relief as tends to sin, confusion, and misery. Divine grace will sanctify this cross, support under it, and teach so to behave, as will gradually render it more tolerable.

MHCC: Deu 24:5-13

It is of great consequence that love be kept up between husband and wife; that they carefully avoid every thing which might make them strange one to another. Man-stealing was a capital crime, which could not be settled, as other thefts, by restitution. The laws concerning leprosy must be carefully observed. Thus all who feel their consciences under guilt and wrath, must not cover it, or endeavour to shake off their convictions; but by repentance, and prayer, and humble confession, take the way to peace and pardon. Some orders are given about pledges for money lent. This teaches us to consult the comfort and subsistence of others, as much as our own advantage. Let the poor debtor sleep in his own raiment, and praise God for thy kindness to him. Poor debtors ought to feel more than commonly they do, the goodness of creditors who do not take all the advantage of the law against them, nor should this ever be looked upon as weakness.

Matthew Henry: Deu 24:1-4

This is that permission which the Pharisees erroneously referred to as a precept, Mat 19:7, Moses commanded to give a writing of divorcement. It was not so; our Saviour told them that he only suffered it because of the hardness of their hearts, lest, if they had not had liberty to divorce their wives, they should have ruled them with rigour, and it may be, have been the death of them. It is probable that divorces were in use before (they are taken for granted, Lev 21:14), and Moses thought it needful here to give some rules concerning them. 1. That a man might not divorce his wife unless he found some uncleanness in her, Deu 24:1. It was not sufficient to say that he did not like her, or that he liked another better, but he must show cause for his dislike; something that made her disagreeable and unpleasant to him, though it might not make her so to another. This uncleanness must mean something less than adultery; for, for that, she was to die; and less than the suspicion of it, for in that case he might give her the waters of jealousy; but it means either a light carriage, or a cross froward disposition, or some loathsome sore or disease; nay, some of the Jewish writers suppose that an offensive breath might be a just ground for divorce. Whatever is meant by it, doubtless it was something considerable; so that their modern doctors erred who allowed divorce for every cause, though ever so trivial, Mat 19:3. 2. That it must be done, not by word of mouth, for that might be spoken hastily, but by writing, and that put in due form, and solemnly declared, before witnesses, to be his own act and deed, which was a work of time, and left room for consideration, that it might not be done rashly. 3. That the husband must give it into the hand of his wife, and send her away, which some think obliged him to endow her and make provision for her, according to her quality and such as might help to marry her again; and good reason he should do this, since the cause of quarrel was not her fault, but her infelicity. 4. That being divorced it was lawful for her to marry another husband, Deu 24:2. The divorce had dissolved the bond of marriage as effectually as death could dissolve it; so that she was as free to marry again as if her first husband had been naturally dead. 5. That if her second husband died, or divorced her, then still she might marry a third, but her first husband should never take her again (Deu 24:3, Deu 24:4), which he might have done if she had not married another; for by that act of her own she had perfectly renounced him for ever, and, as to him was looked upon as defiled, though not as to another person. The Jewish writers say that this was to prevent a most vile and wicked practice which the Egyptians had of changing wives; or perhaps it was intended to prevent men's rashness in putting away their wives; for the wife that was divorced would be apt, in revenge, to marry another immediately, and perhaps the husband that divorced her, how much soever he though to better himself by another choice, would find the next worse, and something in her more disagreeable, so that he would wish for his first wife again. "No"(says this law) "you shall not have her, you should have kept her when you had her."Note, It is best to be content with such things as we have, since changes made by discontent often prove for the worse. The uneasiness we know is commonly better, though we are apt to think it worse, than that which we do not know. By the strictness of this law God illustrates the riches of his grace in his willingness to be reconciled to his people that had gone a whoring from him. Jer 3:1, Thou hast played the harlot with many lovers, yet return again to me. For his thoughts and ways are above ours.

Matthew Henry: Deu 24:5-13

Here is, I. Provision made for the preservation and confirmation of love between new-married people, Deu 24:5. This fitly follows upon the laws concerning divorce, which would be prevented if their affection to each other were well settled at first. If the husband were much abroad from his wife the first year, his love to her would be in danger of cooling, and of being drawn aside to others whom he would meet with abroad; therefore his service to his country in war, embassies, or other public business that would call him from home, shall be dispensed with, that he may cheer up the wife that he has taken. Note, 1. It is of great consequence that love be kept up between husband and wife, and that every thing be very carefully avoided which might make them strange one to another, especially at first; for in that relation, where there is not the love that should be, there is an inlet ready to abundance of guilt and grief. 2. One of the duties of that relation is to cheer up one another under the cares and crosses that happen, as helpers of each other's joy; for a cheerful heart does good like a medicine.

II. A law against man-stealing, Deu 24:7. It was not death by the law of Moses to steal cattle or goods; but to steal a child, or a weak and simple man, or one that a man had in his power, and to make merchandize of him, this was a capital crime, and could not be expiated, as other thefts, by restitution - so much is a man better than a sheep, Mat 12:12. It was a very heinous offence, for, 1. It was robbing the public of one of its members. 2. It was taking away a man's liberty, the liberty of a free-born Israelite, which was next in value to his life. 3. It was driving a man out from the inheritance of the land, to the privileges of which he was entitled, and bidding him go serve other gods, as David complains against Saul, 1Sa 26:19.

III. A memorandum concerning the leprosy, Deu 24:8, Deu 24:9. 1. The laws concerning it must be carefully observed. The laws concerning it we had, Lev 13:14. They are here said to be commanded to the priests and Levites, and therefore are not repeated in a discourse to the people; but the people are here charged, in case of leprosy, to apply to the priest according to the law, and to abide by his judgment, so far as it agreed with the law and the plain matter of fact. The plague of leprosy being usually a particular mark of God's displeasure for sin, he in whom the signs of it did appear ought not to conceal it, nor cut out the signs of it, nor apply to the physician for relief; but he must go to the priest, and follow his directions. Thus those that feel their consciences under guilt and wrath must not cover it, nor endeavour to shake off their convictions, but by repentance, and prayer, and humble confession, take the appointed way to peace and pardon. 2. The particular case of Miriam, who was smitten with leprosy for quarrelling with Moses, must not be forgotten. It was an explication of the law concerning the leprosy. Remember that, and, (1.) "Take heed of sinning after the similitude of her transgression, by despising dominions and speaking evil of dignities, lest you thereby bring upon yourselves the same judgment."(2.) "If any of you be smitten with a leprosy, expect not that the law should be dispensed with, nor think it hard to be shut out of the camp and so made a spectacle; there is no remedy: Miriam herself, though a prophetess and the sister of Moses, was not exempted, but was forced to submit to this severe discipline when she was under this divine rebuke."Thus David, Hezekiah, Peter, and other great men, when they had sinned, humbled themselves, and took to themselves shame and grief; let us not expect to be reconciled upon easier terms.

IV. Some necessary orders given about pledges for the security of money lent. They are not forbidden to take such securities as would save the lender from loss, and oblige the borrower to be honest; but, 1. They must not take the millstone for a pledge (Deu 24:6), for with that they ground the corn that was to be bread for their families, or, if it were a public mill, with it the miller got his livelihood; and so it forbids the taking of any thing for a pledge by the want of which a man was in danger of being undone. Consonant to this is the ancient common law of England, which provides that no man be distrained of the utensils or instruments of his trade or profession, as the axe of a carpenter, or the books of a scholar, or beasts belonging to the plough, as long as there are other beasts of which distress may be made ( Coke, 1 Inst. fol. 47). This teaches us to consult the comfort and subsistence of others as much as our own advantage. That creditor who cares not though his debtor and his family starve, nor is at all concerned what become of them, so he may but get his money or secure it, goes contrary, not only to the law of Christ, but even to the law of Moses too. 2. They must not go into the borrower's house to fetch the pledge, but must stand without, and he must bring it, Deu 24:10, Deu 24:11. The borrower (says Solomon) is servant to the lender; therefore lest the lender should abuse the advantage he has against him, and improve it for his own interest, it is provided that he shall take not what he pleases, but what the borrower can best spare. A man's house is his castle, even the poor man's house is so, and is here taken under the protection of the law. 3. That a poor man's bed-clothes should never be taken for a pledge, Deu 24:12, Deu 24:13. This we had before, Exo 22:26, Exo 22:27. If they were taken in the morning, they must be brought back again at night, which is in effect to say that they must not be taken at all. "Let the poor debtor sleep in his own raiment, and bless thee,"that is, "pray for thee, and praise God for thy kindness to him."Note, Poor debtors ought to be sensible (more sensible than commonly they are) of the goodness of those creditors that do not take all the advantage of the law against them, and to repay their kindnesses by their prayers for them, when they are not in a capacity to repay it in any other way. "Nay, thou shalt not only have the prayers and good wishes of thy poor brother, but it shall be righteousness to thee before the Lord thy God, "that is, "It shall be accepted and rewarded as an act of mercy to thy brother and obedience to thy God, and an evidence of thy sincere conformity to the law. Though it may be looked upon by men as an act of weakness to deliver up the securities thou hast for thy debt, yet it shall be looked upon by thy God as an act of goodness, which shall in no wise lose its reward."

Keil-Delitzsch: Deu 24:1-5

Deu 24:1-5 contain two laws concerning the relation of a man to his wife. The first (Deu 24:1-4) has reference to divorce. In these verses, however, divorce is not established as a right; all that is done is, that in case of a divorce a reunion with the divorced wife is forbidden, if in the meantime she had married another man, even though the second husband had also put her away, or had died. The four verses form a period, in which Deu 24:1-3 are the clauses of the protasis, which describe the matter treated about; and Deu 24:4 contains the apodosis, with the law concerning the point in question. If a man married a wife, and he put her away with a letter of divorce, because she did not please him any longer, and the divorced woman married another man, and he either put her away in the same manner or died, the first husband could not take her as his wife again. The putting away (divorce) of a wife with a letter of divorce, which the husband gave to the wife whom he put away, is assumed as a custom founded upon tradition. This tradition left the question of divorce entirely at the will of the husband: " if the wife does not find favour in his eyes (i.e., does not please him), because he has found in her something shameful "(Deu 23:15). ערוה , nakedness, shame, disgrace (Isa 20:4; 1Sa 20:30); in connection with דּבר , the shame of a thing, i.e., a shameful thing (lxx ἄσχημον πρᾶγμα ; Vulg . aliquam faetiditatem ). The meaning of this expression as a ground of divorce was disputed even among the Rabbins. Hillel's school interpret it in the widest and most lax manner possible, according to the explanation of the Pharisees in Mat 19:3, "for every cause."They no doubt followed the rendering of Onkelos , פתגם עבירת , the transgression of a thing; but this is contrary to the use of the word ערוה , to which the interpretation given by Shammai adhered more strictly. His explanation of דּבר ערות is"rem impudicam, libidinem, lasciviam, impudicitiam ." Adultery, to which some of the Rabbins would restrict the expression, is certainly not to be thought of, because this was to be punished with death.

(Note: For the different views of the Rabbins upon this subject, see Mishnah tract. Gittin ix. 10; Buxtorf, de sponsal. et divort. pp. 88ff.; Selden, uxor ebr. l. iii. c. 18 and 20; and Lightfoot, horae ebr. et talm. ad Matth. v. 31f.)

כּריתת ספר , βιβλίον ἀποστασίου , a letter of divorce; כּריתת , hewing off, cutting off, sc., from the man, with whom the wife was to be one flesh (Gen 2:24). The custom of giving letters of divorce was probably adopted by the Israelites in Egypt, where the practice of writing had already found its way into all the relations of life.

(Note: The rabbinical rules on the grounds of divorce and the letter of divorce, according to Maimonides , have been collected by Surenhusius, ad Mishn. tr. Gittin, c. 1 (T. iii. pp. 322f. of the Mishnah of Sur. ), where different specimens of letters of divorce are given; the latter also in Lightfoot, l.c. )

The law that the first husband could not take his divorced wife back again, if she had married another husband in the meantime, even supposing that the second husband was dead, would necessarily put a check upon frivolous divorces. Moses could not entirely abolish the traditional custom, if only "because of the hardness of the people's hearts"(Mat 19:8). The thought, therefore, of the impossibility of reunion with the first husband, after the wife had contracted a second marriage, would put some restraint upon a frivolous rupture of the marriage tie: it would have this effect, that whilst, on the one hand, the man would reflect when inducements to divorce his wife presented themselves, and would recall a rash act if it had been performed, before the wife he had put away had married another husband; on the other hand, the wife would yield more readily to the will of her husband, and seek to avoid furnishing him with an inducement for divorce. But this effect would be still more readily produced by the reason assigned by Moses, namely, that the divorced woman was defiled ( הטּמּאה , Hothpael , as in Num 1:47) by her marriage with a second husband. The second marriage of a woman who had been divorced is designated by Moses a defilement of the woman, primarily no doubt with reference to the fact that the emissio seminis in sexual intercourse rendered unclean, though not merely in the sense of such a defilement as was removed in the evening by simple washing, but as a moral defilement, i.e., blemishing, desecration of the sexual communion with was sanctified by marriage, in the same sense in which adultery is called a defilement in Lev 18:20 and Num 5:13-14. Thus the second marriage of a divorced woman was placed implicite upon a par with adultery, and some approach made towards the teaching of Christ concerning marriage: "Whosoever shall marry her that is divorced, committeth adultery"(Mat 5:32). - But if the second marriage of a divorced woman was a moral defilement, of course the wife could not marry the first again even after the death of her second husband, not only because such a reunion would lower the dignity of the woman, and the woman would appear too much like property, which could be disposed of at one time and reclaimed at another ( Schultz ), but because the defilement of the wife would be thereby repeated, and even increased, as the moral defilement which the divorced wife acquired through the second marriage was not removed by a divorce from the second husband, nor yet by his death. Such defilement was an abomination before Jehovah, by which they would cause the land to sin, i.e., stain it with sin, as much as by the sins of incest and unnatural licentiousness (Lev 18:25).

Attached to this law, which is intended to prevent a frivolous severance of the marriage tie, there is another in Deu 24:5, which was of a more positive character, and adapted to fortify the marriage bond. The newly married man was not required to perform military service for a whole year; " and there shall not come (anything) upon him with regard to any matter ."The meaning of this last clause is to be found in what follows: "Free shall he be for his house for a year," i.e., they shall put no public burdens upon him, that he may devote himself entirely to his newly established domestic relations, and be able to gladden his wife (compare Deu 20:7).

Keil-Delitzsch: Deu 24:6-9

Various Prohibitions . - Deu 24:6. " No man shall take in pledge the handmill and millstone, for he (who does this) is pawning life ." רחים , the handmill; רכב , lit., the runner, i.e., the upper millstone. Neither the whole mill nor the upper millstone was to be asked for as a pledge, by which the mill would be rendered useless, since the handmill was indispensable for preparing the daily food for the house; so that whoever took them away injured life itself, by withdrawing what was indispensable to the preservation of life. The mill is mentioned as one specimen of articles of this kind, like the clothing in Exo 22:25-26, which served the poor man as bed-clothes also. Breaches of this commandment are reproved in Amo 2:8; Job 22:6; Pro 20:16; Pro 22:27; Pro 27:13.

Deu 24:7-9

Repetition of the law against man-stealing (Exo 21:16). - Deu 24:8, Deu 24:9. The command, "Take heed by the plague of leprosy to observe diligently and to do according to all that the priests teach thee," etc., does not mean, that when they saw signs of leprosy they were to be upon their guard, to observe everything that the priests directed them, as Knobel and many others suppose. For, in the first place, the reference to the punishment of Miriam with leprosy is by no means appropriate to such a thought as this, since Miriam did not act in opposition to the priests after she had been smitten with leprosy, but brought leprosy upon herself as a punishment, by her rebellion against Moses (Num 12:10.). And in the second place, this view cannot be reconciled with בּנגע השּׁמר , since השּׁמר with בּ , either to be upon one's guard against (before) anything (2Sa 20:10), or when taken in connection with בּנפשׁ , to beware by the soul, i.e., for the sake of the worth of the soul (Jer 17:21). The thought here, therefore, is, "Be on thy guard because of the plague of leprosy,"i.e., that thou dost not get it, have to bear it, as the reward for thy rebellion against what the priests teach according to the commandment of the Lord. "Watch diligently, that thou do not incur the plague of leprosy"( Vulgate ); or, "that thou do not sin, so as to be punished with leprosy"( J. H. Michaelis ).

Keil-Delitzsch: Deu 24:10-11

Warning against oppressing the Poor . - Deu 24:10, Deu 24:11. If a loan of any kind was lent to a neighbour, the lender was not to go into his house to pledge (take) a pledge, but was to let the borrower bring the pledge out. The meaning is, that they were to leave it to the borrower to give a pledge, and not compel him to give up something as a pledge that might be indispensable to him.

Keil-Delitzsch: Deu 24:12-13

And if the man was in distress ( עני ), the lender was not to lie (sleep) upon his pledge, since the poor man had very often nothing but his upper garment, in which he slept, to give as a pledge. This was to be returned to him in the evening. (A repetition of Exo 22:25-26.) On the expression, "It shall be righteousness unto thee,"see Deu 6:25.

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 23:19--24:8

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

The eighth commandment is, "You shall not steal" (5:19). All these laws have some connection with respecting the possessions of others.

"Respect was to be shown to all those dignified by the status of covenant servant to the Lord. This section of stipulations was designed to guarantee this sanctity of the theocratic citizen by regulations which assured peace, prosperity, and liberty within the covenant commitment to all God's people, but especially to those classes whose welfare was jeopardized by various circumstances."²⁶⁴

Constable: Deu 24:1-5

Marital duties and rights 24:1-5

A discussion of divorce and remarriage fits into this context because they both involve respect for the rights of others. The first of the two situations Moses dealt with in this section concerns a married, divorced, and remarried woman (vv. 1-4).

"In modern society, marriage and divorce are not only regulated by law, but are invalid unless conducted or decreed by accredited officials in accredited places (churches and register offices, or law-courts in the case of divorce). In Israel, however, both were purely domestic matters, with no officials and scarcely any documents involved; the bill of divorce was the exception, and it was essential, to protect the divorced woman from any charge of adultery, which was punishable by death (cf. 22:22)."²⁶⁶

Moses allowed divorce for the "hardness of heart" of the Israelites, but God's preference was that there be no divorce (Gen. 1:27; 2:24; Mal. 2:16; Matt. 19:8). This, then, is another example of God regulating practices that were not His desire for people, but that He permitted in Israel (e.g., polygamy, etc.). The worst situation envisaged in these verses is divorce, remarriage, and then remarrying the first spouse. The better situation was divorce and remarriage. Still better was divorce and no remarriage. Best of all was no divorce.

The Egyptians practiced divorce and gave written certificates of divorce, so perhaps the Israelites learned these practices from them.²⁶⁷ Divorce was common in the ancient Near East, and it was easy to obtain.²⁶⁸ However, the Israelites took marriage more seriously than their neighbors did.

The reason for the granting of the divorce by the husband, who alone had the power to divorce, was "some indecency" in his wife (v. 1). This could not have been just adultery since the Israelites stoned adulteresses (22:22). However it is debatable whether the Israelites enforced the death penalty for adultery.²⁶⁹ It could not have been just suspicion of adultery either since there was a specified procedure for dealing with that (Num. 5:5-31). Two schools of rabbinic interpretation of this phrase developed in time. Rabbi Hillel's liberal position was that God permitted a divorce "for every cause" (Matt. 19:3), for example, burning his breakfast. Rabbi Shammai's conservative position allowed divorce only for fornication (sexual sin). Jesus said that God permitted divorce for fornication, but He warned against remarrying after such a divorce (Matt. 19:9).²⁷⁰

Divorce not permitted by God and remarriage, which involved post-marital adultery for the woman, resulted in the moral defilement and uncleanness of the woman (v. 4; cf. Lev. 18:20; Num. 5:13-14).

The point of Moses' legislation was that when a couple divorced and then wanted to remarry, the woman's first husband could not marry her again. Evidently Israel's neighbors would divorce their mates, marry someone else, and then remarry their first spouse after their "affair." This ordinance would have discouraged hasty divorce as well as strengthening second marriages in Israel.²⁷¹

"Thus the intent of the legislation seems to be to apply certain restrictions on the already existing practice of divorce. If divorce became too easy, then it could be abused and it would become a legal' form of committing adultery."²⁷²

Jesus taught His disciples not to divorce and remarry (Matt. 19:1-12; Mark 10:1-12). Matthew included Jesus' clarification of the condition for divorce that God permitted (Matt. 19:9; cf. Deut. 24:1), but Mark did not. Paul restated Jesus' point (1 Cor. 7:10-11) and added that a believing spouse need not remain with an unbelieving mate if the unbeliever departs (i.e., divorces; 1 Cor. 7:12-16). He did not say the believer is free to remarry, but he encouraged the believer not to remarry by giving hope that the unbeliever may change (1 Cor. 7:16).²⁷³

The second situation Moses dealt with in this section concerns a recently married male (v. 5). Such a person did not have to participate in military service for one year. The reason for this provision was so the man could establish a strong home and begin producing descendants. Both strong homes and descendants were essential to God's purposes through Israel. His going to war and dying was a type of stealing from his wife.

Constable: Deu 24:6-7

Stealing livelihood and life 24:6-7

To take a millstone from a person amounted to depriving him of his ability to grind his meal to make his daily bread (v. 6). Evidently a small millstone is in view here, not a large one that required an animal to turn. Kidnapping violated the right to freedom of choice that God wanted every Israelite to enjoy (v. 7; cf. Exod. 21:16).

Constable: Deu 24:8--26:1

9. Laws arising from the ninth commandment 24:8-25:19

The ninth commandment is, "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor" (5:20). There may be a deliberate descending order of heirarchy in the list of offended parties in this section beginning with the highest to the lowest.²⁷⁴

Constable: Deu 24:8-9

Leaders 24:8-9

The reference to Miriam recalls her misrepresenting Moses and her punishment (Num. 12:1-15). The Israelites were to be careful to submit to the Levites if the Israelites contracted leprosy. Miriam had given false testimony against a Levite, Moses, and had contracted leprosy as a result.

Constable: Deu 24:10-15

Debtors 24:10-15

The Israelites were not to take advantage of their poorer brethren because of their vulnerable condition. God looked out for them. They were not to withhold their clothing and wages from them (cf. James 5:4). Specifically they were not to humiliate a debtor by entering his house and demanding repayment of a debt. They were to allow the debtor to initiate repayment. Perhaps the connection with the ninth commandment is this. By taking the initiative the creditor was saying something about the debtor that was not necessarily true, namely, that he was unable and or unwilling to repay the debt.

Guzik: Deu 24:1-22

Deuteronomy 24 - The Law of Divorce and Other Various Laws

A. Divorce, remarriage and marriage.

1. (1) The law of divorce in ancient Israel.

When a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some uncleanness in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce, puts it in her hand, and sends her out of his house,

a. A certificate of divorce: According to these laws, divorce was allowed in Israel, but carefully regulated. Under God's law, the marriage contract cannot be simply dissolved as soon as one partner wants out; there must be cause for a certificate of divorce.

i. Even with cause, divorce was never to be seen as a preferred or easy option. The Hebrew word translated divorce has as its root the idea of "a hewing off, a cutting apart" - it is the amputation of that which is one flesh.

ii. "(Christians) all regard divorce as something like cutting up a living body, as a kind of surgical operation. Some think that the operation is so violent that it cannot be done at all; others admit that it is a desperate remedy in extreme cases. They are all agreed that it is more like having your legs cut off than it is like dissolving a business partnership or even deserting a regiment." (C.S. Lewis)

b. He writes her a certificate of divorce: God commands here that any divorce be sealed with a certificate of divorce. In other words, it was not enough for a man to just declare "we're divorced" to his wife. The divorce had to be recognized legally just as the marriage had been, so a certificate of divorce - a legal document - must be issued, and properly served (puts it in her hand).

c. She finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some uncleanness in her: This describes the grounds of divorce and indicates that a certificate of divorce could not be written for just any reason. It had to be founded on these two important clauses.

i. There has to be some uncleanness in her. Some later Rabbis defined uncleanness as anything in the wife which might displease the husband. At the time of Jesus, some Rabbis taught that if a wife burned her husband's breakfast, he could divorce her.

ii. But Jesus carefully and properly defined what uncleanness is in Deuteronomy 24:1. He said, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery (Matthew 19:9). Jesus rightly understood that uncleanness refers to sexual immorality, a broad term referring to sexual sin, which includes, but is not restricted to, sexual intercourse with someone who is not your spouse. The Hebrew word translated uncleanness in itself implies the meaning of sexual immorality; it is literally, "nakedness of a thing."

iii. So, if a husband finds some uncleanness in her, he has the right to give his wife a certificate of divorce. But he is not obligated to do so. It must also be that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some uncleanness in her. In other words, it must be that the husband is so troubled at his wife's sexual immorality that he simply cannot look upon her with favor in his eyes any more. The lack of favor in his eyes must be because of her uncleanness.

iv. This helps us understand what Jesus said in Matthew 19:8: Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. If a woman did not have a hard heart, she would never commit sexual immorality against her husband, and there would be no need for divorce. If a husband did not have any hardness in his heart, he could forgive and still look upon his wife with favor in his eyes, even though she was guilty of sexual immorality. But because God knows there is hardness in our hearts - both in the offending and offended parties - He grants permission for divorce.

v. In the days of Jesus, Rabbis taught that it was the duty of a godly man to divorce his wife if she displeased him. Both Moses and Jesus make it clear that God permits divorce in certain circumstances, but never commands it.

vi. Yet, if someone has Biblical grounds of divorce (which, according to 1 Corinthians 7:15, includes abandonment by an unbelieving spouse), they certainly do have permission to divorce, and God does not "hold it against them," unless of course, He has specifically told them to not divorce and they are disobeying His specific word to their lives.

d. He writes her a certificate of divorce: Most people think that in ancient Israel, only husbands had the right to divorce their wives, and wives did not have the right of divorce. But what is said here may be intended to be applied to both husband and wife. Jesus, in Mark 10:12 says and if a woman divorces her husband and marries another, clearly saying that in His day, a wife had the right to divorce.

2. (2-4) The law of remarriage in ancient Israel.

When she has departed from his house, and goes and becomes another man's wife, if the latter husband detests her and writes her a certificate of divorce, puts it in her hand, and sends her out of his house, or if the latter husband dies who took her as his wife, then her former husband who divorced her must not take her back to be his wife after she has been defiled; for that is an abomination before the LORD, and you shall not bring sin on the land which the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance.

a. Her former husband who divorced her must not take her back: This is a strong law, saying that if a divorced woman marries again, she could not return to her first husband, should her second marriage end through divorce or death. To break this law was an abomination before the LORD.

b. An abomination before the LORD: It seems that it might be a good thing for the first husband and wife to get back together. But this command is made because God wanted both marriage and divorce to be seen as serious, permanent things. One couldn't be married or divorced casually; it had to be carefully thought out because it was permanent.

i. This law would also strengthen the second marriage; it would discourage a spouse from thinking they might as well just leave their second marriage and go back to their first partner.

3. (5) The law honoring marriage.

When a man has taken a new wife, he shall not go out to war or be charged with any business; he shall be free at home one year, and bring happiness to his wife whom he has taken.

a. He shall be free at home one year: This was God's way of honoring and blessing the marriage covenant. He allowed men who were newly married to be exempt from military or other state service for one year.

b. Bring happiness to his wife: This is an important job for every husband. Even as before the LORD, we find our lives by losing them (Matthew 10:39), so a husband will find the most happiness if he will bring happiness to his wife.

i. As the role of the husband in Ephesians 5 is described, we see that God emphasizes the essential oneness between husband and wife. The husband cannot make his wife happy without also bringing happiness into his own life. Conversely, he cannot bring misery into the life of his spouse without also bringing misery into his own life.

ii. A happy wife is the foundation for a happy home; a bitter or contentious wife makes for a miserable home. A continual dripping on a very rainy day and a contentious woman are alike (Proverbs 27:15). Better to dwell in a corner of a housetop, than in a house shared with a contentious woman. (Proverbs 21:9). Better to dwell in the wilderness, than with a contentious and angry woman (Proverbs 21:19).

B. Other various laws.

1. (6) Do not take someone's livelihood as a pledge.

No man shall take the lower or the upper millstone in pledge, for he takes one's living in pledge.

a. No man shall take the lower or the upper millstone in pledge: A millstone was something essential to a family's livelihood, therefore it was forbidden to take it as a guarantee for a loan.

i. This warns Israel against taking advantage of each other in times of great need. We must take care that we never unfairly profit from the poverty or difficulty of others.

b. For he takes one's living in pledge: Non-essential items could be taken as a pledge. Although interest could not be charged on a loan to an Israelite in need, a pledge could be taken - collateral to guarantee the repayment of the loan. This command forbids the taking of collateral that would take away a man's ability to provide for his family, and get himself out of debt.

2. (7) The punishment for kidnapping.

If a man is found kidnapping any of his brethren of the children of Israel, and mistreats him or sells him, then that kidnapper shall die; and you shall put away the evil from among you.

a. If a man is found kidnapping any of his brethren of the children of Israel: Kidnapping was usually done in the ancient world not so much for return and ransom, but so that one could sell the one abducted to slavery, just as was done to Joseph by his brothers (Genesis 37:28).

b. That kidnapper shall die: This crime was serious enough before God, so as to command the death penalty.

3. (8-9) The command to act swiftly when leprosy breaks out.

Take heed in an outbreak of leprosy, that you carefully observe and do according to all that the priests, the Levites, shall teach you; just as I commanded them, so you shall be careful to do. Remember what the LORD your God did to Miriam on the way when you came out of Egypt.

a. Take heed in an outbreak of leprosy: Leviticus 13 and 14 describe in great detail how God wanted lepers examined and quarantined. Because leprosy was such a dreaded disease, God commands here that they take heed in an outbreak of leprosy, so it would not become a plague throughout Israel.

b. Remember what the LORD your God did to Miriam: In Numbers 12, Miriam led her brother Aaron in a rebellion against Moses, and for it, God struck her with leprosy. Though Moses prayed for her to be healed, God let her be a leper for seven days before healing her, and she was shut out of the camp seven days (Numbers 12:14). If someone as prominent as Miriam was quarantined as a leper, it showed that every other leper in Israel should also be quarantined.

4. (10-13) Handling a pledge rightly.

When you lend your brother anything, you shall not go into his house to get his pledge. You shall stand outside, and the man to whom you lend shall bring the pledge out to you. And if the man is poor, you shall not keep his pledge overnight. You shall in any case return the pledge to him again when the sun goes down, that he may sleep in his own garment and bless you; and it shall be righteousness to you before the LORD your God.

a. You shall not go into his house to get his pledge: When a pledge was taken for a loan, it had to be received in a way that kept the poor man's dignity.

i. God does not condemn the principle of taking a pledge, only commanding that it be received humanely. The idea of taking collateral for a loan is valid, because it encourages personal responsibility in the one receiving the loan.

b. You shall not keep his pledge overnight: Assuming the pledge was something to keep the man warm (such as a garment or a blanket, which would often be the only pledge a poor man could make), the pledge had to be returned so the man could use it to keep warm overnight.

i. "The Jews in several cases did act contrary to this rule, and we find them cuttingly reproved for it by the Prophet Amos, chap. ii. 8." (Clarke)

5. (14-15) The command to pay your workers.

You shall not oppress a hired servant who is poor and needy, whether one of your brethren or one of the aliens who is in your land within your gates. Each day you shall give him his wages, and not let the sun go down on it, for he is poor and has set his heart on it; lest he cry out against you to the LORD, and it be sin to you.

a. You shall not oppress a hired servant: A servant might be oppressed by not being paid, or by brutal or unsafe working conditions. God commanded employers to treat their employees fairly and kindly.

b. Lest he cry out against you to the LORD: The LORD hears the cry of the oppressed. James 5:4 warns the rich man who oppresses his workers: Indeed the wages of the laborers who mowed your fields, which you kept back by fraud, cry out; and the cries of the reapers have reached the ears of the Lord of Saboath.

6. (16) Each shall bear his own sin.

Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor shall the children be put to death for their fathers; a person shall be put to death for his own sin.

a. A person shall be put to death for his own sin: God commanded that each individual be responsible for their own sin. A father cannot be blamed and responsible for the sin of their (grown) children, and the children cannot be blamed and responsible for the sin of their parents.

i. It is wrong for a parent to automatically blame themselves for their wayward children; though they may have a part in the problem, it isn't always the case.

b. For his own sin: There are instances when God commands that a whole family be punished for sin, such as with the family of Achan in Joshua 7:16-26. When God deals with a whole family, it shows that there must have been some conspiracy between family members, for each is responsible for his own sin.

7. (17-18) A command to be compassionate and fair.

You shall not pervert justice due the stranger or the fatherless, nor take a widow's garment as a pledge. But you shall remember that you were a slave in Egypt, and the LORD your God redeemed you from there; therefore I command you to do this thing.

a. You shall remember: If Israel kept remembering how much God had done for them, it would make them more compassionate and fair in dealing with others. We must always deal with others remembering how much God has blessed and forgiven us.

8. (19-22) Leave behind some of the harvest for the poor.

When you reap your harvest in your field, and forget a sheaf in the field, you shall not go back to get it; it shall be for the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow, that the LORD your God may bless you in all the work of your hands. When you beat your olive trees, you shall not go over the boughs again; it shall be for the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow. When you gather the grapes of your vineyard, you shall not glean it afterward; it shall be for the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow. And you shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt; therefore I command you to do this thing.

a. It shall be for the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow: This was one of God's welfare programs for Israel, establishing the right of the gleaner. Farmers were instructed to not completely harvest their fields, so that some would be left behind for the hard-working poor to gather for themselves.

b. Therefore I command you to do this thing: This was a wonderful way of helping the poor. It commanded farmers to have a generous heart, and it made the poor to be active and work for their food. It made a way for them to provide for their own needs with dignity.

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

Commentary -- Other

Critics Ask: Deu 24:1

DEUTERONOMY 24:1-4 —Is Moses’ teaching on divorce contrary to the teaching of Jesus and Paul?

PROBLEM: According to Deuteronomy 24:1-4 , a man was allowed to divorce his wife if he had found her to be unfaithful. However, according to the teaching of Jesus in Mark 10:1-12 , and the teaching of Paul in 1 Corinthians 7:10-16 , it seems that a man is not permitted to divorce his wife and remarry. Is the teaching in Deuteronomy contrary to the teaching of Jesus and Paul?

SOLUTION: It would be a mistake to assume that the statements of Moses here gave divine sanction to divorce. The passage presents a hypothetical situation which was likely to happen among the people. It simply says that if a man divorces his wife because of some uncleanness in her, and if she remarries, and if her new husband dies or divorces her, it is unlawful for the first husband to take her back. This is not a sanction of divorce. Rather, it is an acknowledgement of the fact of divorce and the implementation of regulation concerning remarriage.

As Jesus said in Mark 10:5 , Moses allowed divorce and gave the people this precept because of the hardness of their hearts, but this is not God’s ideal. God’s ideal for marriage was that there be a lifetime commitment between husband and wife. There is no contradiction here between Moses’ teaching and the teaching of Jesus and Paul. Moses simply recognizes the fact of divorce, while Jesus and Paul present God’s ideal for marriage, as it was from the beginning.   

Critics Ask: Deu 24:2

DEUTERONOMY 24:1-4 —Is Moses’ teaching on divorce contrary to the teaching of Jesus and Paul?

PROBLEM: According to Deuteronomy 24:1-4 , a man was allowed to divorce his wife if he had found her to be unfaithful. However, according to the teaching of Jesus in Mark 10:1-12 , and the teaching of Paul in 1 Corinthians 7:10-16 , it seems that a man is not permitted to divorce his wife and remarry. Is the teaching in Deuteronomy contrary to the teaching of Jesus and Paul?

SOLUTION: It would be a mistake to assume that the statements of Moses here gave divine sanction to divorce. The passage presents a hypothetical situation which was likely to happen among the people. It simply says that if a man divorces his wife because of some uncleanness in her, and if she remarries, and if her new husband dies or divorces her, it is unlawful for the first husband to take her back. This is not a sanction of divorce. Rather, it is an acknowledgement of the fact of divorce and the implementation of regulation concerning remarriage.

As Jesus said in Mark 10:5 , Moses allowed divorce and gave the people this precept because of the hardness of their hearts, but this is not God’s ideal. God’s ideal for marriage was that there be a lifetime commitment between husband and wife. There is no contradiction here between Moses’ teaching and the teaching of Jesus and Paul. Moses simply recognizes the fact of divorce, while Jesus and Paul present God’s ideal for marriage, as it was from the beginning.   

Critics Ask: Deu 24:3

DEUTERONOMY 24:1-4 —Is Moses’ teaching on divorce contrary to the teaching of Jesus and Paul?

PROBLEM: According to Deuteronomy 24:1-4 , a man was allowed to divorce his wife if he had found her to be unfaithful. However, according to the teaching of Jesus in Mark 10:1-12 , and the teaching of Paul in 1 Corinthians 7:10-16 , it seems that a man is not permitted to divorce his wife and remarry. Is the teaching in Deuteronomy contrary to the teaching of Jesus and Paul?

SOLUTION: It would be a mistake to assume that the statements of Moses here gave divine sanction to divorce. The passage presents a hypothetical situation which was likely to happen among the people. It simply says that if a man divorces his wife because of some uncleanness in her, and if she remarries, and if her new husband dies or divorces her, it is unlawful for the first husband to take her back. This is not a sanction of divorce. Rather, it is an acknowledgement of the fact of divorce and the implementation of regulation concerning remarriage.

As Jesus said in Mark 10:5 , Moses allowed divorce and gave the people this precept because of the hardness of their hearts, but this is not God’s ideal. God’s ideal for marriage was that there be a lifetime commitment between husband and wife. There is no contradiction here between Moses’ teaching and the teaching of Jesus and Paul. Moses simply recognizes the fact of divorce, while Jesus and Paul present God’s ideal for marriage, as it was from the beginning.   

Critics Ask: Deu 24:4

DEUTERONOMY 24:1-4 —Is Moses’ teaching on divorce contrary to the teaching of Jesus and Paul?

PROBLEM: According to Deuteronomy 24:1-4 , a man was allowed to divorce his wife if he had found her to be unfaithful. However, according to the teaching of Jesus in Mark 10:1-12 , and the teaching of Paul in 1 Corinthians 7:10-16 , it seems that a man is not permitted to divorce his wife and remarry. Is the teaching in Deuteronomy contrary to the teaching of Jesus and Paul?

SOLUTION: It would be a mistake to assume that the statements of Moses here gave divine sanction to divorce. The passage presents a hypothetical situation which was likely to happen among the people. It simply says that if a man divorces his wife because of some uncleanness in her, and if she remarries, and if her new husband dies or divorces her, it is unlawful for the first husband to take her back. This is not a sanction of divorce. Rather, it is an acknowledgement of the fact of divorce and the implementation of regulation concerning remarriage.

As Jesus said in Mark 10:5 , Moses allowed divorce and gave the people this precept because of the hardness of their hearts, but this is not God’s ideal. God’s ideal for marriage was that there be a lifetime commitment between husband and wife. There is no contradiction here between Moses’ teaching and the teaching of Jesus and Paul. Moses simply recognizes the fact of divorce, while Jesus and Paul present God’s ideal for marriage, as it was from the beginning.   

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 24 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

Deu 24:1, Of divorce; Deu 24:5, A new married man goes not to war; Deu 24:6, Of pledges; Deu 24:7, Of man-stealers; Deu 24:8, Of leprosy; Deu 24:10, Of pledges; Deu 24:14, The hire is to be given; Deu 24:16, Of justice; Deu 24:19, Of charity.

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 24 (Chapter Introduction)

CHAPTER 24

Of the woman that was dismissed by her husband with a bill of divorcement, Deu 24:1-4 . The liberty of the new-married man, Deu 24:5 . Pawns and pledges, Deu 24:6 . Man-stealers, Deu 24:7 . Leprosy, Deu 24:8 . And again of pawns or pledges, Deu 24:10-13 . Of day wages, Deu 24:14,15 . Prone to be punished for another’ s offence, Deu 24:16 . Of justice and love towards widows, fatherless, and strangers, Deu 24:17-22 .

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 24 (Chapter Introduction)

(Deu 24:1-4) Of divorce.

(Deu 24:5-13) Of new-married persons, Of man-stealers, Of pledges.

(Deu 24:14-22) Of justice and generosity.

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 24 (Chapter Introduction)

In this chapter we have, I. The toleration of divorce (Deu 24:1-4). II. A discharge of new-married men from the war (Deu 24:5). III. Laws concerning pledges (Deu 24:6, Deu 24:10-13, Deu 24:17). IV. Against man-stealing (Deu 24:7). V. Concerning the leprosy (Deu 24:8, Deu 24:9). VI. Against the injustice of masters towards their servants (Deu 24:14, Deu 24:15). Judges in capital causes (Deu 24:16), and civil concerns (Deu 24:17, Deu 24:18). VII. Of charity to the poor (Deu 24:19, etc.).

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 24 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO DEUTERONOMY 24

This chapter contains various laws concerning divorces, Deu 24:1; the discharge of a newly married man from war and business, Deu 24:5; about taking pledges, Deu 24:6; man stealing, Deu 24:7; the plague of leprosy, Deu 24:8; and giving servants their hire in due time, Deu 24:14; concerning doing justice in capital cases, and towards the stranger, fatherless, and widow, Deu 24:16; and of charity to the poor, in allowing them the forgotten sheaf, and the gleanings of their oliveyards and vineyards, Deu 24:19.