What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Bible Study CALLING ALL BIBLE STUDY ENTHUSIASTS! Come and join us for an indepth study of the Book of Deut.

yes the Pharisees added to the torah with their oral traditions, but the Lord also abolished their view of the torah. for those that understand that word abolish. It means to correctly interpret the law.
 
Chapter 22 This Chapter covers various laws that are meant to favor the following:
1. Livestock in case it gets separated from its owner, a brother Israelite....It is not "finders keepers".
2.The law of male/female clothing was to discourage homosexual/transvestite behavior. This upholds the purpose of holding to the distinction of God's creation of man for woman, and woman for man....homosexuality is an abomination to god!
3. God's concern for even a bird shows His value on the life of the young....how much more for a human life.

There were laws of mixture
Value of life and purity The care of a Brother's property.

Chapter 23 As I was praying this morning my thoughts went to being thankful for Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, for without their faithfulness I would not be saved today. As I thought about the wilderness years, I am grateful for Moses and his faith and leadership. Especially for his long suffering for a rebellious Israel.

As I view all the Commands, Statues, and Rules that we are studying, I want all the ones that apply to me to be followed joyfully in my heart.

In the beginning verses of this Chapter, there are Laws set down by Jehovah that display His Holiness. No man who took part in pagan worship or a person who was born out of a forbidden union could partake in the assembly of Jehovah, to the 10 generation (or forever). (When the Nation gathered for instructon or worship).

In times of war, the soldiers were not to engage in anything which would be considered unclean or evil. Even the outside of the camp itself had to be kept clean when having to releave themselves, for in times of war, Jehovah their God was present in their midst.

Making vows or promises to one another was very serious business, better not to make vows.

For the poor, hungry, or stranger, they could eat from anothers vineyard or field, just not take more in a bag because that would be considered stealing.
 
The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man - כלי גבר (keli geber), the instruments or arms of a man. As the word גבר (geber) is here used, which properly signifies a strong man or man of war, it is very probable that armor is here intended; especially as we know that in the worship of Venus, to which that of Astarte or Ashtaroth among the Canaanites bore a striking resemblance, the women were accustomed to appear in armor before her. It certainly cannot mean a simple change in dress, whereby the men might pass for women, and vice versa. This would have been impossible in those countries where the dress of the sexes had but little to distinguish it, and where every man wore a long beard. It is, however, a very good general precept understood literally, and applies particularly to those countries where the dress alone distinguishes between the male and the female. The close-shaved gentleman may at any time appear like a woman in the female dress, and the woman appear as a man in the male‘s attire. Were this to be tolerated in society, it would produce the greatest confusion. Clodius, who dressed himself like a woman that he might mingle with the Roman ladies in the feast of the Bona Dea, was universally execrated
 
Chapter 22
All I can say is that it's a good thing for women that Paul stood up for them.

I was reading the bird law like a farmer, if you kill the hen, you'll no longer have young to raise or eggs to eat. But that seemed too easy it had something to do with her being on the nest. So I went Jewish....http://www.jewfaq.org/animals.htm and Matt. Henry

The one about the mother bird is to show kindness to the mother bird. That one chases her away from her young that she is trying to protect before taking them away. (to eat)
The Jews say this is the least of the all the laws but if a person shows kindness to animals they will show kindness to people. This is usually true. If a person is mean to animals they are often mean to people, too. I know someone who calls her chickens to grain outside the hen house before gathering their eggs. She is a Christian (Church of Christ) I wouldn't be surprised if she new this law.

Chapter 23 ESV
1. “No one whose testicles are crushed or whose male organ is cut off shall enter the assembly of the Lord.
I read that this law was made to discourage parents from doing these terrible things to their sons. It was a pagan thing to do so that they could gain employment for their sons in royal families.
 
Deborah13 said:
Chapter 22
All I can say is that it's a good thing for women that Paul stood up for them.

I was reading the bird law like a farmer, if you kill the hen, you'll no longer have young to raise or eggs to eat. But that seemed too easy it had something to do with her being on the nest. So I went Jewish....http://www.jewfaq.org/animals.htm and Matt. Henry

The one about the mother bird is to show kindness to the mother bird. That one chases her away from her young that she is trying to protect before taking them away. (to eat)
The Jews say this is the least of the all the laws but if a person shows kindness to animals they will show kindness to people. This is usually true. If a person is mean to animals they are often mean to people, too. I know someone who calls her chickens to grain outside the hen house before gathering their eggs. She is a Christian (Church of Christ) I wouldn't be surprised if she new this law.

Chapter 23 ESV
1. “No one whose testicles are crushed or whose male organ is cut off shall enter the assembly of the Lord.
I read that this law was made to discourage parents from doing these terrible things to their sons. It was a pagan thing to do so that they could gain employment for their sons in royal families.
Click to expand...
my wife said that chickens can be trained.
 
I think I'm confused, although I'm not sure. What chapter are we supposed to be on today?

The TOG​
 
TOG said:
I think I'm confused, although I'm not sure. What chapter are we supposed to be on today?

The TOG​

Deborah13 said:
Chapter24
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

That's what I thought. Does that mean that I was confused about being confused about the chapter or that I wasn't confused about confusing chapters or... or... something? Anyway... Back to the study...

When a man takes a wife and marries her, if then she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house, and she departs out of his house, and if she goes and becomes another man's wife, and the latter man hates her and writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house, or if the latter man dies, who took her to be his wife, then her former husband, who sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after she has been defiled, for that is an abomination before the Lord. And you shall not bring sin upon the land that the Lord your God is giving you for an inheritance. (Deu. 24:1-4 ESV)
​
This is the only place in the entire Torah that mentions anything about divorce for the common people. All other mentions of divorce are for the priests and the Levites. If we have nothing but this to base our views on (as did the Jews before the New Testament was written), then on what grounds can a man get a divorce? The rabbis had two ways of interpreting it. Some emphasized the part that says "she finds no favor in his eyes". Based on this they conclude that a man can get a divorce for any reason. Others point to the part that says "he has found some indecency in her". They conclude that the reason she finds no favor in his eyes must be related to some sexual sin, either adultery after marriage or fornication before marriage. Even 1500 years after it was written, people were still debating what it meant. (It's not hard to believe when you consider that it has now been 3500 years since the Torah was written and people are still debating whether Adam had a belly button). In the first century rabbis were debating this issue (divorce, not the belly button) back and forth without ever coming to a definite conclusion. One day, one of them decided to ask Jesus about his opinion.

And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful to divorce one's wife for any cause?” (Matt. 19:3 ESV)​

This Pharisee was alluding to these verses in Deuteronomy and asking Jesus which of these two interpretations was correct. As was often the case when Jesus talked to the Pharisees, he didn't answer the question directly, but started by pointing out that instead of trying to find an excuse for divorce, we should be concentrating on the sanctity of marriage. He did however answer the question later.

And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.” (Matt. 19:9 ESV)
​
He seems to have been answering the same question in the Sermon on the Mount.

But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery. (Matt. 5:32 ESV)
​
People often interpret that to mean that divorced women can't remarry. The same rule apparently doesn't apply for divorced men, in spite of In spite of the fact that the answer he gave in Matt. 19 says that the man commits adultery if he remarries. And then there is this verse...

And he said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her, and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.” (Mark. 10:11-12 ESV)
​
Here both the man and the woman are mentioned as committing adultery if they remarry. But remarriage was never the issue. If we read the section in Deuteronomy closely, we see that it is presumed that the woman will remarry, as well as the man.

I never realized what this was all about and why men could remarry and women couldn't, until I read and understood this chapter of Deuteronomy and realized that that's what they were talking about. After I started studying the Torah, I was amazed at how often it clarified things in the New Testament.

The TOG​
 
TOG said:
That's what I thought. Does that mean that I was confused about being confused about the chapter or that I wasn't confused about confusing chapters or... or... something? Anyway... Back to the study...

When a man takes a wife and marries her, if then she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house, and she departs out of his house, and if she goes and becomes another man's wife, and the latter man hates her and writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house, or if the latter man dies, who took her to be his wife, then her former husband, who sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after she has been defiled, for that is an abomination before the Lord. And you shall not bring sin upon the land that the Lord your God is giving you for an inheritance. (Deu. 24:1-4 ESV)
​
This is the only place in the entire Torah that mentions anything about divorce for the common people. All other mentions of divorce are for the priests and the Levites. If we have nothing but this to base our views on (as did the Jews before the New Testament was written), then on what grounds can a man get a divorce? The rabbis had two ways of interpreting it. Some emphasized the part that says "she finds no favor in his eyes". Based on this they conclude that a man can get a divorce for any reason. Others point to the part that says "he has found some indecency in her". They conclude that the reason she finds no favor in his eyes must be related to some sexual sin, either adultery after marriage or fornication before marriage. Even 1500 years after it was written, people were still debating what it meant. (It's not hard to believe when you consider that it has now been 3500 years since the Torah was written and people are still debating whether Adam had a belly button). In the first century rabbis were debating this issue (divorce, not the belly button) back and forth without ever coming to a definite conclusion. One day, one of them decided to ask Jesus about his opinion.

And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful to divorce one's wife for any cause?” (Matt. 19:3 ESV)​

This Pharisee was alluding to these verses in Deuteronomy and asking Jesus which of these two interpretations was correct. As was often the case when Jesus talked to the Pharisees, he didn't answer the question directly, but started by pointing out that instead of trying to find an excuse for divorce, we should be concentrating on the sanctity of marriage. He did however answer the question later.

And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.” (Matt. 19:9 ESV)
​
He seems to have been answering the same question in the Sermon on the Mount.

But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery. (Matt. 5:32 ESV)
​
People often interpret that to mean that divorced women can't remarry. The same rule apparently doesn't apply for divorced men, in spite of In spite of the fact that the answer he gave in Matt. 19 says that the man commits adultery if he remarries. And then there is this verse...
And he said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her, and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.” (Mark. 10:11-12 ESV)
​
Here both the man and the woman are mentioned as committing adultery if they remarry. But remarriage was never the issue. If we read the section in Deuteronomy closely, we see that it is presumed that the woman will remarry, as well as the man.

I never realized what this was all about and why men could remarry and women couldn't, until I read and understood this chapter of Deuteronomy and realized that that's what they were talking about. After I started studying the Torah, I was amazed at how often it clarified things in the New Testament.

The TOG​
Click to expand...

I think you have hit the nail on the head about what this dispute was about. I believe for 'any cause' was what the more liberal Hillel taught if I remember correctly.
I also see a difference between Moses' Law and what is stated in Mark. In Mark we see that a woman can legally get a divorce which was not permitted under Moses' Law. It is the same today in Judaism, women cannot divorce, only the man can give her a 'get'.
So I believe we see that in Christ, there is no difference between Jew/Gentile, man/woman.
 
I'd also like to point out something else that is taught by many churches today when it comes to marriage and divorce.
There a churches/pastors/leaders, who teach that one is always married to their first spouse. They teach that if a person has been divorced and remarried (even if it was before they were a Christian) they must divorce their present spouse and return to the first if at all possible. There is absolutely nowhere is scripture that I have found that states any such thing. In fact, that would be breaking the law.
"and if she goes and becomes another man's wife, and the latter man hates her and writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house, or if the latter man dies, who took her to be his wife, then her former husband, who sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after she has been defiled, for that is an abomination before the Lord.
 
Chapter 24 Divorce is always a big issue in the N.T. Church. For the Israeli's, they had first hand knowledge. A wife who was divorced from the original husband could not take her back, if she became the wife of another, because she was defiled, a term that today"s Christians completely ignore. To defile is to be made common, in other words beneath the position of a Christian.

The remaining rules for life were to protect the poor and disadvantaged, and those who were indebted. A person's value as a child of God was to be honored, and valued highly.
 
I have tried to ignore this completely but I can't, it's eating at me because there are Christians on this site who have been divorced and it is important for them to know that God does not see them as second class 'unclean' people.

So I am starting a thread to deal with this misconception taken from this verse in Deuteronomy. But I'll quickly point out here....

This verse does Not say that she is unclean. It says that she "has been defiled".

"and if she goes and becomes another man's wife, and the latter man hates her and writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house, or if the latter man dies, who took her to be his wife, then her former husband, who sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after she has been defiled, for that is an abomination before the Lord.

This word translated as 'defiled' in the Hebrew is a verb, it is not describing her as an adjective would.
H2930 = tame - sexually, religiously, or ceremonially unclean (against the law)
In other words, no longer legal for the ex-husband.

Continued in another thread, in the Bible Study forum.
 
Last edited:
agua. said:
I was taught years ago that Deuteronomy was the restatement of the law ie, Leviticus. The "second law" I think was the term. I'm keen to learn about Deut it isn't a Book I've read much and it's in the Bible :).
Click to expand...
Probably my favorite OT book.

Read through the eyes of NT revelation it's chock full of spiritual gold.
 
Deborah13 said:
I have tried to ignore this completely but I can't, it's eating at me because there are Christians on this site who have been divorced and it is important for them to know that God does not see them as second class 'unclean' people.
Click to expand...
Never heard that before.

What divorced people need to know, if their divorce was not authorized by God, is they have to acknowledge that and get clean of their guilt just like we all have to do with any other sin.

The problem comes in when we try to twist the scriptures to avoid facing the guilt of our wrong doing. There's no reason to do that since God invites us to confess and renounce wrong doing and move on in cleanness of conscience. Unauthorized divorce is handled the same way any other sin is. That's what improperly divorced people need to know.
 
Deborah13 said:
I have tried to ignore this completely but I can't, it's eating at me because there are Christians on this site who have been divorced and it is important for them to know that God does not see them as second class 'unclean' people.

So I am starting a thread to deal with this misconception taken from this verse in Deuteronomy. But I'll quickly point out here....

This verse does Not say that she is unclean. It says that she "has been defiled".

"and if she goes and becomes another man's wife, and the latter man hates her and writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house, or if the latter man dies, who took her to be his wife, then her former husband, who sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after she has been defiled, for that is an abomination before the Lord.

This word translated as 'defiled' in the Hebrew is a verb, it is not describing her as an adjective would.
H2930 = tame - sexually, religiously, or ceremonially unclean (against the law)
In other words, no longer legal for the ex-husband.

Continued in another thread, in the Bible Study forum.
Click to expand...

I agree that divorced women are not "unclean" in the way we usually understand that word, but going into more detail about what "tame" means and implies would derail this thread. Could you provide a link here when you start the new thread? And please don't put it in the marriage forum. I'm not allowed to post there, since I'm not considered a whole person (my "better half" is missing).

The TOG​
 
TOG said:
I agree that divorced women are not "unclean" in the way we usually understand that word, but going into more detail about what "tame" means and implies would derail this thread. Could you provide a link here when you start the new thread? And please don't put it in the marriage forum. I'm not allowed to post there, since I'm not considered a whole person (my "better half" is missing).

The TOG​
Click to expand...
I had always understood the defilement happening after she leaves the marriage, not happening by virtue of the divorce itself. And that is why it is not allowed that she come back to the first marriage. That made sense to me since remarrying after being divorced is adultery.
 
Jethro Bodine said:
I had always understood the defilement happening after she leaves the marriage, not happening by virtue of the divorce itself. And that is why it is not allowed that she come back to the first marriage. That made sense to me since remarrying after being divorced is adultery.
Click to expand...

I believe there's more to it than that, but like I said, it would derail the thread to go into it in detail. I think I'll wait til Deborah13 starts her new thread before I say more. I hope you'll take part there too.

The TOG​
 
Jer_3:8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top