The Temptation of Jesus, and His Ministry Begins

Continuing a Bible study of the Gospels:

(Matthew 4:1) Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil.

At the end of the last chapter, Jesus had just been baptized by John the Baptist, and the Holy Spirit of God had descended upon Him like a dove.  Now being full of the Holy Spirit, as Luke 4:1 described it, Jesus was led by that Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil.  Jesus, the man, was about to endure strong temptation, just as we all do.  This is exactly the way it most often is, when we have received the clearest light and message from the Holy Spirit, that is when Satan shows up strongest to tempt us away from that light.  

(2) And when He had fasted forty days and forty nights, He was afterward hungry.

Jesus spent forty days and forty nights fasting in the wilderness, and was afterward obviously very hungry.  Adam Clarke, in his Commentary on the Bible, pointed out that this was intended to show that God's kingdom on earth was to be spiritual and divine, that it should not consist in meat and drink, but in righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit (Romans 14:17).  However, being fully human, Jesus was very hungry, and so prepared for the first temptation of the devil.

(3) And when the tempter came to Him, he said, "If You are the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread."

The tempter is, of course, Satan; his main purpose is to tempt people into denying God and to sin.  God had just declared that Jesus was His Son, and Satan came to make Him doubt that.  After all, if He truly was the Son of God, He could command the stones around Him to become bread and He could satisfy His great hunger.  Jesus was called the second or last Adam in scripture.  Think of the parallels in their temptations.  Adam was tempted by Eve, who had been tempted by the serpent, "Did God really say...?"  

(4) But He answered and said, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God.’"

Jesus answered by relying on and quoting the settled word of God.  He quoted Deuteronomy 8:3, "...man shall not live by bread alone; but man lives by every word that proceeds from the mouth of the LORD."  Jesus WAS the word (John 1:1).  He could have spoken the mind of God with authority of Himself, but He chose to quote the writings of Moses to give honor to and present as an example for us when dealing with temptation.  The Word of God is the sword of the Spirit (Ephesians 6:17) which is the only offensive weapon in the Christian armor as described in Ephesians 6:13-17.  However, to use that weapon, we must know the Word of God!  Satan knows the Word of God, and he will use it to tempt us.  His temptations are always partly true and plausible, and our best defense is our offense of the knowledge of God's Word.  We see here that Jesus did not deny that He had the power to turn those stones to bread, but demonstrated faith in God and His will, knowing that He was able to sustain Him, regardless of His present circumstances.  Abraham showed that kind of faith in God's Word when he offered Isaac, his only son, upon the altar.  God had told him He would make a great nation from his descendants, so he was confident that God would provide whatever was needed in his present circumstance.  

(5) Then the devil took Him up into the holy city, and set Him on the pinnacle of the temple, (6) And said to Him, “If You are the Son of God, cast Yourself down, for it is written, 'He shall give His angels charge concerning You,' and 'In their hands they shall bear you up, lest at any time you dash your foot against a stone.'"

I don't believe the devil physically picked up Jesus and flew Him over to the temple as one commentator I read suggested.  Nor did he do it against His will.  Jesus had been led by the Holy Spirit to be tempted by the devil.  Therefore, the tempter could have just led Him willingly into the holy city of Jerusalem and onto the top of the temple.  Satan once again quoted scripture.  How important is it that we know the Word of God when Satan knows it so well and uses it diabolically against us.  There is always a half or distorted truth to that which the devil uses as temptation.  That is the way he gets away with it, quoting scripture and partial truths draws us in, so we'd better know the whole truth in God's Word so as not to be taken in.  The devil partially quoted Psalm 91:11-12.  The context of the psalmist was that because his refuge was in the Lord, "He shall give His angels charge over you, to keep you in all your ways. They shall bear you up in their hands, lest you dash your foot against a stone."  The devil conveniently left out the part about keeping one in all his ways, God's promise to protect and support His servants; God did not promise to always protect them when they walked outside their way, outside their duty within His will.  With his distorted version of scripture, Satan said to Jesus if He were truly the Son of God, then He could throw Himself down and God's angels would lift Him up and protect Him.

(7) Jesus said to him, “It is written again, 'You shall not tempt the Lord your God.'"

Jesus offered another scripture that supported the context of the one Satan misquoted, Deuteronomy 6:16, "You shall not tempt the Lord your God..."  The rest of that original quotation was "...as you tempted Him in Massah."  The context there was that the people kept requiring more and more evidence of what God had already made plain; when He had always been completely trustworthy and protected and provided for them, they continually had no faith that He would do it again.  In this case against Satan, Jesus meant it would be tempting or testing God to require Him to prove His Word that He would protect and defend Him even if He were to go out of His way to do something dangerous.

(8) Again, the devil took Him up on an exceedingly high mountain, and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. (9) And he said to Him, “All these things I will give You if You will fall down and worship me.”

It seems the devil thought he must go higher and offer more to make Jesus give into temptation.  He took Him to an exceedingly high mountain, and showed Him all the kingdoms below, claiming he would give Him the world and all its glory if He would fall down and worship him.  This was a very vain and silly attempt on the devil's part.  This could only work as a temptation if Satan had proved by His first two temptations that Jesus was not truly the Son of God, which he hadn't.  However, it serves as a valuable lesson to us in how to recognize Satan's lies and how to fight temptation.  It does seem like he uses the same old tactics all the time.  Did God really say that?  (Doubt the Word.)  You surely won't die.  (Doubt judgment and consequences.)  You can be as God.  An entire society has fallen for those tactics.  Did God really say that about homosexuality, etc.?  God surely wouldn't send His beloved children to hell.  Once you eliminate the idea of judgment as a consequence of our disobedience toward God’s commands, then anything goes!  People professing to be wise, having a form of religion, but denying the power and changing the glory of the incorruptible God into an image they have made (Romans 1:22-23, 2 Timothy 3:5).

(10) Then Jesus said to him, “Get away, Satan! For it is written, ‘You shall worship the LORD your God, and Him only you shall serve.’”

Jesus answered this temptation with decidedly more indignation and detestation, and commanded Satan to get away.  He still used the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God (Ephesians 6:17), quoting Deuteronomy 6:13 and 10:20.  From Jesus's temptation, we learn that no one, no matter how holy, is exempt from temptation when even God in the flesh was tempted.  Temptation in itself, even to the greatest abomination, is not sin, for even Christ was tempted to fall down and worship the devil.  The best way to fight the adversary is with that sword of the Spirit, the Word of God.  We can fight just as Jesus did with knowing the Word, knowing the consequences of sin, and knowing there is only One God, and idolatry of self and the big EGO is still idolatry.  Furthermore, we don't have to face temptation alone, for we have a Savior who has already fought the battle and defeated Satan, and we can call on Him. 

(11) Then the devil left Him, and behold, angels came and ministered to Him.   

The devil indeed left Jesus, and then angels came and ministered to Him, most likely in visible, and possibly even human form, giving Him food and whatever else His human body needed.  What a comfort this can be for us when we resist and conquer temptation!  James 4:7 tells us we can make the devil flee from us, as well, "Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you."  When he does leave us, just as there is a world of wicked and malicious spirits that fight against Christ, His church, and all believers, so there is a world of holy, blessed spirits engaged and employed for them.  Consider the following verses:

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. - Ephesians 6:12

Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons. - 1 Timothy 4:1

Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares. - Hebrews 13:2

Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation? - Hebrews 1:14

...For I tell you that in heaven their angels are always in the presence of my heavenly Father. - Matthew 18:10b

(12) Now when Jesus had heard that John was cast into prison, he departed into Galilee.

According to the other Gospels, this was not immediately after Christ was tempted, but regardless, the fact is that when He heard John the Baptist had been put in prison, He went to Galilee.

(13) And leaving Nazareth, He came and dwelt in Capernaum, which is on the sea coast, in the borders of Zebulun and Naphtali.

According to other Gospel accounts, Jesus had gone to Nazareth some time after His temptations.  Now He left Nazareth and went first to Capernaum by the sea on His way to Galilee.  Capernaum was within the borders of Zebulun and Naphtali, two tribes of the children of Israel which were located in that part of the land of Canaan.

(14) That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Isaiah the prophet, saying, (15) "The land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, by the way of the sea, beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles; (16) The people who sat in darkness saw great light; and to them who sat in the region and shadow of death, light has dawned."

Jesus going to Capernaum fulfilled a prophecy by Isaiah, who said in Isaiah 9:1-2, "...the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali...by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, in Galilee of the nations. The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light; they who dwell in the land of the shadow of death, upon them has the light shined."  Galilee was divided into upper and lower Galilee.  Upper Galilee was called Galilee of the Gentiles, because it was occupied mainly by Gentiles.  The word “Gentiles” included all who were not Jews; it meant the same as the pagan nations.  The prophecy spoke of Upper Galilee where the people walked in spiritual darkness and ignorance, and then they saw the great light of Christ.

(17) From that time Jesus began to preach and to say, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”

"From that time" refers to from the time Jesus was tempted by the devil.  It can't be said of from the time he was in Capernaum, because according to accounts in Luke 4, He had preached in Nazareth before He went to Capernaum.  It can't mean from the time that John was cast into prison, because according to John 3 and 4, He had preached and made and baptized disciples before John's imprisonment.  As soon as His combat with Satan was over, He immediately went to Galilee (Luke 4:14), and began preaching and calling disciples.  The words Jesus used are the same ones with which John the Baptist began his ministry (Matthew 3:2) which shows the complete agreement between them.

(18) And Jesus, walking by the sea of Galilee, saw two brothers, Simon called Peter, and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea, for they were fishermen.  

Capernaum was on the sea coast, and while Jesus was walking there, he saw two fishermen casting a net into the sea.  They were brothers, Simon called Peter, and Andrew.  The name "Peter" means a rock or stone, and is the same as "Cephas," seen elsewhere.  According to John 1:40-42, the brothers had had an acquaintance with Jesus before.

(19) And He said to them, "Follow Me, and I will make you fishers of men."

Peter and Andrew were poor fishermen, probably unlearned men, in that part of Galilee.  Jesus didn't walk through the city looking for more cultivated and refined men of knowledge and means.  The Lord does not see men as men see men, and often chooses the foolish and base things of this world to confound the wise (1 Corinthians 1:27-28).  He told the brothers to follow Him and He would make them fishers of men, obviously an allusion to their former calling.  Matthew Henry suggested it was to let them not be too prideful of the new honor bestowed on them, as they were still fishers; likewise not to be afraid of the new work to which they had been called, as they were still fishers, a job with which they were very familiar.  Likewise, David was called from shepherding sheep to shepherding Israel.  In order to take on this new work, the brothers had to follow Jesus, a complete diligent attendance with Him.  To preach Christ and be fishers of souls, they had to know Christ; to be able to continue His work after Him, they needed an intimate relationship with Him. 

(20) And they immediately left their nets and followed Him.  

According to John 1:37, they had followed Jesus before, but it had been as ordinary disciples, following His preaching, but still employed in their trade or calling.  Jesus was now calling them to a close and constant attendance, and they would have to leave their trade.  They immediately left their nets and followed Him.  Because the brothers had been disciples of John the Baptist, and had met Jesus, they were probably more receptive to following Him.  That is symbolic of how Christ often calls us, by degrees.  He often softens and prepares our hearts before we ultimately embrace Him.

(21) And going on from there, He saw two other brothers, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, in a ship with Zebedee their father, mending their nets, and He called them.

Going on from where He called Peter and Andrew, He saw two other brothers, James and John, in a boat with their father, Zebedee.  They were also fishermen, mending their nets, getting them ready to use.  Jesus called them to follow Him.

(22) And they immediately left the ship and their father, and followed Him.

James and John also immediately left all behind, including their father, and followed Jesus.  Every Christian must love Christ more than he or she loves anything or anyone.  James and John may have also followed Jesus before as ordinary disciples, but were now being called to follow Him wholeheartedly, devoted to the ministry of Christ.

(23) And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people.

Jesus went about through all of Galilee.  He didn't summon and wait for people to come to Him, but went to the people in their synagogues, to teach them and preach about the good news for lost sinners that grace and glory were available to them through the Messiah who had come.  He healed all manner of sickness and disease, serving to confirm His doctrine, to demonstrate that the Son of Man came to save people and not destroy them, and to strengthen faith in their heavenly Father's love for them.

(24) And His fame went throughout all Syria; and they brought to Him all sick people who were afflicted with various diseases and torments, and those who were possessed with devils, those who were lunatic, and those who had palsy, and He healed them.

Evidently, the exact boundaries of Syria during the time of Christ is not exactly known, but I believe the sense here is that the fame of Jesus went far and wide beyond the Holy Land and the Jews.  The people both near and from these far away places brought all sorts of diseased people, and those with torments, like demon-possession, insanity, and paralysis, and Jesus healed them.

(25) And great multitudes of people followed Him, from Galilee, Decapolis, Jerusalem, Judea, and beyond the Jordan.

Great multitudes of people followed Jesus who had heard Him and seen His miracles, or had heard of Him and His message and miracles.  People from Galilee followed Him, as well as from other regions.  Decapolis was a region east of the Jordan River named for ten cities within it.  People from there, Jerusalem, Judea, and even beyond the Jordan River followed Him.  

In summary, Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist in the last chapter, and God's Spirit descended on Him and He proclaimed Him His son.  Immediately afterward, He was tempted by the devil, and conquering him, He began His ministry.  He gathered four disciples and went all about Galilee, teaching, preaching, and healing the sick and tormented.  His fame went far and wide.

John the Baptist, and the Baptism of Jesus

Continuing a study of the Gospels:

(Matthew 3:1) In those days John the Baptist came preaching in the wilderness of Judea.

Here "those days" refers to the time of Christ.  Matthew Henry, in his Commentary on the Whole Bible, wrote that there had not been a prophet since Malachi, some 400 years earlier than the time of Christ.  Indeed, Malachi, in Malachi 3:1, had prophesied the coming of John the Baptist in the days of Jesus:  "Behold, I will send My messenger, and he shall prepare the way before Me, and the Lord, whom you seek, shall suddenly come to His temple, even the Messenger of the covenant, whom you delight in; behold, He shall come, says the LORD of hosts."  Now in Matthew 3:1, here came John the Baptist, preaching:

(2) And saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!”

John's message was to repent; the original Greek word used was "metanoeo", meaning "to think differently, reconsider (morally to feel compunction)".  The state of the Jews at that time was very corrupt.  Many were righteous in their own eyes and felt they needed no repentance, but here John called all to repent because the kingdom of heaven was at hand.  This kingdom of heaven was not that glorious kingdom of God in another world, heaven, but the kingdom of the Messiah was here.  God was about to erect His kingdom on earth as prophesied by Daniel in Daniel 2:44, "And in the days of these kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever."  It was not really a physical kingdom on earth, but rather a spiritual kingdom coming to earth.  The covenant of grace, the opening of the kingdom of heaven to all believers, by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, had come to earth through the birth of Jesus.  This was to be a kingdom of which Christ was sovereign, and all must be the willing, loyal subjects of it, by repentance.  

(3) For this is he who was spoken of by the prophet Isaiah, saying, "The voice of one crying in the wilderness, 'Prepare the way of the Lord, make His paths straight.'"

Matthew explained that this John the Baptist was the one who had been prophesied by Isaiah in Isaiah 40:3, "The voice of one crying in the wilderness, 'Prepare the way of the LORD; make straight in the desert a highway for our God.'"  It was said of John before he was born that he was to prepare the way for the Lord, preparing the people for the coming of their Messiah.

(4) And the same John had his clothing of camel's hair, and a leather belt around his waist; and his food was locusts and wild honey.

Matthew went on to describe John the Baptist.  He wore clothing of camel's hair, which was surely an undressed camel skin with hair, as later we are told in scripture that he did not wear soft clothing, camel hair that had been softened and dressed or spun into soft wool.  Matthew Henry commented on John's "garb", "The garb in which he appeared, the figure he made, and the manner of his life. They, who expected the Messiah as a temporal prince, would think that his forerunner must come in great pomp and splendour, that his equipage should be very magnificent and gay; but it proves quite contrary; he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, but mean in the eyes of the world..."  Just as 1 Corinthians 1:27-28 told us, "God has chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God has chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; and the base things of the world and the things which are despised God has chosen, and the things which are not, to bring to nothing the things that are."  I think the significance of his diet was to suggest it was plain and was what was available to him in the wilderness.  Albert Barnes, in his Notes on the Bible, took it a step further and declared that, "Among the Greeks the vilest of the people used to eat them (locusts); and the fact that John made his food of them is significant of his great poverty and humble life."  It would also add to the notion that God used the base things and things that are despised.

(5) Then Jerusalem, all Judea, and all the region around the Jordan went out to him.

Great multitudes of people from Jerusalem, all parts of Judea, and from all the region around the Jordan River went out to see John the Baptist, and to hear the message he preached.

(6) And were baptized of him in the Jordan, confessing their sins.  

Not only did all these people go out to see and hear him, but they confessed their sins, desiring to repent as John had called them to do, and were baptized by him in the Jordan River.

(7) But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said to them, "O generation of vipers, who has warned you to flee from the wrath to come?"

The Pharisees were a sect of Jews who derived their name from "parash" meaning "to separate".  They separated themselves from the rest of their countrymen, and devoted themselves to a strict interpretation of the law that they felt made them justified in their self-righteousness, and they looked down upon the common people.  The Sadducees took their name from Sadok, who was just as legalistic, but apparently not believing in any future reward or resurrection, just following God's law.  They were deists and materialists who believed there was no spiritual influence of God on His people, and they endeavored to secure worldly rewards, wealth and high office.  When the Pharisees and Sadducees came to John's baptism, it is interesting that he did not greet them with the same offering as the other people to come, repent, and be baptized.  He called them by the same name that Jesus would later use, a generation of vipers, the serpent's seed of their father the devil.  Though they thought themselves to be holy and above reproach, John called out their true character.  Being they were so self-righteous, John asked them who or what could have persuaded them to seek escape from the wrath to come, divine punishment.

(8) “Therefore bring forth fruits worthy of repentance."

John told the Pharisees and Sadducees to show the evidence that they were sincere in their desire to repent.

(9) “And do not think to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ For I say to you that God is able to raise up children to Abraham from these stones."

Furthermore, John warned them not to think just because they were descendants of Abraham, that made them righteous.  That was of small matter in the eyes of God; He could raise up stones to be more worthy descendants of Abraham than those self-righteous, hypocritical descendants.

(10) "And now also the axe is laid to the root of the trees; therefore every tree which does not bring forth good fruit is cut down, and cast into the fire."

He told them the axe was laid to the root of the trees, meaning they were about to be cut down; the time was very near.  Every person who did not bring forth the fruit of true repentance would be cut down and cast into an eternal fire, not being good for fruit, but only for fuel. 

(11) “I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who comes after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire."

John admitted that he baptized people in water upon their repentance, but the One he was preparing the way for, Who would come after him, was mightier than he was.  John said He was so great that he was not worthy to even carry His shoes.  It was He who would baptize with the Holy Spirit and fire.  It was only through Him that real baptism of souls could take place, pouring the Holy Spirit upon His people.  John's baptism with water was only an outward sign that people had repented and desired Christ.  It was through Christ alone and His sending of the Holy Spirit that the souls of people were truly baptized and then led by the Holy Spirit to become anew.

(12) "Whose fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly purge His floor, and gather His wheat into the granary, but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire."

Continuing a description of the One who would come after him, John described Him as having a fan, or more precisely, a winnowing fork used to throw or fan the grain in the air to separate the chaff from the grain.  He would thoroughly clean His threshing floor, His floor being the world He came to save.  He would gather His people into safety and everlasting life, but the chaff, those who would reject Him, He would burn with an unquenchable fire, one that could never be extinguished by man.

(13) Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to John to be baptized by him.

After John had spent some time preaching repentance and baptizing people, Jesus came from Galilee to John at the Jordan River, seeking to be baptized by him.  

(14) But John forbade Him, saying, "I need to be baptized by You, and You come to me?”

One can only imagine John's surprise at this.  He had stated He was not even worthy enough to carry Jesus's shoes, yet Jesus came to him for baptism.  He opposed this, saying he was in need to be baptized by Jesus, and it didn't make sense to him that Jesus would come to him.

(15) And Jesus answering said to him, “Permit it to be so now, for thus it becomes us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he allowed Him.

Jesus, who had no need for repentance or baptism, told John to let it be that way for that moment in time.  Christ was at that time in a state of humiliation; He had emptied Himself and made Himself of no reputation (Philippians 2:7), made in the likeness of sinful flesh (Romans 8:3).  He would be baptized by John, as if He needed to be washed, and He was made sin for us, though He knew no sin (2 Corinthians 5:21).  Jesus said it was fitting that they should fulfill all God's righteous laws, or perhaps He meant it was proper at that time because the time had not yet come that He baptize with the Holy Spirit.  This reason satisfied John and he baptized Jesus.

(16) And Jesus, when he was baptized, came up immediately out of the water; and lo, the heavens were opened to Him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on Him.

When Jesus was baptized and had come up out of the water, immediately the heavens opened, a visible sign seen by John and upon Jesus, and John saw the Spirit of God descend like a dove and light on Jesus.  Luke 3:22 says that the Holy Spirit descended in bodily shape like a dove.  Whether it was actually a dove or not, it was certainly a visible likeness and motion as of a dove that John could see land on Jesus.

(17) And lo, a voice from heaven, saying, "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased."

At the moment the Holy Spirit lit on Jesus, a voice came from heaven, God declaring that this Jesus was His beloved Son, in Whom He was well pleased.  God had been displeased with His people who all sinned and fell short (Romans 3:23).  God was very pleased with His son of man, in whom His plan of salvation for His people would be fulfilled.  At this moment in time, there was evidence of all three forms of God simultaneously--God the Father in heaven speaking, God the Holy Spirit descending in a visible bodily form, and God the Son, God in human form born of woman.  

The Child Jesus

Continuing a study of the Gospels:

(Matthew 2:1) Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem, (2) Saying, “Where is He who has been born King of the Jews? For we have seen His star in the East and have come to worship Him.”

Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, so called because there was another Bethlehem in the tribe of Zebulon.  This Bethlehem was a small town about six miles south of Jerusalem.  Jesus was born during the reign of Herod, called Herod the Great, the first with that name.  After His birth there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem inquiring about the newborn King of the Jews.  The ancient historians write that during this time there was a prevalent expectation that some remarkable person was about to appear.  The Jews were looking for their Messiah, but they expected Him to arrive as a king who would deliver them from their Roman bondage.  This expectation spread to other countries, so it was natural that these wise men should come looking for a king.  These wise men who came to Jerusalem had seen a remarkable star all the way from where they had been in the east, which they took to mean an extraordinary person had been born in Judea.  They came seeking to worship the newborn King as a king, not as God, but as honoring an earthly king.  It is interesting to note that men came from afar to see this king because they had known the expectation of Him, but the Jews closest to the event did not seem to take much notice.  

(3) When Herod the king heard this, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him.

When Herod the king heard about these wise men seeing an extraordinary star and coming to see the newborn King of the Jews, he was very much troubled, for he was a foreigner who had taken the kingdom by force.  He would certainly have been alarmed at the news of a remarkable appearance of a star that would prove that indeed a new King was born and would depose him.  All Jerusalem was troubled, as well, Herod's friends and supporters for the same reason Herod was troubled, but the rest of Jerusalem probably just feared what Herod might do that might result in war or some other sort of commotion.

(4) And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born.

After hearing the news, he gathered all the chief priests, and scribes who were men learned in the law, and demanded they tell him where this Christ was to be born. 

(5) And they said to him, "In Bethlehem of Judea, for thus it is written by the prophet, (6) 'And you Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are not the least among the princes of Judah, for out of you shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel.'"

The chief priests and scribes told Herod that Christ was to be born in Bethlehem of Judea, referencing the prophecy of Micah, which literally read in Micah 5:2, "But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of you shall He come forth to Me who is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting."  The priests and scribes called the coming Christ a Governor, and the word literally meant "leader"; they said He would rule His people, and the word translated as "rule", "poimaino", was a form of the word "shepherd", and literally meant to tend or feed the flock.

(7) Then Herod, when he had privately called the wise men, enquired of them diligently what time the star appeared.

Then Herod summoned the wise men who had come from the east seeking the newborn king, and met with them secretly.  He asked them exactly when the star had appeared.  The scripture says he diligently inquired, meaning he must have taken great pains to determine the exact time.

(8) And he sent them to Bethlehem and said, “Go and search diligently for the young child, and when you have found him, bring back word to me, that I may come and worship him also.”

Herod then sent the wise men to Bethlehem, where the birth of the newborn king they had originally inquired about, was to have been.  He told them to search diligently for the child, and when they had found him, return to him and tell him where they had found the child, so that he might also go and worship the child; at least that is what he told them.

(9) When they had heard the king, they departed; and, lo, the star, which they saw in the east, went before them, till it came and stood over where the young child was.

After meeting with the king and hearing what he had to say, they departed from him, and saw the star they had seen in the east, and it went before them, guiding them to the child.  Whether the star literally moved, or it was just before them and they followed it to the place where it hung over where the child was, it was a precise guide to take them directly to the child.

(10) When they saw the star, they rejoiced with exceeding great joy.

This seems to suggest that they had lost sight of the star that had led them from the east to Jerusalem.  It seems they had gone as far as they could to Jerusalem when they had to ask for directions to the child, so when they saw that same star again, guiding them, they were overjoyed.

(11) And when they had come into the house, they saw the young Child with Mary His mother, and fell down and worshiped Him; and when they had opened their treasures, they presented to Him gifts, gold, frankincense, and myrrh.

When they reached the house that had stood under the star, the wise men went in and found the young Child with His mother, Mary.  They fell down and worshiped him, not as God, but bowing and giving homage as King of the Jews.  They presented Him with gifts, as was the custom in the east when meeting a person of distinction.  They gave Him gold, frankincense, and myrrh.  Frankincense was a very fragrant incense, and myrrh, a spice used in perfumes and medicines.  Adam Clarke, in his Commentary on the Bible, wrote that some suggested these gifts were emblematic of the divinity, regal office, and manhood of Christ.  They offered incense as to their God, gold as to their king, and myrrh as to a human body.

(12) And being warned of God in a dream that they should not return to Herod, they departed into their own country another way.

After seeing the Child and offering Him gifts, the wise men departed to return to their own country.  However, they had been warned in a dream by God not to return to Herod, so they went back another way.

(13) And when they were departed, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream, saying, "Arise, and take the young Child and His mother, and flee into Egypt, and be there until I bring you word, for Herod will seek the young Child to destroy Him."

After the wise men had left, the angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream telling him to take the Child and Mary, His mother, and flee to Egypt.  They were to remain there until God brought further word because Herod would be seeking the Child to kill Him. 

(14) When he arose, he took the young Child and His mother by night and departed into Egypt.

When Joseph awoke and rose up from his dream, he took the Child Jesus and Mary, His mother, apparently still in the night, so he had acted immediately to take them to Egypt.

(15) And was there until the death of Herod, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, "Out of Egypt have I called My Son."

Joseph, Mary, and Jesus stayed in Egypt until the death of Herod, fulfilling a prophecy spoken of the Lord through the prophet Hosea, that precisely in Hosea 11:1, read, "When Israel was a Child, then I loved Him, and called My Son out of Egypt."  The statement at the time of Hosea speaks of God bringing young Israel out of Egypt under the direction of Moses.  However, by this scripture, we understand that Hosea was actually prophesying that God would call His Son Jesus out of Egypt, and that God bringing His people out of Egypt during the exodus was symbolic of God bringing His Son out of Egypt.  So much of the Old Testament was symbolic of God's plan of sending Jesus from the beginning.

(16) Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceedingly angry, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all its coasts, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently enquired of the wise men.

Herod felt he had been mocked by the wise men when they did not return to him, and he was exceedingly angry.  He had all the children two years old and younger in Bethlehem to all its borders killed, choosing that age based on his conversation and the information he had received from the wise men regarding the time of the appearance of the star.

(17) Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying, (18) "In Ramah was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are no more."

Once again there is a fulfillment of prophecy, this time spoken by the prophet Jeremiah in Jeremiah 31:15, "Thus says the LORD, 'A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, and bitter weeping; Rachel weeping for her children refused to be comforted for her children, because they were no more.'"  Ramah was a town in the tribe of Benjamin, very near Bethlehem in the tribe of Judah.  Between these two places, and near to both of them, was the grave of Rachel, and because Ramah belonged to Benjamin, a son of hers, Rachel is here representing all the Jewish women in these parts mourning the loss of their infants in this massacre by Herod.

(19) But when Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt, (20) Saying, “Arise, take the young Child and His mother, and go to the land of Israel, for those who sought the young Child’s life are dead.”

After Herod was dead, an angel of the Lord again spoke to Joseph in a dream, telling him to return to Israel with the Child Jesus and His mother, Mary, because those who had sought to kill Jesus were dead.

(21) And he arose, and took the young Child and His mother, and came into the land of Israel.

Joseph arose from his dream and did just as the angel of the Lord had told him, and took Jesus and His mother Mary back to the land of Israel.

(22) But when he heard that Archelaus reigned in Judea in the place of his father Herod, he was afraid to go there; however, being warned of God in a dream, he turned aside to the parts of Galilee.

The angel had first told Joseph just to return to Israel, no specific place.  However, when Joseph went back to Judea from where he had come when he went to Egypt, he found Herod's son Archelaus reigning and he was afraid to stay there.  Evidently, God spoke to him in another dream, guiding him to Galilee.

(23) And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, "He shall be called a Nazarene."

Joseph brought his family to the city of Nazareth, again fulfilling a prophecy, said to be spoken by the prophets, plural, so it seemed to be a common acknowledgment that Jesus would be called a Nazarene.  The closest language of a prophecy to this seems to be before the birth of Samson, when the angel of the Lord prophesied to Samson's barren mother, “For behold, you shall conceive and bear a son. And no razor shall come upon his head, for the child shall be a Nazarite to God from the womb; and he shall begin to deliver Israel out of the hand of the Philistines” (Judges 13:5).  Again, as with so many Old Testament scriptures, the events were symbolic of the coming Christ.  Most early Biblical scholars believed the prophecy in verse 23 was more of a consensus of many prophets.  Albert Barnes, in his Notes on the Bible, wrote:

The character of the people of Nazareth was such that they were proverbially despised and contemned...(he referenced John 1:46 suggesting nothing good came out of Nazareth).  To come from Nazareth, therefore, or to be a Nazarene, was the same as to be despised, or to be esteemed of low birth; to be a root out of dry ground, having no form or comeliness. This was what had been predicted by all the prophets. When Matthew says, therefore, that the prophecies were “fulfilled,” his meaning is, that the predictions of the prophets that he would be of a low and despised condition, and would be rejected, were fully accomplished in his being an inhabitant of Nazareth, and despised as such.

Part 3 of Genealogy of Jesus Christ, and His Birth

Because Blogger only allows twenty labels per post, and all the names of Jesus's ancestors are important to note, I have divided this subject into three posts.  The genealogy began in the below linked posts:

Genealogy of Jesus Christ, Part 1

Genealogy of Jesus Christ, Part 2

Continuing the list of ancestors:

(Matthew 1:12) And after they were brought to Babylon, Jeconiah begat Salathiel, and Salathiel begat Zerubbabel.

During the Babylonian captivity, Jeconiah begat Salathiel.  There was a prophecy of Jeremiah that appeared to indicate that Jeconiah was childless, but that was not the case.  What his prophecy actually said was, "Write this man childless, a man who shall not prosper in his days, for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah" (Jeremiah 22:30).  What Jeremiah was actually saying that the Lord had said, was to consider Jeconiah childless for no descendant of his would sit on the throne of David, and in fact, Jeconiah was the last king of Judah until the King Messiah came.  Once again a grandson is called a son, as Salathiel's son was Pedaiah, and Pedaiah begat Zerubbabel.

(13) And Zerubbabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor.

Zerubbabel is said to be the father of Abiud, although in 1 Chronicles 3:19, Abiud is not listed as a son among the list of Zerubbabel's children.  It is believed that Abiud was the same as Meshullam who was among the names in that verse in 1 Chronicles.  Often people went by two different names in Biblical times, and that was definitely seen during the Babylonian captivity as with the case of Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego (Daniel 1:7), where they had different names in Babylon than their names in Judea.  Abiud begat Eliakim, and Eliakim begat Azor.

(14) And Azor begat Zadok; and Zadok begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud; (15) And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob; (16) And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

The descendant line continues down to Joseph, the husband of Mary.  These names are of probably so little note and not otherwise mentioned because they were not kings.  It is interesting that the ancestors of Joseph were said to have produced Jesus, when Jesus was actually not the son of Joseph, but the son of God.  However, Mary was of the same tribe and family as Joseph, so that, both by His mother and by His supposed father, He was of the house of David; and Jews always reckoned their genealogies by the males.  It is also interesting to note that verse 16 does not say "begat" as in all the previous verses.  Jesus was born of Mary, but He was not begotten of natural generation.

(17) So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations.

Matthew summed up all the generations from Abraham to Jesus into three 14 generation groups.  Although there are in fact, not exactly 14, 14, and 14, especially with some grandsons being called sons, this was Matthew's way of separating the generations into three distinct periods.  From Abraham to David, there was the family of David rising, the patriarchs, prophets, and judges (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judah, Pharez, Hezron, Aram, Amminadab, Nahshon, Salmon, Boaz, Obed, Jesse, and David).  From David to Josiah, the family of David was flourishing as kings (David, Solomon, Rehoboam, Abijah, Asa, Jehoshaphat, Jehoram, Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, Hezekiah, Manasseh, Amon, and Josiah).  From Josiah to Joseph, the family of David declined (Josiah, Jeconiah, Salathiel, Zerubbabel, Abiud, Eliakim, Azor, Zadok, Achim, Eliud, Eleazar, Matthan, Jacob, and Joseph), and dwindled into the family of a poor carpenter, Joseph, and then came Jesus Christ, the glory of His people Israel.

(18) Now the birth of Jesus Christ was in this way: When his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Spirit.

Upon finishing the genealogy of Jesus Christ, Matthew turned to the events leading up to His birth.  His mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, but they were not yet married and living together as husband and wife, when Mary was found to be with child of the Holy Spirit.  However, it was not immediately known that the child was of the Holy Spirit.

(19) Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privately.

Joseph, Mary's betrothed and called her husband according to Jewish law, was a just man, and not willing to make public her pregnancy, but also apparently not willing to keep her as his wife because he was probably a strict observer of the law, being a just man, and he had planned to divorce her secretly.

(20) But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, "Joseph, you son of David, fear not to take Mary as your wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. (21) And she shall bring forth a son, and you shall call His name JESUS, for He shall save His people from their sins."

While Joseph was pondering what he might do about pregnant Mary, an angel or messenger of the Lord came to him in a dream, calling him a son of David, and told him not to fear taking Mary as his wife, because the child conceived in her was of the Holy Spirit.  That was quite a fantastic thing, so it had to be of the Holy Spirit that Joseph was able to accept that fact.  The angel went on to tell him that he would name the child Jesus, literally Iesous, which in Hebrew was Yehoshua, which meant "Jehovah saved".  The reason He should have that name, the angel explained, was because He would save His people from their sins.

(22) Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, (23) "Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call His name Immanuel, which being interpreted is, 'God with us'."

All this came about to fulfill the prophecy of Isaiah, in Isaiah 7:14, which was that the Lord Himself would give them a sign when a virgin conceived and bore a son and called Him Immanuel, which literally meant "God with us", a symbolic name indicative of the fact that He would indeed be God with us.  The fact that Matthew stated the child's name was to be Jesus, and Isaiah said it would be Immanuel is not to be considered a contradiction.  Isaiah went on to prophesy that He would have many other names, Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, and Prince of Peace.  All these names, including God With Us, are names that are characteristics of Jesus.  "They shall call His name Immanuel" referred to one of many names people would call Jesus, indicating He was God among us in this world.  Shiloh, as discussed previously, was another characteristic name of Jesus.

(24) Then Joseph, being aroused from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him and took to him his wife, (25) And did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn Son; and he called His name JESUS.

When Joseph awoke from his dream, he did as the angel of the Lord had told him, and took Mary to be his wife.  However, he did not know her intimately until after she had brought forth her firstborn son.  This act, or lack thereof, also fulfilled the prophecy that a virgin would bring forth a son.  Not only was she a virgin when she conceived, but Mary was a virgin when she brought forth her firstborn son, Jesus.

Genealogy of Jesus Christ, Part 2

Because Blogger only allows twenty labels per post, and all the names of Jesus's ancestors are important to note, I have divided this subject into three posts.  The genealogy began in the below linked post:

Genealogy of Jesus Christ, Part 1

Continuing the list of ancestors:

(Matthew 1:6) And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her who had been the wife of Uriah.

David was the youngest of Jesse's sons, despised by his brothers, yet God chose him and anointed him to be king, and set him on the throne of Israel, which was symbolic of the coming king Messiah.  Other kings are named in this genealogy, but only David is noted as "the king", because to him was given the promise of the kingdom of the Messiah, Who was said to inherit the throne of His father David (Luke 1:32).  David had taken Bathsheba, the wife of another man, Uriah, and committed adultery with her.  The child from that first encounter died, but Bathsheba, as later David's wife, bore Solomon.

(7) And Solomon begat Rehoboam, and Rehoboam begat Abijah, and Abijah begat Asa.

Solomon's son Rehoboam succeeded him as king; then Rehoboam's son Abijah ruled; and Abijah's son was King Asa.  Matthew Henry, in his Commentary on the Whole Bible, pointed out there was quite a mixture of good and bad in the succession of these kings; wicked Rehoboam begat wicked Abijah, and wicked Abijah begat good Asa, and the good and bad continued down the line.  Henry noted, "Grace does not run in the blood, neither does reigning sin. God's grace is his own, and he gives or withholds it as he pleases."

(8) And Asa begat Jehoshaphat; and Jehoshaphat begat Jehoram; and Jehoram begat Uzziah.

Good king Asa begat good Jehoshaphat, and Jehoshaphat begat wicked Jehoram.  Then there were actually three names left out of the succession--Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziah.  As with many instances in scripture, Jehoram said to beget Uzziah simply means Uzziah descended directly from Jehoram, which is all that is necessary to prove the lineage of David to the Messiah.  The commentators I study offer different explanations of this.  One plausible explanation is that they had been purposely omitted from the Jewish registers because of the curse denounced on Ahab's family, into which Jehoram married, whose idolatry was punished to the third or fourth generation.  Their omission doesn't change the fact that Uzziah was a direct descendant of Jehoram.

(9) And Uzziah begat Jotham; and Jotham begat Ahaz; and Ahaz begat Hezekiah.

From Uzziah came Jotham, and Jotham begat Ahaz, to whom was given a great prophecy of the coming Messiah, “Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel" (Isaiah 7:14).  The son of Ahaz was Hezekiah.

(10) And Hezekiah begat Manasseh, and Manasseh begat Amon, and Amon begat Josiah.

Manasseh, a wicked king, was the son of Hezekiah, and his son was Amon, very wicked, as well.  Amon's son was Josiah, a pious king who had been prophesied of by name hundreds of years before his birth (1 Kings 13:2).

(11) And Josiah begat Jeconiah and his brothers about the time they were carried away to Babylon.

Jeconiah was actually the grandson of Josiah, his father being Josiah's son Jehoiakim.  His brothers were actually his uncles, sons of Josiah.  As often the case in scripture, because they all directly descended from Josiah, they are called sons.  The Babylonian captivity occurred during the lifetime of Jeconiah and his uncles.

Again because Blogger limits the number of labels per post, I will continue in the next post:

Part 3 of Genealogy of Jesus Christ, and His Birth

Genealogy of Jesus Christ, Part 1

I have been challenged to stop my current chronological Bible study and study only what Jesus said.  Although I feel like God gave us the entire Bible for a reason, and those who pick and choose only the parts they like are "...according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables" (2 Timothy 4:3-4).  The argument was that Jesus fulfilled the law, meaning there is no more law, and the letters can't be trusted because they were just written by men who were only writing their interpretation of what it was to follow Christ.  Only Jesus's words mattered, and Jesus never said anything about homosexuality or abortion or transgenderism or much of any of today's cultural issues.  (Never mind the fact that men wrote down what Jesus said.)  However, I accepted the challenge.  I know that regardless of any arguments, I will learn a lot from the words of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

(Matthew 1:1) The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham: 

The first verse of Matthew acts as a sort of title for what was to follow:  The genealogy of Jesus Christ, Son of David, and Son of Abraham.  Jesus came from the line of David and Abraham.  It had been promised to Abraham that the Christ should descend from him, "...in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed" (Genesis 12:3), and, "In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice" (Genesis 22:18).  There is only One who could bless every family of every nation on earth, and that is Jesus Christ.  The prophecy was also made to David and by David, "When your days are fulfilled and you rest with your fathers, I will set up your seed after you, who will come from your body, and I will establish His kingdom" (2 Samuel 7:12), and, "The LORD has sworn in truth to David; He will not turn from it, 'I will set upon your throne the fruit of your body'" (Psalm 132:11).

(2) Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judah and his brothers.

Abraham's son was Isaac, and from Isaac came Jacob, and from Jacob came Judah.  There were also prophecies about Jesus (Shiloh) being descended from Judah, one being, "The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be" (Genesis 49:10).  The meaning of Shiloh was "tranquility, safety" and both of those describe the Messiah who would make peace between God and men, and would save men from their sins.  Another prophecy is, "Yet Judah prevailed over his brothers, and from him came the chief ruler, although the birthright was Joseph’s" (1 Chronicles 5:2).  Jesus is called the Lion of Judah:  "And one of the elders said to me, 'Weep not; behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has prevailed to open the book, and to loose its seven seals'" (Revelation 5:5).  Also of note about Judah, as well as other of Jesus's ancestors like Jacob, David, and others, the ancestor was often a younger brother, demonstrating that the preeminence of Christ did not come from the primogeniture of His ancestors, as earthly princes did, but from the will of God.

(3) Judah begat Pharez and Zerah by Tamar, Pharez begat Hezron, and Hezron begat Aram.

Judah had twins Pharez and Zerah by Tamar, his daughter-in-law, and Jesus descended from Pharez through his son Hezron, and Hezron's son Aram, called Ram in the Old Testament.  It is interesting to note that Tamar was actually an adulteress and played a prostitute to seduce her father-in-law, although when you read her entire story, she was deemed more righteous than Judah.  Bathsheba, also in the line of Christ, as David's wife, was an adulteress.  Rahab, also an ancestor of Christ, was a Canaanite harlot.  In Deuteronomy 23, we just learned that descendants of an illegitimate child were forbidden from ever entering "into the congregation of the Lord", yet God sent "His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh" (Romans 8:3). Additionally, Ruth, also in the line of Christ, was a Moabitess, and we were also told in Deuteronomy 23 that a Moabite was forbidden from entering into the congregation of the Lord.  However, there came Jesus Christ, the Messiah, as prophesied in Isaiah 56, through whom God would give to all such imperfect sinful people in His house and within His walls "a place and a name better than that of sons and daughters." 

(4) And Aram begat Amminadab; and Amminadab begat Nahshon; and Nahshon begat Salmon.

Aram's son was Amminadab, and Amminadab's son was Nahshon, who was named prince of the tribe of Judah in the book of Numbers.  Nahshon fathered Salmon.

(5) And Salmon begat Boaz by Rahab, and Boaz begat Obed by Ruth, and Obed begat Jesse.

Salmon and Rahab, the Canaanite harlot who was justified by works when she received the Israelite spies into her house and sent them out a secret way (Joshua 2, James 2:25), brought forth Boaz.  Boaz married Ruth, the Moabitess, and they begat Obed, who was the father of Jesse.  John Wesley, in his Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible, pointed out that "Salmon, Boaz, and Obed, must each of them have been near a hundred years old, at the birth of his son here recorded."  Wesley suggested that it was owing to "the providence of God (that) was peculiarly shown in this."  However, Dr. John Gill, in his Exposition of the Entire Bible, wrote that "Jesse is thought to be, not the immediate son of Obed, but to be of the fourth generation from him; though no others are mentioned between them in Ruth, any more than here.  A Jewish writer observes, that 'the wise men of the Gentiles say, that there were other generations between them; perhaps,' says he, 'they have taken this from the wise men of Israel, and so it is thought.'"  Even if this were true, Jesse may be said to be begotten by Obed, just as others in scripture are said to be sons when in fact they might have been grandsons or great-grandsons.  We can be sure that Jesse was a direct descendant of Obed.

I will stop this post with this, as Blogger only allows twenty labels per post, and all these names of Jesus's direct ancestors are important to note.  The genealogy of Jesus is continued in the next post:

Genealogy of Jesus Christ, Part 2

Laws of Divorce and of Justice and Generosity

Continuing a chronological Bible study:

(Deuteronomy 24:1) "When a man has taken a wife and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favor in his eyes, because he has found some uncleanness in her, then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house."

Moses continued reviewing God's laws as he had been doing in most all of the book of Deuteronomy.  Here he began the subject of divorce which was allowed by God's law, although certainly not what He preferred.  Matthew 19:8 quotes Jesus as saying Moses gave this law because of the hardness of men's hearts, but that from the beginning it was not so.  When a man had married a woman and later found no favor in her because of some uncleanness he found in her, he could write a bill of divorcement from her.  It seems clear here that God did not approve of frivolous divorce just because the man no longer liked his wife, and preferred another.  There had to be a just cause, some uncleanness in her, which might be something dishonest or wicked.  However, the law does seem to give great latitude of meaning to the man, and perhaps the uncleanness could mean something more trivial that the man could not tolerate.  If it was so disagreeable to him that he became ill-natured and even cruel to his wife, then divorce was permitted and might even be better for the woman than to expose her to her husband's anger that might even put her life in danger.  The man was allowed to give his wife a bill of divorcement and send her out of his house.

(2) "And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife."

With her bill of divorcement, the woman was free to marry another man.

(3) "And if the latter husband hates her and writes her a bill of divorcement, and gives it in her hand and sends her out of his house; or if the latter husband dies, who took her to be his wife, (4) Her former husband who sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife after she is defiled, for that is abomination before the LORD; and you shall not cause the land to sin, which the LORD your God gives you for an inheritance."

If the woman's second husband detested the woman as well, and wrote her a bill of divorcement and sent her out of his house, or if the second husband died, leaving her a widow, the first husband was forbidden to take her again as his wife because she had been defiled by another man.  The meaning could also be that because she had been considered unclean to him when he divorced her, taking her back would be considered defiling his house once again with her.  The divorced woman was allowed to marry again, and that second husband apparently was not seen as defiling his house with her, but if the first husband took her again, he was committing abomination before the Lord.  This can only be seen as a determent to men from frivolously divorcing their wives from the sacred union God held in high regard; acting thusly would cause sin throughout their promised land.

(5) “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 shall cheer up his wife which he has taken."

When a man had married a wife, he was not to be called to war or charged with any business that would take him away from his wife for the first year of their marriage.  He was to be free at home with his new wife to rejoice with her and build a loving and lasting relationship that could later withstand necessary separation. 

(6) “No man shall take the lower or the upper millstone in pledge, for he takes a man's living in pledge."

This most likely refers to a pledge for security of money lent.  The children of Israel were forbidden to take something as collateral that would prevent a man from making a living.  Even taking just part of the necessary tools as taking only one of a pair of millstones, if it would prevent the borrower from making a living, it was forbidden.

(7) "If a man be found stealing any of his brethren of the children of Israel, and makes merchandise of him, or sells him, then that thief shall die; and you shall put evil away from among you."

If a man was found stealing any of his Israelite brethren, whether it be a child or a woman or a servant, to sell the person or sell the services of that person, the person stealing was to be put to death.  That way the children of Israel would put the evil one away as well as the evil deed by inflicting punishment upon it and deterring others from such practices.

(8) "Take heed in the plague of leprosy, that you observe diligently, and do according to all that the priests the Levites shall teach you; as I commanded them, so you shall observe to do."

The people were cautioned to carefully observe the laws concerning leprosy, including leprosy in houses and garments, as well as in people.  They were to do all and exactly what the priests told them to do regarding it.  Moses would teach the priests what God would have them do, and in turn, the people were required to do what the priest told them as they had learned.

(9) “Remember what the LORD your God did to Miriam on the way after you had come forth out of Egypt."

Moses exhorted the people to remember the case of Miriam, Moses's sister, when God struck her with leprosy for quarreling with Moses.  Not only should that be a reminder against entertaining thoughts of usurping God's ordained authorities, but as it relates to leprosy itself, if even a prophetess and the sister of Moses was not exempted from the severe discipline required in the leprosy law, so would all the people be required to adhere precisely to the law.

(10) “When you lend your brother anything, you shall not go into his house to fetch his pledge. (11) You shall stand outside, and the man to whom you lend shall bring the pledge out to you."

In verse 6, Moses had taught that a man lending to his brother was never to take the borrower's livelihood as pledge or collateral.  Likewise, the lender was not to go into the borrower's house to fetch whatever he wanted in pledge.  He was to wait outside the man's house and accept whatever the borrower could spare.  This law provided for dignity and protection for the borrower.  As the proverb in chapter 22, verse 7 stated, "...the borrower is servant to the lender."  This law prevented abuse by the lender to the borrower, but taught consideration of the comfort and subsistence of others.

(12) “And if the man is poor, you shall not sleep with his pledge. (13) In any case you shall deliver him the pledge 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."

If the borrower was terribly poor, the lender was not to keep his pledge overnight.  The law seems to refer specifically to the borrower's bedclothes when it speaks of allowing the borrower to have his garment returned so that he might sleep in it overnight, but it could be returned again to the lender the next day.  I believe this law would pertain to anything that the borrower parted with that might cause him great distress and discomfort to be without for the night.  Again this taught kindness and consideration for the poor, a kindness that would be so appreciated by the poor borrower that he would praise God for his kindness and mercy and seek blessings for him, and that merciful act would be considered righteousness to God.

(14) “You shall not oppress a hired servant who is poor and needy, whether one of your brethren or one of the strangers who are in your land within your gates. (15) At his day you shall give him his hire; neither shall the sun go down on it, for he is poor, and sets his heart upon it, lest he cry against you to the LORD, and it be sin to you."

The children of Israel were forbidden to oppress a hired servant who was poor and needy, whether a fellow Israelite or a stranger who lived within their gates.  He was to be given his wage at the end of each day of his hire, because he was so poor and his heart was set upon receiving it for his needs.  If the hired servant cried out to the Lord in desperation because he had not received the wage he was so desperately counting on, it would be considered sin against the man who had withheld it.

(16) "The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers; every man shall be put to death for his own sin."

The commandment to the children of Israel was that parents should never be put to death for the capital sins of their children; neither should children be put to death for the sins of their parents, if they were innocent.  Every man was to be put to death for his own sin only.  This does not contradict what a sovereign God might do, as stated in Exodus 20:5 when God said He would visit the iniquity of the fathers unto the children unto the third and fourth generations of those who hated Him.  Their Lord could pronounce whatever judgment He found to be just, and He could show mercy to those whom He wished, but He did not allow mortal men to make such judgments.

(17) “You shall not pervert the judgment of the stranger, nor of the fatherless, nor take a widow's garment as pledge. (18) 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."

The Israelites were forbidden to pervert justice for the strangers, fatherless, and widows, as they were not able to defend themselves.  They were to remember that they had once been slaves in Egypt and in dire distress, and their Lord had redeemed them from there.  Therefore the Lord commanded they show like mercy to those less fortunate.

(19) “When you cut down your harvest in your field, and have forgotten a sheaf in the field, you shall not go back to fetch 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."

In many ways the rich were commanded to be charitable to the poor.  In this case they were forbidden to go back and gather gleanings from their fields after harvest.  Those were to be left for the poor, the strangers, the fatherless, and the widows.  Again this merciful act would be considered righteous in the eyes of the Lord and He would bless all the work of their hands.

(20) “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. (21) 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.

Likewise, the people were not to go back over their olive trees to beat them again for the last remaining olives, nor gather the gleanings of their vineyards, but were to leave those for the poor, the fatherless, the widow, and the stranger.

(22) “And you shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt; therefore I command you to do this thing."

Once again the people were commanded to perform these acts of mercy because they had once been slaves in Egypt, and their Lord had blessed them; so must they bless others.  I am struck by how many of these laws sought to teach mercy and generosity--that Golden Rule, loving their neighbors as themselves, doing to them as they would like to have done to them, as the Lord often reminded them, as when they were captives in Egypt.

Sanctity, Purity, and Rights and Duties of Citizenship

Continuing a chronological Bible study:

(Deuteronomy 23:1) "He who is wounded in the stones, or has his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD."

Most of the book of Deuteronomy up to this point has been a speech of Moses reviewing the laws of God.  He continued in this chapter.  A man who had been wounded in the testes or had his penis cut off could not enter into the congregation of the Lord.  This is a description of what was called a eunuch in the Bible.  Biblical scholars have mixed views on what exactly is meant by entering "into the congregation of the Lord."  Many thought it must only refer to holding office or having high honor in Israel, because it didn't seem likely that a man who might have been born that way would be completely cut off from the Lord.  However, it seems in keeping with the laws of purity and perfection for God's special people, that eunuchs were not allowed the same privileges as the children of Israel.  Compare Leviticus 21:17-23:

"Speak to Aaron, saying, 'Whoever he be of thy seed in their generations that hath any blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God. For any man who has a defect shall not approach: a man blind or lame, who has a disfigured face or any limb too long, a man who has a broken foot or broken hand, or is a hunchback or a dwarf, or a man who has a defect in his eye, or eczema or scab, or has his stones broken. No man of the descendants of Aaron the priest, who has a defect, shall come near to offer the offerings made by fire to the LORD. He has a defect; he shall not come near to offer the bread of his God. He may eat the bread of his God, both the most holy and the holy; only he shall not go near the veil or approach the altar, because he has a defect, lest he profane My sanctuaries; for I the LORD sanctify them.'"

That passage did refer to the tribe of Levi, the priests, so it is reasonable to assume that "the congregation of the Lord" might mean that the eunuch described in verse 1 could not come near to the Lord, but was allowed in the general congregation of Israel.  There were proselytes or converts allowed to live among the children of Israel who could partake of some of the privileges of the Israelites.  A eunuch certainly had the privileges of any proselyte.  For those who believe that it is a cruel God who would keep people with deformities who were created by Him out of His presence, I believe this is symbolic of we sinners in this fallen world who could not approach the perfect God of the universe Who cannot tolerate being in the presence of sin.  We have to have Jesus cover our sins with His perfect sacrificial blood in order to approach God.  Indeed there is a prophecy in Isaiah 56, verses 3 through 7, that tells of the time when the ban against imperfect people would be lifted by the Messiah:

"Do not let the son of the foreigner who has joined himself to the LORD speak, saying, 'The LORD has utterly separated me from His people,' nor let the eunuch say, 'Here I am, a dry tree.' For thus says the LORD, 'To the eunuchs who keep My Sabbaths, and choose what pleases Me, and hold fast My covenant, even to them I will give in My house and within My walls a place and a name better than that of sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting name that shall not be cut off. Also the sons of the foreigner who join themselves to the LORD, to serve Him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be His servants; everyone who keeps from defiling the Sabbath, and holds fast My covenant, even them I will bring to My holy mountain, and make them joyful in My house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and their sacrifices will be accepted on My altar, for My house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations.'”

Once again we see Jesus in the Old Testament!  Now back to the study of Deuteronomy 23:

(2) "A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD."

An illegitimate child was likewise forbidden to approach the presence of the Lord; even to the tenth generation of his descendants, they could not enter into the presence of the Lord.  Like the eunuch above, I am sure the illegitimate child could enjoy the privileges of a proselyte.  Also like the eunuchs and all people with deformities, there would come a time when those born of illegitimate births would also be accepted by the Lord when they accepted the sacrifice of the Messiah.  I couldn't help but take note of what importance the Lord puts on marriage and the proper family unit as He designed it, that even to the tenth generation, that illegitimate birth tainted the perfection of those who came afterward.

(3) "An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to their tenth generation shall they not enter into the congregation of the LORD forever."

The same applied to the Ammonites and Moabites, but once again, I am sure if they desired to convert to the Jewish religion, they could reside among the children of Israel as proselytes.  Note that this also states that the prohibition held till the tenth generation and then the word "forever" is added.  Ten is a number that symbolized perfection and completeness, so I believe that it is safe to assume that the Ammonite and Moabite blood that tainted the perfection of God's special people, as well as the tainted blood from an illegitimate union, would forever forbid one to enter the presence of the Lord, until the time of the Messiah, that is.

(4) “Because they did not meet you with bread and water on the road when you came out of Egypt, and because they hired against you Balaam the son of Beor from Pethor of Mesopotamia, to curse you."

The reason why the Ammonites and Moabites, who were descendants of Lot, and might otherwise be among the children of Israel, were not allowed to approach the presence of the Lord was because they did not aid the children of Israel when they came out of Egypt, and they in fact, sought to curse them by hiring Balaam.

(5) "Nevertheless the LORD your God would not listen to Balaam, but the LORD your God turned the curse into a blessing for you, because the LORD your God loves you."

Regarding Balaam, hired by the Ammonites and Moabites to curse Israel, Moses told the people that the Lord did not hearken to Balaam's curse, but turned the curse into a blessing because He loved His people so. 

(6) “You shall not seek their peace nor their prosperity all your days forever."

The children of Israel were not to ally themselves with the Ammonites and Moabites; they were to make no peace treaties or trade and commerce agreements with them.  This did not mean that they were to treat them with malice.  They should always act in kindness and live as peaceably as possible with their neighbors, but they were to make no formal agreements for peace or prosperity that required something on their part.

(7) “You shall not abhor an Edomite, for he is your brother; you shall not abhor an Egyptian, because you were a stranger in his land."

The children of Israel were not to hate the Edomites, for as descendants of Esau, they were nearest akin to Israel of all the nations, for Jacob and Esau had been twin brothers.  They were to hold no grudges against the Egyptians; they had been strangers in their land, and had partaken of one of the richest and most fruitful parts of the country.  Although they ultimately were treated harshly in Egypt, they should forgive and treat any Egyptian the way they would have wished to be treated, by God's Golden Rule.

(8) "The children who are begotten of them shall enter into the congregation of the LORD in their third generation."

The descendants of the Edomites and Egyptians were welcome to become proselytes of Israel, and by the third generation of them who had become proselytes, they were welcome to become members of the congregation.

(9) “When the army goes forth against your enemies, then keep yourself from every wicked thing."

When Israel went forth against their enemies into Canaan, they were to keep themselves pure and resist gratifying themselves with the lusts of malice, covetousness, or idolatry, etc.

(10) "If there be among you any man, who is not clean by reason of uncleanness that by chance occurred to him by night, then he shall go outside the camp; he shall not come within the camp."

From the wording "by chance...by night", this may be a reference to Leviticus 15:16 about an involuntary "seed of copulation" that might occur in the night.  Even involuntarily, a semen discharge from a man would make him unclean before the Lord, and he was to go outside the camp to keep the Israelite camp pure from all moral, ceremonial, or even natural uncleanness.

(11) “But it shall be, when evening comes on, he shall wash with water; and when the sun is down, he shall come into the camp."

After being outside the camp for that day he discovered his uncleanness from during the previous night, when evening came at the end of that day, he was to wash himself and he would be allowed back into the camp at sundown, which was actually the beginning of the next day according to the Israelite days.

(12) "You shall have a place also outside the camp, where you shall go out; (13) And you shall have a paddle among your weapons, and it shall be, when you ease yourself outside, you shall dig with it and turn back and cover that which comes from you."

There was to be a designated place outside the camp where the Israelites could go to relieve themselves.  They had a paddle or some type of implement that they used to dig a hole and cover their refuse, in order to keep their camp clean and healthy.

(14) “For the LORD your God walks in the midst of your camp, to deliver you and to give up your enemies before you; therefore your camp shall be holy, that He sees no unclean thing among you and turns away from you."

Most importantly, it was to keep their camp holy, for their Lord God dwelt among them to lead them and save them from falling into the hands of their enemies, and to, in fact, deliver their enemies into their hands.  Therefore, they were to keep Him from seeing any unclean thing in their camp which would make Him turn away from them.

(15) “You shall not deliver to his master the servant who has escaped from his master to you."

This is to be understood of the slave who was owned by one in the pagan countries they would soon be overtaking.  If the servant had fled from his master to one of the Israelites, it had to be assumed that he was either fleeing unjust oppression or desired to be among the Israelites, and he was not to be refused and sent back to his pagan master.

(16) "He shall dwell with you and among you, in the place which he chooses in one of your gates, where it seems best to him; you shall not oppress him."

This runaway servant was not to be detained in any particular place, or remanded to the custody of the one to whom he had first run, but could dwell where he wished within their gates, and he was not to be oppressed in any way.  

(17) "There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel."

The children of Israel were forbidden to become whores or sodomites.  The children of Israel were to be pure.  Prostitution was a common part of religious observances among idolatrous nations, but such a practice was not at all honoring to the God of Israel, but an abomination.

(18) “You shall not bring the hire of a whore, or the price of a dog, into the house of the LORD your God for any vow, for even both these are abomination to the LORD your God."

In this context, "dog" refers to a sodomite, the ancient scholars say.  A woman prostitute was called a whore and a male prostitute was called a dog.  Indeed, it follows that the hire of a whore refers to the one in verse 17, so the price of a dog refers to the sodomite in verse 17.  See Revelation 22:15 that obviously refers to a human dog and not an animal in its list of wicked people.  In verse 18 here, not only were the Israelites forbidden to be whores and sodomites, they must never even bring the money or any other thing that was used as payment for the services of a whore or sodomite into the house of the Lord.  Such practices were such an abomination to the Lord, even the money received by them was abomination to Him.

(19) "You shall not lend upon usury to your brother; usury of money, usury of victuals, usury of anything that is lent upon usury."

The Israelites were forbidden to charge interest or any increase on anything lent to their fellow Israelites, including money, food, or provisions, that is, anything. 

(20) "To a stranger you may lend upon usury; but to your brother you shall not lend upon usury, that the LORD your God may bless you in all that you set your hand to in the land where you go to possess it."

In further clarification, Moses told the people they could charge interest to a stranger, as they were allowed to trade and do commerce with their pagan neighbors.  However, they were never to charge interest to one of their own, as the Lord commanded, so that He would continue to bless them in all they did in their promised land they were about to go in and possess.

(21) “When you make a vow to the LORD your God, you shall not delay to pay it, for the LORD your God will surely require it of you, and it would be sin in you."

Whenever an Israelite made a vow to the Lord, whether a sacrifice or offering or even some action he vowed to perform, he was to do it right away and not delay the payment of the vow.  The Lord would require that he not lie and mock the Lord by vainly and flippantly making promises to Him that he did not keep, for that would be sin against God.

(22) “But if you forego vowing, it shall be no sin in you."

However, if a person did not make a vow, even if it was within his means to do so, there was no sin.  Of course, this referred only to freewill vows, not of those sacrifices and offerings required by law.  It was far worse to promise something to the Lord in the heat of passion and not deliver it, than to never promise anything at all.

(23) “That which has gone from your lips you shall keep and perform, a freewill offering, according as you have vowed to the LORD your God, which you have promised with your mouth."

When a freewill vow was voiced aloud to the Lord, it must be kept and performed.  This would make the children of Israel careful of not making rash vows, because once they were made, an exact and rigid performance of them was expected.

(24) “When you come into your neighbor’s vineyard, you may eat your fill of grapes at your pleasure, but you shall not put any in your container."

This law provided for the poor traveler, but was not limited to just that.  Anyone was allowed to eat from a vineyard, but was forbidden to take any grapes away for later.  It taught the children of Israel charity and hospitality for their hungry neighbors.

(25) “When you come into the standing corn of your neighbor, then you may pluck the ears with your hand, but you shall not move a sickle to your neighbor’s standing corn."

Likewise, one was allowed to pluck an ear of corn from a cornfield that did not belong to him, but he was forbidden to use a sickle to cut down stalks or to take any corn with him.  The law humanely provided for the immediate hunger of travelers, but only what could be plucked by hand and eaten at the moment.

The laws in this chapter emphasized the necessity of purity and cleanliness in order to be a part of God's special people and to be in His presence, but the last also directed God's people to be trustworthy, humane, and unselfish.

Laws of Humanity and Purity

Continuing a chronological Bible study:

(Deuteronomy 22:1) “You shall not see your brother’s ox or his sheep go astray, and hide yourself from them; you shall in any case bring them back to your brother."

Moses continued reviewing laws with the people of Israel, as he had been doing for most of the book of Deuteronomy.  Here he discussed humanity toward their brethren.  If one saw that his brother's ox or sheep had gone or been driven astray, he was not to pretend he did not notice and continue on his way, but he was to bring it back to his brother.

(2) “And if your brother is not near to you, or if you do not know him, then you shall bring it to your own house, and it shall remain with you until your brother seeks after it, and you shall restore it to him again."

In the case of strays belonging to someone far away, or if the owner was not known, they were to be brought to the finder's own house and cared for, until the owner sought after them.  The one who found the strays was to then give them back to their owner. 

(3) "In like manner shall you do with his ass, and so shall you do with his clothing; and with any lost thing of your brother's, which he has lost and you have found, you shall do likewise; you may not hide yourself."

The same applied to his donkey, his clothing, or any lost thing of his brother.  He was not to pretend he didn't see the lost thing, but was to return it to his brother or protect it until his brother came looking for it.

(4) “You shall not see your brother’s ass or his ox fall down along the way and hide yourself from them; you shall surely help him lift them up again."

Additionally, if one was to see his brother's donkey or ox fall down, he must not act as if he didn't see it and continue on his way; he was to help his brother lift the animal up again.  Basically, all these acts are summed up by the golden rule, to do unto others as we would have them do unto us.  We must act in love and help our brother in distress as we will surely need help one day and would hope someone was there to help us.

(5) "The woman shall not wear that which pertains to a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment, for all that do so are abomination to the LORD your God."

Women were not to wear men's clothing and men weren't to wear women's clothing as confusing the sexes that way was an abomination to the Lord.  This should not be understood as simply putting on the other sex's clothing for one occasion, as the warrior Deborah might have worn men's garments into battle.  Perhaps a man might dress as a woman to escape capture.  Those cases wouldn't be abomination to the Lord.  The sense is that one should not seek to alter what has been naturally and divinely established; altering the order of nature would demonstrate contempt for God's creation.  A man wearing the under clothes of a woman because it brings him sensual pleasure is a means for self-gratification rather than a deep, intimate human connection, which has been God's plan from the beginning.  In Moses's time it is likely this confusing of garments had been used to gain opportunity of committing sexual impurity, as with the case of Clodius who dressed himself like a woman that he might mingle with the Roman ladies in a feast reserved solely for women, purportedly with the intention of seducing Caesar's wife.  A woman might dress like a man to gain the attention of a woman because of homosexual desires.  These are the reasons that cross dressing would be an abomination to the Lord.  As with all God's laws, it's the heart behind the act that matters.  Jesus said in Matthew 5:27-28, "You have heard that it was said by them of old, 'You shall not commit adultery.' But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart."

(6) “If a bird’s nest happens to be before you in the way, in any tree or on the ground, with young ones or eggs, and the mother sitting on the young or on the eggs, you shall not take the mother with the young; (7) You shall surely let the mother go, and take the young for yourself, that it may be well with you and that you may prolong your days."

This is said to be the least of all the commandments of the law of Moses.  Yet, as Matthew Henry pointed out in his Commentary on the Whole Bible, "the same promise is here made to the observance of it that is made to the keeping of the fifth commandment, which is one of the greatest, that it may be well with thee, and that thou mayest prolong thy days; for as disobedience in a small matter shows a very great contempt of the law, so obedience in a small matter shows a very great regard to it."  If a bird's nest was in the way and it had to be disturbed, one was permitted to take the eggs or the young birds, but not the mother bird; she was to be allowed to fly away.  In a very practical sense, it makes good common sense, that to destroy both young and old, would make the breed soon become extinct, and destroying animal species in the land would necessarily shorten men's lives in the land that depended on animals.  From the beginning in Genesis, God gave man dominion over the animals, and after the flood, God said specifically that all animals could be used for food.  However, there are numerous scriptures against cruelty to animals.  This particular passage shows an especial tenderness by the Lord for a mother and her young as has been seen in other scriptures, such as not killing a mother and her young both in one day (Leviticus 22:28) and not boiling a kid in its mother's milk (Exodus 23:19).  Laws like these taught humanity and compassion, but I can't help but take note of what regard the Lord seems to have in these type of laws for the mother and child bond.

(8) “When you build a new house, then you shall make a parapet for your roof, that you may not bring guilt of bloodshed on your house if any man falls from it."

When the people built houses, they were to make them safe.  The roofs were generally flat in those times and were often walked upon, so there were occasions when one might fall off the roof if there wasn't a parapet or some such wall to protect against falling.  The law was said to protect against guilt of bloodshed implying that one who didn't make a parapet for his roof would indeed be guilty of a man's death who might fall off his roof and die.  The same such common sense measures are applied now, for example, covering a well or fencing around a swimming pool, so that fatal accidents be avoided. 

(9) “You shall not sow your vineyard with diverse seeds, lest the fruit of your seed which you have sown and the fruit of your vineyard be defiled."

This and the next two laws don't appear to be morally evil in themselves, but as God's people were to be pure and were not to intermarry with the heathens, so should their vineyards remain pure and not mixed.  As Matthew Henry wrote, "They must not gratify their own vanity and curiosity by putting those things together which the Creator in infinite wisdom had made asunder..."

(10) “You shall not plow with an ox and a donkey together."

The people were not to plow with an ox and a donkey yoked together.  They could use each separately, but were not to use them together.  This seems to be a very good illustration of not being unequally yoked with unbelievers, or of mingling with the unclean, as an ox with a donkey. 

(11) “You shall not wear a garment of diverse sorts, as of woolen and linen together."

Once again here is a law that seems to have no moral or ethical foundation, but would serve to teach the people to be pure and not to experiment with the mixing of fabrics.  For one thing, it's a wise and practical law because mixing fabrics that do not wash and wear in the same ways would make for ill-fitting and motley-looking garments.  Additionally, as I quoted from Matthew Henry above, it might be seen as a vain and prideful thing to mix and match colors and fabrics.

(12) “You shall make fringes upon the four quarters of your vesture, with which you cover yourself."

The Israelites were to put fringes on the four corners of their cover garments.  In Numbers 15:38-39, they were told to do this so that they might look upon the fringes as reminders of God's commandments.  Additionally, it could be for a public profession of their nation and religion, and as God's special people, they might be distinguished from other peoples.  They were called to be pure and set apart, and the previous few laws were illustrative of this.

(13) “If any man takes a wife, and goes in to her, and hates her, (14) And gives occasions of speech against her, and brings up an evil name upon her, and says, 'I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maiden,' (15) Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the evidence of the damsel's virginity to the elders of the city in the gate."

This law covers the case of a man who took a wife and was intimate with her, but then decided he didn't like her.  He then talked badly about her and accused her of not being a virgin when he married her.  It was up to the parents of the woman to bring forth the evidence of their daughter's virginity to the elders of their city.  What evidence that was is not explained here, but no doubt the people of the time understood what evidence was required to prove a daughter's virginity.

(16) "And the damsel's father shall say to the elders, 'I gave my daughter to this man as wife, and he hates her; (17) And, lo, he has given occasions of speech against her, saying, "I found your daughter not a maiden," and yet these are the tokens of my daughter's virginity.' And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city."

The father of the maiden who had been slandered would present her case to the elders and provide the evidence of her virginity.  Again, what exactly this could be is unknown, but it appears there was physical evidence that would be shown to the elders.

(18) "And the elders of that city shall take that man and punish him; (19) And they shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver, and give them to the father of the damsel, because he has brought an evil name upon a virgin of Israel, and she shall be his wife; he may not put her away all his days."

The man who lied about his wife's virginity was to be punished and fined 100 shekels of silver to be given to her father, as his lie had been injurious to the reputation of the woman's family.  The man would not be allowed to ever divorce his wife.  Dr. John Gill pointed out in his Exposition of the Entire Bible, that it was permitted within the law to divorce a wife, but the man would have to give his wife a dowry.  It appears in this case, the man sought to save himself the dowry and chose to lie and ruin her reputation.  For this evil act, the fine he paid was double what the dowry would have been, according to Dr. Gill, which seems a reasonable punishment. 

(20) “But if the thing is true, and evidences of virginity are not found for the damsel; (21) Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die, because she has wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house; so shall you put evil away from among you."

However, if it was found that the husband was telling the truth and there was found no evidence to prove his wife's virginity before their marriage, then the woman was to be brought to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city were to stone her to death.  The reason given was that she had wrought folly or foolishness in Israel.  Actually, the archaic meaning of the word folly was wickedness or wantonness, and that is more likely what is meant here.  Because she had played the whore in her father's house which is where she had been before her marriage, she was brought back to his door.  With this punishment, the children of Israel put away such evil from among them.  They literally put away the evil one in this case, and by that example, deterred other young women from such action.

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

If any man, married or unmarried, lay with a married woman, then both of them were to be put to death for the crime of adultery.  Again this was said to put away evil from Israel.

(23) “If a damsel who is a virgin is betrothed to a husband, and a man finds her in the city and lies with her, (24) Then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city, and you shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she did not cry out, being in the city; and the man, because he has humbled his neighbor's wife; so you shall put away evil from among you."

If a young virgin who was betrothed to a husband, but not yet married and the marriage not yet consummated, was found in the city and a man lay with her, and she did not cry out, indicating her consent, both the man and the woman were to be brought to the gate of that city and stoned to death.  This was seen as adultery even though the woman was not yet married.  She was promised to her husband and the man who lay with her had taken what should have been her husband's alone.  Note this was just indicated for the woman in a city.  The young woman probably shouldn't have been wandering the city alone, exposing herself to temptation.  If she was completely innocent, she would have cried out against the man trying to take advantage of her.  

(25) "But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her, then the man only that lay with her shall die."

However, if a man found a young betrothed woman in the field and he forced himself on her to lie with her, then the man only was to be put to death.  The young woman alone in a field would not be seen as curiously tempting fate, and the fact that she was alone in a field meant that there would be no one to help her if she cried out.

(26) "But to the damsel you shall do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death; as when a man rises against his neighbor and slays him, even so is this matter. (27) For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her."

Only the man who forced himself on the young woman was to be put to death.  It was to be assumed that the young woman cried out, and there was no one to save her.  Just as when a man rose up against another and killed him, only the murderer was guilty of sin, and this matter of rape was to be judged the same way. 

(28) “If a man finds a young woman who is a virgin, who is not betrothed, and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are found, (29) Then the man who lay with her shall give to the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he has humbled her, he may not put her away all his days."

If a man found a young woman who was a virgin but was not betrothed to another, and he lay with her, and they were found out, then the man was to marry the woman and give her father a dowry of fifty shekels of silver.  In this particular case, the man was not allowed to ever divorce the woman.  Although divorce was permissible in some cases, because this man had defiled the young virgin, no matter how unpleasing she might afterward be to him, his "punishment" was that he could never divorce her.  This was to deter young men from acting rashly and taking advantage of young virgins.

(30) "A man shall not take his father's wife, nor discover his father's skirt."

In conclusion of this chapter, a man was forbidden to marry his father's wife, or to lie with her whom his father had thrown his skirt over.  This is understood to be the young man's stepmother, his father's second wife.  Otherwise, it would have read that he not take his mother.  Even if his father had married a much younger woman and then he died, his son was not to marry his widow, as it would be to uncover what was only to have been revealed to his father, his father's "nakedness" as it has been referred to in previous passages (Leviticus 18:8).