Continuing Review of Various Laws

Continuing a chronological Bible study:

(Deuteronomy 21:1) “If anyone is found slain in the land which the LORD your God gives you to possess it, lying in the field, and it is not known who has slain him, (2) Then your elders and your judges shall come forth, and they shall measure to the cities which are round about him that is slain."

Moses continued reviewing the laws of God as he had been doing throughout the book of Deuteronomy.  Here he discussed what was to be done if a man was found slain in their promised land of Canaan, and it was not known who had killed him.  The elders and judges of the people were to measure how far the slain man was from the surrounding cities.

(3) “And it shall be that the elders of the city nearest to the slain man will take a heifer which has not been worked and which has not pulled with a yoke.

The elders of the city found to be nearest the slain man were to take a heifer that had not been worked and had not yet pulled with a yoke.

(4) "And the elders of that city shall bring down the heifer to a rough valley, which is neither eared nor sown, and shall strike off the heifer's neck there in the valley." 

The elders of the city nearest the slain man were to take the heifer to a rough valley, an uncultivated place neither plowed nor sown, and they were to either break its neck, or cut off its head at the neck.  It's unclear in the original text what exactly was meant, but it certainly meant to kill the heifer there in the rough valley.  There is much symbolism in this act.  First, this was not a sacrifice, but an execution of a representative for the murderer who could not be found.  The fact that this representative had not ever pulled with a yoke might be seen as a symbol of the murderer who could not bear the yoke of God's laws.  A rough and uncultivated valley was chosen for the blood of the murderer who had shed innocent blood that would have forever polluted the land.  Although not a proper sacrifice, this act of killing the heifer representing the murderer, was a type of atonement for the innocent blood that had been shed in the land.  You could also see some symbolism of Christ who was brought low to earth to atone for our sins.  Free from labor and the yoke could represent the freedom of Christ from the yoke of sin and the workings of it.  Christ descended from heaven, took on the sins of the world, and was killed, shedding his innocent blood for atonement of those sins.

(5) "And the priests the sons of Levi shall come near, for the LORD your God has chosen them to minister to Him and to bless in the name of the LORD; and by their word shall every controversy and every stroke be tried."

The priests who were from the tribe of Levi were to come forth for the Lord had chosen them for His service, and it would be by their word that controversies between men and whatever strokes or injuries might be made by one to another would be tried.

(6) “And all the elders of that city nearest to the slain man shall wash their hands over the heifer that is beheaded in the valley. (7) And they shall answer and say, 'Our hands have not shed this blood, nor have our eyes seen it.'"

Verse 6 does confirm that the heifer was beheaded.  The elders of that city that was nearest to where the slain man had been found were to wash their hands over the heifer that had been beheaded in the rough valley, professing that they had not shed innocent blood nor did they know who had shed the innocent blood in the first place.

(8)  "'Be merciful, O LORD, to Your people Israel, whom You have redeemed, and do not lay innocent blood to Your people of Israel's charge.'"

The priests would pray to God to have mercy on His children of Israel and not to charge them as guilty of the shedding of innocent blood.

(9) "So shall you put away the guilt of innocent blood from among you when you do what is right in the sight of the LORD."

Indeed, thusly, they would put off the punishment from the shedding of innocent blood that polluted their land when they did as God had instructed they do. 

(10) “When you go out to war against your enemies, and the LORD your God has delivered them into your hands, and you have taken them captive, (11) And you see among the captives a beautiful woman, and have a desire for her, that you would have her as your wife, (12) Then you shall bring her home to your house, and she shall shave her head and trim her nails."

Moses spoke of a war other than one with the Canaanites, because there would be no captives among the seven nations that the Lord would have His people completely destroy.  In other wars, they were to spare the women, children, and cattle (Deuteronomy 20:14).  If in one of these wars, after the Lord had delivered their enemy into their hands, if one saw among the captives a beautiful woman whom he desired to have as a wife, it appears he was permitted that.  He could bring her into his house, but she was to shave her head and trim her nails.  Although intermarriage among the heathen nations was discouraged and in some cases forbidden as with the Canaanite nations, if a woman was captive, she was totally within her husband's power and would be converted to the Israelite religion.  Shaving her head and cutting her nails might be for a form of purification, but it was more likely that it made the woman less desirable.  There was a custom among the heathen nations of women adorning their nails to make them desirable for men to look at and then take and handle them, bringing them into the heathen woman's web, so to speak.

(13) "And she shall put the clothes of her captivity off her, and shall remain in your house, and mourn her father and her mother a full month; and after that you shall go in to her and be her husband and she shall be your wife."

The captive woman was also to remove the clothing she had worn when she was taken captive as those might have also been part of what had made her so appealing.  She was to remain in her captor's house for a full month, allowed to mourn her parents and her family, and all she was forced to leave behind, as the sense of the word translated as "mother" can also mean "parting".  After that month, the man could then go in to her, be intimate with her, and make her his wife.  This appears to provide a cooling off period for the lust of the man.  The woman was not to be abused and raped in the heat of the moment.  She was allowed time for her emotions and after a month, the man could be intimate with her and make her his wife.

(14) “And it shall be, if you have no delight in her, then you shall let her go where she will, but you shall not sell her at all for money, you shall not make merchandise of her, because you have humbled her."

If after that month's cooling off period, the man decided he really didn't want to marry the woman after all, but it had just been the heat of the moment, then he was to set her free.  He was forbidden to try to sell her or use her for any gain; just because she had been his captive for a month, humiliated by being shaved and all adornments removed, she was not to be treated as an object.

(15) “If a man has two wives, one beloved and the other hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved and the hated; and if the firstborn son be hers that was hated, (16) Then it shall be, when he makes his sons inherit that which he has, he may not make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, who is indeed the firstborn."

Moses then moved to the subject of a man with two wives, where one was much loved, and the other not so much.  If both wives had borne him children, and the firstborn had come from the wife who was not loved, the man was forbidden to favor his beloved wife's child over the rightful firstborn heir.  Although polygamy was allowed, it was not God's way, one man and one woman becoming one flesh.  This passage demonstrates one of the many ways that having more than one wife can complicate things.  There would always be a favorite or preferred wife, and it would most often cause envy and constant strife in the household, even more so when there were children involved.  Who doesn't think their child is the best and most deserving?  God's law in this case said that the firstborn was the firstborn, regardless of affection.  Interestingly, previous to this law being enacted, birthright was given to Joseph, the oldest son of Rachel, the most beloved wife of Jacob, before Reuben, son of Leah, the less loved wife, who was actually the firstborn.  However, this was God's appointment and Jacob had been tricked into marrying Leah.  His desire all along had been Rachel.  This law was enacted because of the hardness of men's hearts, just as Jesus said about divorce in Matthew 19:8.  A provision was made for the case, but it was not God's intention from the beginning.

(17) “But he shall acknowledge the son of the hated as the firstborn, by giving him a double portion of all that he has, for he is the beginning of his strength; the right of the firstborn is his."

Continuing the thought started in verse 15 above, the man with two wives was required to acknowledge his true firstborn son, even if he was the son of the wife who was not loved.  That firstborn was the beginning of his father's strength, or his family that became larger and strengthened by the addition of the firstborn.  The actual firstborn was to have his birthright privilege, which was a double portion of his father's estate.

(18) “If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and who, when they have chastened him, will not hearken to them, (19) Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out to the elders of his city, and to the gate of his place; (20) And they shall say to the elders of his city, ‘This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.’ (21) And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he dies; so shall you put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear."

In the case of a stubborn and rebellious son who would not obey his father and his mother, even after they had chastened him, and refused to listen to them, the parents were to take hold of their son and bring him to the elders of his city.  There they would declare their son stubborn and rebellious and unwilling to obey his parents, which would necessarily find him unwilling to obey any authority.  From the beginning, in one of the Ten Commandments, God required that children honor and obey their parents (Exodus 20:12), and abusing them mentally, as well as physically, was worthy of death (Exodus 21:15, 17 and Leviticus 20:9).  The parents would declare the son's sins to the elders, and all the men of his city would stone him with stones until he died.  In that way, the parents and all the people would put evil away from Israel, and all the people would hear of it and take heed.  Wow!  It seems so harsh to us now.  However, when you consider God's commandment, and His laws since Exodus that a rebellious son was worthy of death, sons would necessarily understand their requirements under the civil law and more importantly, the Law of God, which were one and the same at this time.  If, knowing this, they were still so stubborn and evil, it could be assumed they would never change their rebellious hearts.  If such a law were executed now, it would certainly do a lot to destroy the wicked in the world.  We must love God with all our hearts and souls, and as Jesus said, "...he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me."  Such hate and rebellion against God is of Satan and cannot be tolerated.  Though we don't go around stoning our rebellious kids in this day and age, we should remember Who comes first in our lives.

(22) "And if a man has committed a sin worthy of death, and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, (23) His body shall not remain all night on the tree, but you shall surely bury him that day (for he that is hanged is accursed of God) that your land not be defiled, which the LORD your God gives you for an inheritance."

The hanging mentioned here is most likely not a strangulation by hanging by the neck, but a suspension as on a cross or tree or the like.  Additionally, from what I have read, crucifixion was not a normal mode of execution, but that after criminals were stoned to death, they were sometimes hung afterward as an additional public shame and as a visual reminder to the people of what would happen if they committed a sin worthy of death; they would not only hear and fear, but would see and fear.  However, if a criminal was hung on a tree, he was not to be left all night, but was to be taken down and buried that day.  The reason given is that the land not be defiled.  This can be taken literally; allowing rotting bodies to hang indefinitely would certainly pollute the land.  Also the criminal was said to be accursed by God, so again, allowing cursed things to hang around indefinitely defiled the land.  As a person was considered unclean who touched a dead body, so the land would be unclean that allowed hanging dead bodies in it.  The law called for the criminal's life, and once that life was taken, the law was fulfilled, and no more was required.  This seems to include an element of mercy for even the worst of criminals and a respect for the human body.  Most notably, this law was symbolic, and in these particular words by Moses, prophetic of the coming Christ who "redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, 'Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree'" (Galatians 3:13).  As the criminal's body fulfilled the law in his case, so Christ's hanging on a cross was indication and proof of His being made sin and a curse for His people and that He bore the curse of the law for their sins, and so the law was ultimately fulfilled.  The taking down of the body before sunset and burying him, signified the removal of the curse from the land, as Christ's body taken down and placed in the tomb signified the removing of the curse from Him and His people for whom He suffered, and redeeming them from the curse of the law.  The Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge by Canne, Browne, Blayney, Scott, etc., made an additional point that being accursed of God proclaimed him "under the curse of God as much as any external punishment can. They that see him thus hanging between heaven and earth, will conclude him abandoned of both, and unworthy of either."  This certainly applied to the death of Christ who was forsaken by God in that moment He took all our sins upon Him, but declared His work finished upon His death.  No more was required to fulfill the law, and of course, He was not left hanging between heaven and earth, but was risen.  More words from the TSK, "...the law was satisfied... It demanded no more. Then he, and those that are his, ceased to be a curse. And as the land of Israel was pure and clean when the body was buried, so the church is washed and cleansed by the complete satisfaction which Christ thus made."  

Once again, I am in awe of how often Jesus Christ appears in the Old Testament!

Rules in Times of War

Continuing a chronological Bible study:

(Deuteronomy 20:1) “When you go out to battle against your enemies, and see horses and chariots and people more numerous than you, do not be afraid of them, for the LORD your God is with you, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt."

Moses had been giving a very long speech in the book of Deuteronomy, mainly reviewing God's Laws.  He now turned to the subject of war.  When the children of Israel went out to battle against their enemies, most assuredly a God-sanctioned war, and they saw all the horses and chariots and people much more numerous than they were, they were not to fear.  Their Lord God was with them, the same God who wrought so many miracles to bring them out of Egypt.

(2) "And it shall be, when you come near to the battle, that the priest shall approach and speak to the people. (3) And shall say to them, 'Hear, O Israel, you approach this day to battle against your enemies; let not your hearts faint, fear not, and do not tremble, neither be terrified because of them; (4) For the LORD your God is He who goes with you, to fight for you against your enemies, to save you.’"

Moses told them that when they were on the verge of battle, the priest would come and speak to the people to encourage them, telling them not to fear their enemies, because their Lord was going with them to fight against their enemies, and to save and protect them from those enemies.

(5) "And the officers shall speak to the people, saying, ‘What man is there who has built a new house and has not dedicated it? Let him go and return to his house, lest he die in the battle and another man dedicate it.'"

The officers would then speak to the people readying for battle.  It seems there were provisions for those indisposed to fight and they could be discharged.  For instance, if there was a man who had just built a new house and had not yet dedicated it, he was to return to his house to do so.  It was customary in Israel to dedicate a new house to God with prayer, praise, and thanksgiving.  This was done in order to secure the Divine presence, protection, and blessing of God.  If a man died in battle without having dedicated his house, another man would take possession of it and dedicate it for himself and his family.

(6) "'And what man is there who has planted a vineyard and has not yet eaten of it? Let him go and return to his house, lest he die in the battle and another man eat of it.'"

Likewise, the officers would ask if there was any man who had planted a vineyard and had not yet eaten of it.  It was perhaps at great expense that a man had planted a vineyard, tending it for years, for he was forbidden by law to eat of it for the first three years (Leviticus 19:23) as it was "uncircumcised", then it was dedicated to the Lord in the fourth year, and finally he was allowed to eat and share it with friends and family in the fifth year.  It seems the Lord was being generously indulgent to allow His people to be dismissed from battle for what appears to be so trivial a reason.  However, John Wesley, in his Notes on the Whole Bible, pointed out that in the beginning of their settlement in Canaan, the people had been encouraged and charged with the building of houses and planting of vineyards for the benefit of their commonwealth. 

(7) "‘And what man is there who has betrothed a wife and has not taken her? Let him go and return to his house, lest he die in the battle and another man take her.’"

Additionally, the officers would ask if any man had been betrothed to a woman, but had not yet married her.  He was encouraged to return home to marry her.  If he should die in battle, his betrothed would probably become the wife of another.  It was deemed a hardship for a person to be obliged to go to battle, who had left a house unfinished, newly purchased land half tilled, or a wife with whom he had just contracted marriage.  It seems God only wanted willing volunteers and not those who might be distracted by unfinished business.

(8) "And the officers shall speak further to the people, and say, ‘What man is there who is fearful and fainthearted? Let him go and return to his house, lest his brethren's heart faint as well as his heart.'"

The officers would ask further if there was any man who was too fearful or fainthearted to go into battle.  Those, too, were given leave from battle.  Once again, only the ready and able volunteers were called to battle.  It was both a kindness to the fearful, but also to the men who remained who would have had to contend with useless cowards whose fear might have infected those soldiers around them.

(9) "And it shall be, when the officers have made an end of speaking to the people, that they shall make captains of the armies to lead the people."

Once all the men who wanted to be dismissed had been discharged, then they were to assign captains of the armies to lead the soldiers into battle.

(10) “When you come near to a city to fight against it, then proclaim peace to it."

When the Israelite armies came to a city to fight against it, they were first to offer peace.  Some of the commentators I study struggle with the fact that the seven nations the Israelites were dispossessing could not possibly be offered peace, because God had already told them that these nations were to be totally destroyed.  I see no contradiction here.  The nations could be offered peace, but God knew they would not accept it.  Perhaps He hardened their hearts to reject peace just as He had with Pharaoh because their cup of iniquity was now full.  Each time Moses had gone before Pharaoh, he had peaceably asked that Pharaoh let the people go, but Pharaoh refused each time.  In the same way, these nations would refuse to let Israel come into to their nations.

(11) “And it shall be that if they accept your offer of peace, and open to you, then it shall be all the people that are found therein shall be tributaries to you, and they shall serve you."

If the people of the city Israel was approaching accepted their offer of peace and opened up to let them enter, then those people could be allowed to remain and become tributaries to the children of Israel.  By authority of God, the one and only God of the universe, they were to become subject to Israel and would certainly have to renounce idolatry and serve the God of Israel.  Obviously, the seven nations would not accept such terms, although they were to be offered.  The offer would be genuine, for God would have saved any person who gave up his idols and desired to follow Him. 

(12) "And if it will make no peace with you, but will make war against you, then you shall besiege it."

If the city rejected the Israelites' offer of peace, and acted to make war with them, then the Israelites were to besiege the city.

(13) “And when the LORD your God has delivered it into your hands, you shall smite every male in it with the edge of the sword."

When the city was surrendered because the Lord had delivered it into the hands of His people, the Israelite army was to strike down every male in it with the sword.

(14) “But the women, the little ones, the cattle, and all that is in the city, all its spoil, you shall take for yourself; and you shall eat the spoil of your enemies, which the LORD your God has given you."

However, the women and children were to be spared, as well as their cattle.  All the spoil of the city they were allowed to take for themselves, any gold, silver, merchandise, household goods, tools, and whatever was of any worth and value to be found within the cities and the people's homes.  The Lord had delivered their enemy into their hands and it was He who gave them the spoil.

(15) “Thus you shall do to all the cities which are very far from you, which are not of the cities of these nations."

The sparing of the women, children, and cattle, and the spoil of the city, was to be done only in the cities far outside the land of Canaan, outside the seven nations that God had willed destroyed.

(16) “But of the cities of these people which the LORD your God gives you for an inheritance, you shall save alive nothing that breathes."

However, of the cities of the seven nations that the Lord was giving them as their inheritance, they were not to spare any living person or animal.

(17) “But you shall utterly destroy them, the Hittites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, as the LORD your God has commanded you."

They were to completely destroy the nations the Lord was driving out of the land of Canaan to give it to His people--the Hittites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites.  Six nations are mentioned here, but in Deuteronomy 7:1-2, the Girgashites are listed as one of the seven nations to be destroyed as commanded by God.

(18) "That they not teach you to do according to all their abominations which they have done for their gods, so should you sin against the LORD your God."

The reason the nations had to be utterly destroyed was so that the children of Israel not be tempted to do any of the abominations the people of those nations had done in their idol worship, and thus sinning against their Lord God.

(19) “When you besiege a city for a long time, in making war against it to take it, you shall not destroy its trees by wielding an ax against them, for you may eat of them, and you shall not cut them down (for the tree of the field is man's life) to employ them in the siege."

If the Israelites were in a city a long time in their effort to overtake it, they were instructed not to cut down the trees of the city to use them in their siege, for those would serve as food for the Israelites.

(20) “Only the trees which you know are not trees for food you may destroy and cut down, and you shall build bulwarks against the city that makes war with you, until it is subdued."

However, if the Israelites knew certain trees were not to be eaten of, those trees they were allowed to cut down to use in protecting them from the people of the city that were warring with them.  The trees that bore fruit would provide food for the Israelites for as long as it took to subdue the city.  This was a sensible rule against waste.  No fruit tree was to be destroyed unless it was barren, but they could make use of the trees that could not be used for food.  This was in accordance with other of God's laws against waste that provided for all, as for the poor and the birds of the field, for example.  In Leviticus 23:22, the people were told not to completely reap to the very edges of their fields or to go back and glean after the harvesting, but to leave that for the poor.  Jesus talked about God providing for the birds.  God's creations are by His design and good, and we should always strive to be good stewards of them.  Dr. John Gill, in his Exposition of the Entire Bible, pointed out that this passage might be seen as an "emblem of the axe being to be laid to fruitless trees in a moral and spiritual sense; and of trees of righteousness, laden with the fruits of righteousness, the planting of the Lord, being preserved and never to be cut down or rooted up..."

Laws About Cities of Refuge, Fraud, and Perjury Reviewed

Continuing a chronological Bible study:

(Deuteronomy 19:1) “When the LORD your God has cut off the nations whose land the LORD your God gives you, and you succeed them, and dwell in their cities and in their houses, (2) You shall separate three cities for yourself in the midst of your land which the LORD your God gives you to possess."

Throughout the book of Deuteronomy, Moses had been reviewing the Law for the children of Israel before he died and left them.  He now reviewed the law about cities of refuge.  When the people came into their promised land of Canaan after God had driven out the previous inhabitants, and began to dwell there in their cities and houses, they were to set about setting apart three cities in the land.

(3) “You shall prepare yourself a way and divide the coasts of your land, which the LORD your God gives you to inherit, into three parts, to which every slayer may flee."

The people were to create an open way, or perhaps a better translation is a roadway or highway.  They were to divide their entire land into three sections, and in each section would be a place that a man slayer might flee to await judgment.  Moses had already appointed on their current side of the Jordan River three cities of refuge, and he now told them they were to appoint three more, as God had commanded they have six cities of refuge, three on each side of the Jordan (Numbers 35:14). 

(4) “And this is the case of the manslayer who flees there, that he may live: Whoever kills his neighbor ignorantly, whom he did not hate in time past, (5) As when a man goes into the woods with his neighbor to hew wood, and his hand swings a stroke with the ax to cut down the tree, and the head slips from the handle and strikes his neighbor so that he dies, he shall flee to one of these cities and live."

Moses described the case of a man slayer who might flee to a city of refuge.  If a man accidentally or unintentionally killed another, someone he had never shown any hatred toward in the past, he could flee to a city of refuge and live.  He gave an example of a man chopping wood with his neighbor, and his ax slipping and striking his neighbor, and killing him unintentionally.  He could flee to the city of refuge and be safe from the avenger of blood, who was a relative who might take vengeance for the life of his brother.

(6) "Lest the avenger of the blood pursue the slayer, while his heart is hot, and overtake him, because the way is long, and slay him; whereas he was not worthy of death, inasmuch as he hated him not in time past."

Verses 3 through 6 represent one long directive by Moses.  Verse 6 is intended to finish the thought started in verse 3 that the people were to provide an open way to three separate cities of refuge for the convenience of the man slayer to run to from the avenger of blood.  If the path was not clear and open and it was a great distance away, an innocent man might be killed by the avenger of the accidentally killed man.  Adam Clarke, in his Commentary on the Bible, wrote, "The Jews inform us that the roads to the cities of refuge were made very broad, thirty-two cubits; and even, so that there should be no impediments in the way; and were constantly kept in good repair."

(7) “Therefore I command you, saying, ‘You shall separate three cities for yourself.’"

Moses finished his thought by saying his previous statements established the reason why these three cities of refuge must be provided.

(8) "And if the LORD your God enlarges your coasts, as He has sworn to your fathers, and gives you all the land which He promised to give to your fathers, (9) If you shall keep all these commandments to do them, which I command you this day, to love the LORD your God and to walk always in His ways, then you shall add three more cities for yourself besides these three, (10) That innocent blood be not shed in your land which the LORD your God gives you for an inheritance, and blood be upon you."

If the Lord enlarged Israel's territory as He had sworn to their forefathers, conditional on them keeping the Lord's commandments, loving the Lord and always walking in His ways, then they were to add three additional cities of refuge so that innocent blood not be shed in their land because someone who accidentally killed someone else without malice and intention, was killed by a relative avenger of blood, although he was innocent.  The guilt of innocent blood would be upon their land if they did not provide more proper asylums for such people if their territory was enlarged.

(11) "But if any man hates his neighbor, lies in wait for him, rises up against him and strikes him mortally, that he dies, and flees to one of these cities, (12) Then the elders of his city shall send and fetch him from there, and deliver him into the hand of the avenger of blood, that he may die."

However, if a man hated his neighbor and with malice and premeditation, lay in wait for his neighbor and killed him, and he presumed to flee to a city of refuge, then the elders of his city were to send for him to be delivered to them to be tried before them, to determine whether he was a proper person to receive the benefit of the city of refuge or not, and if not, to pass the sentence of death upon him, at which time he would be delivered into the hands of the avenger of blood, who would be the executioner of that death sentence.

(13) “Your eye shall not pity him, but you shall put away the guilt of innocent blood from Israel, that it may go well with you."

The people, including the judges in his case, were to have no pity on a person guilty of killing his brother intentionally.  They must execute murderers to put away the guilt of innocent blood upon their land, so that it might go well for them.

(14) “You shall not remove your neighbor’s landmark, which the men of old have set in your inheritance, which you will inherit in the land that the LORD your God gives you to possess."

Before the use of fencing, people marked the boundaries of their property with some sort of landmark.  A landmark might be easily moved, and this was a law against moving such a landmark that had been previously set marking the inherited property of an estate.

(15) “One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin that he sins; at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established."

A single witness was not allowed to give evidence against another so that a sentence was passed.  It must be the testimony of at least two or three witnesses to establish that an iniquity had been performed.

(16) “If a false witness rises against any man to testify against him for wrongdoing, (17) Then both the men in the controversy shall stand before the LORD, before the priests and the judges who will be in those days."

If a false witness rose up to testify against another for wrongdoing, bearing false witness against his neighbor, in direct conflict with one of God's Ten Commandments, then both the one bearing false witness and the one he was accusing with his false statements were to come before the priests and judges who would be serving at that time, and before the Lord, as well.

(18) “And the judges shall make diligent inquisition, and, behold, if the witness is a false witness, and has testified falsely against his brother, (19) Then you shall do to him as he had thought to have done to his brother; so shall you put away the evil from among you."

The judges were to make a thorough examination of the facts, and if they determined that the one bringing the charges was indeed a false witness, then he was to receive the same punishment he had been seeking against the one about whom he had brought false accusation.  Once again, this was to put evil away from their land.  It must be noted that although this was a single witness, and his testimony wouldn't be allowed to pronounce sentence on the one he was accusing anyway, it was so grievous to bear false witness, that it must be lawfully determined if the accuser was a false witness.

(20) “And those who remain shall hear and fear, and henceforth commit no more such evil among you."

All other people would hear about the case and would take care not to commit such false testimony against another, knowing what the outcome would be; thus they would not commit such evil in the land.

(21) "And your eye shall not pity; life shall be for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot."

Again no one, including the judges, was to pity the false witness.  He must be held to account and punished for his false testimony in like manner as he had desired against the one he had falsely accused.  Just laws are necessary for the safety and flourishment of a society.  A Christian may and should act in forgiveness for injuries, but unless wrongdoers are brought to account and punished, and the public see that these wrongdoings will not be tolerated, such evil deeds will only increase in number, and a society will be destroyed.  Once again, we see how wise God's laws are.  I can't help but think of the "wisdom of men" in this present day who want to let prisoners out of jail, or not even bring them to justice in the first place.  As in the case of illegal entry to our country or of rioting that we are experiencing at the time I write this, letting people get away with lawless acts scot-free serves only to embolden the criminals and others to do likewise and more.  Rather than putting evil away from our society, we encourage it.  Sadly, that is what a Godless nation will do.

Prophecy of Christ the Great Prophet

Continuing a chronological Bible study:

(Deuteronomy 18:1) "The priests the Levites, all the tribe of Levi, shall have no part nor inheritance with Israel; they shall eat the offerings of the LORD made by fire, and His inheritance."

Moses continues reviewing the Law.  He now spoke of the priests and all the tribe of Levi; they were to have no portion of land in Canaan as their inheritance as all the other tribes had.  The Levites' inheritance was to eat of the offerings that were the Lord's inheritance, that part that was the Lord's portion or inheritance, which God had reserved to Himself, as tithes and first fruits, and other offerings made by fire.  The Levites, as priests and ministers and servants of God, were given His inheritance.

(2) “Therefore they shall have no inheritance among their brethren; the LORD is their inheritance, as He has said to them."

The Levites were to have no inheritance among the other tribes because the Lord was their inheritance; they had no other needs other than Him.  Working in the service of God, they would have a special nearness and communion with Him, but God also provided for their physical needs by giving His portion of the inheritance to them.  The Lord had told Aaron the Levites would have no part in the inheritance among their brethren in Numbers 18:20.

(3) “And this shall be the priest’s due from the people, from those who offer a sacrifice, whether it be ox or sheep; and they shall give to the priest the shoulder, and the two cheeks, and the maw."

Moses went on to describe what would be the priests' portion required from the people who gave sacrifices of their cattle or sheep.  We were already told in Leviticus 7:32-34 that the priests were to be given the shoulder and the breast.  Here their portion seems to be increased to include the cheeks and the maw.  This led some commentators to think the breast was meant by maw here, but the original word translated as "maw" was "qebah" meaning "paunch or cavity", from the word "qabab" which means "to scoop out"; it does seem that the stomach was meant.  Additionally, there is the addition of the cheeks.  Albert Barnes, in his Notes on the Bible, noted that as a slain animal might be thought to consist of three main parts, the head, the legs, and the trunk of the body, a portion of each was to be given to the priests, representing the consecration of the whole.  He added that some ancient commentators thought it represented the dedication of words (cheeks), acts (shoulder or legs), and appetites (stomach) of the worshiper to God.

(4) “The firstfruits of your corn, of your wine, and of your oil, and the first of the fleece of your sheep, shall you give him."

Additionally, all the people's firsts of their grains, wine, oil, first fleece, and firstlings, too, were all the Lord's, and He gave His portion to the priests.

(5) “For the LORD your God has chosen him out of all your tribes to stand to minister in the name of the LORD, him and his sons forever."

By law, these were to be given to the priests because God had chosen Levi from among the tribes to minister in His name, Levi and his posterity, forever, at least until Jesus Christ came and was the perfect priest (Hebrews 7:11).

(6) "And if a Levite comes from any of your gates out of all Israel, where he dwells, and comes with all the desire of his mind to the place which the LORD shall choose, (7) Then he shall minister in the name of the LORD his God, as all his brethren the Levites do, who stand there before the LORD."

If one of the Levites who were dispersed all over the country, instructing and teaching the people, came to the place of God's temple that He would choose, with all his heart and soul and eager desire to serve the Lord, then he was permitted to minister at the temple where his Levite brethren ministered.

(8) “They shall have equal portions to eat, besides what comes from the sale of his patrimony."

Although the Levites had no portion of the land divided to them, it does seem by this and suggested by other verses involving Levites (1 Kings 2:26 and Jeremiah 32:7-8), that they were allowed to buy property that might be left to their children (patrimony).  Even though the Levites that came from where they dwelt outside the temple to minister within the temple might have had property, they were still to receive their equal portions as priests ministering in the temple.

(9) “When you come into the land which the LORD your God gives you, you shall not learn to follow the abominations of those nations."

When the Israelites came into their promised land of Canaan, they were not to follow the traditions of the nations that dwelt before them, practices that were abominations to the Lord.

(10) “There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, or who uses divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, (11) Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer."

The people were forbidden to practice the consecrating of their children to the sun god by the passing between two fires.  They were forbidden to use divination, or be an observer of times, astrology.  They were forbidden to be witches, wizards, or mediums who communicated with spirits.  They were forbidden to perform enchantments, spells, or curses; they were to have no part in the dark spirit world, but were to follow only their Lord God and His light.

(12) “For all who do these things are an abomination to the LORD, and because of these abominations the LORD your God drives them out from before you."

All who practiced the things above were abominations to the Lord, and it was because of those pagan practices that the Lord was driving out those people from the land that He was then giving the children of Israel.

(13) "You shall be perfect with the Lord your God."

As discussed before, no person is perfect, except Jesus Christ, but God's people were to strive for perfection by adhering to all His laws, sincerely serving and worshiping Him, and walking uprightly before Him to the best of their abilities.

(14) “For these nations which you shall possess hearkened to observers of times, and to diviners; but as for you, the LORD your God has not allowed you to do so."

The people of the nations the children of Israel were dispossessing had listened to fortune-tellers and soothsayers, but the Lord had forbidden His people to do likewise.

(15) “The LORD your God will raise up to you a Prophet from the midst of you, of your brethren, like me; to Him you shall listen."

Here Moses makes a prophetic statement about the coming Messiah.  He told the people that God would raise up a Prophet from the midst of their tribes, a Prophet like him, and to this Prophet they were to listen.  God indeed raised up Jesus from birth from the tribe of Judah, and of course, He was raised up in resurrection.  This Prophet would be like Moses; actually Moses was the antitype or symbol of the coming Jesus Christ.  Moses was a prophet, a teacher, law-giver, and deliverer from bondage in Egypt, certainly symbolic of the coming Messiah.  All the Bible translations seem to suggest that "like me" was meant to be spoken by Moses, as "me" was lower-case and not an upper-case M.  My first thought was that the prophetic words were being spoken as directly from God, and "Me" referred to God.  If that were true, certainly no other prophet would be as like the Lord as would Jesus.  This prophecy was quoted by Peter in Acts 3:22 and by Stephen in Acts 7:37.  In Matthew 17:5 and Luke 9:35, God spoke from a cloud declaring Jesus to be His son and said to "Hear Him."

(16) "According to all that you desired of the LORD your God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, ‘Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not.'"

According to what the people desired of their Lord that day at Mount Sinai when the Lord had spoken directly to them in fire and thunder, the Lord would send them.  They no longer wanted to hear the direct voice of the Lord in terrible fire and thunder and lightning, fearing they might die in the presence of it, but desired that Moses talk with God and then tell them what God had said (Deuteronomy 5:24-27).

(17) “And the LORD said to me, 'They have well spoken what they have spoken.'"

The Lord had said at the time the people told Moses their desire, that what they suggested was good (Deuteronomy 5:28).

(18) "'I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like to you, and will put My words in His mouth; and He shall speak to them all that I shall command Him.'"

Although it was not stated at the time, it appears from this verse that after the Lord had said the people had well spoken, He told Moses He would raise up a Prophet from among their tribes, someone like him (Moses); it does appear from this verse that one like Moses was intended in verse 15, not one like God.  God would put His words in this Prophet's mouth, and He would speak all that God commanded Him.  Indeed, Jesus said that He didn't speak of Himself, but what God had commanded He speak, that He spoke (John 12:49).

(19) "'And it shall come to pass, that whoever will not hearken to My words, which He shall speak in My name, I will require it of him.'"

Continuing the prophecy that the Lord had given Moses at the time and what he now relayed to the people, he told them that it would be that whoever would not listen to the words of this Prophet that He would speak in God's name, God would "require it of him".  Most of the commentaries I study wrote this just meant they would be punished.  Indeed, we are told in the New Testament that those who believe and accept the Lord Jesus will have everlasting life, but those who don't will have death, even the wrath of God (John 3:36).  Matthew Henry, in his Commentary on the Whole Bible, took it a step further, suggesting the Word itself would require it of the person who would not listen to God's word.  In John 1:1-2, we were told that Jesus Christ was the Word of God, with Him from the beginning.  Mr. Henry pointed out that in John 12:48 Jesus said that whoever rejected Him and did not accept His words, had one that judged him, "...the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day."  The Word would judge him; Jesus Christ, the Word, would judge him in the end.  I, myself, couldn't help but think of the scripture that said every knee would bow to the Lord and every tongue would confess to Him (Romans 14:11).  In the end, it would be required of everyone to profess that Jesus Christ was Lord (Philippians 2:11).

(20) "‘But the prophet who shall presume to speak a word in My name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or who shall speak in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die.'"

However, a prophet who presumed to speak a word in the Lord's name, which the Lord had not told him to speak, or one who spoke in the name of false gods, that was a false prophet who was to die.

(21) “And if you say in your heart, ‘How shall we know the word which the LORD has not spoken?’ (22) When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing does not happen or come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him."

Moses added that if the people wondered how they would know if a prophet spoke the word of the Lord or not, he told them simply to observe whether or not what the prophet spoke came to be or not.  Obviously, if the thing did not come to pass, then the word had not come from the Lord, and the prophet had spoken of himself presumptuously, and was not to be feared.  In the New Testament, John wrote not to believe every spirit because there were many false prophets in the world.  He said to test the spirits to see if they were of God.  When Paul and Silas preached to the Bereans, the Bereans were said to be noble because not only did they listen to them, but they searched the scriptures to see if what they preached was so.  The people in the New Testament times had more knowledge and more resources to test a prophet, but the children of Israel could watch the fruits of a prophet to see if what he said came true, and also they could compare it to what they knew of the law.  God would not contradict His law, so any prophet who suggested the people do what was completely contrary to what God had told them to do, would obviously be a false prophet.

The most significant part of this chapter and post is the prophecy of Jesus Christ.  Once again I am in awe of how often Jesus is found in the Old Testament!  Think of God's love and mercy for His people.  He had chosen Israel to be His own people, but when His own people failed miserably to keep His commandments, and even said they didn't want to hear from Him directly for fear they would die from the awesome terror of it, God agreed to send a prophet to speak for Him.  This wasn't any prophet; it was the Lord Himself!  The people were terrified by the awesome God of the universe, so He came to earth in the flesh, completely man with all the earthly temptations of man, but perfect as God, to be the perfect sacrifice for us sinners.  Where John 1:1 told us that the Word was with God and the Word was God, John 1:2-3 went on to say that the Word was there from the beginning and all things were made by Him.  Then in John 1:14, we are told, "...the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us."  The Word WAS God and the Word was made flesh!  God Himself came to save the world!  That fleshly man would be the Prophet who would speak God's words because He was God's Word!  He was called His only begotten son as that was the way He was brought into the world, as a son born to an earthly mother, but there is no doubt He was God Himself!  It's a hard concept for our feeble minds to grasp, but then we are not capable of totally comprehending God.  If we were capable, then we would have a pretty small god.  Jesus prayed to God in heaven; did He pray to Himself?  God in the flesh prayed to God in heaven; He was after all bound in the flesh with all the earthly feelings and temptations.  A hard concept, perhaps, but what a beautiful one!  God so loved us that He came down to suffer on this earth to save us!  No greater love than this!  He suffered terrible pain and laid down His fleshly life for us.