Covenant Order: Neighbor, Creation, and Sexual Holiness

Deu 22:6-7 The affectionate relation of parents to their young, which God had established even in the animal world, was also to be kept just as sacred. If any one found a bird’s nest by the road upon a tree, or upon the ground, with young ones or eggs, and the mother sitting upon them, he was not to take the mother with the young ones, but to let the mother fly, and only take the young.

נקרא for נקרה, as in Exo 5:3. The command is related to the one in Lev 22:28 and Exo 23:19, and is placed upon a par with the commandment relating to parents, by the fact that obedience is urged upon the people by the same promise in both instances (vid. , Deu 5:16; Exo 20:12).

Deu 22:6-7 The affectionate relation of parents to their young, which God had established even in the animal world, was also to be kept just as sacred. If any one found a bird’s nest by the road upon a tree, or upon the ground, with young ones or eggs, and the mother sitting upon them, he was not to take the mother with the young ones, but to let the mother fly, and only take the young.

נקרא for נקרה, as in Exo 5:3. The command is related to the one in Lev 22:28 and Exo 23:19, and is placed upon a par with the commandment relating to parents, by the fact that obedience is urged upon the people by the same promise in both instances (vid. , Deu 5:16; Exo 20:12).

Deu 22:8-12 Still less were they to expose human life to danger through carelessness. “ If thou build a new house, make a rim ( maakeh ) - i. e. , a balustrade - to thy roof, that thou bring not blood-guiltiness upon thy house, if any one fall from it . ” The roofs of the Israelitish houses were flat, as they mostly are in the East, so that the inhabitants often lived upon them (Jos 2:6; 2Sa 11:2; Mat 10:27).

- In Deu 22:9-11, there follow several prohibitions against mixing together the things which are separated in God’s creation, consisting partly of a verbal repetition of Lev 19:19 (see the explanation of this passage). - To this there is appended in Deu 22:12 the law concerning the tassels upon the hem of the upper garment (Num 15:37.) , which were to remind the Israelites of their calling, to walk before the Lord in faithful fulfilment of the commandments of God (see the commentary upon this passage).

Deu 22:8-12 Still less were they to expose human life to danger through carelessness. “ If thou build a new house, make a rim ( maakeh ) - i. e. , a balustrade - to thy roof, that thou bring not blood-guiltiness upon thy house, if any one fall from it . ” The roofs of the Israelitish houses were flat, as they mostly are in the East, so that the inhabitants often lived upon them (Jos 2:6; 2Sa 11:2; Mat 10:27).

- In Deu 22:9-11, there follow several prohibitions against mixing together the things which are separated in God’s creation, consisting partly of a verbal repetition of Lev 19:19 (see the explanation of this passage). - To this there is appended in Deu 22:12 the law concerning the tassels upon the hem of the upper garment (Num 15:37.) , which were to remind the Israelites of their calling, to walk before the Lord in faithful fulfilment of the commandments of God (see the commentary upon this passage).

Deu 22:8-12 Still less were they to expose human life to danger through carelessness. “ If thou build a new house, make a rim ( maakeh ) - i. e. , a balustrade - to thy roof, that thou bring not blood-guiltiness upon thy house, if any one fall from it . ” The roofs of the Israelitish houses were flat, as they mostly are in the East, so that the inhabitants often lived upon them (Jos 2:6; 2Sa 11:2; Mat 10:27).

- In Deu 22:9-11, there follow several prohibitions against mixing together the things which are separated in God’s creation, consisting partly of a verbal repetition of Lev 19:19 (see the explanation of this passage). - To this there is appended in Deu 22:12 the law concerning the tassels upon the hem of the upper garment (Num 15:37.) , which were to remind the Israelites of their calling, to walk before the Lord in faithful fulfilment of the commandments of God (see the commentary upon this passage).

Deu 22:8-12 Still less were they to expose human life to danger through carelessness. “ If thou build a new house, make a rim ( maakeh ) - i. e. , a balustrade - to thy roof, that thou bring not blood-guiltiness upon thy house, if any one fall from it . ” The roofs of the Israelitish houses were flat, as they mostly are in the East, so that the inhabitants often lived upon them (Jos 2:6; 2Sa 11:2; Mat 10:27).

- In Deu 22:9-11, there follow several prohibitions against mixing together the things which are separated in God’s creation, consisting partly of a verbal repetition of Lev 19:19 (see the explanation of this passage). - To this there is appended in Deu 22:12 the law concerning the tassels upon the hem of the upper garment (Num 15:37.) , which were to remind the Israelites of their calling, to walk before the Lord in faithful fulfilment of the commandments of God (see the commentary upon this passage).

Deu 22:8-12 Still less were they to expose human life to danger through carelessness. “ If thou build a new house, make a rim ( maakeh ) - i. e. , a balustrade - to thy roof, that thou bring not blood-guiltiness upon thy house, if any one fall from it . ” The roofs of the Israelitish houses were flat, as they mostly are in the East, so that the inhabitants often lived upon them (Jos 2:6; 2Sa 11:2; Mat 10:27).

- In Deu 22:9-11, there follow several prohibitions against mixing together the things which are separated in God’s creation, consisting partly of a verbal repetition of Lev 19:19 (see the explanation of this passage). - To this there is appended in Deu 22:12 the law concerning the tassels upon the hem of the upper garment (Num 15:37.) , which were to remind the Israelites of their calling, to walk before the Lord in faithful fulfilment of the commandments of God (see the commentary upon this passage).

Deu 22:13-14 Laws of Chastity and Marriage. - Higher and still holier than the order of nature stands the moral order of marriage, upon which the well-being not only of domestic life, but also of the civil commonwealth of nations, depends. Marriage must be founded upon fidelity and chastity on the part of those who are married. To foster this, and secure it against outbreaks of malice and evil lust, was the design and object of the laws which follow.

The first (Deu 22:13-21) relates to the chastity of a woman on entering into the married state, which might be called in question by her husband, either from malice or with justice. The former case is that which Moses treats of first of all. If a man took a wife, and came to her, and hated her, i. e. , turned against her after gratifying his carnal desires (like Amnon, for example, 2Sa 13:15), and in order to get rid of her again, attributed “deeds or things of words” to her, i.

e. , things which give occasion for words or talk, and so brought an evil name upon her, saying, that on coming to her he did not find virginity in her. בּתוּלים, virginity, here the signs of it, viz. , according to Deu 22:17, the marks of a first intercourse upon the bed-clothes or dress.

Deu 22:13-14 Laws of Chastity and Marriage. - Higher and still holier than the order of nature stands the moral order of marriage, upon which the well-being not only of domestic life, but also of the civil commonwealth of nations, depends. Marriage must be founded upon fidelity and chastity on the part of those who are married. To foster this, and secure it against outbreaks of malice and evil lust, was the design and object of the laws which follow.

The first (Deu 22:13-21) relates to the chastity of a woman on entering into the married state, which might be called in question by her husband, either from malice or with justice. The former case is that which Moses treats of first of all. If a man took a wife, and came to her, and hated her, i. e. , turned against her after gratifying his carnal desires (like Amnon, for example, 2Sa 13:15), and in order to get rid of her again, attributed “deeds or things of words” to her, i.

e. , things which give occasion for words or talk, and so brought an evil name upon her, saying, that on coming to her he did not find virginity in her. בּתוּלים, virginity, here the signs of it, viz. , according to Deu 22:17, the marks of a first intercourse upon the bed-clothes or dress.

Deu 22:15-17 In such a case the parents of the young woman (הנּער for הנּערה, as in Gen 24:14, Gen 24:28, according to the earliest usage of the books of Moses, a virgin, then also a young woman, e. g. , Rth 2:6; Rth 4:12) were to bring the matter before the elders of the town into the gate (the judicial forum; see Deu 21:19), and establish the chastity and innocence of their daughter by spreading the bed-clothes before them.

It was not necessary to this end that the parents should have taken possession of the spotted bed-clothes directly after the marriage night, as in customarily done by the Bedouins and the lower classes of the Moslem in Egypt and Syria (cf. Niebuhr, Beschr. v. Arab. pp. 35ff. ; Arvieux, merkw. Nachr. iii. p. 258; Burckhardt, Beduinen, p. 214, etc.) It was sufficient that the cloth should be kept, in case such a proof might be required.

Deu 22:15-17 In such a case the parents of the young woman (הנּער for הנּערה, as in Gen 24:14, Gen 24:28, according to the earliest usage of the books of Moses, a virgin, then also a young woman, e. g. , Rth 2:6; Rth 4:12) were to bring the matter before the elders of the town into the gate (the judicial forum; see Deu 21:19), and establish the chastity and innocence of their daughter by spreading the bed-clothes before them.

It was not necessary to this end that the parents should have taken possession of the spotted bed-clothes directly after the marriage night, as in customarily done by the Bedouins and the lower classes of the Moslem in Egypt and Syria (cf. Niebuhr, Beschr. v. Arab. pp. 35ff. ; Arvieux, merkw. Nachr. iii. p. 258; Burckhardt, Beduinen, p. 214, etc.) It was sufficient that the cloth should be kept, in case such a proof might be required.

Deu 22:15-17 In such a case the parents of the young woman (הנּער for הנּערה, as in Gen 24:14, Gen 24:28, according to the earliest usage of the books of Moses, a virgin, then also a young woman, e. g. , Rth 2:6; Rth 4:12) were to bring the matter before the elders of the town into the gate (the judicial forum; see Deu 21:19), and establish the chastity and innocence of their daughter by spreading the bed-clothes before them.

It was not necessary to this end that the parents should have taken possession of the spotted bed-clothes directly after the marriage night, as in customarily done by the Bedouins and the lower classes of the Moslem in Egypt and Syria (cf. Niebuhr, Beschr. v. Arab. pp. 35ff. ; Arvieux, merkw. Nachr. iii. p. 258; Burckhardt, Beduinen, p. 214, etc.) It was sufficient that the cloth should be kept, in case such a proof might be required.

Deu 22:18-19 The elders, as the magistrates of the place, were then to send for the man who had so calumniated his young wife, and to chastise him (יסּר, as in Deu 21:18, used to denote bodily chastisement, thought the limitation of the number of strokes to forty save one, may have been a later institution of the schools); and in addition to this they were to impose a fine upon him of 100 shekels of silver, which he was to pay to the father of the young wife for his malicious calumniation of an Israelitish maiden, - twice as much as the seducer of a virgin was to pay to her father for the reproach brought upon him by the humiliation of his daughter (Deu 22:29); and lastly, they were to deprive the man of the right of divorce from his wife.

Deu 22:18-19 The elders, as the magistrates of the place, were then to send for the man who had so calumniated his young wife, and to chastise him (יסּר, as in Deu 21:18, used to denote bodily chastisement, thought the limitation of the number of strokes to forty save one, may have been a later institution of the schools); and in addition to this they were to impose a fine upon him of 100 shekels of silver, which he was to pay to the father of the young wife for his malicious calumniation of an Israelitish maiden, - twice as much as the seducer of a virgin was to pay to her father for the reproach brought upon him by the humiliation of his daughter (Deu 22:29); and lastly, they were to deprive the man of the right of divorce from his wife.

Deu 22:20-21 In the other case, however, if the man’s words were true, and the girl had not been found to be a virgin, the elders were to bring her out before the door of her father’s house, and the men of the town were to stone her to death, because she had committed a folly in Israel (cf. Gen 34:7), to commit fornication in her father’s house. The punishment of death was to be inflicted upon her, not so much because she had committed fornication, as because notwithstanding this she had allowed a man to marry her as a spotless virgin, and possibly even after her betrothal had gone with another man (cf.

Deu 22:23, Deu 22:24). There is no ground for thinking of unnatural wantonness, as Knobel does.

Deu 22:20-21 In the other case, however, if the man’s words were true, and the girl had not been found to be a virgin, the elders were to bring her out before the door of her father’s house, and the men of the town were to stone her to death, because she had committed a folly in Israel (cf. Gen 34:7), to commit fornication in her father’s house. The punishment of death was to be inflicted upon her, not so much because she had committed fornication, as because notwithstanding this she had allowed a man to marry her as a spotless virgin, and possibly even after her betrothal had gone with another man (cf.

Deu 22:23, Deu 22:24). There is no ground for thinking of unnatural wantonness, as Knobel does.

Deu 22:22 If any one lay with a married woman, they were both of them to be put to death as adulterers (cf. Lev 20:10). In connection with the seduction of a virgin (נער, puella , a marriageable girl; בּתוּלה, virgo immaculata , a virgin), two, or really three, cases are distinguished; viz., (1) whether she was betrothed (Deu 22:23-27), or not betrothed (Deu 22:28, Deu 22:29); (2) if she were betrothed, whether it was ( a ) in the town (Deu 22:23, Deu 22:24) or ( b ) in the open field (Deu 22:25-27) that she had been violated by a man.

Deu 22:23-24 If a betrothed virgin had allowed a man to have intercourse with her (i. e. , one who was not her bridegroom), they were both of them, the man and the girl, to be led out to the gate of the town, and stoned that they might die: the girl, because she had not cried in the city, i. e. , had not called for help, and consequently was to be regarded as consenting to the deed; the man, because he had humbled his neighbour’s wife.

The betrothed woman was placed in this respect upon a par with a married woman, and in fact is expressly called a wife in Deu 22:24. Betrothal was the first step towards marriage, even if it was not a solemn act attested by witnesses. Written agreements of marriage were not introduced till a later period (Tobit 7:14; Tr. Ketuboth i. 2).

Deu 22:23-24 If a betrothed virgin had allowed a man to have intercourse with her (i. e. , one who was not her bridegroom), they were both of them, the man and the girl, to be led out to the gate of the town, and stoned that they might die: the girl, because she had not cried in the city, i. e. , had not called for help, and consequently was to be regarded as consenting to the deed; the man, because he had humbled his neighbour’s wife.

The betrothed woman was placed in this respect upon a par with a married woman, and in fact is expressly called a wife in Deu 22:24. Betrothal was the first step towards marriage, even if it was not a solemn act attested by witnesses. Written agreements of marriage were not introduced till a later period (Tobit 7:14; Tr. Ketuboth i. 2).

Deu 22:25-27 If, on the other hand, a man met a betrothed girl in the field, and laid hold of her and lay with her, the man alone was to die, and nothing was to be done to the girl. “ There is in the damsel no death-sin (i.e., no sin to be punished with death); but as when a man riseth against his neighbour and slayeth him, even so is this matter .” In the open field the girl had called for help, but no one had helped her. It was therefore a forcible rape.

Deu 22:25-27 If, on the other hand, a man met a betrothed girl in the field, and laid hold of her and lay with her, the man alone was to die, and nothing was to be done to the girl. “ There is in the damsel no death-sin (i.e., no sin to be punished with death); but as when a man riseth against his neighbour and slayeth him, even so is this matter .” In the open field the girl had called for help, but no one had helped her. It was therefore a forcible rape.

Deu 22:25-27 If, on the other hand, a man met a betrothed girl in the field, and laid hold of her and lay with her, the man alone was to die, and nothing was to be done to the girl. “ There is in the damsel no death-sin (i.e., no sin to be punished with death); but as when a man riseth against his neighbour and slayeth him, even so is this matter .” In the open field the girl had called for help, but no one had helped her. It was therefore a forcible rape.

Deu 22:28-29 The last case: if a virgin was not betrothed, and a man seized her and lay with her, and they were found, i. e. , discovered or convicted of their deed, the man was to pay the father of the girl fifty shekels of silver, for the reproach brought upon him and his house, and to marry the girl whom he had humbled, without ever being able to divorce her.

This case is similar to the one mentioned in Exo 22:15-16. The omission to mention the possibility of the father refusing to give him his daughter for a wife, makes no essential difference. It is assumed as self-evident here, that such a right was possessed by the father.

Deu 22:28-29 The last case: if a virgin was not betrothed, and a man seized her and lay with her, and they were found, i. e. , discovered or convicted of their deed, the man was to pay the father of the girl fifty shekels of silver, for the reproach brought upon him and his house, and to marry the girl whom he had humbled, without ever being able to divorce her.

This case is similar to the one mentioned in Exo 22:15-16. The omission to mention the possibility of the father refusing to give him his daughter for a wife, makes no essential difference. It is assumed as self-evident here, that such a right was possessed by the father.

Deu 22:30 (or Hebrew_Bible_23:1) This verse, in which the prohibition of incest is renewed by a repetition of the first provision in the earlier law (Lev 18:7-8), is no doubt much better adapted to form the close of the laws of chastity and marriage, than the introduction to the laws which follow concerning the right of citizenship in the congregation of the Lord.

Regulations as to the Right of Citizenship in the Congregation of the Lord - Deuteronomy 23 From the sanctification of the house and the domestic relation, to which the laws of marriage and chastity in the previous chapter pointed, Moses proceeds to instructions concerning the sanctification of their union as a congregation: he gives directions as to the exclusion of certain persons from the congregation of the Lord, and the reception of others into it (Deu 23:1-8); as to the preservation of the purity of the camp in time of war (Deu 23:9-14); as to the reception of foreign slaves into the land, and the removal of licentious persons out of it (Deu 23:15-18); and lastly, as to certain duties of citizenship (Deu 23:19-25). The Right of Citizenship in the Congregation of the Lord.

- Deu 23:1. Into the congregation of the Lord there was not to come, i. e. , not to be received, any person who was mutilated in his sexual member. פּצוּע־דּכּה, literally wounded by crushing, i. e. , mutilated in this way; Vulg . eunuchus attritis vel amputatis testiculis . Not only animals (see at Lev 22:24), but men also, were castrated in this way. שׁפכה כּרוּת was one whose sexual member was cut off; Vulg .

abscisso veretro . According to Mishnah Jebam. vi. 2, “ contusus דּכּה est omnis, cujus testiculi vulnerati sunt, vel certe unus eorum; exsectus (כּרוּת), cujus membrum virile praecisum est . ” In the modern East, emasculation is generally performed in this way (see Tournefort, Reise. ii. p. 259, and Burckhardt, Nubien, pp. 450, 451). The reason for the exclusion of emasculated persons from the congregation of Jehovah, i.

e. , not merely from office ( officio et publico magistratu , Luth .) and from marriage with an Israelitish woman ( Fag. , C. a Lap. , and others), but from admission into the covenant fellowship of Israel with the Lord, is to be found in the mutilation of the nature of man as created by God, which was irreconcilable with the character of the people of God. Nature is not destroyed by grace, but sanctified and transformed.

This law, however, was one of the ordinances intended for the period of infancy, and has lost its significance with the spread of the kingdom of God over all the nations of the earth (Isa 56:4).

Deu 23:2 So also with the ממזר, i. e. , not persons begotten out of wedlock, illegitimate children generally (lxx, Vulg .) , but, according to the Talmud and the Rabbins , those who were begotten in incest or adultery (cf. Ges. thes . p. 781). The etymology of the word is obscure. The only other place in which it occurs is Zec 9:6; and it is neither contracted from מוּם and זר (according to the Talmud , and Hitzig on Zec 9:6), nor from זר מעם ( Geiger Urschr.

p. 52), but in all probability is to be derived from a root מזר, synonymous with the Arabic word “to be corrupt, or foul. ” The additional clause, “ not even in the tenth generation ,” precludes all possibility of their ever being received. Ten is the number of complete exclusion. In Deu 23:3, therefore, “ for ever ” is added. The reason is the same as in the case of mutilated persons, namely, their springing from a connection opposed to the divine order of the creation.

Deu 23:3-8 Also no Ammonite or Moabite was to be received, not even in the tenth generation; not, however, because their forefathers were begotten in incest (Gen 19:30.) , as Knobel supposes, but on account of the hostility they had manifested to the establishment of the kingdom of God. Not only had they failed to give Israel a hospitable reception on its journey (see at Deu 2:29), but they (viz.

, the king of the Moabites) had even hired Balaam to curse Israel. In this way they had brought upon themselves the curse which falls upon all those who curse Israel, according to the infallible word of God (Gen 12:3), the truth of which even Balaam was obliged to attest in the presence of Balak (Num 24:9); although out of love to Israel the Lord turned the curse of Balaam into a blessing (cf.

Num 22-24). For this reason Israel was never to seek their welfare and prosperity, i. e. , to make this an object of its care (“to seek,” as in Jer 29:7); not indeed from personal hatred, for the purpose of repaying evil with evil, since this neither induced Moses to publish the prohibition, nor instigated Ezra when he put the law in force, by compelling the separation of all Ammonitish, Moabitish, and Canaanitish wives from the newly established congregation in Jerusalem (Ezr 9:12).

How far Moses was from being influenced by such motives of personal or national revenge is evident, apart from the prohibition in Deu 2:9 and Deu 2:19 against making war upon the Moabites and Ammonites, from the command which follows in Deu 23:8 and Deu 23:9 with reference to the Edomites and Egyptians. These nations had also manifested hostility to the Israelites.

Edom had come against them when they desired to march peaceably through his land (Num 20:18.) , and the Pharaohs of Egypt had heavily oppressed them. Nevertheless, Israel as to keep the bond of kindred sacred (“he is thy brother”), and not to forget in the case of the Egyptians the benefits derived from their sojourn in their land. Their children might come into the congregation of the Lord in the third generation, i.

e. , the great-grandchildren of Edomites of Egyptians, who had lived as strangers in Israel (see at Exo 20:5). Such persons might be incorporated into the covenant nation by circumcision. Preservation of the Purity of the Camp in Time of War. - The bodily appearance of the people was also to correspond to the sacredness of Israel as the congregation of the Lord, especially when they gathered in hosts around their God.

“ When thou marchest out as a camp against thine enemies, beware of every evil thing . ” What is meant by an “evil thing” is stated in Deu 23:10-13, viz. , uncleanness, and uncleanliness of the body.

Deu 23:3-8 Also no Ammonite or Moabite was to be received, not even in the tenth generation; not, however, because their forefathers were begotten in incest (Gen 19:30.) , as Knobel supposes, but on account of the hostility they had manifested to the establishment of the kingdom of God. Not only had they failed to give Israel a hospitable reception on its journey (see at Deu 2:29), but they (viz.

, the king of the Moabites) had even hired Balaam to curse Israel. In this way they had brought upon themselves the curse which falls upon all those who curse Israel, according to the infallible word of God (Gen 12:3), the truth of which even Balaam was obliged to attest in the presence of Balak (Num 24:9); although out of love to Israel the Lord turned the curse of Balaam into a blessing (cf.

Num 22-24). For this reason Israel was never to seek their welfare and prosperity, i. e. , to make this an object of its care (“to seek,” as in Jer 29:7); not indeed from personal hatred, for the purpose of repaying evil with evil, since this neither induced Moses to publish the prohibition, nor instigated Ezra when he put the law in force, by compelling the separation of all Ammonitish, Moabitish, and Canaanitish wives from the newly established congregation in Jerusalem (Ezr 9:12).

How far Moses was from being influenced by such motives of personal or national revenge is evident, apart from the prohibition in Deu 2:9 and Deu 2:19 against making war upon the Moabites and Ammonites, from the command which follows in Deu 23:8 and Deu 23:9 with reference to the Edomites and Egyptians. These nations had also manifested hostility to the Israelites.

Edom had come against them when they desired to march peaceably through his land (Num 20:18.) , and the Pharaohs of Egypt had heavily oppressed them. Nevertheless, Israel as to keep the bond of kindred sacred (“he is thy brother”), and not to forget in the case of the Egyptians the benefits derived from their sojourn in their land. Their children might come into the congregation of the Lord in the third generation, i.

e. , the great-grandchildren of Edomites of Egyptians, who had lived as strangers in Israel (see at Exo 20:5). Such persons might be incorporated into the covenant nation by circumcision. Preservation of the Purity of the Camp in Time of War. - The bodily appearance of the people was also to correspond to the sacredness of Israel as the congregation of the Lord, especially when they gathered in hosts around their God.

“ When thou marchest out as a camp against thine enemies, beware of every evil thing . ” What is meant by an “evil thing” is stated in Deu 23:10-13, viz. , uncleanness, and uncleanliness of the body.