The MacArthur Study Bible, NKJV

by John MacArthur

  19:20 hear and fear. When the fate of the false witness became known in Israel, it would serve as a deterrent against giving false testimony in Israel’s courts.

  19:21 eye for eye. This principle of legal justice (called lex talionis, “law of retaliation”) was given to encourage appropriate punishment of a criminal in cases where there might be a tendency to be either too lenient or too strict (see notes on Ex. 21:23, 24; Lev. 24:20). Jesus confronted the Jews of His day for taking this law out of the courts and using it for purposes of personal vengeance (cf. Matt. 5:38–42).

  Deuteronomy 20

  20:1–20 The humanitarian principles applicable in war under Mosaic law are in stark contrast to the brutality and cruelty of other nations.

  20:1 do not be afraid. When Israelites went into battle, they were never to fear an enemy’s horses or chariots because the outcome of a battle would never be determined by mere military strength. The command not to be afraid was based on God’s power and faithfulness, which had already been proved to Israel in their deliverance from Egypt.

  20:2–4 the priest shall…speak to the people. The role of the priest in battle was to encourage the soldiers by God’s promise, presence, and power to be strong in faith. A lack of trust in God’s ability to fight for them would affect the strength of their will so that they would become fainthearted. Victory was linked to their faith in God.

  20:5–8 Let him go and return to his house. Four exemptions from service in Israel’s volunteer army were cited to illustrate the principle that anyone whose heart was not in the fight should not be there. Those who had other matters on their minds or were afraid were allowed to leave the army and return to their homes, since they would be useless in battle and even influence others to lose courage (v. 8).

  20:10–15 offer of peace. Cities outside of Canaan were not under the judgment of total destruction, so to them Israel was to offer a peace treaty. If the city agreed to become a vassal to Israel, then the people would become tributary subjects. However, if the offer of peace was rejected, Israel was to besiege and take the city, killing the men and taking possession of the rest of the people and animals as spoils of war. Note here the principle that the proclamation of peace preceded judgment (cf. Matt. 10:11–15).

  20:16–18 utterly destroy. The Canaanite cities were to be totally destroyed, i.e., nothing was to be spared, in order to destroy their influence toward idolatry (cf. 7:22–26).

  20:19, 20 you shall not destroy its trees. When besieging a city, armies in the ancient world would cut down the trees to build ramps and weapons, as well as facilities for the long siege. However, Israel was not to use fruit trees in the siege of a city so they could enjoy the fruit of the Land God had given to them (7:12, 13).

  Deuteronomy 21

  21:1–9 it is not known who killed him. This law, which dealt with an unsolved homicide, was not given elsewhere in the Pentateuch. In the event that the guilty party was unknown, justice could not adequately be served. However, the people were still held responsible to deal with the crime. The elders of the city closest to the place where the body of a dead man was found were to accept responsibility for the crime. This precluded inter-city strife, in case relatives sought revenge. They would go to a valley (idol altars were always on high places, so this avoided association with idolatry) and there break the neck of a heifer, indicating that the crime deserved to be punished. But the handwashing of the elders (v. 6) would show that, although they accepted responsibility for what had happened, they were nevertheless free from the guilt attached to the crime.

  21:5 This distinctly indicates that final judicial authority in the theocracy of Israel rested with the priests.

  21:11–14 a beautiful woman. According to ancient war customs, a female captive became the servant of the victors. Moses was given instruction to deal in a kind way with such issues. In the event her conquerors were captivated by her beauty and contemplated marriage with her, one month was required to elapse, during which her troubled feelings might settle, her mind would be reconciled to the new conditions of conquest, and she could sorrow over the loss of her parents as she left home to marry a stranger. One month was the usual mourning period for Jews, and the features of this period, e.g., shaving the head, trimming the nails, and removing her lovely clothes (ladies on the eve of captivity dressed to be attractive to their captors), were typical signs of Jewish grief. This action was important to show kindness to the woman and to test the strength of the man’s affection. After the 30 days, they could marry. If later he decided divorce was appropriate (based on the provisions of 24:1–4), he could not sell her as a slave. She was to be set completely free because “you have humbled her.” This phrase clearly refers to sexual activity, in which the wife has fully submitted herself to her husband (cf. 22:23, 24, 28, 29). It should be noted that divorce appears to have been common among the people, perhaps learned from their time in Egypt, and tolerated by Moses because of their “hard hearts” (see notes on Deut. 24:1–4; Matt. 19:8).

  21:11, 12 among the captives a beautiful woman. Such a woman would be from a non-Canaanite city that Israel had captured (see 20:14) since all the Canaanites were to be killed (20:16). These discarded items were symbolic of the casting off of her former life and carried purification symbolism (cf. Lev. 14:18; Num. 8:7).

  21:15–17 has two wives. In the original, the words are rendered “has had two wives,” referring to events that have already taken place, evidently intimating that one wife is dead and another has taken her place. Moses, then, is not legislating on a polygamous case where a man has two wives at the same time, but on that of a man who has married twice in succession. The man may prefer the second wife and be exhorted by her to give his inheritance to one of her sons. The issue involves the principle of the inheritance of the firstborn (the right of primogeniture). The firstborn son of the man, whether from the favorite wife or not, was to receive the double portion of the inheritance. The father did not have the authority to transfer this right to another son. This did not apply to sons of a concubine (Gen. 21:9–13) or in cases of misconduct (Gen. 49:3, 4).

  21:18–21 a stubborn and rebellious son. Cf. 27:16. The long-term pattern of rebellion and sin of a child who was incorrigibly disobedient is in view. No hope remained for such a person who flagrantly violated the fifth commandment (Ex. 20:12), so he was to be stoned to death.

  21:22, 23 hang him on a tree. After an execution, the body was permitted to hang on a tree for the rest of the day as a public display of the consequences of disobedience. However, the body was not to remain on the tree overnight, but was to be properly buried before sunset. Cf. Gal. 3:13, where Paul quotes this text in regard to the death of the Lord Jesus Christ.

  Deuteronomy 22

  22:1—26:19 While loving God was the first duty (cf. 6:5), loving one’s neighbor came next (cf. Matt. 22:37–40). In this section, the law of loving one’s neighbor is applied to domestic and social relationships.

  22:1–4 hide yourself. The Israelite must not hide his eyes from such an obvious loss. It was his duty to pursue and bring back the lost property of his neighbor.

  22:5 anything that pertains to a man…woman’s garment. Found only here in the Pentateuch, this statute prohibited a man from wearing any item of feminine clothing or ornamentation, or a woman from wearing any item of masculine clothing or ornamentation. The same word translated “abomination” was used to describe God’s view of homosexuality (Lev. 18:22; 20:13). This instance specifically outlawed transvestism. The creation order distinctions between male and female were to be maintained without exception (cf. Gen. 1:27).

  22:6 a bird’s nest. Found only here in the Pentateuch, this law showed that God cared for the long-term provisions for His people. By letting the mother go, food could be acquired without killing the source of future food.

  22:8 a parapet. Found only here in the Pentateuch, this refers to the roof of a home in ancient Israel, which was flat and usually reached by outside stairs. To prevent injury or dea
th from falling, a fence was to be built around the roof. This, too, expressed love for those who might otherwise be injured or killed.

  22:9 different kinds of seed. The aim of the legislation seems to be to maintain healthy crops by keeping the seeds separate from one another. See note on Lev. 19:19.

  22:10 an ox and a donkey together. According to the dietary laws prescribed earlier (14:1–8), the ox was a “clean” animal, but the donkey was “unclean.” Even more compelling was the fact that these two different animals couldn’t together plow a straight furrow. Their temperaments, natural instincts, and physical characteristics made it impossible. As with the seed (v. 9), God is protecting his people’s food.

  22:11 garment…wool and linen. See note on Lev. 19:19.

  22:12 make tassels. See Num. 15:38–40 for the purpose of these tassels.

  22:13–30 This section is on family life (cf. Lev. 18:1–30; 20:10–21).

  22:13–21 An Israelite who doubted the virginity of his bride was to make a formal accusation to the “elders of the city.” If her parents gave proof of virginity showing the accusation was false, the husband was to pay a penalty and was prohibited from divorcing the woman. However, if she was found not to be a virgin, then she was to be put to death.

  22:15 the evidence of the young woman’s virginity. Probably a blood-stained garment or a bed sheet from the wedding night.

  22:19 shekels. This word is not in the Hebrew text, but the context suggests it. A shekel weighed .4 oz., so the total fine would be about 2.5 lbs. of silver.

  22:22–29 Adultery was punished by death for the two found in the act. If the adulterous persons were a man with a woman who was pledged to be married to someone else, this consentual act led to the death of both parties (vv. 23, 24). However, if the man forced (i.e., raped) the woman, then only the man’s life was required (vv. 25–27). If the woman was a virgin not pledged in marriage, then the man had to pay a fine, marry the girl, and keep her as his wife as long as he lived (vv. 28, 29).

  22:30 A man shall not take his father’s wife. In no case was a man to marry his father’s wife or have sexual relations with her. This probably has relations with a stepmother in view, though incest was certainly forbidden (cf. Lev. 18:6–8).

  Deuteronomy 23

  23:1 the assembly of the LORD. From the sanctification of the home and marriage in the previous chapter, Moses proceeds to the sanctification of their union as a congregation and speaks of the right of citizenship, including being gathered before the presence of the Lord to worship Him. Most likely, this law did not exclude one from residence in the area where Israel was to live, but from public offices and honors, intermarriage, and participation in the religious rites at the tabernacle plus later at the temple. The emasculated (v. 1), the illegitimate (v. 2), and the Ammonites and Moabites (vv. 3–6) were not allowed to worship the Lord. The general rule was that strangers and foreigners, for fear of friendship or marriage connections which would lead Israel into idolatry, were not admissible until their conversion to God and the Jewish faith. This purge, however, describes some limitations to the general rule. Eunuchs, illegitimate children, and people from Ammon and Moab were excluded. Eunuchs were forbidden because such willful mutilation (lit. in Heb., by crushing, which was the way such an act was generally performed) violated God’s creation of man, was associated with idolatrous practices and was done by pagan parents to their children so that they might serve as eunuchs in the homes of the great (cf. 25:11, 12). The illegitimate were excluded so as to place an indelible stigma as a discouragement to shameful sexual misconduct. People from Ammon and Moab were excluded, not because they were born out of incest (cf. Gen. 19:30ff.), but on account of their vicious hostility toward God and His people Israel. Many of the Israelites were settled E of the Jordan in the immediate neighborhood of these people, so God raised this wall to prevent the evils of idolatrous influence. Individuals from all 3 of these outcast groups are offered grace and acceptance by Isaiah upon personal faith in the true God (cf. Is. 56:1–8). Ruth the Moabitess serves as a most notable example (cf. Ruth 1:4, 16).

  23:2, 3 to the tenth generation. The use of the word “forever” in vv. 3, 6 seems to indicate that this phrase is an idiom denoting permanent exclusion from the worshiping community of Israel. In contrast, an Edomite or Egyptian might worship in Israel in the third generation (see vv. 7, 8). Though these nations had also been enemies, Edom was a near relative, coming from Jacob’s family, while individual Egyptians had shown kindness to the Israelites at the Exodus (cf. Ex. 12:36).

  23:9–14 Because the camp of Israelite soldiers was a place of God’s presence (v. 14), the camp was to be kept clean. Instruction was given concerning nocturnal emission (vv. 10, 11) and defecation (vv. 12, 13). Such instruction for external cleanness illustrated what God wanted in the heart.

  23:15—25:19 Moses selected 21 sample laws to further illustrate the nature of the requirements of living under the Sinaitic Covenant.

  23:15, 16 A fugitive slave was not to be turned over to his master. Evidently this has in mind a slave from the Canaanites or other neighboring nations who was driven out by oppression or with a desire to know Israel’s God.

  23:17, 18 Prostitution as a form of worship was forbidden. “Dog” was a reference to male prostitutes (cf. Rev. 22:15).

  23:19, 20 This prohibition of lending money at interest to a fellow Israelite is qualified by Ex. 22:25 and Lev. 25:35, 36, which indicates that it restricts its application to the poor and prevents further impoverishment, but it was allowed for foreigners who were engaged in trade and commerce to enlarge their wealth. According to Deut. 15:1, 2, it is also clear that money could be legitimately lent in the normal course of business, subject to forgiveness of all unpaid debt in the sabbatical year (cf. 24:10).

  23:21–23 Though vows were made voluntarily, they were to be promptly kept once made. Cf. Num. 30:2.

  23:24, 25 Farmers were to share their produce with the people in the Land, but the people were not to profit from the farmers’ generosity.

  Deuteronomy 24

  24:1–4 This passage does not command, commend, condone, or even suggest divorce. Rather, it recognizes that divorce occurs and permits it only on restricted grounds. The case presented here is designed to convey the fact that divorcing produced defilement. Notice the following sequence: 1) if a man finds an uncleanness (some impurity or something vile, cf. 23:14) in his wife, other than adultery, which was punished by execution (cf. 22:22); 2) if he legally divorces her (although God hates divorce, as Mal. 2:16 says; He has designed marriage for life, as Gen. 2:24 declares; and He allowed divorce because of hard hearts, as Matt. 19:8 reveals); 3) if she then marries another man; 4) if the new husband then dies or divorces her; then that woman could not return to her first husband (v. 4). This is so because she was “defiled” with such a defilement that is an abomination to the Lord and a sinful pollution of the Promised Land. What constitutes that defilement? Only one thing is possible—she was defiled in the remarriage because there was no ground for the divorce. So when she remarried, she became an adulteress (Matt. 5:31, 32) and is thus defiled so that her former husband can’t take her back. Illegitimate divorce proliferates adultery. See notes on Matt. 5:31, 32; 19:4–9.

  24:5 During the first year of marriage, a man was not held responsible for military service or any other duty. He was to devote that year of marriage to the enjoyment and establishment of his marriage.

  24:6 Two millstones were needed to grind grain. Neither was to be taken in pledge because it was indispensable to one’s daily subsistence.

  24:7 The death penalty would be exacted on kidnappers who kidnaped a brother Israelite for involuntary servitude or as merchandise to sell.

  24:8, 9 Moses exhorted the people to follow the commands of the Lord regarding infectious skin diseases (see notes on Lev. 13:1—14:57).

  24:10–13 his pledge. This would often be a cloak, an outer garment, which was given in pledge to guarantee the repayment of a loan. God’s pe
ople were to act righteously in the lending of money. An example of a righteous lender was one who did not forcefully exact payment and who allowed a poor person to retain his pledge (cloak) overnight if it was necessary to keep him warm. Lending to the poor was permitted, but without 1) interest (23:19, 20); 2) coercion to repay; and 3) extension of the loan beyond the sabbatical year (15:1, 2).

  24:14, 15 Day laborers were to be paid on the day they labored because they lived day to day on such wages (cf. Lev. 19:13; Matt. 20:1–16).

  24:16 Punishment for a crime was to be borne only by the offender. See notes on Ezek. 18. The death of Saul’s 7 grandsons (2 Sam. 21:5–9) is a striking exception of national proportion grounded in God’s sovereign wisdom, as was the death of David and Bathsheba’s first son (2 Sam. 12:14).

  24:17, 18 The administration of law should be carried out with equity for all members of society, including those with the least power and influence, e.g., widows, orphans, and immigrants.

  24:19–22 The practice of allowing the needy to glean in the field was grounded in the remembrance of Israel’s hard service in Egypt (v. 18).

  Deuteronomy 25

  25:1–3 Corporal punishment for crimes committed was to be equitably carried out in the presence of the judges and was limited to 40 stripes.

  25:4 A worker must be allowed to enjoy the fruit of his own labor (cf. 1 Cor. 9:9; 1 Tim. 5:18; 2 Tim. 2:6).

  25:5–10 Levirate marriages (from Latin, levir, “husband’s brother”) provided that the brother of a dead man who died childless was to marry the widow in order to provide an heir. These were not compulsory marriages in Israel, but were applied as strong options to brothers who shared the same estate. Obviously, this required that the brother be unmarried and desired to keep the property in the family by passing it on to a son. Cf. Lev. 18:16; 20:21 where adultery with a living brother’s wife is forbidden. Though not compulsory, this practice reflected fraternal affection, and if a single brother refused to conform to this practice, he was confronted with contempt and humiliation by the elders. The perpetuation of his name as a member of the covenant people witnessed to the dignity of the individual. Since Num. 27:4–8 gave daughters the right of inheritance when there were no sons in a family, it is reasonable to read “no child” rather than “no son” in v. 5. Cf. Tamar, Gen. 38:8–10, and the Boaz-Ruth marriage, Ruth 4:1–17.