Chapter 24

1 Of divorce. 5 A new married man goeth not to war. 6, 10 Of pledges. 7 Of manstealers. 8 Of leprosy. 14 The hire is to be given. 16 Of justice. 19 Of charity.

1. Uncleanness. Literally, “nakedness,” and figuratively, as here, “shame” or “dishonor.” Her offense could not have been adultery, for that was punishable by death (Deut. 22:22; cf. Matt. 19:9). It was simply some behavior the husband considered improper or disgraceful. The Jews understood this Mosaic precept to mean that a man might divorce his wife for almost any reason (Matt. 19:3, 7). Christ explained, however, that it was not God’s will for divorce to be thus easily obtained (Matt. 19:4–6), and that this provision had been made only because of the “hardness” of their hearts (Matt. 19:8).

A bill of divorcement. Literally, “a note of separation.”

Give it. This was to be done formally, perhaps before witnesses, in order that it might be legally valid and incontestable.

Send her out. Another formal act. Presumably the husband was under obligation to send her forth provided with at least the necessary means to reach her father’s house in safety (see Gen. 21:14; cf. Deut. 15:13).

2. She may go. Her formal departure was a public announcement of the fact that she was no longer the man’s wife and was, therefore, free to remarry. The “note of separation,” or “note of cutting,” completely dissolved the marriage.

4. She is defiled. Consummation of marriage with a second husband made her unclean to her first husband. For him ever to take her again would be to commit adultery. She was unlawful to him (see Jer. 3:1).

Cause the land to sin. That is, by permitting moral depravity. Although God tolerated some things of which He certainly could not approve (see on Deut. 14:26), there were limits beyond which man might not transgress. The “land” is often personified, as though it felt and acted (see Lev. 18:25; Isa. 24:5).

Today some individuals refer to Deut. 24:1–4 as a basis for what they are pleased to consider “Christian divorce.” In reality, these verses open to our view the home life of the Jew, in which the taking of a wife was regarded as the acquiring of a piece of property. The husband’s authority over his wife was almost absolute. The purpose of the law here announced was to better the lot of Hebrew women. This law, far from establishing a low moral standard, or approving of one, represented a far higher standard than the cruel customs of the time recognized. The law guaranteed a divorced woman certain rights, and actually protected her from being considered as an adulteress and an outcast. She left her first husband’s home a free woman and a respected member of society, eligible to contract an honorable marriage. The writ of divorce stated that her first husband no longer had any legal claim upon her and that she was in no way obligated to him—she was free to become another man’s wife. Upon marrying again she did not become guilty of adultery, and the rights of her first husband were not infringed upon.

The Mosaic divorce law was instituted, not to annul the ideals of marriage as instituted by God at creation, but because of the “hardness” of men’s hearts (Matt. 19:8). The cast-off, unattached woman’s lot was a deplorable one. The bill of divorce alleviated her unfortunate lot. This law simply recognized the prevailing situation and sought to improve it. This was a law of permission, not one of command. These precise restrictions were designed to eliminate the easy divorce procedure the Hebrews had apparently learned in their association with heathen peoples.

It was against the concept of the wife as property that Christ spoke so emphatically (Matt. 5:27–32; 19:3–9). It had brought great misery and injustice to Jewish womanhood. The school of Hillel, which provided the popular Jewish religious philosophy of the time of Christ, interpreted the expression translated “some uncleanness” (Deut. 24:1) as meaning anything that may have become displeasing to the husband. The stricter, less popular Shammai school defined the “uncleanness” as some proved act of immodesty or adultery. In Christ’s time the Hillel school allowed divorce for such trivialities as the exposure of a woman’s arm in public, the burning of a husband’s meal, or when the husband found another woman more attractive. Of this lax attitude Josephus writes, “He that desires to be divorced from his wife for any cause whatsoever (and many such causes happen among men), let him in writing give assurance that he never will use her again as his wife any more, for by these means she may be at liberty to marry another husband, although before this bill of divorce be given, she is not to be permitted so to do” (Antiquities iv. 8. 23).

The law of Deut. 24:1–4 did not institute divorce, but tolerated it in view of the imperfections of human nature and the low moral concepts of God’s people at that time. To know God’s mind concerning marriage one must not camp at Deut. 24:1–4, but journey back to Gen. 1:27 and 2:24, even as Jesus did (Matt. 5:27–32; 19:3–9). The written counsel of Moses for the people of his day is to be interpreted against the background of his day, not of ours, and ever with the divine ideal in view. Christ lifted men’s eyes once more to that divine ideal ordained in Eden. That first marriage provides the pattern God would have His people follow today.

5. A new wife. That is, if he is “newly married” (RSV; see ch. 20:5–8).

Go out to war. See ch. 20:7. It is to the advantage of the state to enact such measures as will honor and exalt marriage. This law provided time for the firm establishment of the home. Even more important, from the Hebrew point of view, it made more certain an heir to perpetuate the family name and to inherit the family land.

Business. Literally, “service,” as the Hebrew word is often translated (Num. 4:23, 30, 35, 39, 43; 8:24). This refers to any public service that would take him away from home.

6. Nether or the upper millstone. Literally, “both millstones or the part of one.” The word translated “upper millstone” may refer to one stone, or to a piece of the mill (Judges 9:53; 2 Sam. 11:21).

A man’s life. That is, by taking from him something essential to the preparation of his food, and thus endangering the health of his family. For centuries the poor of the East have lived on the verge of starvation, and a seemingly little thing such as this might prove tragic.

7. Stealing. See Ex. 21:16. Kidnaping a man to make a slave of him was a crime punishable by death. A man’s personal freedom is precious in God’s sight. Slavery is an inexcusable sin against God and against society, as well as against the slave. Yet slavery has existed in some form or other in Eastern lands from time immemorial. The laws of God gave Israel were designed to eliminate slavery, in time. Slavery violates every human right and decency.

8. Leprosy. This was the worst form of ceremonial uncleanness, and therefore the most careful precautions were taken in respect to it. Two lengthy chapters in Leviticus (chs. 13 and 14) list the symptoms in great detail. The “plague,” literally, “the stroke.” The same Hebrew word is used in chs. 17:8; 21:5.

9. Miriam. See Num. 12. Miriam was one of three prominent leaders of Israel (Micah 6:4). Yet she was suddenly smitten with the dreadful disease leprosy, and driven from the camp of Israel for seven days (Num. 12:14). Neither her outstanding position nor her personal relation to Moses protected her from it. The poorest and most miserable leper was treated no more harshly than a leper from some wealthy or officially prominent family. There was a tendency among the Jews to view all cases of leprosy as divine judgments, but it is not reasonable to take such a view of all such instances (Luke 13:1–6). Leprosy is a type of sin. The spiritual leper, whose very soul is diseased, can find no cure for his malady outside of Jesus Christ.

10. Into his house. A legal provision for the protection of the poor. His home and its contents would be of small material value, and would consist of only the barest of necessities. Such a family would probably own nothing more than their clothes, a few pots, and a primitive grinding mill, in addition, perhaps, to house and land. Yet such a home was to be respected and to remain inviolate. It had little to offer as security for a loan (see Ex. 22:26, 27), but it was not to be abused as something of little consequence. The owner would come to the door and display what he could offer as security. The lender was not to enter the home to pick and choose what he wished to take.

11. Thou shalt stand abroad. Literally, “outside thou shalt stand.” God has erected a fence around the poor and humble. The property rights of the needy are as dear to God as are those of the wealthy and socially prominent. Compare the parable of Matt. 18:23–35. God expects the Christian to manifest considerateness in dealing with his brethren.

12. His pledge. His outer cloak may have been the only worth-while thing the poor man had to offer as his “pledge.” To offer clothing as security was not uncommon (Deut. 24:17; Job 22:6; Prov. 20:16; 27:13; Amos 2:8). This pledge was not to be held overnight (Ex. 22:25, 26). The outer garment was used for many purposes (Ex. 12:34; Judges 8:25). On the requirement of restoring a poor man’s pledge see Eze. 18:7, 12; 33:15.

13. Righteousness. The faith of Abraham was reckoned to his account before God as righteousness. The manifestation of mercy to the poor and needy is equally pleasing to God (Matt. 25:34–36). Men are the objects of God’s tender love and mercy, and He would have us look upon our fellow men in the same way. The Hebrew word for “righteousness” appears in both masculine and feminine forms. The later prophets of Israel used the feminine form, as Moses does here, with reference to sympathetic attention to the poor and needy. They were dependent on God (Ps. 10:14; 72:12), who ever reminded His people that their obligation to Him included solicitous care for these needy ones (cf. 1 Sam. 2:8). But at the same time they were not to do their “alms,” literally, “righteousness,” before men (Matt. 6:1). They were to be righteous before the Lord.

14. Oppress. Literally, “defraud.” The same Hebrew word is used in Lev. 19:13; 1 Sam. 12:3, 4; Lev. 6:2, 4.

An hired servant. See Lev. 19:13; Jer. 22:13; Mal. 3:5; James 5:4.

Strangers. No difference was to be made between the natural Jew and the proselyte (Lev. 19:34).

His hire. Punctuality in the payment of wages is as positive a divine requirement as Sabbath observance or tithing. It is not an act of benevolence, but of justice. Compare the parable on laborers in the vineyard (Matt. 20:1, 2, 8).

Setteth his heart. Literally, “lifteth up his soul.” He lived, as it were, from hand to mouth, and had no reserve.

16. Every man. It was not unusual among the heathen to condemn an entire family for the crime of one member (see Dan. 6:24). But God would have the transgressor himself bear the full penalty of his crime (2 Kings 14:6; Eze. 18:10–24). The Scriptures draw a clear line of distinction between a penalty inflicted for a wrong act, as here (see also Rom. 6:23), and the natural results of such an act (Ex. 20:5).

Pervert the judgment. See Ex. 22:22–24.

A widow’s raiment. Compare Job 24:3. Justice is not to be denied even the most helpless. The stranger, the widow, the orphan, and the helpless are to enjoy the full protection of the law (see Matt. 18:28–35).

18. Thou wast a bondman. Compare Lev. 19:33, 34. The oppressor who has himself experienced the bitterness of oppression is doubly culpable.

19. Thine harvest. God ordained numerous laws for easing the lot of the needy (Lev. 19:9, 10; 23:22). The landless were given the privilege of gleaning the fields, the vineyards, and the olive groves. The landowner could well spare the gleanings, and thereby bring happiness to the poor, relieve their need, and at the same time warm his own heart (see Prov. 11:24).

20. Olive tree. From season to season the harvesttime in particular would remind men of the value and beauty of a compassionate spirit. The existence of the poor among us provides an opportunity for cultivating the spirit of generosity. He who remains callous of heart at harvesttime, when he gathers in the bountiful gifts of nature, may scarcely be expected to exercise generosity at other times.

22. Remember. See v. 18; ch. 15:15. Our own difficult and disappointing experiences in life should make us sympathetic toward others who may at a later time be suffering as we once did.

Ellen G. White comments

5    AH 216

10-12MH 187

10-13MB 111

14, 15  PP 532

17   MH 187

19-21MH 186

19-22PP 531