Some of these guidelines seem arcane, but let’s see if a pattern appears when we summarize them. What’s the bigger picture?
A woman divorced cannot remarry her first husband…but it didn’t seem to be a problem for a divorced woman to remarry. Store that one away for a minute.
Every other command in this passage make sense. Don’t take away a person’s means of making a living in order to repay a debt. Respect privacy, give newlyweds time to enjoy one another, Don’t take vital garments from the poor…even if they owe you.
Keeping that in mind, this idea of marriage/remarriage must also have made perfect sense at the time. For the life of me, I can’t understand it right now…or think of any way that it points to a spiritual lesson. For instance; when we betray God and prostitute ourselves, He takes us back.
Moving to the idea of leaving crops for others to “glean”, I am reminded of a time when my aunt taught me what gleaning was. They had just picked corn in the neighbors field, and the picker had missed a stalk here or there. We spent an hour walking around in the field picking up stray ears and chatting, and she mentioned that gleaning was in the Bible. I thought it was pretty cool…then again I was around 8 years old. She was the first one to tell me the story of Ruth and Boaz…my aunt Frances (Franny) is quite a lady.
Coming back from memory lane: leaving some crops in the field is the Lords welfare system. Welfare isn’t a bad thing, when it’s done correctly. In this example the poor people may work to collect enough to survive on, and none goes to waste. The value of the crops left in the field is probably far less than what we are taxed today, trying to accomplish the same thing. Again, this whole section is themed toward taking care of others. Yesterday we learned about fairness with a hint of justice. Today it seems to be justice and compassion for those less fortunate. inside all these passages is the constant exhortation to remain holy. I don’t know how you could read any of this without coming away with a mandate to follow God’s laws completely so that you, your family and the land would be blessed.
Just for fun, let’s tackle chapter 25.
Once again, almost all of this guidance describes a situation that has gone “too far”. The flogging cannot extend past 40 lashes. The ox may not be stopped from eating, the brother may not refuse to give his sister in law children, the woman may not grab a man’s private parts.]
It seems to me that there was a certain amount of action that was acceptable, but it could go too far. For instance, you are allowed to use oxen to tread out grain, but to refuse them feed is going too far. A woman is allowed to break up a fight, but if she grabs the privates, that’s too far.
Maybe what we are learning here (besides compassion, justice, holiness and fairness) is that there is such a thing as the outer limit of what’s acceptable. I know that I can go 3 or 4 miles over the speed limit…but there is a speed that is “too far”. Could it be that God is trying to get us to understand that our unintentional sins will be tolerated and dealt with (even though they are not acceptable) but the intentional transgressions are “too far”?
I’m thinking this as I have just finished reading chapter 27. There are blessings for obedience, and curses for disobedience. Could it be as simple as God saying to a nation “Listen, I will tolerate your imperfection, but there are some activities that you cannot “accidentally or innocently” become involved in. If you do these things, you will be punished, it’s simply going too far”
Idols aren’t created by accident, that’s intentional. Denying a family extension of the bloodline is intentional. Associating with people that God is angry with and has declared “off limits” is intentional. Intentional sin is a very serious thing indeed.
Faithfully,
PR