Grace Theological
Journal 8.2 (1987) 213-25.
[Copyright © 1987
Grace Theological Seminary; cited with permission;
digitally prepared for use at
Gordon and
DEUTERONOMY: AN EXPOSITION
OF THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW
JOHN H. WALTON
In contrast to the idea that the book of Deuteronomy is a
legalistic refinement of Mosaic regulations, the structure of Deuter-
onomy suggests that it is designed to elucidate the broader
morality
behind each of Ten Commandments. The book, then, is an exposition
of the spirit of the Commandments. The sweeping implications
of the
decalogue oblige the individual to a lifestyle of moral conduct that
is
far broader than the “letter of the law" would suggest.
Deuteronomy
revolves around four major issues (authority, dignity, commitment,
and rights and privileges), each of which is the focus of two
or more
commandments. Under each of the four issues, one commandment
deals with conduct toward God and one or more with conduct
toward man. When this structure is studied, it becomes clear that
Moses grouped legal
cases around common themes to bring a truer
understanding of God's concerns and requirements as they are re-
flected in each command of the decalogue.
Thus, there is a moral
theme behind each command that creates timeless parameters for
ethical conduct.
*
* *
INTRODUCTION
ONE of the most frequently
encountered questions among Chris-
tians of the last nineteen
hundred years concerns the significance
and applicability of the OT law for the Church.
Such questions have
not been limited to the laity, as theologians have
grappled with the
hermeneutical issues involved with
cross-testamental exegesis. Careful
responses need to be made to such questions in
order to lay a
foundation for a correct understanding of "Church
and Society."
Deuteronomy,
as one of the major repositories of Israelite law,
has been subjected to much scrutiny in this regard.
A breakthrough in
the understanding of the book came in 1979 when
Kaufman pub-
lished his suggested
correlation of the deuteronomic laws and the
214
GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
decalogue.1 This was the first
successful attempt at such a correlation
and has already gained recognition as a seminal
work in the area of
Deuteronomy
studies.2
Kaufman was of the opinion that the arrangement
of the deuter-
onomic laws in accordance with
the decalogue was merely a literary
device and that it did not necessarily betray the
Israelite perception of
legal classification.3 An examination of
the correlations of the various
sections of Deuteronomy with the decalogue suggests, however, that
the arrangement served more than a literary
function. Rather, by his
choice and classification of the legal material, Moses
exemplified the
"spirit" behind each of the ten basic laws, the decalogue. The impli-
cation of this hypothesis is
that it is not left to Christ or even to
Jeremiah
to recognize that the Ten Commandments are to be under-
stood as broader in scope than the "letter of
the law." Rather, the
commandments serve as doors into the
discussion of a transcendant
morality which they are fully understood to
require. In other words,
the Ten Commandments, even as early as Moses, were
understood to
oblige the individual to a lifestyle of moral conduct
both with regard
to God and to man.
It is possible to identify in Deuteronomy four
major issues which
the decalogue addresses
and around which the laws seem to be
organized. They are:
MAIN
ISSUES RE:GOD RE:MAN
Authority
Commandment
1 Commandment 5
Dignity
Commandment
2 Commandments 6; 7, 8
Commitment
Commandment 3 Commandment 9
Rights
and Privileges Commandment 4 Commandment 10
AUTHORITY
Commandment 1 has as its focus the authority of
God, while
Commandment
5 is concerned with human authority, mostly in its
relationship to divine authority.
While Kaufman saw Commandments
1
and 2 combined in Deuteronomy 12, I believe Commandment 1 is
1 Stephen A. Kaufman, "The Structure
of the Deuteronomic Law," Maarav 1/2
(1978-79) 105-58.
2 Note: for instance, its influence in
such works as Victor Hamilton, Handbook
On
the Pentateuch (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1982), and Walter Kaiser,
Toward Old Testa-
ment Ethics (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1983).
3Cf., e.g., Kaufman,
"The Structure of the Deuteronomic Law,"
125.
WALTON: DEUTERONOMY: AN EXPOSITION 215
more closely aligned with Deuteronomy 6-11.4
These chapters convey
the idea that God should be our first priority and
final authority, and
that we owe him preference and obedience.
There are two direct statements of God's
authority in this sec-
tion. The first is in 6:4
where the well-known shema
presents YHWH,
and YHWH alone, as God. The second direct statement
is in
which speaks of YHWH as the God of Gods, the Lord of
Lords, and
the great, mighty and awesome God. Besides these
direct statements,
several explicit warnings against worshiping
other gods not only
speak of the authority of YHWH, but seem to
demonstrate that
Commandment
1 is under discussion (
21;
11:16). Rather than discussing the implications of the First Com-
mandment in legislative terms,
these chapters give examples of ways
that adherence to the First Commandment can be
demonstrated.
Included
here are the exhortations to love God (6:5;
22)
and to obey his commandments (6:6, 17, 24-25;
Lord
(
much time reminding the reader of how God has proven
or will prove
himself worthy of the respect and status that he
demands. For exam-
ple, Moses states that
that
(
8:2-5,
14-16; 11:2-7). Furthermore, God is able to bring prosperity
(
7:1-2,
16-18, 20-24; 9:1-6;
are met. While these chapters appear at first
glance to be somewhat
rambling, it seems that the concept of God's
authority and priority
serves as a common denominator and provides a key to
understand-
ing the thoughts that are
expressed.
In Commandment 5, human authority is the issue.
The deuter-
onomic treatment of the
commandment, however, does not focus on
how we are to respond to human authority as much as
it addresses
how human authority is to conform to divine
authority. It speaks of
the exercise of divine authority in the human
realm. The main role of .
human authority that is emphasized is instruction.
In the commandment proper (Deut
basic link for the communication of instruction and
for the repre-
sentation of divine authority.
The honor given to parents is put in the
4 This was initially the suggestion of my
colleague William Luck. For this and
numerous other insights gleaned from our hours of
discussion and reflected throughout
this paper I am deeply indebted to him.
216
GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
context of preservation of the covenant
("that you may live long in
the land"), and that preservation is
accomplished in the instruction of
children by the parents. This commandment
attempts to cover a weak
link: if parental instruction is not heeded, the
covenant's benefits are
in jeopardy.
The deuteronomic
treatment of Commandment 5 (Deut
sion of other forms of human
authority. It has the appearance of a
national application of the Fifth Commandment.
Each section speaks
of the way in which the various authorities could
place the covenant
benefits in jeopardy by identifying the weakest
link--the ways in
which each office can fail in carrying out its
responsibility before
God.
The first group treated is the judges who are
seen as responsible
for enforcing the covenant (17:2-7). Each time a
sentence is passed
there is an opportunity for instruction. The weak
link here would
occur if the judges were not preserving the integrity
of the system. So
the text speaks of bribes that distort justice (
are not enforced (
heeded (
to be the weak links in the authority/instruction
chain that could put
the covenant's benefits in jeopardy.
The next office to be treated is that of the
king (Deut
The
king is viewed as God's representative and is held responsible for
the people in the sense that he should set up a
system that conforms
to the requirements of the covenant. He is thereby
seen as the admin-
istrator of the covenant. The
weak links occur when he becomes
preoccupied with the accoutrements of office (vv
16-17) or when he
fails to observe the law. Either of these situations
can cause him
to fail in setting up an administration that
supports the covenant.
Instruction
here takes place through modeling. The king models
godliness to the people by governing in a way that
conforms to the
requirements of the covenant.
The priests and Levites had the responsibility
of serving, which
included teaching the people (
support of the priests and Levites by the
populace. The weak link
here is that if the priests were not supported they
could not function
and the covenant would be in jeopardy.
The last group is the prophets (18:9-22). They
had the respon-
sibility of passing on God's
messages, and thus were involved in both
the authority of God and in instruction. The
weakest links occur if
wrong authority is used (e.g., divination, vv 9-14),
if the people fail to
heed the prophet's words (v 19), or if the prophet
speaks his own
words rather than God's (v 20).
WALTON: DEUTERONOMY: AN EXPOSITION 217
In dealing with these four groups, the biblical
author moves
backwards through the line of authority which
starts with God com-
municating his instructions to the
people through the prophets. After
this, the priests have the responsibility of
instructing the people
concerning the word of God, and then the kings have
the responsi-
bility of setting up and
maintaining a system based on the instructions
given by God. Finally, the judges have the
responsibility of enforcing
the system that has been set up.
Deuteronomy may be seen to warn of areas where
the covenant
could be jeopardized through a break in the chain of
authority and
instruction. Human authorities need to be honored in
that they serve
as an important link in communicating God's
instructions to his
people. On the other hand, it is the responsibility of
human author-
ities not to corrupt their
offices by losing sight of their primary
function.
DIGNITY
Commandment 2 appears to be reflected in Deut
12:1-32. The
key verse is v 4: "You shall not treat the
LORD your God that way."
This
chapter addresses the fact that Israel was not to use the things or
places that were part of Canaanite worship. The
Israelites were not to
worship YHWH in the same way that the Canaanites
worshiped their
gods. This, of course, is directly related to the
ban on the use of
images that is the Second Commandment. The treatment
in Deuter-
onomy confirms that the ban
on images specifically concerns images
of YHWH, and it further clarifies that the
prohibition of images is
intended to be understood in the context of
worship.
It is easy to understand the concern that God
has for the Israelites
as they enter a land infested with Canaanites.
Syncretism is the path
of least resistance. So rather than allowing the
Canaanite sanctuaries
to be converted, only a central sanctuary is
sanctioned. This would
serve to assure homogeneity of religious practice and
set up a priestly
control of popular practice. Both of these
factors would help guard
against syncretism. This is especially evident
with regard to the ritual
elements where the closest monitoring was needed.
Deut 12:30-31
again make this clear: "beware that you are not
ensnared to follow
after them. . . and that you do not inquire after
their gods saying,
'How
do these nations serve their gods, that I also may do
likewise?'
You
shall not behave this way."
The main thrust of the deuteronomic
treatment, then, concerns
how the ritual aspect of worship takes place. The
Israelites are
instructed not to repeat pagan rituals (of which
images are a large
part), and a central sanctuary is to be established
to monitor the
218
GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
ritual practice. The concern is that the ritual must
reflect the true and
unique nature of YHWH rather than accommodating the
pagan stan-
dards in the world around
them. The dignity of YHWH is jeopardized
when he is treated as the pagans treat their
deities. The point is that
ritual is performed for the recognizing of no one else
but YHWH.
Thus,
ritual should never accommodate the world's standards. Rather,
all ritual must reflect true worship on the part of
the individual. True
worship cannot take place if ritual becomes an
end in itself. True
worship must give God his proper place. It
cannot be manipulative or
self-serving, for that robs God of
the dignity that the worship is
intended to recognize.
Corresponding to Commandment 2 and its concern
with the
preservation of the dignity of God
are three commandments (6, 7 and
8)
that are concerned with preserving the dignity of man.
Com-
mandment 6 appears to be treated
in Deut 19:1-21:23. This section,
for the most part, seeks to delineate what is
really behind the prohibi-
tion against murder by
discussing some of the instances in which life
is being taken, but where murder has not been
committed. As a result
we find sections on the following:
1. Accidental homicide and the connected
discussion of the function
of the levitical cities (19:1-13);
2. The requirement of two witnesses in a capital
case (since capital
punishment involves the taking of a life and the witnesses
are
implicated in the taking of life;
3. The treatment of malicious witnesses (
death if the case is a capital case;
4. The lex talionis as a protection against a judicial taking of life
where the crime would not call for that serious a punishment
(
Chap. 20 then proceeds to discuss the rules for
warfare, another
situation in which life is being taken, but the
commandment is not
being broken. In chap. 21, miscellaneous issues are
treated such as
caring for bloodguilt when the murderer is unknown.
This dem-
onstrates that the issue of
murder must be dealt with not only on the
level of punishing the murderer, but also in terms of
absolving blood-
guilt on the land (21:1-9). Also mentioned are the
guidelines for
dealing with the rebellious child (
capital punishment victim (
designed to protect the dignity of the individual
from a minimalist
perspective. That is, everyone deserves the dignity
of existence. Deu-
teronomy appears to be
suggesting exceptions to that general rule. A
murderer has forfeited his right to that dignity,
and war is another
matter altogether. In this section there are also
portions that do not
WALTON: DEUTERONOMY: AN EXPOSITION 219
fit this commandment easily, though they can be
seen to impact the
dignity issue (
Commandment 7, which would seem to connect with
22:1-23:14,
is one of the most difficult to fit together.
Chap. 22:1-12 deals with a
number of diverse issues, some of which can be tied to
dignity, some
of which seem more suitable to the issue of
integrity, and some which
do not seem to fit well at all. This sort of
development always causes
one to question his own system of organization. However,
the appar-
ently smooth operation of the
classification system throughout the
rest of the material leads to the hope that this is
merely a case of the
elusive nature of these specific examples.
Perhaps others will be able
to suggest suitable solutions.
Deut 22:12-30 treats the various types of
adultery including
inferred adultery (13-21), simple adultery (22),
rape (23-29), and
incest (30). These all threaten the dignity of the
family. Chap. 23:1-14
speaks of the relationship of emasculated, illegitimate,
and foreign
individuals to the assembly, as well as the matter
of cleanness in the
camp. These both have to do with preserving the
dignity of the camp.
Commandment
8, the prohibition against stealing, seems to be
treated in Deut 23:15-24:7 with regard to
preserving the dignity of
individuals. By his treatment of the issue, the
author attempts to deal
with the question of why stealing is wrong. By
seeing dignity as the
basic element behind the prohibition, he is able to
discuss other areas
that are impacted by the commandment. Deut 23:15-20
speaks of
stealing intangible things. The case of the
foreign slave who has
escaped to the land is a situation where
Israelites are prohibited from
stealing his freedom (a dignity issue). Deut 23:17-18,
in singling out
daughters and sons, implies that these individuals
are being forced
into prostitution, thus having their self-respect
stolen. Deut 23:19-20
forbids the charging of interest within the
institution of debt slavery in
that that is like stealing the interest from the
debtor, as well as
robbing him of the ability to recover. Again, in
the end, this robs him
of his self-respect.
Deut 23:21-23 speaks of stealing from God by not
paying one's
vows. This seems unusual in the context of
preserving human dignity,
and, as yet, the reason for its being here has not
been identified.
Deut 23:24-25 attempts to draw the line
concerning what is
stealing and what is not by giving a guideline
for picking food on
someone else's property. It also serves to
preserve the dignity of poor
travelers who gain their subsistence in this way.
Deut 24:1-4 covers the well-known case where a
man is pro-
hibited from remarrying a woman
whom he has divorced and who
has been married to someone else in the meantime.
Here the legisla-
tion does not treat the
issue of divorce but rather appears to be
220
GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
concerned about preserving the woman's
self-respect by forbidding
that she be treated as a piece of property. The
indecency found in her
(v 1) cannot be adultery, for the text has affirmed in the
previous
chapter that adultery is a capital crime.
Rather, the indecency ought
to be considered a matter of technicality5
that the husband is using as
an excuse to discard the woman. This would again
be an issue of
stealing her dignity from her.
Deut 24:5-6 speaks of stealing the things that
are essential for
survival. Military conscription of a
newly-married man is depriving
the new wife of her conjugal rights and of the
privilege of bearing
children (for her new husband might be slain in
battle). Likewise, the
theft of major food-producing implements is more than
theft of
goods, it is the stealing of an individual's ability
to provide for
himself and his family. Thus the issue of
stealing is expanded far
beyond the confines of the simple notion of taking
some object that
belongs to someone else. Most of this section
deals with intangibles
and is concerned with the dignity, rights, and
self-respect of others
which must not be violated. This is emphasized again
in the last
prohibition of this section.
Deut 24:7 deals with kidnapping. It is
interesting to note, how-
ever, that it treats only one specific kidnapping
situation. That is, it
identifies kidnapping as a capital crime when it is
either connected
with violence or with the sale of the kidnapped
individual. Presum-
ably if neither of these related crimes occurred,
kidnapping would not
be a capital crime. Kidnapping in general was
prohibited by the
Eighth Commandment without further elaboration. But here the
legislation is protecting the dignity of the
kidnapped individual even
further by placing a stricter punishment on
anyone who would abuse
the victim.
5 The rbd
tvrf referred to in Deut 24:1 could not be adultery, for
condemned the adulterer to death. The term is used
elsewhere only in Deut
it describes the situation in which excrement is
not properly cared for. It is significant
also that the woman is not prevented from
remarrying, and there is no prohibition
against the first husband remarrying the woman
if another marriage has not inter-
vened. Likewise, the woman is
not "defiled" if she marries anyone but the first
husband. The verbal stem used to reflect the
defilement in v 4 is the unusual hothpa’al,
which appears to involve passive, causative, and
reflexive or durative elements. For this
reason, I would interpret the defilement as something
that would be brought upon her
by her first husband should he attempt to remarry
her. This is treated under Com-
mandment 8 which suggests that
Deut 24:1 is not dealing with a sexual sin per se, but
with a situation in which the woman has been robbed
of her dignity. A possibility is
that the husband has used a menstrual dysfunction as
a legal loophole and excuse to
divorce the woman. After this kind of humiliation,
he is prevented from acting as if it
never happened and "graciously" taking her
back again. The second marriage is
brought into the case as the indicator that the
first husband totally repudiated the
woman.
WALTON: DEUTERONOMY: AN EXPOSITION 221
COMMITMENT
Commandments 3 and 9 seem to deal with the issue
of com-
mitment. These two commandments
have often been identified to-
gether because of the
similarity of their subject matter, and this
schema supports even further that connection.
Commandment 3 seems to be treated in Deut
13:1-14:21 and
addresses in various ways the problem of not
taking God seriously
enough or not taking one's relationship, commitment,
or obligations
to God seriously enough, which is part of the same
problem.
Deut 13:1-5 concern the false prophet. The false
prophet's activ-
ity is identified in v 3 as
a test from God, "to find out if you love the
Lord
your God with all your heart." If an individual is serious about
God,
the described behavior will be offensive and intolerable. The end
of v 5 makes it clear that the concern is to
"purge evil from among
you." Commandment 3 speaks of how God treats
those who do not
take him seriously ("God will not hold him
guiltless"). This chapter
follows up on that by suggesting that if one is
not offended by those
who do not take God or their commitment to God
seriously, then he
is guilty along with them. He should not hold them
guiltless or he
becomes an accomplice. If he tolerates wicked
behavior and fails to
purge it out, he is not taking God seriously. The
enticement to
worship other gods is used here as an example--any
wicked behavior
would qualify.
In vv 6-11, wickedness even in one's relatives
or friends should
not be tolerated. It is suggested in vv 12-18 that
even if a whole town
is involved, there should be no mercy. So whether
the offender is a
highly respected religious authority, a good friend,
or a large group of
people, wicked behavior cannot be tolerated.
Chap. 13 uses the hypothetical case of the most
blatant and basic
offense--enticement to serve other gods. In that
case, being serious
about a relationship with God requires immediate and
total purging.
In
contrast, chap. 4 uses a hypothetical case of something that is
tangential and subtle.
Chap. 14 is, of course, the section concerning
the dietary laws.
Wenham,
following the research of Douglas, an anthropologist, has
suggested that "holiness requires that
individuals shall conform to the
class to which they belong.”6 The unclean
animals are those that in
one way or another fail to conform to the
expectations of the animal
group to which they belong. Concerning the
restriction on the Isra-
elites to eat only clean animals, Wenham explains,
6 Gordon Wenham, "The Theology of
Unclean Food," The Evangelical
Quarterly
53 (1981) 11. My thanks to my
colleague, Dennis Magary, for bringing this article
to
my attention.
222
GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
Their diet was limited to certain meats in
imitation of their God who
had restricted his choice
among the nations to
bring to mind
distinguished between clean and
unclean foods, they were reminded
that holiness was more than
a matter of meat and drink but a way of
life characterized by purity
and integrity.7
The connection here would be that while
seriousness about God
requires severe action in blatant cases (chap
13), it requires a response
that is above reproach in the subtle cases
("gray areas"). In many
cases there would have been nothing innately wrong
with eating the
listed animals, but the truly committed person would
demonstrate his
commitment to God even in his diet. This is
holiness through symbol
and analogy (not unlike baptism). In chap. 13 the
preaching of an
individual was leading the people astray, and the
person who was
preaching needed to be put to death if God was to
be taken seriously.
In
chap. 14 the practice of an individual is an indicator of that
individual's commitment to God and
holiness in his life. This is an
important step for the person who is taking his
relationship to God
seriously.
Commandment 3 is paralleled by Commandment 9 which
treats
three areas:
1. Taking your commitments to your fellow man
seriously;
2. Assuming that he is going to take his
commitment to you
seriously;
3. Not making false accusations.
The
common denominator between these areas and the decalogue's
injunction against bearing false witness is the
matter of trust--trusting
one another to do what has been agreed upon. This
is the important
issue in the case of false witness. It was frequently
impossible to
determine by objective means whether an individual
was telling the
truth in court cases. The entire justice system, and
therefore the whole
fabric of society, was dependent on being able to
trust the word of a
witness. For trust to exist in a society,
individuals must have the
confidence that commitments are being taken
seriously.
The section in Deuteronomy that deals with this
commandment
is Deut 24:8-16, though others would extend the
section as far as
Deut
25:4. The verses in question, 24:17-25:4 could fit with either
commandment and may serve as a transition section,
but it seems to
fit better into the Commandment 10 discussion.
Deut 24:8-9 introduces the section by referring
to the example of
Miriam.
Here, a case of false accusation against Moses is adduced to
7 Ibid.,
12.
WALTON: DEUTERONOMY: AN EXPOSITION 223
remind the reader of the strict punishment that may
accompany a
violation of this commandment.
Deut 24:10-13 deals with the handling of a situation
where an
individual is the holder of his poor neighbor's
pledge. The reader is
admonished not to act in such a way that he would
betray a lack of
trust in his neighbor. He is not to think so poorly
of his neighbor as
to protect himself against the neighbor's not
fulfilling his pledge. This
is the same kind of statement that in Commandment
3 admonished
the reader not to imagine that God would not defend
things that were
said in his name.
Deut 24:14-15 instructs the Israelites
concerning pledges and
agreements. Everyone has the obligation to
establish his own trust-
worthiness by carrying out the agreements he has
made, and even
further, by being sensitive to the needs of
those who are depending on
him to meet their needs.
Deut 24:16 prohibits punishing someone for a
crime that he did
not commit. To punish an innocent person is like
bearing false
witness against him.
RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES
Commandments 4 and 10 speak of rights and
privileges. Com-
mandment 4 speaks of God's
rights, and Commandment 10 addresses
the issue of human rights.
In the decalogue,
the focus in Commandment 4 is on the Sab-
bath. God has a right to be honored through the
dedication of a
special day to him in gratitude for his
deliverance of
(Exodus 20). Deuteronomy seems to
pick up from that point by
discussing other things one might dedicate to God
in gratitude or
commemoration to honor him. Deut
14:22-16: 17 suggests showing
gratitude to God as the source of one's goods
(tying into Creation)
and as the source of one's freedom (tying into the
Exodus) by dedi-
cating some of one's goods to
him and by becoming a source of goods
and freedom to others in his name.
In this connection Deut 14:22-29 begins by
discussing the tithe.
This
is giving a portion of one's goods back to God in gratitude.
Every
third year this tithe is to go to the support of the community.
Other
elements of this section include the following:
1. During the seventh year no payment is to be
expected toward
long term debts of fellow Israelites (15:1-3). This is an
act of
compassion because observance of the fallow year would mean
that there was no guaranteed income that year.
2. Willingly lending to the poor among
224
GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
3. A six year limit to debt slavery of a fellow
Hebrew is set
(15:12-18)
4. Firstling sacrifice (
5. Passover (16:1-8)
6. Feast of weeks and first fruits (16:9-12)
7. Feast of Booths (
All
of these involve the setting apart of time or goods to give honor
to God in gratitude. This is the right of God and
our privilege: he
demands of us goods and acts of compassion, just
as he provides
goods and acts of compassion.
Commandment 10 in the decalogue admonishes against coveting.
Coveting
something is desiring something that does not belong
to
one. It oversteps the bounds of what one has a
right to possess.
Deuteronomy
appears to expand this thinking into the whole area of
violating the rights and privileges of others. The
rights of others are
to be preserved just as the rights of God needed
to be preserved in the
Fourth Commandment.
Deut 24:17 -18 speaks of the right to justice--the
basic right of
all, even those who are most vulnerable. In
connection to this, the
Israelites
are reminded of the time when they lost all their rights (in
only in the parallel section elaborating Commandment
4 (
Deut 24:19-22 deals with the right of the poor
to the leftovers of
the harvest. Deut 25: 1-3 speaks of the right of
the innocent that
punishment be made in full and the right of the
guilty that a limit be
set for being beaten. Deut 25:4 speaks of the right
of the ox. Deut
25:5-10
deals with the institution of levirate marriage-a protection
of the rights of the dead brother's family. Deut
25:11-12 addresses
the violation of the rights of the individual who
is being attacked. His
right to bear children is being threatened without
due process. Deut
25:13-16
speaks of the right to fair treatment in the marketplace.
Deut
25:17-19 uses the example of the Amalekites' taking
unfair
advantage of the vulnerable ones in the
wilderness.
Finally, 26:1-15 addresses the issue of first
fruits as a way of
remembering the rights and privileges that the
Israelites were enjoying
that their forefathers did not enjoy. There is also
a stress on the third
year tithe, which should be considered a right of
the poor.
The commandment itself, then, has focused on
coveting as a
violation of the rights that others have to their
own property. The
Deuteronomic treatment moves beyond
this to the basic issues of
human rights, justice and fair treatment.
WALTON: DEUTERONOMY: AN EXPOSITION 225
CONCLUSION
Based on this preliminary study, it is suggested
that a working
hypothesis may be established that views the deuteronomic law (chaps.
6-26)
as an expansion of the decalogue
with the intent of addressing
the spirit of the law. That is, the decalogue has implications con-
cerning conduct that far
transcend the limited number of issues that it
addresses directly. The author is accomplishing
this task by choosing
exemplary cases that are intended to highlight the
attitudes implied
by the initial commandment. In other words, the
author is presenting
implications of the decalogue by developing a legislative portfolio for
each of the commands--all with the express purpose
of moving
beyond legalism to a truer understanding of God's
concerns and
requirements. This then is much the
same as what Christ does in the
Sermon on the Mount. When the Lord
extrapolates from the com-
mandment against murder to the
idea that hateful anger falls into the
category of murder (Matt
mic treatment of the decalogue that has been suggested herein.
Morality
is more than a list of rules. The spirit of those rules must be
discerned and heeded. Both Moses in Deuteronomy
and Christ in the
Sermon
on the Mount show that the prohibition against murder is a
prohibition against things murderous, whether
attitudes or actions.
While much more work is needed, if this working
hypothesis is
true, it implies that the Deuteronomic
code is relevant to the church
because it elucidates not the letter but the
spirit of the law. While the
law in some ways has passed away, the validity of
the spirit behind
the law can never pass away, for it is a reflection
of an absolute
morality.
This
material is cited with gracious permission from:
Grace
Theological Seminary
www.grace.edu
Please
report any errors to Ted Hildebrandt at:
thildebrandt@gordon.edu