The Middle Passage

Approximately 12.5 million people were stolen from Africa during the transatlantic slave trade, and just under 2 million of them died during the Middle Passage. The Middle Passage is the the name given to the journey from the coast of Africa to the Americas. During this time slaves were shackled together and kept in the hull of the ship, often left to lie in their own feces and vomit. When slaves died, they were carelessly thrown overboard into the ocean, which changed the routes of sharks.

References

1. Michel Marriott. "Remembrance of Slave Ancestors Lost to the Sea". New York Times. June 19, 1994
2. Brendan Wolfe. "Slave Ships and the Middle Passage". Encyclopedia Virginia; visited February 2020

Why Does God Let Bad Things Happen?

Just because things aren't perfect on Earth, doesn't mean God doesn't exist. It doesn't mean He doesn't love us, and it doesn't mean He isn't watching out for us.

Introduction

Tuesday, I was all in my feelings about the mistrial in the Michael Slager case. I tried to make myself remember that only one of the twelve jurors seemed to think it was OK to shoot a fleeing man in the back, not once, but multiple times (side note: in my opinion, the black police officer who saw that the taser was nowhere near Walter Scott's body should be on trial as an accomplice). Of course, that doesn't ease the hurt of knowing that one person can halt the delivery of justice when a black man has been shot by a police officer. Meanwhile, 2 million more people voted for Hillary Clinton than Donald Trump,^[1] but the man who ran a campaign that incited racial violence is our president-elect. Seems like in both cases the system is working against black people. That's why it didn't surprise me when I saw so many comments and responses to the mistrial on Facebook when I logged on.

One of my friends posted the beautiful response of Walter Scott's mother, a proclamation of her faith in God and her strength to continue on. The comments on the video reflected a sentiment I've heard all too much it my life. They all boiled down to rage against God for letting bad things happen. So many people lose faith, or never gain faith, because they don't believe a good God would let these things happen. In the "woke" black community I see an even stronger aversion to God, with people blaming God for the enslavement of our ancestors. Reading those comments, I was moved to speak on the issue.

The issue is basically a cake made up of three layers: false doctrine, confusion of good and evil, and a sense of entitlement. Now bear with me, because we all fall into these traps—this isn't an indictment on people, but an attempt to show how what we are taught and how we feel create this disbelief, and an answer to some of the question broached.
Top

False Doctrine

People seem to think God is a fairy godmother waiting for us to wish on a star so He can grant our wishes. People quote "ask and ye shall receive" (Matthew 21:22) or "I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me" (Philippians 4:13) so much, that our image of God is that He just wants us to have what we want. When someone dies, we are quick say God has failed us, because we asked for them to live and for Christ to help them survive. We totally neglect John 11:25: "Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in me will live, even though they die." It's just another instance of picking and choosing what verses we want to believe and how we interpret them. If you believe the whole of the Bible, death isn't the end. Further, unless we live to see Jesus come back, we're all going to die some point; that's the price of sin.

We also tend to link sin with "bad people." If I say someone has sinned or is in sin, people assume I'm calling them a bad person. When a person like me says we're all going to die a first death because of sin, people are quick to talk about how good of a person the deceased is, but I'm not suggesting otherwise. We all sin. Abraham sinned, Moses sinned. David. Peter. Everyone in the Bible sinned (except Jesus). It doesn't mean we're "bad" people. The notion that because we haven't committed what we consider "major" sins, such as murder, give us a false sense that we aren't sinners so we should live long, healthy lives and reap the benefits of our "goodness."

Lots of preachers today are known as what has been dubbed "prosperity" preachers. They talk about all the great things that will happen if you follow Christ and stay true to God. According to them, life is a cake walk if you trust God: your bills will get paid, you'll find the spouse of your dreams, you'll be successful at whatever you do, and everyone around you will build you up...

Is that what happened in the Bible? Does the Bible not say that in the last days God's faithful won't be able to buy or sell (Revelation 13:17)—if you can't buy or sell, how do you pay bills (that's buying a service), how do you get paid (that's selling a service)? Was Jesus married? Paul? I'm not saying you won't find a spouse, but if the Bible were a Disney movie Christ would be the prince and the Church would be the princess, any other romance would be considered a subplot and likely not get a lot of air time.

Speaking of Disney movies, our society has us believing the good guy always wins in a triumphant victory, and then rides off into the sunset with his girl. We forget that Christ is the victor, not us. Most of the disciples ended up in jail or crucified. They weren't "successful" by the world's standard and they certainly weren't accepted by the world. So, why are people convinced that because Mr. Scott's mother (or anyone else) has strong faith, God will stop every bad thing from happening in their life? 1 Corinthians 10:13 tells us that God won't let us be tempted by more than we can handle; notice that He doesn't say He won't tempt us at all...

Job is my go to guy, for almost every thing in life, and is a perfect parallel for this situation. Job was a righteous man. God loved Job, and Job loved God, but the devil thought Job only loved God back because God gave him favor. As much as I hate to play devil's advocate, the devil's point of view makes sense. I'm sure if I'd lived during Job's era, I would have thought something like "yeah, sure, it's easy to be all righteous when you're being fed with a silver spoon."

Think about it: we are the bride of Christ, so you should always think about faith as a relationship between you and God. Love comes easy when the other person gives you everything you want and need. However, we know that men can get irritated with their wives because they talk through the football game and women can get irritated with their husbands because they don't want to spend 4 hours in the mall picking out the perfect towels. I know both of these are overly stereotypical; I'm exaggerating to making a point. The truth is, you're never going to be 100% satisfied with your spouse; they're going to do something you don't like at some point. That's the price of having free will and independent thought. What keeps people together is the fact that you're choosing to love the person (this applies to any relationship really). God doesn't want us to be gold diggers, claiming to love Him simply because He gives us everything we ask for. He wants us to choose Him. That's the whole point of Him letting Satan screw up Job's life; He proved that Job would trust and choose Him despite his pain and misfortune.

God knew that Job had done nothing to deserve the misfortune that befell him. God knew that Job loved Him, but He wanted to prove to the world what that love meant—that's why we know the story today. In the end, Job ended up with more blessings than he'd had before his trial, but people often forget that he still had to live through the trial. Do you think that just because God gave Job more children he forgot all about the children that died? Satan thinks that by wreaking havoc in lives of God's children, we will leave God, that's why he wanted to torture Job. Satan's goal is to steal as many from God as he can—even if you aren't joining a Satanic temple to worship the devil, the simple fact that you turn away from God is a victory in Satan's eyes. The easiest way to do this is to get you to question God's love.
Top

Confusion of Good and Evil

Let me ask you, how do you define a good person versus a bad person, and how do you assess a good action from a bad action? Right or wrong, some people in the country believe Micahel Slager was the good person, and Walter Scott was the bad person. Clearly, one the jurors believed killing Walter Scott was OK. We don't all have the same definition for these things, so who is right? Will we ever agree?

An Evil Guy

Most of us will agree that Hitler was a bad person; bad is an understatement. We feel this way because of what we know he did. Would we have felt this way in say, 1930? Would it have been a good action for someone to have killed him before he rose to power? Perhaps instead of outright murder, an illness claimed his life, would that have been better? If Hitler had died before he became the infamous murdering maniac he was, it would have been considered a tragedy and there would be absolutely nothing to make us say "he deserved to die." His mother would have felt the same pain that Mr. Scott's mother is feeling now.

I'm not suggesting Mr. Scott could have turned into a murdering machine later in life. I gave this example to remind you that how we view an action is completely relative to what we know. As humans, we have limited information. No matter how many different news sources we keep up with or how close to the victim/murderer we may be, our opinion of good and bad is based on biased information. God on the other hand knows all the information, that's why He's the only one able to judge good and evil in the end. The jury may acquit a murderer, but God will handle the final judgment. For all we know, God has an even worse fate lined up for Mr. Slager.

With the knowledge we have, it's easy to say what we think would have been a better outcome. Yet, we don't actually know how changing an event alters our current realty. Remember, if an event never happens, we loose every thing we learned from it. Now think, what did we learn from Hitler and World War 2?

Hitler didn't invent anti-semitism. He didn't even invent the idea of eugenics (the process of weeding out undesired genes to create a "superior" races of people). Had Hitler not shown the world the damage these ideas could cause, would California still be a hotbed for researching eugenics?^[2][3][4] Would someone else have picked up that torch? If the US hadn't bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, no one would know the harm radiation from nuclear bombs does after the initial explosion. We may have seen nukes fly back and forth across countries, resulting in even more people dead, before anyone realized the danger if the weapons had been delayed for the next war.

I'm not saying these things are good—they're horrific moments in humanity that should bring shame and saddness—but everything happens for a reason. We can't see what would happen if different events had played out over history. We don't know if it would have been better or worse. God does. I choose to trust He took us down the best path, despite our subconscious determination to do as much harm to one another and the Earth as we possibly can. Outrage over the death of our black men is going to serve a higher purpose, you can believe that.

An Evil Time

Since the issue and the comments were more specific to black people, I want to address the issues brought up about God and slavery while I'm talking about the ambiguity of how life works. One of the commenters said slavery (assumably the enslavement of Africans in the Americas) was proof that God didn't exist. Really? Were the Israelites His chosen people? Were they not enslaved for 400 years? Interestingly, we too were enslaved for around 360 years (roughly 1503 to 1865^[5][6])—history has a way of repeating itself... Of course the same logic goes for slavery that goes for what I said about WWII... What would the world look like today if slavery had never occurred?

Well, for one, I doubt the United States of America would have ever existed. Part of what made America financially stable was the fact that it had a free source of labor. The ideas of freedom of speech and freedom of religion (albeit, only for white men at the time) would have never gained popularity, because America wouldn't have existed. The Catholic Church would probably still be torturing people who dared to disagree with them. Would Europe have relinquished the colonies in Africa, Southeast Asia, Australia, and the Americas? Would they have ever been inspired to lead a revolt, or would Europe still be greedily consuming these countries resources while decimating their people? If the US never grew in to a super power, what would have happened when the world went to war?

Another obvious consequence would be the erasure of most of our own existences. Let's face it, as black as we claim we are, African-Americans are, on average, about 20% white.^[7] Chances are, most of us wouldn't exist because ol' massa wouldn't have been able to rape our great-great-great-great-grandmother. Sure, she might have still had a child, but it would not have been the same the child. Furthermore, all of the inventions by slaves would probably not have been invented; why invent stuff you don't need?

We're so content to focus on one detail, we forget there's a bigger picture. Regardless of whether you look at our lives from a religious point of view or from an atheistic point of view, we are but a speck in the grand scheme of things.
Top

Entitlement

I know, I know, you still want to know why so much bad stuff happens on Earth. It isn't satisfactory to simply say God is providing us with a choice or that these things happen for a reason. It doesn't really make us feel better that the Bible clearly shows bad things happening to good people, either, does it? Why can't we just be happy?

³But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: ⁴In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.2 Corinthians 4:3-4

Well, have you ever stopped to think about who's running the show here on Earth, and why?

We've been taught to think in terms of black and white, not just racially, but for good and evil too. Good always wins, and evil always loses. Yes. In the end. But it isn't the end yet, is it? We're in the middle of the story! Right now Satan is the ruler of this world; that's why bad things happen. The world rejected God when they crucified His Son on the cross; the message was "we want to do it our way."

We want to tell God what we will and won't do, but expect Him to swoop in and save us every time the world plunges into chaos. We don't want prayer in schools. We don't want "In God We Trust" on our money. We don't want "under God" in our pledge. We don't want to take the whole Sabbath for rest and worship. We don't want to give up the things God has said were bad for us. Yet, suddenly, when tragedy strikes, we feel like God has wronged us because He didn't intervene. That's entitlement...

Like I said earlier, we all sin. I may not be a cold-blooded killer (or even a warm-blooded killer—does that exist?), or an adulterer, or a thief, but I'm not perfect. Therefore, I do not deserve a perfect life. Adam and Eve chose to eat the forbidden fruit. Now, we're all born with the knowledge of good and evil and the freedom to choose. If I choose wrong, my actions don't just affect me, they affect everyone around me. Eve's choice affected Adam. Together, their choices affected Cain and Abel. Cain's choice to be jealous killed Abel. Could God have put a bubble around Abel to protect him? Sure. Could God have struck Cain dead the moment the idea crossed his mind? Sure. Of course, then we wouldn't have free will. If we had no choice in the matter, that would make Him an evil dictator. If you could make your spouse stay with you forever and only do what you wanted, but on the inside, they though to do differently, and you exercised your power over them, would you be a good person? Conversely, if you gave your spouse the freedom they deserve and they chose to betray you, are they entitled to your forgiveness? Do you owe them anything?
Top

The Battle Isn't Over

Just because things aren't perfect on Earth, doesn't mean God doesn't exist. It doesn't mean He doesn't love us, and it doesn't mean He isn't watching out for us.
Top

References

1. Wolf, Richard. "Clinton's popular vote lead surpasses 2 million". USA Today. November 21, 2016
2. Black, Edwin. "The Horrifying American Roots of Nazi Eugenics". History News Network. September 2003
3. "Introduction to Eugenics". Genetics Generation. 2015
4. Cherney, Isabelle. "The History of Eugenics in the United States". Crieghton University. 2016
5. Adi, Hakim. "Africa and the Transatlantic Slave Trade". BBC. October 5, 2012
6. Wickham, DeWayne. "Wickham: Do you know when slavery began and ended?". USA Today. February 10, 2014
7. Gates, Henry Louis. "Exactly How ‘Black’ Is Black America?". The Root. February 2013

Deuteronomy 28: The Curse of Israel & The Black Israelite Theory

The basis of the Black Israelite movement and the pronouncement of the curses that will befall God's people when they turn away from Him. Are they on to something?

Introduction

I've known that there were people who believed Blacks were actually the Israelites for quite some time. Many Afro-centric forms of Christianity have emerged throughout the years, which only seems logical. Many ask the question how can a slave and a master serve the same God. When you see the tremendous whitewashing of the Bible Europeans accomplished—Adam and Eve weren't White, Moses blended in with the Egyptians (who weren't White), Jesus has black African ancestry (Tamar, Rehab, and Bathsheba were all of Hamitic descent and all ancestors of King David^[1])—it's no wonder that Blacks would be put off from the whitewashed ideas. Often referred to as "the White man's religion" in pro-Black circles, Christianity is often blamed for the demise of Blacks, despite the fact that it is actually the misinterpretation and misuse of God's Word (i.e. man not God) that led to men justifying the horrors of slavery. This history has split Blacks into 3 general groups: those who follow traditional Christianity, those who reject Christianity, and those who have formed pro-Black Christian ideologies.

The first pro-Black Christian ideology I was ever introduced to is the Rasta movement. Born in Jamaica in the 1920s and 1930s, Rastafarianism isn't even considered a religion by some followers (they'd probably not like for me to call it an "ism" now that I think about it). Rastafari doctrine includes many practices that have nothing to do with Africa, but some of the most recognizable practices and beliefs, such as their signature dreadlocks, point back to African roots. Within Rastafari doctrine are the following Afro-centric beliefs: Ethiopian emperor Haile Selassie I as a divine or messianic figure, pride for one's African heritage, heavy influences of Jamaican culture (note that dreadlocks are not just associated with Rastas, but Jamaicans as a whole), along with strength and resistance to oppression.^[2]

Some time in college, I came across another movement that professes the Israelites of the Bible were actually Black or African. I never followed their theology much, from my understanding the Israelites were quite diverse in race. Not only did God command them to be acceptant of strangers (i.e. foreigners) who would become part of Israel by following God's law, but there are specific examples of Israelites marrying Africans. Moses married an Ethiopian woman while Joseph married an Egyptian. It seems self-explanatory that the Israelites of the Bible would have had both Arab and African ancestry, accumulating European ancestry once the Romans invaded. To me the Black Israelite theory, even more so than the Rasta movement, seemed like a way of answering the question of why everyone seems to hate Black people. It wasn't until I finished re-reading Deuteronomy 28 that I had to go back and look at the ideology of this theory.
Top

Deuteronomy 28

Deuteronomy 28 conveys a blessing or a curse upon Israel contingent upon their decision to follow God. Deuteronomy 28:1-14 tells of the blessings Israel will receive if they follow the Word of God, while Deuteronomy 28:15-68 outlines the curses that will befall them if they do not follow the Word of God. Deuteronomy 31 already confirms that Israelites will not be able to keep God's law and will fall into idolatry. Today, the people identified as Jews and considered descendants of the Israelites are only descendents of the Southern Kingdom of Judah, which contained the tribes of Judah and Benjamin along with a few Levites. The other 10 tribes of the Israelites are referred to as the lost tribes.^[3] Assumably they are still under the curse presented in Deuteronomy 28. One of the many curses God places on the Israelites is that they will be scattered from end to end of the Earth.

And the Lord shall scatter thee among all people, from the one end of the earth even unto the other; and there thou shalt serve other gods, which neither thou nor thy fathers have known, even wood and stone.Deuteronomy 28:64 KJV

To me, this implies that the Israelites, no matter what their original race may or may not have been, are now a very diverse group of people. The fact that the were to be scattered from one end of the Earth to the other and worship other gods implies that they would try to blend in or be like the people of these foreign places, which would likely include relationships leading to racial mixing (this already occurred at Baal-peor and in Egypt, so why not in these foreign lands?).

While this whole passage is often used by those who claim the Blacks of America must be the Israelites of the Bible, it is Deuteronomy 28:68 that comes to the forefront.

And the Lord shall bring thee into Egypt again with ships, by the way whereof I spake unto thee, Thou shalt see it no more again: and there ye shall be sold unto your enemies for bondmen and bondwomen, and no man shall buy you.Deuteronomy 28:68 KJV

My study Bible denies that Egypt was meant to refer to the literal land of Egypt as the Israelites would not need to be transported to their neighboring country by boat.^[4][5] Many sources believe that Egypt was used as a symbol in this verse to represent bondage and oppression. Others suggest that this was fulfilled during the reign of Titus.^[5][6] The verse goes on to predict that they will not see "it" again and will be sold to their enemies as slaves, where no man will buy them. Scholars assert that "no man shall buy you" refers to the process of redemption.^[5] Remember the Israelites could be redeemed from slavery through monetary means, and were also meant to be set free in 7 years. This would not hold when they were cursed and no man would be able to buy them their freedom. The "it" in the verse may be speaking of Egypt. It seems as though being transported to Egypt is only the beginning of their punishment as it from "there ye shall be sold;" this implies that as scholars suggest, the Israelites would be sold into slavery in Egypt. The question is whether it is Egypt or Israel that they won't see again.

Photocredit: ShutterStock.com/michaeljung

It is common knowledge that the only people to literally be sold into slavery and transported away from their home via ships are Africans during the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade. This is part of why those who follow this movement believe this verse is referring to those descending from African slaves. Many scholars say the reference to ships is not to be taken as literal ships, but to be a reminder to the people that when they came out of Egypt God parted the Red Sea, but when they went back He would not be with them. From this verse alone, I see the trouble of interpretation, as it really could go either way. Everything seems to hinge on whether it's Egypt or the ships that are figurative or symbolic, and whether either or even both may be literal.

However, as we step through the whole passage, there really is a great similarity to the experience of the descendants of the African Slaves.
Top

Plagues

In Deuteronomy 28:59-61, God says He will unleash plagues and sickness upon the Israelites as part of this curse. God says there will be plagues upon them that are not recorded in the book of law (i.e. not leprosy or boils, but something new). A professor at the Harvard School of Public Health was quoted by ABC News as stating that of the 15 leading causes of death in the U.S., Blacks have higher death rates in 12 of them.^[10]
Top

STDs and HIV

Though Blacks make up only 13% of the U.S. population, 44% of new HIV cases were among Blacks and 41% of those living in America with HIV are Black. All sources confirm that HIV disproportionately effects Blacks in America.^[7][8] In the year 2000, it was found that STDs in general are disproportionately effecting Blacks as well. Gonorrhea rates in the Black community were found to be 30 times higher than in the White community. Black women were found to be at the highest risk for Genital Herpes (HSV-2).^[9]
Top

Cancer

Treatments for cancer have increased rapidly over the years, making many of them less likely to cause death. Yet for colorectal cancer, Blacks have a higher death rate than Whites, even with treatment. Black women are more likely to die from breast cancer, despite getting mammograms at similar rates to White women. Death rates from all types of cancer are at least 30% higher in Blacks.^[10] Although Black men have lower exposure to tobacco fumes, they are 50% more likely to develop lung cancer.^[11]
Top

Heart Disease

Minorities, specifically Hispanics (who can be Black or White) and Blacks, are more likely to be affected by obesity and hypertension which makes us more susceptible to heart disease.^[10] Hypertension, or high blood pressure, effects Blacks at much younger ages than Whites. Nearly half of Blacks (42% of Black men and 45% of Black women) over the age of 20 suffer from hypertension.^[11] While Whites, Hispanics, and Asians saw a decline in instances of cardiovascular disease between 2006 and 2010, Blacks and Native Americans saw an increase.^[10]
Top

Diabetes

Hispanics, who can identify racially as White or Black and may also have descendants from the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade, have the highest rate of diabetes in the U.S.; they are twice as likely to die from the disease. Compared to non-Hispanic whites, Mexican Americans were 87% more likely to have diabetes and Puerto Ricans were 94% more likely! While Hispanics lead in diabetic cases in the U.S., Blacks are still 60% more likely than Whites to acquire the disease. In fact, Blacks who have diabetes are 2.5 times more likely to need an amputation because of diabetes, and 5.6 times more likely to develop kidney disease as a result of the disease, than people of other races also living with diabetes.^[11]

Asthma

Blacks are 3 times more likely to die from Asthma than Whites.^[11]

Stroke

First time stroke risk is twice as high for Blacks. Blacks in the age range of 34-54 are 4 times more likely than Whites to be killed by stroke.^[11]
Top

What Diseases Don't We Lead In?

There are a few health problems we don't lead in, however. Asian American women have the highest risk of osteoporosis.^[10] There are also several diseases that are more prevalent in the Ashkenazi Jewish community.^[25]
Top

Loss of Family

Deuteronomy 28:30 says that the Israelite men will seek to marry a woman, but another man will sleep with her. Later, in Deuteronomy 28:32, God says the sons and daughters of the Israelites would be taken from them and given to another people.

This may or may not apply to the Holocaust (many of the people supporting the Black Israelite Theory deny the Jews of today as Isrealites at all—I don't necessarily agree with this, but we'll talk about that in depth later). Families were split in the concentration camps, though I'm not certain that they were sent to different places so much as some were sent directly to the gas chambers while others were forced into labor. I'm also not sure if the Nazi's were raping Jews.

The parallels to American Slavery, however, are quite apparent. Blacks were denied the right to legally marry, though they were sometimes allowed to do so by their owners. However, this didn't prevent the owners from raping Black women they wanted to sleep with or selling one of the spouses to another place.^[12][13] Research has validated that more than 32% of slave marriages were dissolved due to the master selling one of the spouses.^[14] Not only were spouses sold away, children could be sold from their parents. Sometimes they were sent to nearby plantations, other times to completely different states. Slave owners didn't care about the family structure, they simply sold for profit (or to make a point).

Today, Child Protect Services (CPS) takes children from families accused of abusing the child. Of the children removed by CPS, Whites claim the majority, however, Blacks are removed from families at the highest rate: 14.5 per 1000 children. Essentially, Black children are taken in to custody disproportionately to the number of Blacks in the population.^[15] Not only are Black children taken from their parents at a higher rate, children of color are less likely to be reunited with their families, less likely to be placed in a permanent family, and more likely to experience poor educational, social, or behavioral outcomes.^[16] In the year 2000, Blacks made up 15% of the U.S. population, but 36% of the children in foster care. In 2004 and 2009, Blacks had the highest rate of disproportionality among minorities by a landslide. Whites, Hispanics, and Asians were found to be "underrepresented" in the foster care system, with Blacks and Native Americans being overrepresented in the foster care. Blacks were found to be overrepresented by a factor of 2.36 and Native Americans at a factor of 1.76 in 2009.^[17]

Whether the children are actually being abused at a higher rate or not is not the point; the fact is children are still being taken from the Black community at a higher rate than normal. God didn't say why the children would be given away (aside from the Israelites being disobedient, which could involve child abuse). Jewish children in the U.S. are not singled out for examination to see if this problem persists in their families as well. Most Jewish children are probably counted under "White," though there are Jews of other races in the U.S. as well.
Top

Other Parallels

A verse by verse description of the parallels can be found curtesy of Hebrew Israel (if you're reading this post after July 25, try looking for this reference at here; Hebrew Israel is in the process of moving their site). It is quite an interesting read.
Top

Are Blacks The True Israelites

Many who follow this theory believe that Blacks are the true descendants of the Israelites and that the Jews of today are imposters. One site based their theory of the Jews being "imposter" Israelites on the fact that most Jews of today are either Ashkenazi Jews or Sephardi Jews, the bulk being Ashkenazi. Yet, Ashkenaz was a descendant of Gomer, son of Japheth and clearly defined as a Gentile.

²The sons of Japheth; Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan, and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras. ³And the sons of Gomer; Ashkenaz, and Riphath, and Togarmah. ⁴And the sons of Javan; Elishah, and Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim. ⁵By these were the isles of the Gentiles divided in their lands; every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations.Genesis 10:2-5 KJV

A scientific study actually confirms that the majority of Ashkenazi Jews descend, maternally, from Europeans. This confirms that many of the women were converts to Judaism.^[18] This does not discount them from being descended form the Israelites, however! Not only was conversion perfectly acceptable in God's law (strangers could become part of the Israelite community by following God's law), but the husbands of these converts were likely Israelite. Just as Joseph was an Israelite and his wife was an Egyptian, but their sons Ephraim and Manasseh were Israelites. Though we are not told who they marry, it is possible that they married Egyptians as well. No one is suggesting that because Joseph's wife was Egyptian the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh are not Israelite tribes, though.

As I mentioned before, God Himself said that the Israelites would be scattered across the globe. There are groups of people from every continent that claim to be descended from the Israelites. The Conchin Jews of India,^[19] the Bene Israel also of India,^[20] the Bnei Menashe of India,^[21] and the Beta Israel of Ethiopia,^[22] are all recognized as Jews. In addition there are tribes that have claimed Israelite heritage that have not yet been recognized as Jews. These include the Lemba of South Africa,^[23] and the Igbo Jews.^[24] It is very possible that Blacks in the U.S. today are descended from African Jews. However, the same truth exists in Asia and Europe. God's people are not restricted to one race or phenotype.

Another issue I take with the conclusions made by those who promote the Black Israelite theory, is that they neglect the binary nature of Deuteronomy 28. Yes, the curses listed were predicted to befall the Israelites if they disobeyed God, but those who returned to Him would again reap the benefits. Most of the people I've met that claim Jewish descent are actually practicing Judaism. Whether it's Rabbinic Judaism or Torah based Judaism I can't be sure, but if they are in fact following God's law (minus the sacrifices which are both unnecessary thanks to Jesus and impossible now that the Temple is gone). Would they not still be keeping His covenant and thus reap the blessings? Not only would this would explain the wealth those promoting the Black Israelite theory use against the Jews of today, but exempt them of the curse.
Top

References

1. McCray, Walter A. "The Black Presence in the Bible: Discovering the Black and African Identity of Biblical Persons and Nations. December 1995
2. "Rastafarianism". Religion Facts. November 2015
3. "Where are the Ten Lost Tribes?"". PBS. November 2000
4. Holman Bible Publishers. Holman KJV Study Bible. pg. 347. 2014
5. "Deuteronomy 28:68 Commentaries". Bible Hub. 2016
6. "Deuteronomy 28:68 Commentary". Bible Study Tools. 2016
7. "HIV Among African Americans". Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. February 2014
8. Guo, Jeff. "HIV in America has disproportionately hurt blacks — even after treatment". Washington Post. July 2014
9. "2000 STD Prevention Conference - African Americans Disproportionately Affected by STDs". Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. June 2003
10. Carollo, Kim. "5 Diseases More Common in Minorities". ABC News. October 2011
11. DeNoon, Daniel J. "Why 7 Deadly Diseases Strike Blacks Most". WebMD. 2016
12. Hunter, Tara. "Putting an Antebellum Myth to Rest". New York Times. August 2011
13. "Slave Marriages, Families Were Often Shattered By Auction Block". NPR. February 2010
14. Simkin, John. "Slave Marriages". Spartacus Educational. August 2014
15. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Administration on Children, Youth and Families, Children’s Bureau. Child Maltreatment 2012. pg. 20,37. 2013
16. The Alliance for Racial Equity in Child Welfare. Disparities and Disproportionality in Child Welfare: Analysis of the Research. December 2011
17. Padilla, Joshua and Summers, Alicia. Disproportionality Rates for Children of Color in Foster Care". pg. 2-3. May 2011
18. Yandell, Kate. "Genetic Roots of the Ashkenazi Jews". The Scientist. October 2013
19. Johnson, Barbara C. "The Cochin Jews Of Kerala". My Jewish Learning. 2016
20. Isenberg, Shirley B. "The Bene Israel". My Jewish Learning. 2016
21. Epstein, Steven. "A Long-Lost Tribe is Ready to Come Home". Bnei Menashe. 2013
22. Winchester, Atira. "The History of Ethiopian Jewry". My Jewish Learning. 2016
23. "Lemba tribe in southern Africa has Jewish roots, genetic tests reveal". World Jewish Congress. March 2010
24. Oduah, Chika. "Nigeria's Igbo Jews: 'Lost tribe' of Israel?". CNN. February 2013
25. "Ashkenazi Jewish Genetic Panel (AJGP) - What Are Ashkenazi Jewish Genetic Diseases?". WebMD. March 2014
26. Dan Witters and Jade Wood. "Blacks Suffer Disproportionately from Chronic Conditions". Gallup. December 26, 2014

Deuteronomy 27-30: The Third Address

The third address of Moses focuses on the blessings and curses of Israel. Also included is information on the twin mountains Mt. Gerizim and Mt. Ebal.

Introduction

Identifying the beginning of the 3^rd address is little more difficult than the 1^st and 2^nd. Moses does not call the people together this time, or provide location details. Instead we are told that he and the elders "command the people" in Deuteronomy 27:1. Most scholars use this to denote the start of the 3^rd address.
Top

Israel to Build an Altar

An example of calligraphy.
Photocredit: Behance/Pokras Lampas

The Israelites were to take great stones, plaster them together, and write the words of the law upon them. They were assured that the stones would be found in the promised land as soon as they crossed the Jordan. The stones were to be set up on Mt. Ebal as an altar to God. They are forbidden from using iron tools on the altar and the stones were not to be broken.

Upon this altar, they were to offer burnt offerings to God, as well as, peace offerings. There they would eat and rejoice before God—seems to me like a victory/thank you party. God had delivered them as promised, which seems like the perfect time for a thank you and celebration. God also specifies that His laws are to be written plainly on the stones. I don't necessarily know if this is a condemnation of decoration so much as a command for practicality. Ornate calligraphy, particularly that of Arabic (which is also a semitic language and spoken in many Middle Eastern countries), is very difficult to read. God wanted a functional list of the commandments, not something for decoration. He wanted the text plain enough for people to be able to read. God requests this because obedience to His law is a requirement of being His chosen people.
Top

Twin Mountains: Gerizim & Ebal

Mt. Gerizim and Mt. Ebal are first mentioned in Deuteronomy 11:29. Ebal is also the name of a descendant of Esau (see Genesis 36). Interestingly the mountain God instructs them to place the altar upon, is the "cursed" mountain.
Top

Mount Gerizim

Moses announces 6 tribes that are to bless the people from Mt. Gerizim. These tribes are Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Joseph, and Benjamin.
Top

Mount Ebal

From Mt. Ebal, the tribes of Reuben, Gad, Asher, Zebulun, Dan, and Naphtali were to curse the people. The listing of curses found Deuteronomy 27:15-26 remind me of the Beatitudes of Matthew 5 (except theses are curses instead of blessings). The curses were to fall on those who disobeyed God's law, whether the person sinned against God or their neighbor. The Levites were to speak the curses (even though they were assigned to stand on Mt. Gerizim), and everyone was to respond with "Amen" after each curse. It is thought that on both mountains the tribes stood near the base of the mountain so that they could hear each other shout. Some suggest the Levites announced both the blessings and curses. Based on the text, I would assume the Levites only spoke the curses listed, with the tribes on both mountains responding "Amen" and the division representing the ability to be blessed by avoiding the behavior the Levites cursed.^[1]

Today

The mountains of Gerizim and Ebal are located at Jeel-et-Tur and Imad-el-Deen, respectively.^[1] Despite arguments that the altar may have been placed on Mt. Gerizim,^[2] evidence of the altar on Mt. Ebal has been found!^[3] It is said that Mt. Ebal, was barren, while Mt. Gerizim was full of life. Perhaps (and this is just a thought) God chose Mt. Ebal for the altar so that as they made their sacrifices, they were reminded of death and the purpose of the sacrifices.

God Will Bless Israel

As usual, the pronouncement of blessings in the beginning of Deuteronomy 28 was contingent upon the Israelites following God's commands. God promised to blessed them in fruit (harvest, livestock, and offspring) regardless of their location or activity. In addition, He promises that strong armies would be scattered upon attacking the Israelites. Another blessing God gives is to their basket and kneading bowl (plentiful food). All the Israelites had to do was follow God and He would exalt them above all nations, allowing them to prosper.

Land of Plenty

Once again, we are told that the promised land was to be a land of plenty. God would send water from the heavens when it was needed and would bless the labors of the Israelites. He promised that they would always be the head, never the tail, and always above, never below. Idolatry was strictly forbidden; only the God of Abraham is deserving of our full attention.

Curses

The same blessings God promised for obedience, became curses if Israel disobeyed. God would send pestilence and plagues to devour the people; the would receive dust instead of rain, and the ground would be like iron. The severity of punishment should Israel fail to comply with God's commandments was intense.

Captivity & Plaques

Ailments that could not be cured would ravage them and they would suffer madness. Note, problems such as these are abundant in today's society: people are plagued with incurable diseases both physically and mentally. In addition to these sicknesses, God says they will lose their betrothed women to other men, their children to foreign lands, and themselves. They would end up in strange, unknown lands, worshipping unknown gods.

Land Failing to Produce

God says that their fields will still produce crops under this curse, but they won't get to enjoy the crops. The worms and insects would devour the crops instead, leaving Israel with nothing. The Israelites would lose their place as head, becoming tail; they would be forced to borrow instead of lend. The consequences of disobedience were clearly laid out and quite an incentive to remain obedient to God.

Enslaved

The next verses tell us that a nation they had never heard of would seize them as part of the curse. The warring would be so bad that they would resort to cannibalism! This is also foretold in Leviticus 26:29. These atrocities came to pass eventually. The nation from afar that they knew nothing of is said to be Assyria, who fought a gruesome battle for Israel's capital. The battle lasted for 3 years! Eventually the Israelites were forced to surrender. 2 Kings 6:24-30 confirms that cannibalism occurred in an by the king of Syria.^[4] Failing to uphold God's Word not only brought failure and pain, it brought madness and desperation, as well.

More Plagues

God warns of ghastly plagues to befall the Israelites should they abandon His Word. These plagues would cull their population to low numbers. Today, those who can trace their lineage back to the Israelites is very small, roughly .2% of the population.^[5] Many of the Israelites lost their identity long before even Jesus was born, but among the Jews of today, the Holocaust is estimated to have killed 2/3 of the population in countries under German occupation. In some countries this number was as high as 90%!^[6] Death in the concentration camps were from both Nazi gas chambers and diseases (such as Typhus). Today, Ashkenazi Jews have higher risks for a number of diseases.^[7] The population is on the rise today, but clearly the number of Israelites today is not what it could be.

Scattered

Just as God would be happy and rejoice to bless an obedient Israel, God would rejoice in destroying the disobedient Israel. God promised to scatter them across the world to places where they would serve false gods. Approximately 10 of the 12 tribes were in fact scattered across the planet and can no longer be identified as Israelites; they lost their identity just as God said.

No Rest For Israel

The Israelites would not find peace in these foreign places. They would suffer, be fearful, and be in a constant state of unhappiness. Eventually they would be sold back into slavery through Egypt. Some scholars believe the name Egypt was merely a figure of speech to represent a bad place due to the reference to ships.^[4]

An Interesting Theory

Many people can easily see parallels in the curses listed in Deuteronomy 28 and the plight of African-Americans today. From the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade and selling of children and spouses during slavery to modern discrimination. In fact, there are African Jews in both Ethiopia and South Africa, as well as, a group claiming Jewish ancestry in Nigeria. I am covering this theory in a separate post due to its length.

God's Covenant

The Israelites had been walking with God for 40 years in the wilderness, they had overcome temptations, but they still had a choice when it came to believing. God did not give them a heart to perceive Him, because He wanted to show them who He was and have them choose to follow Him. They had abstained from wine, alcohol, and bread while in the wilderness, relying on on the manna given to them by God. Not only had God provided them with food, but He defeated the attacking armies of Sihon and Og. The Israelites had no reason to reject God's covenant. In these verses, He reminds them that after all He had done and shown, it was in their best interest to obey His commands.

The time for Israel to officially take the oath of keeping the covenant came just before they crossed the Jordan. Everyone in the family, including servants and strangers, were to enter into the covenant with God. God would then accept the people as His chosen people. It is unclear wether this was simply a renewal or the official acceptance (likely it was a renewal, since their parents accepted the commandments at Mt. Sinai 38 years prior). It is also possible that the agreement at Mt. Sinai was like an engagement and this was the official marriage ceremony. Either way, the covenant was binding on everyone who stood before God that day, as well as, all future generations born to those people.

Warnings

Once again, God warns the Israelites not to take on the idols of the nations around them. These idols came in the form of wood, stone, silver, and gold. Those who embraced idolatry would be cursed according to the curses in the book of Deuteronomy. There would be sickness and destruction, which is likened to Sodom and Gomorrah. When other nations saw the devastation, they would wonder why God had done such a thing and what had angered Him. The answer to this question, of course, would be that the Israelites had forsaken the covenant. Moses says that God has secrets which belong to God, but that He has revealed things to His chosen people and they were not to forget. That which was revealed is said to be the law.

God's Mercy

The punishment would not be forever. Once the Israelites repented and submitted themselves back to God, He would receive them. Once again they would be blessed an all the curses would befall their enemies. God would not forget His covenant. Again, obedience to God is coupled with circumcision of the heart. God expected the Israelites to keep the commandments in their hearts. He had given it to them directly so that there was no need to travel far and wide, it was always with them. This meant it was freely available and they were to be able to keep it because it wasn't secret knowledge.^[4] This is even more true for us today, with the invention of the internet and abundance of books.

Choices

God gave Israel 2 choices: life (good) or death (evil). He set the earth and heaven to witness this choice and hoped that they would choose life. If the Israelites chose evil and idolatry, He would let them perish. Only those who chose Him (good and life) would flourish. We have the same choice today.

References

1. "Deuteronomy 27". Bible Study Tools. 2014
2. Clarke, Adam. "Deuteronomy Chapter 27". Sacred Texts. 1831
3. Rudd, Steve. "Joshua's Altar". Bible.ca. 2016
4. Holman Bible Publishers. Holman KJV Study Bible. pg. 346-347. 2014
5. "Jewish Population". Jewish Virtual Library. 2016
6. "The "Final Solution": Estimated Number of Jews Killed". Jewish Virtual Library. 2016
7. "Ashkenazi Jewish Genetic Panel (AJGP) - What Are Ashkenazi Jewish Genetic Diseases?". WebMD. 2016

Deuteronomy 5-26: The Second Address (Part 3)

This post covers the last third of Moses' second address in Deuteronomy 21-26. In these chapters Moses talks about familial issues (such as marriage and parenting), murder, rape, tithes and fair business practices.

Introduction

This post covers the last third of Moses' second address. The address spans from Deuteronomy 5 to 26, but this post focuses on the information covered in Deuteronomy 21-26. In these chapters Moses talks about familial issues (such as marriage and parenting), murder, rape, tithes and fair business practices.

Unknown Murderers

Photocredit: FreeImages.com/Teran Chestnut

In some cases (probably most cases if the murderer could help it), a murder may occur without a witness. The city closest to the where the murder occurred was assumed to harbor the victim's killer. It's not like they could flee by car or plane. Therefore it was up to the elders of that city to make it right. This required a ritual in which the elders brought a female cow that had never been used for work to a valley that was not sewn or cultivated; there the cow was to be beheaded. After killing the cow, the elders washed their hands of the blood. This was the testimony of the elders that the people the city had neither seen or committed the murder.

Captives as Wives

In the case of captives, an Israelite man could take a wife, if he desired (women couldn't take husbands because men were never taken as captives). However, there were steps that had to be taken. The woman had to shave her head, which was symbolic of her humility—even today cutting off hair often symbolizes a new beginning. The man had to allow the woman a full month to mourn her parents along with anyone else she'd lost in the battle/war. The woman was to be elevated to an equal as his wife, as opposed to a slave. If the man chose to divorce her at a later point, he could not sell her as though she were a slave; she was to go freely wherever she chose. Since rape is condemned in Deuteronomy 22:25-27, this passage is addressing consensual relationships between captives and Israelites. This also debunks the myth that the Bible forbids interracial or cross-cultural marriage. As long as both the man and woman worshipped Him, He didn't seem to have a problem.

Firstborn Inheritance

In the case of polygamy, there was the possibility that one wife would be loved and the other despised (like Jacob's wives, Rachel and Leah). If the firstborn son was the son of the despised wife, he was not to be cheated of his inheritance. Instead, he was to receive a double portion of the inheritance. This would likely ease jealousy among brothers, avoiding situations like that between Joseph and his brothers.

Rebellious Children

Most children go through a "rebellious" phase, and all of us get in trouble at some point. However, some children are uncontrollable. If a child was unbearably rebellious and still wouldn't heed his/her parents, the child was to be brought before the elders and stoned. Key words in describing the children that were to be punished are glutton and drunkard, which not only indicated something more serious than sass-mouthing, but the age of the children. Likely this is referring to post-adolescent children, perhaps even adult offspring.

Like most of the 10 commandments, the penalty for not honoring your parents was death. The command to honor our parents parallels our relationship to God, the Father. If we can't love and obey our earthly parents who physically clothe, feed, and protect us, how can we love and obey God? This may be part of the reason God set the penalty for breaking this law so high.

Death by Hanging

Those put to death for sin were often hung from trees, perhaps as a reminder of their shame. Israel was not to leave such a body hanging after sunset. Since dead bodies were unclean to touch, the curse of the dead body would spread to land if they left it hanging too long. Death in this manner was considered a most shameful way to die—a disgrace not only to the man but to God, as we are made in His image and thus a reflection of Him—because only those who transgressed the law died in this manner.[1]

Various Laws

Lend A Hand

If you saw your neighbor's livestock roaming free or running away, you were to take them to your neighbor (as opposed to watching idly). If you didn't know who the animals belonged to, you were to hold them until someone came to claim them. This principle was true of anything one found that had been lost—clothes, animals, etc. If you saw someone's ox fall, you weren't to hide away, but to approach and offer a hand. God is commanding compassion and helpfulness among man. The basic concept is, if you see someone in need, you are to go help that person: a precursor to "do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

Attire

Women and men were not to wear each other's garment. People often make this one of the hardest and most difficult commands to understand today. Some denominations interpret this to mean women can't wear pants (for instance, Pentecostal). I saw a blog post where a woman gave up clothing we consider unisex like t-shirts (I'm quite curious as to whether she gave up sneakers and tennis shoes as well). The problem with these interpretations is that pants aren't reserved for men, especially not in the way society sees skirts and heels for women today. No one would bat an eyelash if they saw a woman in pants, but people will stare if they see a man in a skirt. The irony is that at one point in time, no one wore pants... Robes, which were basically dresses and skirts, were worn during most of Biblical history.

If one doesn't want to take into consideration the change of fashion over time, recognizing the fact that there are women's pants and men's pants just as there were women's robes and men's robes in Moses' day, then I would think they would also have to advocate dressing in the same manner that Moses' contemporaries dressed. Why would pants, which weren't made for men at that time, ever be ok for a man if fashion was not allowed to change?

I think God's intent for this passage, was to inform us that it should be easy to distinguish a man from a woman. Women should not be masquerading as men (i.e. Mulan) and men should not be masquerading as women (i.e. drag queens). I'm sure we've all met people that we couldn't figure out if they were male or female just by looking at them. I know I've met several people like this.

From there, of course, comes the question of transgenderism. Unlike L, G, and B in the LGBT community, transgenderism isn't specifically condemned in the Bible. Some would probably use this verse (Deuteronomy 22:5) to suggest it condemns transgenderism, but does it?

I would say that in order to come to the conclusion that the Bible condemns transgenderism, you have to use multiple verses and think through the process. With this verse, you have to ask, if you have a sex change—let's say male to female—does God consider you a female now, or are you still a male? In that case, you are a male dressing as a female, which God calls an abomination. Also, during the transitioning time, you were definitely a man dressing as a woman, so it seems you would have to break God's law to get to the end result Further, we saw in the last part of Moses' second address, self disfigurement is forbidden. Would not changing your external reproductive organs into other reproductive organs be disfiguring your original organs? Further, the assumption that a person is one gender in their mind and another gender physically, implies that God made a mistake: that He put your consciousness in the wrong body. God doesn't make mistakes, however. Further, one could argue the idea that you are being a false witness against yourself by presenting your self as one gender when you were actually born another.

I think the Bible gives us reason to believe God does not approve of transgenderism, but I do not think there is one specific verse that outright condemns the practice; you can only come to that conclusion by using the context of several verses to draw a conclusion. More importantly, I think that a person who has undergone gender reassignment surgery, but repents and returns to God spiritually is saved. I don't know if the surgery is reversible (it probably costs a ton if is), but I would assume the ramifications of that would be between that person and God. Remember it is not our position to judge people but to love and share the truth.

Preservation of Life

When the colonists began moving West in the U.S., they found sport in hunting the buffalo, as well as, to cut off supplies needed by Native Americans. This act put the American Buffalo in danger of extinction (luckily conservation efforts have kept the species from disappearing).[2][3] God created each animal with a purpose and wanted to make sure the Israelites respected the balance of nature. It would do them no good if they hunted their source of food, clothing, and cleansing to extinction. God tells the Israelites that when they came upon a nest with a mother and her eggs (or babies), they were not to take both. This was to assure that either the mother or the babies survived to create more life.

Construction Guidelines

When you build a house today, there are rules and regulations that require certain safety features or precautions usually specific to the location. God issued the same type of guidelines for the construction process in Israel. The types houses they built had flat roofs, which were often used for sleeping. This opened the door for the possibility of someone falling off the roof, so God required them to have a railing on the roof.

Mixing Types

This is another one of those interesting passages that take a few read throughs, and some studying to understand. In Deuteronomy 22:9-11, God forbids the Israelites from mixing types together. Oxen and donkeys weren't allowed to plow together, seeds could not be mixed together, and clothes of blended cloth were not to be worn. (I discussed these commands in more depth when they appeared in Leviticus 19:19 in my post on Leviticus 19).

Of course the stand out question is does this mean the 50% cotton, 50% polyester shirt you have is against God's law? In the first iteration of this law (Leviticus 19:19), the materials specified are wool and linen. In Deuteronomy, God mentions this specific combination again. Most sources agree that God is specifically talking about wool and linen as opposed to the general mixing of clothes.[4][5][6][7] It is important to note the possible reasons why God instituted this law before we can understand how and if it is applicable today.

According to some sources, the priestly garments and and many of the adornments for the tabernacles were to be woven of both linen and wool, but when I reread the chapters on these topics, I only see linen being used. One source clarifies that the wool element comes from the dyed threads they were to use (see Exodus 28:6-8). From this, the claim is that the prohibition was to separate the holy from the average, similar to the way only a king wears a crown.[5][8] The implication is that it was not a moral issue so much as a separation issue. Still there are others who state that this is an issue of quality; garments that are 100% anything (silk, cotton, linen, wool) are more durable and of higher quality than those that are from mixed materials.[6] The third possibility listed is the fact that wool and linen when blended have been scientifically proven to cause problems.[4] I am still looking to verify this final claim. A final claim is that the mixing of things is symbolic, relating to Paul's command in the New Testament not to be unequally yoked. This claim asserts that mixing types is like mixing sin with righteousness, which is of course not something we are to do.[13]

Premarital Sex Allegations

If a man was to accuse his new bride of not being a virgin at the time of their marriage, he brought shame upon her. A man could not idly accuse a woman of such without having a chance to prove otherwise. The parents of the bride were to produce the "tokens" of her virginity—likely the cloth were she bled on her wedding night. If the man was proven wrong (the parents produced the tokens), he was to be chastised and required to pay the father of the bride 100 shekels of silver for tainting the name of the woman. By studying the original language and the historical context of the Bible, scholars conclude that the chastising was a physical punishment, not merely a verbal scolding.[9] After the ordeal, the man could not divorce the woman.

On the other hand, if the man was found to be right and the woman's innocence was not proven, she was to be stoned. Sexual purity was (and still is in God's eyesight) considered a huge deal. On top of this, there is the implied issue of lying. Deuteronomy 22:28-29 tells us what is to happen to unwed, unbetrothed virgins who have sex (hint: death is not the answer). Clearly, the issue in a man finding that his new wife was not a virgin is that he had been lied to and betrayed. Sex outside of marriage was essentially the same as committing adultery. Marriage between a man and a woman is symbolic of the covenant between man and God. Just as God calls idolatry whoredom, which was punished with death, sleeping with anyone other than your spouse, even if you didn't have a spouse yet, was considered whoredom and punished with death. God makes it perfectly clear that His people were only to have sex within the confines of marriage. Note that in cases of premarital sex, it was nearly impossible to prove a man had committed the crime unless he was caught in the act or admitted to it, which is why we are only given a scenario in which the woman is accused.

If an unmarried woman who was not engaged had sex, the man was required to marry her as well as pay the father 50 shekels of silver. This money was compensation of the dowry that would have been traditionally required in a typical marriage. The verse doesn't specify if the sex is consensual or if this is a case of rape, which seems so drastic compared to the strong condemnation of rape earlier in the chapter! Why would God force a woman to marry her rapist? This verse parallels the law given in Exodus 22:16-17, where we see that the marriage could be refused, forcing the man to pay without receiving a bride.

There are many things to be taken into consideration when thinking about this situation. Now that the woman was not a virgin, it would be hard for her to find a husband; she would have been considered defiled even though it was not her fault. On top of that she would be unable to take care of herself as a single woman. Women did not work, and her father's inheritance would have passed to her brothers (unless she had none). This arrangement was to ensure the woman had at least one choice for a husband. (Also note that in the case of consensual sex, this law forced men to marry the women they convinced to sleep with them, which discouraged leading women on to get sex.) In addition, the man could not divorce the woman if the marriage was accepted; he was stuck with that decision. He couldn't divorce her even in the case of adultery! Likely, however, the father would refuse the marriage in the case of rape and if the woman never found a husband, her brothers would be responsible for caring for her. No one in the Old Testament is ever forced to marry their rapist.[10][11]

Furthermore, there seems to be contention on whether the phrase "lay hold" means "seize" which implies rape, or simply means convince. Earlier in the chapter the word "forced" is used to indicate rape. Well known theologian John Gills contends that the original Hebrew used in this verse doesn't mean rape, but refers to consensual sex.[12] Gills' explanation makes the most sense to me. From this perspective, this is merely forcing men not to be players. Unlike today's society where some men try to sleep with as many women as they can before settling down, this would force them to be serious about any woman they chose to have sex with.

Adultery

Which brings us to the topic of adultery. In the case of adultery where both the man and woman were identified, both the man and the woman were to be stoned. However, if the act was a result of rape, only the man dies. God reminds us that there is no sin (fault) in the woman who is raped. The sin of rape is equated to killing a man. Many believe that Deuteronomy 22:24-27 seems to imply rape only occurs outside the city, however, this is not what is the verses are saying. Within the city, it was expected that if a woman was raped, she would cry out and someone would hear her. The person who heard the woman crying out would either rescue her and prevent the rape, or act as a witness to the event. Contrarily, in the country, it was unlikely that anyone would hear the woman cry out, thus they were to believe her by her own word without witness.

Decency

God also warns sons not to sleep with their father's wives (as Reuben did to Jacob). This seems like a given considering God forbids both incest and adultery.

Exclusions from the Congregation

From official churches to rogue individuals, there are lots of people today who try to exclude people from the body of Christ. Before Jesus opened the door to all of humanity, God actually specified who could not be accepted into the congregation of Israel in Deuteronomy 23. None of the people excluded where being punished for committing a sin so much as fro being the evidence of sin. Generally speaking, the congregation included adult males (at least 20 years old) who had been circumcised per the covenant and represented the holy community. God restricted those that would taint the holiness of the community as a reminder to the Israelites of the lingering effects of sin. Included in the list of excluded persons were those who were eunuchs, anyone born out of wedlock, Ammonites, and Moabites.

These people were not at fault and exclusion from the congregation was not a punishment, but a reminder to those who were in the congregation. The person born out of wedlock was the evidence of sexual impurity in the nation. Ammonites and Moabites were created through incest (Lot's daughters' sons were the progenitors of these two groups); also they were hostile to Israel during the journey through the wilderness. They too were a reminder of abominations man had taken part in since the fall. The more people that were excluded from the congregation spoke negatively on those who were included. The people who were excluded were not sinners themselves, but byproducts of sins. Thus, it wasn't an issue where if 90% of the population was excluded, the 10% were elite; the fewer people excluded from the nation, the closer the Israelites were walking with God (he blesses their offspring to be healthy and no children are born out of wedlock when the Israelites are obedient). Scholars believe that this command not only served as a reminder, but a deterrent to keep the Israelites from creating eunuchs.[14]

The exclusion lasted forever in the case of illegitimate children, Ammonites, and Moabites. However, Isaiah 56:3-4 tells us the eunuch, though excluded from the congregation, are promised a home with God if they keep His commandments. Clearly God is not abandoning these people. The exclusion did not keep them from worshipping God or exclude them from salvation. Likely, they were simply barred from being counted in the census or holding office.[14]

Inclusions in the Congregation

God also describes who is included in the congregation of Israel. They were not to turn their backs against the Egyptians and Edomites. The Edomites are described as their brothers, which is quite literal since Esau, father of the Edomites, was the brother of Jacob, father of the Israelites. The Egyptians were to be forgiven for their treatment of the Israelites and could enter the congregation at the 3rd generation. It is interesting to see that God had mercy on these people—particularly the Egyptians who participated in idolatry. What was different about them verses the Ammonites or Moabites? Was it their inability (or lack of desire) to covert the Israelites?

A parallel thought to remember when considering God's inclusion of the Egyptians is that this act magnified His ability to deliver them but minimized their cruelty the Egyptians. Jesus tells us we are to forgive people, this is exemplified in God's command to first forgive their brothers (Edom) and then their captors (Egypt).[16]

Uncleanness

Purity was a must, so uncleanness was not allowed in the camp—especially during war. If someone became unclean in their sleep they were to depart that morning, then wash their self that evening and return. They were to relieve themselves at the side of the camp, using a paddle to uncover a hole for their waste, which was to be covered afterward.

Slaves

Interestingly, the Israelites were told not to return runaway slaves to their masters, nor to oppose their slaves. While they were not to turn away or force slaves back to their masters, they were commanded to turn away the sexually impure, particularly those involved in cult prostitution. Along with not accepting these people into the congregation, they were not hire these people either. If it wasn't obvious before, clearly God was not ok with prostitution.[15]

Usury

Usury is the practice of charging obscenely high interest rates. The Israelites were not to place these types of interest rates on anything they leant to their neighbors. On the other hand, lans to strangers could be leant with high interest rates, probably because strangers would have a higher risk factor. All Israelites were bound to the same morals and obligation to pay back their debts and deal honestly, while strangers were not.

Vows

Once a vow was made to God, though it was made voluntarily and thus not required, it was considered stealing not to continue to uphold or complete a vow taken. As such, it was considered a serious sin to renege on a vow to the Lord.

Stealing

If a man walked through his brother's or neighbor's vineyard (or field of corn—possibly any field, but only corn and vineyards are specified directly), it was fine for him to take a little but he was not to take enough to place in a vessel (a basket, bag, etc.). The person could have just enough to fill their hunger—which seems to go hand in hand with leaving crops for the poor—but couldn't make a profit from someone else's handiwork.

Domestic Life

Moses discusses a series of issues that affect the Israelites' domestic life.

Marriage and Divorce

Marriage was a serious contract; it was supposed to last forever. God likens His relationship with His people as a marriage which explains why marriage was so important to Him. It's a lot easier to commit to someone who is flesh and blood than someone you can't see. Like our relationship with God, marriage was supposed to be binding for life.

Divorce was only allowed on certain occasions. In these verses, God is addressing divorces based on "uncleanness." Men were not allowed to simply divorce their wives because they liked someone else better, and throughout the New Testament we see that adultery is listed as the only legitimate reason to divorce someone. However, the law provides rules for divorces not concerning adultery to prevent men for treating their wives poorly after they decide they no longer wish to be married.[17] In Deuteronomy 24, we learn that if a man divorced his wife, she was free to marry another, however, under no circumstance was she ever allowed to go back to her first husband if she took a second. This stipulation was to force the man to really think about his action. Neither divorcing her second husband nor the death of her second husband made this woman available to her first. The divorce made them dead to each other because death is the only thing that severs the bond of marriage.[17]

Another marriage issue Moses discusses at the beginning of chapter 24, is the honeymoon phase. A newlywed man was to be free from work for an entire year! His sole duty during that time was to make his wife happy. He was also exempt from war for this same reason. God expected the husband to put all his effort in to pleasing his wife and building a home together during that first year.

Pledges

A pledge was basically collateral, such as how they take your license before you can tour an apartment.[18] In some cases, this may have been an "I owe you" situation and in others it may simply have been a temporary trade (for instance I may give you something of value as a pledge to use your horse for the day). Millstones could not be taken as a pledge, because they were required for grinding food. Both the upper and lower stones were necessary for survival and God didn't want people forcing others to die (or suffer more debt) over a pledge. He thus forbid anyone from taking such an object for payment or collateral. in addition, God specifies that pledges to taken from the poor were to be returned before night so that they would not have to be cold. This is also discussed in Exodus 22:26-27.

Leprosy

The Israelites were to learn about the plague of leprosy from the Levites. With this knowledge, they were to be diligent in quarantining those identified with leprosy. Moses gives the example of his sister Miriam being quarantined in the wilderness. In using this example, Moses was also declaring that it didn't matter who had the plaque, they were to be quarantined regardless. Miriam was the sister to both the leader and the high priest, and she was still quarantined.

Slavery & Kidnapping

The Israelites were commanded not to steal people, especially not for he purpose of servitude or selling. Anyone who was found guilty of such a thing was to be put to death. Regardless of whether the man was a stranger or brother, a servant was not to be oppressed. The Israelites were to pay their help on time and without delay.

Sin & Family

Children who damage someone's property usually aren't held liable for the damages, but it is very likely that parents will have to pay the bill. In the case of sin, however, parents can't bail out their children. They were not to die for their child's sin. Similarly, a child was not to be put to death for his father's sins. Here we learn that each person is ultimately responsible for his own sins.

Fairness

The Israelites were not to twist the law to harm the strangers, orphans, or widows. Neither were they to change to the law to help the rich. Taking a widow's garments for a pledge is discussed as Moses impresses fairness upon the people. Like millstones, the widow's garment couldn't be taken from the her as a pledge. God tells them to remember that they were one slaves in Egypt and how they were treated, but God spared them. For this reason they should obey God, and for this reason, they should spare those around them.

Crops were to be left in the field for the less fortunate (widows, orphans, and strangers). They were to freely glean from these crops—this is how Ruth meets Boaz. Both olive trees and vineyards fell under this law as well. This made sure that the poor had something; while it may not have been the best of the crop (beggars can't be choosers, right?), it would keep them from starving. This method provides for the poor, but still leaves reason for one to want to get out of poverty. Remember, the poor had to pick their own food, they weren't simply handed the crops. This is God's version of public assistance.

This mercy was also applied to animals. The Israelites weren't to muzzle an ox as they tread through the cornfield. The ox was owed the fruits of his labor.

Relationships & Mercy

When problems arose between people, a judge was to determine who was guilty of wrong doing. If the judge found the act worthy of punishment by lashing, they were restricted to 40 lashes, anything more was deemed cruel and vile. For comparison, in the American South, the number of lashings a slave could receive was dependent upon the master. There is evidence to show that some slaves received as few as 39 (within the Biblical range), to as many as 200 lashings as punishment.[19] The Quran (the basis of Islam) allows for up to 80 lashes, but Muslim countries such as Saudi Arabia are much like the so-called Christian slave owners and may deliver well beyond that limit. Saudi Arabia issued a sentence of 7000 lashes for two men in 2007 (though they are not given all at one).[20]

Duties of a Brother-in-Law

Known as a Levirate marriage, a woman widowed before having children was to marry her husband's brother to produce a line to inherit the deceased husband's possessions and name. This is seen in Genesis 38 with Judah's daughter-in-law Tamar. When Judah's eldest son passed away before Tamar could conceive, he sent his middle son to marry her (read more about this example here). The firstborn child was to receive the deceased husband's name. The other children would received the brother's name.

If a man did not perform this duty, the woman was to take him before the elders. If he was found guilty and still refused his duty, she was to remove his shoe and spit in his face. While this punishment seems strange today, it would have been demoralizing back then (actually, it would be pretty demoralizing today, too). He would then be known as "the house of him that hath his shoe loosed" (how embarrassing?).[15]

Immodest Women

"Kick him were the sun don't shine" is a common phrase and popular for getting back at a man, but God would never give you that advice. The Bible tells us that a woman who attempts to help her husband in a fight by taking hold of the other man's "secrets" (i.e. private parts) was to lose her hand and no one was to pity her. Besides the obvious, the logic is that this action may prevent the man from having children, hence the harsh punishment. The ability to continue one's line, as discussed above in "Duties of a Brother-in-Law", was the closest thing to immortality people had and it was a huge deal. A man who couldn't produce heirs or a woman who was barren was considered incomplete.[15] Another possible reason for the severity of the punishment was the concept of fairness. Most societies had rules of honor in fighting. Even today, one would consider it a "low blow" or an unfair shot if someone were to go for the groin in a fight. On top of that, she would be interfering with a fight that should have been settled between the two men. Further, if the woman did damage the man's ability to reproduce or injure him, he may have been considered an eunuch, which would then exclude him from the congregation.

Just Weights

The Israelites were supposed to carry just weights. These weights would have been used to measure money when buying or selling. In Deuteronomy 25:13-16, God is condemning the practice of cheating people of their money. Everything was to be fair.

Amalek

Deuteronomy 25:17-19, God gives us the reason why He despises Amalek and the Amalekites. He reminds the Israelitesthat Amalek brought an army to attack their rear, smiting the weak and feeble. Amalek did not fear God, which automatically made him an enemy. In return, God wanted the Israelites to blot Amalek's existence out of history. Paradoxically, God commands them never to forget blotting Amalek out of history. I think what is meant by this series of commands from God, is that their ability to wipe away the memory of Amalek was to be an example for all generations to come. All the people would ever know about Amalek is that at one point he existed, he made God mad, and the Israelites destroyed his legacy. Aside from that information, the response would be "Amalek, who?" We will see the continuing conflict between the Israelites and the Amalekites over the course of the next few books.

Offering First Fruit

When the Israelites were settled in the promised land, they would eventually plant and/or harvest crops (some things were already planted). The first of these crops were to be given to God at the Temple via the priest. They were to recite their history from Israel's entry to Egypt through God delivering them—the highlights at least—before giving the first fruits to God. Likely, this is a reference to the Feast of Harvest (or Pentecost).

Tithes

Every 3rd year tithes went to the Levites, strangers, widows, and orphans. During the other two years, the tithes went directly to God. This measure helped the less fortunate in the same manner welfare or public assistance help the poor today. In the New Testament, Jesus continues to stress the importance of giving to others in need.

35For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: 36Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. ... 40And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.Matthew 25:35-40 KJV

Keep the Commandments

Once again, God reminds the Israelites to keep His commandments. Remember, this task is their end of the bargain in the covenant, so it is often stressed by God.

References

1. "Deuteronomy 21:22 Commentary". Bible Hub. 2016
2. "American Buffalo Are Endangered". Endangered Species. 2000
3. "Are buffalo endangered?". Reference.com. 2016
4. "Mixed Fabrics". Beyond Today. January 2011
5. "Why does the Bible speak against wearing clothing made of different types of fabric?". GotQuestions.org. 2016
6. "Should a Christian Wear Clothing of Mixed Fibers (Leviticus 19:19)?". Church of the Great God. 2016
7. Gilson, Tom. "Why Wearing Clothes of Mixed Fabrics (Leviticus 19:19) was Warong". Thinking Christian. January 2013
8. "What’s So Wrong with Mixing Wool & Linen?". Our Rabbi Jesus. July 2013
9. "Deuteronomy 22:18 Commentaries". Study Light. 2016
10. Hanegraaff, Hank. "How could the Bible command a rape victim to marry her rapist?". Christian Research Instituate. 2016
11. "Does Deuteronomy 22:28-29 command a rape victim to marry her rapist?". GotQuestions.org. 2016
12. Gills, John. "Deuteronomy 22:28 Commentary". Bible Study Tools. 2016
13. Ford, Mike. "Wool and Linen". Church of the Great God. 2015
14. "Deuteronomy 23:1". Bible Hub. 2016
15. Holman Bible Publishers. Holman KJV Study Bible. pg. 338, 340. 2014
16. "Deuteronomy 23 Commentary". Bible Study Tools. 2016
17. "Deuteronomy 24 Commentary". Bible Study Tools. 2016
18. "Pledge. Merriam Webster. 2016
19. Simkin, John. "Whipping of Slaves". Spartacus Educational. August 2014
20. Malone, Noreen. "How Many Lashes Can One Man Take". Slate. November 2008