Deuteronomy 22: 1 – 30
And let me tell you some other things
22 “You shall not see your brother’s ox or his sheep going astray, and hide yourself from them; you shall certainly bring them back to your brother. 2 And if your brother is not near you, or if you do not know him, then you shall bring it to your own house, and it shall remain with you until your brother seeks it; then you shall restore it to him. 3 You shall do the same with his donkey, and so shall you do with his garment; with any lost thing of your brother’s, which he has lost and you have found, you shall do likewise; you must not hide yourself. 4 “You shall not see your brother’s donkey or his ox fall down along the road, and hide yourself from them; you shall surely help him lift them up again. 5 “A woman shall not wear anything that pertains to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman’s garment, for all who do so are an abomination to the LORD your God. 6 “If a bird’s nest happens to be before you along the way, in any tree or on the ground, with young ones or eggs, with the mother sitting on the young or on the eggs, you shall not take the mother with the young; 7 you shall surely let the mother go, and take the young for yourself, that it may be well with you and that you may prolong your days. 8 “When you build a new house, then you shall make a parapet for your roof, that you may not bring guilt of bloodshed on your household if anyone falls from it. 9 “You shall not sow your vineyard with different kinds of seed, lest the yield of the seed which you have sown and the fruit of your vineyard be defiled. 10 “You shall not plow with an ox and a donkey together. 11 “You shall not wear a garment of different sorts, such as wool and linen mixed together. 12 “You shall make tassels on the four corners of the clothing with which you cover yourself. 13 “If any man takes a wife, and goes in to her, and detests her, 14 and charges her with shameful conduct, and brings a bad name on her, and says, ‘I took this woman, and when I came to her I found she was not a virgin,’ 15 then the father and mother of the young woman shall take and bring out the evidence of the young woman’s virginity to the elders of the city at the gate. 16 And the young woman’s father shall say to the elders, ‘I gave my daughter to this man as wife, and he detests her. 17 Now he has charged her with shameful conduct, saying, “I found your daughter was not a virgin,” and yet these are the evidences of my daughter’s virginity.’ And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city. 18 Then the elders of that city shall take that man and punish him; 19 and they shall fine him one hundred shekels of silver and give them to the father of the young woman, because he has brought a bad name on a virgin of Israel. And she shall be his wife; he cannot divorce her all his days. 20 “But if the thing is true, and evidences of virginity are not found for the young woman, 21 then they shall bring out the young woman to the door of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death with stones, because she has done a disgraceful thing in Israel, to play the harlot in her father’s house. So you shall put away the evil from among you. 22 “If a man is found lying with a woman married to a husband, then both of them shall die—the man that lay with the woman, and the woman; so you shall put away the evil from Israel. 23 “If a young woman who is a virgin is betrothed to a husband, and a man finds her in the city and lies with her, 24 then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city, and you shall stone them to death with stones, the young woman because she did not cry out in the city, and the man because he humbled his neighbor’s wife; so you shall put away the evil from among you. 25 “But if a man finds a betrothed young woman in the countryside, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man who lay with her shall die. 26 But you shall do nothing to the young woman; there is in the young woman no sin deserving of death, for just as when a man rises against his neighbor and kills him, even so is this matter. 27 For he found her in the countryside, and the betrothed young woman cried out, but there was no one to save her. 28 “If a man finds a young woman who is a virgin, who is not betrothed, and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are found out, 29 then the man who lay with her shall give to the young woman’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife because he has humbled her; he shall not be permitted to divorce her all his days. 30 “A man shall not take his father’s wife, nor uncover his father’s bed.
To begin I would just like to remind you all that we have an Amazing Intelligent and All Knowing Holy God. Not only Is He the Only Supreme Creative Genius God, He knows perfectly when and how to teach us fallen beings things that can help us in all areas of our lives.
Have you ever thought about the scripture passage in the Gospel of Matthew which reports, “23 Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to His disciples, 2 saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do, but do not do according to their works; for they say, and do not do. 4 For they bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. 5 But all their works they do to be seen by men. They make their phylacteries broad and enlarge the borders of their garments. 6 They love the best places at feasts, the best seats in the synagogues, 7 greetings in the marketplaces, and to be called by men, ‘Rabbi, Rabbi.’ 8 But you, do not be called ‘Rabbi’; for One is your Teacher, the Christ, and you are all brethren. 9 Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. 10 And do not be called teachers; for One is your Teacher, the Christ. 11 But he who is greatest among you shall be your servant. 12 And whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.
He Is our Perfect Teacher. So, if you love to be someone you imitate the way He does things. You study all that He has given as instructions in communicating and try to do likewise.
Teaching is a difficult profession. There are many problems for teachers that make the profession more complicated than it has to be. This does not mean that everyone should avoid being a teacher. There are also substantial benefits and rewards for those who decide that they want a career in teaching. The truth is that every job has its own unique set of challenges. Teaching is no different. These problems sometimes make it feel as if you are constantly fighting an uphill battle. However, most teachers find a way to overcome this adversity. They do not allow obstacles to stand in the way of student learning.
Part of what makes teaching a challenging career is the diversity of the students that you teach. Every student is unique having their own background, needs, and learning styles. Teachers in the United States cannot use a “cookie cutter” approach to teaching. In our present school system we use the ‘herd’ mentality. They group kids based on the same ages. The trouble with this is the learning curve and maturity level of each child is different. In order then to affectively educate each child teachers have to adapt their instruction to each individual student’s strengths and weaknesses. Being adept at making these changes and adjustments is challenging to every teacher. Teaching would be a much simpler task if this were not the case.
In the early days of American education teachers were only responsible for teaching the basics including reading, writing, and arithmetic. Over the last century, those responsibilities have increased significantly. It seems that every year teachers are asked to do more and more. Things that were once deemed a parent’s responsibility to teach their children at home are now the school’s responsibility. All of these increased responsibilities have come without a significant increase in the length of the school day or the school year meaning that teachers are expected to do more with less.
In my initial years in college my interest was in Business Management. Various courses explained to me controls that on a whole major successful business incorporated to properly run their corporations. , These policies were referred to as Internal Controls; involve two separate but related efforts to keep your organization operating smoothly and transparently. First, internal controls are a structure of clearly written organizational policies, procedures, processes and systems to foster recordkeeping and to identify and delineate authorities, responsibilities and duties.
Secondly, this structure is complemented by a system of checks and balances to assure that every member of the organization adheres to the guidelines laid out in writing. Checks and balances are used so that staff and management understand and abide by the separations of authority, responsibilities and duties defined by the written policies.
Together written policies and procedures that include appropriate checks and balances for the implementation of those procedures provides an organization with internal controls.
Internal controls support a wide variety of goals that are essential to a healthy organization. Also, internal controls minimize waste; fraud; mismanagement; legal liability; and the loss of resources, public assets and trust.
In order for internal controls to function effectively in your organization you need a good control environment. As I mentioned, a good control environment relies on clearly written policies, procedures and processes.
These written policies should accomplish 3 main goals:
. Delegate authority and responsibility;
. Identify challenges and training needs; and
. Provide for the review and management of the organization’s processes.
In order to accomplish this last goal of management and review, written guidelines and procedures are needed that specify the requirements for financial reporting, cash management, and employee timekeeping. To allow these functions to adapt and change alongside the realities of operating your organization, a follow-up and feedback system should be clearly presented in writing.
In your organization, many people are responsible for internal controls. The responsibility for creating and maintaining internal controls doesn’t fall to any single person or group, but instead is shared throughout the organization.
Some of the main stakeholders are the:
•Board of directors
•Executive managers
•Program managers, and
•Fiscal managers
While these groups, and individuals within these groups, have the main roles that are responsible for creating and managing internal control procedures, each staff member should be informed about his or her role in complying with the internal control initiatives.
When key stakeholders decide to implement or modify internal controls, they do so by leveraging a strong combination of written policies, procedures, checks and balances. In the next section, we’ll detail what goes into developing good policies and procedures, both in general and through the exploration of specific key elements
The most important characteristic of good written policies and procedures is that they are visible to and clearly understood by the entire organization. To this end, policies and procedures should be established, followed, monitored, and reviewed. This process is one that repeats itself constantly throughout the grant cycle and the life of your organization.
Written policies and procedures act as the standards for an organization’s operations. They should be written clearly to communicate their messages. Specifically, policies outline what tasks need to be done. Procedures complement policies by explaining how and when those tasks should be completed, as well as who should be primarily responsible for completing them. It’s important to note that the best policies and procedures explain the rationale behind them and give enough structure to assure that members of an organization can follow them to the letter without ambiguity or hesitation.
I have mentioned first about teaching then I drifted into successful business plans and now I want to add the various additional rules that our Lord wants us to follow. So, you might be saying to yourself, ‘You lost me Tom’. All the things I listed talks about written directions. For Teachers to teach they have to incorporate in their specialty books and other printed aids. In addition, as I just mentioned successful businesses have to put plans down in writing in order to accomplish their goals. If you do not know the exact course in which you need to follow then how do you get to a successful end.
If you have been with us in our studies through God’s Holy Word of the books of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and now Deuteronomy then what I have just given to you jumps off our Bible pages. Our Majestic Holy Master has given to us a perfect way to not only conduct business but to have effective laws and policies for all areas of our lives. All you have to do is read again His Commandments, Statutes, Laws, Decrees, and other directions He has spoken and recorded for us and merely just fill in the blanks and then you have your plan. The Bible is God’s road map for us to have a successful existence now and for all eternity.
Today we are going to learn about a whole variety of these various truths that need to be in human policies so we can have a healthy orderly way to govern our lives.
We have all heard sermons where the experienced preacher suddenly begins to roam far and wide, jumping swiftly from one subject to another in rapid succession, picking out information here and there, in order to present an overall picture. Sometimes there may seem to be no logic to it, but there usually is. And that is partly what Moses was doing here. The regulations that follow may not seem to come in any discernible overall pattern, although Moses probably had one in his mind. But items are grouped together, or joined by key words and thoughts. Moses had a wide collection of laws from which he here extracted examples covering a wide range of circumstances so as to turn their thoughts back to Yahweh’s written Instruction. It was not intended to be comprehensive or detailed, but to convey an impression.
From this point on therefore we have a miscellany of regulations which cap what has gone before. While certain connections are unquestionably at times discoverable there seem in some cases to be no particular pattern to them, apart from the important one of consideration for others, and a need to consider covenant regulations. The essence of the message was that they were to love their neighbors, and foreigners, as themselves.
In this chapter the regulations cited cover such things as lost livestock, avoiding cross dressing, conservation in nature, keeping buildings safe, avoiding cross connection of what Yahweh has established separately and not to be joined, maintaining a woman’s honor, and so on. The underlining principle behind them all was consideration and thoughtfulness, and respect for what belonged to God. The very wideness of the range is testimony to the wideness of the area covered by the covenant; concern for their neighbors’ possessions, concern for the relationship between man and woman, concern for the birds and animals, concern for the life of one’s guests, concern for natural things, concern for the women of the land, concern for a father’s position.
22 “You shall not see your brother’s ox or his sheep going astray, and hide yourself from them; you shall certainly bring them back to your brother.
The straying of livestock would be a regular occurrence. Here stress was laid on a man’s responsibility towards his brothers. Where straying livestock were discovered they must be taken in charge and every effort made to restore them in good health to their owner. In Exodus 23 the ox and the ass are mentioned, being the most valuable. But the idea behind it was simply, of course, any domestic animal.
2 And if your brother is not near you, or if you do not know him, then you shall bring it to your own house, and it shall remain with you until your brother seeks it; then you shall restore it to him.
If the owner was known to live at a distance, or was for the time being unknown, the straying livestock must be housed and fed, probably separately and not mixed with his own herds and flocks, with the aim of restoring it in good condition to its owner.
3 You shall do the same with his donkey, and so shall you do with his garment; with any lost thing of your brother’s, which he has lost and you have found, you shall do likewise; you must not hide yourself.
The sheep and cattle were mentioned first as being examples, but the same treatment in principle was to be followed with respect to any lost animal or article. They were not to deliberately let it pass unnoticed but do all that was reasonable to ensure its restoration in good condition to its owner. They were not to prevent the recovery of the articles in any way.
4 “You shall not see your brother’s donkey or his ox fall down along the road, and hide yourself from them; you shall surely help him lift them up again.
Where someone was seen to be in need of assistance with regard to his livestock which had had an accident while going along the road, or was overburdened assistance must be offered so as to help them.
Both these examples are a reminder to us that we should not just ignore the needs of our neighbors, but while not becoming a nuisance, should give a helping hand where we can.
Israel was to avoid all that was unseemly. That had applied with regard to what living things could be eaten (14.3-21). Now it applies to dressing as transsexuals (verse 5), to dealings with nature (verse 6-7), and to mixing unlike with unlike (verses 10-12).
5 “A woman shall not wear anything that pertains to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman’s garment, for all who do so are an abomination to the LORD your God.
Cross dressing is strictly forbidden. Men should be men and women should be women, and they should be clearly distinguishable, and on principle should not wear each other’s clothing. To do so would be an abomination to God. From the beginning mankind was made male and female, the former as God’s representative on earth, the latter to assist him as an equal and bear children. And this distinction must be maintained and be clear to their children, and to the world.
This law respected the positions of both men and woman, and honored their respective responsibilities. To mix them up was to dishonor both, and ignore God’s purpose for each. Both had authority in their own sphere within the covenant, which must not be trespassed on.
The modern attempt to blur the difference between the sexes is rebellion against God’s way of things. In His economy each has their differing function. While male and female are all one in Christ Jesus (Galatians 3.28), stressing equality of status, this does not affect function. Each must act within their sphere. Such behavior would also affect their children and of coarse society.
Next our Precious Holy Spirit lists for us what was seemly with regard to nature is in mind. Man was able to look on nature as a provider, but was not to treat it with disregard. Rather he should receive all with gratitude and watch over the provider. Compare the attitude required with regard to trees which were also providers (20.19-20). A general principle was being taught here of preserving the sources of supply.
6 “If a bird’s nest happens to be before you along the way, in any tree or on the ground, with young ones or eggs, with the mother sitting on the young or on the eggs, you shall not take the mother with the young; 7 you shall surely let the mother go, and take the young for yourself, that it may be well with you and that you may prolong your days.
There were two principals involved here. The first was the unseemliness of taking the young or the eggs of a bird for consumption, and at the same time eating the mother, who was fulfilling her God given responsibility of ‘multiplying’, thus taking the provision and eating the provider. This was seen as an offence against creation and against decency. The second was the principle of conservation. Some of what was found should be left so that it could reproduce further food in the future. To take the supplies and kill off the supplier was foolishness.
This has to do with taking eggs for food, not as an interesting hobby. The latter would have been looked on as waste. A bird could, of course, be shot down with a slingshot, and eaten, but it was not to be slain while it was fulfilling its God-given function. Thus this was very much a matter of principle. The point may also be of the impropriety of finding a bird nesting and killing the bird as well as stealing her young. It had similarities to boiling a kid in its mother’s milk (14.31).
A further thing that may be in mind could be that in normal circumstances the bird could have flown to safety. It had remained to defend its young. It was fulfilling its motherhood. Under such circumstance it was to be spared on a parallel with the fatherless and widows, as an act of compassion. It inculcated a sense of decency and fair play.
8 “When you build a new house, then you shall make a parapet for your roof, that you may not bring guilt of bloodshed on your household if anyone falls from it.
In all construction concern was to be shown to ensure that it was not dangerous to others, and to make it as safe as possible. They were to be concerned for each other’s welfare. This was especially so in order to prevent the spilling of blood. Thus all Israelite houses had to have a parapet. If they did not, and a man died through their negligence then innocent blood would have been spilled and the owners would bear the guilt before God. They might even be found guilty of manslaughter.
9 “You shall not sow your vineyard with different kinds of seed, lest the yield of the seed which you have sown and the fruit of your vineyard be defiled.
Practically speaking the danger of seeking to grow two things on the same piece of land was that there may not be sufficient sustenance for both, thus both might fail to grow properly. It would therefore be something best avoided. Behind it all would seem to be the principle that what was compatible must go with what was compatible, that there be no dissension in creation.
10 “You shall not plow with an ox and a donkey together.
This may well have been because one was ‘clean’, and the other was not. To do this would thus seem to have a disregard for holiness. Alternately it may have been because of the incompatibility between the two and out of consideration for both.
11 “You shall not wear a garment of different sorts, such as wool and linen mixed together.
The practical problem with mixing two types of such distinctive cloth was that they might not weave well together, each having different strengths, and secondly that when washed each might react differently thus spoiling the garment the new patch and old garment mentioned by Jesus (Mark 2.21)).
The repetition of examples would suggest that below all the other reasons lay the fact of incompatibility, and the importance of maintaining distinctions, whether for religious, ethical, or practical reasons. And it may be that this principle was then to be extended towards ways of living. How shall two walk together except they be agreed?
12 “You shall make tassels on the four corners of the clothing with which you cover yourself.
One purpose of the tassels was that the Israelite should look at them and remember all the commandments of Yahweh and do them (Numbers 15.37-41). Just as they could not do their own will with regard to these tassels, so neither could they do their own will with respect to the covenant. The robe would be worn by day and serve as a blanket by night. Thus the tassels would remind them constantly of Yahweh’s covenant by day and by night. They would also be a means by which Israelites could be identified by their clothing, and would thus recognize fellow Israelites abroad or in battle, and provide a quiet means of witness to outsiders. They were the badge of the members of the covenant. They were to be attached by a dark blue thread which made them distinctive, a sign of heaven (Numbers 15.38).
13 “If any man takes a wife, and goes in to her, and detests her, 14 and charges her with shameful conduct, and brings a bad name on her, and says, ‘I took this woman, and when I came to her I found she was not a virgin,’
The idea was that the man had married the young woman and had found her unsatisfactory. Thus in order to get rid of her and keep her dowry he had accused her of not having been a virgin when he married her. That was to say, in other words, that she had previously committed fornication. That way she would be put to death and he would be free of her without losing face and without losing her dowry.
15 then the father and mother of the young woman shall take and bring out the evidence of the young woman’s virginity to the elders of the city at the gate. 16 And the young woman’s father shall say to the elders, ‘I gave my daughter to this man as wife, and he detests her. 17 Now he has charged her with shameful conduct, saying, “I found your daughter was not a virgin,” and yet these are the evidences of my daughter’s virginity.’ And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city.
Then when an accusation was made against their daughter they could produce what they claimed to be the evidence of her virginity to the elders who were acting as judges at the city gates. It appears that these would normally be accepted as proof of the accuracy of their statement, as the parents represented two witnesses to the fact that the evidence truly related to their daughter at the important time. It should be noted that it is their testimony that is accepted. The court expected the parents to have such proof. Producing a bloodstained garment would not be too difficult. It was their testimony, and the fact that they would be known to have preserved it that gave it added significance.
In a case like this it was essential that the wife's parents could prove that their daughter had been a virgin, not only to save her life and uphold the family honor, but in order that their daughter’s future should not be wrecked, and so that any child born could not be denied as the rightful heir. No one would be able to say that the child was illegitimate, for the wife had been demonstrated to be a virgin on her wedding night, (and would have been carefully observed afterwards). Such rights of inheritance were seen as of huge importance.
18 Then the elders of that city shall take that man and punish him; 19 and they shall fine him one hundred shekels of silver and give them to the father of the young woman, because he has brought a bad name on a virgin of Israel. And she shall be his wife; he cannot divorce her all his days.
The accuser would then be taken and ‘chastised’. This probably indicated a severe beating depending on who the man was. He was also fined a hundred shekels of silver, the price of a number of slaves, which indicated the value put on a wife. This would be given to the father of the young woman as compensation for the slur on the family name, and perhaps to be held to safeguard her future. The woman would also then remain his permanent wife, because he would no longer have a right to divorce her. That right would have been lost. She would be secure from any further charges. Presumably her family would also keep an eye on her from then on. Indeed she may no longer have lived with him, but the rights of inheritance for any children she might have would have been secured.
Under the law of witnesses (19.19) we might have expected him to be put to death. But the decision here probably took into account that that would not be helpful to the injured woman. Instead he was to be sentenced to maintain her living expenses or what we call today alimony,
20 “But if the thing is true, and evidences of virginity are not found for the young woman, 21 then they shall bring out the young woman to the door of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death with stones, because she has done a disgraceful thing in Israel, to play the harlot in her father’s house. So you shall put away the evil from among you.
However, if no tokens of virginity could be produced the woman would be presumed guilty. Had they existed they would have been preserved. She was then to be taken to the door of her father’s house and stoned to death. This was because the parents had failed, possibly innocently, to ensure that their daughter was a virgin when they had arranged for her marriage, although professing that she was.
One lesson for us from this is the importance laid on virginity at marriage. This was God’s purpose for His people.
Various aspect of sexual misbehavior now are dealt with in the following passage with the most heinous at the beginning and the end.
22 “If a man is found lying with a woman married to a husband, then both of them shall die—the man that lay with the woman, and the woman; so you shall put away the evil from Israel.
Where a man, and a married woman who was someone else’s wife, were found having sexual relations both were to be put to death. By this act they had broken her unity with her husband (Genesis 2.24). They had blasted apart a family. This was in order to put away evil in Israel. Their act was seen as a stain on, and a disruption, the whole community. The man was slain as a corrupter, the woman as one who was misusing her God-given responsibility to be a bearer of legitimate children in order to maintain the family and its inheritance.
23 “If a young woman who is a virgin is betrothed to a husband, and a man finds her in the city and lies with her, 24 then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city, and you shall stone them to death with stones, the young woman because she did not cry out in the city, and the man because he humbled his neighbor’s wife; so you shall put away the evil from among you.
A woman who was betrothed who committed adultery was to be treated in the same way as a wife, but only if it had happened in the city and she had not cried out. Houses were built so close together that the likelihood of her not being heard was very small. There is no suggestion of force having been used in contrast with the next case. The man should be stoned because he had humbled his neighbors’ wife, the woman because she was deemed to have consented.
25 “But if a man finds a betrothed young woman in the countryside, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man who lay with her shall die. 26 But you shall do nothing to the young woman; there is in the young woman no sin deserving of death, for just as when a man rises against his neighbor and kills him, even so is this matter. 27 For he found her in the countryside, and the betrothed young woman cried out, but there was no one to save her.
However, if the same action took place in the open country it was to be accepted that the man had forced her and that the woman would have cried out, but that no one heard. Only the man was then to be put to death. The woman was free from guilt. It was a similar case to murder. The guilty party would be seen as having ensured that he did it where no one would know, while she would be seen as the unwilling victim. Thus the woman was considered as having not been able to do anything about it, and therefore as innocent.
28 “If a man finds a young woman who is a virgin, who is not betrothed, and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are found out, 29 then the man who lay with her shall give to the young woman’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife because he has humbled her; he shall not be permitted to divorce her all his days.
Where a young unmarried woman was of marriageable age and could therefore be presumed to be a virgin and a man forced on her sexually then the man must pay compensation to her family of fifty shekels of silver which in Exodus 22.16 is described as a dowry, and must marry her permanently with no right of divorce. It should be noted that this was both to protect the good name of her family, and to see to the young woman’s interests. The penalty was against the man. The woman would not be bound to marry him if she did not wish to do so in which case he would still have to pay the compensation (Exodus 22.17). But society was such in those days that it was usually to her benefit to marry him.
30 “A man shall not take his father’s wife, nor uncover his father’s bed.
The short section on sexual misconduct ends with the worse possible case, that of a man taking his father’s wife, (probably not to be seen as his own mother), and having sex with her. This would uncover his own father’s naked relationship, and would be a gross insult to the father and a great sin against him, betraying family honor and trust, and destroying family relationships. It might also be seen as an attempt to usurp his father’s place
