We begin by discussing what is to be done when a person comes across a missing or injured animal. I've referred to this as "Animal Rights" although Moses may have intended this information to be regarded more as property rights. He may have been looking out for the owner of the animal more than for the animal itself, but I believe the Lord cares deeply about the animals He created and we'll compare our passage today with a passage from Exodus 23 which I feel backs up the idea that the Lord has in mind not only the rights of the animal's owner but the rights of the animal itself.
"If you see your fellow Israelite's ox or sheep straying, do not ignore it but be sure to take it back to its owner. If they do not live near you or if you do not know who owns it, take it home with you and keep it until they come looking for it. Then give it back. Do the same if you find their donkey or cloak or anything else they have lost. Do not ignore it." (Deuteronomy 22:1-3) It would be easy for a man going about his business to spot a loose ox or sheep and say to himself, "I don't have time for this. I've got so much to do today and I'm behind already. I'm just going to pretend I didn't see this." But the Lord says that's a wrong attitude. A person ought to care about the welfare of animals. Solomon said that a righteous person cares about an animal's needs. (Proverbs 12:10) A person ought to care about the welfare of his fellow man too. The Apostle Paul said to the church: "In humility value others above yourselves, not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others." (Philippians 2:3b-4)
Exodus 23:4 takes the law regarding a wandering animal even further. "If you come across your enemy's ox or donkey wandering off, be sure to return it." I believe this verse displays the Lord's concern for animals. It's not the animal's fault his owner has made himself someone's enemy. The animal may belong to a bad guy but if someone finds the animal running loose, he is still to get it back to its owner safely. Obeying this rule is a way of obeying a couple of other rules, namely: "Love your enemies," (Matthew 5:44) and, "Do to others what you would have them do to you." (Matthew 7:12) Returning an enemy's animal to him fulfills these laws of love.
If a person's animal has fallen in the roadway, a person passing by is not to ignore its predicament. He is to help the animal and its owner even if its owner is his enemy. "If you see your fellow Israelite's donkey or ox fallen on the road, do not ignore it. Help the owner get it to its feet." (Deuteronomy 22:4) This verse corresponds to Exodus 23:5, "If you see the donkey of someone who hates you fallen down under its load, do not leave it there; be sure you help them with it." Helping the animal of one's enemy not only supplies much-needed aid to the animal but may also facilitate peace between the two people. If nothing else, the kindness shown to one's enemy in the name of the Lord might help to thaw his cold heart toward the Lord. Someday in the future he may think on the kindness a child of the Lord showed him and begin thinking about the kindness of the Lord Himself.
Next we look at a verse regarding clothing which has been inserted at this point in the list. "A woman must not wear men's clothing, nor a man wear women's clothing, for the Lord your God detests anyone who does this." (Deuteronomy 22:5) Some scholars think this is a reference to pagan practices in which during certain festivals the women would don the battle armor of men and the men would wear the robes and accessories of women. Since a great deal of these types of pagan festivals involved sexual immorality, it's possible that the cross dressing was a part of the orgies they indulged in, but we can't say for certain. Either way it's the general consensus of most mainstream scholars that the heathens of the land of Canaan indulged in such shenanigans.
I think we have to take into account the time period and the culture in which verse 5 was spoken. The Israelites of Moses' day would primarily have worn long robes, and this goes for men and women both. Men probably wore a different style of garments when going into battle, but in their everyday lives the clothing of everyone was quite similar. It wasn't a culture in which women only wore dresses and men only wore slacks, so a lot of their clothing was not specific to either sex. I think what's intended by verse 5 is to prohibit the deliberate blurring of the differences between the sexes. I don't believe it's intended to prohibit women in modern cultures from wearing pants, for example, because in most developed countries pants are not considered a garment only of men. If we lived in a culture where only men were supposed to wear pants, then an argument could be made that a woman is trying to look like a man if she puts on a pair of pants. But I personally feel there's nothing wrong with a woman wearing pants in a culture where pants are a garment common to both sexes. Likewise, while in the United States we might consider a skirt to be a woman's garment, in other cultures it's perfectly acceptable for a man to wear a kilt or a long flowing robe which to our eyes might resemble a dress. In those cultures a kilt or a robe is not exclusively a female garment. A man is not trying to look like a woman just because he's wearing this type of garment.
I'm not going to get into a discussion here in the study about anyone being a transvestite or about anyone who is transgendered. (I must ask that no one post a comment under the study link on Facebook that has anything to do with these subjects either. The last thing I want is for anyone to feel that they are not welcome to read the Bible study and learn about the Lord.) I'm also not going to apologize for what the word of God says in verse 5. Moses knew the Israelites might see some heathen festivals in the promised land and that in these festivals the pagans were rebelling against the way God created human beings. It was perhaps a way of spitting in the face of God by deliberately pretending to be something they were not, by saying, "I don't care who or what I was created to be. No one---not even the God who made me---has the right to tell me who I am."
The best explanation I've heard for what's going on here (masquerading as the opposite sex) is something I heard on a Christian radio program some years ago. I don't recall which program it was or who the speaker was but he said he thinks the main reason the devil wants to see the lines blurred between the sexes is because the relationship between Christ and His church is compared to marriage between a man and a woman. Christ is the husband; the church is the wife. Christ is the male in the relationship and the church (although it's made up of members both male and female) is spoken of in a feminine context. Behaving as if we are all one sex, or as if our identity is fluid and changeable, or as if we shouldn't use male or female terminology at all, takes something away from the beautiful picture of Christ and His church in which He is the strong male provider and protector of His beloved wife and in which His adoring wife respects Him and responds to His love.
Now we'll move on to the last verse we'll look at today and it is another verse regarding animals. "If you come across a bird's nest beside the road, either in a tree or on the ground, and the mother is sitting on the young or on the eggs, do not take the mother with the young. You may take the young, but be sure to let the mother go, so that it may go well with you and you may have a long life." (Deuteronomy 22:6-7) Why is the promise of a long life connected to this law? Probably because if a person cannot obey the Lord in small matters, he will fail to obey the Lord in big matters. If a person is unwilling to extend mercy to a small and common creature like a bird, he will scarcely be able to extend mercy to his fellow man.
Because man needs to eat, he is permitted to gather what food he finds along the journey, but he is not to distress the mother bird further by capturing her along with her young. She is not to witness the end of life of her young. Preserving the life of the mother shows restraint---a refusal to be greedy---and it allows the mature female bird to go on to produce more offspring, thus helping to preserve her species.
Tomorrow we'll continue the section called "Various Laws" and will look at the restrictions against mixing certain things together.
No comments:
Post a Comment