The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Did God command women's hands to be cut off without pity?

Practices Christian Living
#1

When men fight with one another and the wife of the one draws near to rescue her husband from the hand of him who is beating him and puts out her hand and seizes him by the private parts,then you shall cut off her hand. Your eye shall have no pity. (Deuteronomy 25:11,12 NKJV)

This doesn’t sound like the heavenly Father which Jesus described, when He taught us to love our enemies and to pray for our persecutors. He indicated that if we do good to every one, we will become true children of God, and will be perfect.

You have heard that it was said, “You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.” But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may become sons of your father who is in heaven; for he causes his sun to rise on the bad and on the good, and rains on the righteous and on the unrighteous…Therefore, you shall be perfect, as your heavenly father is perfect. (Matthew 5:;43-45,48)

Can you imagine Jesus instructing His disciples to cut off a woman’s hand? — He who wouldn’t condemn the woman who was caught in adultery, and told her so, asking her to sin no more? Jesus is Another exactly like His Father. He is the exact imprint of the Father’s essence (Heb 1:3) so that He was able to say to His disciples, that he who has seen Him has seen the Father. So would the Father request such a harsh treatment of a woman, if Jesus would never do so, no matter what the woman did?

#2

What happened to all of the responses that were just here?

#3

I don’t know. I didn’t check the thread until now, and so I didn’t see them.

#4

I call it progressive revelation IMO. We cannot judge what Father did by todays standards or by the total revelation we see in Jesus.

Father was trying to establish a nation surrounded by some very barbaric people who may not of thought twice to grab a fellow by the family jewels. He was setting a higher standard and it started by saying that this was a no no.

I have found that in most cases of these strange laws (in our opinion today) in the OT, that they were far better then what was the going practice. We must remember that they were very barbaric and not as civilized as we may think.

I see it as baby steps towards what Father really is or will accomplish in the end. The baby doesn’t always think the punishment is fair.

IMO

#5

I must admit I struggle verses like this also. I am reading a book right now called “Is God a Moral Monster - Making sense of the Old Testament God” by Paul Copan that explains many of these rather strange laws and practices (by our modern standards) in much the same way as URPilgrim does. However this verse (which is not addressed in the book) is perplexing. Cutting off a hand is extreme. Why would God prescribe a measure that could easily lead to death due to blood loss and infection? In addition, this hardly seems fair to the ones required to carry out the punishment who would undoubtedly be traumatized by being involved in such gore.

Even Exodus 21 which contains the “eye for an eye” law of retribution (verse 24) specifies more human punishments for those who harm their servants. The woman in Deuteronomy 25 did not cause any lasting harm and actually had an understandable reason for taking such action. She didn’t just wake up one day and say “I’m gonna go grab my neighbor’s #@^&*%!”

OK, she intervened in an inappropriate manner. She was wrong. She sinned. I get that. But couldn’t God have come up with a better way to deal with her - even in the Old Testament?!

#6

Not exactly, Jesus never said that Moses was following the Laws of God; but rather the Law of Moses.

Mark 10:5
“It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law,” Jesus replied.

Moses wrote the law because their hearts were hard, The Father didn’t command it.

John 1:17
For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.

The Law isn’t the truth.

#7

Have you considered the possibility that such a passage uses figurative language, and is not meant to be taken literally but, instead, contain deep truths in ‘parable’ form? This may fit with Jesus saying that all the Law and Prophets “hang” on the two commands of loving God and loving one another. :slight_smile:

#8

I see it as progressive revelation. We really must be careful mining the OT for ethics. As Lewis said, the Bible “carries the Word of God; and we (under grace, with attention to tradition and to interpreters wiser than ourselves, and with the use of such intelligence and learning as we may have) receive that word from it not by using it as an encyclopedia or an encyclical but by steeping ourselves in its tone or temper and so learning its overall message.”

What really gets up my nose is when people quote such verses and say “How absurd! How primitive! How barbaric!”, then go off and support abortion on demand.

#9

Well, I am not saying “How primitive! How barbaric!” with regard to the ancient Hebrews. Perhaps they were barbaric, but if they understood such “laws” as coming from Yaheweh, who can blame them for their “barbaric” actions? Nor do I support the “barbaric” killing of children before they are born. But if GOD is requiring such practices, then I have a problem!

The second century gnostics saw it has a problem, too. They came up with a “solution.” Yahweh was the Hebrew tribal god who created all matter, and thought he was the Supreme God, but was mistaken. The Father of our Lord Jesus Christ was the actual Supreme God, who created all spirit, but nothing material. Yahweh was harsh and punishing, but the Father was loving and giving.

I believe the gnostics were grossly mistaken. But at least they faced the problem. Today’s Christians would rather ignore it, or try to integrate the two, saying, “Oh yes, God is a God of love, but he’s also a God of justice (by which they mean ‘a punishing God’.” They seem to think they actually have an answer by portraying God as schizophrenic in His ethical character. The only way in which I can reconcile the apparent contradiction is that, although Moses declared that Yahweh talked to him “face to face as one talks with a friend”, he sometimes wrongly understood the revelation of God, and unwittingly considered some of his reasonings and other thoughts, as God speaking to him.

#10

It’s impossible to love a God who isn’t worth loving. When I read things that are unworthy of God, I say, “Either I do not properly understand the intended meaning, or the person who wrote this was mistaken.”

#11

CC,
The problem with that kind of thinking is that the people who received the command would not have taken it literally.

Sonia

#12

Sonia, would you please clarify or restate your previous comment? What kind of thinking? What people who received the command?

#13

Paidion,

It is true that many try to side-strep verses like this and I appreciate your desire to face this head-on. If we cannot trust God to be consistent in this one area then we cannot trust God at all. At the same time if we cannot trust Moses to write down what God intended, then how can we trust anything Moses wrote? I would jump at your explanation of how this verse got in the Bible but I am afraid I will then be forced to lose confidence in all the O.T. It will then be left up to me to decide what reflects the heart of God and what does not … a scary thought.

Therefore … I am inclined to see this as the actual command of God. And yes I have a problem with that! But perhaps not an insurmountable problem. Why is this crime by the woman such a big deal? Can we think of a reason why her doing this jeopardized the stability or future of God’s people? And is there reason to believe that she should know why this is such a big deal? Is there something going on in this scenario we are not considering?

BTW This verse reminds me of :

Is there something we can learn from 1 Chronicles 13:5-10 that may shed some light on Deuteronomy 25:11,12?

#14

It was enough for the early Christians (other than the Marcionites) to recognize that the fullest revelation dwelt within Yeshua, and to follow Yeshua first and foremost, without doubting the goodness of God from the OT.

#15

Perhaps it was enough for them. But I still think it is a worthwhile pursuit to see if we can understand how some portions of scripture are compatible with other portions. Its not about doubting the goodness of God but about discovering the goodness of God where it might not be immediately evident. We may find that the key to unlocking one obscure passage is also a key to unlocking other passages, which will help us appreciate God even more.

#16

Sorry, that was unclear of me. I meant that the Israelites who received the command about cutting off the womans hand would have taken that literally. To say it is “figurative” and “contains deep truths in parable form” is problematic, since while that may be true for us in the Christian age, it still leaves the fact of God having in the past given this disturbing command for literal application.

Sonia

#17

George MacDonald, a believer in the reconcilation of all to God, once wrote something like this (I can’t recall where it is found, nor can I vouch for how accurate I remember the quote to which I refer):

#18

Isa 45:5 I am Jehovah, and there is none else; besides me there is no God. I will gird thee, though thou hast not known me;
6that they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none besides me: I am Jehovah, and there is none else.
7I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil. I am Jehovah, that doeth all these things.
8Distil, ye heavens, from above, and let the skies pour down righteousness: let the earth open, that it may bring forth salvation, and let it cause righteousness to spring up together; I, Jehovah, have created it.
9Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! a potsherd among the potsherds of the earth! Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands?
10Woe unto him that saith unto a father, What begettest thou? or to a woman, With what travailest thou?

1 Sa 2:6 "The LORD kills and makes alive; He brings down to the grave and brings up.

2 Co 3:6 who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

I’ve heard people say, what kind of god would kill his own son? We overlook the horridness of Jesus coming and dying, at the fathers will. Why is this any different? Is it ok because He died for me? seems kind of selfish, we don’t like God’s law when we don’t get anything out of it (the woman dying), but its ok if it saves our neck.(this is directed at me, and how I feel about it btw) Jesus didn’t even break any laws (well thats up for debate) the woman in this instance did.

If this world was all there is, or there was a chance that woman could spend all eternity in hell then I would really have a problem with this. Thankfully HE also makes alive. That womans next conscious moment after being killed for grabbing the nads would be to see her God, which surpasses all else. If they didn’t kill her she would likely suffer here, I’m sure her husband would beat her, or disown her, I mean you didn’t disrespect a man like that and not pay a penalty.

#19

Isa 45:5 I am Jehovah, and there is none else; besides me there is no God. I will gird thee, though thou hast not known me;
6that they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none besides me: I am Jehovah, and there is none else.
7I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil. I am Jehovah, that doeth all these things.
8Distil, ye heavens, from above, and let the skies pour down righteousness: let the earth open, that it may bring forth salvation, and let it cause righteousness to spring up together; I, Jehovah, have created it.
9Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! a potsherd among the potsherds of the earth! Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands?
10Woe unto him that saith unto a father, What begettest thou? or to a woman, With what travailest thou?

1 Sa 2:6 "The LORD kills and makes alive; He brings down to the grave and brings up.

2 Co 3:6 who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

I’ve heard people say, what kind of god would kill his own son? We overlook the horridness of Jesus coming and dying, at the fathers will. Why is this any different? Is it ok because He died for me? seems kind of selfish, we don’t like God’s law when we don’t get anything out of it (the woman dying), but its ok if it saves our neck.(this is directed at me, and how I feel about it btw) Jesus didn’t even break any laws (well thats up for debate) the woman in this instance did.

If this world was all there is, or there was a chance that woman could spend all eternity in hell then I would really have a problem with this. Thankfully HE also makes alive. That womans next conscious moment after being killed for grabbing the nads would be to see her God, which surpasses all else. If they didn’t kill her she would likely suffer here, I’m sure her husband would beat her, or disown her, I mean you didn’t disrespect a man like that and not pay a penalty.

#20

That is also my inclination.
Jesus rode roughshod over OT laws when necessary.