Talk:Biblical Law Discussions

Interesting... Every reading that I have heard, and the way I have always understood these two sets of verses understands that the "uncleanness" mentioned by Moses is the "fornication" mentioned by Jesus. In fact, here's the latest and greatest translation we have:

Deuteronomy 24:1-4, NASU

24:1 Law of Divorce

"When a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out from his house, 2 and she leaves his house and goes and becomes another man's wife, 3 and if the latter husband turns against her and writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house, or if the latter husband dies who took her to be his wife, 4 then her former husband who sent her away is not allowed to take her again to be his wife, since she has been defiled; for that is an abomination before the LORD, and you shall not bring sin on the land which the LORD your God gives you as an inheritance.

NASU

In light of what Jesus says in Matthew, we understand that the second man in the Deuteronomy scenario actually commits adultery, so the wife is by association unclean; more than this, if the second man, too, finds cause to divorce his wife - only by infidelity on part of the wife, then the wife is unclean again - the wife would have to be called unclean, because both men found her out.

Any ideas? Jdmeans 00:53, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

What recourse did the woman so situated have? Both husbands found "some indecency" in her, but we're not told what that actually means, was there anyways to restore her name and reputation?

I think, though, the point of the article is missed, as it seems to infer that Jesus thought the Bible of His day was flawed (in, at least) this one area. This could be bad for people of a fundamental outlook on the Bible, that is the "all or nothing" crowd. Cracker_talk 01:41, 7 April 2007 (EDT)