Deuteronomy 21 explained: Laws on Death, War and Family

An unsolved killing (vv. 1-9)

When a killer cannot be found, the elders of the nearest town break the neck of a young cow that has never been worked, in an untouched valley with a stream, then wash their hands over it and declare they had no part in the death. An unpunished killing was thought to stain the whole land, so they ask the LORD not to hold the people guilty; what the cow and the valley stood for is uncertain.

Women captured in war (vv. 10-14)

A soldier may marry a captured woman, with no mention of her consent, after she shaves her head, trims her nails, changes out of the clothes she was captured in and mourns her parents for a full month. If he later rejects her, he must let her go free and may not sell her, because he has dishonored her.

The firstborn's share (vv. 15-17)

A man with two wives may not hand his eldest son's double share of property to a younger son just because he prefers the younger son's mother. The eldest keeps his right whatever his father feels for his mother, whom the translations call 'unloved' or 'hated,' likely meaning loved less.

A defiant son (vv. 18-21)

If a son keeps defying his parents and is a glutton and a drunkard, both parents bring him to the town leaders at the gate, and the men of the town stone him to death. Some readers point out that both parents and a public hearing were required, and some later Jewish teachers held that the law was so hedged with conditions that it was never actually carried out.

A body on a pole (vv. 22-23)

An executed person's body might be hung on a pole for display, but it had to be buried that same day, because the text calls such a person cursed by God and says leaving the body would defile the land. Christians read this in light of Jesus, since Paul quotes it to say Christ took this curse on himself by dying on a cross (Galatians 3:13).

Key verse: Deuteronomy 21:9

Where Christians differ

Christians differ on how to read laws like those on captive women and the defiant son: some see them as God restraining the harsh customs of that time, while others see them as reflecting an ancient culture in ways that later Scripture moves beyond.

Something to think about

When a rule softens a harsh practice without ending it, how would you weigh what it protects against what it still allows?