Deuteronomy chapter 25

vs 1

That's a pretty good overall summary of the justice system.

vs 2

Which you will note is not given - the number of lashes obviously was in some way subjective to the judge, or attested to culturally.

vs 3

So except for a maximum, you could get any number of thrashing in between. The reason they stop at 40 is because anything beyond that would be degrading! This is important though - it means that even those who do wrong are still fundamentally valuable and should not be degraded through punishment, only punished.

vs 4

5 points to the person who can link this to its preceding and following verses.

Paul uses this verse to teach that church leaders should be financially supported.

vs 5-6

The duty of a brother-in-law being to father a son for his brother's family name. I suppose the 'living together' thing is to let brothers off who live on the other side of the promised land. Because remember, with marriage comes the responsibility of the land that was apportioned to the brother, and you'd be flicking between land spots, managing your own and your brother's otherwise.

vs 7

That a woman could approach the elders with this shows how serious it is.

vs 8

He might have a good reason... like his current wife will get jealous, or he doesn't have time. Or he might have a not so good reason, like she's ugly or he hated his brother.

vs 9

Lovely. We must understand that it is very much in the widow's interests for her to become married to the brother-in-law. Not only is there great shame in not providing a son, but your living standards drop horribly when you're a widowed woman otherwise - especially when you have no son to look after you! So the brother saying no is a big insult to her too.

vs 10

This is not necessarily linked to what happens in Ruth 4, with the passing of a sandal. I'm not saying it isn't, I'm just saying it isn't necessarily the same thing. At least, that's what I've been told.