Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Exodus 23:1
Thou shalt not raise a false report: put not thine hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness.
1 3. Veracity and impartiality to be observed, especially in giving evidence in a court of law. Cf. (in H) Lev 19:15-18.
1a. A groundless report not to be given currency as might readily happen, for instance, from thoughtlessness or malice. Cf. Lev 19:16.
take up ] on the lips, i.e. utter. Cf. on Exo 20:7.
a groundless report ] On shw ’, ‘groundless,’ see on Exo 20:7.
1b. Not to assist the evildoer by giving dishonest witness.
put not thy hand with ] make not common cause with: cf. for the idiom 2Ki 15:19, Jer 26:24.
the wicked ] or, as in Exo 2:13, him that is in the wrong.
an unrighteous witness ] better, a malicious witness: lit. a witness of violence (so Deu 19:16, Psa 35:11 ), i.e. a witness who seeks to subvert the innocent, either ( ll.cc.) directly, or, as here, by assisting to clear the guilty.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Chapters Exo 20:22 to Exo 23:33
The Book of the Covenant
The ‘Book of the Covenant’ (see Exo 24:7 in explanation of the name) is the oldest piece of Hebrew legislation that we possess. The laws contained in it are spoken of in Exo 24:3 as consisting of two elements, the words (or commands) and the judgements: the judgements (see on Exo 21:1) are the provisions relating to civil and criminal law, prescribing what is to be done when particular cases arise, and comprised in Exo 21:2 to Exo 22:17; the words are positive injunctions of moral, religious, and ceremonial law, introduced mostly by Thou shalt or shalt not, and comprised in Exo 20:23-26, Exo 22:18 to Exo 23:19: Exo 23:20-33 is a hortatory epilogue, consisting chiefly of promises intended to suggest motives for the observance of the preceding laws. The laws themselves were doubtless taken by E from some already existing source: the ‘judgements’ in Exo 21:2 to Exo 22:17 seem to have undergone no alteration of form: but the ‘words’ which follow can hardly be in their original order; moral, religious, and ceremonial injunctions being intermingled sometimes singly, sometimes in groups (see the following summary), without any apparent system (notice also Exo 23:4 f., evidently interrupting the connexion between vv. 1 3 and 6 8); and in parts (as Exo 22:21-22;Exo 22:24, Exo 23:9 b, Exo 23:23-25 a, Exo 23:31-33: see the notes) slight parenetic additions have probably been made by the compiler of J E.
The laws themselves may be grouped as follows:
i. Enactments relating to civil and criminal law:
1. Rights of Hebrew slaves (male and female), Exo 21:2-11.
2. Capital offences, viz. murder (in distinction from manslaughter), striking or cursing a parent, and man-stealing, Exo 21:12-17.
3. Penalties for bodily injuries, caused ( a) by human beings, Exo 21:18-27, ( b) by animals (a vicious ox, for instance), or neglect of reason able precautions (as leaving a pit open), Exo 21:28-36.
4. Theft of ox or sheep, and burglary, Exo 22:1-4.
5. Compensation for damage done by straying cattle [but see note], or fire spreading accidentally to another man’s field, Exo 22:5-6.
6. Compensation for loss or injury in various cases of deposit or loan, Exo 22:7-15.
7. Compensation for seduction, Exo 22:16-17.
ii ( a). Regulations relating to worship and religious observances:
1. Prohibition of images, and regulations for the construction of altars, Exo 20:23-26.
2. Sacrifice to ‘other gods’ to be punished with the ‘ban,’ Exo 22:20.
3. God not to be reviled, nor a ruler cursed, Exo 22:28.
4. Firstfruits, and firstborn males (of men, oxen, and sheep), to be given to Jehovah, Exo 22:29-30.
5. Flesh torn of beasts not to be eaten, Exo 22:31.
6 & 7. The seventh year to be a fallow year, and the seventh day a day of rest (in each case, for a humanitarian motive), Exo 23:10-12.
8. God’s commands to be honoured, and ‘other gods’ not to be invoked, Exo 23:13.
9. The three annual Pilgrimages to be observed (all males to appear before Jehovah at each), Exo Exo 23:14-17.
10. A festal sacrifice not to be offered with leavened bread, nor its fat to remain unburnt till the following morning, Exo 23:18.
11. Firstfruits to be brought to the house of Jehovah, Exo 23:19 a.
12. A kid not to be boiled in its mother’s milk, Exo 23:19 b.
ii ( b). Injunctions of a moral, and, especially, of a humanitarian character:
1. Sorcery and bestiality to be punished with death, Exo 22:18-19.
2. The ‘sojourner,’ the widow, and the orphan, not to be oppressed, Exo 22:21-24.
3. Interest not to be taken from the poor, Exo 22:25.
4. A garment taken in pledge to be returned before sun-down, Exo 22:26-27.
5. Veracity and impartiality, the duties of a witness, Exo 23:1-3.
6. An enemy’s beast to be preserved from harm, Exo 23:4-5.
7. Justice to be administered impartially, and no bribe to be taken, Exo 23:6-9.
These three groups of laws may have been taken originally from distinct collections. The terse form in which many of the laws in ii ( a) and ii ( b) are cast resembles that which prevails in Leviticus 19 (H). The regulations respecting worship contained in Exo 23:10-19, together with the allied ones embedded in Exo 13:3-7; Exo 13:11-13, are repeated in Exo 34:18-26, in the section (Exo 34:10-26) sometimes called the ‘Little Book of the Covenant,’ with slight verbal differences, and with the addition in Exo 34:11-17 of more specific injunctions against idolatry (see the synoptic table, pp. 370 2).
The laws contained in the ‘Book of the Covenant’ are, as has been already said, no doubt older than the narrative (E) in which they are incorporated: they represent, to use Cornill’s expression, the ‘consuetudinary law of the early monarchy,’ and include (cf. the notes on trh, p. 162, and mishp, Exo 22:1) the formulated decisions which, after having been begun by Moses (Exo 18:16; cf. p. 161), had gradually accumulated up to that age. The stage of society for which the Code was designed, and the characteristics of the Code itself, are well indicated by W. R. Smith ( OTJC. 2 [180] p. 340 ff). ‘The society contemplated in it is of very simple structure. The basis of life is agricultural. Cattle and agricultural produce are the main elements wealth; and the laws of property deal almost exclusively with them (see Exo 21:28 to Exo 22:10). The principles of criminal and civil justice are those still current among the Arabs of the desert, viz. retaliation and pecuniary compensation. Murder is dealt with by the law of blood-revenge; but the innocent man-slayer may seek asylum at God’s altar (cf. 1Ki 1:50; 1Ki 2:18; 1Ki 2:29).’ Man-stealing, offences against parents, and witchcraft are also punishable by death. Personal injuries fall mostly, like murder, under the law of retaliation (Exo Exo 21:24 f.). These are the only cases in which a punishment affecting the person is prescribed: in other cases the punishment takes as a rule the form of compensation. ‘Degrading punishments, as imprisonment or the bastinado, are unknown; and loss of liberty is inflicted only on a thief who cannot pay a fine (Exo 22:3 b). The slave retains definite rights. He recovers his freedom after 7 years, unless he prefers to remain a bondman, and to seal his determination by a solemn symbolical act (Exo 21:6).’ He cannot appeal to the lex talionis against his master: to beat one’s own slave to death is not a capital crime; but for minor injuries he can claim his liberty (Exo 21:20 f., 26 f.). ‘Women do not enjoy full social equality with men. The daughter was her father’s property, who received a price for surrendering her to her husband (Exo 21:7); and so a daughter’s dishonour is compensated by law as a pecuniary loss to her father (Exo 22:16 f.).’ A woman slave was a slave for life, except when she had been bought to be her master’s concubine, and he withheld the recognized rights which she thus acquired (Exo 21:11). Concubine-slaves had also other rights (Exo 21:8-10). Various cases of injury to property are specified: the penalty is usually simple compensation, though naturally it is greater, if deliberate purpose (as in the case of theft, Exo 22:1), or culpable negligence, can be proved. Cases of misappropriation of property are settled by a decision given at a sanctuary (Exo 22:9).
[180] W. R. Smith, Old Testament in the Jewish Church, ed. 2, 1892.
From the point of view of ethics and religion, the regard paid in the Code to the claims of humanity and justice is observable. An emphatic voice is raised against those crying vices of Oriental Government, the maladministration of justice, and the oppression of the poor. Even an enemy, in his need, is to receive consideration and help (Exo 23:4-5). ‘The gr, or foreigner living in Israel under the protection of a family or the community, though he has no legal status (cf. on Exo 22:21), is not to be oppressed. The Sabbath is enforced as an ordinance of humanity; and to the same end the produce of every field or vineyard must be left to the poor one year in seven. The precepts of religious worship are simple. He who sacrifices to any god but Jehovah falls under the ‘ban’ (Exo 22:20). The only ordinance of ceremonial sanctity is to abstain from the flesh of animals torn by wild beasts (Exo 22:31). Altar are to be of the simplest possible construction. The sacred dues are the firstlings and firstfruits; and the former must be presented at a sanctuary on the eighth day. This regulation presupposes a plurality of sanctuaries, which also agrees with the terms of Exo 20:24.’ The only sacrifices mentioned are burnt- and peace-offerings. The three pilgrimages, at which every male is to appear before Jehovah with a gift, celebrate three periods of the agricultural year, the beginning and close of harvest, and the end of the vintage. The only points of sacrificial ritual insisted on are the two rules that the blood of a festal sacrifice is not to be offered with leavened bread, and that the fat must be burnt before the next morning. The simplicity of the ceremonial regulations in this Code stands in striking contrast to the detailed and systematic development which they receive in the later legislation of P.
Some of the laws strike us as severe (Exo 21:15-16; Exo 21:21, Exo 22:18; Exo 22:20); but we must remember the stage of civilization for which they were designed: they were adapted, not for people in every stage of society, but for people living as the Israelites were circumstanced at the time when they were drawn up. They also, it is to be observed, are in many cases clearly intended to impose restrictions upon abuse of authority, or arbitrary violence. We may remember also that far severer punishments, such as mutilation and torture, were common not only in many other ancient nations, but even, till comparatively recent times, in Christian Europe; and in England, till 1835, death was the penalty for many trivial forms of theft. Of course some of the laws notably the one about witches have been terribly misapplied in times when the progressive character of revelation and the provisional character of Israel’s laws were not realized. But they were adapted on the whole to make Israel a just, humane, and God-fearing people, and to prepare the way, when the time was ripe, for something better.
The laws of J and E (except the section dealing with the compensations to be paid for various injuries, Exo 21:18 to Exo 22:15), expanded, and, in some cases, modified to suit the requirements of a later age, form a substantial element in the Deuteronomic legislation (Deuteronomy 5-28; see the synoptic table in LOT. p. 73 ff.): to some of the moral and religious injunctions there are also parallels (referred to in the notes) in the ‘Law of Holiness’ (Leviticus 17-26). The ceremonial laws appear in a partially developed form in Dt., and in a more fully developed form, with many minutely defined regulations, in the Priests’ Code (for an example in Exodus itself, contrast Exo 23:15 with Exo 12:14-20). A discussion of the differences between the laws of JE and the later codes belongs more to the commentaries on Lev., Numb., and Dt., than to one on Exodus; and they have been noticed here only in special cases. A detailed comparison of the different regulations will be found in McNeile, pp. xxxix xlvi, li lvi.
The promulgation of a new code of laws was often among ancient nations ascribed to the command of the national deity. Thus among he Cretans, Minos, the ‘companion of great Zeus’ ( , Od.19:179), was said to have held converse with Zeus, and to have received his laws from him in a cave of the Dictaean mountain (cf. [Plato], Minos, 319 b 320 b); his laws and those of Lycurgus are called ‘the laws of Zeus’ and ‘Apollo’ respectively (Plato, Legg. i. 632 D); and Numa’s laws were ascribed to the goddess Egeria (Dion. Hal. ii. 60 f.). The closest parallel is however afforded, on Semitic ground, by Hmmurabi, who expressly speaks of his code as consisting of ‘righteous laws’ delivered to him by Shamash, the sun-god (see below, p. 418 ff.).
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
These four commands, addressed to the conscience, are illustrations of the ninth commandment, mainly in reference to the giving of evidence in legal causes. Compare 1Ki 21:10; Act 6:11.
Exo 23:2
This verse might be more strictly rendered, Thou shalt not follow the many to evil; neither shalt thou bear witness in a cause so as to incline after the many to pervert justice.
Exo 23:3
Countenance – Rather, show partiality to a mans cause because he is poor (compare Lev 19:15).
These four commands, addressed to the conscience, are illustrations of the ninth commandment, mainly in reference to the giving of evidence in legal causes. Compare 1Ki 21:10; Act 6:11.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Exo 23:1
Thou shalt not raise a false report.
Slander characterized, prohibited, and punished
I. Slander is characterized.
1. Originating a false report. It may be from–
(1) Envy.
(2) Carelessness.
(3) Hasty conclusions.
2. Listening to false reports.
3. Circulating a false report.
II. Slander is prohibited.
1. Affecting antecedents.
2. Affecting character.
3. Affecting family or social relations.
4. Affecting goods.
III. Slander is punished. The slanderer is–
1. Excluded from religious fellowship (Psa 15:3).
2. Exposed to contempt of mankind (Pro 10:18).
3. Object of Divine vengeance (Psa 10:5).
4. Excluded from kingdom of heaven (Rev 22:15). (J. W. Burn.)
Description of slander
The tongue of the slanderer is a devouring fire, which tarnishes whatever it touches; which exercises its fury on the good grain equally as on the chaff, on the profane as on the sacred: which, wherever it passes, leaves only desolation and ruin; digs even into the bowels of the earth, and fixes itself on things the most hidden; turns into vile ashes what only a moment before had appeared to us so precious and brilliant; acts with more violence and danger than ever in the time when it was apparently smothered up and almost extinct; which blackens what it cannot consume, and sometimes sparkles and delights before it destroys. (Massillon.)
Envious slander
The worthiest persons are frequently attacked by slanders, as we generally find that to be the best fruit which the birds have been pecking at. (Bacon.)
How to avoid slander
The celebrated Boerhaave, who had many enemies, used to say that he never thought it necessary to repeat their calumnies. They are sparks, said he, which, if you do not blow them, will go out of themselves. The surest method against scandal is to live it down by perseverance in well-doing, and by prayer to God, that He would cure the distempered minds of those who traduce and injure us. It was a good remark of another, that the malice of ill tongues cast upon a good man is only like a mouthful of smoke blown upon a diamond, which, though it clouds its beauty for the present, yet it is easily rubbed off, and the gem restored, with little trouble to its owner.
Slander reproved
When any one was speaking ill of another in the presence of Peter the Great, he would shortly interrupt him, and say, Well now; but has he not a bright side? Come, tell me what have you noticed as excellent in him! It is easy to splash mud; but I would rather help a man to keep his coat clean.
Listening to slander
Calumny would soon starve and die of itself, if nobody took it in, and gave it lodging. (Leighton.)
There would not be so many open mouths if there were not so many open ears. (Bishop Hall.)
The progress of slander
It is AElians observation, how that men being in danger to be stung by scorpions, use to place their beds in water, yet the politic serpents have a device to reach them: they get up to the top of the house, where one takes hold, the next hangs at the end of him, a third upon the second, a fourth upon the third, and so making a kind of serpentine rope, they at last wound the man. And thus it is, that amongst scandalizers and slanderers, one begins to whisper, another makes it a report, a third enlargeth it to a dangerous calumny, a fourth divulgeth it for a truth. So the innocent mans good name, which, like a merchants wealth, got in many years, and lost in an hour, is maimed, and so secretly traduced, that it is somewhat hard to find out the villain that did it. (J. Spencer.)
False reports
The Rev. C.H. Spurgeon has given publicity to the following letter: Dear Mr. Spurgeon,–As I see that you are still occasionally put to the trouble of answering inquiries as to the truth of various anecdotes, etc., concerning yourself, I thought the following brief statement might interest you, or some of your numerous readers, if you think it well to publish it. About seventeen years ago I was for some time at a well-known health resort on the south coast. At the table dhote I sat next to a young married lady, who was, alas! consumptive, and of that temperament which is so common in such cases, tres spirituelle, and very learned and accomplished. You may be sure she never lacked auditors for her lively conversation. At dessert one day she was telling stories (in the literal and juvenile sense of the phrase) about yourself. I let her go on for some time, until I thought the fun was getting a little too fast; and then I said, I hope Mrs., you do not believe the stories you are detailing, because I assure you, I heard nearly all of them in my boyhood, before Mr. Spurgeon was born, and that most of them were then attributed to Rowland Hill–doubtless with equal lack of authenticity. She looked me calmly in the face, with a comical expression, and replied, Oh, Mr.
, we never ask whether such stories are true; it is quite sufficient if we find them amusing. Well, I said, so long as that is understood all round, by all means keep on. The poor, brilliant, thoughtless woman and her husband also have many years since passed away; but she has many, many successors, who are without her wit, and not quite so goodhumouredly candid as to their practice. If only you can get it understood all round that such folk really do not consider whether their anecdotes are true or not, it might save you some trouble. Yours faithfully. Mr. Spurgeon himself adds: This is quite true, but it is a pity that people should lie in jest. The lady was let off very easily. Our friend has touched the root of the matter, It is not malice, but the passion for amusement, which creates the trade in falsehood, which never seems to decline.
Description of calumny
Apelles painted her thus: There sits a man with great and open ears, inviting Calumny, with his hand held out, to come to him; and two women, Ignorance and Suspicion, stand near him. Calumny breaks out in a fury; her countenance is comely and beautiful, her eyes sparkle like fire, and her face is inflamed with anger; she holds a lighted torch in her left hand, and with her right twists a young mans neck, who holds up his hands in prayer to the gods. Before her goes Envy, pale and nasty; on her side are Fraud and Conspiracy; behind her follows Repentance, clad in mourning, and her clothes torn, with her head turned backwards, as if she looked for Truth, who comes slowly after. (A. Tooke.)
False insinuations
Often are the most painful wrongs inflicted through the medium of covert inuendoes and malignant insinuations. Half of a fact is a whole falsehood. He who gives the truth a false colouring by a false manner of telling it is the worst of liars. Such was Doeg in his testimony against the priests. He stated the facts in the case, but gave them such an artful interpretation as to impart to them the aspect and influence of the most flagrant falsehoods. It was through the same mode of procedure that our Lord was condemned.
An unrighteous witness.–
The duties of witnesses
I. Not to co-operate in an unrighteous cause (verse 1). This commandment is exceeding broad, and conveys a lesson–
1. To judicial witnesses.
(1) Personal friendships.
(2) The guilt of the accused on some other point.
(3) A show of justice must not influence us.
2. To all partisans, controversialists, politicians.
3. To trades unionists, etc.
II. Not to co-operate in any unrighteous cause because it is popular (verse 2).
1. Because majorities are no test of truth. Multitudes may be roused by passion, prejudice, or self-interest.
2. Because men should be weighed as well as counted.
3. Because righteousness, from the constitution of human nature, is often unpopular and in the minority.
III. Not to co-operate in an unrighteous cause Because it is apparently benevolent (verse 3; Lev 19:15).
1. Because we may be putting a premium on vice which is the source of all misery.
(1) By endeavouring to conceal the crime.
(2) By extolling other virtues, so as to minimize the enormity of guilt. But to what purpose is it if we extol a mans honesty, if he is lazy, or a drunkard; or his sobriety, if a thief?
2. Because justice is above mere sentiment, and for the well-being of the whole community, and not for the exclusive benefit of a class.
3. Because of its influence on the object himself. Let a man feel that you do this or that for him simply because he is poor, and he will see no advantage in helping himself.
Learn then–
1. To entertain none but righteous considerations.
2. To pursue them at all cost. (J. W. Burn.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
CHAPTER XXIII
Laws against evil-speaking, 1.
Against bad company, 2.
Against partiality, 3.
Laws commanding acts of kindness and humanity, 4, 5.
Against oppression, 6.
Against unrighteous decisions, 7.
Against bribery and corruption, 8.
Against unkindness to strangers, 9.
The ordinance concerning the Sabbatical year, 10, 11.
The Sabbath a day of rest, 12.
General directions concerning circumcision, c., 13.
The three annual festivals, 14.
The feast of unleavened bread, 15.
The feast of harvest, and the feast of ingathering, 16.
All the males to appear before God thrice in a year, 17.
Different ordinances-no blood to be offered with leavened
bread-no fat to be left till the next day-the first fruits
to be brought to the house of God-and a kid not to be seethed
in its mother’s milk, 18, 19.
Description of the Angel of God, who was to lead the people into
the promised land, and drive out the Amorites, c., 20-23.
Idolatry to be avoided, and the images of idols destroyed, 24.
Different promises to obedience, 25-27.
Hornets shall be sent to drive out the Canaanites, &c., 28.
The ancient inhabitants to be driven out by little and little,
and the reason why, 29, 30.
The boundaries of the promised land, 31.
No league or covenant to be made with the ancient inhabitants,
who are all to be utterly expelled, 32, 33.
NOTES ON CHAP. XXIII.
Verse 1. Thou shalt not raise a false report] Acting contrary to this precept is a sin against the ninth commandment. And the inventor and receiver of false and slanderous reports, are almost equally criminal. The word seems to refer to either, and our translators have very properly retained both senses, putting raise in the text, and receive in the margin. The original lo tissa has been translated, thou shalt not publish. Were there no publishers of slander and calumny, there would be no receivers and were there none to receive them, there would be none to raise them and were there no raisers, receivers, nor propagators of calumny, lies, &c., society would be in peace.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Thou shalt not raise, Heb. not take up, to wit, into thy mouth, as Exo 20:7, either by the first raising, or further spreading of it; or not bear, or endure, as that word oft signifies; not hear it patiently, delightfully, readily, approvingly, as persons are very apt to do; but rather shalt discourage and reprove the spreader of it, according to Pro 25:23. Possibly the Holy Ghost might choose a word of such general signification to show that all these things were forbidden. Put not thine hand, i.e. not conspire or agree with them, which is signified by joining hands, Pro 11:21, not give them a helping hand in it, not encourage them to it by gifts or promises, not assist them by counsel or interest. Others, not swear with them; but swearing is not noted by putting the hand, but by lifting it up.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
1. put not thine handjoin nothands.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Thou shalt not raise a false report,…. Of a neighbour, or of any man whatever, either secretly by private slanders, whispers, backbiting and tale bearing, by innuendos, detracting from his good name and credit, suggesting things false and wicked concerning him; or publicly in a court of judicature, bringing a false accusation, laying a false charge, and bearing a false testimony against him: or “thou shall not receive a false report” p; if there were not so many, that say, Report, and we will report it, that are ready to receive every ill thing of their neighbours, there would not be so many that would raise such ill things of them; everything of this kind should be discountenanced, and especially by judges in courts of judicature, who are chiefly spoken to and of in the context; these should not easily admit every charge and accusation brought; nor bear, or endure a false report, as the word also signifies, but discourage, and even punish it:
put not thine hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness; which is not a gesture used in swearing, such as with us, of putting the hand upon a book, which did not obtain so early; nor is there any instance of this kind in Scripture; the gesture used in swearing was either putting the hand under the thigh, which yet is questionable, or lifting of it up to heaven; but here it is expressive of confederacy, of joining hand in hand to carry on a prosecution in an unrighteous way, by bearing false testimony against another; and such were to be guarded against, and not admitted to give evidence in a cause, even a man that is known to be a wicked man, or to have been an unrighteous witness before; on the one hand, a man should be careful of joining with him in a testimony that is unrighteous; and, on the other hand, judges should take care not to suffer such to be witnesses. The Jews say q, that everyone that is condemned to be scourged, or has been scourged for some crime committed, is reckoned a wicked man, and he is not to be admitted a witness, nor his testimony taken.
p “non suscipies”, V. L. Pegninus, Vatablus, Drusius, Fagius. q Maimon. & Bartenora in Misn. Sanhedrin, c. 3. sect. 3.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Lastly, no one was to violate another’s rights. – Exo 23:1. “Thou shalt not raise (bring out) an empty report.” , a report that has no foundation, and, as the context shows, does injury to another, charges him with wrongdoing, and involves him in legal proceedings. “ Put not thine hand with a wicked man (do not offer him thy hand, or render him assistance), to be a witness of violence.” This clause is unquestionably connected with the preceding one, and implies that raising a false report furnishes the wicked man with a pretext for bringing the man, who is suspected of crime on account of this false report, before a court of law; in consequence of which the originator or propagator of the empty report becomes a witness of injustice and violence.
Exo 23:2-3 Just as little should a man follow a multitude to pervert justice. “ Thou shalt not be behind many (follow the multitude) to evil things, nor answer concerning a dispute to incline thyself after many (i.e., thou shalt not give such testimony in connection with any dispute, in which thou takest part with the great majority), so as to pervert ” ( ), sc., justice. But, on the other hand, “ neither shalt thou adorn the poor man in his dispute ” (Exo 23:3), i.e., show partiality to the poor or weak man in an unjust cause, out of weak compassion for him. (Compare Lev 19:15, a passage which, notwithstanding the fact that is applied to favour shown to the great or mighty, overthrows Knobel’s conjecture, that should be read for , inasmuch as it prohibits the showing of favour to the one as much as to the other.)
Exo 23:4-5 Not only was their conduct not to be determined by public opinion, the direction taken by the multitude, or by weak compassion for a poor man; but personal antipathy, enmity, and hatred were not to lead them to injustice or churlish behaviour. On the contrary, if the Israelite saw his enemy’s beast straying, he was to bring it back again; and if he saw it lying down under the weight of its burden, he was to help it up again (cf. Deu 22:1-4). The words , “ cease (desist) to leave it to him (thine enemy); thou shalt loosen it (let it loose) with him, ” which have been so variously explained, cannot have any other signification than this: “beware of leaving an ass which has sunk down beneath its burden in a helpless condition, even to thine enemy, to try whether he can help it up alone; rather help him to set it loose from its burden, that it may get up again.” This is evident from Deu 22:4, where , “withdraw not thyself,” is substituted for , and , “set up with him,” for . From this it is obvious that is used in the first instance in the sense of leaving it alone, leaving it in a helpless condition, and immediately afterwards in the sense of undoing or letting loose. The peculiar turn given to the expression, “thou shalt cease from leaving,” is chosen because the ordinary course, which the natural man adopts, is to leave an enemy to take care of his own affairs, without troubling about either him or his difficulties. Such conduct as this the Israelite was to give up, if he ever found his enemy in need of help.
Exo 23:6-8 The warning against unkindness towards an enemy is followed by still further prohibitions of injustice in questions of right: viz., in Exo 23:6, a warning against perverting the right of the poor in his cause; in Exo 23:7, a general command to keep far away from a false matter, and not to slay the innocent and righteous, i.e., not to be guilty of judicial murder, together with the threat that God would not justify the sinner; and in Exo 23:8, the command not to accept presents, i.e., to be bribed by gifts, because “ the gift makes seeing men ( open eyes) blind, and perverts the causes of the just.” The rendering “ words of the righteous” is not correct; for even if we are to understand the expression “seeing men” as referring to judges, the “righteous” can only refer to those who stand at the bar, and have right on their side, which judges who accept of bribes may turn into wrong.
Exo 23:9 The warning against oppressing the foreigner, which is repeated from Exo 22:20, is not tautological, as Bertheau affirms for the purpose of throwing suspicion upon this verse, but refers to the oppression of a stranger in judicial matters by the refusal of justice, or by harsh and unjust treatment in court (Deu 24:17; Deu 27:19). “ For ye know the soul ( animus , the soul as the seat of feeling) of the stranger, ” i.e., ye know from your own experience in Egypt how a foreigner feels.
Exo 23:10-13 Here follow directions respecting the year of rest and day of rest, the first of which lays the foundation for the keeping of the sabbatical and jubilee years, which are afterwards instituted in Lev 25, whilst the latter gives prominence to the element of rest and refreshment involved in the Sabbath, which had been already instituted (Exo 20:9-11), and presses it in favour of beasts of burden, slaves, and foreigners. Neither of these instructions is to be regarded as laying down laws for the feasts; so that they are not to be included among the rights of Israel, which commence at Exo 23:14. On the contrary, as they are separated from these by Exo 23:13, they are to be reckoned as forming part of the laws relating to their mutual obligations one towards another. This is evident from the fact, that in both of them the care of the poor stands in the foreground. From this characteristic and design, which are common to both, we may explain the fact, that there is no allusion to the keeping of a Sabbath unto the Lord, as in Exo 20:10 and Lev 25:2, in connection with either the seventh year or seventh day: all that is mentioned being their sowing and reaping for six years, and working for six days, and then letting the land lie fallow in the seventh year, and their ceasing or resting from labour on the seventh day. “ The seventh year thou shalt let (thy land) loose ( to leave unemployed), and let it lie; and the poor of thy people shall eat (the produce which grows of itself), and their remainder (what they leave) shall the beast of the field eat.” : lit., to breathe one’s self, to draw breath, i.e., to refresh one’s self (cf. Exo 31:17; 2Sa 16:14). – With Exo 23:13 the laws relating to the rights of the people, in their relations to one another, are concluded with the formula enforcing their observance, “ And in all that I say to you, take heed, ” viz., that ye carefully maintain all the rights which I have given you. There is then attached to this, in Exo 23:14, a warning, which forms the transition to the relation of Israel to Jehovah: “ Make no mention of the name of other gods, neither let it be heard out of thy mouth.” This forms a very fitting boundary line between the two series of mishpatim, inasmuch as the observance and maintenance of both of them depended upon the attitude in which Israel stood towards Jehovah.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| Judicial Laws. | B. C. 1491. |
1 Thou shalt not raise a false report: put not thine hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness. 2 Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest judgment: 3 Neither shalt thou countenance a poor man in his cause. 4 If thou meet thine enemy’s ox or his ass going astray, thou shalt surely bring it back to him again. 5 If thou see the ass of him that hateth thee lying under his burden, and wouldest forbear to help him, thou shalt surely help with him. 6 Thou shalt not wrest the judgment of thy poor in his cause. 7 Keep thee far from a false matter; and the innocent and righteous slay thou not: for I will not justify the wicked. 8 And thou shalt take no gift: for the gift blindeth the wise, and perverteth the words of the righteous. 9 Also thou shalt not oppress a stranger: for ye know the heart of a stranger, seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.
Here are, I. Cautions concerning judicial proceedings; it was not enough that they had good laws, better than ever any nation had, but care must be taken for the due administration of justice according to those laws.
1. The witnesses are here cautioned that they neither occasion an innocent man to be indicted, by raising a false report of him and setting common fame against him, nor assist in the prosecution of an innocent man, or one whom they do not know to be guilty, by putting their hand in swearing as witnesses against him, v. 1. Bearing false witness against a man, in a matter that touches his life, has in it all the guilty of lying, perjury, malice, theft, murder, with the additional stains of colouring all with a pretence of justice and involving many others in the same guilt. There is scarcely any one act of wickedness that a man can possibly be guilty of which has in it a greater complication of villanies than this has. Yet the former part of this caution is to be extended, not only to judicial proceedings, but to common conversation; so that slandering and backbiting are a species of falsewitness-bearing. A man’s reputation lies as much at the mercy of every company as his estate or life does at the mercy of a judge or jury; so that he who raises, or knowingly spreads, a false report against his neighbour, especially if the report be made to wise and good men whose esteem one would desire to enjoy, sins as much against the laws of truth, justice, and charity, as a false witness does–with this further mischief, that he leaves it not in the power of the person injured to obtain redress. That which we translate, Thou shalt not raise, the margin reads, Thou shalt not receive a false report; for sometimes the receiver, in this case, is as bad as the thief; and a backbiting tongue would not do so much mischief as it does if it were not countenanced. Sometimes we cannot avoid hearing a false report, but we must not receive it, that is, we must not hear it with pleasure and delight as those that rejoice in iniquity, nor give credit to it as long as there remains any cause to question the truth of it. This is charity to our neighbour’s good name, and doing as we would be done by.
2. The judges are here cautioned not to pervert judgment. (1.) They must not be overruled, either by might or multitude, to go against their consciences in giving judgment, v. 2. With the Jews causes were tried by a bench of justices, and judgment given according to the majority of votes, in which cause every particular justice must go according to truth, as it appeared to him upon the strictest and most impartial enquiry, though the multitude of the people, and their outcries, or, the sentence of the rabbim (we translate it many), the more ancient and honourable of the justices, went the other way. Therefore (as with us), among the Jews, the junior upon the bench voted first, that he might not be swayed nor overruled by the authority of the senior. Judges must not respect the persons either of the parties or of their fellow-judges. The former part of this verse also gives a general rule for all, as well as judges, not to follow a multitude to do evil. General usage will never excuse us in a bad practice; nor is the broad way ever the better or safer for its being tracked and crowded. We must enquire what we ought to do, not what the majority do; because we must be judged by our Master, not by our fellow-servants, and it is too great a compliment to be willing to go to hell for company. (2.) They must not pervert judgment, no, not in favour of a poor man, v. 3. Right must in all cases take place and wrong must be punished, and justice never biassed nor injury connived at under pretence of charity and compassion. If a poor man be a bad man, and do a bad thing, it is foolish pity to let him fare the better for his poverty, Deu 1:16; Deu 1:17. (3.) Neither must they pervert judgment in prejudice to a poor man, nor suffer him to be wronged because he had not wherewithal to right himself; in such cases the judges themselves must become advocates for the poor, as far as their cause was good and honest (v. 6): “Thou shalt not wrest the judgment of the poor; remember they are thy poor, bone of thy bone, thy poor neighbours, thy poor brethren; let them not therefore fare the worse for being poor.” (4.) They must dread the thoughts of assisting or abetting a bad cause (v. 7): “Keep thyself far from a false matter; do not only keep thyself free from it, nor think it enough to say thou art unconcerned in it, but keep far from it, dread it as a dangerous snare. The innocent and righteous thou wouldest not, for all the world, slay with thy own hands; keep far therefore from a false matter, for thou knowest not but it may end in that, and the righteous God will not leave such wickedness unpunished: I will not justify the wicked,” that is, “I will condemn him that unjustly condemns others.” Judges themselves are accountable to the great judge. (5.) They must not take bribes, v. 8. They must not only not be swayed by a gift to give an unjust judgment, to condemn the innocent, or acquit the guilty, or adjudge a man’s right from him, but they must not so much as take a gift, lest it should have a bad influence upon them, and overrule them, contrary to their intentions; for it has a strange tendency to blind those that otherwise would do well. (6.) They must not oppress a stranger, v. 9. Though aliens might not inherit lands among them, yet they must have justice done them, must peaceably enjoy their own, and be redressed if they were wronged, though they were strangers to the commonwealth of Israel. It is an instance of the equity and goodness of our law, that, if an alien be tried for any crime except treason, the one half of his jury, if he desire it, shall be foreigners; they call it a trial per mediatatem linguae, a kind provision that strangers may not be oppressed. The reason here given is the same with that in ch. xxii. 21, You were strangers, which is here elegantly enforced, You know the heart of a stranger; you know something of the griefs and fears of a stranger by sad experience, and therefore, being delivered, can the more easily put your souls into their souls’ stead.
II. Commands concerning neighbourly kindnesses. We must be ready to do all good offices, as there is occasion, for any body, yea even for those that have done us ill offices, Exo 23:4; Exo 23:5. The command of loving our enemies, and doing good to those that hate us, is not only a new, but an old commandment, Pro 25:21; Pro 25:22. Infer hence, 1. If we must do this kindness for an enemy, much more for a friend, though an enemy only is mentioned, because it is supposed that a man would not be unneighbourly to any unless such as he had a particular spleen against. 2. If it be wrong not to prevent our enemy’s loss and damage, how much worse is it to occasion harm and loss to him, or any thing he has. 3. If we must bring back our neighbours’ cattle when they go astray, much more must we endeavour, by prudent admonitions and instructions, to bring back our neighbours themselves, when they go astray in any sinful path, see Jas 5:19; Jas 5:20. And, if we must endeavour to help up a fallen ass, much more should we endeavour, by comforts and encouragements, to help up a sinking spirit, saying to those that are of a fearful heart, Be strong. We must seek the relief and welfare of others as our own, Phil. ii. 4. If thou sayest, Behold, we know it not, doth not he that pondereth the heart consider it? See Pro 24:11; Pro 24:12.
| Sacred Feasts. | B. C. 1491. |
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
EXODUS – CHAPTER TWENTY-THREE
Verses 1:
This is an expansion of the Ninth Commandment. It forbids starting an evil report, and prohibits joining with others in spreading one. It deals with testimony in a court of law, but is not confined to such testimony. It covers the sin of gossip, tale bearing, etc.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
1. Thou shalt not receive (margin) a false report. It might also be translated, Thou shalt not raise, or stir up: and, if this be preferred, God forbids us to invent calumnies; but, if we read, Thou shalt not receive, He will go further, i e. , that none should cherish, or confirm the lie of another by his support of it. For it has been stated that sin may thus be committed in two ways: either when the wicked invent false accusations, or when other over-credulous persons eagerly associate themselves with them; and thus either sense would be very applicable, that the original authors are condemned, who raise a false report, or those who help on their wickedness, and give it, as it were, their endorsement. But, since it immediately follows, “put not thine hand with” them, I willingly embrace the version, “Thou shalt not receive,” in order that the two clauses may combine the better. Indeed Moses uses this word with great propriety, for a lie would soon come to nothing from its own emptiness, and fall to the ground, if it were not taken up and supported by the unrighteous consent of others. God, therefore, recalls His people from this wicked conspiracy, (167) lest by their assistance they should spread abroad false accusations; and calls those false witnesses who traduce their neighbors by lending their hand to the ungodly: because there is but little difference between raising a calumny and keeping it up.
If it be thought preferable to restrict the second verse to judges, it would be a Supplement to the Sixth Commandment as well as the Eighth, viz., that none should willingly give way to the unjust opinions of others, which might affect either the means or the life of an innocent person. But, inasmuch as the error of those who are too credulous is reproved by it, whence it arises that falsehood prevails, and calumniators throw what is clear into obscurity, it finds a fit place here. (168)
(167) “De s’accoupler avecques les malins et les menteurs pour diffamer le prochain;” of associating themselves with the malicious and with liars to defame their neighbor. — Fr.
(168) “Ceste sentence doit estre comprinse aussi bien sous les faux tesmoignages;” this declaration ought to be comprised under the head of false testimony. — Fr.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
CRITICAL NOTES.
Exo. 23:1 Thou shalt not raise] = tissa, from the inf. napa, in its simple sense, to carry, and in its ethical, to bear about in the heart. Hence tissa is a pregnant word, and signifies: Thou shalt neither raise nor carry abroad, nor harbour in your heart, evil report.
Exo. 23:2. Thou shalt not follow]. Our idiomatic expression, to be after, i.e., to preserve a course of parsistent getting at a person or thing answers well to the literal meaning of the words, lo tihyeh, be not; achrey. after; rabbim, multitude; le roth, for evil. In other words, do not get at the multitude with evil designs, and so become an evil unto the multitude. Hence the appositeness of the other clause of the sentence becomes evident, if rightly rendered: Neither shalt thou speak in a cause to incline (to the multitude) to wrest judgment. The exhortation means, not to give way, or bend (lintoth), on account of the pressure of the multitude, and thus suffer the multitude to become an occasion for evil unto thee.
Exo. 23:3. Thou shalt not adorn] (tehdar), i.e., gloss over the cause of a man (though he be) dal = destitute.
6. The poor referred to in this verse is thy poor ones (ebyoncha), in the sense of simply being in, or suffering from, want, but not being absolutely destitute.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Exo. 23:1-9
RULES FOR JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
We see a connection running through the whole of these verses. They may all be said to have a bearing upon judicial proceedings. Rightly received they tend to promote the integrity of the witness, the uprightness of the judge, and the correctness of the judicial conclusion. All must regard themselves under law. Subjects are under law. Lawgivers and law administrators are likewise under law. There can be no escape from law. The highest condition is that of being ruled by the great law of love.
I. Perjury is to be avoided. Thou shalt not raise or receive a false report; put not thine hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness. If the receiver is as bad as the thief, then the receiver of a false report is as bad as the raiser. If we pass out of the court of justice and say that men are not to raise false reports, which is undoubtedly true, and that the receivers are just as guilty as the raisers of false reports; then we get a very painful view of even Christian (so called) society. Such is the corruption of human nature that we delight in listening to a false report, though we may doubt its accuracy. Laws against perjury are severe, and justly so, for the perjurer is one of the vilest of men.
II. The influence of the multitude is to be repudiated. Too often the multitude is omnipotent. The voice of the people is the voice of God, is a proverb which is injurious, which is in great measure false, but which shows how men follow the leading of the crowd. The voice of the sovereign people is too often appealed to as the divinest law. The conclusion of the thinking multitude will very likely be correct; but the movements of the unreflecting multitude are just as likely to be under the direction of folly; and the greater part of large gatherings are unreflecting. The crowd will cut a mans head off to-day, and canonize him to-morrow. There is no reason why the multitude passes so quickly from crying Hosannah to crying Crucify. The leaders of the people exercise a responsible function. Too often the leaders are only led. The men are benefactors who work to create a healthy public opinion. Judges, above all men, should be free from the influence of the multitude.
III. False sentiment must find no place. Neither shalt thou countenance a poor man in his cause. Thou shalt not wrest the judgment of thy poor in his cause. Tenderness for poverty is misplaced when it leads to the perversion of justice. The emotional must not be stifled, but kept in its right position. The emotional must be subordinate to the intellectual and deliberative faculties. In all our judgments let us preserve the true position of our God-given faculties.
IV. Prejudice must be laid upon one side. Regard the directions in Exo. 23:4-5 not merely as enjoining upon men the duty of doing good to those who hate them, but as showing that the judge must not let prejudice influence while seeking to come to a conclusion. Thus we see a purpose in the placing of them in this part of the general legal directions. It is certain that judges ought to be even-handed, as free on the one hand from the sentiment of pity as from the feeling of hatred on the other.
V. The bribe must be at once rejected. How true universally are those wordsthe gift blindeth the wise. Gold can throw a yellow film over the most keen-sighted of men, that they see not clearly. All things are tinged with the colour of the metal prostituted to a base purpose.
VI. And yet the judge must not be a hard oppressor. He must give the Poor stranger a fair chance. He must make due allowance for his timorousness; for ye know the heart of a stranger. How suggestive from the homiletical point of view!
1. Sorrowful dispensations increase knowledge.
2. Sorrowful dispensations develop refinement.
3. Sorrowful dispensations enlarge sympathy.
4. Sorrowful dispensations promote beneficence.
V. Judges themselves must be judged. I will not justify the wicked. Therefore be careful. The innocent and righteous slay not. Fearful will be the doom of unjust judges. Slaughtered innocents will confront them, and fill their souls with unutterable anguish. God is judge, and a great day of trial will come to universal man.W. Burrows, B.A.
SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON THE VERSES
SLANDER.Exo. 23:1 (first clause)
The word rendered thou shalt not raise is from to take away; hence both text raise, and margin receive, are correct. In this law slander is characterised, prohibited, and punished.
I. Slander is characterised
1. Slander consists in originating a false report.
(1.) It may be from envy.
(2.) It may be from carelessness; judging appearances merely.
(3.) It may be from hasty conclusions, through not taking into consideration the whole of the circumstances of a given case, or not waiting for its full explanation.
2. Slander consists in listening to false reports.
(1.) Because it countenances and encourages the slanderer.
(2.) Because you allow it to be reported to one at least who ought not to have heard it.
(3.) Because repeated encouragement of slander may make you a slanderer.
3. Slander consists in circulating a false report (Lev. 19:16.)
(1.) It may be circulated confidentially; I wouldnt let any one know it for the world! It may not be true, you know.
(2.) It may be circulated as an ordinary topic of information in gossip.
(3.) It may be circulated by a pretended desire to benefit the individual concerned: Dont you think I ought to mention it to him?
(4.) It may be circulated by implication; shoulders, eyes, lips, hands, may be all eloquent with slanderous insinuations.
(5.) It may be circulated negatively: I dont believe it; now, do you?
II. Slander is prohibited.
1. Affecting antecedents.
(1.) A mans character does not consist in what he has been, but in what he is.
(2.) What a man has been ought not to be a lever to lift him into it again.
(3.) Even if a man has been very bad in the past, he may be very good in the present.
2. Affecting character. A mans character is his all; if you take that away, you leave him poor indeed!
3. Affecting his family or social relations.
4. Affecting his goods.
III. Slander is punished. This is one of those commandments which are addressed to the conscience, common sense, and good feeling, and is not followed by judicial punishment. But does the slanderer escape? Nay, verily!
1. He is excluded from religious fellowship (Psa. 15:3).
2. He is the object of Divine vengeance (Psa. 10:5).
3. He is exposed to the contempt of mankind (Pro. 10:18).
4. He is excluded from the kingdom of heaven (Rev. 22:15). See some excellent remarks by Wesley (Sermon xxii. on Mat. 5:5-7).
In conclusion
1. Exo. 20:16; Exodus 2. Mat. 18:15; Matthew ,
3. Gal. 6:1.
J. W. Burn.
THE DUTIES OF WITNESSES (last clause of Exo. 23:1-3)
I. Not to co-operate in an unrighteous cause, Exo. 23:1. This commandment is exceeding broad, and conveys a lesson
1. To judicial witnesses.
(1.) Personal friendships.
(2.) The guilt of the accused on some other point.
(3.) A show of justice must not influence us.
2. To all partisans, controversialists, politicians.
3. To trades unionists, &c.
II. Not to co-operate in any unrighteous cause because it is popular, Exo. 23:2.
1. Because majorities are no test of truth. Multitudes may be roused by passion, prejudice, or self-interest.
2. Because men should be weighed as well as counted.
3. Because righteousness, from the constitution of human nature, is often unpopular, and in the minority.
III. Not to co-operate in an unrighteous cause because it is apparently benevolent, Exo. 23:3; (Lev. 19:15).
1. Because we may be putting a premium on vice which is the source of all misery.
(1.) By endeavouring to conceal the crime.
(2.) By extolling other virtues, so as to minimise the enormity of guilt. But to what purpose is it if we extol a mans honesty, if he is lazy, or a drunkard; or his sobriety, if a thief?
2. Because justice is above mere sentiment, and for the wellbeing of the whole community, and not for the exclusive benefit of a class.
3. Because of its influence on the object himself. Let a man feel that you do this or that for him simply because he is poor, and he will see no advantage in helping himself.
Learn then
i. To entertain none but righteous considerations. ii. To pursue them at all cost.J. W. Burn.
ON DUTIES TO ENEMIES.Exo. 23:4-5
Notice
I. That duties to enemies are enjoined (Pro. 24:17; 1Th. 5:15).
1. It is our duty to protect the interests of our enemy.
(1.) If they are damaged, we should endeavour to retrieve them.
(2.) If they are in danger of damage, we should endeavour to prevent them (Jas. 5:19-20).
2. It is our duty to help the difficulties of our enemy.
(1.) His mind may be in difficulties.
(2.) His soul may be in difficulties.
(3.) His material interests may be in difficulties.
II. That duties to enemies are difficult: and wouldest forbear to help him.
1. Such duties are against the grain of human nature.
2. Such duties are apparently against self-interest.
3. Such duties require self-denials and sacrifices.
III. That duties to enemies are rewarded (Pro. 25:21-22; Mat. 5:44-45; Rom. 12:20).
IV. That neglect of duties to enemies is punished (Job. 31:29; Pro. 24:18). In conclusion
i. Our text applies to all enmity, whether polemical, political, or national. ii. Its precepts should be obeyed, because we may be in the wrong and our enemy in the right. iii. Because God has Himself set us the sublime example. When we were enemies, we were reconciled by the death of His Son.
J. W. Burn.
THE DUTIES OF JUDGES.Exo. 23:6-9
Our text enjoins
I. That judges should be impartial
1. In particular towards the poor, Exo. 23:6.
(1.) Because the poor are most open to the oppression of the powerful.
(2.) Because the poor are often at a disadvantage for the want of technical knowledge, or means to procure legal assistance.
(3.) Because the poor are easily overawed.
2. In general towards the right, Exo. 23:7, first clause. Not to aid or abet a wrong cause.
II. That judges should be cautious, particularly with regard to matters relating to capital punishment. The innocent and righteous slay thou not.
1. The case must be clearly proved.
2. The accused to have the benefit of the doubt.
3. Because justice would be done. If the criminal escaped an earthly doom, God would not justify the wicked (Pro. 11:21).
III. That judges should be incorrupt, Exo. 23:8, either in the shape of direct bribe or indirect present.
1. Because the bribe may blind him to the true merit of the case; and
2. Because the bribe may weigh down and pervert his judgment on the wrong side.
IV. That judges should be considerate, Exo. 23:9; particularly in regard to foreigners. Because
1. They had been foreigners themselves, and had suffered for the want of consideration.
2. They therefore knew something of the sufferings of foreigners.
(1.) Foreigners may be ignorant of the law and unwittingly break it.
(2.) When broken, they may know nothing of legal technicalities, or be unable to pay legal expenses.
Application.I will not justify the wicked applies to the judge as well as to the accused. Judges will have to stand before the judgment-seat of Christ.J. W. Burn.
ILLUSTRATIONS
BY
REV. WILLIAM ADAMSON
Mosaic Morals! Exo. 23:1-19. A modern jurist, Hennequin, says: Good right had Moses to challenge the Israelites, what nation hath statutes like yours? a worship so exaltedlaws so equitablea code so complex? A Frenchman and an infidel, he observes that, compared with all the legislations of antiquity, none so thoroughly embodies the principles of everlasting righteousness. Lycurgus wrote, not for a people, but for an army: It was a barrack which he erected, not a commonwealth. Solon, on the other hand, could not resist the surrounding effeminate influences of Athens. It is in Moses alone that we find a regard for the right, austere and incorruptible; a morality distinct from policy, and rising above regard for times and peoples.
But what could Moses law have done
Had it not been divinely sent?
The power was from the Lord alone,
And Moses but the instrument.
Newton.
Slander-Scandal! Exo. 23:1-9. It must be universally acknowledged that mankind at large are insatiable reporters of gossipthat gossip heats by frictionand that what today is only an unusual circumstance, is tomorrow a foul crime. If an apprentice runs away from his master, the latter is straightway reported to have killed and concealed him. If a girl is found drowned without any circumstance whatever to warrant such a notion, it is immediately insinuated that she has been murdered. If a husband or wife dies suddenly, the slander is at once broached that the survivor accomplished the death for sinister purposes. If a child is burnt to death, forthwith the calamity floats abroad that the parents behaved cruelly to the child, and at last burnt the body to destroy all traces of their wanton and unuatural brutality. The morbid appetite for horrors and the ordinary appetite for gossip, when combined together, constitute a calumnious power of terrible evil. Hence the Mosaic Law here seeks to dry up the fount of corruption by legal barriers.
For Slander lives upon succession;
For ever licensed when once it gets possession.
Shakespeare.
Slander-Sting! Exo. 23:1. It is fruitful in variety of expedients to satiate as well as disguise itself. But, says Sterne, if these smooth weapons cut so sore, what shall we say of open and unblushing scandal, subjected to no caution, tied down to no restraints? If the one, like an arrow shot in the dark, does nevertheless so much secret mischief, this, like the pestilence which rages at noon-day, sweeps all before it, levelling without distinction the good and bad. The whispered tale
That, like the falling hill, no foundation knows;
Fair-faced deceit, whose wily, conscious eye
Neer looks directthe tongue that licks the dust,
But, when it safely dares, as prompt to sting.
Thomson.
Multitudes. Exo. 23:2. It is here assumed that the multitude do evil; and it is here implied that we are in danger of copying their example. Hence the urgent need to guard against the seductive influence of the multitude. This is best accomplished by seeking the grace of God. Colton remarks that the mob is a monster with the hands of Briareus, but the head of Polyphemus, strong to execute, but blind to perceive. If Dryden is correct, how valuable the command not to follow a multitude: it is the scum that rises upmost when the nation boils. Nothing is more easily swayed than the multitude, and that sway is always most easy in the direction of evil.
And since the rabble now is ours,
Keep the tools hot, preach dangers in their ears,
Till they run headlong into evil discords,
And do our business with their own destruction.
Otway.
Judges! Exo. 23:4-7. Aristides being judge between two private persons, one of them declared that his adversary had greatly injured Aristides. Interrupting him at once, the judge said: Relate rather what wrong he hath done thee; for it is thy cause, not mine, that I now sit judge of. Corrupt judgment is a familiar evil in Egypt, Syria, and other Eastern lands. Of these, we may say with Massinger, petitions not sweetened with gold are but unsavoury and oft refused; or, if received, are pocketed, not read.
Who painted Justice blind, did not declare
What magistrates should be, but what they are;
Not so much cause they rich and poor should weigh
In their just scales alike, but because they,
Now blind with bribes, are grown so weak of sight,
Theyll sooner feel a cause than see it right.
Heath.
FalsehoodFolly! Exo. 23:7. There is nothing of so ill consequence, says Lloyd, to the public as falsehood, orspeech being the current coin of conversethe putting false money upon the world; or so dark a blot as dissembling, which, as Montaigne remarks, is only to be brave towards God, and a coward towards man; for a lie faceth God, and shrinketh from man. Therefore a lie should be trampled on and extinguished wherever found. Carlyle says, I am for fumigating the atmosphere when I suspect that falsehood, like pestilence, breathes around me. Let those who bear false witness remember Reade when he says, that every false report, great or small, is the brink of a precipicethe depth of which nothing but Omniscience can fathom.
Lyings a certain mark of cowardice;
And when the tongue forgets its honesty,
The heart and hand may drop their functions too,
And nothing worthy be resolved or done.
Southerne.
Judicial Venality! Exo. 23:8.
(1.) Sir Thomas More succeeded Cardinal Wolsey as Lord Chancellor of England. Many abuses had multiplied during Wolseys chancellorship, more especially in the way of gratuities. Sir Thomas, however, neither in his own person nor in that of any under him, would allow of anything in the shape of a bribe. At this his son-in-law rather complained, saying, The fingers of my Lord Chancellor Cardinals veriest doorkeepers were tipped with gold; but I, since I married your daughter, have got no pickings. And yet, no matter how immaculately impartial a judge may be, how far wrong may be his judgment! Not so God; His judgment is unerring and unimpeachable. Venal judges cannot bribe the Divine Judgment.
(2) There is a machine in the Bank of England which receives sovereigns as a mill receives grain. This is for the purpose of determining wholesale whether they are of full weight. As they pass through, the machineryby unerring lawsthrows all that are light to the one side. This proceeding affords the most vivid similitude of the judicial functions at the Last Day! Venal judgments will be weighed in the balances and found wanting. The Lord Cardinals fingers, as well as those of his veriest doorkeeper, may have been weighted heavily with gold, but this will not avail to pass them from before the Divine Judge as of standard weight.
Of mortal justice, if thou scorn the rod,
Believe and tremble, thou art judged of God.
Swenam.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
THE TEXT OF EXODUS
TRANSLATION
23 Thou shalt not take up a false report: put not thy hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness. (2) Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou speak in a cause to turn aside after a multitude to wrest justice: (3) neither shalt thou favor a poor man in his cause.
(4) If thou meet thine enemys ox or his ass going astray, thou shalt surely bring it back to him again. (5) If thou see the ass of him that hateth thee lying under his burden, thou shalt forebear to leave him, thou shalt surely release it with him.
(6) Thou shalt not wrest the justice due to thy poor in his cause. (7) Keep thee far from a false matter; and the innocent and righteous slay thou not: for I will not justify the wicked. (8) And thou shalt take no bribe: for a bribe blindeth them that have sight, and perverteth the words of the righteous. (9) And a sojourner shalt thou not oppress: for ye know the heart of a sojourner, seeing ye were sojourners in the land of Egypt.
(10) And six years thou shalt sow thy land, and shalt gather in the increase thereof: (11) but the seventh year thou shalt let it rest and lie fallow, that the poor of thy people may eat: and what they leave the beast of the field shall eat. In like manner thou shalt deal with thy vineyard, and with thy oliveyard. (12) Six days thou shalt do thy work, and on the seventh day thou shalt rest; that thine ox and thine ass may have rest, and the son of thy handmaid, and the sojourner, may be refreshed. (13) And in all things that I have said unto you take ye heed: and make no mention of the name of other gods, neither let it be heard out of thy mouth.
(14) Three times thou shalt keep a feast unto me in the year. (15) The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep: seven days thou shalt eat unleavened bread, as I commanded thee, at the time appointed in the month A–bib (for in it thou camest out from E-gypt); and none shall appear before me empty: (16) and the feast of harvest, the first-fruits of thy labors, which thou sowest in the field: and the feast of ingathering, at the end of the year, when thou gatherest in thy labors out of the field. (17) Three times in the year all thy males shall appear before the Lord Je-ho-
vah.
(18) Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leavened bread; neither shall the fat of my feast remain all night until the morning. (19) The first of the first-fruits of thy ground thou shalt bring into the house of Je-ho-vah thy God. Thou shalt not boil a kid in its mothers milk.
(20) Behold, I send an angel before thee, to keep thee by the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. (21) Take ye heed before him, and hearken unto his voice; provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgression: for my name is in him. (22) But if thou shalt indeed hearken unto his voice, and do all that I speak; then I will be an enemy unto thine enemies, and an adversary unto thine adversaries. (23) For mine angel shall go before thee, and bring thee in unto the Am-or-ite, and the Hit-tite, and the Per-iz-ite, and the Ca-naan-ite, the Hi-vite, and the Jeb-u-site: and I will cut them off. (24) Thou shalt not bow down to their gods, nor serve them, nor do after their works; but thou shalt utterly overthrow them, and break in pieces their pillars. (25) And ye shall serve Je-ho-vah your God, and he will bless thy bread, and thy water; and I will take sickness away from the midst of thee. (26) There shall none cast her young, nor be barren, in thy land: the number of thy days I will fulfil. (27) I will send my terror before thee, and will discomfit all the people to whom thou shalt come, and I will make all thine enemies turn their backs unto thee. (28) And I will send the hornet before thee, which shall drive out the Hi-vite, the Ca-naan-ite, and the Hit-tite, from before thee. (29) I will not drive them out from before thee in one year, lest the land become desolate, and the beasts of the field multiply against thee. (30) By little and little I will drive them out from before thee, until thou be increased, and inherit the land. (31) And I will set thy border from the Red Sea even unto the sea of the Phi-lis-tines, and from the wilderness unto the River: for I will deliver the inhabitants of the land into your hand; and thou shalt drive them out before thee. (32) Thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor with their gods. (33) They shall not dwell in thy land, lest they make thee sin against me; for if thou serve their gods, it will surely be a snare unto thee.
EXPLORING EXODUS: CHAPTER TWENTY-THREE
QUESTIONS ANSWERABLE FROM THE BIBLE
1.
After careful reading propose a topic for the chapter.
2.
What was the law about spreading false reports? (Exo. 23:1)
3.
How might this be done? Where? (Exo. 23:1)
4.
What was the law about following a mob? (Exo. 23:2-3)
5.
What law was given about witnessing in court? (Exo. 23:2-3)
6.
Why was it necessary to forbid the people to favor a poor man in his cause? (Exo. 23:3; Lev. 19:15)
7.
How were the people to treat their enemys overloaded fallen donkey? (Exo. 23:5) Was the general attitude that is commanded in the law about the fallen donkey limited to that one situation?
8.
What was the law about justice to the needy? (Exo. 23:6)
9.
What was the law about bribes? (Exo. 23:8)
10.
How were the Israelites to treat strangers? Why? (Exo. 23:9; Exo. 22:21)
11.
What was the law about farming in the seventh years? (Exo. 23:10-11)
12.
What was the purpose of the sabbath day according to Exo. 23:12?
13.
What was the law concerning talking about other gods? (Exo. 23:12-13)
14.
Name the Israelites three annual compulsory feasts. (Exo. 23:14-15; Compare Exo. 34:22-24; Deu. 16:16)
15.
What did God mean by saying Ye shall not appear before me empty? (Exo. 23:15)
16.
What was not to be offered with their sacrifices? (Exo. 23:18)
17.
What law was given about preparing a kid to be eaten? (Exo. 23:19)
18.
What was to be sent before Israel? (Exo. 23:20)
19.
What divine characteristics did the guiding angel have? (Exo. 23:21)
20.
What was to be done with Canaanites religious objects? (Exo. 23:24; Exo. 23:32)
21.
What promise was given about sickness? (Exo. 23:25)
22.
How would God help the Israelites to conquer the Canaanites? (Exo. 23:27-28)
23.
Were the Canaanites to be driven out suddenly? Why or why not? (Exo. 23:29-30)
24.
What were to be the boundaries of the promised land? (Exo. 23:31; Compare Gen. 15:18)
25.
What River is referred to in Exo. 23:31?
26.
Were the Canaanites to live among the Israelites? (Exo. 23:33) Why or why not?
Exodus Twenty-three: Gods Covenant ordinances (concluded)
1.
Justice and goodness to all men; Exo. 23:1-9.
2.
The sacred seasons and feasts; Exo. 23:10-19.
3.
Conquering the Canaanites; Exo. 23:20-33.
EXODUS TWENTY-THREE: GODS GOOD ORDINANCES
1.
Ordinances about JUSTICE; Exo. 23:1-9.
2.
Ordinances about WORSHIP; Exo. 23:10-19.
3.
Ordinances about VICTORY in the Lord; Exo. 23:20-33.
SLANDER! (Exo. 23:1)
1.
Dont start it.
2.
Dont listen to it.
3.
Dont repeat it.
ADMINISTERING JUSTICE (Exo. 23:1-3; Exo. 23:6-9)
1.
Avoid perjury; Exo. 23:1 a.
2.
Avoid collusion; Exo. 23:1 b.
3.
Avoid mob pressure; Exo. 23:2.
4.
Avoid false sentiment; Exo. 23:3.
5.
Avoid oppression; Exo. 23:6-7; Exo. 23:9.
6.
Avoid bribes; Exo. 23:8.
7.
Remember that judges shall themselves be judged; Exo. 23:7.
DUTIES TO ENEMIES (Exo. 23:4-5)
1.
Protect their interests; Exo. 23:4.
2.
Restrain our impulses to leave them; Exo. 23:5.
3.
Help their difficulties; Exo. 23:5.
SABBATIC YEARS AND SABBATH DAYS (Exo. 23:10-12)
I.
Sabbatic years; Exo. 23:10-11.
1.
Required faith in God; Lev. 25:20-22.
2.
Benefited the land; Lev. 25:5; Exo. 23:11.
3.
Benefited the land owner; Lev. 25:6.
4.
Benefited the poor and the beasts; Exo. 23:11.
II.
Sabbath days; Exo. 23:12.
1.
Rest for animals.
2.
Rest for men.
RELIGIOUS FEASTS (Exo. 23:14-17)
1.
Kept unto God; Exo. 23:14.
2.
Kept as memorials; Exo. 23:15.
3.
Kept by bringing offerings; Exo. 23:15.
4.
Kept frequently; Exo. 23:16.
(The Lord requires dedication of our time, as He required it in Israels time. The Lord blesses those who worship Him.)
FEASTS REQUIRED BY GOD (Exo. 23:14-17)
1.
A feast to commemorate past deliverance; Exo. 23:15.
2.
A feast to dedicate the first-fruits of our labor; Exo. 23:16.
3.
A feast to celebrate the years final ingathering; Exo. 23:16; Lev. 23:39-44.
JESUS, THE ANGEL OF THE COVENANT (Exo. 23:20-23)
I.
His nature.
1.
Equal with God. My name is in Him. Exo. 23:21.
2.
Able to forgive sins; Exo. 23:21.
II.
His work.
1.
Keeping Gods people; Exo. 23:20.
2.
Overcoming enemies; Exo. 23:22.
3.
Bringing Gods people to their destination; Exo. 23:23.
III.
Our attitude toward Him.
1.
Take heed; Exo. 23:21.
2.
Provoke Him not;
3.
Hearken; obey; Exo. 23:21-22.
FALSE GODS! (Exo. 23:24; Exo. 23:32-33)
1.
Treatment of them.
a.
Dont bow down to them; Exo. 23:24.
b.
Destroy them; Exo. 23:24.
c.
Drive them out; Exo. 23:31.
d.
Make no covenant with them; Exo. 23:32.
2.
Dangers from them.
a.
Cause sin; Exo. 23:33.
b.
Be a snare; Exo. 23:33.
BLESSINGS FOR THE OBEDIENT! (Exo. 23:25-30)
1.
Bless their food; Exo. 23:25.
2.
Bless their rainfall; Exo. 23:25.
3.
Bless their health; Exo. 23:25.
4.
Bless their productivity; Exo. 23:26.
5.
Bless them with long life; Exo. 23:26.
6.
Give victory over enemies; Exo. 23:27-30.
AN EXCLUSIVE FAITH! (Exo. 23:24-33)
1.
Destroy false religious objects (Exo. 23:24; Act. 19:19.)
2.
Drive out sinful associates; (Exo. 23:27-31; Exo. 23:33; 1Co. 15:33.)
(See 1Co. 5:9-13)
3.
Make no covenant with evildoers; (Exo. 23:32; 2Co. 6:14-18; 2Jn. 1:10-11)
EXPLORING EXODUS: NOTES ON CHAPTER TWENTY-THREE
1.
What is in Exodus twenty-three?
This chapter contains the closing group of Gods covenant ordinances, which are given in chapters 2123. By the acceptance of this book of the covenant (Exo. 24:7), Israel entered into its covenant with God and became Gods special people, a holy nation.
The chapter deals with three main themes: (1) justice and goodness for all men (Exo. 23:1-9); (2) the sacred seasons and feasts (Exo. 23:10-19); (3) conquering the Canaanites (Exo. 23:20-33). This last section forms an epilogue to chapters 2123, and looks forward to future triumphant conquests in Canaan.
2.
What were the people to do with a false report they heard? (Exo. 23:1-2)
They were not to pick it up and tell it to others, nor to utter it in court as testimony.
Exo. 23:1-2 could be translated rather literally, You shall not take up something you have heard (that is) false (or vain); put not your hand with a wicked (man, to conspire together) to be a witness of violence.
There are five brief negative commands in Exo. 23:1-3, each introduced by a negative particle (in Hebrew). These would be guidelines in maintaining justice. Exo. 23:1-3 is an expansion of the ninth commandment, which forbade bearing false witness.
We could take up a false report by repeating it as gossip, or by telling it in a court hearing. Psa. 101:5 : Whoso privily slandereth his neighbor, him will I destroy. Lev. 19:16 : Thou shalt not go up and down as a talebearer among thy people.
The word translated report means something heard, a rumor, report, reputation, fame. False might also be translated vain, since it is the same word as that used in Exo. 20:7 with reference to taking Gods name in vain.
An unrighteous witness is a witness of violence, that is, one who inflicts violence upon others. Violence need not always be physically violent to be terribly hurtful!
A witness who made false charges against someone was to be punished with the same penalty which he had tried to bring upon someone else. (Deu. 19:16-21).
The Israelites were not to follow a mob (multitude) in its efforts to do evil. Mobs sway people into doing or tolerating acts that they would not do if they considered the matter without pressure. Christ was crucified through mob action instigated by a few leaders (Mat. 27:20). Mobs, multitudes, and majorities are often in the wrong. Only Noah was righteous in his time. (Gen. 7:1. Compare Mat. 7:13-14.)
If some cause (lawsuit) was being heard, no Israelite was to give false testimony just because a certain feeling was popular (and probably loud!) just then. Many innocent people have died because a multitude was stirred up against them and many were screaming for their blood. Note the cases of Stephen (Act. 6:11) and Naboth (1Ki. 21:10).
3.
Why should they not favor a poor man in his cause? (Exo. 23:3)
The Israelites were to promote JUSTICE. Justice favors neither the poor nor the rich; nor does it disfavor either the poor or the rich.
Lev. 19:15 : Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment. Thou shalt not respect (show partiality to) the person of the poor, nor honor the person of the mighty; but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbor.
God is NOT indifferent to the plight of the poor. See Exo. 23:6; Exo. 22:25-27; Deu. 15:7-11. The poor are often oppressed by the rich and powerful (Amo. 5:12). They have their special temptations (Pro. 30:9; Pro. 30:14).
Nonetheless, the poor man may be fully as selfish, cruel, dishonest, lazy, and covetous as anyone else. Men can be minded to be rich even when they are not rich (1Ti. 5:9). When a poor man has broken the law, he is to be punished just as anyone else. Note Exo. 22:3.
Neither pressure from a crowd, sympathy for the poor, or even revenge, was to influence the Israelites conduct.
Our times have seen the rise of the foolish notion that we should pass every possible law to take wealth from the rich and give it to the poor. There is not enough material wealth in the world for all (or even most of us) to live like kings. When there are no longer any wealthy people to help the poor, all become poor.
4.
What was to be done if one saw his enemys donkey going astray? (Exo. 23:4-5)
In such a case, one was surely to bring it back to him again. (The surely is emphatic.)
Deu. 22:4 : Thou shalt not see thy brothers ass or his ox fallen down by the way, and hide thyself from them: thou shalt surely help him to lift them up again.
How beautiful! Animosity is not to destroy ones willingness to be of assistance in the times of need. Your enemy is also your brother! It is only a short step from the kind actions suggested by these verses to the Love your enemy of Mat. 5:44. Compare Rom. 12:20.
Lev. 19:18 : Thou shalt not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people; but thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself: I am Jehovah.
Exo. 23:5 describes a situation in which a man sees his enemy with his donkey. The enemy obviously has been cruel to his beast and has overloaded it till it has fallen down under the load and cannot get up. The enemy has brought the problem upon himself. What shall the man of God do? He shall forbear doing his natural inclination of walking off and leaving his enemy to solve his own problem. Rather, he shall most certainly give assistance, and working WITH his enemy, release the ass!
If the law taught men to be good to their enemies (as it surely did!), what did Jesus mean by saying, Ye have heard that it was said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor and hate thine enemy? (Mat. 5:43.) Some Jewish authorities are incensed at these words, which they regard as a baseless charge against the Torah and the rabbis.[329]
[329] J. H. Hertz, op. cit., p. 316.
We happily acknowledge that the law taught men to do good to their enemies. However, there are a few verses in the Old Testament which indicate that even some Godly men did hate their enemies. See Psa. 139:21-22; Psa. 26:5). Also certain passages in the apocryphal books (like Sir. 12:4; Sir. 12:7) and in the Dead Sea Scrolls show that Jesus was telling the truth when he indicated that some pre-Christian Jews really advocated hating enemies. The Manual of Discipline (one of the Dead Sea Scrolls) declared about their chosen members, He is to bear unremitting hatred towards all men of ill repute, and to be minded to keep in seclusion from them.[330] We hasten to add (in shame and pain) that some who claim to be Christians have also taught their followers to hate their enemies. Consider the bloodshed in northern Ireland. But this has never been Gods approved attitude for men.
[330] Theodore Gaster, The Dead Sea Scrolls in English Translation (Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor, 1964), pp. 46, 68.
The R.S.V. on Exo. 23:5 reads You shall refrain from leaving him with it, you shall help him to lift it up. The footnote on this verse says that this is the Greek reading and the Hebrew is obscure.
The Hebrew of Exo. 23:5 could be literally translated If you see the ass of him who hates you [lying] under his (or its) burden, you shall beware that you leave him not, but you shall surely release [it] with him.[331]
[331] This translation is adapted from that in Alexander Harkavys Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary.
As you can see, this is hardly an obscure verse. It is only slightly difficult because no object follows the verb release. Probably it is best to supply an indefinite object, such as the it inserted in italics in the American Standard version. The Hebrew does not make completely clear whether the man is releasing the ass or its load (although both involve the same actions). The Greek reading makes it clear that it is the ass that the verb release refers to,[332] and the Hebrew very probably means that also.
[332] The genders of the Greek pronouns and articles indicate clearly that the object being released was the ass rather than its burden.
5.
What command is given about the justice due to the poor? (Exo. 23:6-7)
Men were not to wrest the justice due to the poor man in his lawsuit. (Wrest means stretch out, distort, turn aside, or pervert.)
The word translated justice in Exo. 23:6 is mishpat, or judgment. It is the same word occurring in Exo. 21:1, translated judgments (or ordinances).
Note that the poor are thy poor. Probably this hints that the poor are our brothers and our responsibility. We cannot say, They are no concern of mine.
Exo. 23:7 commands men to keep far away from a false matter. In its setting this matter appears to refer to false utterance in a lawsuit. Exo. 23:7 is primarily directed at judges in court.
We must take heed to our court decisions, because God also holds court; and all our witnesses and judges are on trial before HIM. Our decisions must be in harmony with His! God will not justify (that is, acquit, declare not guilty) the wicked person. (The word wicked is singular, emphasizing every individuals responsibility in this matter.)
6.
What is the effect of a bribe? (Exo. 23:8)
A bribe blinds those whose eyes are usually open and watchful, and perverts (tangles, twists) the words of those usually righteous.
They that have sight (KJV, the wise) are the judges and officials. Exo. 23:8 (like Exo. 23:7) is directed at the judges.
Exo. 23:8 is very much like Deu. 16:19. We simply must not let ourselves be deceived about the power of a bribe upon us.
Bribery was a very common practice in Biblical times (and still is!). See Amo. 5:12; 1Sa. 8:3; Psa. 26:10; 2Ch. 19:7; Isa. 1:23; Eze. 22:12. Pro. 15:27 : He that hateth bribes shall live.
No specific penalty is set in the law for accepting bribes. But in the rule of God over men, it did NOT go unpunished!
The words of the righteous seem to be the words of usually-righteous judges who have been influenced by bribes. It may also refer to the causes (or lawsuits) of the poor, who are referred to as the righteous (or innocent) in Exo. 23:7. (The word translated words also may have the meaning of causes.)
7.
Why were the Israelites not to oppress sojourners? (Exo. 23:9)
They had been sojourners in Egypt and therefore knew the heart of a sojourner. Compare Exo. 22:21.
Heart is from the Hebrew nephesh, meaning soul, life, feelings, self, and numerous related meanings. The use of nephesh here makes a transition to the next paragraph (Exo. 23:10-12), where a related word (the verb naphash) is translated be refreshed in Exo. 23:12.
8.
For how many years were Israelites to sow the land and gather crops? (Exo. 23:10-11)
Israel was to sow seed and gather crops for six consecutive years, but in the seventh years the land lay fallow, uncultivated. The oliveyards (literally olive trees) and vineyards were to be treated the same way. This seventh year is commonly called the sabbatical year. The laws about this year are given more fully in Lev. 25:1-7 and Deu. 15:1-3. Grain which grew by itself in the seventh year was not harvested, but was left for the poor of the people to eat, and for the beast of the field. God plainly promised that the land would produce enough in the sixth years to carry them over until the harvest of the eighth year. See Lev. 25:20-22 and Neh. 10:31.
The spiritual basis for this law is stated by God in Lev. 25:23 : For the land is mine; for ye are strangers and sojourners with me.
The word rest in Exo. 23:11 is not from the verb shabath (meaning to keep sabbath), but from another verb (shamat), meaning to let rest, or to release (as of a debt). (That has interesting spiritual implications.) See Deu. 15:1-2.
Note that God cares for the beasts. Psa. 36:6 : O Jehovah, thou preservest man and beast. Compare Psa. 104:21. God cares for sparrows and feeds the raven (Luk. 12:24).
In the following centuries Israel neglected keeping its sabbatical years. The seventy years of Babylonian captivity was partly intended to make up for unkept sabbatical years. 2Ch. 36:21.
To a child of God, his relationship with God controls all his life, even the way he farms and eats.
9.
What was the purpose of the seventh-day rest? (Exo. 20:12)
It was a time of rest for all, even for the work (draft) animals, the servants, and the sojourners. It was to bring refreshment and rest. The reference here to the sabbath emphasizes its humanitarian character rather than its memorial character, which is stressed in Exo. 20:8-11 and Deu. 5:12-15.
Be refreshed is from a verb (naphash) related to the noun (nephesh) meaning soul. It can be translated to breathe, to take rest, to draw breath, to be refreshed. On the Sabbath days people were to catch their breath. By keeping the Sabbath, every Israelite was reminded that he had a soul and there was a higher life than mere drudgery.
10.
What mention of pagan gods were the Israelites to utter? (Exo. 23:13)
NO mention was to be made of the name of other gods. While the Israelites were not to oppress sojourners, they were not to utter the names of the sojourners gods. This prohibition about uttering the names of gods should have prevented marriages and other contacts with idolatrous peoples.
This verse probably accounts for the dropping of the name Baal in the names of several men whose names included Baals name. Instead of Baal the word bosheth (meaning shame) was inserted. Thus Jerubbaal (Jdg. 6:32) became Jerubbesheth (2Sa. 11:21); Eshbaal (1Ch. 8:33) became Ishbosheth (2Sa. 2:8); Meribaal (1Ch. 8:34) became Mephibosheth (2Sa. 4:4). Note that the book of Samuel, which is prophetic in character, avoided the name Baal.
The apostle Paul tells Christians to avoid mentioning several sins, in a manner similar to the way the Israelites were to avoid mentioning the names of gods. (Eph. 5:3)
Exo. 23:13 opens with a general exhortation to obey: In all things that I have spoken unto you, take ye heed.
11.
How many annual feasts was each Israelite required to keep? (Exo. 23:14; Exo. 23:17)
Three. Compare Exo. 34:23; Lev. ch. 23; Deu. 16:1-17.
All male Israelites were required to come before the Lord for these three feasts. Though not required, women and boys often went with the men to the feasts (1Sa. 1:3-4; 1Sa. 1:22; Luk. 2:41-43). Israels religious observances were the one factor in their society that could hold the nation together.
The three feasts are not mentioned here for the first time nor in full detail. Probably they are mentioned as part of the privileges of the people bestowed on them by Jehovah. This view relates the observance of the feasts to the nearby paragraphs. Exo. 23:13 told of a false way to worship God. Exo. 23:14-17 gave the true way.
Three times is literally three feet, suggesting pilgrim festivals to which they marched on foot.
Critics (Martin Noth, for example) say that the three feasts were taken over by Israel only after the settlement in Canaan, long after Moses time. (This view eliminates Moses as author of Exodus.) The proof (?) of such a view is mainly the presupposition that such feasts could not have originated from direct divine revelation and commandments, but gradually developed through cultural contacts with other peoples who observed similar feasts.[333]
[333] Noth, op. cit., pp. 190191.
12.
What were the three annual compulsory feasts? (Exo. 23:15-16)
(1) The feast of unleavened bread. This seven-day observance was immediately preceded (the day before) by the Passover, which, surprisingly, is not mentioned here. Perhaps the reason for this was that the Passover in early days was more of a family meal than a central religious activity.[334] Another possible reason for not mentioning the Passover may be that the extremely close linkage of the Passover to the feast of Unleavened bread probably caused most Israelites to think of both when they heard either one mentioned.
[334] Cole, op. cit., p. 180.
Noth in his usual manner contends that the Passover is not mentioned here with the rules about Unleavened Bread because the Passover came into Israels practice much later than the feast of Unleavened bread.[335] There is no real evidence for this view.
[335] Noth, ibid.
An allusion is made by God in Exo. 23:15 to the previous commandment about keeping the feast of unleavened bread, As I commanded thee. See Exo. 12:14-20; Exo. 13:6-10. Regarding the month Abib, see Exo. 13:4.
The Passover was observed sporadically by Israel during the days of the kingdom. (2Ki. 23:22).
None shall come before me empty means that no man was to come to the central place of worship during the three compulsory feasts without an offering, that is, empty-handed. They were to bring animals and other things for offerings. See Deu. 16:16-17; Lev. 7:32-34; Exo. 34:20. We feel that the same rule about not coming before the Lord empty should be a guideline to Christians: Do not come to the Lords services without an offering.
(2) The feast of harvest. This is the same feast that is called the feast of weeks (Lev. 23:9-21; Deu. 16:9-12) and the day of firstfruits (Num. 28:26), It is called Pentecost in the New Testament (Act. 2:1; Act. 20:16). It came fifty days after the first grain was harvested. It was a harvest feast of dedication and thanks to God.
(3) The feast of ingathering. This is the same feast that is called the feast of booths or tabernacles. Its observance is described fully in Lev. 23:34; Lev. 23:39-43; Deu. 16:13-15. Note Joh. 7:2. This feast occurs in late September, at the end of the year, that is, of the civil year, which begins in the autumn, as distinguished from the religious year, which began in the spring. Its name Ingathering is taken from the gathering in of the grapes and olives, which had been completed by that time each year. During this feast the Israelites lived outdoors in temporary brush arbors called booths or tabernacles. This was to remind them year by year of their wilderness wandering experiences. An extensive series of sacrifices was offered each day of this feast. On Exo. 23:17, see Exo. 23:14.
13.
What was NOT to be offered with blood sacrifices?(Exo. 23:18)
They were not to offer leavened bread with the blood of sacrifices. Also they were NOT to let the fat or sacrificed animals remained unburned overnight.
Lev. 3:17 : It shall be a perpetual statute throughout your generations in all your dwellings, that ye shall eat neither fat nor blood.
The fat or sacrifices was all burned, even in the peace offerings, which were partly eaten by the offerer. (See. Lev. 1:8; Lev. 3:3-5; Lev. 4:8; Lev. 4:19.) Thus no fat should have ever been left unburned overnight. Compare Lev. 19:6.
Israels burnt-offerings (animal sacrifices) were to be accompanied by a grain (or meal) offering, which was sometimes presented in the form of baked bread (Lev. 2:4-5; Num. 15:1-9). These meal-offerings were NOT to be made with leaven (Lev. 2:11; Lev. 6:17). This would be doubly enforced during the week of the feast of unleavened bread, when no leaven at all was to be seen in their property (Deu. 16:4; Exo. 13:6-11; Exo. 12:15-20). Leaven is a symbol of evil influence and sin (1Co. 5:7-8).
During the feast of unleavened bread no flesh sacrificed at evening was to remain all night until the morning: eat it or burn it. See Deu. 16:4. At the original passover, nothing was left till the morning. See Exo. 12:10. This custom of not leaving sacrifices unconsumed overnight seems to have applied to all Israels sacrifices. The practice impressed Israel with the seriousness and the unique function of sacrifices. They were not to be treated as leftover garbage.
Regarding the offering of first fruits (Exo. 23:19 a), see Exo. 22:29-30 and Deu. 26:2-11.
14.
How were kids NOT to be cooked for eating? (Exo. 23:19)
They were not to be boiled in the milk of their mother.
This law is now generally understood to make allusion to a Canaanite religious practice, in which a kid was boiled in its mothers milk. This practice was included in the rituals at Ugarit, when such a dish was prepared at festal ceremonies pertaining to the fertility of the soil. In the Ugaritic tablet on The gods pleasant and beautiful, it is written, Boil a kid in milk, a lamb in butter.[336] The practice of boiling small cattle in milk has been continued among Bedouin to this time. God did not want His peoples practice even to resemble those of the heathen.
[336] Cassuto, op. cit., p. 305.
Partly on the basis of Exo. 23:19 b Jews do not prepare or serve meat dishes and milk dishes at the same meal. Orthodox Jews even keep separate kitchens for preparation of milk and meat dishes. The connection between this custom and Exo. 23:19 seems rather remote, although the Kosher diet laws of the Jews would certainly eliminate any possibility of cooking a kid in its mothers milk. J. H. Hertz,[337] a Jewish commentator, says that the practice of not eating milk and meat together was doubtless observed long before the age of the rabbis (about 400 B.C.-A.D. 500), and in connecting the practice with this text, they merely sought a support in the Torah for the very ancient Jewish practice. That is a fair and accurate statement. The Jewish diet laws are not directly derived from this verse, although it is an indirect support for their practice.
[337] Op. cit., p. 318.
Christians are not obligated by the diet laws of the O.T., although they may find some helpful guidance in them. See Mar. 7:19; 1Co. 8:8; 1Ti. 4:3; Rom. 14:13-17.
15.
Who was sent with Israel to keep them in their journey? (Exo. 23:20-21)
An angel was sent. Exo. 20:23 reads literally, behold, I (the I is emphatic) am sending an angel before thy face to guard you in the way and to bring you unto the place which I have prepared. Compare Exo. 14:19; Exo. 3:2; Act. 7:38. This angel was a personality. Israel was to hearken unto his voice. He could pardon transgressions and Gods name was in him, literally, in the midst of him, in the inward part of his being and body.
My name is in him means My (Gods) presence is in him, In Biblical usage, name often refers to ones entire being, nature, and authority. See Psa. 8:1; Psa. 20:1; Act. 8:12.
We believe that this angel was none other than that divine person called the Word (Joh. 1:1), who later came to earth as Jesus Christ. The word angel means a messenger, Jesus has certainly always been Gods communicator (Joh. 1:18). Mal. 3:1 prophesied the coming of the messenger (or angel) of the covenant whom ye desire. Certainly no one since Malachis time has claimed to be eternal with God and to have power to forgive sins and to know all truth, other than Jesus. He backed up these claims with miracles done in the presence of many witnesses.
Isa. 63:9 : In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them: in his love and in his pity, he redeemed them; and he bare them, and carried them all the days of old.
Numerous O.T. prophecies foretold the coming of Gods Messiah, who would bear Gods name. Unto us a son is given; . . . and his name shall be called . . . Mighty God, . . . (Isa. 9:6). Jer. 23:6 spoke of the coming branch from David, that his name . . . shall be called Jehovah our righteousness. We believe that these prophecies refer to Jesus. They help us to understand what God meant when he said of the angel, My name is in him.
Israel was to take care that they did not provoke the angel of God. Provoke means to make bitter. (The verb is related to Marah, bitter.) Sadly, we learn from Psa. 78:40, How often did they provoke him in the wilderness.
Not surprisingly, liberal and Jewish commentators strongly deny that the angel could be the Word (Jesus). But they disagree among themselves as to who or what the angel is. Some seek to identify the angel with the ark of the covenant that went before the tribes.[338] (This is impossible. The angel was personal and the ark very impersonal.) Hertz maintains that the angel is Moses himself! (How could Moses himself go before thee, when God was talking to Moses? Furthermore, Moses did not bring Israel into the land, as the angel was to do. See Exo. 23:23.) Cassuto[339] argues that the angel is not distinct from God himself and simply is a term for Gods own actions. (It surely seems unlikely that God would say My name is in him, if He only meant My name is in myself.) Some feel that the pillar of cloud was the angel. See Exo. 14:19. (How could the pillar of cloud pardon your transgressions?) The angel manifested his presence in the cloud, but was distinct from the cloud. These views show how far men will go in their determined refusal to confess the Lord Jesus.
[338] Broadman Bible Commentary, I, (1968), p. 428.
[339] Op. cit., pp. 305306.
16.
What would the angel do for Israel if they were obedient? (Exo. 23:22-23)
He would bring them unto the Canaanite nations, and there God would cut them off (destroy them). This act of cutting them off would be done gradually. See Exo. 23:29.
Observe in Exo. 23:22-23 how very closely linked are God and the angel. If thou shalt indeed hearken unto his voice, and do all that I speak;. . . . This is exactly the relationship of Jesus and the Father. Joh. 10:30 : I and the Father are one. Joh. 8:28-29 : I (Jesus) do nothing of myself, but as the Father taught me, I speak these things . . . for I do always the things that are pleasing to him.
Concerning the Canaanite tribes, see notes on Exo. 3:8; Exo. 3:17.
To cut them off (R.S.V., blot them out) meant to hide or conceal, cut off, efface, destroy. The Canaanites were finally indeed utterly effaced from the earth, although it took Israel a long time.
For God to be an enemy unto your enemies is a fulfillment of Gods promise to Abraham in Gen. 12:3. Psa. 139:21-22 indicates that Gods enemies become enemies of Gods people. Even the New Testament speaks about those that are enemies of the cross of Christ (Php. 1:18).
Some interpreters feel that the idea of Gods being an enemy to Israels enemies is theological propaganda justifying Israels conquest of the land, and differs from the view expressed elsewhere in the O.T. that God is the God of all nations. This idea fails to consider the depravity of the Canaanites. It also injects the implications that the Bible teaches contradictory points of view. We feel that further study will always show that the Bible is completely harmonious.
17.
What was Israel to do with Canaanite religious objects? (Exo. 23:24)
They were not to bow down to them or serve them, but were to destroy them utterly. Compare Exo. 20:5; Exo. 34:13; Deu. 7:5; Num. 33:52; Exo. 23:32-33. The Hebrew text emphasizes the utter destruction of these things. Thou shalt utterly destroy them, and you shall utterly break in pieces their pillars.
They were particularly to break in pieces their pillars. These were upright standing stones, sometimes as much as ten feet tall. Such pillars have been found in excavations at Gezer and Tanaach. See Deu. 12:3.
The works of the Canaanites included burning their sons and daughters in fire to their gods. See Deu. 12:30-31. Israelites were not even to inquire about their gods. Compare Deu. 6:14.
18.
What would God bless if Israel served Him? (Exo. 23:25-26)
He would bless their bread, their water, and their health.
Their bread would be their grain harvest, from which bread was made. See Deu. 28:5. The water would be the needed rainfall. See Deu. 28:12.
Mal. 3:11 : I will rebuke the devourer (such as locusts) for your sakes . . ., neither shall your vine cast its fruit before the time in the field. Compare Amo. 4:9.
The promise to protect the Israelites from sickness is repeated several times in the scripture. See Exo. 15:26. Deu. 7:15 : Jehovah will take away from thee all sickness. It is painful to compare this promise with Israels later afflictions sent upon them because of their unfaithfulness. See Amo. 4:10; Isa. 1:5-6. (In this passage the sickness spoken of seems to be a collective national sickness of soul.)
God further promised that there would not be a woman miscarrying in the land, or a barren woman. Deu. 7:14 enlarges this promise to declare that there shall not be a male or female barren among you or among your cattle. Compare Deu. 28:4.
Another promise yet more! The number of thy days I Will fulfill. Their people would not die young, before they had fulfilled their potential in life. Compare Exo. 20:12 : That thy days may be long in the land. It would be true of Israelites generally as it was of Abraham: Abraham gave up the ghost and died . . . an old man, and full . . . (Gen. 25:8). So also David: David was old and full of days (1Ch. 23:1).
As Christians we do not claim all of these material physical promises in the law. But we do live under a covenant with better promises (Heb. 8:6).
19.
How would God prepare things so as to help Israel conquer Canaan? (Exo. 23:27-28)
God would send his terror before Israel and would discomfit (that is, bring into confusion, or disturb) all the people in Canaan to whom Israel would come; and God would cause Israels enemies to turn their back (literally neck) unto Israel, that is, to turn and flee.
God spread this terror ahead of Israel by causing reports and rumors about Israels invincible power to be circulated widely. See Jos. 2:9; Jos. 2:11; Deu. 2:25; Exo. 15:14-16; Num. 22:2-3; 1Sa. 4:6-8.
God further promised to send the hornet before Israel, which would drive out the Canaanite nations. Compare Deu. 7:20. The closeness of Exo. 23:27-28 suggests that hornet and terror refer to the same thing, the psychological and social weakening of the peoples courage and ability to resist. The word hornet as here used seems to have a figurative and indefinite meaning, and could refer to anything which helped Israel to be victorious in its conquest psychological terror, storms (Jos. 10:11), or such. The word hornet is singular (not like KJV and RSV hornets), but it is probably used in a collective sense for all the means used by God to soften up the Canaanites for Israels conquest. Jos. 24:12 indicates that God surely did send the hornet before Israel, as He had promised.
The archaeologist John Garstang,[340] who excavated at Jericho in the 1930s, suggested that since the hornet (or wasp) was the sacred symbol of some of the Pharaohs of Egypt, that the hornet may have referred to the Egyptian armies that fought victoriously in Canaan against the Hyksos and other peoples about eighty years before Israel conquered the land. These Egyptian conquerors supposedly weakened Canaans ability to resist Israel. We consider this theory very improbable. God did not say I have sent the hornet before you, but I will send (future).
[340] Joshua-Judges: The Foundations of Bible History (New York: Richard R. Smith, Inc., 1931), p. 259.
Furthermore, God never indicated that the Canaanites would be weak (or weakened) adversaries. They are described as being greater and mightier than yourselves. (Deu. 11:23; Deu. 4:38).
20.
Would God drive out the Canaanites quickly? (Exo. 23:29-30)
No. Israel would need considerable time to occupy the land. And if the land were left without people, it would soon become desolate and run-down. Israel would occupy the houses, cities, fields, and vineyards of the former inhabitants (Deu. 6:10-11). These things would soon be in disrepair if left unoccupied.
The danger that wild beasts (lions, bears, wild dogs, etc.) would multiply and become a peril in the land if people were not occupying it was a very real menace. (2Ki. 17:24-26; Lev. 26:22).
Israels conquests of Canaan required six or seven years. See Jos. 14:7; Jos. 14:10; Num. 14:33. Jehovah cast out those nations before Israel little by little. Deu. 7:22.
Further reasons for the slowness in conquering the land were (1) that Israel transgressed Gods covenant, and He wanted to test Israel whether they would walk in His ways or not (Jdg. 2:20-23; Jdg. 3:4); and (2) to teach them war, that is, how to fight (Jdg. 3:2).
Even after Israel had conquered much of the land, various tribes were slow in occupying it. See Jos. 18:1-3. They lacked the aggressive faith to take over the land.
Skeptical critics think that the promise to drive the Canaanites out little by little indirectly suggests that the number of incoming Israelites was actually considerably smaller than the two and a half million people often presupposed on the basis of 600,000 fighting men.[341] This view is not a presupposition, but merely an acceptance of the statistics given in the scripture (Exo. 12:37). The people who operate on presuppositions are those who feel that the record just could not be true as it stands and therefore it isnt.
[341] Broadman Bible Commentary, I, (1969), p. 429.
21.
What were to be the borders of Israels land? (Exo. 23:31)
From the Red Sea (probably from the tip of the Gulf of Akabah at Elath) to the sea of the Philistines (the Mediterranean); and from the wilderness (probably the Sinai wilderness of Shur) unto the river (the Euphrates).
The boundaries of Israels promised land are given several places in the scriptures. See Deu. 11:24 (from the river [Euphrates] even unto the hinder sea [the Dead Sea]); Gen. 15:18 (from the river of Egypt [probably the Wady el Arish in the northern Sinai peninsula] unto the . . . river Euphrates); 1Ki. 4:21 (from the River [Euphrates] unto the land of the Philistines). This passage in I Kings tells of the extent of the land in the days of king Solomon. It reached nearly to that extent in the time of Jeroboam II of Israel (2Ki. 14:25) and Uzziah of Judah (2Ch. 26:1-2; 2Ch. 26:6).
The reference to the Red Sea in Exo. 23:31 is literally to the Sea of Reeds. This is the same body of water known as the Red Sea. See notes on Exo. 13:18.
Observe that while God would deliver the inhabitants of the land into Israels hand, that Israel had to drive them out. Human effort must work with the divine assistance.
22.
What sort of covenant was Israel to make with the Canaanites?
NO covenant was to be made with them or with their gods! The Hebrew says that no covenant was to be made TO them, rather than with them. Israel was to enter the land as a conqueror, who might condescend to make a covenant of amnesty to the conquered people. But they were not even to do this. Much less were they to deal with the people as equals, with whom a covenant might be made. Compare Exo. 34:12-16; Deu. 7:2-3.
Israel was permitted to make peace covenants with cities far off from their land. See Deu. 7:1-2; Deu. 20:10-15.
The Canaanites and their gods would cause Israel to sin against God and would surely be a snare (trap) unto Israel. The word snare (like stumbling-block in the New Testament) expresses the idea of being trapped into destruction, rather than simply into sin (as bad as that is!). The warning is very severe and stern.
Israel did fall into this snare! Psa. 106:36-37 : And (they) served their (the Canaanites) idols, which became a snare unto them. Yea, they sacrificed their sons and their daughters unto demons, and shed innocent blood.
Exo. 23:33 marks the end of the book of the covenant. This section has included chs. 2123, and perhaps part of chapter twenty. It told the terms upon which God would enter into covenant with Israel. The next chapter moves on to the actual ratification of this covenant. In view of the exclusive nature of the relationship between God and Israel, it is appropriate that the covenant book should end with commands forbidding Israel to make any covenant with any other gods or men.[342]
[342] Cole, op. cit., p. 184.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(1) Thou shalt not raise a false report.The LXX. and Vulg. Translate, Thou shalt not receive a false reporti.e., give it credit, accept it as true, and act upon it. This meaning accords well with the succeeding clause, which forbids our giving support to the false testimony of others. In both clauses the principle of the ninth commandment is extended from principals to accessories.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
XXIII.
(1-19) The miscellaneous laws are here continued. From Exo. 23:1 to Exo. 23:9 no kind of sequence in the laws can be traced; from Exo. 23:10 to the first clause of Exo. 23:19 there is, on the contrary, a certain connection, since the laws enunciated are concerned with ceremonial observance. The closing law, however, is not ceremonial, but the prohibition of a practice considered to be cruel. On the whole, it may be said that The Book of the Covenant maintains its unsystematic character to the close. (See Note on Exo. 20:22-26.)
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
1. Raise a false report This law guards against slander, and all circulating of slanderous utterances . It is supplemented by the admonition of Exo 23:7, and is comprehended in the ninth commandment, (Exo 20:16,) where see note.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
THE BOOK OF THE COVENANT, Exo 20:22 to Exo 23:33.
Here follows a collection of sundry laws which were compiled by Moses, and doubtless represent the oldest written legislation of the Pentateuch. This compilation probably constituted “the book of the covenant” which is mentioned in Exo 24:7. Kalisch classifies the laws under three heads: (1 . ) Those touching the rights of persons, Exo 21:1-32; (2 . ) Those touching the rights of property, Exo 21:33 to Exo 23:14; and (3 . ) General moral laws . Exo 22:15 to Exo 23:19. These are followed by sundry exhortations. Exo 23:20-33. The various precepts, however, are scarcely susceptible of such a classification, or of any systematic arrangement . They take a wide range, and deal with some twenty-eight distinct subjects . Beginning with a prohibition of idolatrous images, (23,) we have laws touching the construction of altars, (24-26,) the relations of servants and masters, (Exo 21:1-11,) personal assaults and injuries, (12-27,) goring oxen, (28-32,) losses of cattle, (33-36,) cattle-stealing, (Exo 22:1-4,) cattle feeding in others’ fields, (5,) kindling destructive fires, (6,) stolen or damaged trusts, (7-15,) seduction, (16-17,) witchcraft, (18,) lying with beasts, (19,) idolatrous sacrifices, (20,) treatment of foreigners, (21,) treatment of widows and the fatherless, (22-24,) loaning money, (25,) pledges, (26-27,) reviling God and rulers, (28,) devotion of firstlings, (29, 30,) abstinence from torn flesh, (31,) perversions of honour and justice, (Exo 23:1-3,) favour toward enemies, (4-5,) judgment of the poor, (6,) maintaining justice, (7, 8,) oppression of strangers, (9,) sabbath laws, (10-12,) other gods, (13,) three annual feasts, (14-17,) sacrifice and offerings, (18, 19 . ) This body of legislation is followed in Exo 23:20-33, by a number of prophetic promises, designed to encourage and strengthen the hearts of the people . Many of the laws and precepts here collected together were doubtless older than the time of Moses, but as Israel was now becoming a body politic, and about to occupy a prominent place among the nations, such a body of laws as was contained in this book of the covenant required formal codification .
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Regulations Concerning Behaviour to One’s Neighbour ( Exo 23:1-9 ).
There is an interesting pattern to the following verses. (Compare Exo 23:1 with Exo 23:7, Exo 23:2 with Exo 23:6, Exo 23:3 with Exo 23:5).
a Taking a false report and perverting justice (Exo 23:1).
b Following a crowd to do evil (Exo 23:2).
c Dealing with the poor by favouring him (Exo 23:3).
d Attitude to dumb beasts (Exo 23:4-5).
c Dealing with the poor by preventing justice for him (Exo 23:6).
b Following a false matter (Exo 23:7).
a Taking a gift and perverting the truth (Exo 23:8-9).
Exo 23:1
“You shall not take up a false report. Do not put your hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness.”
This is a warning against perjury. To take up false information in order to use it, is to be hand in hand with the wicked, that is, with those condemned by Yahweh. Such people stand against God.
“Do not put your hand with the wicked.” A joining of hands to confirm the agreement to give false testimony seems to be in mind, an act which puts all under equal condemnation. Compare Job 9:33.
Exo 23:2
“You shall not follow a crowd to do evil. Nor shall you speak in a cause to turn aside after a crowd to bend judgment.”
This is a warning against being influenced by the crowd, whether in private affairs or in court. If a crowd plans evil it is to be avoided. Nor must a man join with the many to bring about a wrong judgment. God’s man must stand up for right and truth even against the will of a crowd.
Exo 23:3
“Neither shall you favour a poor man in his cause.”
Rich and poor are to be treated the same. To be prejudiced on behalf of a poor man is no better than being prejudiced on behalf of a rich man. The truth is what matters without fear or favour.
Some feel that the statement is unexpected and try to change the sense. But there is no textual justification for it and prejudice against the rich by the poor is not unknown (also see verse 6 where the converse is dealt with).
Exo 23:4-5
“If you meet your enemy’s ox or his ass going astray you shall surely bring it back to him again. If you see the ass of him who hates you lying under his burden and would forbear to help him, you shall surely help with him.”
Concern for the animal’s welfare is possibly as much in mind here as concern for the ‘enemy’. Attitudes between people are not to prevent acts of mercy towards dumb animals. But such an act would often produce reconciliation.
This sudden switch in subject matter is typical of ancient law codes, but in fact the switch may not be as noticeable to the ancient mind as to us. After concern for the poor man comes concern for brute beasts. It is simply a step downwards The change of format is required by the content.
The phrase ‘your poor’ is found elsewhere only in Deu 15:11 and speaks of the poor as a whole. To wrest (or bend) judgment suggests the twisting or manoeuvring of the facts. Thus the command is not to interfere with true judgment just because the poor are involved. This would seem to warn against discriminating against the poor, the opposite of Exo 23:3. The content of Exo 23:4 and Exo 23:5 may well have been deliberately included here to separate the two ideas in Exo 23:3 and Exo 23:6 so that they could be stated separately and not confused.
Exo 23:7
“Keep yourself far from a false matter, and do not slay the innocent and the righteous, for I will not justify the wicked.”
Anything that is dubious or false is to be avoided, especially as relating to matters of justice. To assist in a false verdict is to punish and even possibly kill those who are righteous, and to declare the wicked innocent. This is something Yahweh could not participate in and therefore neither can His people. It is contrary to all that Yahweh is.
“I will not justify the wicked.” This could refer to His not participating in a verdict that brings guilt or innocence on the wrong person, or it could be referring His judgment on those who assist in a false verdict. There is One Who sees and judges (Pro 15:3).
Exo 23:8
“And you shall accept no gift, for a gift blinds those who have sight (literally ‘the open-eyed’) and perverts the words of the righteous.”
This refers especially to witnesses, but it can also be seen as referring to any occasion when the reception of a gift could produce biased judgment. To accept a gift from someone about whom you are called to give an opinion, or from his friends, is strictly forbidden. We will always favour those who reward us however much we may protest otherwise, and this can apply equally in churches as well as in courts of law.
“A gift blinds the open-eyed.” This is the fact, however much we persuade ourselves otherwise. Its effect is subtle but certain. It makes us close our eyes to what we have seen. It makes even the righteous behave and speak unrighteously, in other words to say what otherwise they would not have said. ‘A gift is as a precious stone in the eyes of him who has it, wherever it turns it prospers’ (Pro 17:8), which simply indicates that it obtains what the giver is seeking to obtain.
As today, bribery was a common fact of Old Testament life and utterly condemned (see Isa 1:23; Amo 5:12; Mic 3:11; Psa 15:5; Psa 26:10; Pro 17:23).
Exo 23:9
“And a stranger you will not oppress, for you understand the heart of a stranger seeing you were strangers in the land of Egypt.”
The position of this verse shows that the previous warning is in mind. Strangers resident among us have as much right to justice as anyone else, and it is especially easy to be turned against a foreigner by ‘gifts’. But they deserve justice too. Compare Exo 22:21, which is very similar, for the general attitude to strangers. But here the emphasis is on the resident alien receiving proper justice, in Exo 2:21 it was on seeing him as within the sphere of God’s covenant mercy.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Expansion of the Ten Words of the Covenant ( Exo 20:22 to Exo 23:33 ).
In this section, which is composed of elements put together mainly in chiastic form (see later), Yahweh expands on the Ten Words of the covenant. Notice that it begins with ‘and Yahweh said to Moses’. This proceeds as follows:
a Instructions concerning future worship in obedience to the commandments in Exo 20:3-5, for He will be with them and record His name in places where they go (Exo 20:22-26).
b Instructions concerning bondservants remembering the manservants and maidservants in mentioned in Exo 20:10 (Exo 21:1-11).
c Instructions concerning those who cause death or injury and those who dishonour their parents in obedience to Exo 20:12-13 (Exo 21:12-36).
d Instructions concerning a neighbour’s goods in obedience to Exo 20:15; Exo 20:17 (Exo 22:1-15).
d Instruction concerning the forcing of virgins, who belong to their families, which connects with Exo 20:14; Exo 20:17 (Exo 22:16-17).
c Instructions concerning wrong attitudes which connect with wider implications from the words of the covenant, which include some for which the penalty is death, and the need for avoidance of dishonourable conduct (Exo 22:18 to Exo 23:11).
b Instructions concerning the Sabbath (compareExo 20:8-9) and the regular feasts (Exo 23:12-19).
a Yahweh’s resulting promise that His Angel will go with them until the land is theirs, finishing with a warning against idolatry (Exo 23:20-23).
We should note here that in ‘a’ the approach to and worship of Yahweh is in mind, and His recording of His name in places as they go on their way, and they are warned against idolatry, and in the parallel the Angel of Yahweh is to go with them and they are warned against idolatry. In ‘b’ we are instructed concerning bondmen and bondwomen and in the parallel the Sabbath is dealt with which, in the announcing of the covenant, contained reference to the rights of menservants and maidservant (Exo 20:9). The bondmen also had a right to enjoy a seven year sabbath. It may be this connection which decided the positioning of this law prior to those concerning murder and theft. In ‘c’ we have reference to death and violence, while in the parallel death is the sentence for some of the crimes mentioned. In ‘d’ we have reference to misappropriation of people’s goods, and in the parallel misappropriation of their daughters.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The Covenant Code Exo 21:1 to Exo 23:12 can be called the “Covenant Code.” Sailhamer tells us that the laws listed in the “Covenant Codes” (Exo 21:1 to Exo 23:12) are 42 (7 x 6), which was in intentional multiple of seven. He also notes that there are 611 laws listed in the Pentateuch, which equals the numerical value of the Hebrew word “Torah” ( ). He notes that “the traditional number of laws in the Pentateuch (613) is obtained by treating both Deu 6:4 (the “Shema”) and Exo 20:2 (“I am the Lord your God”) as ‘laws.’” In addition, there are three hundred seventy-five (375) proverbs in Solomon’s First Collection (Exo 10:1 to Exo 22:16), which equals the numerical value of Solomon’s Hebrew name. He says there are His point is that such numerical coincidences reflect deliberate composition by the ancient Jewish scribes, and concludes that the laws, as well as the statutes, were not intended to be exhaustive. [87]
[87] See John H. Sailhammer, Introduction to Old Testament Theology (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, c1995), 257.
Exo 21:10 Scripture References – Note
Isa 4:1, “And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel : only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach.”
Exo 21:11 And if he do not these three unto her, then shall she go out free without money.
Exo 21:12 Exo 21:12
Exo 21:13 And if a man lie not in wait, but God deliver him into his hand; then I will appoint thee a place whither he shall flee.
Exo 21:13
Exo 21:14 But if a man come presumptuously upon his neighbour, to slay him with guile; thou shalt take him from mine altar, that he may die.
Exo 21:14 Deu 19:11-12
1Ki 2:29-30, “And it was told king Solomon that Joab was fled unto the tabernacle of the LORD; and, behold, he is by the altar. Then Solomon sent Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, saying, Go, fall upon him. And Benaiah came to the tabernacle of the LORD, and said unto him, Thus saith the king, Come forth. And he said, Nay; but I will die here. And Benaiah brought the king word again, saying, Thus said Joab, and thus he answered me.”
Exo 21:15 And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death.
Exo 21:16 Exo 21:17 Exo 21:17
Mat 15:4, “For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.”
Mar 7:10, “For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:”
Exo 21:18-19 Comments The Penalty for Smiting a Man – See Luk 10:25-37. The good Samaritan paid the penalty under the Law for those who beat the man. Likewise, Jesus paid our penalty.
Exo 21:21 “if he continue a day or two” – Comments – That is, “If the man live a few days before dying.”
Exo 21:22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.
Exo 21:22
Exo 23:25-26, “And ye shall serve the LORD your God, and he shall bless thy bread, and thy water; and I will take sickness away from the midst of thee. There shall nothing cast their young , nor be barren, in thy land: the number of thy days I will fulfil.”
Exo 21:23 And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,
Exo 21:24 Exo 21:24
Mat 5:38, “Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:”
Exo 21:32 “thirty shekels of silver” Comments – Scholars suggest that thirty shekels of silver was considered the price of a good, healthy slave (see Adam Clarke [88] , Keil [89] ).
[88] Adam Clarke, Exodus, in Adam Clarke’s Commentary, Electronic Database (Seattle, WA: Hendrickson Publishers Inc., 1996), in P.C. Study Bible, v. 3.1 [CD-ROM] (Seattle, WA: Biblesoft Inc., 1993-2000), comments on Exodus 21:32.
[89] C. F. Keil, and F. Delitzsch, Pentateuch, vol. 2, in Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament, trans. James Martin, in P.C. Study Bible, v. 3.1 [CD-ROM] (Seattle, WA: Biblesoft Inc., 1993-2000), comments on Exodus 21:32.
Mat 26:15, “And said unto them, What will ye give me, and I will deliver him unto you? And they covenanted with him for thirty pieces of silver .”
Exo 21:33 Comments – This pit would most commonly be a well. Short walls around a well were required to prevent a person or animal from falling into the pit.
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Further Ordinances Regarding Social Relations
v. 1. Thou shalt not raise a false report, v. 2. Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest judgment. v. 3. Neither shalt thou countenance a poor man in his cause. v. 4. If thou meet thine enemy’s ox or his ass going astray, thou shalt surely bring it back to him again; v. 5. If thou see the ass of him that hateth thee lying under his burden, v. 6. Thou shalt not wrest the Judgment of thy poor, v. 7. Keep thee far from a false matter; and the innocent and the righteous slay thou not; for I will not justify the wicked. v. 8. And thou shalt take no gift, v. 9. Also thou shalt not oppress a stranger,
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
THE BOOK OF THE COVENANT.Continued.
EXPOSITION
Exo 23:1-19
MISCELLANEOUS LAWScontinued. The same want of logical arrangement appears in this chapter as in the preceding one. The first nine verses contain some twelve laws, of which not more than two that are consecutive can be said to be on the same subject. There is perhaps in the section a predominant idea of warning against sins and errors connected with the trial of causes before a court, but Exo 23:4 and Exo 23:5, at any rate, lie quite outside this idea. From Exo 23:10 to Exo 23:19 the laws are connected with ceremonial observance and include
(1) The law of the Sabbath,
(2) of the Sabbatical year,
(3) of the Great Festivals,
(4) of sacrifice, and
(5) of first-fruits.
Exo 23:1
The ninth commandment is here expanded and developed. Thou shalt not raise a false report, forbids the origination of a calumny; the other clause prohibits the joining with others in spreading one. Both clauses have a special reference to bearing witness in a court, but neither would seem to be confined to it.
Exo 23:2
Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil. Rather, “Thou shalt not follow a multitude to evil.” A law alike for deed, for word, and for thought. The example of the many is to be shunned. “Wide is the gate and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat.” But “strait is the gate and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life; and few there be that find it” (Mat 7:13, Mat 7:14). It is extraordinary that so many, even of professing Christians, are content to go with the many, notwithstanding the warnings against so doing, both of the law and of the Gospel. Neither shalt thou speak, etc. Rather, “Neither shalt thou bear witness in a cause to go aside after a multitude to put aside justice.” The general precept is followed by a particular application of it. In judging a cause, if thou art one of the judges, thou shalt not simply go with the majority, if it he bent on injustice, but form thine own opinion and adhere to it.
Exo 23:3
Neither shalt thou countenance a poor man in his cause. After the many precepts in favour of the poor, this injunction produces a sort of shock. But it is to be understood as simply forbidding any undue favouring of the poor because they are poor, and so as equivalent to the precept in Le Exo 19:15, “Thou shalt not respect the person of the poor.” In courts of justice, strict justice is to be rendered, without any leaning either towards the rich, or towards the poor. To lean either way is to pervert judgment.
Exo 23:4
Thine enemy’s ox. A private enemy is here spoken of, not a public one, as in Deu 23:6. It is remarkable that the law should have so far anticipated Christianity as to have laid it down that men have duties of friendliness even towards their enemies, and are bound under certain circumstances to render them a service. “Hate thine enemies” (Mat 5:43) was no injunction of the Mosaic taw, but a conclusion which Rabbinical teachers unwarrantably drew from it. Christianity, however, goes far beyond Mosaism in laying down the broad precept”Love your enemies.”
Exo 23:5
If thou see the ass of him that hateth thee, etc. The general meaning of the passage is clearassistance is to be given to the fallen ass of an enemybut the exact sense of both the second and third clauses is doubtful. Many renderings have been suggested; but it is not clear that any one of them is an improvement on the Authorised Version. Thou shalt surely help with him. The joint participation in an act of mercy towards a fallen beast would bring the enemies into friendly contact, and soften their feelings towards each other.
Exo 23:6
As in Exo 23:3 men were warned not to favour the poor unduly in courts of justice out of compassion for them, so here there is a warning against the opposite, and far more usual error, of leaning against the poor man in our evidence or in our decisions The scales of justice are to be held even; strict right is to be done; our feelings are not be allowed to influence us, much less our class prejudices.
Exo 23:7
Keep thee far from a false matter. Hold aloof, i.e; from anything like a false accusation. Neither bring one, nor countenance one, else those mayest cause the death of an innocent and righteous man, and bring down on thyself the vengeance of him, who will not justify the wicked.
Exo 23:8
And thou shalt take no gift. The worst sin of a judge, and the commonest in the East, is to accept abribe from one of the parties to a suit, and give sentence accordingly. As such a practice defeats the whole end for which the administration of justice exists, it is, when detected, for the most part, punished capitally. Josephus tells us that it was so among the Jews (Contr. Apion. 2.27); but the Mosaic code, as it has come down to us, omits to fix the penalty. Whatever it was, it was practically set at nought. Eli’s sons “turned aside after lucre, and took bribes, and perverted judgment” (1Sa 8:3). In David’s time, men’s hands were “full of bribes” (Psa 26:10). Solomon complains of wicked men” taking gifts out of their bosoms to pervert the ways of judgment” (Pro 17:23). Isaiah is never weary of bearing witness against the princes of his day, who” love gifts and follow after rewards” (Isa 1:23);who “justify the wicked for reward, and take away the righteousness of the righteous from him” (Isa 5:23). Micah adds his testimony”Hear this, I pray you, ye heads of the house of Jacob and princes of the house of Israel, that abhor judgment and pervert all equity. They build up Zion with blood, and Jerusalem with iniquity. The heads thereof judge for reward” (Exo 3:9-11). The gift blindeth the wise. See Deu 16:19.
Exo 23:9
Thou shalt not oppress a stranger. This is a repetition of Exo 22:21, with perhaps a special reference to oppression through courts of justice. For thou knowest the heart of a stranger. Literally, “the mind of a stranger,” or, in other words, his thoughts and feelings. Thou shouldest therefore be able to sympathise with him.
Exo 23:10, Exo 23:11
CEREMONIAL LAWS (Exo 23:10-19).
Law of the Sabbatical year. Days of rest, at regular or irregular intervals, were well known to the ancients and some regulations of the kind existed in most countries But entire years of rest were wholly unknown to any nation except the Israelites. and exposed them to the reproach of idleness.. In a primitive condition of agriculture, when rotation of crops was unknown, artificial manure unemployed, and the need of letting even the best land sometimes lie fallow unrecognised, it may not have been an uneconomical arrangement to require an entire suspension of cultivation once in seven years. But great difficulty was probably experienced in enforcing the law. Just as there were persons who wished to gather manna on the seventh day (Exo 16:27), so there would be many anxious to obtain in the seventh year something more from their fields than Nature would give them if left to herself. If the “seventy years” of the captivity were intended exactly to make up for omissions of the due observance of the sabbatical year, we must suppose that between the time of the exodus and the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, the ordinance had been as often neglected as observed. (See 2Ch 36:21.) The primary object of the requirement was, as stated in Exo 23:11, that the poor of thy people may eat, what the land brought forth of its own accord in the Sabbatical year being shared by them (Lev 25:6.). But no doubt it was also intended that the Sabbatical year should be one of increased religious observance, whereof the solemn reading of the law in the ears of the people at the Feast of Tabernacles “in the year of release” (Deu 31:10) was an indication and a part. That reading was properly preceded by a time of religious preparation (Neh 8:1-15), and would naturally lead on to further acts of a religious character, which might occupy a considerable period (Neh 9:1-38; Neh 10:1-39.). Altogether, the year was a most solemn period, calling men to religious self-examination, to repentance, to the formation of holy habits, and tending to a general elevation among the people of the standard of holiness. What they leave the beasts of the field shall eat. There was to be no regular ingathering. The proprietor, his servants, the poor, and the stranger were to take what they needed; and the residue was to be for the cattle and for the beasts that were in the land (Deu 25:6, Deu 25:7). Thy vineyardthy oliveyard. Corn, wine, and oil were the only important products of Palestine; and this mention of the vineyard and the oliveyard shows that one and the same law was to hold good of all the lands in the country, however they might be cultivated. The whole land was to rest.
Exo 23:12
Law of the Sabbath, repeated. Nothing is here added to the teaching of the Fourth Commandment; but its merciful character is especially brought out. Men are called on to observe it, in order that their cattle may obtain rest, and their servants, together with the stranger that is within their gates, may find refreshment. It is to be borne in mind that the foreign population of Palestine was mostly held to hard service. (See 2Ch 2:17, 2Ch 2:18.)
Exo 23:13 contains two injunctionsone general, one special:
1. “Be circumspect” (or cautious, careful) “in respect of all that I command you.”
2. “Do not so much as utter the name of any false god.” Not even to mention their names, was to show them the greatest contempt possible; and, if followed out universally, would soon have produced an absolute oblivion of them. Moses, it may be observed, scarcely ever does mention their names. Later historians and prophets had to do so, either to deliver the true history of the Israelites, or to denounce idolatries to which they were given. There are many words one would wish never to utter; but while wicked men do the things of which they are the names, preachers are obliged to use the words in their sermons and other warnings.
Exo 23:14-17
Law of Festivals. “The sanctification of days and times,” says Richard Hooker, “is a token of that thankfulness and a part of that public honour which we owe to God for admirable benefits, whereof it doth not suffice that we keep a secret calendar, taking thereby our private occasions as we list ourselves to think how much God hath done for all men; but the days which are chosen out to serve as public memorials of such his mercies ought to be clothed with those outward robes of holiness whereby their difference from other days may be made sensible” (Eccles. Pol. 5.70, 1). All ancient religions had solemn festival seasons, when particular mercies of God were specially commemorated, and when men, meeting together in large numbers, mutually cheered and excited each other to a warmer devotion and a more hearty pouring forth of thanks than human weakness made possible at other times. In Egypt such festivals were frequent, and held a high place in the religion (Herod. 2.58-64:). Abraham’s family had probably had observances of the kind in their Mesopotamian home. God’s providence saw good now to give supernatural sanction to the natural piety which had been accustomed thus to express itself. Three great feasts were appointed, of which the most remarkable features were
1. That they were at once agricultural and historicalconnected with the regularly recurrent course of the seasons, and connected also with great events in the life of the nation;
2. That they could be kept only at one spot, that namely where the tabernacle was at the time located;
3. That they were to be attended by the whole male population.
The three festivals are here called
1. The Feast of Unleavened Bread (Exo 23:15), the early spring festival, at the beginning of barley harvest in the month Abib (Nisan), commemorative of the going forth from Egypt;
2. The Feast of Harvest (elsewhere called “of weeks”) at the beginning of summer, when the wheat crop had been reaped, commemorative of the giving of the law; and
3. The Feast of Ingathering (Exo 23:16) in Tisri, at the close of the vintage, when all the crops of every kind had been gathered in, commemorative of the sojourn in the wilderness. The first of the three, the feast of unleavened bread, had been already instituted (Exo 13:3-10); the two others are now for the first time sketched out, their details being kept back to be fined in subsequently (Le Exo 23:15-21, and 34-36). Here the legislator is content to lay it down that the great feasts will be three, and that all the males are to attend them.
Exo 23:15
The feast of unleavened bread. This commenced with the Passover, and continued for the seven days following, with a “holy convocation” on the first of the seven and on the last (Lev 23:5-8). Unleavened bread was eaten in commemoration of the hasty exodus from Egypt (Exo 12:34). A sheaf of new barleythe first-fruits of the harvestwas offered as a wave-offering before the Lord (Lev 23:10-14). Every male Israelite of full age was bound to attend, and to bring with him a free-will offering. In the time appointed of the monthi.e; on the fourteenth day (Exo 12:18). None shall appear before me empty. This rule applies, not to the Passover only, but to all the feasts.
Exo 23:16
The feast of harvest. Fifty days were to be numbered from the day of offering the barley sheaf, and on the fiftieth the feast of harvest, thence called “Pentecost,” was to be celebrated. Different Jewish sects make different calculations; but the majority celebrate Pentecost on the sixth of Sivan. The main ceremony was the offering to God of two leavened loaves of the finest flour made out of the wheat just gathered in, and called the first-fruits of the harvest. The festival lasted only a single day; but it was one of a peculiarly social and joyful character (Deu 16:9-11). Jewish tradition connects the feast further with the giving of the law, which must certainly have taken place about the time (see Exo 19:1-16). The firstfruits. Rather, “Of the first-fruits.” The word is in apposition with “harvest,” not with “feast.” Which thou hast sown. The sown harvest was gathered in by Pentecost; what remained to collect afterwards was the produce of plantations.
The feast of ingathering. Called elsewhere, and more commonly, “the feast of tabernacles” (Le 23:34; Deu 16:13; Deu 31:10; Joh 7:2), from the circumstance that the people were commanded to make themselves booths, and dwell in them during the time of the feast. The festival began on the 15th of Tisri, or in the early part of our October, when the olives had been gathered in and the vintage was completed. It lasted seven, or (according to some) eight days, and comprised two holy convocations. In one point of view it was a festival of thanksgiving for the final getting in of the crops; in another, a commemoration of the safe passage through the desert from Egypt to Palestine. The feast seems to have been neglected during the captivity, but was celebrated with much glee in the time of Nehemiah (Neh 8:17). In the end of the yeari.e; the end of the agricultural yearwhen the harvest was overas explained in the following clause.
Exo 23:17
Three times in the year all thy males shall appear before the Lord God. This seems to moderns a very burthensome enactment. But we must remember that Palestine is not bigger than Wales, and that great gatherings had great attractions for many in the ancient world, when they were the only means by which information was spread, and almost the only occasions on which friends and relations who lived far apart could expect to see each other. The European Greeks had, in their Olympian and other games, similar great gatherings, which occurred once or twice in each year, and, though under no obligation to do so, attended them in enormous numbers. It may be doubted if the religious Hebrews felt the obligation of attendance to be a burthen. It was assuredly a matter of great importance, as tending to unity, and to the quickening of the national life, that they should be drawn so continually to one centre, and be so frequently united in one common worship. Most students of antiquity regard the Greek games as having exerted a strong unifying influence over the scattered members of the Grecian family. The Hebrew festivals, occurring so much more frequently, and required to be attended by all, must have had a similar, but much greater, effect of the same kind.
Exo 23:18
Law of the Paschal sacrifice. That the Paschal lamb is here intended by “my sacrifice,” seems to be certain, since the two injunctions to put away leavened bread, and to allow none of the victim’s flesh to remain till the morning (see Exo 12:10), are combined in the Paschal sacrifice only. Of all the offerings commanded in the law the Paschal lamb was the most important, since it typified Christ. It may therefore well be termed, in an especial way, “God’s sacrifice.” By the fat of my feast some understand the fat of the lamb, others the best part of the feast (Keil)i.e; the lamb itself. In Exo 34:25, which is closely parallel to the present place, we read, for “the fat of my feast,” “the sacrifice of the feast of the passover.”
Exo 23:19
Law of first-fruits. The first of the first-fruits may mean either “the best of the first-fruits” (see Num 18:12), or “the very first of each kind that is ripe” (ib, Exo 23:13). On the tendency to delay, and not bring the very first, see the comment on Exo 22:29. The house of the Lord. Generally, in the Pentateuch we have the periphrasis” the place which the Lord thy God shall choose to put his name there” (Deu 12:5, Deu 12:11, Deu 12:14; Deu 16:16; Deu 26:2, etc.); but here, and in Exo 34:26, and again in Deu 23:18, this “place” is plainly declared to be a “house” or “temple.”
Law against seething a kid in the mother‘s milk. The outline of law put before the Israelites in the “Book of the Covenant” terminated with this remarkable prohibition. Its importance is shown
1. By its place here; and
2. By its being thrice repeated in the law of Moses (see Exo 34:16; and Deu 14:21). Various explanations have been given of it; but none is saris-factory, except that which views it as “a protest against cruelty, and outraging the order of nature,” more especially that peculiarly sacred portion of nature’s order, the tender relation between parent and child, mother and suckling. No doubt the practice existed. Kids were thought to be most palatable when boiled in milk; and the mother’s milk was frequently the readiest to obtain. But in this way the mother was made a sort of accomplice in the death of her child, which men were induced to kill on account of the flavour that her milk gave it. Reason has nothing to say against such a mode of preparing food, but feeling revolts from it; and the general sense of civilised mankind reechoes the precept, which is capable of a wide applicationThou shalt not seethe a kind in his mother’s milk.
HOMILETICS
Exo 23:1-3; 6-9
God’s care for the administration of justice.
The well-being of a community depends largely on the right administration of justice within its limits. It has been said that the entire constitution of England with all its artifices, complications, balances, and other delicate arrangements, exists mainly for the purpose of putting twelve honest men into a jury-box. Fiat justitia, ruat coelum. Anything is preferable to the triumphant rule of injustice. The present passage clearly shows that God recognises very decidedly the importance of judicial proceedings. By direct communication with Moses, he lays down rules which affect
1. The accuser;
2. The witnesses; and
3. The judge.
I. WITH RESPECT TO THE ACCUSER. False accusation is to be avoided, and especially capital charges against the innocent (Exo 9:7).
II. WITH RESPECT TO WITNESSES. Men are to beware of either inventing an untrue tale or giving any support to it when it has been invented by others (Exo 9:11).
III. WITH RESPECT TO JUDGES.
1. They are not to act like Pilate and “follow a multitude to do evil” (Exo 9:2).
2. They are not either unduly to favour the poor (Exo 9:3); or
3. To wrest justice against them (Exo 9:6).
4. They are not to oppress strangers (Exo 9:9). And
5. They are, above all things, not to take a bribe.
Accusers, beware! Be sure that your charge is true, or do not make it. A false charge, even though proved false, may injure a man for lifehe may never be able to recover from it. Particularly, be careful, if your charge is a serious one, involving risk to life. You may, if successful, “slay the innocent and the righteous” (Exo 9:7). Nay, you may slay a man by a false charge which does not directly affect his lifeyou may so harass and annoy him as to drive him to suicide, or “break his heart,” and so shorten his days. Even if you have a true charge to bring, it is not always wise or Christian to bring it. St. Paul would have us in some cases “take wrong” and “suffer ourselves to be defrauded” (1Co 6:7).
Witnesses, beware! Do not give untrue evidence, either in the way of raising false reports yourselves, or of supporting by your evidence the false reports of others. The witnesses who cause an innocent person to be condemned are as much to blame as the false accuser. Be very careful in giving evidence to speak “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.” Depose to nothing of which you are not sure. If you are uncertain, say that you are uncertain, however much the adverse counsel may browbeat you. In cases of personal identity, be specially careful. It is exceedingly easy to be mistaken about a man whom you have seen only once or twice.
Judges, beware! On you the final issue depends. Be not swayed by popularity. Yield not to the outcries either of an excited mob, or a partisan press, when they shout, “away with him!” Hold the scales of justice even between the rich man and the poor, neither suffering your prejudice of class to incline you in favour of the former, nor a weak sentimentality to make you lean unduly towards the latter. Be sure not to oppress foreigners, who must plead to disadvantage in a country, and amid proceedings, t hat are strange to them. Above all, do not condescend to take a bribe from either side. A gift is a weight in the scales of justice; and “a false balance is an abomination to the Lord” (Pro 11:1).
Exo 23:5, Exo 23:6
The duties which men owe to their enemies.
These duties may be considered as they were revealed to men.
1. Under the law: and
2. Under the gospel.
I. UNDER THE LAW. Men were required to protect the interests of their enemies, when they could do so without loss to themselves. For instance
1. They were not to cut down fruit trees in an enemy’s country (Deu 20:19, Deu 20:20).
2. They were not to remove a neighbour’s landmark, even though he might be an enemy.
3. They were to hasten after an enemy’s ox or ass if they saw it going astray, to catch it, and bring it back to him.
4. They were to approach him, if they saw his ass fallen under the weight of its load, and to help him to raise it up.
5. If he were suffering from hunger or thirst, they were to give him bread to eat and water to drink (Pro 25:21).
6. They were to refrain from rejoicing over his misadventures (ib, Exo 24:17).
II. UNDER THE GOSPEL. Men are required under the Gospel to do all this, and much more.
1. They are to “love their enemies” (Mat 5:44).
2. To do good to them in every wayfeed them (Rom 12:20), bless them (Mat 1:1-25.s.c.), pray for them (ib,), be patient towards them (1Th 5:14), seek to convert them from the error of their ways (Jas 5:20), save them (ib,). Christ set the example of praying for his enemies upon the crossGod set the example of loving his enemies when he gave his Son to suffer death for themthe Holy Spirit sets the example of patience towards his enemies, when he strives with them. We have to forgive our enemies day by day their trespasses against usto pray and work for their conversionto seek to overcome their evil with our good. In temporal matters, it is our business to be most careful that we do them no injury, by misrepresentation, by disparagement, by unfair criticism, by lies, even by “faint praise.” We are to “love” them; or, if poor human nature finds this too hard, we are to act as if we loved them, and then ultimately love will come.
Exo 23:10, Exo 23:11
The Sabbatical year.
The Sabbatical yearan institution peculiar to the Israelites, and quite contrary to anything of which they had had experience in Egyptis a remarkable proof,
I. OF THE DIVINE WISDOM. Under the ordinary circumstances of tillage, land from time to time requires rest. In Egypt it was otherwise. There, under the exceptional circumstances of a soil continually recruited by the spread over it of a rich alluvium from the great river, not only was the whole arable area capable of producing good crops year after year, without ever lying fallow, but from the same soil several crops were ordinarily taken, in the course of the twelvemonth. The Israelites had had no experience of any other agriculture than this for above four centuries. Yet now, suddenly, a new system is adopted by them. God knew that the system of Egyptian tillage was not suitable for Palestinethat there the soil would not recruit itselfthat, cultivated on the Egyptian system, it would rapidly become exhausted; and therefore he devised, in the interests of his people, a new system for Palestine. The whole land should have rest one year in seven. Thus only, in the then existing condition of agriculture, could exhaustion be prevented, productiveness secured, and the land enabled to retain its character of “a good land,” “a land flowing with milk and honey,” “a land of corn and wine, of bread and vineyards, and oil olive,” “a land of wheat, and barley, and vines, and fig-trees, and pomegranatesa land of oil olive, and honeya land wherein thou shalt eat bread without scarceness, thou shalt not lack anything in it” (Deu 8:8, Deu 8:9).
II. OF THE DIVINE BENEFICENCE. Under the system thus Divinely imposed upon the Israelites, three beneficent purposes were accomplished.
1. The proprietor was benefited. Not only was he prevented from exhausting his farm by over-cropping, and so sinking into poverty, but he was forced to form habits of forethought and providence. He necessarily laid by something for the seventh year, and hence learnt to calculate his needs, to store his grain, and to keep something in hand against the future. In this way his reason and reflective powers were developed, and he was advanced from a mere labouring hind to a thoughtful cultivator.
2. The poor were benefited. As whatever grew in the seventh year grew spontaneously, without expense or trouble on the part of the owner, it could not be rightfully considered to belong exclusively to him. The Mosaic law placed it on a par with ordinary wild fruits, and granted it to the first comer (Lev 25:5, Lev 25:6). By this arrangement the poor were enabled to profit, since it was they especially who gathered the store that Nature’s bounty provided. In the dry climate of Palestine, where much grain is sure to be shed during the gathering in of the harvest, the spontaneous growth would probably be considerable, and would amply suffice for the sustenance of those who had no other resource.
3. The beasts were benefited. God “careth for cattle.” He appoints the Sabbatical year, in part, that “the beasts of the field” may have abundance to eat. When men dole out their food, they have often a scanty allowance. God would have them, for one year in seven at least, eat their fill.
Exo 23:12
The rest of the Sabbath.
In the fourth commandment it is the main object of the Sabbath that is put prominently forward. It is a day to be “kept holy”a day which God has “blessed and hallowed.” Here, on the contrary, our attention is called to its secondary objectit is for “rest” and “refreshment.” Perhaps men of the classes who are in easy circumstances do not sufficiently realise the intense relief that is furnished by the Sunday rest to the classes below them, to the over-taxed artisan, the household drudge, the wearied and stupefied farm-labourernay, even to the clerk, the accountant, the shopkeeper, the salesman. Continuous mechanical work of one and the same kind is required of most of those who labour, from morning till night, and from one end of the week to the other. The monotony of their occupations is terribleis deadeningis sometimes maddening. For them, the treat that the Sunday affords is the single gleam of light in their uniformly murky sky, the single ray of hope that gilds their else miserable existence, the single link that connects them with the living world of thought, and sentiment, and feeling, for which they were born, and in which their spirits long to expatiate. Rest! To the tired brute, forced to slave for his owner up to the full measure of his powers, and beyond themready to sink to the earth the moment he is not artificially sustainedwho goes through his daily round in a state that is half-sleep, half-wakingwhat a blessed change is the quietude of the Sunday, when for four-and-twenty hours at least he enjoys absolute and entire repose, recruits his strength, rests all his muscles, is called on to make no exertion! Refreshment! How thrice blessed to the overwrought man, and still more to the overwrought woman, is the relaxation of the dreadful tension of their lives which Sunday brings! “No rest, no pause, no peace,” for six long daysdays beginning early and ending latedays without change or varietywithout relaxation or amusementwretched, miserable days, during which they wish a hundred times that they had never been born. On such the Sunday rest falls as a refreshing dew. Their drooping spirits rise to it. They inhale at every pore its beneficent influences. They feel it to be “a refuge from the storms of life, a bourne of peace after six days of care and toil, a goal to which they may look with glad hearts, and towards which they may work with hopeful spirits amid the intense struggles, and fervid contests, and fierce strifes of existence.” Without the Sunday rest, modern life, at any rate, would be intolerable; and the mass of those who are actively engaged in its various phases would drift into idiocy, or be driven to madness!
Exo 23:14-17
Festival times.
I. FESTIVALS ARE COMMEMORATIONS. The joyful occurrences of our own lives we by a natural instinct commemorate yearly, as the day comes round when they happened to us. Our birth-day, our wedding-day, are thus made domestic festivals. Similarly, a nation commemorates the Day of its Independence, or the three glorious days of its Revolution, or the day on which its armies gained a great and crowning victory. It is reasonable that the practice thus established should be followed also in the Church of God, and the days on which great spiritual blessings or deliverances were granted to it kept in remembrance by some appropriate and peculiar observance. The Jews kept three great festivals, to which afterwards two others were added, all of them more or less commemorative. The Passover commemorated the passing over of the houses of the Israelites by the destroying angel and the hasty flight out of Egypt; the feast of Pentecost commemorated, according to Jewish tradition, the giving of the law; tabernacles recalled and perpetuated the dwelling in tents in the wilderness; Purim, the deliverance kern the malice of Haman; the Dedication, that from Antiochus Epiphanes. And Christian festivals are of a similar character. Advent commemorates the approach, and Christmas the birth, of Christ, Epiphany his manifestation to the Gentiles, Easter his resurrection from the dead, Ascension-day his ascent into heaven, Whitsuntide the coming of the Holy Ghost. “Saints’ days,” as they are called, commemorate the entrance into final bliss of those whose names they bear. All the greater, and almost all the lesser, festivals of the Christian Church are commemorations, days appointed for perpetuating the remembrance of events dear to the Christian heart and deeply interwoven with the Christian life. It follows that
II. FESTIVALS ARE TIMES OF SPIRITUAL JOY‘. There are some to whom religion seems altogether a melancholy thing. Religious persons they suppose to be dwellers in perpetual sadness, gloomy, ascetic, dull, cheerless, miserable. But this is altogether a mistake. Holy joy is continually required of men as a duty in the Bible. “Rejoice evermore,” says the great apostle of the Gentiles (1Th 5:16); and again, “Rejoice with them that do rejoice” (Rom 12:15). “O be joyful in the Lord,” is a constant cry of the Psalmist. Our Lord bade us “rejoice and he exceeding glad,” even when we are persecuted, and assured us that “our joy no man taketh from us.” There may be a sobriety in Christian joy which distinguishes it from the fitful, feverish, and excited joy of the world; but it is joytrue joynevertheless. And for this joy no times are so fitting as festival times. “This is the day which the Lord hath made,” said holy David; “let us rejoice and be glad in it.” “Offices and duties of religious joy,” as Hooker notes, “are that wherein the hallowing of festival times consisteth” (Eccl. Pol. 5:70, 2). The set services of religion on festival days take a tone of gladness beyond the common; and the “psalms and hymns and spiritual songs” suited for such occasions are of a still more jubilant type. Then especially do the precepts hold”Rejoice in the Lord,” “Serve the Lord with gladness,” “Show yourselves joyful unto the Lordsing, rejoice, and give thanks.”
III. FESTIVALS SHOULD BE TIMES OF THANKSGIVING. Nothing is more remarkable in man than his deadness, and dulness, and apathy in respect to all that God has done for him. Warm gratitude, lively thankfulness, real heartfelt devotion, are rare, even in the best of us. Festivals are designed to stir and quicken our feelings, to rouse us from our deadness, to induce us to shake off our apathy, and both with heart and voice glorify God, who hath done so great things for us. Festivals bring before us vividly the special Divine mercy which they commemorate, and at the same time present to our view the beneficent side, so to speak, of the Divine nature, and lead- us to contemplate it. God is essentially love; “he declares his Almighty power most chiefly in showing mercy and pity” (Collect for Eleventh Sunday after Trinity). Festivals remind us of this. We lose the advantage of them wholly if we do not stir ourselves, on occasion of them, to some real outpouring of love and thanks to him who granted us the blessing of the time, as well as every other blessing, and every “good and perfect gift” of which we have the enjoyment.
IV. FESTIVALS SHOULD BE TIMES OF BOUNTY. When the soul of a man is glad, and penetrated with the sense of God’s goodness and mercy towards it, the heart naturally opens itself to a consideration of other men’s needs and necessities. Being glad itself, it would fain make others glad. Hence, in the old world, great occasions of joy were always occasions of largess. The Israelites were commanded to remember the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow at the time of their festivals (Deu 16:14); and the practice was to “send portions” to them (Neh 8:10; Est 9:22). We shall do well to imitate their liberality, and to make, not Christmas only, but each festival season a time of “sending portions” to the poor and needy.
HOMILIES BY J. ORR
Exo 23:1-10
Doing justice and loving mercy.
In pursuance of its great requirement of love to one’s neighbour, the law next prohibits the raising of a false report, the bearing of false witness in a court of justice, and the wresting of judgment. Recognising however, that “out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies” (Mat 15:19), the taw, in addition to forbidding the outward acts, is at pains to warn against the motives and influences which most commonly lead to these acts. This section naturally follows the catalogue of “rights’ in previous chapters, as dealing with cases of litigation arising on the basis of these “rights.” Notice:
I. THE SINS PROHIBITED.
1. The raising of a false report. This also is a species of false witness, though of a less formal character than the bearing of false witness in a court of justice. The forms it may assume are innumerable. The three principal are:
(1) Deliberate invention and circulation of falsehoods.
(2) Innuendo, or malicious suggestion.
(3) Distortion or deceitful colouring of actual facts.
In God’s sight slander ranks as one of the worst of off, aces. It indicates great malevolence. It is grievously unjust and injurious to the person traduced. It is certain to be taken up, and industriously propagated. For a calumny is never wholly wiped out. There are always some evil-speaking persons disposed to believe and repeat it. It affixes a mark on the injured party which may remain on him through life. Everyone is interested in the suppression of such an offencethe parties immediately concerned, the Church, society at large, the magistracy, God himselfof one of whose commandments (the 9th) it is a daring violation. It is a form of vice which should incur the emphatic reprobation of society, and which, where possible, should be visited with heavy legal penalties.
2. False witness in court. This, as a deliberate attempt to poison the stream of public justice, is a crime which admits of no palliation. It is a form of vice which, so far as we know, has never found a defender. All ages and all societies have united in condemning it as an offence deserving of severe punishment. Yet many a privately-circulated slander may do more harm than a falsehood uttered in the witness-box. God judges of these matters, not by their legal but by their moral turpitude.
3. Wresting of judgment. The corruption of public justice here reaches the fountain head. The judge who gives dishonest decisions betrays the cause of righteousness. He misrepresents the mind of God. He inflicts irremediable injury on the innocent. He opens a floodgate to iniquity. Few men, therefore, are guiltier than he. God will not spare him in the day of his judgment. Even in private life, however, we need to beware of judging rashly, of judging with bias and prejudice, of judging so as to do wrong to individuals, of judging so as to injure truth and retard progress and- improvement. This also is “wresting judgment.”
II. MOTIVES LEADING TO THESE SINS.
1. The influence of the crowd (Exo 23:2). There is an infectiousness in the example of a crowd which only a firm back-bone of principle, and some independence of mind, will enable us to resist. The tendency is to follow the multitude, even when it is to do evil.
(1) Men like to be on the side that is popular. They dread the reproach of singularity. There are those who would almost rather die than be out of the fashion.
(2) A crowd can ridicule, and a crowd can intimidate. It may put pressure upon us which we have not the moral courage to resist.
(3) A thing, besides, does not look so evil, when many are engaged in doing it. They do not, of course, call it evil. They put new names upon it, and. laugh at us for our scruples. This may lead us to think that the course in which we are asked to join is not so very bad after all. So we belie or dissemble our real convictions, and do what the crowd bids us. To such influences we are certain to fall a prey, if we are governed by the fear of man more than by the fear of God (Act 4:19, Act 4:20), or if we seek the praise of man more than the honour which comes from God (Joh 5:44; Joh 12:4 :3). As counteractives to the influence of the crowd we do well to remember that the “vox populi” is not always “vox Dei;” that the fashion of the clay can never make that right which the law of God declares to be wrong; that the voice of the multitude is one thing to-day, and another thing to-morrow, while truth and duty remain one and the same; that whatever others think, it can never be lawful for us to act contrary to our own convictions; that if the multitude are bent on doing evil, it is our duty, not to go with them, but to be witnesses for the truth in opposition to their courses; that great guilt attaches to us if we do wrong simply in deference to popular sentiment; finally, that there is one who judges us, that is, God, and that he will surely call us to account for all such unfaithfulness to conviction (Exo 23:7).
2. False sympathy. Judgment was not to be wrested, nor false witness given, out of any quasi-benevolent wish to do a good turn to the poor (Exo 23:3). The poor man is not to be unjustly dealt with (Exo 23:6), but neither is he to receive favour. A court of law is not the place for sentiment. Equal measure is to be meted out to all. Judgment is to be given impartially as between brother and brother; rich and poor; citizen and foreigner (Exo 23:9); applying the same principles to each case, and keeping in view the essential merits as the sole thing to be regarded.
3. Enmity. Emnity to another, or the consideration of another’s enmity to us, is not to be allowed to sway us in giving judgment in his cause, or in any other matter in which his rights are affected. This seems to be the connection of Exo 23:4, Exo 23:5, with what precedes and follows; but the duty is taught somewhat indirectly by laying down the principle that enmity is not to be allowed to influence us at all, in any of our dealings with our neighbours. The illustrations taken are very striking, and fairly anticipate the gospel inculcation of love to enemies (cf. Deu 22:1, Deu 22:4). If an enemy’s ox or ass was seen going astray, the Israelite was not to hide himself, and let it go, but was “surely” to take it back again. Or if his enemy’s ass fell under a burden, he was not to yield to the temptation to forbear help, but was “surely” to help him to lift it up. A fortiori, he was not to allow himself to be in any way influenced by enmity in giving evidence before the judges, or in pronouncing judgment on a cause brought before him.
4. Covetenseness. (Exo 23:8.) This forbids bribery. It is impossible for a judge to take a bribe, whether given directly or indirectly, and yet retain his integrity. Despite of himself, the gift will blind his eyes, and pervert his words. For the same reason a man can never be an impartial judge in his own cause.J.O.
Exo 23:10-20
Sabbaths and feasts.
I. SABBATHS.
1. The Sabbatic year (Exo 23:10, Exo 23:11). Every seventh year the land was to lie fallow, and what it spontaneously produced was to be a provision for the poor, and for the beasts of the field. There was connected with the ordinance a special promise of unusual fertility in the sixth yearof such plenty as would make the nation independent of a harvest in the seventh (Le Exo 25:21, Exo 25:22). The Sabbatic year was
(1) A period of rest for the land. Even nature requires her seasons of rest. Only thus will she yield to man the best of her produce. The seventh year’s rest was an agricultural benefit.
(2) A period of rest for the labourer. It gave him time for higher employment. Moses enjoined that the whole law should be read on this year at the feast of Tabernacles (Deu 31:10, Deu 31:14). This may have been designed to teach, “that the year, as a whole, should be much devoted to the meditation of the law, and engaging in services of devotion” (Fairbairn).
(3) A merciful provision for the poor. It laid an arrest on man’s natural selfishness, and taught beneficence and consideration for the needy. It showed that if man cared not for the poor, God did.
(4) It was a test of obedience. It would test conclusively whether the people were disposed to obey God, or would be ruled only by their own wills. In point of fact, the ordinance was not kept. It proved to be too high and Divine a thing for covetous and selfish dispositions. The neglect of it commenced very early, and lasted till the period of the captivity (2Ch 36:21).
(5) A periodical reminder that the land, and everything that grew upon it, belonged to God. Had the Israelites observed the ordinance, the recurrent plenty of the sixth year would, like the double supply of manna on the sixth day in the wilderness, have been a visible witness to them of the supernatural presence of Jehovah in their midst.
2. The weekly Sabbath (Exo 23:12). The invaluable seventh day’s rest was also to be sacredly observed by the nation. Well-kept Sabbaths have much to do with national prosperity.
II. FEASTS. The stated festivals were three (Exo 23:14 17). The design in their appointment was to commemorate mercies, to keep alive the memory of national events, to foster a sense of unity in the people, to quicken religious life, to furnish opportunities of public worship. They afforded a means of strengthening the bond between the people and Jehovah, promoted brotherly intercourse, infused warmth and gladness into religious service, and were connected with a ritual which taught the worshippers solemn and impressive lessons. The feasts were:
1. The Passoverhere called “the feast of unleavened bread” (Exo 23:15-18). It commemorated the great National Deliverance (see on Exo 12:1-51.). The use of unleavened bread was a call to spiritual purity (1Co 5:8). The blood was offered (Exo 23:18) as an ever-renewed atonement for sin. The “fat” of the sacrifice betokened the consecration of the best.
2. Pentecosthere called “the feast of harvest, the first-fruits of thy labours” (Exo 23:16). Its primary reference was agricultural. It was a recognition of God in the gift of the harvest. It besought his blessing upon the labours of the field. It consecrated to him the first-fruits (Exo 23:19) of what he had given (two wave-loaves, Le Exo 23:17). In the dedication of the wave-loaves, as in the weekly presentation of the shewbread in the tabernacle (Exo 25:30), there was further symbolised the dedication to God of the life which the bread nourished. Fitly, therefore, was this day chosen for the presentation to God of the first-fruits of his Church (Act 2:1-47.).
3. The feast of Tabernacles“the feast of ingathering” (Exo 23:16). This was the feast of the completed harvest, when the corn, the wine, and the oil, had all been gathered in. During the seven days of the feast the people dwelt in booths, in commemoration of their wanderings in the wilderness. The dwelling in booths was a symbol also of their present pilgrim condition on earth, as “strangers and sojourners” (Psa 39:12). The precept in Exo 23:19, which seems related to this feast,”Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother’s milk,” had probably reference to some harvest superstition. On its moral lessons, see Deu 14:21.J.O.
HOMILIES BY D. YOUNG
Exo 23:1-9
Seeking the things which make for justice.
The illustrations adduced in these nine verses show the various ways in which men may be tempted to injustice in judicial procedure. Those who believe themselves wronged have to appeal to their fellow men to settle the matter so far as human capacity can settle it. Hence the positions indicated in this passage. We see plaintiffs, defendants, witnesses, judges, and supporters and sympathisers, and the great aim set before all of them is the attainment of just conclusions. Men feel nothing more bitterly than unjust treatment; and yet just treatment is one of the most difficult of all things to get. Even he who himself has been unjustly treated cannot be induced to treat others justly. Thus there are put before the individual Israelite here illustrations of all the ways in which it is possible for him either to help or to hinder justice.
I. THE ISRAELITE IS CAUTIONED LEST BY YIELDING TO UNWORTHY MOTIVES, HE SHOULD HELP OTHERS TO GAIN VICTORIES OF UNRIGHTEOUSNESS. It is only too easy to send abroad an empty story which may end in the ruin of an innocent man. We may become afflicted with a spirit of partisanship which, even if it lead not to downright lying, may prompt to exaggerations and distortions, just as valuable for the attainment of malicious purposes, lie who would not deliberately fabricate a lie will nevertheless be well disposed to believe it when fabricated by another, and will then utter it for truth. We easily believe what we want to believe. It is so pleasant to be with the multitude; to go against it requires a great deal of courage, and a deep devotion to what is just, as the paramount thing to be considered in all judicial enquiries. Let us feel that justice is not a matter of majorities, but of great principles honestly and ably applied to particular cases, the nature of these cases being determined by evidence which has been carefully sifted and arranged so as to get at the truth. He who comes into a court of justice comes there in the simple and sufficient claims of his humanity; all considerations of popular applause, all sympathy with a poor man, merely as a poor man, are entirely out of place. We must guard against all cheap sentiment; we must be just before we are generous. Adroit appeals to the feelings of a jury are part of the stock-in-trade of a practised advocate; and witnesses themselves understand how to profit by the prejudices and weaknesses of sensitive minds. The poor, the sick, the maimed only too often think that they may gain by their poverty, their feebleness, their mutilation, what is not to be gained by the righteousness of their cause. Everyone, therefore, who has to do with a court of justice needs great circumspection to keep himself clear of all words and actions such as might lend themselves to injustice. The effort of one may not secure a just judgment, but each individual must do his part. Then the stain of injustice is not on his garments.
II. AN INJURED PERSON MUST KEEP CLEAR OF PERSONAL ANIMOSITY IN THE PURSUIT OF HIS RIGHTS. An illustration is given from the misfortune which may happen to his enemy’s ox or ass (Exo 23:4, Exo 23:5). We must never forget that our enemy is also our neighbour. If a man wrongs us, it does not cancel that wrong to do him wrong in return. There is a certain appointed way of getting all such wrong put right, and if it cannot be put right in that way there is no other to be found,no other at least so far as human aid avails. For a man to see his enemy in this position, with ox or ass gone astray or in any way needing help, is a capital chance for showing that no petty grudge actuates him in legal proceedings. He who is treated wrongly must seek for justice, but he will gladly hail the opportunity of showing that it is justice only that he seeks. It is often those who are most unyielding in the matter of right who are also most tender and assiduous in the matter of compassion. It is an easier thing through sentimental weakness to countenance a poor man in his cause than to take the trouble of driving home a lost ox or ass to its owner. The very same considerations of right which make a man feel that he cannot sit down tamely under injustice, should also make him feel that he cannot allow the property of others to go to ruin, when his timely intervention will save it.
III. THERE ARE DIRECTIONS IN PARTICULAR FOR THOSE WHO HAVE TO JUDGE. The instructions in Exo 23:6-9 seem specially to concern the judge. Plaintiffs, defendants and witnesses are only occasionally in courts of justice, but the judge is always there. It is his daily work to settle right as between man and man. Those who have to come before him are instructed and cautioned to come in a just spirit; but inasmuch as many of them will not attend to the instructions, it is the business of the judge to neutralise as far as he can their unrighteous approaches; and it seems to be particularly implied that he must keep himself from all temptations such as come so fascinatingly through the rich and the powerful. He with whom judicial decisions rest will have many to tempt him if he shows himself at all open to temptation. Let the judge remember that his judgment, though it may gain a cause, does not effect a final settlement. Through prejudice or bribery he may justify the wicked; but that does not hold them justified. He must not say of anyone who comes before him, that he is only a poor man or a foreigner and therefore his interests cannot matter. It should be his joy to feel and his pride to say that no one went away from him with wrongs unredressed, so far as any searching of his could discover the doer of the wrong. A judge has great opportunities. Every upright, discerning and scrupulous judge does much in the circle of his own influence to keep a high standard of right and wrong before the minds of his fellow men.Y.
HOMILIES BY G.A. GOODHART
Exo 23:14-17
A threefold cord is not quickly broken.
To forget is far easier than to remember. Festivals are like posts to which we can fasten the cords of memory, so that, securely fastened, we may not drift down the stream of Lethe. To forget facts is to ignore the duties to which facts prompt us. We must leave undone what we ought to do, unless we take measures to keep us in remembrance. The great fact which the Israelites needed to remember was the relation of dependence in which they stood to God. He had freed them from slavery, he had provided them with food, he had given them, besides, the means of enjoymentwine and oilabove all that they could ask or think. By means of the three great annual festivals threefold security was given against forgetfulness of this fact. To keep the festivals was to realise the relation, and to strengthen it by practical acknowledgment. Consider
I. THE FEAST OF FREEDOM. In this connection (Exo 23:15) the unleavened bread is the point emphasisedto be eaten for seven days, a full week, at the commencement of the sacred year. As a reminder it suggested
1. Past slavery. The tyrannous oppression of Egypt; hopeless condition ere God looked upon them; life but a synonym for bare existence; even sustenance depending upon the caprice of others.
2. Past deliverance. The paschal night; unleavened bread the accompaniment of the first paschal feast; food a very secondary consideration when freedom was in question.
3. Present duties. God had delivered them from slavery that they might serve him as his free people; an inner slavery worse than the outer; a purification needed in the heart even more important than that in the home. The leaven of malice and wickedness must be sought out and put away; so long as they retained that, freedom was but a nominal privilege.
II. THE FEAST OF FIRST–FRUITS. Linked on to the second day of unleavened bread. God would have his children look forward; and so he makes the first blessing a seed in which are enwrapped others. Freed by God, the people could appropriate, as his children, the promise made to children (Gen 1:29, as modified by the fall, Gen 3:19). The gift of food was God’s gift, but their cooperation was needed for its fruition; it was to be the fruit, not the creation of their labours. Familiarity breeds forgetfulness as often as it breeds contempt. A reminder needed that human labour can, at most, work up God’s raw material. [The cerealia, or corn plants, well called “a standing miracle.” Apparently a cultivated grass, yet no known grass can be improved into corn by cultivation. Corn can be degraded by artificial means into a worthless perennial; as it is, it is an annual, exhausting itself in seeding, needing man’s labour to its perfection and preservation.] To get his food, man is constantly reminded that he must be a fellow-worker with God.
III. THE FEAST OF INGATHERING. As the year rolls on, it exhibits more and more of God’s goodness and bounty. It calls for ever fresh acknowledgment of that love which gives “liberally and upbraideth not.” Freedom a great gift, the capacity to work for one’s own livelihood; so, too, food, the means through which that capacity may find exercise; further, God gives all the fruits of the earth in their season, so that man through his labour may find not merely health but happiness. Naturally this was the most joyful of all the festivalsthe blossoms which glorified the stem springing from the root of freedom. To rejoice in the Lord is the final outcome of that faith which enables us to realise our sonship.
Conclusion.These festivals have more than an historical interest. They teach the same truths as of old, but for Christians their meaning is intensified. Unleavened bread is associated with Calvary, freedom from the tyranny of sin (1Co 5:7, 1Co 5:8). Linked to this is our first-fruits festival; Christ, the first-fruits (1Co 15:20), made our food through the gift of the Spirit at Pentecost. The feast of ingathering is not yet, but we may rejoice in it by anticipation (1Pe 1:6). The final festival is described for us by St. John in the Revelation (vii. 9-17). Blessed are they who, with robes washed white, shall share the joy of that feast of Ingathering.G.
Exo 23:20-31
EXPOSITION
THE REWARDS OF OBEDIENCE. God always places before men” the recompense of the reward.” He does not require of them that they should serve him for nought. The “Book of the Covenant” appropriately ends with a number of promises, which God undertakes to perform, if Israel keeps the terms of the covenant. The promises are:
1. That he will send an angel before them to be their guide, director, and helper (Exo 23:20 – 23).
2. That he will be the enemy of their enemies (Exo 23:22), striking terror into them miraculously (Exo 23:27), and subjecting them to other scourges also (Exo 23:28).
3. That he will drive out their enemies “by little and little” (Exo 23:30), not ceasing until he has destroyed them (Exo 23:23).
4. That he will give them the entire country between the Red Sea and the Mediterranean on the one hand, the Desert and the Euphrates on the other (Exo 23:31). And
5. That he will bless their sustenance, avert sickness from them, cause them to multiply, and prolong their days upon earth (Exo 23:25, Exo 23:26). At the same time, all these promisesexcept the firstare made conditional. If they will “beware” of the angel and “obey his voice,” then he will drive their enemies out (Exo 23:22, Exo 23:23): if they will serve Jehovah, and destroy the idols of the nations, then he will multiply them, and give them health and long life (Exo 23:24-26), and “set their bounds from the Red Sea even unto the Sea of the Philistines, and from the desert unto the river” (Exo 23:31). So far as they fall short of their duties, is he entitled to fall short of his promises. A reciprocity is established. Unless they keep their engagements, he is not bound to keep his. Though the negative side is not entered upon, this is sufficiently clear. None of the promises, except the promise to send the angel, is absolute. Their realisation depends on a strict and hearty obedience.
Exo 23:20
Behold, I send a messenger before thee. Jewish commentators regard the messenger as Moses, who, no doubt, was a specially commissioned ambassador for God, and who might, therefore, well be termed God’s messenger. But the expressions”He will not pardon your transgressions,” and “My name is in him,” are too high for Moses. An angel must be intendedprobably “the Angel of the Covenant,”whom the best expositors identify with the Second Person of the Trinity, the Ever-Blessed Son of God. To keep thee in the way is not simply “to guide thee through the wilderness, and prevent thee from geographical error,” but to keep thee altogether in the right path. s, to guard thy going out and thy coming m, to prevent thee from falling into any kind of wrong conduct. The place which I have prepared is not merely Palestine, but that place of which Palestine is the typeviz; Heaven. Compare Joh 14:2 :”I go to prepare a place for you.”
Exo 23:21
Provoke him not. On the disobedience of the Israelites to this precept, see Num 14:11; Psa 78:17, Psa 78:40, Psa 78:56, etc. My name is in him. God’s honour he will not give to another. He does not set His Name in a man. The angel, in whom was God’s Blame, must have been co-equal with Godone of the Persons of the Blessed Trinity.
Exo 23:22
If thou shalt indeed obey his voice, and do all that I speak. The change of persons in the latter clause”all that I speak,” instead of “all that he speaks”implies the doctrine of the perienchoresis or circuminsessio, that God the Father is in the Son and the Spirit, as they are in him. An adversary to thy adversaries. Rather “an affiictor of thy affiictors.”
Exo 23:23
The Amorites, and the Hittites, etc. The nations of Canaan proper, to whom the Gergashites are sometimes added. See the comment on 2Sa 3:8. I will cut them off. Or “cut them down,” i.e; destroy them from being any longer nations, but not exterminate them, as is generally supposed. David had a “Hittite” among his “mighty men” (2Sa 23:39), and was on friendly terms with Araunah the “Jebusite” (2Sa 24:18-24).
Exo 23:24
Thou shalt not bow down to their gods, nor serve them, nor do after their works. It is always to be borne in mind that with the idolatries of the heathen were connected “works of darkness,” which it is shameful even to speak of. The rites of Baal and Ashtoreth, of Chemosh, Molech, Rimmon, and the other Canaanite and Syrian deities were at once defiled by the abomination of human sacrifices, and polluted with the still more debasing evil of religious impurity. “The sacrifice offered to Ashtoreth,” says Dr. Dollinger, “consisted in the prostitution of women: the women submitted themselves to the visitors of the feast, in the temple of the goddess or the adjoining precinct. A legend told of Astarte (Ashtoreth) having prostituted herself in Tyre for ten years: and in many places matrons, as well as maidens, consecrated themselves for a length of time, or on the festivals of the goddess, with a view of propitiating her, or earning her favour as hieroduli of unchastity In this way they went so far at last as to contemplate the abominations of unnatural lust as a homage rendered to the deity, and to exalt it into a regular cultus. The worship of the goddess at Aphaca in Lebanon was specially notorious in this respect. The temple in a solitary situation was, as Eusebius tells us, a place of evil-doing for such as chose to ruin their bodies in scandalous ways Criminal intercourse with women, impurity, shameful and degrading deeds, were practised in the temple, where there was no custom and no law, and no honourable or decent human being could be found.” Thou shalt utterly overthrow them. The heathen gods are identified with their images. These were to be torn from their bases, overthrown, and rolled in the dust for greater contempt and ignominy. They were then to be broken up and burnt, till the gold and the silver with which they were overlaid was calcined and could be stamped to powder. Nothing was to be spared that had been degraded by idolatry, either for its beauty or its elaborate workmanship, or its value. All was hateful to God, and was to be destroyed.
Exo 23:25
He shall bless thy bread and thy water. If the Israelites were exact in their obedience, and destroyed the idols, and served God only, then he promised to bless “their bread and their water”the food, i.e; whether meat or drink, on which they subsisted, and to give them vigorous health, free from sickness of any kind, which he pledged himself to take away from the midst of them. Though Christians have no such special pledge, there is, no doubt, that virtuous and godly living would greatly conduce to health, and take away half the sicknesses from which men suffer, even at the present day.
Exo 23:26
There shall nothing out their young, nor be barren in thy land. This blessing could not have followed upon godly living in the way of natural sequence, but only by Divine favor and providential care. It would have rendered them rich in flocks and herds beyond any other nation. The number of thy days I will fulfil. There shall be no premature deaths. All, both men and women, shall reach the term allotted to man, and die in a good old age, having fulfilled their time. Godly living, persisted in for several generations, might, perhaps, produce this result.
Exo 23:27
I will send my fear before thee. The fear which fell upon the nations is seen first in the case of Balak and the Moabites. “Moab was sore aft-aid of the people, because they were many” (Num 22:3). Later it is spoken of by Rahab as general (Jos 2:9, Jos 2:11). A very signal indication of the alarm felt is given in the history of the Gibeonites (Jos 9:3, Jos 9:27). I will make all thine enemies turn their backs unto thee. For the fulfilment of this promise see Num 21:3, Num 21:24, Num 21:35; Num 31:7; Jos 8:20-24; Jos 10:10, etc. Had their obedience been more complete, the power of the Canaanitish nations would have been more thoroughly broken, and the sufferings and servitudes related in the Book of Judges would not have had to be endured.
Exo 23:28
And I will send hornets before thee. This is scarcely to be taken literally, since no actual plague of hornets is mentioned in the historical narrative. “Hornets” here, and in Deu 7:20; Jos 24:12, are probably plagues or troubles of any kind, divinely sent to break the power of the heathen nations, and render them an easier prey to the Israelites, when they made their invasion. Possibly, the main “hornets” were the Egyptians, who, under Rameses III; successfully invaded Palestine about the time of Israel’s sojourn in the wilderness, and weakened the power of the Hittites (Khita). The Hivite, the Canaanite, and the Hittite. By a common figure of speech, a part is put {or the wholethree nations for seven. The three names seem to be taken at random, but include the two nations of most powerthe Canaanites and the Hittites.
Exo 23:29
I will not drive them out from before thee in one year. The Divine action is for the most part “slack, as men count slackness”it is not hasty, spasmodic, precipitate, as human action is too often. Men are impatient; God is strangely, wonderfully patient. He would not drive out the Canaanitish nations all at once
1. Lest the land should become desolate, there being an insufficient population to keep down the weeds and maintain the tillage; and
2. Lest the beast of the field should multiply so as to become a danger to the new-comers. It is related that when the kingdom of Samaria was depopulated by the removal of the Ten Tribes, there was a great increase of lions, which preyed upon the scanty remnant left (2Ki 17:25). Even in France, after the Franco-German war, it was found that in many districts wolves increased. A third reason why the nations were not subdued all at once, not mentioned here, is touched in Jdg 2:21-23“The Lord left those nations, without driving them out hastily, that through them he might prove Israel, whether they would keep the way of the Lord to walk therein, or not.”
Exo 23:31
And I will set thy bounds from the Red Sea even unto the sea of the Philistines. This passage by itself would be sufficient to confute Dr. Brugsch’s notion, that the Yam Suph (or “Red Sea” of our translators) is the Lake Serbonis, which is a part of the Mediterranean or “Sea of the Philistines,” and cannot stand in contrast with it. The “Sea of the Philistines” and the “Red Sea” mark the boundaries of the Holy Land East and West, as the “Desert” and the “River” (Euphrates) do its boundaries North and South. That Moses here lays down those wide limits which were only reached 400 years later, in the time of David and Solomon, and were then speedily lost, can surprise no one who believes in the prophetic gift, and regards Moses as one of the greatest of the Prophets. The tract marked out by these limits had been already promised to Abraham (Gen 15:18). Its possession by Solomon is distinctly recorded in 1Ki 4:21, 1Ki 4:24; 2Ch 9:26. As Solomon was “a man of peace,” we must ascribe the acquisition of this wide empire to David. (Compare 2Sa 8:3-14; 2Sa 10:6-19.) The river (han–nahar) is in the Pentateuch always the Euphrates. The Nile is ha-y’or. A powerful kingdom established in Syria is almost sure to extend its influence to the Euphrates. I will deliver the inhabitants of the land into your hand. Compare Jos 21:44, for the first fulfilment of this prophecy. Its complete fulfilment was reserved for the time of David. Thou shalt drive them out. The mass of the Canaanites were no doubt “driven out” rather than exterminated. They retired northwards, and gave strength to the great Hittite kingdom which was for many centuries a formidable antagomst of the Egyptian and Assyrian empties.
HOMILETICS
Exo 23:20-31
God’s promises sometimes absolute, but for the most part contingent on obedience.
“Behold, I send an angel before thee.” Here was a positive promise. An angel, a guide, a protector, would go before them throughout their wanderings in the wilderness, and lead them into the promised landlead, at any rate, some remnant of them, out of which God would make a great nation. Thus much was certain. God’s word to give his descendants the land of Canaan was pledged to Abraham, and he would not go back from it. They should reach Canaan, and an angel should lead them; but the rest was all more or less uncertain. If they indeed obeyed God, and did as he commanded, then he would be an enemy to their enemies, and give them full possession of the land of promise. If they truly served Jehovah, and not idols, then he would grant them health and long life, and other temporal blessings. And so it is with Christians. God gives absolutely certain blessings to all whom he accepts into covenant with him; but the greater part of the blessings which he has promised are contingent on their behaviour.
I. BLESSINGS PROMISED TO CHRISTIANS ABSOLUTELY.
1. A Divine guide is promised to all. The Holy Spirit, speaking in men’s hearts, directing and enlightening their conscience, tells them continually how they ought to walk, points cut the way, offers his guidance, nay, presses it on them, and seeks to lead them to heaven. The guide is more than an angelGod’s holy name is in him. Nor does he guide only. He supports the footsteps, strengthens, sustains, comforts men.
2. Membership in Christ is promised. “I am the vine; ye are the branches.” “Abide in me.” We are as branches cut out of a wild olive, which have been grafted, contrary to nature, into a good olive-tree, to partake of its root and fatness (Rom 11:17-24). We are “made members of Christ,” for the most part, in our infancy, without effort or merit of our own, by God’s great mercy.
II. BLESSINGS WHICH ARE CONTINGENT ON OUR OBEDIENCE.
1. The answer of a good conscience towards Goda great blessing can only, by the very nature of the case, belong to those who have striven always to be obedient, and have served the Lord from their youth.
2. Growth in grace is granted only to such as cherish and follow the grace already vouchsafed them.
3. Spiritual wisdom and understanding are attained by none but those who, having “done the will of God, know of the doctrine” (Joh 7:17).
4. Assistance against spiritual enemies is contingent on our doing our best to resist them.
5. Length of days is attached as a special blessing to obedience to parents (Eph 6:2, Eph 6:3). Finally, and above all
6. The eternal bliss which is promised us in another world is conditional upon our “patient continuance in well-doing” in this. We must” so run that we may obtain.” Most of those to whom the promises of Exo 23:1-33. were addressed, forfeited them by their misconduct, and did not enter Canaan. They “lusted,” they became “idolaters,” they “tempted God,” they “committed fornication,” they “murmured”and the result was that they “were overthrown in the wilderness.” And “all these things happened unto them for ensamples, and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come. Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall” (1Co 10:11, 1Co 10:12).
HOMILIES BY J. ORR
Exo 23:20-33
Promises and warnings.
These conclude the Book of the Covenant.
I. PROMISES.
1. An angel guide (Exo 23:20-23). But this angel was no ordinary or created angel. He is repeatedly identified with Jehovah himself. God’s “name”his essential naturewas in him. He is one with Jehovah, yet distinct from himno mere personification, but a real hypostasis. See the careful treatment of “the doctrine of the Angel of the Lord,” in Oehler’s “Old Testament Theology,” vol. 1. pp. 188-196 (Eng. trans.). We view the “angel” as the pro-incarnate LogosChrist in the Old Testament. Israel’s guide was the Son of Godthe same Divine Person who is now conducting “many sons unto glory,” and who is become” the author of eternal salvation to all them that obey him” (Heb 2:10; Heb 5:9).
2. Defence against enemies (Exo 23:22). If Israel obeyed God’s voice, and did all that God spake, their enemies would be reckoned his enemies, and their adversaries his adversaries. And “if God be for us, who can be against us?” (Rom 8:31).
3. Aid in the conquest of Canaan (Exo 23:23, Exo 23:27-31). Apply throughout to the spiritual warfare of the individual and of the Church.
(1) The way for the conquest would be prepared. God would send his fear before the Israelites (Exo 23:27)would, as stated in Deuteronomy, put the dread of them, and the fear of them, upon the nations that were under the whole heaven (Deu 2:25; Deu 11:25; cf. Exo 15:15, Exo 15:16). There is a presentiment of defeat in the hearts of the enemies of God, especially when the Church is energetic and fearless in her work, which goes far to secure the victory for the latter. Something whispers to them that their “time is short” (1Co 7:29; Rev 12:12; cf. Mat 8:29). Moral forces are all on the side of the kingdom of God. They assist its friends, and operate to enervate and discourage its enemies. The Christian worker may rely on numerous invisible allies in men’s own hearts. Workings of conscience, stings of fear, dread of God, etc. God would also send hornets before the Israelites, to drive out the Canaanites from their strong castles (verse 28). To us there seems no good reason for taking this declaration otherwise than literally. If taken symbolically, the “hornets” are equivalent to the stings of fear, etc; above referred to. A veritable hornet warfare this, and one of great value to the Gospel cause. Taken literally, the “hornets” may be regarded as types of secret providential alliesof the co-operation of God in his providence, often by means of things insignificant in themselves, but working, under his secret direction, for the furtherance of his kingdom, and the defeat of those opposed to it. In a million unseen wayshow encouraging the reflection!Providence is thus aiding the work of those who fight under Christ’s captaincy.
(2) They would be prospered in battle (verse 27). The individual, in his warfare with the evil of his own heartthe Church, in her conflict with the evil of the worldenjoy a similar promise. If Christ inspires, if he, the captain of the Lord’s host, gives the signal to advance, victories are certain. However numerous and powerful our spiritual enemies, greater is he that is with us than they that are against us (1Jn 4:4).
(3) The conquest would be given by degrees. God would drive out their enemies before them, “little by little” (verse 30). The reason given is, “lest the land become desolate, and the beast of the field multiply against thee” (verse 27). The method was a wise one. It doubtless had its dangers. Remaining idolatry would tend to become a snare. The delay in the extirpation of the Canaanites had thus its side of trialit would act as a moral test. In other respects it was attended with advantage. It would make the conquest more thorough. It would enable the Israelites to consolidate, organise, and secure their possessions as they went along. It would prevent the multiplying of the beasts of the field. And quite analogous to this is God’s method of conducting us unto our spiritual inheritance. The law of “little by little” obtains here also. “Little by little” the believer gains the victory over evil in self, and the heart is sanctified. “Little by little” the world is conquered for Christ. In no other way is thorough conquest possible. Suppose, e.g; that, as the result of extraordinary shakings of the nations, a multitude of uninstructed tribes, peoples, communities, were suddenly thrown into the arms of Christendomeven supposing the conversions real, how difficult would it be to prevent mischiefs from arising! Compare the troubles of the Reformation Churches. Make the yet more extravagant supposition that by some supreme moral effortthe evil of our own hearts being suddenly aroused to intense activityit pleased God to give us the victory over the whole of this evil at once. How little could we do with such a victory when we had it! Thrown at once upon our own hands, how difficult it would be to know what to do with ourselves! Would not new foesfantastic conceitsspeedily arise from the ground of our yet undisciplined natures, to give us new troubles? The surest method is “little by little.” It is not good for any man to have more than he needsto have a greater victory than he can rightly use; e.g; a man who reads more books than he can mentally digest and assimilate; who has a larger estate than he can manage; who has more money than he can make a good use of. And yet the fact of evil still lurking in our hearts, and continuing in the world around us, exposes us to many perils. It acts as a moral test, and so indirectly conduces to the growth of holiness.
4. Material blessings (verses 25, 26). In the land to which he was conducting them, God would give the people of Israel abundance of food and water; would take away all sickness from their midst (cf. “I am the Lord that healeth thee.” Exo 15:26); would greatly bless their flocks and herds; and would lengthen out their days to the full term (cf. Deu 28:1-14). The blessings of the new covenant are predominantly spiritual (Eph 1:3). Yet even under it, “godliness is profitable unto all things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come” (1Ti 4:8). Godliness has a natural tendency to promote temporal well-being. So ample a measure of prosperity as that promised in the text could, however, only accrue from direct Divine blessing. The absolute form of the expression answers to the absoluteness of the requirement”Obey my voice, and do all that I speak” (verse 31). Falling short of the ideal obedience, Israel fell short also of the ideal fulness of the blessing.
5. Expansion of bounds (verse 31). Only once or twice was this maximum of possession touched by Israel. Failure in the fulfilment of the condition kept back fulfilment of the promise. The Church’s destiny is to possess the whole earth (Psa 2:8).
II. WARNINGS. If these glorious promises are to be fulfilled to Israel, they must obey the voice of God and of his angel. Let them beware, therefore,
1. Of provoking the angel (verse 21). God’s name was in him, and he would not pardon their transgressions. That is, he would not take a light view of their sins, but would strictly mark them, and severely punish them. He was not a Being to be trifled with. If his wrath against them were kindled but a little, they would perish from the way (Psa 2:12). He was one with Jehovah in his burning zeal for holiness, and in his determination not to clear the guilty. See below. The Gospel is not wanting in its similar side of sternness. There is a “wrath of the Lamb” (Rev 6:17). There is a “judgment” which “begins at the house of God” (1Pe 4:17). There is the stem word”It shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people” (Act 3:23). Cf. also Heb 2:2, Heb 2:3; Heb 10:26-39; Heb 12:25.
2. They must not serve other gods (Heb 12:24). Conversely, they were utterly to overthrow the idol gods, and to break down their images. “Where Jesus comes, he comes to reign.” No rival will be tolerated alongside of him. We cannot serve
(1) God and Mammon (Mat 6:24).
(2) God and fashion (1Jn 2:15-18).
(3) God and our own lusts (2Pe 1:4; 2Pe 2:20, 2Pe 2:21).
(4) God and human glory (Joh 5:44).
The worship of Jehovah and that of any of the world’s idols will not amalgamate. See reflected in these commands the principles which are to regulate the relation of God’s servants at this hour to the world and to its evil
(1) No toleration of it (Mat 5:29, Mat 5:30).
(2) No communion with it (2Co 6:14-18; Eph 5:3, Eph 5:11).
(3) Unceasing war against it (2Co 10:4; Col 3:5).
3. They must make no league with the Canaanites (verse 32). The lesson taught is, that believers are to seek their friendships, their alliances, their consorts, etc; elsewhere than among the ungodly. We are not only to keep out of harm’s way, and avoid occasions of sin, but we are to labour to remove from our midst entirely what experience proves to be an incurable snare.J.O.
Exo 23:21
The angel provoked.
The language in this passage is very strong, and may occasion difficulty. “Provoke him not, for he will not pardon your transgressions; for my name is in him.” If this angel is the Son of God, he who afterwards became incarnate for man’s salvation, and who died to procure forgiveness for us, it startles us to hear of him”he will not pardon your transgressions.” When we think, too, on what God’s name importson the revelation subsequently made of it,”The Lord, the Lord God, merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin,” etc; it astonishes us to learn that this angel, in whom the name is, will not pardon Israel’s sin. The history, also, may be thought to create difficulties. For, undeniably, the Israelites were often pardoned. They were, in truth, continually being pardoned; for, “stiff-necked” as they were, they could not have stood for a day in their covenant, had not God’s mercy been constantly extended to them. It is plain, therefore, from the nature of the case, that the expression is not to be taken absolutely; the sense in which it is to be understood well deserves investigation.
I. IN WHAT SENSE TRUE OF ISRAEL. The general meaning is, as stated above, that the angel would not look lightly on their offences, would not pass them over, but would severely punish them. This accorded with the constitution under which they were placed, to which it belonged, that “every transgression and disobedience” should “receive a just recompense of reward” (Heb 2:2). The context suggests, or admits of, the following qualifications
1. The statement refers, it will be observed, to what the angel will do when “provoked”to what will happen when his wrath is “kindled” against Israel (cf. Psa 78:21, Psa 78:49, Psa 78:50, Psa 78:59, etc.). But how long did this Divine conductor bear with Israel before permitting his wrath to be thus kindled against them! He was “slow to anger.” What pardon was implied in his very long-suffering!
2. The transgressions alluded to are not ordinary offencesnot the sins of infirmity and short-coming which mark the lives even of the bestbut such outstanding acts of transgression as are mentioned in the contextfundamental breaches of the covenant. These were the sins which would specially provoke the angel (cf. Deu 32:5, Deu 32:15-28). They would be “surely” punished.
3. The general assertion that transgressions will not be pardoned does not imply that there is no room left for intercession and repentance; that, e.g; an alteration in the spiritual conditions might not procure, if not remission, at least a sensible alleviation of the penalty; that prayer, proceeding from a contrite heart, might not obtain the removal of affliction, or the restoration of the penitent to Divine favour. Great severity, nevertheless, attaches to this announcement. The history is the best commentary upon it. It is literally true that, after the ratification of the covenant at Sinai, no serious transgression of Israel was allowed to go unpunished. In no case did even repentance avail wholly to avert chastisement. At most, the penalty was lightened, or shortened in duration. Thus, on the occasion of the sin of the golden calf, the earnest intercession of Moses availed to save the people from destruction, and obtained from God the promise that he would still go with them; but it did not save the idolaters from being smitten with the sword of Levi (Exo 32:28), or prevent the Lord from still “plaguing” the people “because they made the calf, which Aaron made” (Exo 32:35). Cf. later instances, e.g; Nadab and Abihu (Lev 10:1-8); the murmuring at Taberah (Num 11:1-3); the lusting at Kibroth-hattaavah (Num 11:4-35); the rebellion at Kadesh, punished by the rejection of that whole generation (Num 13:1-33; Num 14:1-45.); the revolt of Korah (Num 16:1-50; Num 17:1-13.); the sin at Meribah, when even Moses forfeited his right to enter the land of promise (Num 20:1-13); the later murmuring, when the people were punished by fiery serpents (Num 21:7-9); the idolatry and fornication of Baal-peor (Num 25:1-18.). This severity is the more remarkable when we remember how leniently God dealt with the people before the ratification of the covenant with Sinai. “All murmurings before they came to Sinai were passed over, or merely rebuked; all murmurings and rebellions after Sinai bring down punishment and death” (Kitto). We trace the same principle of dealing through the whole history of the Old Testament. David, e.g; is personally forgiven for his sin of adultery; but the temporal penalty is not remitted (2Sa 12:1-31.). He is punished on a later occasion for numbering the people, and has the choice given him of three evils; and this, notwithstanding his sincere repentance (2Sa 24:1-25.). So Manasseh is said to have “filled Jerusalem with innocent blood, which the Lord would not pardon” (2Ki 24:5). The congruity of this strict dealing with a dispensation of law is sufficiently obvious; and, in the light of the examples quoted, the language of the text will not be felt to be too strong.
II. HOW FAR TRUE UNDER THE GOSPEL. The Gospel, as befits its nature, places in the forefront, not the declaration that God will not pardon sin, but the announcement of the terms on which he will pardon. It is a declaration of mercy to those who are viewed as already under wraththe law having accomplished its design of convincing men of sin. The terms, however, on which the Gospel proposes to grant forgiveness are of such a nature as fully to establish the truth underlying this text; viz; that God, as a God of holiness, will not clear the guilty (cf. Exo 34:7).
1. This truth is the presupposition of the Gospel Else whence its demand for atonement? Why is sin not simply condonednot simply waived aside as something admitting of unconditional pardon? In view of the fact that the Gospel absolutely refuses pardon save on the ground of “the shedding of blood,” it certainly cannot be accused of making light of guilt, or of ignoring its relations to justice. God remains the just God, even while he is the Saviour (Rom 3:26). Stated otherwise, it is on the ground of the principle in the text, that a Gospel is needed. “The wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men” (Rom 1:18). No clearing of the guilty here. The principle in question is the general principle of God’s moral administration (Rom 2:6-12).
2. This truth still applies in its rigour to those who “disobey” the Gospel. For these there is no pardon. There remains for them only judgment and fiery indignation (Heb 10:27). So solemn is the truth that “there is none other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved” (Act 4:12).
3. Even believers, notwithstanding that they receive spiritual pardon, must not expect to escape temporal chastisements, appropriate to their offences. So far as sin’s penalties are bound up with natural law it is certain that they will not escape them. They may be spiritually pardoned, yet, as respects the temporal penalty, may, like Esau, find no place for repentance, though they seek it carefully with tears (Heb 12:17). God alone is judge of how far, and with what measure of benefit to the individual, and of glory to himself, he can remit temporal chastisements (Exo 33:19). Respect will doubtless be had to the circumstances under which the sin was committed, to the depth and sincerity of the repentance, to the publicity of the scandal (cf. 2Sa 12:14), to the moral benefit likely to accrue, etc.
4. Hypocritical professors of Christ’s name will be dealt with according to this rule. They will be punished with special severity (Mat 24:51).
III. HOW RECONCILABLE WITH GOD‘S REVEALED ATTRIBUTE OF MERCY. Our thoughts revert to the revelation of God’s name in ch. 34:6, 7. The attributes of mercy occupy the foreground, yet not to the denial of the sternness of holiness, which, in the latter clauses, finds distinct expression. “Forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers,” etc. God’s mercy to Israel was exhibited compatibly with what has been seen to be the meaning of the text
(1) In his great long-suffering in bearing with their provocations.
(2) In his turning aside the fierceness of his anger, in answer to earnest intercession, or when signs were shown of repentance.
(3) In limiting the measure of his wratheither by exchanging a severer penalty for a lighter one, or by shortening the time of infliction. Cf. Psa 78:38“But he, being full of compassion, forgave their iniquity, and destroyed them not, yea, many a time turned he his anger away and did not stir up all his wrath. For he remembered that they were but flesh,” etc.
(4) In granting spiritual pardons, even when temporal penalties were not revoked.
(5) In restoring the penitent to favour, after punishment had taken effect in inducing contrition.
(6) In keeping covenant with the children, even when rejecting the fathers.
(7) The full reconciliation is seen in the Gospel, in the fact of the atonement.J.O.
HOMILIES BY D. YOUNG
Exo 23:20-23
The angel of the covenant.
Certain of the matters on which Jehovah had been speaking immediately before the promise of the angel, assumed that the people would assuredly come to dwell in a land very different from that in which they were now sojourning. God had done so much to call forth faith that, in spite of all ugly symptoms of unbelief and murmuring, he could only go on speaking as if the faith would become a regular habit steadily finding deeper root in the Israelite heart. Thus we find him giving rules for the cultivation of cornlands, vineyards and oliveyards into which they had not yet come; rules for the harvest feast and a feast of ingathering of all the fruits, when as yet there was no indication of such an ingathering being possible. It was fitting, therefore, that Jehovah should follow up his statement of regulations by speaking confidently of the people’s entrance into the land where the regulations were to be observed. That land was not yet in sight. So far, indeed, they had been travelling away from it rather than towards it, and the district in which they now were was suggestive of anything but cornlands, oliveyards and vineyards.
I. THERE IS THE DISTINCT ASSURANCE OF SUffiCIENT GUIDANCE. The reference here is presumably to that glory-cloud in which God was to manifest his presence right onward till Canaan was reached. That cloud was to be unintermitting and unmistakable in its guiding efficiency. Whatever perplexities might come to a devout and attentive Israelite because of other things, no perplexities were possible as to the way in which he should go. He might wonder why God led him in such a way; but that it was really God’s way he need not have any doubt whatever. Thus we see how lovingly God ever deals with the ignorance of his people. What is necessary for them to know is made as plain as the necessity demands. They did not need any discussions and counsels among themselves, any balancing of the pros and cons which might determine them to one path rather than another. God perfectly knew the way and the needs and dangers of the way. He himself is never in doubt as to what his people should do. He is no blind leader of the blind. He was taking Israel into the land which he bad prepared, and the way was prepared as much as the destination. Whatever uncertainty and vacillation there may be about the Christian life comes not from him who leads, but from those who follow. Indeed, our very vacillation becomes more conspicuous as we contrast it with the steady undeviating path marked out by our leader. Compare the announcement that is made concerning the angel here with the demand of Jesus upon his disciples”Follow me.”
II. THERE IS THE INDICATED PERIL OF NEGLECTING THAT GUIDANCE, Not to follow the true guide, of course, means all the loss, pain and destruction that come from getting into false ways. But such consequences are not dwelt upon here. The thoughts of the people are rather directed to the sin they would commit by neglecting the intimations of the angel. “My name is in him.” It was not a mere creature of Jehovah, which he used for an index. There was in the guiding-cloud a peculiar manifestation of Jehovah himself, whom the people would neglect if in a fit of self-will they were to turn away and follow the superficial intimations of their earthly surroundings. The great peril was that of coming under the wrath of God because of disobedience. It was only too easy to become used even to the presence of a miraculous cloud. The after conduct of the people shows that the tone of warning here adopted was a wise tone. They were likely to forget how much the presence of the angel demanded from them. That angel was there not only in mercy but in authority. To neglect him was to offend him. And because the cloud, in the ordinary circumstances of it, had nothing to terrify, because the penal consequences of neglecting it did not lie on the surface, it was needful to remind the people how much of holy wrath with unbelief and self-reliance lay within this messenger from God. The negligent Israelite needed to be solemnly assured that there was something even worse than mere failure to attain the earthly Canaan. The foreshadowing is here given of that dreadful doom which fell upon Israel shortly after and kept them in the wilderness for forty years. God can turn all the wanderings of the disobedient into a species of imprisomnent and punishment from himself.
III. THERE IS A MOST INSTRUCTIVE INTIMATION AS TO THE RESULTS OF ACCEPTING THAT GUIDANCE. The very results show how indispensable the guidance is. Enemies and adversaries are in front, and God makes no concealment of the fact. If Israel has had already to deal with Amalekites in the comparative barrenness of the Sinaitic peninsula, what may not be expected when the confines of the fertile promised land are reached? That which is to be a good land to Israel, has long been a good land to the nations at present dwelling in it. But though these enemies lie in front,enemies fighting with all the valour of desperation for their homes and their property,yet all will prove victorious for Israel, if only Israel acts obediently towards God’s angel. The enemies of God’s people are not great or little in themselves. That which is great at one time may become little at another, and that which is little, great; and all because of the fluctuations in the spirit of faith. In Exo 17:1-16. we read of Amalekites discomfited and Jehovah threatening utterly to put out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven. But turn to Num 14:1-45. and a very different story has to be told of how the Amalekites smote and discomfited the children of Israel. If we would be strong for every conflict and assured of every victory, it must be by a calm looking towards the will of God. The will of God tells the way of God; and when we meet our enemies in that way all their preparations avail them nothing.Y.
Exo 23:24-33
The prospect in the promised land.
I. THE TREATMENT OF ITS FORMER OCCUPANTS.
1. The avoidance of their idolatries. God cautions us against those dangers which we are most likely to overlook. When once the Israelites entered the promised land and were fairly settled there, they would show no lack of energy and discrimination in doing their best to guard their temporal possessions. But the most serious dangers are those against which walled cities and great armies are no defence. God could easily cut off the idolaters and put Israel in their place; but what about the idolatries? Whether these should also be expelled would depend upon the guard which God’s people kept over their own hearts. It is very noticeable that as God takes the thoughts of his people forward to their future habitation, he begins with a solemn caution against idolatry and closes with the same. There is thus a kind of correspondence with the order occupied in the Ten Commandments by those against polytheism and image-worship. It was not possible to make mention too often of the subtle perils which lay in the Canaanitish gods.
2. Jehovah‘s complete defeat and expulsion of the former inhabitants. This is indicated in a variety of impressive ways. Only let his people be faithful to him, and Jehovah will go before them as a dread to all who come in contact with them. Evidently God would have his people understand that nothing was to be feared from the very greatest external resources available against them. Let enemies threaten and unite and seek allies far and wide. The greater their efforts, the more signal will be their defeat. We must ever believe that our true strength is in God. It was never intended that Israel should be looked on as a mighty military power. Rather it should be a cause of astonishment among the nations that it was able to stand against all the resources gathered against it. Whenever the Israelites began to trust in themselves and think they were able to awe their enemies, then they were lost. God only can terrify with the terror that lasts. We may confidently leave him to scatter confusion among those whom we, with all our demonstrations, are unable to impress.
3. The injunction to enter into no covenant with the former inhabitants. He who had been expelled by nothing less than an awful Divine force was not to be allowed to return under pretence of a peaceful submission. Peace, concord, mutual helpwe may say God would ever have these between man and man, nation and nationbut at the same time we constantly get the warning against crying, peace! peace! when there is no peace. If a foreigner came forsaking his idolatries, there was an appointed way for him into Israel, and a welcome to be cordially given. But by no stretching of charity could it be made attainable for the idolater to settle down side by side with the worshipper and servant of Jehovah.
II. THE LARGE POSITIVE BLESSINGS TO COME UPON ISRAEL. Tile expulsion and permanent exclusion of the former inhabitants, much as they are insisted on, were but the negative condition, the clearing of the ground, so as to bless Israel with something positive. Very fittingly does God blend together the mention of these positive blessings with cautions and warnings as to the treatment of the former occupants. As the blessings were considered, the wisdom of the cautions would appear; and as the cautions were considered, so earnest and express, the greatness of the blessings would appear. God presents himself here as one very solicitous to make the land not only a good land for his people, but one cherished so as to make the best of its advantages. For this purpose he begins with a kind of graduated expulsion of the former inhabitants. Instead of expelling them by a sudden overwhelming blow, he rather does it little by little. The enemies of Israel were not to be multiplied needlessly by exposing their land to wild beasts; and the human enemies, contrary to their own designs and desires, were to leave for Israel the fruit of their own industries. If the Israelites had been asked which would be better,to cast out their enemies at once or by a gradual process, they would probably have replied, “at once.” God will ever adopt the right plan to secure the most of blessing for his people. Thus we may learn a lesson with regard to the expulsion of evil still. God is still driving out evil little by little, and in so doing he is building up good little by little. Thus the Israelites were to get a gradual and secure settlement in the land; and then that settlement was to prove eminently profitable. Four great elements of prosperity are mentioned.
1. The blessing of the bread and the water. All that was connected with the obtaining of food and drink would be under God’s watchful providence. What are the bread and the water unless he blesses them? God can turn the most fertile of lands into a very proverb of barrenness. Why, this very Canaan had been afflicted with famine. It was because for some reason the blessing of God had been withheld from the bread and the water that the fathers of Israel had found their way into Egypt.
2. The maintenance of health. This is put in the most expressive way by indicating it in the aspect of banished sickness. Disease is such a common sight to us, and presents itself in such varied forms, that in no way can God’s blessing of health be more emphatically revealed than by describing him as the one who healeth all our diseases. To a large extent this health was to be the consequence of blessing the bread and the water, giving by them, thus blessed, abundant and nutritious food.
3. The productiveness of animal life. In a perfectly obedient Israel there were to be no abortions, no barren wombs. It was just because there was disobedience in Israel that such cries as those of Hannah were heard (1Sa 1:11). Evidently all this normal generative efficacy largely depended on the blessing of the bread and water and the blessing of health. That any animal whatever, either human, or lower than human, should cast its young or be barren, was in itself a sort of disease.
4. The fulfilling of the days. The hoary head, with its crown of glory is the appointed possession of God’s people. That so few obtained it only showed how much there was of imperfection in Israelite national life. These purposed blessings did not find their way into reality. The people were disobedient, unbelieving, self-regarding; and hence the seeds of blessing which assuredly God sowed among them either remained dead or struggled forth into a very imperfect life.Y.
HOMILIES BY G.A. GOODHART
Exo 23:20
Mine angel shall go before thee.
A prepared people have to be led into a prepared place (Exo 23:20). To lead them a guide is necessary, and God provides a guide.
I. THE GUIDE AND HIS OFFICE.
1. His nature and character.
(1) An angel, i.e; a Divine messenger; not merely a messenger of God’s appointment, but a messenger from God’s presence. Men may be empowered to act as angels; but naturally during his time of probation man is made “lower than the angels.” The angel guide is superhuman; he helps to direct affairs in this world, but his home is in another. The history certainly implies so much as this; and no theory save that which assumes the fact of such superhuman guidance can adequately account for the marvellous coincidences through which progress was ensured. The enthusiasm of Moses might fire a people, but it is not enough to fire them; they must be fired at the right moment, and with a definite aim. Some superhuman agent, who could view time from the standpoint of eternity and direct men’s actions in accordance with the real necessities of the position, there must have been. [Cf. a game of chess played, as sometimes in India, with living pieces. Success does not depend so much on the strength of the armies on the board as on the skill of the players off the board, who view the whole position from above.] History cannot be explained if we ignore the unseen hand which directs and controls the movements of the actors.
(2) “My name is in him.” The Divine guide must share the Divine character. God’s deputy must be God-like. As viewing things from the standpoint of eternity, he is able to guide through the maze of time; but to view things from the standpoint of eternity he must be a sharer in the life of eternity, the eternal name must be so written on his heart that his guidance may be free from all suspicion of caprice.
2. His office.
(1) To keep in the way. The guide must be a guardian as well. Guides who forget the dangers of the way, intent only on reaching their destination, may push on to the goal themselves, yet lose their charge before they reach it. God-commissioned guides are empowered also to keep and guard those who are given into their care (Joh 17:12).
(2) To bring to the prepared place. If the guide must be a guardian, the guardian must also be a guide. He must protect during the advance, but he must not protect at the expense of progress; his charge has to be brought through the wilderness, not to be maintained there behind barricades and bulwarks. The people of Jehovah are led by the minister of Jehovah, who secures their entrance into the place prepared, if only they will accept his guidance. A place is prepared for us, as for Israel (Joh 14:2). A guide also is given us (Joh 14:16-18). We must not forget his twofold office, to keep in the way and to insist upon our moving forward.
II. THOSE GUIDED AND THEIR DUTIES. The angel guide has to direct men; that he may direct them, they must acknowledge his authority. Two things necessary:
1. Reverence. The disposition of the heart which cannot but show itself in the conduct. Assured that the angel bore the Divine name, men must beware of him, assured that he had the right to speak with authority. A command from such a guide needed no reasons to enforce it.
2. Obedience.
(1) Positive. His commands must be obeyed. There must be no delay, no shrinking back.
(2) Negative. There must be no attempt to evade their real fulfilment by a merely apparent and formal compliance. True obedience is obedience of the spirit as well as of the letter; mere literal obedience may consist with actual provocation. Remembering who our guide is, we must remember also that the like duties are required of us in relation to him. To resist the Spirit is to grieve him, and grieving may eventually quench his power with us; one more step seals our destruction”He that blasphemeth the Spirit of God” sins the unpardonable sin.
III. BLESSINGS CONSEQUENT ON FULFILMENT OF DUTIES. We may call them temporal and eternal; blessings of the pilgrimage and blessings of the home. By the way, guarded by our guide, no enemy has power to hurt us; at the last we reach our home, to find there eternal health and happiness.
Concluding question.What is our relation towards the guide whom God has given us? (Heb 2:2-3.)G.
HOMILIES BY H.T. ROBJOHNS
Exo 23:20-33
The Mediatorial Guide.
“Behold I send an angel before thee,” etc. (Exo 23:20). [We omit from homiletic treatment Ex 20:22-23:19, containing a large amount of minute legislation; but if any one for special reason wishes to deal with any of these laws, he will find a careful and exhaustive analysis in Lunge on “Exodus.” Most of them have strict and sole reference to the Hebrew Commonwealth, and are obsolete for the Christian.] This passage contains a series of promises, which all centre in an august personage, called here an “angel.” That this is so will determine the character of our exposition, and the Christian uses of it.
I. THE ANGEL. None other than the “Angel of Jehovah,” the Angel-God of the Old Testament, i.e; the Lord Jesus Christ. Reference is here made to those many epiphanies, which preceded the Great Epiphany of the incarnation. That these were appearances of the Lord Jesus may be argued:
1. It seems reasonable that there should be anticipations of the incarnation. True, we could not prophesy them beforehand; but when they do take place, they commend themselves to our reason. It seems in a sense natural, that He, who was coming to dwell here, should once and again “come town to deliver.”
2. The history of the appearance of the angel shows:
(1) That he was Divine.
(i.) Perfection implied in the authority he wields, and the promises he gives.
(ii.) Swears by himself.
(iii.) The object of worship.
(iv.) Subject of Divine names and attributes.
(2) And yet there is that which differentiates Him from the Eternal Father. All this accords with the doctrine of the Trinity; and that the angel was Christ the Lord.
II. HIS OFFICE. We assume now that the angel was the Lord Jesus; that what he was to the ancient Church he is now. He is ever presentsometimes unseenoften recognised. His office as here set forth is that of:
1. A Leader. He led Israel, mainly by the pillar of cloud; but not in such a way as to dispense with Israel’s action. The Lord acts, but never so as to swamp our individuality. It was for Israel:
(1) To watch the cloud:
(2) To exercise their own judgment on minor matters. See Num 10:31. Our danger is to rely exclusively on our own judgment, and not to look for the waving of That Hand.
2. A Sentinel. “To keep in the way” in the double sense;
(1) To hold us in the path, and
(2) to defend us on that path. The practical truth here is, that Christ’s keeping is not absolute or independent of our will and action. He watches, that we may watch. This vital practical truth seems to us to be well illustrated by Swedenborg’s doctrine of the “Proprium;” which is well exhibited in “Outlines of the Religion and Philosophy of Swedenborg” by Dr. Parsons. Num 8:3. Moral magistracy. “He will not pardon your transgressions, for my name is in Him”what can this mean? There is reference here to the moral magistracy exercised over us, on our pilgrim way, noting transgression, visiting for it, chastising, Chastening, with a view to ultimate removal. Appeal to life for evidence of the reality of that corrective jurisdiction.
III. OUR DUTY.
1. Loyalty to God, Num 8:25.
2. Recognition of his representative; i.e; the angel; i.e; the Lord Jesus.
3. Obedience; i.e; to the leader, etc. (Num 8:21, Num 8:22.) N.B. “If thou shalt indeed obey His voice, and do all that I speak.” Mark how God identifies himself with the angel.
4. Avoidance of fellowship and complicity with evil (verses 32, 33). Any intercourse for the Jew with the heathen was full of peril. It seems now to be assumed that no companionship for the Christian has any danger. This assumption false, as the tendency to worldliness and open sin shows.
5. Active antagonism to all Anti-theisms (v. 24). It will not do to be content with standing on the defensive. Has not the time now come to carry the war into the enemy’s camp?
IV. THE PROMISES. These cover really all the blessings consequent on a life of practical godliness. Thinking rather of our own position than of the literal meaning of the promises in relation to the life of Israel, they may be classified as follow:
1. God on our side (verses 22, 23).
2. Our daily provision blessed (verse 25). There shall be enough; but whatever there is shall have gladness with it.
3. Health (verse 25).
4. Wealth (verse 26).
5. Long life (verse 26).
6. Influence, before which even adversaries shall bend (verse 27).
7. Enlargement of power and of room for its exercise (v. 31).
8. In the bestowal of these blessings, our Father in heaven will show to us great considerateness (verses 29, 30).
9. Safe conduct to the promised rest (verse 20). Those who know the argument of Binney:”Is it possible to make the best of Both Worlds?” will well understand how, under what conditions, and with what limitations, blessings of this sortmainly secular in characterfall to the lot of the Lord’s redeemed.R
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary
Exo 23:1. Thou shalt not raise a false report, &c. There is an ambiguity in the word tissa, which signifies no less to spread false reports, than to give credit to them when spread. Houbigant prefers the latter sense (thou shalt not give ear to a false report); and for this reason, says he, that the meaning of the two clauses of this verse may be different: the first, providing that false reports may not be credited; the latter, that they may not be spread by an unrighteous testimony. The margin of our Bibles renders the word, receive a false report, which serves to shew the ambiguity of the original word. Perhaps the first clause may refer to the raising or countenancing private calumny; the latter, to the public attestation of such calumny in courts of justice; which appears the more probable, as the union here forbidden seems to imply a formal design for public injury: thou shalt not put thine hand with the wicked, i.e. thou shalt not associate and confederate with such.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
c.First form of the law of the political commonwealth
Exo 21:1 to Exo 23:33
a. Right of Personal Freedom (according to Bertheau, ten in number)
1Now these are the judgments [ordinances] which thou shalt set before them. 2If [when] thou buy [buyest] an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. 3If he came [come] in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were [be] married, then his wife shall go out with him. 4If his master have given [give] him a wife, and she have borne [bear] him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall be her masters, and he shall go out by himself. 5And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free: 6then his master shall bring him unto the judges [God]; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door-post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him foreExo Exo 21:7 And if [when] a man sell [selleth] his daughter to be a maid-servant, she shall not go out as the men-servants do. 8If she please not her master who hath betrothed her to himself,1 then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her. 9And if he have betrothed [betroth] her unto his son, he shall deal with her after the manner of daughters. 10If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage [marriage due] shall he not diminish. 11And if he do not these three unto her, then shall she go out free [for nothing], without money.
b. On Murder and Bodily Injuries. Sins against the Life of ones Neighbor. (Ten in number, according to Bertheau.)
12He that smiteth a man, so that he die [dieth], shall be surely put to death. 13And if a man lie not in wait, but God deliver him into his hand [make it happen14to his hand2]; then I will appoint thee a place whither he shall flee. But [And] if [when] a man come [cometh] presumptuously upon his neighbor, to slay him with guile; thou shalt take him from mine altar, that he may die. 15And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death. 16And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death. 17And he that curseth [revileth]3 his father, or his mother, shall surely be 18put to death. And if [when] men strive together, and one smite [smiteth] another [the other] with a stone, or with his fist, and he die [dieth] not, but keepeth his bed: 19If he rise again, and walk abroad upon his staff, then shall he that smote him be quit: only he shall pay for the loss of his time, and shall cause him to be 20thoroughly healed. And if [when] a man smite [smiteth] his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die [dieth] under his hand; he shall be surely punished. 21Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he Isaiah 22 his money. If [And when] men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her [depart], and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished [fined], according as the womans husband will [shall] lay upon him: 23and he shall pay as the judges determine.4 And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, 24Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25, 26Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. And if [when] a man smite [smiteth] the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it perish 27[and destroyeth it]: he shall let him go free for his eyes sake. And if he smite out his man-servants tooth, or his maid-servants tooth; he shall let him go free for his tooths sake.
c. Injuries resulting from Relations of Property. Through Property and of Property. Acts of Carelessness and Theft. (Ten, according to Bertheau.)
28If [And when] an ox gore [goreth] a man or a woman, that they die, then the ox shall be surely stoned, and his flesh shall not be eaten; but the owner of the ox shall be quit. 29But if the ox were [hath been] wont to push with his horn [to gore] in time past, and it hath been testified to his owner, and he hath not kept him in [keepeth him not in], but that he hath killed [and he killeth] a man or a woman; the ox shall be stoned, and his owner also shall be put to death. 30If there be laid on him a sum of money [ransom], then he shall give for the ransom [redemption] of his life whatsoever is laid upon him. 31Whether he have gored a son, or have gored a daughter, according to this judgment shall it be done unto him. 32If the ox shall push [gore] a man-servant or maid-servant, he shall give unto their master 33thirty shekels of silver, and the ox shall be stoned. And if [when] a man shall open a pit, or if [when] a man shall dig a pit, and not cover it, and an ox or an ass fall therein; 34The owner of the pit shall make it good, and [good; he shall] give 35money unto the owner of them; and the dead beast shall be his. And if [when] one mans ox hurt [hurteth] anothers, that he die [dieth]; then they shall sell the live ox, 36and divide the money [price] of it; and the dead ox also they shall divide. Or if it be known that the ox hath used to push [hath been wont to gore] in time past, and his owner hath not kept him in; he shall surely pay ox for ox; and the dead shall be his own.
Chap. Exo 22:1 If [When] a man shall steal [stealeth] an ox, or a sheep, and kill [killeth] it, or sell [selleth] it; he shall restore [pay] fiveoxen for an ox, and four sheep 2for a sheep. If a [the] thief be found breaking up [in], and be smitten that he die 3[so that he dieth], there shall no blood be shed [no blood-guiltiness] for him. If the sun be risen upon him, there shall be blood shed [blood-guiltiness] for him; for he [him; he] should make full restitution; if he have nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft. 4If the theft be certainly found in his hand alive, whether it be ox, 5or ass, or sheep; he shall restore [pay] double. If [When] a man shall cause [causeth] a field or vineyard to be eaten [fed upon], and shall put in his beast [letteth his beast loose], and shall feed [and it feedeth] in another mans field; of the best 6of his own field, and of the best of his own vineyard, shall he make restitution. If [When] fire break [breaketh] out, and catch [catcheth] in thorns, so that the stacks of corn [grain], or the standing corn [grain], or the field, be [is] consumed therewith; he [consumed; he] that kindled the fire shall surely make [make full] restitution.
d. Things Entrusted and Things Lost
7If [When] a man shall deliver unto his neighbor money or stuff to keep, and it be [is] stolen out of the mans house; if the thief be found, let him pay double. 8If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall be brought unto the judges [unto God], to see whether he have put [have not put] his hand unto his neighbors goods. 9For all manner of trespass [In every case of trespass], whether it be for ox, for ass, for sheep, for raiment, or for any manner of lost [any lost] thing, which another challengeth to be his [of which one saith, This is it], the cause of both parties shall come before the judges [God]; and [he] whom the Judges 10[God] shall condemn, he [condemn] shall pay double unto his neighbor. If [When] a man deliver [delivereth] unto his neighbor an ass, or an ox, or a sheep, or any beast, to keep; and it die [dieth], or be [is] hurt, or driven away, no man seeing 11it: Then shall an [the] oath of Jehovah be between them both, that [whether] he hath not put his hand unto his neighbors goods; and the owner of it shall accept thereof [it], and he shall not make it good [make restitution]. 12And if it be stolen from him, he shall make restitution unto the owner thereof. 13If it be torn in pieces, then let him bring it for witness; and [witness;] he shall not make good that which was 14torn. And if [when] a man borrow [borroweth] aught of his neighbor, and it be [is] hurt, or die [dieth], the owner thereof being not with it, he shall surely make 15it good [shall make full restitution]. But if [If] the owner thereof be with it, he 16shall not make it good: if it be an hired thing, it came for his [its] hire. And if [when] a man entice [enticeth] a maid [virgin] that is not betrothed, and lie [lieth] with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife. 17If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins.
e. Unnatural Crimes. Religious and Inhumane Abominations. (Arranged according to Bertheau.)
(1) 18Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live. (2) 19Whosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death. (3) 20He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto Jehovah only, he [only,] shall be utterly destroyed [devoted to destruction]. (4) 21Thou shalt neither vex [wrong] a stranger, nor oppress him: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt. (5) 22Ye shall not afflict any widow, or fatherless child. 23If thou afflict them in any wise, and they cry at all unto me, I will surely hear their cry; 24And my wrath shall wax hot, and I will kill you with the sword; and your wives shall be widows, and your children fatherless. (6) 25If thou lend money to any of my people that is poor by thee [with thee that is poor], thou shalt not be to him as an usurer; neither shalt thou [shall ye] lay upon him usury [interest]. (7) 26If thou at all take thy neighbors raiment to pledge, thou shalt deliver [restore] 27it unto him by that the sun goeth down: For that is his covering only [only covering], it is his raiment for his skin: wherein shall he sleep? And it shall come to pass, when he crieth unto me, that I will hear; for I am gracious. (8) 28Thou shalt not revile the gods [God], nor curse the [a] ruler of [among] thy people. (9) 29Thou shalt not delay to offer [not keep back] the first of thy ripe fruits and of thy liquors [the first-fruits of thy threshing-floor and of thy press]:5 the first-born of thy sons shalt thou give unto me. 30Likewise shalt thou do with thine oxen, and with thy sheep: seven days it shall be with his [its] dam; on the eighth day thou shalt give it me. (10) 31And ye shall be holy men unto me; neither shall ye [and ye shall not] eat any flesh that is torn of beasts in the field; ye shall cast it to the dogs.
f. Judicial Proceedings
Exo 23:1(1) Thou shalt raise [carry] a false report: (2) put not thine [thy] hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness. (3) 2Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline [turn aside] after many [a multitude] to wrest judgment: (4) 3Neither shalt thou countenance [be4partial to] a poor man in his cause. (5) If [When] thou meet [meetest] thine enemys ox or his ass going astray, thou shalt surely bring it back to him again 5[to him]. (6) If [When] thou see [seest] the ass of him that hateth thee lying under his burden, and wouldest forbear to help him [thou shalt forbear to leavehim], thou shalt surely help [release it] with him.6 (7) 6Thou shalt not wrest the judgment of thy poor in his cause. (8) 7Keep thee far from a false matter; and the innocent and righteous slay them not: for I will not justify the wicked. (9) 8And thou shalt take no gift [bribe]: for the gift [a bribe] blindeth the wise [theseeing], and perverteth the words of the righteous. (10) 9Also thou shalt not oppress a stranger: for ye know the heart of a stranger, seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.
g. Rules for Holidays and Festivals
(1) 10And six years thou shalt sow thy land, and shalt gather in the fruits thereof: 11But the seventh year thou shalt let it rest and lie still [fallow]; that the poor of thy people may eat: and what they leave the beasts of the field shall eat. In like manner thou shalt deal with thy vineyard, and with thy olive-yard. (2) 12Six days thou shalt do thy work, and on the seventh day thou shalt rest: that thine ox and thine ass may rest, and the son of thy handmaid, and the stranger may be refreshed. 13And in [unto] all things that I have said unto you be circumspect [take heed]: and make no mention of the name of other gods, neither let it be heard [gods; let itnot be heard] out of thy mouth. (3) 14Three times thou shalt keep a feast unto me in the year. (4) 15Thou shalt keep the feast of unleavened bread: thou shalt eat unleavened bread seven days, as I commanded thee, in the time appointed [at the set time] of [in] the month Abib; for in it thou camest out from Egypt: and none shall appear before me empty: (5) 16And the feast of harvest, the [of the] first fruits of thy labors, which thou hast sown [sowest] in the field: (6) and the feast of ingathering, which is in [ingathering, at] the end of the year, when thou hast gathered [thou gatherest] in thy labors out of the field. (7) 17Three times in the year all thy males shall appear before the Lord God [Jehovah]. (8) 18Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leavened bread; neither shall the fat of my sacrifice [feast] remain until the morning. (9) 19The first of the first-fruits of thy land thou shalt bring into the house of Jehovah, thy God. (10) Thou shalt not seethe [boil] a kid in his [its] mothers milk.
h. The Promises
(1) 20Behold, I send an angel before thee, to keep thee, in [by] the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. 21Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not: for he will not pardon your trangressions: for my name 22is in him. But [For] if thou shalt indeed obey his voice, and do all that I speak; then I will be an enemy unto thine enemies, and an adversary unto thine adversaries. (2) 23For mine angel shall go before thee, and bring thee in unto the Amorites, and the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Canaanites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites: and I will cut them off. 24Thou shalt not bow down to their gods, nor serve them, nor do after their works: but thou shalt utterly overthrow them, and quite break down their images. (3) 25And ye shall serve Jehovah your God, and he shall [will] bless thy bread and thy water; (4) and I will take sickness away from the midst of thee. (5) 26There shall nothing [no one] cast their [her] young, nor be barren, in thy land; (6) the number of thy days I will fulfil. (7) 27I will send my fear [terror] before thee, and will destroy [discomfit] all the people to whom thou shalt come, 28and I will make all thine enemies turn their backs unto thee. (8) And I will send [send the] hornets before thee, which [and they] shall drive out the Hivite, the Canaanite, and the Hittite, from before thee. (9) 29I will not drive them out from before thee in one year; lest the land become desolate, and the beast of the field multiply against thee. 30By little and little I will drive them out from before thee, until thou be increased, and inherit the land. (10) 31And I will set thy bounds from the Red Sea even unto the sea of the Philistines, and from the desert unto the river: for I will deliver the inhabitants of the land into your hand; and thou shalt drive them out before thee. 32Thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor with their gods. 33They shall not dwell in thy land, lest they make thee sin against me: for if thou serve their gods, it will surely be a snare unto thee.
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL
[Exo 21:8. The Hebrew here, according to the Kthibh, is , and if this were followed, we should have to translate with Geddes, Rosenmller and others: so that he hath not betrothed (or will not betroth) her. The Kri reads , unto him or unto himself. This yields much the easiest sense, and is especially confirmed by the consideration that of itself means, not betroth, but appoint, destine. Followed by the Dative, it may in the connection convey the notion of betrothal; but used absolutely, it cannot convey it.Tr.]
[Exo 21:13. cannot mean deliver, and no object is expressed. It is therefore unwarrantable to render, with A. V., deliver him, or even with Lange, let him accidentally fall into his hand. The object to be supplied is the indefinite one suggested by the preceding sentence, viz. homicide.Tr.]
[Exo 21:17. , though generally rendered curse in A. V., yet differs unmistakably from in being used not merely of cursing, but of evil speaking in general, e.g. Jdg 9:27 and 2Sa 16:9. The LXX. render it correctly by . And this word, where the passage is quoted in the New Testament, is rendered by the same Greek word, viz. Mat 15:4.Tr.]
[Exo 21:23. The Heb. reads , lit. with judges or among judges. Some render unto the judges; others before the judges; but the preposition does not naturally convey either of these senses. The A. V. probably expresses the true meaning: with judges, i.e. the line being judicially imposed.Tr.]
[Exo 22:29. Literally: thy fullness and thy tear. The phrase ripe fruits is objectionable as including too much; liquors as suggesting a wrong conception. The first refers to the crops generally, exclusive of the olive and the grape, from which oil and wine, the liquid products (tear), were derived. Cranmers Bible renders, not inaptly: thy fruits, whether they be dry or moist.Tr.]
[Exo 23:5. The rendering of A. V.: and wouldest forbear, is utterly untenable. Not less so is the rendering of by help. The simplest explanation assumes a double meaning of , viz. to loose, and to leave. We might borrow a vulgar phrase, and read: Thou shalt forbear to cut loose from him, thou shalt cut loose with him. De Wette and Murphy attempt to avoid the double meaning by emphasizing with. Thus: Thou shalt forbear to leave it to him: thou shalt leave it with him. But this is a nicety quite alien from the Hebrew.Tr.]
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
This section is very clearly to be distinguished from the two preceding, so that after the purely religious and ethical legislation, and after the ritual, now the social and political legislation is instituted. The genuinely theocratic character of this legislation here at once appears. It is not a criminal law in the first instance, but a system of legal regulations for a people that is to be trained for freedom. Hence these ordinances begin at once very significantly with the regulating of the laws concerning emancipation; and indirectly all the main points of this law point to the rights of freedom. Just as the sacrificial usages were found already existing, and were thenceforth theocratically regulated, so now the relations of slavery, found as an existing fact, were regulated in the spirit of the typical people of God. So Keil entitles the section: The fundamental rights of the Israelites in their civil and social relations. Less satisfactorily Knobel: The further rights, i.e. laws, etc. But the parallels which he draws between the Jewish legislation and that of other ancient people, and of heathen people in general, as also of the modern Mohammedan Arabs, are excellent. We divide thus: (a) The law of personal freedom. That this may correspond with the first commandment of the decalogue, the duty of holding sacred the divine personality, is obvious. (b) The second division, on murder and bodily injuries, quite as unmistakably aims to secure the human form from abuse or disfigurement, as the second commandment to keep the divine image from being deformed; but it is also connected with the commandment: Thou shalt not kill, (c) The third division, on injuries which result from the relations of property, points to the commandment: Thou shalt not steal, (d) Akin to the foregoing, and yet different, are the regulations concerning goods put in anothers care, and goods lost, (e) The regulations concerning unnatural crimes, offences against religion and humanity are more specially connected with the first and with the fifth and tenth commandments. (f) The section on judicial processes reminds us of the prohibition of false witness. (g) The division relating to holidays and feast-days reminds us of the third commandment, but is more especially an unfolding of the law of the Sabbath. (h) Also the promises which are annexed to the fifth and second commandments are in the last division expanded into a fuller form.
Here must be noticed one more circumstance. When regulations of similar import are found in different sections of the law, this is not to be regarded as mere repetition, still less as confusion. The moral law of the Sabbath, e.g., comes here (Exo 23:12) under consideration again, from a social point of view; in Leviticus still again as connected with the ceremonial law. For the Sabbath, there are moral and ritual reasons, and likewise social or civil reasons, the latter uniting the two former. In like manner the great festivals of the Israelites are here regarded from a national, or civil, point of view: in Leviticus they are associated with the idea of worship. The occasional precepts concerning purification and sacrifice in the book of Numbers relate to the keeping pure of the social commonwealth of Jehovah, and are therefore not primarily ceremonial. The tabernacle is found in Exodus, not in Leviticus, because it is primarily the house of the theocratic lawgiver, and is the repository of the decalogue; only secondarily the place of worship, the place where the lawgiver meets his people.
a. Law of Personal Freedom
(1) The Hebrew man-servant, Exo 21:1-6; (2) The Hebrew maid-servant, Exo 21:7-11. The further development of, and reasons for, the law of emancipation, vid. in Deu 15:12-18. The Hebrew man-servant after six years of service is to receive his freedom gratis. According to Deu 15:12 this holds also of the Hebrew maidservant. The attributive designates the servant as an Israelite (comp. in Deut.) in distinction from the slaves derived from non-Israelitish foreign nations, to whom this law does not apply (Keil). The law evidently tends towards securing the universality of personal freedom. But it also knows that within the theocracy, in the servitude which is mitigated by it, there is an element susceptible of education. Therefore the servant is not compelled to become free in the seventh year. We are to consider that the sons of the household also then stood in the relation of strict subjection, so that a dutiful servant became more and more like them. Vid. Exo 23:12, Lev 25:6, etc. The servant might also be led by devotion to his wife, given to him by his master during his servitude, and to her children, to remain a servant. With reference to this the three cases in Exo 21:3-4 were to be distinguished. The fixing of the seventh year as the year of emancipation is connected with the sabbatical year, but does not coincide with it. How one could become a slave among the Israelites is told in Exo 22:3, Lev 25:39. But how the emancipation was to be beautified and enriched is seen in the parallel passage in Deuteronomy [Exo 15:12-15]. On the manner of emancipation vid. Keil p. 130. Unto God.Not to the priests, but to the court of the assembly, which passed judgment in the name of God, and whose sentence was a divine dispensation. Similar expressions vid. in Knobel, p. 214. There had therefore to be a public declaration that the servant voluntarily remained a servant. The boring of the ears was among the Orientals a sign of slavery (Knobel). The ear-rings among the Carthaginians from being a symbol of slavery came to be an ornament, like the cross among Christians. The case mentioned in Lev 25:39 is probably a modification, but according to Knobel is a contradiction, of the law before us.
Exo 21:7-11 : The Israelitish daughter as servant and concubine. Knobel makes no distinction between concubinage as it is found among the patriarchs, and the usual custom of the Jews. But in reply see the Commentary on Genesis, p. 80. She shall not go out as the men-servants do.It follows from the nature of her position that it is a benefit to her if she can remain in the house of her master, provided that the rights of the concubine are respected. It is therefore presupposed either that he takes her for himself, or gives her to his son, or maintains her honor by the side of his sons wife. In the first case, he must let her be redeemed; in the second case, he must accord to her the domestic rights of an associate wife. If he is not willing to give her this protection, he must let her go free for nothing. In this connection the precepts of Deu 15:12 are also to be considered. Exo 21:8-9. Who hath betrothed her to himself.The before belongs to the 15 passages designated by the Massorah in which stands for (Keil; compare Knobel). To sell her unto a strange people.Knobel: The Greek, too, did not sell a Greek slave to go beyond the boundary of the land. Seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her.It would certainly create a difficulty to translate, on account of his infidelity towards her, as if this unfaithfulness were the only reason why an Israelitess might not be sold to heathen. Therefore the emphasis probably lies on the thought that his injustice would be doubly great if even in this case, in which he has gone so far as to send her away, he should also in his treachery to her violate the theocratic law. That the word has a specially important meaning, is seen from Psa 73:15. Comp. Deu 21:14, and the account of the Arabian customs in Knobel, p. 216. If he betroth her unto his son.Comp. Knobel also on a Persian or Arabian custom of a similar sort. As his sons concubine she is to be regarded by him as a daughter. Exo 21:9. If he take him another wife.That is, the father for his son. So Keil; but Knobel understands it to mean: If he takes another for himself. Keil well disposes of the views, according to which either the son is the subject, or the father takes for himself.7 Her food, etc.All of her domestic rights are to remain secure. , meat, as the chief article of food, because the lawgiver has men of wealth in mind. (Keil). To understand , which properly means lying, of cohabitation, yields no tolerable sense. How could the father in this thing control the son? Or how could the son be obliged to conduct himself towards several wives in the same way as towards one. Either, therefore, the expression has in it something figurative, meaning: She must not as wife be neglected; or it refers to a seat, a resting-place (see the meaning of ), which would well harmonize with the reference to food and raiment. It is therefore assumed that under the conditions imposed she has in the house of her servitude a much better position than if she should be dismissed, especially if she has borne children who belong to the permanent members of the household.
b. On Murder, Homicide, and Bodily Injuries
(1) Homicide proper, Exo 21:12-14. (a) Simple homicide in consequence of beating; (b) unintentional, resulting from misfortune and mistake; (c) murder proper. (2) Spiritual homicide, (a) Smiting of parents; (b) deprivation of freedom (as spiritual fratricide); (c) cursing of parents (spiritual suicide). (3) Bodily injuries, (a) Of uncertain, perhaps fatal result; (i) to a free man; (ii) a man-servant or maid-servant; (iii) a pregnant woman, in which connection is to be noticed that the jus talionis is laid down in close connection with an extremely humane law of protection, Exo 21:22-25; (b) local injuries to men-servants or maid-servants.
Exo 21:12. He that smiteth a man.Says Keil: Higher than personal freedom stands life. It may then be asked, why is capital punishment prescribed (Exo 21:16) for the violent taking away of freedom? The slavery treated of in the preceding section was no innovation, but as a traditional custom it was restricted, and moreover in great part was based on guilt or voluntary assent; it had besides an educational end. It is true, the law of retaliation, as instituted in Gen 9:6, underlies all this section; but it is noticeable that this law is expressly prescribed just where the protection of a pregnant woman is involved. It is repeated (Lev 24:17) in connection with the ordinance that the blasphemer shall be stoned. The reason for the repetition is the principle that in respect to these points perfect equality of rights should be accorded to the stranger and the Israelite; and it was occasioned by the fact that the blasphemer was a Jew on his mothers side, but an Egyptian on his fathers side. So that he dieth.Three cases are specified: first, the severe blow which in fact, but not in intention, proves mortal; secondly, the unfortunate killing through mistake, a providential homicide; thirdly, intentional, and hence criminal and guileful, murder.
Exo 21:13. And if a man lie not in wait.When, therefore not only the murderous blow, but any blow, was unintentional, so that the case is one of severe divine dispensation. I will appoint thee a place.A place of refuge, with reference to the avengers of blood who pursue him. A check, therefore, upon the custom, prevalent in the East, of avenging murder. It is worthy of notice, from a critical point of view, that no place is now fixed; this was done later, vid. Num 35:11; Deu 19:1-10. Here too the innocent homicide is expressly distinguished from the violent one, Num 35:22 sqq. Together with the prescribed place of refuge for the one who kills by mistake is found the stern provision that a real murderer, who has committed his murder with criminal and guileful intent, cannot be protected even by fleeing to the altar of the sanctuary, as it was customary in ancient times for those to do whom vengeance rightly or wrongly pursued, because, as some would say, the altar was a place of expiation. Even from the altar of God he is to be torn away. The expression is not adequately represented by behave viciously, or arrogantly. It denotes the act of breaking through, in ebullient rage, the sacred restraints which protect ones neighbor as Gods image. Particular cases, Num 35:16, Deu 19:11. Murder could be expiated only with death, Num 35:31. Examples of fleeing to the altar, 1Ki 1:50; 1Ki 2:28. This was also customary among the Greeks.
Exo 21:15. Smiteth his father.The simple act of smiting, committed on a father or mother, is made equivalent to man-slaughter committed on ones neighbor. Parricide, as not occurring and not conceivable, is not at all mentioned (Keil). Similar ordinances among the Greeks, Romans, and Egyptians are mentioned by Knobel, p. 217. The two following provisions rest on the same ground. The parents are Gods vicegerents for the children; the neighbor is Gods image; hence a violent abuse of his person is equivalent to murder, vid. Deu 24:7. We explain the insertion of the prohibition of man-stealing between verses 15 and 17 by the fact that in cursing his parents the curser morally destroys himself, vid. Lev 20:9, Deu 27:16. The order is: undutifulness, man-stealing, self-destruction.8 See various views of Exo 21:16 in Keil, p. 133.
Exo 21:18 sq. And when men strive.The section concerning bodily injuries as such is distiuguished from the section beginning with Exo 21:12 in that there injuries are spoken of which result in death. The injuries here mentioned would accordingly also be punished with death if they resulted in death. This is shown especially by Exo 21:20. Here, then, an injury is contemplated which only confines the injured one to his bed. The penalty is twofold: First, the offender must make good his sitting still, i.e. what he might have earned during this time; secondly, he must pay the expenses of his cure, Exo 21:19. In the case of a man-servant or maidservant a different custom prevailed. If manslaughter took place, the manhood of the slain one is fully recognized, i.e. the penal retribution takes place. Probably sentence was to be rendered by the court, which was to decide according to the circumstances. According to Jewish interpretations capital punishment was to be inflicted with the sword; but vid. Knobel for a different view.9 On the one hand, the danger of a fatal blow was greater than in other relations, for it was lawful for a master to smite his slave (vid. Pro 10:13; the rod was also used on children); but on the other hand an intention to kill could not easily be assumed, because the slave had a pecuniary value. Furthermore, the owner is exempted from punishment, if the beaten one survives a day or two; and the punishment then consists in the fact that the slave was his money, i.e. that in injuring the slave he has lost his own money. The Rabbins hold that this applied only to slaves of a foreign race, according to Lev 25:44. This is not likely, if at the same time, in case of death, execution by the sword was to be prescribed; also according to this view there would have been a great gap in the law as regards Hebrew slaves. It is true, reference is here had only to injuries inflicted by the rod. When one was killed with an iron instrument, an intention to kill was assumed, and then capital punishment was inflicted unconditionally, Num 35:16, Lev 24:17; Lev 24:21, Deu 19:11 sqq. On the Egyptian, Greek, and Roman legislation, see Knobel, p. 219.10
Exo 21:22-25. Special legal protection of pregnant women. It might often happen that in quarrelling men would injure a pregnant woman, since wives on such occasions instinctively interpose, Deu 25:11. In the latter passage the rudenesses which the woman, protected by law, might indulge in are guarded against.So that her fruit depart. Literally: so that her children come out; i.e., so that abortion takes place. According to Keil, the expression designates only the case of her bearing real children, not a fetus imperfectly developed; i.e., a premature birth, not an abortion, is meant. The expression is used for the sake of indefiniteness, since possibly there might be more than one child in her body. Strange interpretation of the precept, according to which the plural in individual cases denotes indefiniteness! According to this view, the most, and perhaps the worst cases, would not be provided for, since women far advanced in pregnancy are most apt to guard against the danger of such injuries. The plural may also indicate that the capacity for bearing was injured. If no other injury results from the quarrel, reparation is to be made, according as the husband of the woman imposes it on the perpetrator, and the latter is to give it with judges, i.e., in company with, on application to them, in order that excessive demands may be suitably reduced. The amount of indemnity demanded doubtless was determined by the consideration, whether the injured man had many or few children, was poor or rich, etc. The law stands appropriately at the end of the cases which relate to life and the inviolability of the person. The unborn child is reckoned as belonging to, and, as it were, a part of, the mother (Knobel).
Exo 21:23. And if any mischief follow. It is to the credit of the legislation that the law of retaliation (vid. Lev 24:19, Deu 19:21) is here so particularly laid down. In its connection it reads: The injury of such a woman must be most sternly expiated according to the degree of it. But even this explication of the law of retaliation must be guarded from a lifeless literalism, as is shown by the provisions in Exo 21:26-27. It would surely have been contrary to nature to put out the eye of a master who had put out his servants eye, or to make him lose tooth for tooth. Keil says, The principle of retaliation, however, is good only for the free Israelite, not for the slave. In the latter case, he adds, emancipation takes place. Emancipation, even on account of a tooth knocked out, has nevertheless the force of retaliation, which, even in the relations of free Israelites, could not have been everywhere literally applied, e.g., in the case of burns. On the jus talionis in the ancient heathen world, and generally in the Orient, vid. Knobel, p. 220.
c. Injuries resulting from Property relations. Specially from acts of Carelessness. Chs. Exo 21:28 to Exo 22:6.
We follow in general Bertheaus classification, which makes property the determining thought. Keil and Knobel divide otherwise. Keil with the words, Also against danger from cattle is mans life secured. The conflict between life and property, and the subordination of property is here certainly everywhere observed. In a critical respect it may not be without significance that there is here no trace of horses; also the dog is not mentioned. At the time of Solomon and Ahab the case was quite different. First are to be considered the accidents occasioned by oxen that hook, Exo 21:28-32. But this list is connected with the following one, which treats of the misfortunes which men may suffer in respect to their oxen or asses through the fault of neighbors, in which case a distinction is made between the injuries resulting from carelessness and those resulting from theft, Exo 21:33 to Exo 22:4. Then follow injuries done to fields or estates through carelessness in the use of cattle or of fire, Exo 21:5-6. Then the criminal misuse of goods held in trust constitute a separate section, Exo 21:7-17, which we do not, like Bertheau, make a subdivision of the division (c), but must distinguish from it.
Exo 21:28. First case. And if an ox.The instinct of oxen to hook is so general that every accident of this sort could not be foreseen and prevented. Therefore when an ox has not been described to the owner as properly a goring ox, the owner is essentially innocent. Yet for a possible want of carefulness he is punished by the loss of his animal. But the ox is stoned to death. Legally it would involve physical un-cleanness to eat of the flesh. But the stoning of the ox does not mean that the ox is tainted with capital crime (Keil), but that he has become the symbol of a homicide, and so the victim of a curse (). It is therefore an application of Gen 9:6 in a symbolical sense, on account of the connection of cattle with men. Comp. also Lev 20:15. Similar provisions among the Persians and Greeks vid. in Knobel, p. 220.
Exo 21:29. Second case. The owner has been cautioned that his ox is given to hooking. In this case he himself is put to death as well as his ox. This is the rule. But as there may be mitigating considerations, especially in the case of the injured family; as in general the guilt was only that of carelessness, not of evil intention, the owner might save his life by means of a ransom imposed on him by the relatives of the man that had been killed. Probably with the mediation of the judges, as in Exo 21:22. Reference to the Salic law made by Knobel. Ransom., covering, expiation.
Exo 21:31. Third case. The son or the daughter of a freeman are treated in the same manner as, according to the foregoing, he himself is treated.
Exo 21:32. Fourth case. The ox gores a manservant or a maid-servant to death. The stoning of the ox is still enjoined, but the owner in this case is not doomed to death. He must pay the master of the slave 30 shekels of silver. Probably the usual market price of a slave, since the ransom money of a free Israelite amounted to 50 shekels, Lev 27:3. (Keil). On the value of the shekel ( ) vid. Winer, Realwrterbuch, p. 433 sqq.11 The result of the perplexing investigation is that its value Isaiah 25 or 26 silver groschen.12 The shekel afterwards used for the revenue of the temple and of the king was different from that used in common life. This legal inequality [between the slave and the freeman] is to be explained by the consideration that the capital punishment inflicted on the owner formed an offset, to the revenge to which otherwise the relatives of the murdered man might resort. But this revenge for bloodshed was in no danger of being exercised in the case of a murdered slave, since he was removed from the circle of his relations. The seemingly great difference in the penalty amounts finally to this, that the ransom money for a free man was 50 shekels, and that for a slave 30 shekels. On the estimate of the Attic slave, vid. Knobel; but the great difference in the period of time must be taken into account. In the legal codes of other ancient nations also are found laws concerning the punishment of beasts that have killed or injured a man. Coop. Clericus and Knobel on this passage. But no nation had a law which made the owner of such a beast responsible, because none of them had recognized the divine image in human life (Keil). The responsibility of the owner could certainly be grounded only on the mysterious solidarity of the Hebrew household (thy man-servant, nor thy maid-servant, nor thy cattle), a unity which was not taken into account where a more atomistic view of liberty prevailed.
Exo 21:33-34. Fifth case. And when a man shall open a pit (cistern). This is connected with the foregoing cases as coming under the head of punishable carelessness. The ox or ass are named as examples of domestic animals in general. In this case only property is destroyed; and the careless man has to pay for it, but receives the dead beast, of which he could only use the skin and other such parts, since the flesh was unclean.
Exo 21:35. Sixth case. A specially fine provision. In the ox that has killed another ox there is nothing abominable, but yet a stain; the sight of him is obnoxious. He is therefore sold and comes into another place where his fault is not known. But the two owners share the price of sale and the dead animal. This is an alleviation of a misfortune that is common to both parties. Without doubt the dead ox also must have hooked.
Exo 21:36. Seventh case. But here too is to be considered the special circumstance that the ox may have been a notorious hooker. In this case the owner must make full compensation for the loss with a live ox, in return for which he receives the dead beast.
Exo 22:1-4. Eighth case. The cattle-thief. Five-fold indemnity for the stolen ox; four-fold for the stolen sheep or goat. In the case of the five-fold indemnity any kind of large animal may be delivered over. The difference of five-fold and four-fold points to the greater guilt of the greater theft. The four-fold restitution is also mentioned in 2Sa 12:6 : the seven-fold, Pro 6:31, is not to be understood literally, but only in a general way as manifold (Knobel). From the five-fold and four-fold restitution is distinguished the two-fold, which is prescribed in case the thief has not yet slaughtered or sold the animal, but is able to return it alive. The reasons for this distinction are differently given; vid. Keil; also his note, II. p. 137.13 In the latter case the thief had not carried out his purpose to the full extent, especially as he has not put the object of his theft out of the way. The case differed therefore materially from the other. Vid. Knobel on the Roman laws. Others indicating the value set on ploughing oxen, Knobel. p. 222.
Exo 22:2-3. If the thief be found breaking in.This is obviously an incidental interpolation, which properly belongs to the class (b). There shall be no blood to him; i.e. no blood-guiltiness is incurred by the homicide; vid. Num 35:27; Deu 19:10; Job 24:16. One might understand this chiefly of an attack on the fold, since the topic is the stealing of cattle; at all events a nocturnal irruption is meant, vid. Exo 22:3. Accordingly the watchman, or the one who is awaked, is in a condition of defense. He must protect his property, and therefore fight; and the thief is liable to become a robber and murderer. If the sun be risen upon him.It might be thought that this refers to the early dawn or early day, when he might recognize the thief, or frighten him away unrecognized, or with the help of others capture him. But inasmuch as further on it is assumed that the thief has really accomplished his theft, the expression probably means: If some time has elapsed. If in this case the owner kills the thief, he incurs blood-guiltiness; but on account of the great variety in the cases the sentence of death is not here immediately pronounced upon him. Since the life of the thief is under the protection of the law, the case comes before the criminal court, vid. Exo 21:20. For Calvin on the ratio disparitatis inter furem nocturnum et diurnum, vid. Keil, p. 137. The real punishment for the thief is determined by the law concerning restitution, Exo 22:1; Exo 22:3. But in case the thief can restore nothing, he is sold for the theft, for that which is stolen, i.e. for the value of it. This can mean only a sale for a period of time. The buyer reckoned the restitution which the thief was to render, and used the thief as a slave until the whole loss was made good (Knobel). Similar arrangements among the Romans vid. in Knobel, p. 223. Likewise laws concerning theft, p. 224. The thief could not be sold to a foreigner, according to Josephus, Ant. XVI. 1, 1.
Exo 22:5. Ninth case. A field or a vineyard to be fed upon.There are various views of this. (1) Si lserit quispiam agrum vel vineam, etc. (Vulg.). Luther: When any one injures a field or vineyard, so that he lets his cattle do damage. (2) Knobel: When one pastures a field or a vineyard by sending his cattle to it. (3) Keil: When any one pastures a field or a vineyard, and lets his cattle loose. bears either meaning, to send away, or to let go free; but according to the connection only the latter can be meant here. The sense given to it by the Vulgate might accordingly be accepted: he injures the field or vineyard of his neighbor so that, (in that) etc. But it is more obvious to assume an incidental carelessness to be meant. The beast feeds on his field (perhaps also on the grass between the grape-vines); from this pasture ground he lets him pass over so that he does damage to his neighbor. Knobel even affirms that an intentional damage is meant. And yet only a simple, though ample, indemnity is to be rendered from the best of his field and of his vineyard. Keil rightly contends against Knobels theory. Talmudic provisions on this point are found in Saalschtz, Mosaisches Recht, p. 875 sq.
Exo 22:6. Tenth case. This is about, a fire in a field, which might the more readily sweep over into the neighbors field, inasmuch as it was likely to be kindled at the edge of the field, in the thorn-hedge. Clearly an act of carelessness is meant; comp. Isa 5:5. He that hath kindled the fire.The carelessness is imputed to him as a virtual incendiary, because he did not guard the fire.
d. Things entrusted and lost.
Exo 22:7. First case. The money or articles or stuff (on see Deu 22:5) left for safe keeping are stolen from the keeper, but the thief is discovered. The affair is settled by the thief being required to pay back double, vid. Exo 22:4.
Exo 22:8. Second case. The thief is not discovered. In this case suspicion falls on the keeper; he may have embezzled the property entrusted to him. Therefore such a case must come before the court, which was esteemed a divine court, hence the expression, . The penalty is paid according to the decision of the case. The man under suspicion must approach unto God. Such an approach produced an excitement of conscience. The true high-priest is the one who may approach unto God. In case the keeper is adjudged guilty, he has to pay double.
Exo 22:9. The foregoing provision is designated as an example for a general rule. The cleansing of the suspected man was probably often effected by an oath of purification. The LXX. and Vulgate interpolate , et jurabit. In all cases in which the concealer made a confession, an oath was unnecessary. Also dishonesty respecting objects found is placed under this rule. On the oath among the Arabs and Egyptians, see Knobel, p. 225. Knobel seems to assume without reason that the plaintiff also is meant in the words, whom God shall condemn, etc.14
Exo 22:10-11. Third case. This is about beasts put in others care, which die in their possession, or are mutilated in the pasture, or injure themselves, or are driven away by robbers. Here the oath is positively required, in case the guardian alone has seen the thing; but it is also decisive. On a similar Indian law vid. Knobel.
Exo 22:12. Fourth case. Stolen from him.It is assumed that the thief is not found. Here, says Knobel, restitution is prescribed, but not in Exo 22:8, because he who has an animal in charge is the guardian of it, whereas he who has things in charge cannot be regarded as exactly a watchman. But according to Exo 22:9 the judges could even adjudge a double restitution, while here only simple restitution is spoken of. There a complication was referred to, in which the approach of the master of the household to God and the attitude of his conscience formed the main ground for the judicial sentence. In the case described in Exo 22:10-11 the oath determines the main decision; in the present case the simple restitution is prescribed upon the simple declaration: stolen.
Exo 22:13. Fifth case. The production of the animal torn by a beast of prey (not, or a part of it, as Keil says) proved not only the fact itself, but also that the guardian had watched, and had driven off the beast of prey by a violent exertion. From this we see the severity of Laban who, according to Gen 31:39, required his son-in-law in such cases to make the loss good. Comp. 1Sa 17:34, Amo 3:12. On the Indian law, vid. Knobel, p. 227.
Exo 22:14. Sixth case. A hired beast is injured, or dies, when the owner is not present. The sentence requires restitution, because neglect may be presumed.
Exo 22:15. Seventh case. The owner is present when the accident occurs. In that case it belonged especially to himself to prevent the accident, if prevention was possible.
Eighth case. The borrower is in the hired service of the owner of the beast. In this case he gets the dead beast instead of his pay; it is subtracted from his pay. For the owner as a hired laborer would have had to do only with himself; and a hired servant with a hired beast cannot be meant. It is therefore a day-laborer to whom the animal of the owner has been entrusted. can hardly (with Stier and Keil) be referred to the hired beast. Knobel has a forced explanation, in which the hired servant becomes the one who lets the beast.15
Exo 22:16. Ninth case. The seducer of an unbetrothed virgin (the case is different with the seduction of a betrothed one (Deu 22:23), who has entrusted to him the wealth of her virginity, valuable not only in a moral, but in a civil point of view, must make restitution to her by marrying her, and to her father by giving a dowry.
Exo 22:17. Tenth case. The seducer himself cannot refuse the settlement; but the father of the seduced maiden may have reasons for refusing it. In this case the seducer must pay him the dowry (vid. Gen 34:12), with which she is, in a sort, reinstated as a virgin, and as afterwards a legally divorced woman. The case is not differently provided for in Deu 22:28, as Knobel affirms. There only the price of sale is fixed, viz., at 50 shekels; the right of the father to refuse his daughter to the seducer is simply not repeated. The dowry was not properly a price of sale.
The precepts in Exo 22:18 and onwards, says Keil, differ in form and contents from the foregoing laws; in form, by the omission of [when], with which the foregoing are almost without exception introduced; in substance, by the fact that they impose on the Israelites, on the ground of their election to be the holy people of Jehovah, requirements which transcend the sphere of natural law. Yet the two divisions are not to be distinguished as natural and supernatural. But Keil has correctly found a new section here, whilst Knobel begins a new section, poorly defined, with Exo 22:16.
e. Unnatural Crimes. Abominations committed against Religion and Humanity.
Exo 22:18. First offence. The sorceress is condemned to death. This term is not to be made synonymous with witch, as Knobel makes it. The medival witch may practice, or wish to practice, sorcery; but she may also be a calumniated woman. She gets her name from the popular conception, whereas the sorceress gets her name from the real practice of a lying, dark art. She operates on the assumption that demoniacal powers co-operate with her, and so she promotes radical irreligion. She injures her neighbor in body and life, as being the instrument of hostile passions, which she nourishes; or, when she enters into the mood of the questioner, she nourishes ruinous hopes (Macbeth) or despair (the soothsayer of Endor), and often from being a mixer of herbs becomes a mixer of poisons (Gesina). The sorceress is named instead of the sorcerer, as Calovius says, not because the same thing is not punishable in men, but because the female sex is more addicted to this crime (Keil). According to Knobel the expression, not suffer to live, intimates that perhaps a foreign sorceress might be punished with banishment; but Keil supposes that she may have been allowed to live, if she gave up her occupation. Sorcery was connected not only with simple idolatry, but in many ways with the worship of demons, and the sorceress was regarded as seducing to such things.
Exo 22:19. Second offence. Sexual intercourse with a beast. Comp. Lev 18:23; Lev 20:15; Deu 27:21. This unnatural thing also was punished with death, like the kindred one of sodomy, a prominent vice of the Canaanites, Lev 20:13.
Exo 22:20. Third offence. Idolatry. Keils explanation, Israel must not sacrifice to foreign gods, but must not only tolerate foreigners in the midst of them, etc., almost seems intended to intimate that the heathen in Israel had an edict of tolerance for their offerings. Opposed to this conception is the Sabbath law, and the ordinance in Exo 23:24. In both cases, however, the explanation is that a public worship of strange gods was not tolerated in Israel; but an inquisition to ferret out such worship secretly carried on is not countenanced by the Mosaic law. The words are: whosoever sacrificeth unto any god. The addition, save unto Jehovah only (as likewise Exo 20:24), is a mild expression also as regards the theocratic offerings, and also secures a right understanding of the word Elohim.He is to be devoted, i.e., to the judgment of Jehovah sentencing him to death. Here the notion of (hherem, ban) comes out distinctly. Every capital punishment was essentially a hherem; but here is found the root of the notion: an idolater by his offering has withdrawn from Jehovah the offering due to Him alone; he has, so to speak, removed the offering away from the true divine idea, and perverted it into its opposite. He is to be devoted by death to the Lord, to whom in life he would not devote himself (Keil). It may be that a sort of irony lies in the notion of the hherem; as being consecration reversed, it secures to God the glory belonging to Him alone; but it does this also as being consecration to the judging God in His judgment. No living thing, says Knobel, devoted to Jehovah could be redeemed, but had to be destroyed. Lev 27:28 sq.; 1Sa 15:3. But only when it was a case of hherem, vid. Deu 13:12 sqq.
Exo 22:21. Fourth offence. A beautiful contrast to the foregoing is formed by the statement, of offences against humanity. Maltreatment of the foreigner is put first of all. He must not be wronged, for ye were strangers, etc. A moral principle which re-appears in the N. T. (Mat 7:12). as also in Kant. The particular rules concerning the treatment of aliens are given by Knobel. p. 228, who also gives the appropriate references to Michaelis and Saalschtz. Vid. Exo 3:9, Deu 26:7. Knobel says, The persons meant are the Canaanitish and non-Canaanitish strangers who staid as individuals among the Israelites; the Canaanites as a whole are, according to this lawgiver also, to be extirpated (vid. Exo 23:33). It belongs to the definition of the stranger, that he is dissociated from his own nationality, and has become subject to another, i.e. here, to the national laws of the Israelites. The failure to affix a penalty to this law implies that the noble emotion of gratitude was probably depended on to secure its fulfilment.
Exo 22:22-24. Fifth offence. Against widows and orphans. On this point see Knobels collection of the various passages, p. 229. God takes the place of the deceased fathers and husbands by His special protection; whence follows that they on their part when living are to exercise a divine protection in the house over wife and children. And because, through the selfishness of the strong, widows and orphans were so liable to be oppressed, being easily despoiled on account of their impotence, chief prominence is given to the significance of their crying. This need not always be a conscious prayer uttered in ones extremity, for crying, on the part of living things and before God, has a special meaning, even down to the crying of the young ravens. The threatened punishment, in the first place, is connected with the guilt, and in the second place corresponds with it. Despotism begins with the oppression of the weak (widows and orphans), and reaches its consummation in unrighteous wars and military catastrophes, out of which again widows and orphans are made. Vid. Isa 9:17.
Exo 22:25. Sixth offence. Prohibition of usury, by which the exigency of the poor is abused, Lev 25:36. Two grounds: the poor man belongs to the people of God as a free man, and has lost his freedom through his troubles. By usury he is burdened.
Exo 22:26-27. Seventh offence. Excessive taking of pawn. The lender may require a pledge of the creditor, but his covering (outer garment) he must return to him before sunset, lest he suffer from the nocturnal cold. The mantle marks the extreme of poverty in general, vid. Deu 24:6 sqq. The compassion which Jehovah here promises to the helpless ones that cry has an obverse side for the pitiless. The expression in Exo 22:27 becomes even a rhetorical plea for the poor. Mat 5:7, Jam 2:13. The indigent Oriental covers himself at night in his outer garment. Shaw, Travels, p. 224, Niebuhr, Arabien, p. 64 (Knobel). On the pawning of clothes, see Amo 2:8, Job 22:6, Pro 20:16; Pro 27:13.
Exo 22:28. Eighth offence. Contempt, of the Deity and of princely magistrates. Keil says, Elohim means neither the gods of the other nations, as Josephus (Ant. IV. 8, 10, contra Apionem II. 33), Philo (vita Mos. III. 864) and others explain the word in their dead and Pharisaic monotheism; nor the magistrates, as Onkelos, Jonathan, Aben Ezra and others think; but God, the Deity in general, whose majesty is despised in every transgression of Jehovahs commands, and should be honored in the person of the prince. Comp. Pro 24:21; 1Pe 2:17, etc. So Knobel. This explanation is certainly favored by the context, particularly the following; especially also by the fact that the prince (the exalted, the high one) is mentioned next to God. Yet this is to be observed in the line of Josephus and Philos opinion, that the theocracy does not reject the divine element in the religions themselves, but the false ideal images of the gods (Elilim), and the actual idols, and that even in this sphere there are reservations in reference to Satan (Epistle of Jude). There are two reasons for it: first, the element of truth which underlies the errors; secondly, the moral injury of the religious feelings of the neighbor who is in error. We prefer to render, the Deity; at all events the reviling of the Deity, which may have many degrees, is sharply distinguished from the positive reviling of Jehovah (Lev 24:15-16). The world of to-day would perhaps invert the order of guilt in this relation. Luthers translation transposes the meanings of the verbs [Den Gttern. nicht fluchen, und den Obersten nicht lstern, not curse the gods, and not revile the magistrates]. The princes are under God as His vicegerents. Passages relative to the defamation of princes are given by Knobel. The word comprehends all forms of evil-speaking of God.
Exo 22:29-30. Ninth offence. Holding back of the natural products due to the sanctuary. means the produce of grain (Deu 22:9), and the word , which occurs only here, properly tear, something flowing, liquor stillans, is a poetic designation of the produce of the wine-vat, the wine and the oil, comp. . Theoph.: arborum lacrym; Pliny XI. 6. (Keil.) Vid. Exo 23:19; Deu 26:2-11; Num 18:12. These gifts to the temple retained their festal character and their value only as they were freely and joyfully presented. The first-born of thy sons.Repetition of the precept to sanctify the first-born to Jehovah, Exo 13:2; Exo 13:12. In the passage before us, however, the precept is put under the point of view of the civil commonwealth. This needs religious institutions in order to its perpetuity. Knobel attempts in vain to make out a difference between this passage and others which prescribe the redemption of the first-born. A week of existence with the dam must also be secured to the sacrificial victims taken from the cattle and from the sheep or goats.
Exo 22:31. Tenth offence. Use of unclean meat. As men of holiness consecrated to the sanctuary, they must refrain from the use of unclean meat, especially of that which is torn of beasts. The carcass is to be given to the dogs, whose characteristic here appears. Comp. Exo 19:6; Lev 17:15.
f. Legal Proceedings
Exo 23:1. First precept. Against rashness in cherishing and uttering suspicions. Comp. Lev 19:16; Deu 22:13 sqq. Vid. the references to Michaelis and Saalschtz in Knobel.
Second precept. No one shall allow himself to be misled by wicked men into the utterance of false witness.
Exo 23:2. Third precept. Base compliance with the judgment of the multitude.
Exo 23:3. Fourth precept. Not to favor the poor man in his suit. Affectation in sympathy with the lowly. The error of many modern minds. Against Knobels conjecture, vid. Keil.16
Exo 23:4. Fifth precept. To keep even an enemy from suffering loss. Ones enemy is in this case a brother, according to Deu 22:1. Neglect of this duty is positive and culpable violation of law.
Exo 23:5. Sixth precept. It is still harder to labor in company with the enemy (the hater), in order to help him in his extremity. In this case the inclination to avoid the enemy must be overcome. On the pun see Gesenius under . Comp. Bertheau, p. 41. The neglect of this difficult self-denial also comes into the category of violation of law.
Exo 23:6. Seventh precept. Of thy poor.The poor must be the proteg of the rich. But the temptations to violate his rights, to pervert it this way and that, is strong, since he is defenceless. Hence Moses puts him specially under the protection of the law. Comp. Deu 27:19; 1Sa 8:3; Lam 3:35.
Exo 23:7. Eighth precept. This looks like the first. But there the subject is false testimonyhere, the false judge; because his conduct may possibly bring death to the innocent man. Here, therefore, judicial murder is specifically treated of, with the declaration that God will not acquit the wicked one, i.e., will judge him; and the wicked judge is probably meant. Bertheau, dividing this one precept into two, fails to make out the tenthwherefore Keil is led to pronounce his hypothesis of decades to be arbitrary throughout.
Exo 23:8. Ninth precept. Prohibition of the taking of presents in law-suits. Out of such presents corruption grows. They pervert the cause of the righteousmake right wrong.
Exo 23:9. Tenth precept. This is not identical with the general precept in Exo 22:21, since here the question is about law-suits. It should be considered especially in courts of law how a stranger feels. He is timid, faint-hearted, and readily surrenders a part or the whole of his just claim before the mighty judge. Israel is to learn this from his experience in Egypt. Vid. Deu 24:17; Deu 27:19.
g. Ordinances concerning Feast-days and Days of Rest
Exo 23:10-11. First ordinance. The land must rest the seventh year. It is the Sabbath of the years, the continuation of the Sabbath of the months, as of the Sabbath of the days, while they all look back to the Sabbath of Gods creation, and look forward to the Sabbath of the generation, the great year of jubilee, the type of the future foundation and completion of the Sabbath by Christ. The civil side of the religious ordinances here made should not be overlooked, as is done by Keil and Knobel. In Leviticus 25 the ordinance bears a predominantly religious aspect. What the land produces of itself, without culture, belongs to all as a common possession to be freely enjoyed; likewise to the stranger and to the cattle, and even to the wild beasts. Thus this festal year forms a reflex of Paradise. And if this festal year in point of fact, was poorly observed in Israel, critics may well infer that this law was written long before the time of the later national life of the Israelites. In its ideal significance, however, it belongs to all times: not only the field, but also the forest, the river, and the mine, may be spoiled by unintermittent labor.
Exo 23:12-13. Second ordinance. Man and beast must rest on the seventh day. The humane object of the Sabbath in its civil aspect comes out prominently in the text. Mention is first made even of the rest needed by the ox and the ass, then of the hand-maids son, i.e., the one born a slave, and the stranger; they must on the Sabbath have a breathing-spell, as the verb properly means. Exo 23:13 enjoins the proper celebration for this sacred list of feast-days, strictly excluding the names of all heathen deities, and containing a suggestion for the revision of the Christian calendar in view of the medieval deifications. Says Knobel: The most important point is the exclusive adoration of Jehovah. The Hebrew is not even to mentioni.e., utterthe name of another god; not to take it into his mouth, still less recognize or reverence such a god. So, too, the strict worshippers of Jehovah did (Psa 16:4; Hos 2:17; Zec 13:2). Accordingly the Hebrew was to swear only by Jehovah (Deu 6:13; Deu 10:20; Jer 12:16). So the Phenician could not swear (Josephus c. Apionem I. 22). But we must distinguish between the proper meaning of this command and the superstitious Jewish interpretation of it, which has even imposed a penalty on the utterance of the name of Jehovah. The so-called killing by silence [Todtschweigen], generally a sin, has therefore here, too, its moral side.
Exo 23:14. Third ordinance. Three annual festivals are to be celebrated in accordance with the wants of Gods people in their civil capacity. At the head stands the feast of unleavened bread, as the festival of freedom; then follow the two principal harvest festivals, of which the second at the same time marks the close of the year with reference to the notion of the civil year. Vid. Exo 34:23; Deu 16:16; 2Ch 8:13. Otherwise, says Knobel, the Elohist, on which point see Leviticus 23. But it must be observed that there the festivals are spoken of in their relation to religion and religious rites. Therefore, at that place special prominence is given to the Passover and the day of atonement. The arrangement of the three festivals, however, was, for the most part, prophetic, since in the wilderness there could be no harvesting, nor even sacrifices, vid. Lev 23:10.
Exo 23:15. Fourth ordinance. The feast of unleavened bread as the birth-day festival of the people and of their freedom; whereas the Passover stands at the head of their religious offerings, vid. Exo 12:40 sqq. On Hitzigs view in his Ostern und Pfingsten, vid. Knobel,17 p. 233; Bertheau, p. 57.Not empty, i.e., not with empty hands, but with sacrificial gifts. Even the general festival offerings had to come from the sacrificial gifts of the peoplea fact which Knobel seems to overlook; to these were added the peace-offerings made by individuals. So the Oriental never came before his king without presents; vid. the citations from lian and Paulsen in Keil. The offering is the surplus of the gain which God has blessed, and by the effort to secure this surplus a barrier is built against want in civil life. While the offerings serve to maintain the religious rites, they also serve indirectly to maintain the common weal. The same holds of the true church and of its wants.
Exo 23:16. Fifth ordinance. The feast of harvest.Here named for the first time, as also the third feast, vid. Lev 23:15 : Num 28:26. Also called the feast of weeks, because it was celebrated seven weeks after the feast of unleavened bread; or the feast of the first fruits of the wheat-harvest, because the loaves offered as first-fruits at that time were to be made of wheat flour, Exo 34:22. On the Pentecost, see the lexicons.
Sixth ordinance.The feast of ingathering.Gathering or plucking characterizes this harvest: the fruit-harvest and vintage. Further particulars, as that it is to be held on the 15th day of the 7th month, seven days like that of unleavened bread, a feast of rich abundance in contrast with that of great privation, see in Lev 23:34, Num 29:12, Winer, Realwrterbuch, Art. Laubhttenfest, [Smiths Bible Dictionary, Art. Tabernacles, Feast of]. In the end of the year.Knobel, on account of this passage, assumes that the Hebrews had two new-years, the one in autumn, when the agricultural season of the year ended with the harvesting of the fruits, and the following one, beginning with the ploughing and sowing of the fields. The former, he says, seems to have been the usual mode of reckoning in the East; and he cites many proofs, p. 235. His view that this is a contradiction of the Elohist, who puts the beginning of the year in the spring (Exo 12:2), is not perspicuous; neither, on the other hand, is Keilsthat reference is here made only to the agricultural year, by which he must mean the natural seasons, II. p. 148. We find here a new proof that the Mosaic law distinguishes the civil from the religious ordinances. But because the civil is subordinate to the religious, the determinative regulation proceeds from the feast of Passover, as is seen especially from Num 29:12. That in Lev 23:34 the date is religious, is self-evident.
Exo 23:17. Seventh ordinance. Three times in the year;i.e. of course at the three above mentioned feasts. The place where the Israelites are to appear before Jehovah, i.e. in the place where He reveals Himself, is not yet fixed, an omission explained by the fact that they were still wandering. That only the males are held obliged to do this, shows the civil side of this legislation. for , thy males. Probably, says Keil, from the twentieth year and upwards, those who were included in the census. Num 1:3. But this does not prohibit the admission of the women (comp. 1Sa 1:3 sqq.) and boys (Luk 2:41 sqq.). More exactly: by the side of the civil ordinance the religious custom was developed in a natural way. Knobel thinks he finds here another discrepancy, p. 235.
Exo 23:18. Eighth ordinance. Not offer with leavened bread.The duty of keeping sacred things pure is enjoined especially by references to the feast of the Passover. The connection of the feast of unleavened bread with the Passover is here assumed. Backwards and forwards the paschal feast is to be kept pure in view of the fact that the blood of the offering (i.e. of the offering emphatically so called, the Passover offering) belongs to Jehovah, that therefore the surrender must be unmixed. In reference to the past, therefore, everything leavened must be removed (Exo 12:15; Exo 12:20). In reference to the future, the fatty parts of the paschal offering, which also belong to Jehovah, must not remain over night, and so serve for ordinary food. They must therefore be burned in the night. That cannot mean, as Knobel understands it, that the fatty pieces are to be at the outset separated from the paschal lamb, as was done with other offerings, since the lamb was to remain whole; but it was natural that the fatty parts would be for the most part left over; and then they were to be burned with the other things left over. Thus these fatty remains, which, however, were not burnt on the altar, became a type of the fatty pieces which were from the first designed for the altar. So then this regulation is made to refer to the more detailed laws of the festivals as found in Lev 2:11, etc. As the Passover was to be contrasted with the ordinary mode of life, so also with the feast of unleavened bread. The three stages are: (1) the old life (leaven); (2) the offering of life (Passover); (3) the beginning of the new life (unleavened bread).
Exo 23:19. Ninth ordinance. Precept in reference chiefly to the feast of weeks, or the first feast of harvest, but with a more general significance. The pentecostal loaves (Lev 23:17) are meant, says Knobel. Keil with reason understands the precept of a bringing of firstlings in general, vid. Num 18:12, Deu 26:2 sqq. The sheaf of barley which was to be offered on the second day of the feast of unleavened bread (Lev 23:10) belongs to the same [Keil]. It may be asked how the expression is to be understood; whether, according to the LXX., followed by Keil, as the first of the first fruits, the first gathering of the first fruits; or, according to Aben Ezra and others, including Knobel (p. 236), as the best, the choicest, of the first fruits. Inasmuch as not the very first that came to hand was also the best, the latter explanation is to be taken as a more precise statement of the other: the first, provided it was the best, or the first-fruits, properly so called (for not even every first-born beast was a true firstling). The chronological element in the term first, however, takes precedence, and forbids every delay and sequestration, according to Exo 22:29. The meaning of these offerings is seen from the liturgical forms prescribed for them in Deu 26:3 sqq., 13 sqq. Everything is a gift from Jehovah; therefore the first fruits are brought back to Him, and their acceptance is effected by the priest, who, however, represents also the Levites, the widows and orphans, and the stranger. As in the N. T. Christ pictures Himself to His church as poor, in the person of the poor and the little ones, so Jehovah in the O. T. symbolically pictures Himself as in a human state of want, in the priests under whose protection all, especially all needy ones stand. So then the church ought continually to care for the poor, as a religious duty.
Exo 23:19. Tenth ordinance. Not boil a kid.This precept seems strange, probably for the reason that it may be in a high degree symbolical. First, we must pronounce incorrect Luthers translation: Not boil the kid while it is at its mothers milk (vid. 1Sa 7:9). Other incorrect interpretations see in Knobel: (1) not to cook and eat meat and milk together; (2) injunction not to use butter instead of the oil of trees; (3) prohibition of an odious barbarity and cruelty. According to Knobel there is a reference to a custom of heathen religions which is to be kept away from the worship of Jehovah. Vid. his commentary, p. 237, where are accounts of Jewish opinions and Arabian usages. Aben Ezra and Abarbanel, he says, mention, the boiling of the kid in milk by the Arabs of their time: and they are right. Up to the present day the Arabs generally boil the flesh of lambs in sour milk, thus giving to it a peculiar relish (Berggren, Reisen, etc.). Further on Knobel, following Spencer, professes to give proofs that a peculiar superstition underlay the custom. But the heathen element, if there was one in the practice, might have been excluded without prohibiting the practice itself. If we assume that the precept in Exo 23:18 referred to the first feast, and was designed to prevent the profanation of the offering, and that the one in Exo 23:19 referred to the second one, and was designed to prevent the neglect of the peace-offering and the priesthood with its family of Levites and of the poor, it is natural, with Abarbanel and others, to refer this precept especially to the third feast; and because this was in the highest degree the joyous feast of the Israelites, it is furthermore probable that this prohibition was designed to prevent a luxury which was inconsistent with simple comfort, and which moreover was hideous in a symbolical point of view, the kid here being, as it were, tortured even in death by the milk of the dam. The same precept condemns all the heathen refinements of festive gormandizing, such as are still practiced (e.g. roasting live animals). This epicurism might also pitch upon the eating of unclean animals or other haut got; vid. Deu 14:21, where the same prohibition is connected with the one before us. Keils explanation, that the practice marked a reversal of the divine order of things in regard to the relation between old and young, is less intelligible than that the kids were a very favorite article of food, according to Gen 27:9; Gen 27:14; Jdg 6:19; Jdg 13:15; 1Sa 16:20. To be sure, the usage considered in its symbolical aspect was a sort of unnature such as the keen sense of natural fitness which characterized the Mosaic laws rejected in every form, so that it even denounced the production of hybrid animals and grains, the mixing of different materials in cloth, as well as human misalliances, Lev 19:19-20.
h. The Promises. Exo 23:20-33
That this last division also of the religio-civil legislation relates to the political commonwealth, is seen from the whole contents of it, especially from Exo 23:22; Exo 23:24 sqq., 27, 33. Knobel calls them Some more promises; Keil, The conduct of Jehovah towards Israel. The promises here given are not some, but a whole; not, however, the whole of Jehovahs promises, but the sum of the civil and political blessings conditioned on good behavior. (1) Protection of angelic guidance, of the religion of revelation; and invincibility founded on religious obedience. (2) Victory over the Canaanites. Possession of the holy land on condition of their purifying the land from idolatry. (3) Abundance of food. (4) Blessing of health. (5) Fertility of man and beast, (6) Long life. (7) The respect and fear of all neighboring peoples. (8) Mysterious control of natural forces in favor of Israel, ver 28. (9) The subjected Canaanites themselves made to serve for the protection of the growth of Israel. (10) Wide extent of territory and sure possession of it on condition of not mingling with the Canaanites and their idolatry.
Exo 23:20-22. First promise. I send an angel.That which the people, as the religious congregation of God, afterwards have imposed upon them as a check on account of their misbehavior (chap. 33), is here promised to the civil congregation as a protection. This cannot well be an anticipation, and cannot, with Knobel, be accounted for on the theory of another narrator who calls this angel . For in Exo 33:2-3 two forms of revelation are clearly distinguished. In Exo 33:18-19 this distinction is between the glory of Jehovah and the goodness of Jehovah. Further on it is said that no one can see the glory in its full display, i.e. Jehovahs face, but can see its reflected splendor as it passes by in sacred obscurity (Exo 23:23). It is therefore a private relation between Jehovah and Moses, when Jehovah speaks with him face to face (Exo 33:11), and hence in Moses consciousness the two degrees of revelation go together. The prophet Moses stands as Abrahams son higher than Moses the lawgiver. So Paul (in Galatians 3) distinguishes positively between the form of revelation which Abraham received and the form of revelation by which the people of Israel received the law (Exo 23:16; Exo 23:19). This difference in degree is presented antithetically as early as in Jer 31:32-34. It harmonizes entirely with this distinction, when the angel of Jehovah first appears to Hagar, Gen 16:7; also in the circumstance that he directs her to return to the household to which she legitimately belonged. Comp. Gen 21:17. Later also the immediate revelations made by God to Abraham are distinguished from the appearance of the angel of Jehovah in a legal aspect, Gen 22:1; Gen 22:11. The difference resembles that between inspiration and manifestation, as these two through ecstatic vision are made to assume forms different in degree. The angel of Jehovah is therefore the revelation of Jehovah for the people of Israel in a predominantly legal relation; hence also the form of the political theocracy as it is instituted through the mediation of Moses and Aaron, chiefly of Moses. The salvation of the people will depend on their obedience to the theocratic religion, as shaped by the higher form of the ceremonial revelation. This angel prepares the way for the Israelites, and conducts them to their goal. His countenance in the theocratic legal institutions is turned towards Israel; Jehovahs name, the revelation of His essential being, is within him, under the cover of this angelic form. He requires awe; he can be easily offended; he punishes acts of disloyalty, for he is legal; hence he goes before Israel as the terror of God to intimidate the enemies. Knobel identifies this Angel of the Lord with the pillar of cloud and fire; and in fact this was a sign of the hidden presence of the angel, Exo 33:9.
Exo 23:23-24. Vid. Gen 15:18 sqq. Annihilation of the public heathen worship in Canaan after its conquest by Israel. That the system of worship was connected with the morals, which were horrible and criminal, is even thus early made prominent. Vid. the parallel passages in Knobel, p. 238.
Exo 23:25. The pure service of Jehovah is the condition of well-being and health; vid. Exo 15:26 : comp. Lev 26:16; Lev 26:25; Deu 28:20. Bread and water, the most important articles of nutrition, symbols of all kinds of welfare.
Exo 23:26. Prevention of miscarriages. Only one item in a whole category: diminution of the population through miscarriages, unchastity, conjugal sins against procreation, exposure of children, etc.; comp. Lev 26:9; Deu 28:11; Deu 30:9; vid. Isa 25:8; Isa 65:23. Respecting the blessing of long life, vid. chap, 20; Deuteronomy 5; 1Co 15:51.
Exo 23:27. My fear.This marks the sphere of intimidating influences exerted by the religious power of Israel on the heathen in general; whereas the hornets (Exo 23:28) represent the terrifying or destructive effects of this power in particular. Vid. Gen 35:5; Exo 15:14; Psa 18:41 (40); Exo 21:13 (12); Jos 7:8; Jos 7:12.
Exo 23:28. Hornets.Vid. Deu 7:20; Wisdom of Solomon Exo 12:8. Says Knobel: According to Joshua 24 the kings of the Amorites, Sihon and Og, were driven out not by Israels weapons, but by the . Elsewhere neither the word nor the thing occurs in the O. T. Different explanations: (1) The promise is literally meant. So Jarchi, Clericus, and others. (2) Plagues in general. So Saadias, Michaelis, and others. (3) The expression is figurative. So most modern interpreters. Yet the text evidently does not mean to identify the hornets with the great general terror of God, as Knobel holds, but distinguishes them from it as small, isolated, but very powerful evils, as Keil, following Augustine, has correctly observed. It is a question even whether the hornets are not meant to represent the same thing as the bees, Deu 1:44; Psa 118:12; Isa 7:18. The bee frightens by the multitude of the irresistible swarm; the hornets by the frightful attack and sting of the individual insect. In the petty religious and moral conflicts between Judaism and heathenism, civilized Christian nations and barbarians, Indians, and other savages, it is just these hornets, these thousand-fold particular sources of terror, moral thorns, and even physical stings, under which the enemies gradually succumb. The three Canaanitish nations which are here named denote the totality; perhaps, however, in the heathen trinity may be found a reference to the spiritual impotence of heathenism.
Exo 23:29. Not in one year.Comp. Deu 7:22; Lev 26:22; Eze 14:15; Eze 14:21; 2Ki 17:25; Jos 13:1-7. From this it appears that the destruction denounced by Jehovah on the Canaanites was intended primarily for them in their collective and public capacity, not for the individuals. The individuals, in so far as they submit, Jehovah will allow, as individuals, to live; and to live, in so far as they remain heathen and enemies, for the purpose of preventing the wild beasts from getting the upper hand and diminishing the number of the people of Israel, which as yet is far too small to subdue the wild beasts, and the wildness of nature in general. The higher races of mankind are still indebted for this service to the lowest races throughout the five continents. Even savages constitute still a sort of barrier against what is monstrous in nature, which without them would lapse into wildness. These Canaanites serve this purpose only as being incorrigible. In proportion as nature is reclaimed, they sink away. It was therefore not the fact that these individuals continued to live in Israel, but that the Israelites mingled with them, which led to ruinous consequences. Comp. Judges 1, 2.
Exo 23:31. Set thy bounds.Vid. Gen 15:18. The Red Sea on the souththe sea of the Philistines, or Mediterranean Sea, on the westthe Arabian desert on the east (Deu 11:24), the Euphrates on the north. These ideal boundaries are assured to the Israelites, in so far as they conduct themselves in relation to the heathen according to the ideal standard. Forming alliances with the heathen and recognizing their political existence would not of itself be actual apostasy, but it would be a snare to the Israelites through which they would be drawn into idolatry by way of false consistency in the policy of toleration. The lesson is to be applied even at the present day. The several precepts are given by Knobel, p. 241.
Footnotes:
[1][Exo 21:8. The Hebrew here, according to the Kthibh, is , and if this were followed, we should have to translate with Geddes, Rosenmller and others: so that he hath not betrothed (or will not betroth) her. The Kri reads , unto him or unto himself. This yields much the easiest sense, and is especially confirmed by the consideration that of itself means, not betroth, but appoint, destine. Followed by the Dative, it may in the connection convey the notion of betrothal; but used absolutely, it cannot convey it.Tr.]
[2][Exo 21:13. cannot mean deliver, and no object is expressed. It is therefore unwarrantable to render, with A. V., deliver him, or even with Lange, let him accidentally fall into his hand. The object to be supplied is the indefinite one suggested by the preceding sentence, viz. homicide.Tr.]
[3][Exo 21:17. , though generally rendered curse in A. V., yet differs unmistakably from in being used not merely of cursing, but of evil speaking in general, e.g. Jdg 9:27 and 2Sa 16:9. The LXX. render it correctly by . And this word, where the passage is quoted in the New Testament, is rendered by the same Greek word, viz. Mat 15:4.Tr.]
[4][Exo 21:23. The Heb. reads , lit. with judges or among judges. Some render unto the judges; others before the judges; but the preposition does not naturally convey either of these senses. The A. V. probably expresses the true meaning: with judges, i.e. the line being judicially imposed.Tr.]
[5][Exo 22:29. Literally: thy fullness and thy tear. The phrase ripe fruits is objectionable as including too much; liquors as suggesting a wrong conception. The first refers to the crops generally, exclusive of the olive and the grape, from which oil and wine, the liquid products (tear), were derived. Cranmers Bible renders, not inaptly: thy fruits, whether they be dry or moist.Tr.]
[6][Exo 23:5. The rendering of A. V.: and wouldest forbear, is utterly untenable. Not less so is the rendering of by help. The simplest explanation assumes a double meaning of , viz. to loose, and to leave. We might borrow a vulgar phrase, and read: Thou shalt forbear to cut loose from him, thou shalt cut loose with him. De Wette and Murphy attempt to avoid the double meaning by emphasizing with. Thus: Thou shalt forbear to leave it to him: thou shalt leave it with him. But this is a nicety quite alien from the Hebrew.Tr.]
[7][The reasons are thus stated by Keil: If the language in Exo 21:9 is referred to the son, so as to mean, when he takes to himself another wife, then there must be assumed a change of subject of which there is no indication; but if we understand the language to mean that the father (the purchaser) takes to himself another wife, then this precept ought to have been given before Exo 21:9.Tr.]
[8][This explanation of the order of the verses can hardly he regarded as satisfactory. In fact, any attempt to discover deep metaphysical or psychological reasons for the order and number of these laws is open to suspicion as implying a degree of subtlety and regard for logical order which was quite alien from the Hebrew spirit.Tr.]
[9][Viz. that the omission of the direction, he shall surely be put to death, implies that his punishment was something milder; as does also the spirit of the precept in Exo 21:21.Tr.]
[10][According to whom, the Egyptians punished all murders with death; the Greeks punished all murders, but punished the murder of a slave only by requiring certain expiatory rites; the Roman law, however, until the time of the emperors, allowed masters to treat their slaves as they pleased.Tr.]
[11][See also Smiths Bible Dictionary, Art. Weights and Measures.Tr.]
[12][I.e., about 60 or 62 cents. Mr. Poole, in the article above referred to, makes the silver shekel = 220 grains, i.e., about 53 cents, or 2 shillings and 2 pence.Tr.]
[13][The difference, says Keil, l. c., cannot be explained by the consideration that the animal slaughtered or sold was lost to its owner, while yet it may have had for him a special individual value (Knobel), for such regard for personal feelings is foreign to the law, to say nothing of the fact that an animal when sold might have been regained by purchase; nor by the consideration that the thief in that case has carried his crime to a higher point (Baumgarten), for the main thing was the stealing, not the disposition or consumption of the stolen object. The reason can have lain only in the educational aim of the law, viz., to induce the thief to think of himself, recognize his sin, and restore what he has stolen.Tr.]
[14][This is a mistake. Knobel translates: If God makes (one) a malefactor, (i.e. if the court decides that a misdemeanor has been committed), then he shall restore double to his neighbor. And in opposition to the translation. whichever one God condemns, he shall restore double, he says, How could the plaintiff be condemned to make restitution, if he, even though the complaint was ungrounded, had yet taken nothing from the other?Tr.]
[15][The majority of interpreters (like the A. V.) regard as referring to the beast, not the borrower. Knobel explains thus: If the beast was not merely lent out of kindness, but let for pay, the loss comes upon the hire by the receipt of which the owner is paid. In fixing the hire he had regard to the danger of the loss, and, when the loss takes place, must content himself with the hire. So Keil. The explanation of Knobels above referred to by Lange, is a second one, evidently not preferred by Knobel, but merely stated as possible, especially in view of the fact that everywhere else is used of men.Tr.]
[16][Knobels conjecture is that instead of (and a poor man) we should read (a great man)since in Lev 19:15 it is the mighty who is not to be honored, and partiality to the poor was not to be anticipated, and needed not to be forbidden. Keil replies that this is sufficiently answered by the fact that the same passage has a command not to respect the person of the poor.Tr.]
[17][Hitzig l. c. holds that means the new moon of the month of green earsto which Knobel replies that in that case the phrase time appointed would be superfluous; that the Hebrew expression, if means new moon, would have to be rendered new moon of the green earsa very improbable translation; and that according to Lev 23:6 the festival was to begin on the fifteenth day of the month, i.e., at the time of the full moon.Tr.]
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
CONTENTS
This Chapter, like the two before it, contains an explanation in detail of the law given on Mount Sinai. The precepts against false witness, and false judgment, are enlarged upon: those relating to the regulation of conduct towards enemies and strangers are explained. Some observations, in respect to the observance of the Sabbath, are also added; and the renewal of God’s promises to be with his people through the wilderness, and conduct them safe to Canaan, are subjoined.
Exo 23:1
1Sa 24:9 ; 2Sa 16:32Sa 16:3 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Exo 23:2
At certain seasons the only way of being right in the future consists in knowing how to resign ourselves to being unfashionable in the present.
Renan.
Universal suffrage assembled at hustings I will consult it about the quality of New Orleans pork, or the coarser kinds of Irish butter; but as to the character of men, I will if possible ask it no question: or if the question be asked and the answer given, I will generally consider, in cases of any importance, that the said answer is likely to be wrong, that I have to listen to the said answer and receive it as authentic, and for my own share to go, and with whatever strength may lie in me, do the reverse of the same. Even so, your Lordship; for how should I follow a multitude to do evil? There are such things as multitudes full of beer and nonsense, even of insincere factitious nonsense, who by hypothesis cannot but be wrong.
Carlyle, Latter-day Pamphlets (ii.).
Human authority at the strongest is but weak, but the multitude is the weakest part of human authority.
John Hales.
Reference. XXIII. 2. J. Cole Coghlan, Penny Pulpit, vol. xiv. No. 828, p. 293.
Exo 23:6
It is a lamentable fact that pure and uncorrupt justice has never existed in Spain, as far at least as record will allow us to judge; not that the principles of justice have been less understood there than in other countries, but because the entire system of justiciary administration has ever been shamelessly profligate and vile. Spanish justice has invariably been a mockery, a thing to be bought and sold, terrible only to the feeble and innocent, and an instrument of cruelty and avarice.
Borrow’s The Gypsies of Spain (chap. xi. pt. i.).
Exo 23:8
And that he would for no respect digress from justice well appeared by a plain example of another of his sons-in-law, Mr. Heran. For when he, having a matter before him in the Chancery, presuming too much of his favour, would by him in no wise be persuaded to agree to any indifferent order, then made he in conclusion a flat decree against him…. And one Mr. Gresham likewise having a cause depending in the Chancery against him, sent him for a new year’s gift a fair cup, the fashion whereof he very well liking caused one of his own to be brought out of his chamber, which he willed the messenger to deliver in recompense, and under other conditions would he in no wise receive it. Many things more of like effect for the declaration of his innocence and clearness from corruption, or evil affection, could I here rehearse besides.
Roper’s Life of Sir Thomas More.
Compare the discussion on bribery in Macaulay’s Essay on Bacon.
Exo 23:9
It was God’s argument to the Israelites, to be kind to strangers, because themselves had been strangers in the land of Egypt. So should you pity them that are strangers to Christ, and to the hopes and comforts of the saints, because you were once strangers to them yourselves.
Baxter, Saints’ Rest, chap. IX.
Exo 23:11
God throws the poor upon our charge in mercy to us. Couldn’t He take care of them without us if He wished? are they not His? It’s easy for the poor to feel, when they are helped by us, that the rich are a godsend to them; but they don’t see, and many of their helpers don’t see, that the poor are a godsend to the rich. They’re set over against each other to keep pity and mercy and charity in the human heart. If every one were entirely able to take care of himself we’d turn to stone…. God Almighty will never let us find a way to quite abolish poverty. Riches don’t always bless the man they come to, but they bless the world. And so with poverty; and it’s no contemptible commission to be appointed by God to bear that blessing to mankind which keeps its brotherhood universal.
G. W. Cable, Dr. Sevier, p. 447.
References. XXIII. 12. J. H. Shakespeare, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lviii. 1900, p. 248. XXIII. 14,15. A. M. Fairbairn, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lxiii. 1903, p. 316. XXIII. 15-17. G. Monks, Pastor in Ecclesia, p. 135. XXIII. 16. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture Exodus, etc., p. 115. XXIII. 18-20. Bishop Simpson’s Sermons, p. 347.
Exo 23:19
‘In less than two minutes,’ says Scott, describing at the close of Kenilworth the murder of Amy Robsart, ‘Foster heard the tramp of a horse in the courtyard, and then a whistle similar to that which was the Earl’s usual signal; the instant after, the door of the Countess’s chamber opened, and in the same moment the trap-door gave way. There was a rushing sound a heavy fall a faint groan and all was over…. “So pass our troubles,” said Varney, entering the room; “I dreamed not I could have mimicked the Earl’s call so well.” “Oh, if there be judgment in Heaven, thou hast deserved it,” said Foster, “and wilt meet it! Thou hast destroyed her by means of her best affections. It is a seething of the kid in the mother’s milk!”‘ Compare Newman’s resentful application of this verse to the behaviour of the Anglican Bishops towards himself in 1843. ‘I resigned my living on September the 18th. I had not the means of doing it legally at Oxford. The late Mr. Goldsmid was kind enough to aid me in resigning it in London. I found no fault with the Liberals; they had beaten me in a fair field. As to the act of the Bishops, I thought, to borrow a Scriptural image from Walter Scott, that they had “seethed the kid in his mother’s milk”.’
Reference. XXIII. 20, 21. J. B. Brown, The Divine Life in Man, p. 235.
Exo 23:29
I had never an extraordinary enlargement, either of joy, strength, or sanctification, but the waters dried up. There are no sudden steps in grace; ‘I will not drive them out all at once’.
Fraser of Brea, Memoirs (chap. 1.).
References. XXIII. 30. C. Jerdan, Pastures of Tender Grass, p. 299. XXIV. 1-12. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture Exodus, etc., p. 118.
Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson
Bye-laws
Exodus 21-23
Amongst these bye-laws there are some sayings which may be considered hard, and on reading them we may ask in almost plaintive and despairing tones, “Who is sufficient for these things?” There are also some out-of-the-way responsibilities, which only Divine wisdom and justice could in the then state of society have imposed. We must not permit ourselves to lose the religious philosophy and the religious beneficence of the Mosaic legislation by going back upon it with our Christian instincts and culture. We must forget all we have ever learned in the Christian school, and think ourselves back into the comparative barbarism of the age. Then we shall see a light above the brightness of the sun, and feel round about us an influence which cannot be satisfactorily explained without taking into account the possibility of supernatural existence and Divine sovereignty. We shall lose the whole meaning of ancient writings, so far as their religious philosophy is concerned, if we compare them to their disadvantage with Christian standards and the advanced civilisation of the day in which we live. Critically examined, fibre by fibre as it were, this is not crude legislation; there is nothing rough and ready in this distribution of offices, duties, and obligations. This legislation is, on the contrary, highly spiritual in its assumptions, and full of sublime tribute to the nature which is addressed. The dignity of law pre-supposes the dignity of man. Little laws for little creatures, great laws for great beings that is the philosophy of the Bible system. Looked at, therefore, narrowly and critically, we shall find that, however crude in appearance may be some of these bye-laws, the substance under them, and of which they may be said to be the mere phenomena, is a holy quantity, a Divine substratum, nothing less than God, the Eternal Creator and Sovereign.
Without attempting to go through all the bye-laws, we can touch them here and there with sufficient distinctness and sympathy to understand the whole scheme of which some parts are here quoted.
“And if men strive together, and one smite another with a stone, or with his fist, and he die not, but keepeth his bed: if he rise again, and walk abroad upon his staff, then shall he that smote him be quit: only he shall pay for the loss of his time, and shall cause him to be thoroughly healed” ( Exo 21:18-19 ).
Are our little personal strifes noted in heaven? The answer is: Yes, every one of them. But can men strive together? Properly looked at, that would seem to be the harder question of the two. Coming suddenly upon a line of this kind, we should exclaim, in surprise, “The assumption is impossible. We must begin our criticism of a statement of this kind by rejecting its probability, and, that being done, there is no case left. How can men strive together? Men are brothers, men are rational creatures, men recognise one another’s rights, and interests, and welfare; society is not a competition, but a fraternal and sacred emulation; therefore, the assumption that men can strive together is a false one, and, the foundation being false, the whole edifice totters down.” That would be fine theory, that would be sweet poetry, it might almost be thrown into rhyme, but there are the facts staring us in the face. What are those facts? That all life is a strife, that every man in some way or degree, or at some time, begrudges the room which every other man takes up. The tragedy of Cain and Abel has never ceased, and can never cease until we become children of the Second Adam. Great degrees of modification may, of course, take effect. The vulgarity of smiting may be left to those who are in a low state of life who are, in fact, in barbarous conditions; but they who smite with the fist are not the cruellest of men. There is a refined smiting a daily, bitter, malignant opposition; there is a process of mutual undermining, or outreaching, or outrunning, in the very spirit of which is found the purpose of murder. But mark how beneficence enters into the arrangement here laid down. Not only is the man who smote his brother to pay for the loss of his brother’s time; that would be a mere cash transaction. There are men ready enough to buy themselves out of any obligation; a handful of gold is nothing. Their language is, “Take it, and let us be free.” That would be poor legislation in some cases, though heavy enough in others. To some men money has no meaning; they have outlived all its influences; they are so rich that they can bribe and pay, and secure silence or liberty by a mere outputting of the hand. But the beneficence is in the next clause, “and shall cause him to be thoroughly healed.” The man must be made as good as he was before, therefore he must be inquired about; he must be taken an interest in; he must become a quantity in the life of the man who injured him, and, however impatient the man who inflicted the injury may become under such chafing, the impatience itself may be turned to good account. Some men can be taught philanthropy by only such rough and urgent schoolmasters.
“If an ox gore a man or a woman, that they die: then the ox shall be surely stoned, and his flesh shall not be eaten; but the owner of the ox shall be quit. But if the ox were wont to push with his horn in time past, and it hath been testified to his owner, and he hath not kept him in, but that he hath killed a man or a woman; the ox shall be stoned, and his owner also shall be put to death” ( Exo 21:28-29 ).
In the one case provision is made against what we term an accident, and accidents are treated within their own narrow limits; but from accident we pass to purpose. The ox was “wont to push with his horn in time past,” the ox was known to the owner to be an unmanageable ox; notice had been given to the owner of the temper of the ox; the ox, in short, had won for itself a bad character and reputation. If the owner allowed such an ox to go where danger and injury were possible, the owner was not released on the plea that an accident had occurred: he was held guilty of manslaughter. Is that ox still living? Yes. Is it possible that there are men to day who have oxen “wont to push with their horns,” and who have killed ten thousand men, and are yet permitted to live and carry on this work of devastation? Do not fritter away the meaning of the injunction by fixing on the literal term, ox. The meaning is not to be confined within any one definition; the great solemn meaning is this: If your trade, occupation, method of life, is inflicting injury anywhere, and you have been made aware of it, you are responsible for the injury that has been done, and you cannot throw off that responsibility. It was not the ox that did it, it was the owner of the ox. Guilt comes home to man. How stands the case? Each must answer for himself. The case applies to ministers of the Gospel, and teachers of every kind of doctrine. If a man preach any doctrine that poisons the life of the hearer, that degrades his best ambition, that narrows and diminishes his life’s quantity, that fills him with discontent, peevishness, distrust, and jealousy; and if that preacher has been made aware of the effects of his doctrine, he is responsible for all the heart-ache, for all the up-breaking of life, for all the poisoning of health, and, at the last, hell will be too good a lot for so huge a murderer. The same applies to all men who lecture upon platforms, or who issue vicious books or other literature from the press. Whoever is guilty of the propagation of ideas that injure life, that impair its majesty, and that crush its best endeavours, is a murderer, and he must be held liable for the consequences of his deed. I fix the charge thus particularly upon those who are in the spiritual and intellectual function, that I may the more broadly and pungently suggest the lesson to every man in every other sphere and line of life that he may apply the doctrine to himself. This is the Divine doctrine: it is the rational doctrine, it is the right doctrine. There is nothing so supernatural about this as to cause us to resent it on the ground of its being supermundane, too lofty for us to realise. Reason is satisfied; conscience says “Amen”; the just heart rises up and says, “The judgment is true and righteous; let it stand.” But what a revolution would be created in all teaching, in all commerce, in all social relations, if this one bye-law, respecting the “ox wont to push with his horn,” were carried out this day!
“If a man shall steal an ox, or a sheep, and kill it, or sell it; he shall restore five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep” ( Exo 22:1 ).
That is the only way of getting at a thief. You cannot reason with him. He dismissed his reason before he committed his felony. He had first to strangle his reason; he committed murder in the sanctuary of his soul before he committed theft in the fields of his neighbour. What then is to be done with him? He must be made to feel the folly of theft; he must be made to feel that theft is a bad investment; he must be made to feel that he has played the fool even in the excess of his cleverness. The thief would be made to know what dishonesty is, when for the one ox he must pay five in its place. He could have evaded an argument; he could have doubled upon a covenant, and have quibbled about the ambiguity of its terms; but he could not shuffle out of this four-square arithmetical arrangement. Five oxen for an ox, four sheep for a sheep; and by the time the thief had played at that game two or three days, he would have put on the garb, at least, of an honest man!
“If fire break out, and catch in thorns, so that the stacks of corn, or the standing corn, or the field, be consumed therewith; he that kindled the fire shall surely make restitution” ( Exo 22:6 ).
This is right. The Bible really builds upon granite bases; there is nothing merely fanciful in this legislation. This is sound common-sense, and common-sense in the long run wins the esteem and confidence of the world. No man may trifle with bread. Bad enough to burn down any kind of property; but to consume stacks of corn is to commit murder with both hands; to light the standing corn when it waves in the fields is to thrust a knife, not into one heart, but into the very life of society. How can restitution be made? It cannot be made. You cannot replace corn; money bears no relation to corn; corn is not an arithmetical quantity. Destroyed bread is destroyed life. Who destroys bread? He who makes poison of it; he who turns it into a drink that takes away the reason and deposes the conscience of men. He who holds back the bread-stuff until the time of famine that he may increase his own riches by an enhanced market value is not a political economist, unless, under such circumstances, a political economist is a heartless murderer. And if it is wicked to set fire to corn, is it a light or frivolous matter to set fire to convictions, faiths the bread-stuff of the soul? Is he guiltless who takes away the bread of life, the bread sent down from heaven? Is he a pardonable incendiary who burns down the altar which was a stairway to the light, or reduces to ashes the Church which was a refuge in the day of storm?
“If thou meet thine enemy’s ox or his ass going astray, thou shalt surely bring it back to him again. If thou see the ass of him that hateth thee lying under his burden, and wouldest forbear to help him, thou shalt surely help with him” ( Exo 23:4-5 ).
Man never imposed that law. That is not a trick of human wisdom. It is too profound, too exacting, too full of implications of the noblest kind to have been invented by human nature. Who would not take vengeance upon his enemy’s ox? Who would not hamstring the bullock? Who would not be pleased to see his enemy’s ox going astray, running furiously mayhap along the wrong road? Who would not felicitate himself on such an occurrence, and think with cruel gladness about his enemy’s disappointment and loss? But the other picture is more vivid still: “If thou see the ass of him that hateth thee lying under his burden.”. The enemy himself would be present personally or representatively, because the ass is not unburdened but burdened; he is, therefore, upon an appointed road and journey. Who would not rather taunt his enemy with the petty disaster and tell him to send for his friends to help him, and not to his hated and hating ones? “Who is sufficient for these things?”
But this is Judaism? It is humanism. But this old law is abolished? No, never can be abolished. It is one of the very laws which Jesus Christ came to “fulfil.” Who can do it? To help the cause of a friend would be a pleasure, but to lift up the burden from the back of the ass of an enemy tears us in pieces: tests our quality. Nor can we do it in a mere law-keeping spirit. We know that to keep this law we must be above the law; grace must have begun its redeeming and inspiring ministry in our hearts before we can keep this law in the perfectness of its meaning. We have all opportunities of doing honour to this law. Our enemies need help to day. The man who spoke basely about us may need bread at our hand at this moment; his trade is in a bad way, though a good trade in itself. We could bring custom to his hand, and help him out of his embarrassments. If we hesitate to do so we must no longer bear the Christian name. Do release Jesus Christ from the responsibility involved in such reluctance, or in such disobedience. First let him go! We cannot love Christ and hate an enemy.
But is not sentiment now supplanting law? Have we not left the marble halls of justice, and entered a chamber decked with coverings of tapestry? Certainly not. Read on:
“Neither shalt thou countenance a poor man in his cause” ( Exo 23:3 ).
There is no mere sentiment in that. The meaning is: A man is not to be excused because he is poor. The effect of the law is, that a man is not to be treated with mere pity on the ground of his poverty; the judge is not to say “If you had been a rich man you would have been punished, but being a poor man we take pity upon you.” When a man stands before the law, he stands neither rich nor poor; he stands as one who appeals to the law of right; he is there as a criminal: let him prove his innocence. So the Bible is not softly sentimental. It has not one law for the great, and another for the small, one ordinance for the rich, and another for the poor; it is exceeding broad, it is impartial, it has in it the elements and the guarantees of complete security.
And is it all law hard, iron, pitiless law? Is all life reduced to a schedule of regulations an infinite placard of times, seasons, appointments of a merely hireling kind, so much equivalent for so much labour? Read on:
“Three times thou shalt keep a feast unto me in the year. Thou shalt keep the feast of unleavened bread (thou shalt eat unleavened bread seven days, as I commanded thee, in the time appointed of the month Abib; for in it thou earnest out from Egypt: and none shall appear before me empty): and the feast of harvest, the firstfruits of thy labours, which thou hast sown in thy field: and the feast of ingathering, which is in the end of the year, when thou hast gathered in thy labours out of the field” ( Exo 23:14-16 ).
There is to be feasting as well as law-keeping; there is to be a recognition of the Lawgiver as well as a continual attempt to obey the letter of the law. There was to be a feast of memory the liberation from Egypt there was to be a feast of firstfruits, and there was to be a feast of ingathering. When men put the sickle into the wheatfield there was to be a feast unto the Lord. Fifty days were supposed to elapse between the putting in of the sickle and the full ingathering of the harvest. At the end of the fifty days, there was to be a feast of ingathering, a looking up into heaven, a recognition of the Divine and supernatural element in life. They whose faces had been towards the earth, and whose hands had been put out in daily labour, were to look up to heaven and stretch out the hands to the skies, and to say by attitude and by voice, “We are not the hirelings of men: we are the servants of the living God.” We need these festivals; we need the holy day; we are better for touching one another in Christian companionship and worship. We ought to be the more righteous, the more lofty, for spending one hour in the house consecrated to Jehovah’s praise. We cannot keep the law in all the fulness of Christian obedience until we have been with Christ, and learned of him. It is not our enemy’s ox that is in distress, but our enemy himself. We are not called upon to study the mere framework of regulated society, and to attend to enactments and stipulations which will keep that society in skeleton-outline together; we have not come into a political society, but into a Christian brotherhood. We are not to be kept back from smiting only that we have outlived long ago but we have to come into the spirit of forgiveness, largest pardon, multiplied, heaped up, forgiveness and pardon yea, here we may resort to all tautology of expression, if in the infinite redundance of our speech we do but give some feeble hint of the passion of love that has been created in our hearts by the Spirit of the Cross of Christ.
Thus the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ, and Christ came not to abolish the law, even about ox, and ass, and theft, and burning of standing corn, but to fulfil it, to glorify it, to carry it up to higher meaning, and thus to consolidate the New Society his Church and make it infinitely precious and secure.
We look with some curiosity upon all these endless laws and exactions, and think ourselves well quit of a mechanism so detailed and vexatious. Herein we rejoice before the time. We are not quit of one of them. Is not our life also set in a marvellous network of law? If all the laws which are continually operating upon us and impoverishing us by their taxation could be set down in a book, we should marvel with exceeding astonishment at the mechanism under which our own boasted liberty is breathing. We call ourselves free, and rejoice that all the exactions of the past are done away, and that now it lies very much with our own will to say when life’s work shall begin and end and of what it shall exactly consist. We enjoy no such liberty. We cannot put our foot down upon any point of the earth that is not throbbing with the energy of law. Not a hand can be put out that is not entangled in the meshes of never-ceasing ordinances of life and nature. Cause and effect proceed eternally. The seedtime and the harvest are still linked by bonds that cannot be sundered. The evil-doer finds a thorn in his pillow every night. The oppressor is made to feel that he himself is under domination. Every morning has its duty, every night its sacrifice; the whole year round is but one unceasing opportunity for self-expenditure and self-control. Our liberty consists in our being able to do all the law requires with a steadier hand and a loftier purpose. The law itself is not susponded. Not one moment less of time does God demand; not one penny less of gold, not one thought less of spiritual consecration and intensity of mind; only by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ we have come to such complete devotion of soul that what aforetime was grievous is now pleasant, and what at the beginning was almost impossible has now become the chief delight of life. Never suppose that law has been lessened in its force or in its details; the effort is wholly on the other side, that we ourselves have been blessed with greater power and have been brought into sweet consent with the Divine purpose.
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker
Negative Commandments
Exodus 22-23
We cannot read the book of Exodus without being struck by the number of things which we are not to do. These detailed and emphatic prohibitions we may regard under the name of negative commandments. We are not left to ourselves in any instance to determine a case of doubt; from beginning to end the Divine voice is clear, and direct, and final in its tone. These negative commandments are interesting upon every ground; but perhaps especially so as revealing human nature to itself. When we hear a command to do, or not to do, we hear in that command a voice which startles us into a new consciousness of our own nature and quality. To be told not to do certain things is now considered equivalent to a kind of affront assuming it possible that we could do such things as are thus forbidden. We are annoyed, we are excited in a hostile way, at the very thought of it being supposed that we could have done these things which a high legislation attempts elaborately and penally to forbid. We must, however, think ourselves back to the time of day at which all these negative and positive commandments were given. We do not find them in the New Testament, because it is there assumed that we have attained that moral sensitiveness and that spiritual responsiveness which render it entirely unnecessary that we, with many centuries of civilisation culminating in our experience and history, should be forbidden to do certain things.
Take some instances, and use them especially as showing what human nature is apart from Divine direction and continual and gracious supervision.
Who, for example, would imagine that such a commandment as this could be given to any people who profess to know anything about the true God?
“Thou shalt neither vex a stranger nor oppress him” ( Exo 22:21 ).
Is it possible to vex a stranger? Does not the very fact of his being a stranger entitle him to generous hospitality? to a kind construction of his mistakes? Ought we not to be ready to turn his ignorance into wisdom and his inexperience to certainty of knowledge? Yet is it not true that man can vex a brother man who is a stranger and oppress him? Is it not done every day? Is it not one of the tricks by which we live? Do we not pride ourselves upon being too quick for the stranger, or knowing more than he knows? and do we not turn our knowledge to our own advantage and to his personal loss? Why, in this command from Heaven, we have the beginning of the great Gospel of Christ. To God there are no strangers. And to ourselves there would have been no strangers had we been faithful to God. Why all this strangeness? Simply because we have become estranged from the Father of us all. The strangeness began between man and God, not between man and man, and not until we are right with God can we be right with one another. We may make arrangements for momentary convenience; we may consult public sentiment and study the bearing and influence of public doubts in relation to one another; but we cannot be as one heart, and one soul, until we are one with God through Jesus Christ his Son. You cannot permanently tinker the world; there is no rent in it that can be filled up with material at man’s command. The disease is desperate, vital, and only God, the Physician that is in Gilead, can find the healing for the disease infinite and unspeakable. But the command is a looking-glass. A man looking into it may see himself, see what he would do under given circumstances. The assumptions of the text are impeachments; put those impeachments into words, and how stands the great accusation? Thus: you would vex a stranger if you could; you would oppress a stranger if you could do so with impunity. You perhaps think you would not, but the deepest reading of human nature gives this as a result of the study of the human constitution that none can be so savage as man; there is not a beast in the field or in the forest that can equal man in cruelty. We talk about savage beasts and cruel and fierce creatures made to devour one another; but there is no cruelty so terrible, so unsparing, so pitiless, as the cruelty of the human heart. That is the accusation; we must leave the proof to human consciousness and to human history. We understand how men revolt from the suggestion, and how they cover up their passions by paying compliments to own their tenderness and sensibility; but the mischief is the subtle and tremendous mischief is that our very tenderness may be a calculation, our very tears may be shed as an investment for our own benefit. “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked.”
Akin to this commandment there is another. The tender words are these:
“Ye shall not afflict any widow, or fatherless child” ( Exo 22:22 ).
This is the Gospel of Christ in the book of Exodus. This is God the Father. There is a majestic solemnity in his voice that is full of ineffable tenderness. This is the Father of all. Would men afflict the widow, or the fatherless child? The answer must be frank and direct, and that answer will be in the affirmative. Who speaks for the widow? God; and the orphan? God. Then be cheerful, take heart again; the Orator who speaks for you is God. There are no fatherless children in the deepest sense of that term. As for the fathers we have had after the flesh, they themselves were children, as were their fathers and all their ancestors. There is only one Father. Let us take hold of hands and make a great ring round the family centre and say holding each tremulously, lusty manhood, thriving childhood timidly and lispingly, “Our Father which art in heaven.” Given the time when men shall say so with a sound heart, with an undivided mind, with a loyal and constant affection, and then find the angel who can tell where earth ends and heaven begins. Wondrous it is yea, more and more so that there should be found any friendless people, poor lonely destitute people, who do not love the Bible. Find me in it one text that does not warn the rich man to take care, for he is standing upon a very slippery place, and when he does slip he plunges a long way down. Find one text in all the glowing volume that rebukes the poor, that is hard with the struggling, that smites the penitent man in the face, that forbids a little child to trouble the Jehovah of the universe. Weakness, poverty, helplessness, homelessness, disease, pain, hunger, thirst these are thy clients, thou Servant of us all.
Changing the place altogether, you will find another commandment of a tone somewhat startling and surprising.
“Thou shalt not revile the gods… of thy people” ( Exo 22:28 ).
This is a passage difficult to understand and impossible fully to explain. In other places, we find idols broken, temples erected to forbidden names thrown down, as by great thunders, and lightnings, and strong winds blowing contempt from eternity upon the petty creations of the debased religious imagination. Yet consistently with all this there is to be no reviling of gods. This is a subtle lesson. Mock no man’s religion point out the inadequacy of it, show the vanity of the small idolatrous form, remark with pungency, if you please, upon its grotesqueness and its helplessness; but confine your remarks to the visible thing. That can be treated in this way with obvious reasonableness; but the religious instinct lies deeper than you have yet realised if you have been confining your attention to the mere forms of idol worship. The religion is beyond the idol, above it, below it, away from it. The idol itself is a mere symbol to typify the inexpressible infinite. You do not convert men by mocking their convictions, by reviling them on account of their mistakes. Do what you please with the opprobrious idol lift it up to prove how little it is in weight; set it down to show how helpless it is in your hand; throw it over to show that it cannot defend itself; but you have not treated the whole case in its entire scope and reality by thus treating the merely visible form of a religious conviction. Men may be mistaken in their convictions of a religious kind; show them the truth; live the truth; illustrate the possibility of living perfect, lofty, noble lives; create a religious wonder in the observer of your life as to the range of motive by which your conduct is mellowed and impelled; so live that you cannot be accounted for, except on the basis that you are living, moving, and having your being in God. Thus, and not by fluent mockery will men be drawn from their own mistakes to partake of the convictions which are as rational as they are beneficent. There is no poor suppliant crying to idols and praying to the empty and mocking wind that does not prove by that very act the mysterious, the Divine origin of the heart that can thus make such egregious mistakes. They are the mistakes of a Divine creation: they are not the petty mistakes of human ignorance. In the plunge of idolatry there is the apostacy of one almost God. It is a rush into a darkness from which any mere beast would flee in terror. Do not mock conviction; do not revile mistakenness of apprehension. Do what you please with the mere idol and with the transient ceremony; be even angry with these, yea, destructively angry, but find out in them an instinct, an emotion, a mystery to which you must address yourselves, not in the language of taunt, but in the language of sympathy, with a burning desire to redeem from prostitution an instinct which makes humanity.
“Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil” ( Exo 23:2 ).
Can a multitude do evil? One soul may stray, but can a whole multitude go away from the light and make itself houses in forbidden places? Can the majority be wrong? There is a sense in which the majority is at this moment against Christ. I would not count it so; rather would I see Christ in many disguises; but I should know it to be the very Christ, whatever the disguise which concealed the dignity. Christ has been with men when men did not know it; their eyes have been holden that they should not see him; he has revealed himself to men under many concealments of a strange kind. There is more Christ in the world than we possibly may suppose. God is infinite; God fills all space, and yet takes up no room; God mingles with thinking, civilisation, action, and yet the human factors in all the mysterious action may be unaware of the Divine presence and impulse; but there has been an unveiling, a sudden revelation of the reality of the case. We are waiting for that millennial disclosure. What if some day God shall look right in the face of the very people who have been doubting or denying any relation to him, and should thus convince them that all the time they have had nothing that they have not received from himself? and what if they should also be surprised by the recollection of a warmth of the heart, a glow of the soul, they had never felt before, and should find in that fire the presence of the God of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob? God may be working in you without your knowing his name, or without your being at present able to trace the Divine action, as distinctly separate from human thinking. We are waiting for the day of revelation, the morning of surprise, when we shall stand before God, saying, “Lo! thou wast with us and we knew it not. How solemn is every place which thou hast made!” But when the multitude does evil, we are not to follow it; we must stand still and protest against the evil; in other words, we must see the evil and not the multitude. Always put the emphasis upon the right word, in order to encourage yourself in good action and in straightforward conduct. The emphasis is not altogether upon the word multitude, it is upon the word evil; and we ought to ask God to be enabled so to pronounce the word evil as to feel revolt from everything which it implies and suggests.
Looking at these negative commandments, are we not surprised at the wonderful knowledge of human nature which they reveal? We cannot get away from them; we cannot plant ourselves right in front of them and say, “This is a misinterpretation of human nature.” We cannot return the dreadful look of the eyes that shine out of this revelation; we feel that we are in the hands of a Legislator who knows us altogether, and who speaks to us not according to transient and accidental phases of human nature but in the totality of our being. This is the strength of the Bible, this is the vindication of the commandments: that they root themselves in our constitution, that they know us, and that we can only escape their pressure by telling lies to our own souls. Herein is the inspiration of the Book. Its portraiture of man is a portraiture without a blemish or a flaw. He who drew man so completely in every lineament of his image, in every emotion and sensibility of his nature, must have made the man whose portrait he has delineated.
These commandments also show the true relation of God to the human race. He is the Ruler. He enjoins, he forbids; he never comes with apology from the skies, or palliation of sternness, but with the majesty of right. Yet there is one little word in the midst of all these commandments full of sweetest gospel a word that might have been found in one of the four Evangelists and that might have formed the text of every sermon preached by Apostolic wisdom and eloquence. The sentence you find in the twenty-second chapter and the twenty-seventh verse: “For I am gracious” a word we cannot do without We cannot explain it, yet we feel that it fills all space in human necessity and consciousness which no other word can fill. This is the defence of the commandments: that they are not arbitrary expressions of mere sovereignty of will and position in the universe, but that they, though commandments, are expressions of grace, mercy, pity, love. The very Spirit of the Cross is in the commandment. Sinai is but one phase of Calvary.
We try to evade many of these commandments on the plea that they were not addressed to us. It is a hollow plea; it is in fact a lie. We turn away from the commandments, saying, with an explanatory gesture, that we are not Jews. We are, if we are in Christ; if we have any love for Christ; if we feel that we must follow in some fashion the way and method of the Son of God. The Christian is a Jew plus. Christianity is the fruition of Judaism. The blood of the One Priest that abideth for ever and hath an unchangeable priesthood gathers up in its redness all the meaner blood which typified and prophesied its shedding. As well may the oak say “I am not an acorn” as Christianity say “I am not Judaism.” We cannot have the two Testaments torn asunder as though they had no relation one to the other. The New Testament would have been impossible but for the Old Testament. The song uttered in heaven is the song of Moses and the Lamb. “The law came by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.” Yet Jesus Christ said, “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.” If he did not recite these negative commandments, it was because he came to put within us a Spirit, a Paraclete, that should abide for ever, whose presence was a law, whose operation in the soul was a daily instruction in righteousness and wisdom, in love and pureness, in which he may stand above the commandments and treat them as an obsolete letter who has entered into the Spirit of Christ, and who is breathing in his daily life the obedience to which earlier men had to struggle through many an effort, and in struggling towards which they effected many a mournful failure. God never tells us to trust our moral instinct; God never assumed that the child could find its own way through a universe which it had darkened by its sin. He wrote down every line, made it complete; he wrote a detailed and complete specification of duty, service, action, and worship; if any of us have outlived the mere letter and need it no more, praised be God for a spiritual education which has delivered us from the bondage of the letter and led us into a nobler bondage of the heart, a sweet servitude of the soul, a glorious slavery, a glorious liberty.
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker
XII
THE COVENANT AT SINAI ITS GENERAL FEATURES
Exo 19:1-24:11
The covenant at Sinai is the central part of the Old Testament. There is no more important part than the giving of the law on Mount Sinai, coupled with all of the transactions that took place while the children of Israel remained there. We first discuss, in catechetical form, the covenant in its general features.
1. Describe the place of the covenant.
Ans. The name of the place is sometimes called Sinai and sometimes Horeb. Moses himself calls it each one. Horeb is the range of mountains of which Sinai is the chief peak. So you speak truly when you say that the law was given at Horeb and at Sinai. But that there is a distinction between the two, you have only to see that at Rephidim, where the rock was smitten, it was a part of the high range, and is called, in Exo 17:6 , the rock in Horeb; and yet the succeeding chapters show that they had not yet gotten to Sinai. In describing the place, then, the first thing is to give its name, which is the range of mountains called Horeb, whose chief peak is Sinai. The second idea of the place is that this range of mountains, including Sinai, is situated in Southern Arabia between two arms of the sea, and the triangular district between those two arms of the sea is called the Sianitic peninsula. The third part of the answer in describing the place is this: The immediate place has a valley two and one half miles long by one and one-half miles wide, perfectly level and right under Sinai. Sinai goes up like a precipice for a considerable distance, then slopes toward the peak, and Overlooks a valley and a plain, for it is a long way above the level of the sea. This valley is the only place in all tin country where the people could be brought together in one body for such purposes as were transacted here. Modern re- search has made it perfectly clear that this valley right under Sinai is the place for the camp, and you can put three millions of people there, and then up the gorges on the mountain sides there is abundant range for their flocks and herds.
2. What are the historical associations of this place, before and since?
Ans. It was called the Mount of God before Moses ever saw it, and there was a good road into these mountains prepared by the Egyptians in order to get to certain mines which they had in the mountains of Horeb. Since that time we associate Horeb with Elijah when he got scared and ran a the way from Samaria to Mount Sinai a big run; he was very badly scared; and what he was scared at was more terrible than a man; a woman was after him. He was not afraid of Ahab, but he was afraid of Jezebel. Now, Sinai is associated with Elijah; and I believe that Jesus went to Sinai, an I am sure Paul did. He says when he was called to preach, “I did not go to Jerusalem for the people there to tell me now to preach, but I went into Arabia.” He stayed there three years, and, as I think, he came down to this place when the Law was given, in order to catch the spirit of the occasion of the giving of the Law from looking at the mountain itself and there received the revelations of the new covenant which was to supersede the covenant given upon Mount Sinai. Long after Paul’s time the historical associations of Sinai are abundant. Many of the books that teach about the Crusades have remarkable incidents in connection with the Sinaitic Peninsula and particularly this mountain. If you were there today, you would see buildings perpetuating Mosaic incidents, and on this mountain is a convent belonging to the Eastern, the Greek church, rather than to the Roman church; and in that convent Tischendorf found the famous Sinaitic manuscript of the New Testament, which is the oldest, the best and the most complete. There are associations in connection with Sinai which extend to the fifteenth century and even after.
3. What was the time of the arrival of these people at this mountain?
Ans. The record says, “In the third month after the children of Israel were gone forth out of the land of Egypt, the game day came they into the wilderness of Sinai.” In chapter 16 it says: “And they took their journey from Elim, and all the congregation of the children of Israel came unto the wilderness of Sin, which is between Elim and Sinai, on the fifteenth day of the second month after their departing out of the land of Egypt.” They left Egypt on the fifteenth and were in the wilderness of Sin on the fifteenth of the next month, one month’s time; but while it is only one month in time, it covered parts of two months. “Now in the third month”, but just where in it the record does not say they reached Sinai. Another question on that directly.
In discussing this subject, I shall have the following general heads: (1) The Preparation for the Covenant; (2) The Covenant Itself; (3) The Stipulations of the Covenant; (4) The Covenant Accepted; (5) The Covenant Ratified; (6) The Feast of the Covenant. That will be the order of this chapter.
4. What was the proposition and reply?
Ans. In chapter 19 the proposition for the covenant comes from God in these words: “And Moses went up unto God, and Jehovah called unto him out of the mountain, saying, Thus shalt thou say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel [here’s the proposition]: Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bare you on eagles’ wings, and brought you unto myself. Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be mine own possession from among all peoples: For all the earth is mine: and ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.” On those terms God proposes a covenant. Now, let us see if the people agree to enter into covenant with God: “And Moses came and called for the elders of the people, and set before them all these words which Jehovah commanded him. And all the people answered together and said, All that Jehovah hath spoken we will do.” Moses then reported back to God what the people said here was a mutual agreement on the part of the people enter into a covenant (Exo 19:7-8 ).
5. What was the method of Jehovah’s approach in order enter the covenant?
Ans. The theophanv. “Theonhany” means an appearance of God. God says to Moses, in describing how he will come, that he will come in a cloud; that they won’t see him; but they will see the cloud and hear his voice; an appearance of God, some of it visible, a cloud that envelops God, and voice Heard.
6. What was the preparation for this covenant they se to enter into?
Ans. The first part of it was to sanctify the mountain “Sanctify” means to set apart, or to make holy; to sanctify a mountain is to set it apart. That mountain which was to be the scene and place of this great covenant between God and the people was set apart, things set upon it, fenced about’, with the prohibitions of God: “Don’t you come too close I it; don’t touch it.” Just as God fenced the burning bush when he said to Moses “Don’t, draw nigh; stop, you are enough; take the shoes off your feet; this is holy ground.” The next part of the preparation was to sanctify the people. This was done ceremonially. They were ceremonially purified, as is expressed in these words: “Go down, charge the people, lest they break through unto Jehovah to gaze, and many of them perish. And let the priests also that come near to Jehovah, sanctify themselves, lest Jehovah break forth upon them.”
7. What was to be the signal which would bring the people close to that mountain and put them into the presence of God?
Ans. It was a trumpet sound, described on this occasion in such a way as to thrill the people hearing the sound. This sound was prolonged, and thus it waxed louder and louder and louder a fearful, unearthly sound. No human lips blew that trumpet earth never heard it before; the earth will hear it again only one more time, and that when Christ comes to judge the world; he will then come with the sound of a trumpet.
8. What was to be the time when God and the people, after this preparation, should come together?
Ans. On the third day.
9. Describe Jehovah’s coming on the third day and compare Deu 4:10-12 .
Ans. The record says, “And it came to pass on the third day, when it was morning, that there were thunders and lightnings, and a thick cloud upon the mount, and the voice of the trumpet exceeding loud; and all the people that were in the camp trembled. And Moses brought forth the people out of the camp to meet God; and they stood at the nether part of the mount. And Mount Sinai) the whole of it, smoked, because Jehovah descended upon it in fire; and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly. And when the voice of the trumpet waxed louder and louder, Moses spake, and God answered him by a voice” (Exo 19:16-19 ). In Deu 4:10-12 , Moses describes it again, referring to that great occasion, the theophany, and he uses this language: “The day that thou stoodest before Jehovah thy God in Horeb, when Jehovah said unto me, Assemble me the people, and I will make them hear my words, that they may learn to fear me all the days that they live upon the earth, and that they may teach their children. And ye came near and stood under the mountain; and the mountain burned with fire unto the heart of heaven, with darkness, cloud, and thick darkness. And Jehovah spake unto you out of the midst of the fire: ye heard the voice of words but ye saw no form; only ye heard a voice.” “Form” or similitude is a likeness; “you heard a voice, but saw no likeness or similitude of God.”
10. Who was the mediator of this covenant between God: and the people?
Ans. You will notice that the people and God do not come together directly. In the book of Job he says, “There is no daysman who shall stand between me and God, touching God, touching me.” If God had revealed himself visibly to the people and directly, the sight would have killed them, for they were a sinful people. In order to get to them, then, there was a necessity for a middleman, a mediator; one who should approach God for the people and approach the people for God. Now who was this mediator? Moses.
11. What part did the angels take, and how signified?
Ans. In the later books of the Bible we learn that this law was given by the disposition of angels and was signified by that trumpet, the trumpet served to summon the whole army of God’s angels.
12. When again will it sound, and why?
Ans. When the judgment day comes: “He shall come with the sound of the trumpet”; and when that trumpet sounds, its object is not to wake the dead, according to the Negro theology, but to marshal the angels, to bring them back with him.
13. What are the great lessons of this preparation?
Ans. Let us get these clearly in our minds:
(1) That this is to be a theocratic covenant. I want you to get the idea of this, viz.: The difference between a democratic covenant (made with all the people), an aristocratic covenant (made with the nobles, the best of the people) and a theocratic covenant, one in which God alone makes the stipulation. The people don’t prescribe anything. God tells everything that is to be done, either on his part or on their part. All the people have to do in a theocratic covenant is to say “yes” or “no”; to accept or reject.
(2) That it was a mediatorial covenant) not a covenant directly between God and the people, but a covenant in which a daysman goes between, a mediator to transmit from God to the people, and from the people to God.
(3) The third great lesson is that the people, in order to enter into a covenant with God, even through a mediator, must have the following requirements:
(a) They must make a great voluntary decision (Exo 24:8 ). You remember when Elijah summoned all the people to meet him on the mountain with the prophets of Baal, and had the test as to who was God, and the prophets of Baal were to try to bring proof that they represented God, and he was to prove that he represented God; that he proposed to them that day to make a great decision: “How long halt ye?” “Halt” does not mean to “linger,” but to “limp”; a halting man in the Bible is a “limping” man. “How long hobble ye as a limping man between two opinions? If the Lord be God, follow him; if Baal be God, follow him” (1Ki 18:21-40 ). This is the lesson: That what the people must do was to make this great decision. Moses could not make it for them. They were brought up there; they had plenty of ground on which to stand; that valley was two and a half miles long and one and a half miles wide; and God could speak loud enough for them to hear him, and anything they said he could hear. “Now, you people, will you make this decision?” And they said, “We will.”
(b) The people must have fear toward Jehovah. “You are not entering into a covenant with a dumb idol, but with the living God.”
(c) “And you must have reverence. Don’t get too close to the divine presence; don’t try to break through that fence; don’t touch the mountain; do not presume to be intimate with Jehovah. You must have reverence.”
(d) The next requirement was holiness; and that holiness is a sanctifying by the ceremonial purification. The last requirement
(e) is obedience. “Will you obey? Will you do it.?” Suppose now, to give you, the idea perfectly, I ask again: What are the great lesson from this preparation? Theocratic covenant; lessons of the mediatorial covenant; What the people must do: decide, fear God, have reverence, be purified, obey God. That discusses the first part of the preparation for the covenant. We will now discuss, in general terms, the covenant itself.
14. Give proofs that what we call the giving of the law of Mount Sinai is a covenant as well as a law.
Ans. The evidence of its being a covenant is presented by the meaning of the word “covenant,” viz.: agreement between two, under stipulations binding either party. That is a covenant; and the ratification takes place by the sacrifice of a victim. All the covenants of the Old Testament are of that kind. As a proof that this is a covenant, God, the party of the first part, makes the proposition to enter into the covenant; then the people agree to it; and next, God prescribes, what he will do, and what they must do. These are the stipulations of the covenant. Then the people must accept formally after they have heard all the stipulations, and then comes the ratification. In Exo 24:1-8 , we have an account of the ratification. In this chapter I shall speak of it more as a covenant than as a law.
15. What are its three constituent parts, binding the people?
Ans. Whatever mistakes you make, do not make a mistake in answering this question. It is just as clear as a sunbeam that this covenant entered into on Mount Sinai has three distinctive, constituent parts:
(1) The moral law (Exo 20:17 ), the Ten Commandments, the first part of the covenant.
(2) The altar, or law of approach to God (Exo 20:24-26 ; Exo 23:14-19 ). In case you cannot keep the moral law, the law of the altar comes in.
(3) The civil or national law, (Exodus 1-23:13). Now, what are the constituent parts of the covenant? Moral law, law of the altar, or way of approach to God, also the civil, or national law. The civil law of judgments covers several chapters: they are all a part of this covenant. Now, let us separate those ideas:
(1) Relates to the character of the person;
(2) to the way you can approach God, if you fail in character;
(3) to the civil, or national affairs. Israel was a nation. This is not Abraham making a covenant; it is not Moses making one; it is a nation entering into a covenant with God, to be his treasure, his peculiar people. And I venture to say that everything else in the Pentateuch, whether in the rest of the book of Exodus, in Leviticus, in Numbers, or in Deuteronomy, everything is developed from one or other of these three things. All Leviticus is developed from the law of the altar; it is just simply an elaboration of that part of this covenant they entered into with God, and was enacted when they were at Sinai. All that part of Numbers up to the time they left Sinai (first ten chapters) is a development of one or another of these three parts. Every new enactment which comes in Numbers, every restatement occurring in Deuteronomy must be collocated there with the moral law and with the altar law, or with the national law. I had the pleasure at Brownwood, Texas, at the request of the school, the churches, and the people there, to deliver a lecture on Leviticus, so as in one lecture to give those people an idea of the book. And the first thing I wrote on the blackboard was: “Everything in the book of Leviticus is developed from that part of the covenant given on Mount Sinai which relates to the law of the altar, or the way of approach to God.”
16. In what prophecy is it shown that this covenant given on Mount Sinai shall be superseded by a new covenant with different terms?
Ans. Jeremiah is the prophet. The passage commences: “In the last days, saith the Lord, I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, not like the covenant I made with them when I led them out of Egypt.” Jeremiah then shows how different the terms of the new covenant shall be from those of the covenant given at Sinai (Jer 31:31-34 ).
17. Where in the New Testament are the terms of the two covenants contrasted in this form: “Do and thou shalt live,” and “Live and (thou shalt) do”?
Ans. You are bound to see that there is a sharp contrast between the new and the old covenants. If this old covenant says, “Do in order to live,” and the new one says, “Live in order to do,” you must be alive before you can do; and they then start in different directions, keep going away from each other, one going up, the other going down. Where in the New Testament is that thought brought out? (Rom 10:5 ff.)
18. Where in the New Testament is the contrast between the two covenants expressed in allegory?
Ans. Gal 4:24 ff.
19. What three books of the New Testament best expound the covenants as contrasted?
Ans. Galatians, Romans, and Hebrews (in that order), particularly, Hebrews. And now comes a question of chronology.
20. What is the support for the Jewish tradition that this covenant was enacted the fiftieth day after the Passover sacrifice in Exo 12 ?
Ans. You know the Jews always have maintained that the law given on Mount Sinai was on the fiftieth day after the Passover was celebrated; just as in the New Testament the Holy Spirit was given on the fiftieth day after the sacrifice of Christ on the cross. Alexander Campbell makes a great point of that: The giving of the new covenant law must be on the fiftieth day after Christ’s crucifixion. You could make it a proof this way: Exo 12 says that this month Abib, later called Nisan, i.e., after the captivity it was so called, shall be the beginning of the year to you, and on the fifteenth day of that month they left Egypt, not on the first day of the month, but on the fifteenth, which was the beginning of the new year. The Passover was slain on the night of the fourteenth, and hurriedly eaten. On the fifteenth they marched out. Chapter 16 tells us that on the fifteenth day of the next month, which would be about a month after they left Egypt, they were then in the wilderness of Sin, not very far from Mount Sinai, but only one month gone. Now, there are several stations at which they stopped before reaching Sinai, and they could be at Sinai and waiting three days, devoting the time to preparation, and making the giving of the law on the fiftieth day. The argument can be made out so that the time covered from the leaving of Rameses in Egypt to the arrival at Sinai would be less than two months, as fifty days does not equal two lunar months; there must be fifty-six days to get two lunar months, even.
21. The next question bears on the stipulations of the covenant. Where do we find the stipulations of what God would do for his part?
Ans. What God proposes to do is expressed in Exo 19:5 : “Ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people, and ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation.” Then in Exo 23:20 he enumerates what he will do. “I send an angel before thee, to keep thee by the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. . . . Mine angel shall go before thee . . . and I will cut off the opposing nations . . . and ye shall serve Jehovah your God, and he will bless thy bread, and thy water; and I will take sickness away from the midst of thee . . . I will drive these nations out from before thee. . . . And I will set thy border from the Red Sea even unto the sea of the Philistines, and from the wilderness unto the river [i.e., Euphrates].” In other words, he will do what he promised to Abraham he would do, as to their boundary. That is what he proposes to do.
22. What must the people do?
Aug. Keep those three parts of that covenant, having fear and reverence toward God, and toward his angels and toward Moses, the mediator. That is their part of the covenant.
23. Cite the passage to prove that the people agreed to enter into the covenant when proposed, and cite the passage showing their acceptance of it when stated. Pause Key (Key: Enter!)
Ans. – The covenant having been stated in all of its parts, God propounds to the people the plain question: “Will you accept it?” thus: “Moses told the people all the words of the law,” i.e., the Decalogue, with the judgments, or the civil law, and the law of the altar, or the way of approach to God. And Moses wrote these words and said to the people, “Will you do them?” They said, “We will.” It is very plain that after they had heard they accepted. And the next thing is the ratification.
24. Describe the ratification.
Ans. – I quote it: “Moses rose up early in the morning, and builded an altar under the mount, and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel. And he sent young men of the children of Israel, who offered burnt offerings, and sacrificed peace offerings of oxen unto Jehovah. And Moses took half of the blood, and put it in basins; and half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar. And he took the book of the covenant [wrote those in a book; what both parties had obligated themselves to observe] and read in the audience of the people; and they said, All that Jehovah hath spoken will we do, and be obedient. And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which Jehovah hath made with you concerning all these words” (Exo 24:4-8 ). That was the ratification.
25. What are the developments in the rest of the Pentateuch from each of the three parts of the covenant?
Ans. – The last chapter of Exodus, all of Leviticus, a large part of Numbers are devoted to the development of the Law of the Altar, Deuteronomy, to the Ten Commandments; a large part of Exodus and some of Deuteronomy, to the Civil Code.
26. In what part was the gospel germ?
Ans. – In the Altar, or Law of Approach to God.
27. What three books are specially commended?
Ans. – Boardman’s Lectures on the Ten Commandments; Butler’s Bible on the Giving of the Law at Sinai; and the) Presbyterian Catechism on the Ten Commandments.
28. What is the sign, or token of the covenant? Cite scripture.
Ans. — Circumcision. Gal 5:2 .
29. How long after the call of Abraham and the promise to him, was this?
Ans. – Paul says, “Four hundred and thirty years.” See Gal 3:17 .
XIII
THE COVENANT AT SINAI (Continued)
Scripture: Same as in preceding chapter
1. The first question is based on Exo 24:7 : “And he took the book of the covenant.” What is this book of the covenant?
Ans. All that part of Exodus 19-24-11. Moses wrote it then.
2. How may this book be regarded and what is its relation to all subsequent legislation in the Pentateuch?
Ans. You may regard the book of the covenant as a constitution and all subsequent legislation as statutes evolved from that constitution. The United States adopted a constitution of principles and the revised statutes of the United States are all evolved from the principles contained in that constitution. So that this book of the covenant may be regarded as a national constitution.
3. Why, then, is the whole of the Pentateuch called the law?
Ans. Because every part of the Pentateuch is essential to the understanding of the law. The historical part is just as necessary to the understanding of the law as any particular provision in the constitution, or any particular statute evolved from the constitution. The history must commence back at creation and go down to the passage over into the Promised Land. Very appropriately, then, do the Jews call the Pentateuch the torah, the law.
4. What other Pentateuchs?
Ans. The five books of the Psalter. When you come to study the psalms, I will show you just where each book of the psalms commences and where it ends. They are just as distinct as the five books of Moses. Another Pentateuch is the fivefold Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul; and as Moses’ Pentateuch is followed by Joshua the man of deeds, the Gospel Pentateuch is followed by Acts, which means deeds.
5. Where and when was a restatement and renewal of this covenant at Sinai?
Ans. In the book of Deuteronomy. There not only had been a breach of the covenant in the case of the golden calf, which was forgiven, but there came a more permanent breach at Kadesh-barnea when the people refused, after God brought them to the border, to go over into the Promised Land, and they wandered until all that generation died. Their children are brought where their fathers would have been brought, and it became necessary to renew that covenant. You find the Ten Commandments in Deuteronomy just as you find them here.
6. State again exactly the three parts of the covenant.
Ans. (1) The Ten Commandments, or moral law (Exo 20:1-17 ); (2) the law of the altar, or the way of approach to God, in case the Ten Commandments were violated; (3) The judgments, or the civil law. Now from those three parts, the constituent elements of the covenant, are evolved everything, you might say, in all the rest of the books of the Bible. Leviticus is all evolved from the law of the altar; very much of Numbers and Deuteronomy is evolved from the civil law. Now before I consider Part I, that is, the Decalogue, I want to make a brief restatement of some things in the preceding chapter. The first is the covenant. A covenant is an agreement or compact between two or more parties with expressed stipulations showing what the two parties are to do. The parties to this Sinai covenant are: God upon the first part, and the people on the second part, with Moses as the daysman or mediator. In the preceding chapter we had the following outline:
A proposition upon God’s part for a covenant and the people’s acceptance of that proposition; A preparation for entering into that covenant; The covenant itself as expressed in three parts; The stipulations of the covenant as shown in the last chapter; The covenant ratified; The Feast of the Covenant.
Now we take up Part (1) the moral law; and we are to consider that moral law first, generally, then specifically. I can, in this chapter, get into only a part of the specifics of it.
7. What do we call Part I of this Covenant?
Ans. We call it the moral law; or, using a Greek word, the Decalogue.
8. What are the three scriptural names?
Ans. The Bible gives (1) “the ten words”; that is what “decalogue” means, “the ten words spoken.” God spake all these words. (2) “The tables” or “tablets,” whereon these words were written, and (3) “the tables of the testimony.” When this written form was deposited in the ark of the covenant, from that time on they are called “the tables of the testimony.”
9. Give the history of these tablets.
Ans. They were written on tables of stone by the finger of God; that was the original copy. Moses broke them when the people made a breach of the covenant in the matter of the golden calf. God called him up into the mountain again and rewrote these Ten Commandments; that was the second copy. Both of these God wrote. These two tables that God wrote on were deposited in the ark when it was constructed, and that, too, before they left this Mount Sinai. The last time they were seen, you learn from 1Ki 8 , was when Solomon moved that ark out of the tabernacle into the Temple which he had built. He had it opened and in there were the two tables of atone on which God had written. The probable fate of them is this, that when Jerusalem was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar, he may have taken the ark of the covenant with the things in it as memorials of his victory, just as when Titus destroyed the Temple he took away the sacred things of the Temple; the seven-branched golden candlestick was carried in triumph into the city of Rome.
10. Divide these ten words first into grand divisions, and then into subdivisions.
Ans. The grand divisions were two tables, one of them were the commandments relating to God, i.e., man’s duty to God, and the other were the commandments expressing man’s relation to his fellowman. The subdivisions are these: all that part of Exodus from Exo 20:2-17 is divided into ten parts. Those are the subdivisions of the two tables. We will note them precisely a little further on in the comments for Exo 20:1-6 .
11. What is the Romanist method of subdivision and what are the objections thereto?
Ans. The Romanists make one out of the first two commandments, and two out of the last. We say that the First Commandment is, “Thou shall have no other gods before me,” and they say the first command is: “I am the Lord thy God which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage, etc.,” to the end of the Second Commandment.
12. What other ten words and how do you compare them?
Ans. The ten words of creation and the ten Beatitudes spoken by our Lord. We compare them by a responsive reading.
13. How and where does Moses compress the ten into two?
Ans. I will give the compression. In one place Moses says, “Thou shall love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength.” In another place Moses says, “Thou shalt love their neighbour as thyself,” compressing the first table into one and the second table into one (Deu 6:4 f; Lev 19:18 ).
14. What was the occasion of Christ’s quotation of Moses compression?
Ans. An inquirer came to him propounding this question: “Which is the great commandment in the law?” Jesus, quoting Moses, says, “This is the great and first commandment, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul and with all thy mind. And a second like unto it is this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments the whole law hangeth, and the prophets.”
15. What New Testament scripture shows the solidarity of the law?
Ans. The solidarity of a thing means the inability to touch any part without touching it all; and if you violate one commandment you violate all the Decalogue, and if you are guilty of one you are guilty of all. The place in the New Testament where it is said, “He that is guilty of one point in the law is guilty of all,” is Jas 2:10 . That passage expresses the solidarity of the law.
16. How does the New Testament compress the ten into one?
Ans. This passage is: “All the law is fulfilled in this one word, love,” (Gal 5:14 ).
17. Is this giving of the law, orally or in writing, the origin of the law? That is, was there no law before? Was it the origin of the law; and if not, what is it, and why is it?
Ans. This is not the origin of the law, but it is an addition. The Scriptures say, “The law was added because of trans-gression.”
18. Then, what is law?
Ans. Law is that intent or purpose in the mind of the Creator, concerning any being or thing that he causes to be. Now, the intent that he had in his mind, the purpose, when he made man, is the law of man. The intent or purpose that he had in mind when he created the tree is the law of the tree. That law may not be expressed. It inheres: it is there in the nature of the thing. It may be expressed in the spoken commandment or in the written one. But you do not have to wait until the word is spoken or till the spoken word is written in order to have law. For example, Paul says, “Death reigned from Adam to Moses.” But death is the penalty of the law, and “where there is no law there is no transgression.” Now, if law didn’t exist before given on Mount Sinai, why did those people die?
19. If the spoken or written law at Sinai was added because of transgression, show more particularly and illustrate its purpose, both negatively and positively. Now, if a law exists in God’s mind and in the nature of the things that he creates, why did he afterward speak that law and have it written?
Ans. (1) Because of transgression. We now show the mean ing of that, and illustrate it. We have the answer in this form: The purpose of speaking this law and of having it written negatively, was not to save men by it. They were lost when it was developed. But first it was to discover sin. Sin is hidden and there was a law, but it was not written or spoken. Now, God put that law in writing so that it could be held up by the side of a man, and his life, and his deeds to discover sin in him. Paul says, “I had not known sin except by the law.” (2) This sin by the law is discovered to the man in order to convict him of this sin. Paul says, ” I was alive without the law once [that is, before I knew it I felt like I was all right], but when the commandment came sin revived and I died. I saw myself to be a dead man.” In the next place, (3) it was to make the sin, which looked like something else before the man had the law, appear to be sin, as Paul says in his letter to the Romans, and also, to make it appear to be “exceedingly sinful.” Now to illustrate: Suppose on a blackboard we were to trace a zigzag turning line. That is the path a man walks; he is in the woods and thinks he is going straight, and he feels all right. Now you put a rule there, which is exactly straight, and just watch how that zigzag walk of his is sometimes on one side and sometimes on the other. The rule discovers the variations; it makes it known. Now here is (4) another purpose of the, Law: To incite to sin in order that the heinousness of the exceeding sinfulness of sin may be made manifest. Now, maybe you don’t believe that. Paul says it is so, and I can give you an illustration that will enable you to see just how it is so. I never saw one of the Baylor University boys put his foot on top of the mail box at the street corner, but if the faculty should pass a law that no boy should put his foot on that mail box, some boy’s foot would go on top of it, certainly. Now, that boy may have imagined all along that he was law abiding. But put a standard there and he wants to test it right away. I illustrate again: A little boy once saw a baldheaded man going along up the side of a hill, and the boy said, “Go up, thou bald head! Now trot out your bears.” He had been told that if he was irreverent toward an old, baldheaded man, as the boys were toward Elisha, the bears would tear him to pieces.
20. Explain carefully the Christian’s relation to this law.
Ans. It is a part of the old covenant, you say, and we have a new covenant now. Then is a Christian under obligations to keep this law? Is the law binding on you not to kill, not to lie, not to steal, not to commit adultery? We certainly would be extreme antinomians if we were to say that as an obligation that does not rest on us. It does rest on us, but it does not rest on us as a way to eternal life. You see the distinction? The time never will come when it will be right for a man to kill, to steal, to commit adultery, to covet, and no matter who does any one of these things, whether saint or sinner, it is sin. But the keeping of the Decalogue is an obligation upon the Christian because it is in the nature of his being, as when it was spoken at Sinai, yet that is not the Christian’s way to obtain eternal life.
21. What is the form of the statement of the ten words?
Ans. Negative and positive. For some of them: “Thou shalt not”; for others, positive: “Honour thy father,” etc.; but whether the form be positive or negative if it is negative, it has a positive idea attached, and if it is positive it has a negative idea. If it is an affirmation, it is also a prohibition. No matter what the form, it does prescribe certain things and it does proscribe certain things.
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
XXIV
GOD AND THE STATE, THE STATE AND THE CITIZEN, THE PROMISES, AND THE RATIFICATION OF THE COVENANT Exo 21:1-24:8
1. What are the lesson and the themes?
Ans. Lesson: Exo 21:1-24:8 . Themes: (1) God and the state; and the state and the citizen, 21:1-23:19.
(2) The promises of the covenant, Exo 23:20-33 .
(3) The ratification of the covenant, Exo 24:1-8 . Having considered Part I of the covenant, the Decalogue, or God and the normal man, and Part II, the altar, or God and the sinner, we now consider Part III, the judgments, or God and the state, and the state and the citizen. This lesson is contained in Exodus 21-23.
2. What is the name of section Exo 21:1-23:19 ?
Ans. This section is called the judgments, or decrees.
3. What is the book of the covenant, and what may it be called?
Ans. The whole book of the covenant, i.e., from Exo 19:1-24:8 , in its three parts and in its ratification, may well be called the constitution of the nation of Israel; and all subsequent legislation in the Pentateuch is but statutes developed from this constitution. The United States has a written Constitution; all the legislation of Congress must be simply enlargements or developments of the fundamental principles contained in that Constitution.
4. How is God recognized in this section?
Ans. He is the author of the state, as he is the author of its antecedents, the family and the tribe.
5. What results from this origin of the state?
Ans. God’s providential government over the nations, counted as units, and their responsibility to him.
6. How does Paul put it?
Ans. In Rom 13:1-7 , he says: “The powers that be are ordained of God. Therefore he that resisteth the power, withstandeth the ordinance of God: and they that withstand shall receive to themselves judgment. For rulers are not a terror to the good work, but to the evil. And wouldest thou have no fear of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise from the same: for he is a minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is a minister of God, an avenger for wrath to him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be in subjection not only because of the wrath, but also for conscience’ sake. For for this cause ye pay tribute also; for they are ministers of God’s service, attending continually upon this very thing. Render to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.”
In I Timothy Paul puts it this way: “I exhort therefore, first of all, that supplications, prayers, intercessions, thanksgivings, be made for all men; for kings and all that are in high places; that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and gravity. This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; who would have all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth.” The powers, then, must be respected and honoured, and must be prayed for by those having the good of society at heart (1Ti 2:1-4 ).
7. What is extent of God’s government over the nations and the proof from Paul and Daniel?
Ans. It is absolute in authority and universal in scope; so that the ruler or state must perish that despises God, as Paul says in Act 17:24-31 : “God hath determined . . . the bounds of their habitation and decreed that they should seek after him.” Daniel puts it more strongly in Dan 4:10-37 , especially Dan 4:17 ; Dan 4:25 ; Dan 4:34-35 ; Dan 4:37 , where it is affirmed that God holds a nation responsible just as he holds an individual responsible, and that the ruler who does not know God puts himself on a level with the beast, and that he must be disciplined until he does know that the Most High ruleth over the nations of the world, and that the inhabitants of the earth are but as grasshoppers in his sight.
8. From what additional source arises the state’s jurisdiction over the citizen?
Ans. We have just discussed the authority of God over the state. Now the authority of the state over the citizen, apart from God’s having ordained it, arises also from the social nature of man. He is not independent of other men but codependent with them. The ties which bind him to his fellow men are natural, inherent, indissoluble, and cannot be despised with impunity; so that he cannot be self-centered and apart.
9. What was the particular form of state government organized at Sinai and its subsequent changes?
Ans. This particular Jewish state was theocratic in form, God himself was the king of the nation, and in visible symbol dwelt among them. But keep the etymology of certain words in your mind, viz.: theocracy, aristocracy, democracy. That form of government established over the Jewish nation at Sinai was theocratic, i.e., God was the ruler. There were changes in the form of this national government in subsequent ages. The first change took place in the days of Samuel, when the people rejected God as governor and selected, after the manner of the nations, a man to be their ruler (1Sa 8:4-22 Joshua was priest, and the heads of the tribes were the rulers.). This was the establishment of a monarchial form of government, not theocratic; it was thus changed from a theocracy to a monarchy. Subsequently it perished (2Ki 25 ) and the form of government became in the days of Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zechariah, a mixture of democratic, aristocratic, and the priestly. That is to say, Zerubbabel was governor, Joshua was priest, and the heads of the tribes were the rulers. This mixture continued until under Herod the Great it again became a kingdom, a monarchy, and from that time, it passed into a provincial government under Roman procurators. Those were the changes in the government; then upon the destruction of Jerusalem they were a scattered people without a king, without an ephod, without a priest, without a temple, without sacrifices, and with no national government; and they continue so until this day.
10. Our present section (Exo 21:1-22:10 ) establishes the general principles on which the state shall deal with what matters?
Ans. – (1) With property in slaves, Exo 21:1-11 ; (2) The sanctity of human life, or criminal law, Exo 21:12-36 ; (3) With other kinds of property, Exo 22:1-15 ; (4) With the stranger, the widow, the orphan, and the poor, Exo 22:21-27 ; Exo 23:5 ; Exo 23:11 ; (5) With cases of seduction, Exo 22:16-17 ; (6) With sins against nature, Exo 22:19 , that mate man with the brute, disregarding the distinction between man and beast; (7) With the rights of neighbor or enemy in the matter of his domestic animals going astray, or found in suffering, Exo 23:4-5 ; (8) With false testimony and bribery, Exo 23:1-3 ; Exo 23:7-9 ; (9) With sins against the first commandments, i.e., making sacrifices to others than Jehovah, Exo 22:20 ; Exo 23:13 ; (10) Sins of necromancy, Exo 22:18 , i.e., wizards or witches ‘that seek to find out the future from the dead or from other sources, and not depending on God for revelation; (II) Sins against rulers, Exo 22:28 : “Thou shalt not curse the rulers of the people,” Exo 23:10-11 , and of the weekly sabbaths, Exo 23:12 ; (12) With God’s rights to his firstfruits of the family, the harvest, the herd, and the flock, Exo 22:29-31 ; (13) The three annual festivals, Exo 23:14-19 ; (14) With cases of eating blood, Exo 22:31 . Man was not allowed to eat meat with blood in it, for the blood is the life thereof. He could eat no meat from which the blood had not first been drained; if an animal died and the blood was still in him, he must not eat of that animal; if a wild beast had killed an animal and the blood remained in it he could not eat that which was slain of the beasts. This section shows that God gives the state power to deal with these fourteen questions; it is not God but the state dealing with them. If one violated the sabbath law, the state could put him to death; if he made a sacrifice to another god, the state could put him to death; if he stole a man and put him into slavery, the state could put him to death.
11. What is evident from the scope and variety of these’ cases?
Ans. From the scope and variety of these judgments it is evident that a theocratic state is a union of church and state, the state having jurisdiction over religious matters, as well &a civil, its magistrates and courts being charged with the responsibility of enforcing under penalties duties toward God as well as duties toward man and beast.
12. What are the conditions of success in a theocratic government?
Ans. These are evident as follows: (1) God alone must legislate; (2) God must be present as an oracle to settle vexing questions; as an interpreter of law; as omniscient to read the heart back of the overt act; as omnipotent to enforce the law; and as infinitely holy, just, and merciful to insure the right legislation and right administration of the legislation; (3) The people must have the heart and will to obey every requirement of his law. If you take away these conditions, a theocratic government is a failure.
13. What are the hazards under present conditions?
Ans. The priest may assume the functions of deity, the legislator to define religion, the oracle to interpret it and then call on the state to enforce it. Since he has not the holiness, justice, and mercy of God, nor his wisdom and omniscience, the state may thus become the slave of superstition, priestcraft and irreligion, and the people the victims of its tyranny. These conditions are when the people’s heart are not right toward God and when they are not disposed to obey him.
14. Cite instances where these hazards have been realized.
Ans. History records many instances of just such priestly usurpation of powers with ruinous results to the people. The whole Romanist hierarchy from its establishment down to the present time is an illustration. The Pope claims to be God’s vicar, in the place of the Holy Spirit; he claims the power to interpret the law; to change the law; he claims to have the two keys and two swords; to keep you out of the church on earth and out of heaven hereafter; to inflict upon you ecclesiastical and state punishment. Those are the instruments, the swords and the keys; the result is that they have determined what is religion, and what they have defined to be religion is not God’s religion. They claim to be the oracles of God; to have sole power to interpret that law, and if you vary a hair’s breadth from what they have said is religion, off goes your head; and in their search for evidence they have established the Inquisition that makes domiciliary visits, investigating family life, putting spies over the most thoughtless expressions, and they claim to arrest and try them, and when they have tried them to call upon the state to execute. The bloodiest pages of history are those of the Romanist usurpation in Spain, in France, in Italy, in Bohemia, in the low countries, in the days of Alva, in all the South American states and in Mexico. Not only is that true, but there ‘were other denominations expressing a union of church and state and with the same powers somewhat modified. When the Puritans came over in the May flower they established a theocracy; their preachers prescribed everything they should do; and according to a statements which has been current, a man was punishable by a fine and by imprisonment if he was found kissing his wife on Sunday. And they pushed their jurisdiction to such an extent that they destroyed the liberty of conscience, whipped Baptist preachers, banished Roger Williams, sold out under forced sale or hasty auction the choice acres of Baptist farms and property in order to get money to build meetinghouses for another denomination, and when that Baptist father, Isaac Backus, went to John Adams, President of the United States Continental Congress, and asked him to use his influence to force Massachusetts to allow liberty of conscience, he said, “You might as well expect rivers to run upstream, and the ocean to dry up and the sun to quit shining as to expect to repeal Massachusetts’ law on that subject.”
15. How does the New Testament hedge against these hazards?
Ans. In two ways: (1) By clearly distinguishing between what belongs to God and what belongs to Caesar, rendering unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and unto God those that are his; (2) Especially by its form of church government. There was to be no provincial church government, no district, county, state, national church government; no hierarchy, but each particular congregation was the church of Jesus Christ and having final jurisdiction over its own matters. While there might be district associations, conventions, state or national, for voluntary co-operation, they were not appellate courts over the churches, and hence it would be impossible for the union of church and state with the Baptist church involved. But this New Testament hedging was evaded: (1) By establishing a papal form of government, an autocracy; (2) A prelatical form; as, the Church of England; (3) A federal form of government, like the Presbyterian.
16. What offenses in this section called for capital punishments?
Ans. They say that you may determine the civilization of a people by its code as to blood. If they put people to death for every kind of offense it is a bloody code; if only for a few great offenses, it is not a bloody code. Note in this lesson that there are six causes for which capital punishment would be administered:
(1) For sacrificing to another God; as long as the theocratic government was in vogue a man must be put to death for sacrificing to other gods than Jehovah, because it was treason treason against the state because it belongs to somebody else;
(2) Necromancy; that is a sin against God, in that it seeks to get at the secrets of the future from another source than God’s revelation: “Thou shalt not suffer a wizard or a witch to live”;
(3) Bestial crimes; sins against nature, where the man would mate with a brute;
(4) Stealing a man for slavery; stealing a man’s very life away from him that he may make a slave of him. Now, there are ways discussed in this section by which you could be enslaved. I have not space to go into their details; but they could not steal a man and make a slave of him. The death penalty would always be administered in the case of what is called “slave-stealing,” so largely carried on by the New England States, where as many as 250 ships from a New England town were engaged in the slave trade, and the wealth of a great many of those people up there today was derived from stealing slaves from Africa and selling them to the West Indies and to the United States.
(5) Murder or homicide that resulted from criminal negligence;
(6) In Exo 21:17 , it says, “He that curseth his father or his mother, shall surely be put to death.” So here is another offense calling for capital punishment; and a very remarkable piece of legislation comes into development of that principle. I remember once telling it to Judge Harrison in Waco, my father-in-law. It provides that if a father or mother shall bring a child to the magistrate and say that he is incorrigible; that they cannot do anything with him; he has no respect for them; does not obey them; that he is going to be a terror; he will be awful to the state; they thus bringing him before the magistrate, making that affidavit, that child must be stoned to death by the state. I read that to General Harrison and he said, “Dr. Carroll, you know you would never take your boy there.” While I do not think I would, I certainly have seen some specimens in my time that would have been brought up with great advantage by the state.
(7) Later on we will come to another which is not in this section. A man went out on a sabbath day to get sticks to make a fire to cook some breakfast, and he was put to death. “Thou shalt do no labour on the sabbath day.” “You must make provision for that day beforehand.” There are no exceptions but those of mercy, or necessity, and of worship.
17. In what judgments do the elements of mercy and love to man and beast appear?
Ans. Consideration shown (1) to a stranger; (2) to a widow; (3) to an orphan; (4) to the poor; (5) to animals. They might charge interest for money lent to any Hebrew brother that was well-to-do, but if he was poor they could not charge interest lending him money. Then this reference to the poor in connection with the land, which was to lie every seventh year idle, and, of course, where land was devoted to the culture of cereals like wheat and barley there would be a voluntary crop that year. They were not allowed to harvest that crop at all, but the poor people had the right under this law to enter that field and use that seventh-year voluntary crop. It also applies to the poor in this, viz.: that if he had pawned his cloak, or outer garment, which constituted his bed by night, the pawnbroker was not allowed to keep that garments in pawn overnight, or that man would not have a bed to sleep on; it must be restored to him when night came.
18. What are the promises of the covenant?
Ans. In Exo 23:20-33 are three: (1) That the angel of God’s presence should be with them, and would be their guide to show them how to go and to be their guard to preserve them and to discomfit their enemies on the way to and in the land where they were going. That was one of the great promises of the covenant. The presence of the angel of the Lord was manifest in the pillar of cloud by day and the fire by night, and by his speaking as an oracle when any trouble was brought up to him, and a solution asked.
(2) That God would bless their bread and drink, that is he would give them food and he would give them life: “You shall not be exposed to hunger nor to sickness.” This angel would see to it that a table was set before them; that in the wilderness their shoes should not wear out; that their clothes should not wax old; that there should be no sick people in the camp. What a tremendous blessing that was!
(3) That he would give them all the territory set forth in the original promises to Abraham, extending from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates, and from Gilead on the left bank of the Jordan to the Mediterranean Sea. Those are the three elements of the great promises of the covenant. He had to drive their enemies the Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Jehusites, and the others that held the land all out, but not all at once, for they would not be able to occupy the land, but, mark you, just as they were able to develop the resources of the country.
19. Describe step by step the ratification of the covenant.
Ans. In Exo 24:1-8 , it is treated. Here are the statutes: (1) All the words of the book of the covenant, that is, the moral law, the altar law, and the state law, were repeated very carefully to the people. (2) Then a copy of them was reduced to writing (3) An altar and pillars were erected according to the requirements given in the twentieth chapter. (4) Two kinds of offerings were offered on the altar, (a) burnt offerings, expiatory’, of blood and fire, and (b) the peace offerings, or the eucharist, thank offerings thus were made. (5) The disposition of the blood, one half of the blood flowing from these victims sacrificed was put into basing and set aside; the other half was to be sprinkled upon that altar, and thus the blood of the covenant was put upon the altar. (6) This covenant which has been spoken and written is now carefully read by Moses, item by item, all of them in the hearing of all the people, and they again solemnly agree to make every obligation prescribed for them in that covenant. (7) The sprinkling of the blood on the people. That half that had been set aside in basins, the priests and the Levites took charge of, and with bunches of hyssop moved among the people in every direction (all the Levites engaged in it, as they were afterward established) , and sprinkled that blood on all the people. That was the ratification of the covenant.
I have tried to make the reader see clearly this book of the covenant, beginning at Exo 29 , where was the introduction, the proposition made to have a covenant, and the people’s agreement to go into it, then the preparation for entering it by ratification; next the three parts of the covenant: (a) The Decalogue, or ten words, God’s relation to the normal man; (b) the law of the altar, or approach to God on the part of the sinner; (c) The state and God, and then the state and the citizen. I have tried to make you see these points very clearly. Then the promises bound up in that covenant, and Just exactly with what solemnity step by step that covenant was ratified; and that this was peculiarly a covenant made with the nation regarded as a unit.
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
Exo 23:1 Thou shalt not raise a false report: put not thine hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness.
Ver. 1. Thou shalt not raise. ] Neither raise nor receive it; neither be the tale bearer nor talehearer: the one carries the devil in his tongue, the other in his ear. Not only those that “make a lie,” but those that “love” it when it is made to their hands, are shut out of heaven. Rev 22:15 Solomon makes it an ill sign of a graceless man to be apt to believe scandalous reports of godly persons. Pro 17:4
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
raise = utter, or take up. Same as Exo 20:7.
the wicked = a wicked one. Hebrew. rash ‘ a. App-44.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Thou shalt not raise a false report: [perjury] to put your hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness. [In other words, conspiracy in perjury.] Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; [You’re not to get into a riotous situation.] neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest judgment: Neither shalt thou countenance a poor man in his cause ( Exo 23:1-3 ).
Now the poor man, look also at verse nine, or rather at verse fifteen, “Thou shalt keep the feast of the unleavened bread”. Beg your pardon? Verse six in Leviticus, nineteen, fifteen.
Verse six,
Thou shalt not wrest the judgment of the poor in his cause ( Exo 23:6 ).
First of all, “You shall not countenance a poor man in his cause.” Then, “You’re not to wrest the judgment of thy poor in the cause.” In other words, the judgment has to be fair. You’re not to countenance him just because he’s poor, nor are you to wrest judgment from him because he is poor. In other words, his condition financially should have nothing to do with the judgment. The judgment has to be a fair judgment. Not giving him an advantage because he is poor, neither are you to give him a disadvantage because he is poor. You’re not to take that into consideration. The judgment is to be fair across the board.
If a man meet your enemy’s ox or his ass going astray, you shall surely bring it back to him again. [Now that’s hard to do.] If you see the ass of him that hateth thee lying under his burden, and you wouldn’t forbear to help him, thou shalt surely help him ( Exo 23:4-5 ).
If you see your neighbor’s donkey, and it’s just sort of collapsed under the burden, and you just walk by, that’s not right. God wants you to be kind towards the animal. You’re to help it even if the neighbor hates you; and you’ve got a big feud going with him, that animal hasn’t got a feud going with you. You should be merciful towards the animal. God wants us to be merciful towards animals.
Keep thee far from a false matter; and the innocent and the righteous slay thou not: for I will not justify the wicked. And thou shalt take no gift: [Now these are to the judges, they’re not to take any gift.] for the gift blinds the wise, and perverts the words of the righteous. [So judges weren’t to receive gifts lest they would be influenced by that gift, and would not give true judgment.] Also thou shalt not oppress a stranger: for you know the heart of a stranger, seeing you were strangers in the land of Egypt. Now six years you shall sow the land, and gather the fruits: But the seventh year [We get the six and one pattern again, and we’ve already talked about the six years of sowing, “the seventh year”,] let the ground rest, let it lie still; that the poor of thy people may eat: and leave what they leave to the beasts of the field. And in like manner thou shalt deal with the vineyard, and with the oliveyard ( Exo 23:7-11 ).
In other words, the seventh year is just for the poor people. Let it just rest, whatever grows up naturally whatever seeds were left in the ground, let it grow, let the poor go out and gather it.
Six days thou shalt do thy work, on the seventh day thou shalt rest: that thine ox and thine ass may rest, and the son of thy handmaid, and the stranger, may be refreshed. And in all things that I have said unto you be circumspect: [Be careful, keep it carefully.] and make no mention of the name of other gods, neither let it be heard out of thy mouth. Three times thou shalt keep a feast to me in the year ( Exo 23:12-14 ).
We have a Thanksgiving feast; they have three feasts. The first one is the feast of unleavened bread. The second one is the feast of Passover which takes place fifty days after the feast of unleavened bread when you are bringing in the first of your winter grains. So it’s the first fruits of the winter grain that is brought in there in June, the wheat, the winter wheat that they have sown. The third feast was equivalent to our Thanksgiving feast and it takes place in the harvest time of the year.
when you have gathered of thy labours out of the field ( Exo 23:16 ):
The third feast. It’s equivalent to our Thanksgiving.
So three times a year all of your males shall appear before the Lord God. Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leavened bread; neither shall the fat of my sacrifice remain till morning. The first of the firstfruits of thy land thou shalt bring into the house of Jehovah thy God. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother’s milk ( Exo 23:17-19 ).
Now from this little scripture the Jews have created the whole interpretation of not eating dairy products with meat products at any meal. Because the law said, “Thou shalt not seethe a kid in its mother’s milk.” So they refuse to eat any meat and dairy products together because of this little scripture.
Now what is the scripture actually prohibiting? If you kill a little goat to eat it, you’re not to boil it in its own mother’s milk. That’s what the law has prohibited. But they say that if you eat a shish kabob, and you’re also eating cheese at the same meal, you don’t know but what that cheese was made from the mother’s milk. And that in your stomach the churning and boiling, the meat of the kid is being seethed in its mother’s milk in your stomach.
So they really are very, very religious about this today. You go to Jerusalem and it’s-even those that don’t believe in God, follow the kosher habits of eating. They won’t drink milk at a meal where they have meat nor will-and it’s so sad because they have such delicious rolls and they serve you margarine because you’re having meat to eat. They will not mix any dairy products with meat products at a meal, lest they be guilty of seething a kid in its mother’s milk.
That’s what Jesus was talking about when He said to the Pharisees, “Hey you strain at a gnat, and you swallow a camel”( Mat 23:24 ). Now why would they strain at a gnat? Because you’re not to eat anything that hasn’t been thoroughly bled.
So if you’re jogging along and a gnat gets in your mouth and gets stuck in your throat, you see these guys putting their finger down their throat, and trying to heave, and do everything coughing and carrying on horribly, trying to get that gnat out. Because man, if you eat that gnat that hasn’t been bled thoroughly, you’ve violated the law. There’s no way they’re gonna swallow that gnat. You see them really coughing and heaving, and doing this big thing and Jesus said, “Hey you’re straining at a gnat, but you swallow a camel”.
You know, they in other areas just gloss things, change things, misinterpreted things to where they could get by with horrible things, and yet on the little, little issues, oh, did they get so picky on the little insignificant issues. But the major issues of justice, and mercy, and that, you know they just interpreted right around those. So Christ was after them on these things.
Now the Lord is promising when they go into the land that He’s gonna,
Send an Angel before them, to keep them in the way, and to bring them into the place which God has prepared ( Exo 23:20 ).
I believe that this angel of course is Jesus Christ. The Lord said,
Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him. But if thou shall indeed obey his voice, and do all that I speak; then I will be an enemy unto your enemies, an adversary to your adversaries. For my Angel shall go before thee, and bring thee in to the Amorites, and the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Canaanites, and the Hivites, and Jebusites: and I will cut them off ( Exo 23:21-23 ).
You remember when Joshua was going out looking over the city of Jericho, he saw the captain of the Lord’s host, and he said, “Are you for us or against us?” The angel answered, “As the captain of the Lord’s host have I come”( Jos 5:13-14 ). The Lord’s host, the angel of the Lord going before them to lead them in. Many Bible scholars accept this as one of the appearances of Christ, Theophony, the appearance of God in the Old Testament, actually in the person of Christ.
Thou shalt not bow down to their gods, [That is of the Hivites, and the Jebusites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites and so forth, “thou shalt not bow down to their gods”,] nor serve them, nor do any of their works: but thou shalt utterly overthrow them, and quite break down their images. And ye shall serve the Lord your God, and he shall bless thy bread, and thy water; and I will take sickness away from the midst of thee. And there shall nothing cast their young, nor be barren, in the land: the number of thy days I will fulfil. I will send my fear before thee, and will destroy all the people to whom thou shalt come, I will make all thine enemies turn their backs to thee. I will send hornets before thee, I shall drive out the Hivite, the Canaanite, and the Hittite, from before thee. I will not drive them out from before thee in one year; lest the land becomes desolate, and the beast of the field multiply against thee. By little and little I will drive them out from before thee, until thou be increased, and inherit the land ( Exo 23:24-30 ).
“So these are the blessings, these are the things I’m gonna do for you, predicated upon your serving Me. These are the benefits, the fringe benefits of serving Me. I will do all of these things. I’ll go before you, I’ll drive out the enemy”, and so forth.
Now in this we find the principles of God’s victory and the way He brings forth victory in our lives. For these Jebusites, and Hivites, and so forth, are a type of the giants in our flesh; coming into the promised land is coming into the life of the Spirit, and the victory of the Spirit. The overcoming life, coming out of the wilderness, out of the yo-yo Christian experience, where you’re up and down, and up and down, into a beautiful, victorious overcoming life in Christ Jesus. A life of victory, a life after the Spirit, not after the flesh.
These enemies that were in the land represent those aspects of our flesh, where it so often has defeated us and conquered us. But God is promising victory over anger, over anxiety, over fears, over temper, over any area of the flesh where you are in bondage to your own flesh. God is promising you the victory, but it comes one area at a time. “Little by little, I won’t drive them out in one year.” God doesn’t just give you instant perfection. But we’re growing in grace and in knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. So the processes of God’s victory are reiterated for us here. “Until we inherit the land.”
I will set thy bounds from the Red sea even to the sea of the Philistines, [which would be the Mediterranean.] and the desert unto the river: for I will deliver the inhabitants of the land into your hand; and thou shalt drive them out before thee. Thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor with their gods ( Exo 23:31-32 ).
Now in a little while as we move on we’re gonna find that they violated this commandment, and they made a covenant with the Gideonites, and we’ll deal with the problems that came with the disobedience of this command.
They shall not dwell in thy land, lest they make thee sin against me: for if thou serve their gods, it will surely be a snare to you ( Exo 23:33 ).
And it was. “
Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary
The enactments now recorded have to do with the administration of justice. A study of them reveals that true justice is always merciful and yet makes sterner demand than any moral code of laws. The divine estimate of justice forbids wresting judgment, accepting bribes, and oppression.
The feasts of the Lord are placed in their relation to the people’s social life. The sabbatical year was arranged in the interests of the poor. The rest of the Sabbath is more than selfish, cattle and servants being included in its intention. Community interest underlay the command to observe the three great feasts.
At the close of the section enunciating these laws of application, we have the record of how Jehovah made a gracious promise of that Presence which would lead and guide the people in all the days to come. There can be no question that this Angel Presence was the Angel Jehovah through whom these people received a manifestation of God. The most natural deduction is to identify this mystic Person with Him who eventually became flesh and dwelt among us. This Angel Presence was to ensure blessing to the people and drive out their foes before them.
Concerning the people to be driven out, it is worthy of note that this paragraph shows that “their gods” were their undoing. Everything in the life of a man or a nation depends on the character of its worship. Whatever is worshiped is served. The service ennobles or degrades according to the character of those worshiped.
Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible
Laws of Conduct and Worship
Exo 23:1-17
We may apply these various precepts to our own hearts. Many of them breathe the very spirit of Christ. We must watch our speech, so that no mans character may suffer by our gossip or slander. We must dare to stand for the truth, though we stand absolutely alone. With all kindness and good will we must save our neighbor from damage, even though he has vented on us his spleen. It is never for us to take advantage of him; God will deal with him on our behalf, and in His own time and way. Let us not fret ourselves to do evil. Davids example in refusing to injure Saul when his bitter enemy was within his reach is an inspiring example for us to follow. We must hold an even balance for just and honorable dealing with all men; and cultivate the Sabbath-keeping of the heart. In every life, also, there should be perpetual memory of Calvary, the Resurrection and Pentecost-the three feasts of the soul!
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
Exo 23:20
The Angel, the way, the prepared place. It is the Divine key to the mystery of life. Life is emphatically a way. Not by the way of the sea-a prompt and easy path-but by the way of the wilderness, of old God led His pilgrims. The vision of the Angel in the way lights up the wilderness. Consider the suggestion of the text as to-
I. The pilgrim’s condition. God’s children must be pilgrims, because this world is not good enough, not bright enough, not capable of being blessed enough, for the pilgrim in his home. For (1) the instructed soul sees the touch of essential imperfection and the bounds of close limitation in everything here. (2) There is a constant aching of the heart through memory and hope. (3) Life is a pilgrimage because it is far away from the Friend whom we supremely love.
II. The pilgrim’s Guide. (1) God has sent His Angel before us in the person of His Son. (2) He sends His Angel with us in the person of the Holy Ghost.
III. The pilgrim’s way to the pilgrim’s home. (1) It is a way of purposed toil and difficulty, of wilderness, peril, and night. Suffer we must in the wilderness; the one question is, Shall it be with or without the Angel of the Lord? (2) It is a way of stern, uncompromising duty. God asks us now simply to do and to bear, and to wait to see the whole reason and reap the whole fruit on high. We must train ourselves to the habit of righteous action, and leave the results to God and eternity. (3) It is a way of death. God promises to none of us an immunity from death. The shadow hangs round life as a dreary monitor to all of us. He only who can eye it steadily and fix its form will see that it is angelic and lustrous with the glory beyond. The grave is but the last step of the way by which the Angel leads us to the place which He has prepared.
J. Baldwin Brown, The Congregationalist, vol. i., p. 261.
References: Exo 23:26.-T. T. Lynch, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxii., p. 206. Exo 23:28 (with Exo 33:2).-Parker, vol. ii., p. 192.
Exo 23:30
It is important, not only to see, but to love, the gradual processes of God. There is more love in doing the little thing than in doing the great thing. A great mind is never so great as when it is throwing itself into something exceedingly minute. The special subject to which the text spiritually and allegorically refers is the conquest of sin. For such as the old inhabitants of the land of Canaan were to Israel, such the old inhabitants of our hearts are to us.
I. The sin of our natural state is the temptation of our converted state, and it is only little by little that it can be driven out.
II. The old sins are conquered little by little (1) because God has His punishments in life: He makes sin scourge sin; (2) because it is for the glory of the Holy Ghost and of His Church that these sins should be left to be gradually overcome; (3) because in our present state we could not bear to be made ail at once perfectly holy.
III. Notice the expression “I will drive them out.” It is one of God’s high works; it requires the power of Omnipotence to eradicate sin from the human soul.
J. Vaughan, Meditations in Exodus, p. 24.
I. It is through little things that a man destroys his soul; he fails to take note of little things, and they accumulate into great; he relaxes in little things, and thus in time loosens every bond. It is the maxim of one of our nobles, “We perish by what is lawful;” it were an equally correct aphorism, “We perish by what is little.”
II. It is by little and little that men become great in piety. We become great in holiness through avoiding little faults and being exact in little duties.
III. There is great difficulty in little things. In daily dangers and duties, in the petty anxieties of common life, in the exercise of righteous principles in trifles-in these we must seek and find the opportunity of ejecting “by little and little” the foes we have sworn to expel from our hearts.
H. Melvill, Penny Pulpit, No. 2036.
References: Exo 23:30.-J. N. Norton, The King’s Ferry Boat, p. 237; G. Matheson, Moments on the Mount, p. 154. Exo 24:3-8.-J. Hamilton, Works, vol. v., p. 229.
Fuente: The Sermon Bible
CHAPTER 23 Further Judgments and Directions
1. Concerning unrighteous dealings of various kinds (Exo 23:1-9)
2. Concerning the seventh year (Exo 23:10-13)
3. Concerning the three feasts (Exo 23:14-19)
4. Promises concerning the possession of the land (Exo 23:20-33)
We call attention to the words concerning the seventh year. The seventh day was the day of rest. The seventh year was to give the land rest; it was to rest and lie still. Besides this there was the jubilee year, which occurred every seven times seven years, that is, the fiftieth year was the year of jubilee, in which liberty was proclaimed. We hope to examine this more closely and learn its typical and prophetic significance when we read the book of Leviticus (chapter 25). The seventh year was especially meant for the poor. Whatever grew by itself belonged to them, and what they left the beasts of the field were to eat. What gracious provision this was! How merciful and gracious our God is!
The three feasts are next mentioned. The connection with Exo 23:13 is obvious. It is a warning concerning other gods. The feasts were designed to keep Jehovah, His power and His grace, as a living reality before the nation. The three feasts are: The feast of unleavened bread in memory of the exodus; the feast of the first fruits, also called the feast of weeks, because it came seven weeks after the feast of unleavened bread (Lev 23:15-16; Deu 16:9), and still another name is the feast of the first fruits of the wheat harvest. It was now known by the name of Shavuoth. The third feast came on the fifteenth day of the seventh month (Lev 23:34), and is the feast of ingathering, known as Succoth, the feast of tabernacles. Of all this we shall learn more in Leviticus. The last clause of Exo 23:19 has led to ridiculous speculations among the rabbis. It is looked upon by the Jews as a prohibition against eating flesh prepared with milk (see Deu 14:21).
We must not overlook in our study Exo 23:20-23. Who is this angel? He is called in Exo 33:15, the face of Jehovah (literal translation). The name of God is in Him; God revealed Himself in Him. His voice must be obeyed. He has power to pardon transgressions or not to pardon them. This angel is not a created being, but the same who appeared in the burning bush; the same of whom Jacob said, The angel, the Redeemer. It is Jehovah Himself, the Son of God. The ancient synagogue paraphrased this person by using the expression Memra, which means the Word. They have believed and taught that the Word brought Israel out of Egypt ; the Word led them in the pillar of a cloud; the Word confounded the Egyptian host. And they paraphrased the angel by the Word.
Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)
shalt not: Exo 23:7, Exo 20:16, Lev 19:16, 2Sa 16:3, 2Sa 19:27, Psa 15:3, Psa 101:5, Psa 120:3, Pro 10:18, Pro 17:4, Pro 25:23, Jer 20:10, Mat 28:14, Mat 28:15, Rom 3:8
raise: or, receive
an unrighteous witness: Deu 5:20, Deu 19:16-21, 1Ki 21:10-13, Psa 27:12, Psa 35:11, Pro 6:19, Pro 12:17, Pro 19:5, Pro 19:9, Pro 19:28, Pro 21:28, Pro 24:28, Pro 25:18, Mat 19:18, Mat 26:59-61, Luk 3:14, Luk 19:8, Act 6:11-13, Eph 4:25, 2Ti 3:3, 1Pe 3:16, Rev 12:10
Reciprocal: Gen 39:17 – General Exo 22:11 – that he hath not Deu 22:14 – General 1Ki 21:11 – did as Jezebel Pro 14:5 – General Eze 22:9 – men that carry tales 1Co 6:9 – unrighteous
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Chapter 23 continues, and carries to a conclusion, these “judgments” that Moses was to set before the children of Israel. It appears to divide quite naturally into four sections.
The first – verses Exo 23:1-9 – prohibits those perversions of righteous judgment which are so common amongst men. They were not to be practised in Israel, and there is much instruction here for ourselves. It is to be noted that the first thing to be prohibited is “a false report.” Against the word, “raise,” the word “receive” is put in the margin as an alternative translation, and other versions rather confirm this. What great harm has been wrought amongst Christians by false reports! That it is wrong to raise them we all admit. Do we all realize the wrong of receiving them? When a matter of argument or dispute arises among Christians and an evil or disparaging report is brought as to one’s opponent in the matter, how tempting it is to receive it at once as certain to be true, when it is after all a false report. Any evil report should be scrutinized with care and verified before it is accepted. We do well to note the care Paul took as to reports of evil at Corinth – see, 1Co 1:11; 1Co 11:18.
The injunction against following a multitude in wrongdoing is to be noted. All too often have Christians gone off on a wrong course, assuring themselves that it must be right because many of their friends are travelling on that road. A multitude of real saints may pursue a course that is wrong, but that does not make it right. Our responsibility is to be governed by the Word of God, even if that means diverging from a multitude.
It is noticeable how human feelings are eliminated in these matters of judgment. Not only is all unrighteous witness prohibited but one’s feelings of dislike for an enemy must not be allowed to withhold assistance in a time of need, as we see in verses Exo 23:4-5. And further, one’s feelings in regard to the poor must not sway the judgment, either for him (verse Exo 23:3) nor against him (verse Exo 23:6).
Verse Exo 23:8 prohibits all forms of bribery, which is an appeal to the feelings of the one who is bribed. Where bribery is rampant, justice is practically unknown. “The bribe blindeth those whose eyes are open” (New Trans.). Let us read this verse in the spirit of it as well as in the letter, for it is possible for self-interest to blind the eyes of a sincere Christian, who would not for one moment entertain the idea of accepting a bribe.
This first section ends with throwing the protection of the law over one who might be a stranger in Israel, and therefore likely to be treated differently. In this we see the compassionate interest of our God for those outside “the commonwealth of Israel” (Eph 2:12).
In the second section – verses Exo 23:10-13 – we have rest enjoined, not only for man and beast but even for the land. The natural tendency undoubtedly would be to say, “But if we follow out verse Exo 23:11 as to one year s rest in seven, how are we to live the seventh year?” The answer surely would have been, “As to that you must trust in God.” This accounts, we think, for the closing injunction to be “circumspect,” or, “on their guard;” and not to name other gods. No false god could give them any such assurance. They would only destroy the assurance that would enable them to obey. As a matter of fact Israel did not obey this law, as is intimated in 2Ch 36:21.
The third section – verses Exo 23:14-19 – gives in brief form regulations as to the three great feasts of the year. They were to be observed, and in them all the males were to appear before God. When Deu 16:16 is reached we learn that they were to appear in the place that the Lord would choose; so the place as well as the times was settled by God and not by them. Brief details are also given as to the manner of their offerings – leaven utterly excluded and the fat treated as wholly belonging to God, and all firstfruits of their land duly rendered up.
The closing sentence of verse Exo 23:19 is certainly remarkable. One may wonder why it comes in here, and why repeated in Deu 14:21. May it not be to show us that while God demands that His rights and the rights of His house be scrupulously honoured, it is His will that what is seemly be observed as to even the lowliest of His creatures? The goat gives her milk, as ordained of God, to sustain the life of her kid. It is not seemly therefore to use what God has ordained for life as an instrument connected with its death. Let us all ponder whether the principle involved in this may not have some spiritual application for us today.
The fourth section extends from verse Exo 23:20 to the end of the chapter, and introduces us to the Angel, who was to be their Protector and Guide. The word for Angel is sometimes translated “messenger.” It is so in Mal 3:1 where it occurs twice. In its first occurrence there John the Baptist is indicated, as we know. But “the Messenger [or, Angel] of the covenant, whom ye delight in,” is evidently to be identified with, “the Lord, whom ye seek,” mentioned earlier in the verse, and therefore refers to the Lord Jesus Christ. In our chapter therefore we believe that the “Angel” is to be identified with Him. Hence full obedience to Him in all things was essential if they were to experience the power of God acting on their behalf.
Obedience to Him would ensure that none of the nations then in the land would be able to stand before them, but would be utterly dispossessed. They were to be most careful not to touch their idolatries but completely to destroy them. Then they would be blessed with health and plenty; that is, with fulness of earthly good.
But in all this God would so act as not to create a vacuum. He would drive out these nations, “by little and little,” just as the Israelites increased in number and were able to fill up the land. One can see the wisdom of this, and also note that God acts after this fashion in His dealings with our souls. We have to grow in grace, and as we do we enter into the fulness of the blessing that is ours in Christ, and the old things are dispossessed in our hearts and lives. Hence we progress spiritually “by little and little.”
While thus the process went on by stages there was the danger ever present of Israel being entangled in the ancient idolatries of the land. They are once more warned as to this, and we must accept the warning for ourselves. Seeing that we have within us the flesh with all its evil tendencies, we cannot but feel the pull of the world and its sinful attractions. Hence we too continually need the word, “Keep yourselves from idols” (1Jn 5:21).
In the closing verse of Exo 19:1-25 we read how Moses went down to the people, and through him the words of Exo 20:1-26; Exo 21:1-36; Exo 22:1-31; Exo 23:1-33 were given. He was now called to go up the mount to the Lord. He was to take others with him who could worship afar off. Moses alone might come near. The people could not approach at all. This we learn as we commence Exo 24:1-18. Before we come to details we have an important parenthesis, extending from verse Exo 23:3 to verse Exo 23:8.
In this parenthesis we learn firstly, how faithfully Moses carried out the task with which he was entrusted. Again the people promised complete obedience. All the people promised, and they promised all. They promised this in Exo 19:8, before the law was given. Now that it had been given they repeat their promise. Thereby they reveal to us that they were quite ignorant of their own sinfulness and weakness. But the law was given that these painful facts might be made manifest, as is indicated in such Scriptures as Rom 4:15; Gal 3:19; 1Ti 1:9.
Secondly, he committed to writing the words that had been uttered. Unbelievers used to assert that he did nothing of the kind, inasmuch as the art of writing was unknown in the age in which he lived. It is now proved that the art existed long before his day. God intended His law to be authoritatively recorded for all time. Putting the law thus on record, Moses instinctively felt that the condemnation it inevitably brought could only be expiated by sacrifice, hence next is recorded the building of an altar, and the twelve pillars as a memorial of the tribes. Young men acted as the priests, while as yet Aaron and his sons had not been formally inducted to the priest’s office.
Then thirdly, Moses applied the blood that had been shed, first upon the altar and then upon the people. The sprinkling on the altar came first, then the reading of the law that had been written, hearing which the people for the third time promised obedience, and then came the sprinkling of the people. It is of interest to note that when this is referred to in Hebrews we are furnished with details not given to us in Exodus. He took, “water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop,” and further he sprinkled not only the people but also the book that he had written.
There had not as yet been time for the people to have broken the law, to which they had just listened, so this blood-shedding was not so much an act of atonement, but rather penal in its bearing; that is, a solemn reminder that on the law-breaker the death sentence rested. The book was sprinkled with blood, inasmuch as every infraction of its holy demands or prohibitions meant death to the sinner.
Verses Exo 23:9-11, record what was seen by Moses and the privileged company that began the ascent of Sinai. They “saw the God of Israel” and this is not contradicted by 1Ti 6:16, which refers to God in His essential being and glory. As Ezekiel saw, “the likeness of the glory of the Lord” (Eze 1:28), and as John in Patmos saw One who sat on the throne, who was “like a jasper and a sardine stone” (Rev 4:3) so these saw a manifestation of God. We note that no attempt to describe Him is made. We are only told that what was beneath His feet had the appearance of ” paved,” or “transparent” sapphire and the “clearness” of heaven. To this extent they “saw God,” and were sufficiently sustained in their spirits to eat and drink before Him.
It is noticeable that of the sons of Aaron only Nadab and Abihu are mentioned. The two who died under judgment, almost as soon as they were consecrated as priests, had no excuse for their sin. They fell in spite of this great privilege; whereas Eleazar and Ithamar, who carried on as priests, did not apparently have this unique experience. It is often the way that failure is most pronounced in those who are most highly privileged.
Then Moses alone was called up into the mount of God, though it would appear that Joshua accompanied him for some little way. On the top of Sinai there was the cloud of the Divine presence and the glory of the Lord like a devouring fire. Into the midst Moses went and there abode for forty days and nights. We must remember that, though we now know God as revealed in Christ in the fulness of grace, it is still true that, “Our God is a consuming fire” (Heb 12:29). He is unchanging in nature and attributes, though under the law one feature may specially be emphasized, and another emphasized under grace.
How striking the contrast between the sojourn of Moses in the mount with God and the forty days and forty nights, spent by our Lord fasting and tempted of Satan in the wilderness. Moses was shut up with God and His holy things, totally separated from the failure and evil that transpired below. Jesus, on the contrary, was cut off from all human sustenance, and subjected to the attacks and wiles of the adversary; but it was as true then as later that “the prince of this world cometh and hath nothing in Me” (Joh 14:30). On the mount Moses received the “shadow of good things to come” (Heb 10:1). In the wilderness Jesus proved Himself to be impregnable and therefore the Redeemer, accomplishing the work that made these “good things to come” an assured reality.
We may also note a contrast between the prolonged sojourn of Moses in the mount and the brief sojourn of Paul, whether in the body or out of the body, in the third heaven. Moses heard and saw things that he was expressly commanded to give to the people. Paul heard, “unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter” (2Co 12:4). The shadows of the law revealed through Moses are indeed wonderful, and we do well to study them. But the Gospel will ultimately put us into touch with wonders that cannot be revealed to us while we are in our mortal bodies. Our very language has no words in which they could be expressed.
We now arrive at seven chapters (Exo 25:1-40; Exo 26:1-37; Exo 27:1-21; Exo 28:1-43; Exo 29:1-46; Exo 30:1-38; Exo 31:1-18) in which are recorded the details of the tabernacle system and the priesthood, which served as a shadow of the good things that were to arrive in due season. As we start to consider them we emphasize afresh that here we have “not the very image of the things,” but only the “shadow.” As we observe the evening shadows, we can say with confidence that this is the shadow of a house and that of a tree. But we cannot from the house-shadow deduce the position of the front door nor how many windows there are. We shall not therefore attempt to discover minute details, but consider these shadows in their broad outline.
The first nine verses show that when a sanctuary was to be constructed, that God might dwell in the midst of Israel the people were privileged to furnish the materials of which it was to be made. The New Testament contrast to this is found in Eph 2:22. We often observe, when reading the Epistle to the Hebrews, that there is a strong contrast between the shadow arid the substance. So it is here. The saints today are, so to speak the material out of which God’s present habitation is constructed. We are that by reason of the quickening work of God in us (see Eph 2:1), and it is far more wonderful than just bringing gold, silver, precious stones and other things.
Verse Exo 23:9 emphasizes the importance of observing the word of the Lord. God Himself furnished the pattern of the tabernacle and all its details. The business of Moses and the people was to adhere to God’s pattern and not deviate from it according to ideas of their own. Here is a broad principle of action, which is valid today, in regard to all that God has revealed, as much as it was then. The thoughts of God embodied in His instructions, are perfect and cannot be improved. The thoughts and ways of men can only spoil them.
The detailed instructions begin at verse Exo 23:10, and the first word is as to that which was to be the centre-piece of the whole typical system. Here at the start we see that God’s thoughts are not ours. We should have begun with the tabernacle in which all was to be housed, working from the circumference to the centre. God begins with the centre, and works outward from that. The shadow definitely declares that the centre of all God’s thoughts is – CHRIST.
Fuente: F. B. Hole’s Old and New Testaments Commentary
Exo 23:1. Thou shalt not raise Or, receive, as the margin reads it, and as the Hebrew , tissa, also signifies, or, give credit to a false report. Sometimes the receiver, in this case, is as bad as the thief: and a backbiting tongue would not do so much mischief if it were not countenanced. Sometimes we cannot avoid hearing a false report, but we must not receive it, we must not hear it with pleasure, nor easily give credit to it.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Exo 23:1. Put not thine hand with the wicked, do not conspire or agree with them.
Exo 23:3. Neither shalt thou countenance a poor man. The meaning of this and the former verse is,there shall be no respect of persons whether rich or poor, but an impartial consideration of the cause.
Exo 23:4. If thou meet thine enemys ox. So far shalt thou be from revenging his injuries, that thou shalt render good to him for them. By doing this a man conquers enmity and gains his neighbour.
Exo 23:8. The wise, or the open-eyed and quick-sighted.The righteous. The judgment of the righteous judge, that is, of them who were before such, and are inclined to be so, and probably would be so, were they not tempted with bribes. Or thus, the matters or causes of the righteous, which may be understood not of the judges, but of the parties pleading, whose righteous cause is by this means perverted by the judge, and a wrong sentence given.
Exo 23:11. That the poormay eat, that which groweth spontaneously.
Exo 23:12. On the seventh day thou shalt rest. This command is here repeated, lest any should think the weekly rest might cease when the whole year was consecrated to rest.
Exo 23:13. Make no mention of the name of other gods; that is, with honour or delight, or without detestation.
Exo 23:14. Keep a feast. The three feasts are illustrated in their proper places. Exodus 12. Leviticus 25. The males were commuted for one of a family. But the hope of the Jews to see the gentile world engrafted on their stock, and going to Jerusalem three times a year, is altogether unfounded. The Lords temple is spiritual, and shall be built on the tops of the mountains.
Exo 23:15. None shall appear before me empty. None shall ever come at those times without some offering or other, for the support of the Levites, and of the worship of God.
Exo 23:16. The feast of harvest. Of wheat harvest, for the barley harvest was before this time. This feast was otherwise called Pentecost.The feast of ingathering. To wit, of all the rest of the fruits of the earth, as of the vines and olives. This was also called the feast of booths, and of tabernacles. All their three feasts had a respect to the harvest, which began in the passover, was carried on at the pentecost, and was fully completed and ended in this feast.
Exo 23:19. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mothers milk. The words may be rendered, Thou shalt not seethe, or roast, (for the word bashal signifies to roast as well as boil, as is evident from Deu 16:7.) a kid, being or whilst it is in his mothers milk, which it may be said to be, while it is suckled, and so may be understood of the passover, referred to in the preseding verse, in which a lamb or kid was used; and then the word bashal must be rendered roast. But it is more probable that the prohibition refers to the lamb or kid used at a common meal, which should not be taken too young from its dam; for sucklings might be offered in sacrifice. Lev 22:27. 1Sa 7:9.
Exo 23:20. I send an Angel. Christ, the angel of the covenant, as may be gathered from the following words, and because the pardon of sin, which is a divine prerogative, is here ascribed to him, and Gods name is in him. Compare also Exo 13:21; Exo 14:19; Exo 32:34. Act 7:38-39. 1Co 10:9.
Exo 23:25. Thy bread and thy water. All thy provisions, bread denoting any kind of meat, and water any kind of drink. 1Sa 25:11.
Exo 23:26. The number of thy days I will fulfil. I will preserve thee so as thou shalt live as long as the course of nature and the temperament of thy body will permit.
Exo 23:27. My fear. A great terror, or terror wrought by me.
Exo 23:28. Hornets, properly so called, as may be gathered from Jos 24:12. Deu 7:20. Hornets are of themselves very troublesome and mischievous; but these, it is very probable, were like those Egyptian flies, Exo 8:21, of an extraordinary bigness and perniciousness. Nor is it strange that such creatures did drive many of those people from their habitations; for several heathen writers give us instances of people being driven from their seats by frogs, others by mice, others by bees and wasps.
Exo 23:30. By little and little I will drive them out. This gave the Canaanites time to fly. Our Saxon chronicle mentions a colony coming to the north of Ireland from Armenia, in five long ships, which many take to be expelled Canaanites. They found inhabitants it is said, in the north of Ireland, who advised them to settle in Scotland, promising to be their friends.
Exo 23:31. Sea of the Philistines, the mediterranean. The desert, of Egypt or Arabia, which was obtained by David. Euphrates is often called the river, by way of eminence.
Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Exodus 21 – 23
The study of this section of our book is eminently calculated to impress the heart with a sense d God’s unsearchable wisdom and infinite goodness. It enables one to form some idea of the character of a kingdom governed by laws of divine appointment. Here, too, we may see the amazing condescension of Him who, though He is the great God of heaven and earth, can, nevertheless, stoop to adjudicate between man and man in reference to the death of an ox, the loan of a garment, or the loss of a servant’s tooth. “Who is like unto the Lord our God, who humbleth himself to behold the things that are in heaven and on earth?” He governs the universe, and yet He can occupy Himself with the provision of a covering for one of His creatures. He guides the angel’s flight and takes notice of a crawling worm. He humbles Himself to regulate the movements of those countless orbs that roll through infinite space and to record the fall of a sparrow.
As to the character of the judgement set forth in the chapters before us, we may learn a double lesson. These judgements and ordinances bear a twofold witness: they convey to the ear a twofold message, and present to the eye two sides of a picture. They tell of God and they tell of man.
In the first place, on God’s part, we find Him enacting laws which exhibit strict, even-handed, perfect justice. “Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.” Such was the character of the laws, the statutes, and the judgements by which God governed His earthly kingdom of Israel. Everything was provided for, every interest was maintained, and every claim was met. There was no partiality – no distinction made between the rich and the poor. The balance in which each man’s claim was weighed was adjusted with divine accuracy, so that no one could justly complain of a decision. The pure robe of justice was not to be tarnished with the foul stains of bribery, corruption and partiality. The eye and the hand of a divine Legislator provided for everything; and a divine Executive inflexibly dealt with every defaulter. The stroke of justice fell only on the head of the guilty, while every obedient soul was protected in the enjoyment of all his rights and privileges.
Then, as regards man, it is impossible to read over these laws and not be struck with the disclosure which they indirectly, but really, make of his desperate depravity. The fact of Jehovah’s having to enact laws against certain crimes, proves the capability, on man’s part, of committing those crimes. Were the capability and the tendency not there, there would be no need of the enactments. Now, there are many who, if the gross Abominations forbidden in these chapters were named to them, might feel disposed to adopt the language of Hazael and say, “Is thy servant a dog that he should do this thing?” Such persons have not yet travelled down into the deep abyss of their own hearts. For albeit there are crimes here forbidden which would seem to place man, as regards his habits and tendencies, below the level of a “dog,” yet do those very statutes prove, beyond all question, that the most refined and cultivated member of the human family carries above, in his bosom, the seeds of the very darkest and most horrifying abominations. For whom were those statutes enacted? For man. Were they needful? Unquestionably. But they would have been quite superfluous if man were incapable of committing the sins referred to. But man is capable; and hence we see that man is sunk to the very lowest possible level – that his nature is wholly corrupt – that, from the crown of his head to the sole of his foot, there is not so much as a speck of moral soundness.
How can such a being ever stand, without an emotion of fear, in the full blaze of the throne of God? How can he stand within the holiest? How can he stand on the sea of glass? How can he enter in by the pearly gates and tread the golden streets? The reply to these inquiries unfolds the amazing depths of redeeming love and the eternal efficacy of the blood of the Lamb. Deep as is man’s ruin, the love of God is deeper still. Black as is his guilt, the blood of Jesus can wash it all away. Wide as is the chasm separating man from God, the cross has bridged it. God has come down to the very lowest point of the sinner’s condition, in order that He might lift him up into a position of infinite favour, in eternal association with His own Son. Well may we exclaim, “Behold what manner of love the Father hath bestowed on us, that we should be called the sons of God.” (1 John 3: l) Nothing could fathom man’s ruin but God’s love, and nothing could equal man’s guilt but the blood of Christ. But now the very depth of the ruin only magnifies the love that has fathomed it, and the intensity of the guilt only celebrates the efficacy of the blood that can cleanse it. The very vilest sinner who believes in Jesus can rejoice in the assurance that God sees him and pronounces him “clean every whit.”
Such, then, is the double character of instruction to be gleaned from the laws and ordinances in this section, looked at as a whole; and the more minutely we look at them, in detail, the more impressed we shall be with a sense of their fullness and beauty. Take, for instance, the very first ordinance that presents itself, namely, that of the Hebrew Servant.
“Now these are the judgements which thou shalt set before them. If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master have given him a wife, and she have borne him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall he her master’s, and he shall go out by himself. And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free; then his master shall bring him unto the judges: he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for ever.” (Ex. 21: 1-6) The servant was perfectly free to go out, so far as he was personally concerned. He had discharged every claim, and could, therefore, walk abroad in unquestioned freedom; but because of his love to his master, his wife, and his children, he voluntarily bound himself to perpetual servitude; and not only so, but he was also willing to bear, in his own person, the marks of that servitude.
The application of this to the Lord Jesus Christ will be obvious to the intelligent reader. In Him we behold the One who dwelt in the bosom of the Father before all worlds – the object of His eternal delight – who might have occupied, throughout eternity, this His personal and entirely peculiar place, inasmuch as there lay upon Him no obligation (save that which ineffable love created and ineffable love incurred) to abandon that place. Such, however, was His love to the Father whose counsels were involved, and for the Church collectively, and each individual member thereof, whose salvation was involved, that He, voluntarily, came down to earth, emptied Himself, and made Himself of no reputation, took upon Him the form of a servant and the marks of perpetual service. To these marks we probably have a striking allusion in the Psalms. “Mine ears hast thou digged.” (Ps. 40: 6, marg.) This psalm is the expression of Christ’s devotedness to God. “Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me, I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea thy law is within my heart.” He came to do the will of God, whatever that will might be. He never once did His own will, not even in the reception and salvation of sinners, though surely His loving heart, with all its affections, was most fully in that glorious work. Still He receives and saves only as the servant of the Father’s counsels. “All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.” (John 6: 37-39)
Here we have a most interesting view of the servant character of the Lord Jesus Christ. He, in perfect grace, holds Himself responsible to receive all who come within the range of the divine counsels; and not only to receive them, but to preserve them through all the difficulties and trials of their devious path down here, yea, in the article of death itself, should it come, and to raise them all up in the last day. Oh! how secure is the very feeblest member of the Church of God! He is the subject of God’s eternal counsels, which counsels the Lord Jesus Christ is pledged to carry out. Jesus loves the Father, and, in proportion to the intensity of that love, is the security of each member of the redeemed family. The salvation of any sinner who believes on the name of the Son of God is, in one aspect of it, but the expression of Christ’s love to the Father. If one such could perish, through any cause whatsoever, it would argue that the Lord Jesus Christ was unable to carry out the will of God, which were nothing short of positive blasphemy against His sacred name, to whom be all honour and majesty throughout the everlasting ages.
Thus we have, in the Hebrew servant, a type of Christ in His pure devotedness to the Father. But there is more than this: “I love my wife and my children.” “Christ loved the church and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing ; but that it should be holy and without blemish.” (Eph. 5: 25-27) There are various other passages of Scripture presenting Christ as the antitype of the Hebrew servant, both in His love for the Church, as a body, and for all believers personally. In Matthew 13, John 10 and 13, and Hebrews 2, my reader will find special teaching on the point.
The apprehension of this love of the heart of Jesus cannot fail to produce a spirit of fervent devotedness to the One who could exhibit such pure, such perfect, such disinterested love. How could the wife and children of the Hebrew servant fail to love one who had voluntarily surrendered his liberty in order that he and they might be together? And what is the love presented in the type, when compared with that which shines in the antitype? It is as nothing. “The love of Christ passeth knowledge.” It led Him to think of us before all worlds – to visit us in the fullness of time – to walk deliberately to the door post – to suffer for us on the cross, in order that He might raise us to companionship with himself, in His everlasting kingdom and glory.
Were I to enter into a full exposition of the remaining statutes and judgements of this portion of the Book of Exodus, it would carry me much further than I feel, at present, led to go.* I will merely observe, in conclusion, that it is impossible to read the section and not have the heart drawn out in adoration of the profound wisdom, well-balanced justice, and yet tender considerateness which breathe throughout the whole. We rise up from the study of it with this conviction deeply wrought into the soul, that the One who speaks here is “the only true,” “the only wise,” and the infinitely gracious God.
{*I would here observe, once for all, that the feasts referred to in Ex. 23: 14-19 and the offerings in Ex. 29 being brought out in all their fullness and detail, in the book of Leviticus, I shall reserve them until we come to dwell upon the contents of that singularly rich and interesting book.}
May all our meditations on His eternal word have the effect of prostrating our souls in worship before Him whose perfect ways and glorious attributes shine there, in all their blessedness and brightness, for the refreshment, the delight, and the edification of His blood-bought people.
Fuente: Mackintosh’s Notes on the Pentateuch
Exo 23:1-9 R. Justice.Form and substance also separate this group from the Judgments and ally it with the Words of Yahweh in the Covenant Book. Circulating groundless reports (Exo 23:1 a), conspiring with him that is in the wrong (cf. Exo 2:13) to be a malicious witness (Exo 23:1 b), siding with the strongest in action or witness-bearing (Exo 23:2), and partiality in judgment (Exo 23:3) are condemned. Read in Exo 23:3, for poor, great: partiality for the poor needed no prohibition. The injunctions about a straying or fallen beast of an enemy (Exo 23:4 f., render Exo 23:5 as mg.) breathe a generous spirit: they are here out of place, and were perhaps a marginal illustration to Exo 23:9. Justice must be administered fairly and strictly, and bribes must be rejected, and not Buffered to pervert the cause of the righteous (Exo 23:8). In Exo 23:7 b it is better to read with LXX and thou shalt not acquit the guilty. The alien, like the poor, is to have justice (Exo 23:9 a, Exo 23:9 b being a gloss). We see the true democratic ideal of law and justice emerging in this paragraph, and also the obstacles before it: the man with money, or a large family (cf. Psa 127:3-5), or many friends had a tremendous advantage; he has not lost it all yet.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
INSISTENCE ON HONESTY
(vs.1-9)
Consistently with the language of law, the question of honesty is looked at from a negative viewpoint, that is, emphasizing what one should not do. How easily one may circulate a false report without realizing it is false because he did not carefully check its source. May the Lord keep us from this. To circulate this is bad, and also to associate with others who do so. Both of these are seen in verse 1. Again, a crowd may be carried away by an evil report. We must not dare to follow the crowd. Nor must we speak in such a way as to advocate any perversion of justice. Verse 2 speaks of these two points. Even if we relax justice in favor of a person because he is poor, this is wrong, though we may think we are being kind (v.3). This would be approving evil, which we must never do at any time.
Verse 4 is again intended to try our honesty. Even if one is an enemy and we see his animal straying, the honest thing is to return it to him. Or if we know another person hates us and that person’s donkey has too heavy a load, we are responsible to give what help we can (v.5), though it would be a natural inclination to ignore it. It is the same principle as found in Rom 12:20 : “If your enemy is hungry, feed him: if he is thirsty, given him a drink; for in so doing you will heap coals of fire on his head.”
Verse 6 gives the other side of the matter raised in verse 3. We must not dare to take advantage of a poor person to make him suffer wrongly. This is a common evil, of which James speaks in strongest terms (Jam 5:4). We must be on our guard always to avoid the slightest involvement in a false matter or in condemning the innocent or righteous (v.7). It is just as dishonest also to receive a bribe, for whatever cause it may be: if a righteous man does this, it will lead him to pervert his words (v.8). Finally, oppressing a stranger is also dishonesty, for we were once strangers and have been shown kindness by God. Honesty therefore would show similar kindness to strangers (v.9). All of these things, while written from the viewpoint of law, are still of real value in challenging us as to how honest we really are.
POSITIVE LAWS AS TO GOD’S SET TIMES
(vs.10-19)
In contrast to the negative laws of the first nine verses, verses 10-19 speak positively as regards the attitude Israel was to show toward God. Just as there were six days of the week in which people were told to work, so they are told to sow their crops six years out of seven, and let the land lie fallow during the seventh year. Not only was this good for the land, but it would show consideration for the poor, who could come into another’s property and take any volunteer produce that came up in spite of the land not being worked. This was to include vineyards and olive yards. All could be left without working them during the seventh year (vs.10-11). If the poor did not take what came up, it was still left for animals.
Again it is insisted that they were to work for six days only and rest the seventh day, — Saturday, – and this rest included their servants and their animals (v.12). This was a gracious provision of God for their own benefit, not by any means a law that would oppress them. Yet obedience would show respect for God’s authority, a matter insisted on in verse 13. They were not even to speak the names of idols, for such easy speaking may lead to an easy recognition of these things (v.13).
It was imperative that Israel keep a feast to the Lord three times in the year. There were more feasts (or set times) than these ordered for Israel (Lev 23:1-44), but the feast of unleavened bread (or the Passover) which was in the Spring, the feast of firstfruits, in the summer, and the feast of ingathering, in the fall, were times when all the males in Israel were required to appear before God (vs.14-17). Chapter 34:24 assured Israel that at those times, when the men were obedient to the Word of God, no one would desire their land, so that their wives and children would be in no danger. These feasts were kept at Jerusalem, the place the Lord chose to place His name (Deu 16:5-16).
This section ends with some serious stipulations. The blood of God’s sacrifice was not to be offered with leavened bread, for leaven speaks of sin, and the sacrifice of Christ allows not the least toleration of sin, but is itself the total condemnation of sin (Rom 8:3). Also the fat of the sacrifice must not be left overnight: it must be burned as devoted entirely to God, for Christ’s sacrifice is decisive: no question must be left as to its perfection and finality.
The first of their firstfruits were to be brought to the house of God, in acknowledgment that all was rightly His. Interestingly, however, when God’s rights are first established, then our attitude toward others is immediately inferred in the injunction not to boil a kid in its mother’s milk. For the spiritual significance of this is the most important. Mother’s milk is intended to nourish the kid, not to boil it. Thus the milk of the Word of God (1Pe 2:2) is to be used to nourish young believers not to boil them, or punish them. Let us be careful to use God’s Word rightly, in kind concern for others, not as a whip for them.
IN VIEW OF FUTURE BLESSING IN THE LAW
(vs.20-33)
The goodness of God is again seen in His promise in verse 20. He would send an angel before them, both to guard them and to guide them to the place He had ordained for them, the land of promise. For the Lord does not leave us to make our own way to heaven as best we can!
Yet Israel is warned that it would be no light matter for them to provoke the angel: they must have a spirit of submission and obedience, for they could not expect any pardon for their transgressions. This is of course the language of law, for they had promised to keep the law. If they did obey, then the Lord would be an enemy to their enemies and an adversary to their adversaries. Satan will not gain any advantage over us while we obey the Word of the Lord. The six nations mentioned in verse 23 are symbolical of different forms of spiritual evil that seek to seduce the saints of God from a path of true obedience to the Lord. If obedient, Israel could expect God’s angel to cut off their enemies.
Israel was to give absolutely no recognition to the idols of these nations, nor compromise by following their example in anything (v.24), but rather reject and break down the pillars they considered sacred. This was essential if they were to really serve the Lord, and He would bless them in their daily life, preserving them too from sickness. Their women would not suffer miscarriages, nor be barren (v.26).
These conditional promises were given to Israel under law, not to the church of God today, for our blessings are spiritual, and connected with heavenly places (Eph 1:3). Godly people today may suffer illness and other afflictions such as this, as Epaphroditus was “sick almost unto death,” not for disobedience, but for the sake of the work of Christ (Php 2:25-30). One reason for this is that the knowledge of Christ brings with it the living power to endure such things in a spirit of genuine faith and cheerfulness.
As Israel advanced toward their land, the fear of God would be imprinted on the hearts of their enemies, to cause them to retreat in confusion (v.27). Figuratively God would send hornets before them, small, insignificant things which yet cause people consternation. The Lord can use the smallest thing to scatter His enemies, just as He did in the case of defiant atheist who challenged God to meet him at a certain time and place to have a fight. When God did not appear, he went home to boast that he had proven God did not exist. But a tiny insect had bitten him at the place: he was poisoned and died soon after in acute pain.
Yet God would not drive out the enemies of Israel rapidly, for the land would become desolate if Israel took too long to take possession, and wild animals would increase in number (v.29). Wisely therefore God would gradually drive the enemies out until Israel was able to take full possession of their land. This reminds us that we do not learn all the truth of God suddenly. Rather, gradually, little by little, we enter into the value of the great blessings we inherit “in Christ.” Though “all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ” are the property of all true believers (Eph 1:3), yet it takes time to “possess our possessions.”
The boundaries of Israel’s land mentioned in verse 31 have never yet been possessed by Israel, but will be in the millennium. However, even though some of the enemies had not been driven out, Israel was not to make any covenant with those remaining, and was not to allow any to remain living in the land. The danger of adopting their customs was strongly warned against (v.33).
Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible
Justice and neighborliness 23:1-9
This section appeals for justice toward all people. The subject of the legislation now shifts from love for all to justice for all. The Israelites should treat all people justly, not only the rich but also the poor (Exo 23:3), the enemy as well as the friend (Exo 23:4). Jezebel later did to Naboth what Exo 23:7 warns against (cf. 1Ki 21:9-14).
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
1
CHAPTER XXII.
THE LESSER LAW (continued).
PART IV.
Exo 22:16 – Exo 23:19.
The Fourth section of this law within the law consists of enactments, curiously disconnected, many of them without a penalty, varying greatly in importance, but all of a moral nature, and connected with the well-being of the state. It is hard to conceive how the systematic revision of which we hear so much could have left them in the condition in which they stand.
It is enacted that a seducer must marry the woman he has betrayed, and if her father refuse to give her to him, then he must pay the same dower as a bridegroom would have done (Exo 22:16-17). And presently the sentence of death is launched against a blacker sensual crime (Exo 22:19). But between the two is interposed the celebrated mandate which doomed the sorceress to death, remarkable as the first mention of witchcraft in Scripture, and the only passage in all the Bible where the word is in the feminine form–a witch, or sorceress; remarkable also for a far graver reason, which makes it necessary to linger over the subject at some length.
SORCERY.
“Thou shalt not suffer a sorceress to live.”– Exo 22:18.
The world knows only too well what sad and shameful inferences have been drawn from these words. Unspeakable terrors, estrangement of natural sympathy, tortures and cruel deaths, have been inflicted on many thousands of the most forlorn creatures upon earth (creatures who were sustained in their sufferings by no high ardour of conviction or fanaticism, not being martyrs but simply victims), because it was held that Moses, in declaring that witches should not live, affirmed the reality of witchcraft. No sooner did the argument cease to be dangerous to old women than it became formidable to religion; for now it was urged that, since Moses was in error about the reality of witchcraft, his legislation could not have been inspired.
What are we to say to this?
In the first place it must be observed that the existence of a sorcerer is one thing, and the reality of his powers is quite another. What was most sad and shameful in the mediaeval frenzy was the burning to ashes of multitudes who made no pretensions to traffic with the invisible world, who frequently held fast their innocence while enduring the agonies of torture, who were only aged and ugly and alone. Upon any theory, the prohibition of sorcery by the Pentateuch was no more answerable for these iniquities than its other prohibitions for the lynch law of the backwoods.
On the other hand, there were real professors of the black art: men did pretend to hold intercourse with spirits, and extorted great sums from their dupes in return for bringing them also into communion with superhuman beings. These it is reasonable to call sorcerers, whether we accept their professions or not, just as we speak of thought-readers and of mediums without being understood to commit ourselves to the pretensions of either one or other. In point of fact, the existence, in this nineteenth century after Christ, of sorcerers calling themselves mediums, is much more surprising than the existence of other sorcerers in the time of Moses or of Saul; and it bears startling witness to the depth in human nature of that craving for traffic with invisible powers which the law prohibited so sternly, but the roots of which neither religion nor education nor scepticism has been able wholly to pluck up.
Again, from the point of view which Moses occupied, it is plain that such professors should be punished. They are virtually punished still, whenever they obtain money under pretence of granting interviews with the departed. If we now rely chiefly upon educated public opinion to stamp out such impositions, that is because we have decided that a struggle between truth and falsehood upon equal terms will be advantageous to the former. It is a subdivision of the debate between intolerance and free thought. Our theory works well, but not universally well, even under modern conditions and in Christian lands. And assuredly Moses could not proclaim freedom of opinion, among uneducated slaves, amid the pressure of splendid and of seductive idolatries, and before the Holy Ghost was given. To complain of Moses for proscribing false religions would be to denounce the use of glass for seedlings because the full-grown plant flourishes in the open air.
Now, it would have been preposterous to proscribe false religions and yet to tolerate the sorcerer and the sorceress. For these were the active practitioners of another worship than that of God. They might not profess idolatry; but they offered help and guidance from sources which Jehovah frowned upon, rival sources of defence or knowledge.
The holy people was meant to grow up under the most elevating of all influences, reliance upon a protecting God, Who had bidden His children to subdue the world as well as to replenish it, and of Whom one of their own poets sang that He had put all things under the feet of man. Their true heritage was not bounded by the strip of land which Joshua and his followers slowly conquered; to them belonged all the resources of nature which science, ever since, has wrested from the Philistine hands of barbarism and ignorance. And this nobler conquest depended upon the depth and sincerity of man’s feeling that the world is well-ordered and stable and the heritage of man, not a chaos of various and capricious powers, where Pallas inspires Diomed to hunt Venus bleeding off the field, or where the incantations of Canidia may disturb the orderly movements of the skies. Who could hope to discover by inductive science the secrets of such a world as this?
The devices of magic cut the links between cause and effect, between studious labour and the fruits which sorcery bade men to steal rather than to cultivate. What gambling was to commerce, that was witchcraft to philosophy, and the mischief no more depended on the validity of its methods than upon the soundness of the last device for breaking the bank at Monte Carlo.
If one could actually extort their secrets from the dead, or win for luxury and sloth a longer life than is bestowed upon temperance and labour, he would succeed in his revolt against the God of nature. But the revolt was the endeavour; and the sorcerer, however falsely, professed to have succeeded; and preached the same revolt to others. In religion he was therefore an apostate, and in the theocracy a traitor against the King, one whose life was forfeited if it was prudent to exact the penalty.
And when we consider the fascination wielded by such pretensions, even in ages when the stability of nature is an axiom, the dread which false religions all around and their terrible rituals must have inspired, the superstitious tendencies of the people and their readiness to be misled, we shall see ample reasons for treading out the first sparks of so dangerous a fire.
Beyond this it is vain to pretend that the law of Moses goes. It was right in declaring the sorcerer and the sorceress to be real and dangerous phenomena. It never declared their pretensions to be valid though illegitimate. And in one noteworthy passage it proclaims that a real sign or a wonder could only proceed from God, and when it accompanied false teaching was still a sign, though an ominous one, implying that the Lord would prove them (Deu 13:1-3). This does not look very like an admission of the existence of rival powers, inferior though they might be, who could interfere with the order of His world.
Sorcery in all its forms will die when men realise indeed that the world is His, that there is no short or crooked way to the prizes which He offers to wisdom and to labour, that these rewards are infinitely richer and more splendid than the wildest dreams of magic, and that it is literally true that all power, in earth as well as heaven, is committed into the Hands which were pierced for us. In such a conception of the universe, incantations give place to prayers, and prayer does not seek to disturb, but to carry forward and to consummate, the orderly rule of Love.
The denunciation of witchcraft is quite naturally followed, as we now perceive, by the reiteration of the command that no sacrifice may be offered to any god except Jehovah (Exo 22:20). Strange and hateful offerings were an integral part of witchcraft, long before the hags of Macbeth brewed their charm, or the child in Horace famished to yield a spell.