m
I
*>>,< * *A'/ ^A< V.' '^/
w '"■' ■■" "
35
c. u.
Biblical Refe
CORNELL
UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY
GIFT OF
Barnes Hall Library
PRESENTED BY
ALFRED C. BARNES.
NOT TO BE TAKEN FROM THE ROOM.
CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY
3 1924 092 342 769
Cornell University
Library
The original of tiiis book is in
the Cornell University Library.
There are no known copyright restrictions in
the United States on the use of the text.
http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924092342769
A
COMMENTARY
ON THE
HOLY SCRIPTURES :
CRITICAL, DOCTRINAL AND HOMILETICAL,
WITH SPECIAL KEFERENCE TO MINISTERS AND STUDENTS.
BY
JOHN PETER LANGE, D. D.
PROFESSOR OF THE0L067 IN THE UNIVERSITY OF BONN,
ASSISTED BY A NUMBER OP EMINENT EUROPEAN DIVINES.
TRANSLATED, ENLARGED, AND EDITED
BY
PHILIP SCHAFF, D.D.
PROFESSOR OP SACIIED LITERATURE IN THE UNION THEOtOGICAL SEMINAnr, NEW YORK.
IN CONNECTION WITH AMERICAN AND ENGLISH SCHOLARS OF VARIOUS
DENOMINATIONS.
VOLUME II. OF THE OLD TESTAMENT:
EXODUS AND LEVITICUS.
NEW YORK:
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS,
743-745 EKOAD-WAY.
EXODUS;
OE,
THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
BY
JOHN PETER LANGE, D.D.,
PEOFESSOE OF THEOLOGY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF BONN.
TRANSLATED BY
CHARLES M. MEAD, PH.D.,
PEOFESSOE OP THE HEBEEW LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE IN THE THEOLOGICAL
SEMINAEY AT ANDOVEE, MASS.
NEW YORK.
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS,
743-745 BROADWAY.
Copyright, 1876.
jiT SCRIBNEK, ARMSTRONG & CO.
PREFACE BY THE GENERAL EDITOR.
Dr. Lange's Commentary on Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers was not published till 1874.
Dr. Scheoedeb's Deuteronomy was issued in 1868.
The two corresponding English volumes were begun several years ago. The present volume
contains : —
1. A general and special Introdiwtion to Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers. It unfolds Dr.
Lange's original and ingenious view of the organic unity and trilogy of the three Middle Books
of the Pentateuch and their typical import. The translation is by Eev. Howabd Osgood, D. D.,
Professor in Kochester, N. Y.
2. The Commentary on Exodus by Dr. Langb, translated, with many additions, by Re^r. C. M.
Mead, Ph. D., Professor in the Theological Seminary at Andover, Mass. The Textual and Gram-
matical notes, some of which are very elaborate (e. g., pp. 72-75), belong wholly to the American
Edition, there being no corresponding part in the German of Lange. The "Doctrinal" and
" Homiletical," which in the German edition are put together at the end of Numbers, have been
appended to the Commentary proper.
3. The Commentary on Lemiicas by Eev. Pbederic Gardiner, D. D., Professor in the Berke-
ley Divinity School, Middletown, Conn. This part differs in one respect from most of the series.
It was alreaay far advanced before the commentary of Langb appeared, and it then seemed best
to complete it on the plan begun, incorporating into it as much as possible of the German work
of Lange. For the general structure and arrangement of this commentary, therefore, Dr. Gardi-
ner is responsible ; but the greater part of Lange, including every thing of importance, and espe-
cially every thing in which there is any difference of opinion, has been translated and included in
the work. Nearly the whole of Lange's "Homiletical," and a large part of his "Doctrinal," have
been distributed to the several chapters to which they pertain. Every thing from Lange is care-
fully indicated by his name and by quotation marks; all matter not so indicated is by the trans-
lator, and is not marked by his initials, except in the case of remarks introduced into the midst
of quotations from Langb. A large part of the translation was prepared by Eev. Henry Fergu-
son, of Exeter, N. H.
The Commentary on Numbers and Deuteronomy will appear in a separate volume early in au-
tumn. The remaining parts of the Old Testament division are also fast approaching completion.
PHILIP SCHAFF.
UsioK Theol. Seminaet, New Yoek, \
April 2Sth, 1876. J
IlfTRODUOTION
TO THE
If ,
m ill
ill lis i 11 Piiffl
BY
JOHK PETER LAFGE, D.D.,
PEOFESSOE OF THEOLOGY IN THE UNIVEESITY OF BONN.
TRANSLATED BY
HOWARD OSGOOD, D.D.,
EOCHESTEE, N. T.
NEW TORE:
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS,
743-745 BEOADWAY.
THE
THREE MIDDLE BOOKS OF THE PENTATEUCH.
A. GENERAL INTRODUCTION
OF THE THREE MIDDLE BOOKS OF THE LAW CONSIDERED
AS A WHOLE.
2 1. THE EELATION OF THE THREE MIDDLE BOOKS OP THE PENTATEUCH TO THE
WHOLE PENTATETJCH.
While the Pentateuch describes the Law of the Lord in its whole compass as the
symbolical, typical, fundamental law of the kingdom of God, its universal basis stated
in Genesis, and its universal purpose in Deuteronomy, it appears to be the unique
character of the three middle books to set forth this law as the law of Israel strictly
considered. They are the fixed, written, literal law of God for this people his-
torically bounded and defined. But since this people should not live egotistically for
itself, but be a blessing of the nations, and also a type of the nations to be brought
into the kingdom of God, its law is not merely a law for the Israelites. Throughout
it has a typical meaning as far as its ordinances and shadows indicate the principles of
spiritual life and the divine regulations for all the nations of the kingdom of God, for all
Christian nations. Israel is the type of Christian nationalities. Israel's law is the type
of Christian theocratic systems in their ethical, ecclesiastical and political regulations.
It is therefore both one-sided and erroneous to mistake either the national and directly
popular meaning of the Mosaic law in earliest times or the Judaizing and superficiality con-
cerning this law in the Kationalistic era. This last view Kationalism has held equally with
the Pharisees. Paul had this in view in his opposition to mere legality. The law of the
three middle books is literally and particularly the law of the people of Israel; but this peo-
ple Israel is essentially a type of the people of the kingdom of God ; not only of God's peo-
ple in general, but also of national institutions, of Christian nationalities. The significance
of Israel in respect to Christian nationalities has been excellently set forth by Pastor Bram
of Neukirchen. Concerning the significance of nationalities in the Christian Church, comp.
my Vermischfe Schri/ten, New Series 11, p. 185, and W. Hofiinann, Deutschland, 1870,
Vol. 2.
We may consider the special religion of the patriarchs as the subjective religion of the
individual conscience led by divine grace, as a walk before and with God directed by special
instruction from God and by complete obedience of faith. But now commences the predo-
minantly objective form of religion in which the people of Israel, as an individual, are led by
an external social code of laws and by mysterious external tokens of God. The patriarchal
religion as compared with the Mosaic is more subjective, which gives it a gleam of New
GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE THREE MIDDLE BOOKS.
Testament or of Protestant evangelical freedom and joy (Gal. iii.), as we see portrayed in
the life of the Sethites : whilst the religion of Moses is that of promise contained in the
training of the people, and therefore the external law and symbols are chiefly employed; as
in a similar manner in the Middle Ages Christendom served for the elementary training
of the nations. But on the other side a great progress is shown, in that now for the first
time a whole nation is made the people of God, instead of a holy family living by them-
selves, and in that the simple word of God and the simple covenant of circumcision unfold
into a complete code of laws and an organization of worship and of society. It is also an ex-
ceedingly important fact that Deuteronomy again points out the spirituality of the law, or
throws a bridge over to the prophetic era — a fact frequently mistaken. Comp. Gen.
Introd. p. 49.
I 2. THE PAETICULAE RELATION OF THE THREE MIDDLE B00K8 TO GENESIS.
According to the preceding, it is not correct to speak of Genesis as the introduction to
the following books. According to that view, the Old Testament was designed as a particu-
lar and national Bible for the Jews. It is rather the archives of the foundation of the uni-
versal and indestructible kingdom and people of God, whose coming is prefigured by the
typical people of God, Israel, and by the typical kingdom of God, the theocracy. For it is
the high destination of Israel that in becoming the representative of the concentration or
contraction of God's kingdom in process of development, it should prepare and bring about
the expansion or enlargement of the real and complete kingdom of God as it is promised in
the blessing of Abraham (Gen. xii. 3), but especially in the second part of the prophet Isaiah
(chap, xliii. 21 f ). Yet ^^^ Catholicism of Genesis tends to this typical speciality by defining
narrower circles for the Messianic promise. The first circle is the universe itself in the sig-
nificant religious contrast, heaven and earth. The second circle is the earth, ■ Adam with
his race. The third circle is the nobler line of Adam in the Sethites in contrast to the line
of Cain. The fourth circle is the family of Noah baptized with the water of the flood and
uivided into the pious and blessed family of Shem and the humanitarian and blessed people
of Japhet. Then the distinctive genealogical speciality is begun by the setting apart of
Abraham. His posterity is ennobled by a series of exclusions ; Ishmael, the children of
Keturah and Esau, are shut out from the consecrated circle of Israel. Indeed within this
circle great distinctions are indicated, though in the three books the tribes of Judah and
Joseph (Ephraim and Manasseh) stand far behind that of Levi. Thus Genesis, which in
its Catholicism is one with the loftier Genesis, the Apocalypse, ends with the foundation of
the Jewish nationality, with the seed-corn of the typical people of God in the house of
Jacob.
The three middle books in relation to Genesis are the record of the first typical fulfill-
ment of the divine promise which was given to Israel, and through Israel to mankind (Gen.
XV. 13, 14). They inform us how a people of God grew out of the holy family, a people born
amid the travail of oppression and tyranny in Egypt. This people, consecrated to God,
come out through the typical redemption, which first makes them a people, and which is
based upon the fact that the Almighty God (El Shaddai) appears under the name Jehovah,
and proves Himself Jehovah. For in the revelation of God as Jehovah, as the covenant
God who ever remains the same, and ever glorifies Himself by His faithfulness, there inhere
two very diverse revelations, since by the first it was not proved that he would continue to
return. As in geometry we must have two separate points in order to determine the dis-
tance of a third point, so in the region of faith we must have two indications of salvation in
order to conclude assuredly that the covenant-God will continue to return. In this way for
the first time the name Jehovah obtained its full significance, though it was known in ear-
lier times in connection with the prevailing name El Shaddai : just as at the Reformation
the word "justification'' was invested with a new meaning, though it had been known
before. On this redemption the theocracy (Ex. xix.) was founded, and appeared not in
abstract forms, but in concrete, historical characteristics, in ethical, ecclesiastical and politi-
cal laws. This code of laws was a boundary separating Israel from all other peoples, placing
J 3. THEIR PARTICULAR RELATION TO DEUTERONOMY. 3
them in strongest contrast to other peoples, making them particularly the executioner of the
Canaanites, who had come to ruin through the practice of unnatural lust. By this Israel
would have become actually, according to the idea of the Pharisees, " odium generis hu-
mani," had they not been predestined to be educated as the teacher of the peoples and as the
mediator of their salvation.
2 3. THE PAETICITLAR EELATION OF THE THREE MIDDLE BOOKS TO DEUTEEONOMY.
Doubt has been expressed whether the man Moses who, in the spirit of the severe jurist,
issued the code of laws contained in the three middle books, could also be the author of the
essential parts of Deuteronomy. Doubts of this sort appear to pre-suppose that a law-
giver should make his own ideals, his loftiest thought a code for his people. But very
false conceptions of the best legislation lie at the foundation of this view. A wise lawgiver
will approve himself by the manner and mode in which he accommodates his. toftiest views
of right to the culture or want of culture of his people. Moses therefore might have given
a law to his people corresponding to their culture as he found it, by mere external form, the
very letter of the law, and the enlargement of the bald form by picturesque representations
of a ceremonial worship which appealed to the senses and thought, not less than by a strong
organization of the whole people. All this Moses might have done in the character of a
Jewish Solon. But his giving an ethical, ecclesiastical and civil national law which was
throughout a transparent representation, the symbol and type of the kingdom of God, proved
him to be a prophet led and illumined by the Spirit of God.
Throughout his whole course Moses had been educated equally as a Jewish specialist of
his times and as a catholic embracing all future humanity. As the adopted child of the
daughter of a Pharaoh, he was educated in all the wisdom of Egypt, the most renowned cen-
tre of human culture of that time, and he also became familiar among the sons of the desert,
the Midianites, with a noble patriarchal house. But as he was a true spiritual heir of Abra-
ham, his personal experiences formed the basis for the catholic enlightenment imparted to
him.
But as a prophet of Jehovah it could not be hidden from Moses, that with the institution
of the covenant-religion in the forms of the external law, there was danger that the majority
of his people might go astray in the mere letter of the law and in seeking righteousness by
works. This danger of misunderstanding his law he met by bringing out in the second law,
in Deuteronomy, the germs of spirituality which lay in the first law, and thereby opened a
way from the isolation of Israel by its code to the spiritual catholicity which was to be de-
veloped in the prophets. Such a transition is unmistakably shown in the original portions
of Deuteronomy which we distinguish from the final compilation. We are not called to treat
of this compilation, or to ofier any review of treatises upon it (e. g. Kleineet's Treatise, Das
Deuteronomium und der Deuteronomiher).
In the first place, there is throughout Deuteronomy a solemn prophetic tone. Then
there is the historical account of the miraculous leading of Israel in the light of Jehovah's
grace, who pardoned the transgressions of the people, and even made Moses a typical
substitute for the sins of the people (chap. iii. 26, 27). Israel and the law do not appear
here in the lightning-flame of Sinai ; Israel is the glorious people among the nations (chap.
iv. 7), and the fiery law by which Jehovah made Himself known to Israel is comprised in
the words : " Yea, he loved the people " (chap, xxxiii. 3). Respecting the form of the reve-
lation on Sinai, not the terrors at the giving of the law are recalled, but the fact
that Israel heard only the words of God ; they did not see His form, in order that the danger
of making images of God might be averted (chap. iv. 15). Thus decidedly were the people
directed in the way of spiritual worship. The command against image worship in its length
and breadth becomes a long-continued, positive demand for spirituality in religion. In the
repetition of the ten commandments (chap, v.), in the tenth, the wife is placed before the
house, and the critics have greatly troubled themselves with the question whether this posi-
tion (chap. V. 21) or the reverse in the decalogue (Ex. xx. 17) is the right one. This alter-
native would make no essential change ; for in Exodus the lawgiver speaks, but in Deutero-
GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE THREE MIDDLE BOOKS.
nomy the prophet who interprets the law. According to the law the wife is part of the
house and the property of the man; according to her spiritual relations, she is above the
house. By the law of the Sabbath (its importance as regards worship in Leviticus must be
distinguished from its ethical value, Ex. xx.) the principle of humanity, which was stated in the
first sketch of the civil law (Ex. xxiii. 12), is further developed (Deut. v. 14, 15). Especially
remarkable is the expansion of the first commandment in the declaration : Thou shalt love
Jehovah thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might (chap,
vi. 5). The covenant-sign of circumcision is here referred to the circumcision of the heart,
regeneration (chap. x. 16; xxx. 6).
In Leviticus, after the curse and the blessing, come a few words of promise of the resto-
ration of'israel (chap, xxvi.) ; but here how greatly is that promise expanded in prophecy
(Deut. chap, xxx.) 1 This prophetic tendency in Deuteronomy is not obscured by the severe
enactments against the Canaanites (chap, vii.) ; they are rather, on the one side, moderated
(chap. vii. 22), and, on the other side, the reason for them is given (ver. 22). If more
is said in this book of the Levites than of the priests, it is a proof not of the exaltation,
but of the lessening of the priesthood, a step towards the general priesthood. To these are
added the laws of a genuine humanity in the laws of war (chap, xx.) and also in various
commands touching forbearance and morality. And finally the solemnity of the song and
of the blessing of Moses. The grand antithesis between the song and the blessing makes
these chapters the flower of Deuteronomy : in the song the curse referred to culminates ; in
the blessing, the promise. As Genesis from a universal basis converges to the particularity
of the three middle books, so Deuteronomy diverges in the direction of catholicity. This
shows that the particularity of the three books is economical and temporary, and that a
golden thread of spiritual significance, of symbolical, typical suggestion runs through the
whole law.
For the distinction between Deuteronomy and each of the three middle books, comp.
the article "Pentateuch'' inB-ERZOa'a Real- Ikeyclopxdie.
i 4. THE EELATION OF THE THREE MIDDLE BOOKS OF THE LAW TO EACH OTHER.
The internal, essential relation of the three middle books of the law to each other is not
defined with sufficient theological exactness either by the Hebrew names which are the first
words of the books, H'lDE' n7S, K^p?!- ^IIP?, or by the Greek names of the Septnagint rep-
resenting the principal subjects of the books (comp. Habtwig's Tabellen zur Einleitung des
Alten Testaments, 2 Aufl. S. 28).
An approximate distinction is found in the old division of the law into the moral, cere-
monial and civil law. Yet these three forma do not sufficiently correspond to the concrete
character of the three books.
But in perfect accord with the distinguishing marks of Messianic prophecy, we may
designate the first book (Exodus) as the prophetic book of the theocracy, the second (Levi-
ticus) as the priestly book, the third (Numbers) as the kingly book, the book of the army,
its preparation and marches, and service of the heavenly king. In the sequence of these
books there is mirrored the sequence of the offices of Christ, whilst in the history of Israel
the rule of the prophets (judges included) comes first, then the rule of the kings, and lastly
the rule of the priests.*
That in the preparation of the three books this distinction was intentionally maintained
appears from the plainest marks. A cursory consideration might, for instance, ask : why do
we not find the large section containing the erection of the tabernacle in Leviticus rather than
in Exodus, since the tabernacle is the holy place of Levitical worship ? According to the
explanation of the Scriptures themselves, the tabernacle is primarily not the house of the
oflerer, but of him to whom the offering is brought ; not the priest's house, but God's house,
• Ewald greatly mlBunderstanda the matter when he makes the following order: God's rule, kings' rule, saints' rule.
God's rule, or the theocracy, is not a form of government; it is the principle of government; but in permanent sovereignty
it controlled all the three forms of government until they ended with the destruction of Jeiiisalem.
? 5. ORGANISM OF THE THREE BOOKS AS TO THEIR UNITY, ETC. r,
the temple-palace of Jehovah, where He is present as law-giver, and maintains the law given
on Sinai ; we might say, it is the Sinai that moves with the people ; and therefore it is the
house where Jehovah ever meets with His people through the mediation of His representa-
tives. The significance of the tabernacle as the place of the revelation of the glory of God
comes out very clearly at the close of Exodus {"'J^.'in 'TIS and Jinjjn hTlit).
But we must more exactly define the two parts of Exodua.
The first part (chaps. i.-xviii.) narrates the formation of the people of Israel up to the
foundation of the theocracy by their redemption, that is, the typical redemption and creation
of the people of God and the typical foundation of the kingdom of God. The second part
(chaps, xix.-xl.) comprises the giving of the law, the ethical law, and the tabernacle as the
dwelling-place of the Law-giver. To this is added in Leviticus the law of worship and in
Numbers the political law, for the most part illustrated by examples.
The first part (chaps. i.-xviii.) is therefore the real foundation of the three books, the sin-
gle trunk which is further on divided into three codes of laws. But the preponderance of
the prophetical and ethical law, of the decalogue over the law of worship and the civil law
is shown by its place in the foundation, and it also appears from the fact that with the deca-
logue the outline of the three-fold code of laws is given (Ex. xx.-xxiii.).
In accord with the same law of a definite characteristic distinction of the books, we find
in Leviticus the laws of the festivals arranged. All those festivals are placed before them as
priests (chap, xxiii.). The Sabbath appears here not in an ethical point of view as the day of rest
but in its relation to worship as the day of the great assembly and as the basis of all other
festivals ordained by God (chap, xxiii.). But all these festivals are preceded by the distinc-
tive mark of Leviticus, the complete directions concerning the great day of atonement (chap,
xvi.). In like manner the ten commandments and all the statutes are conformed to the
priestly idea (chap, xix.); and so the fourth book of Moses, the book of the army of God and
of the beginning of its marches, true to its character, commences with a muster of the people
fit for war.
Numbers therefore stands with the impress of the kingly revelation of Jehovah. It
forms the foundation for the conscription of the army of the Lord (chap, i.-iii.). And if the
Levites are again mentioned here, it is because they are now appointed to sanctify the march
of the people of God and their wars (chaps, iii. 44 — chap. iv.). The laws of purification,
which were inculcated in Leviticus with respect to worship, are repeated here that the camp
of the army of God should be kept clean, in order that the army may be invincible (chap,
v.). All directions with respect to sacrifice which are repeated here are given more or less
for this end (chaps, vi.-x.). And therefore the two silver trumpets, which sounded the inarch,
form the last of all these regulations. But the ofiences of the people, their calamities and
judgments, afford visible proofs that it is the typical march of the people of God and the
divine guidance of the people which are set before us (chaps. xi.-xvii.), and that by severe, yet
gracious interposition, the errors of the people are removed. And then, preceded by new
Ordinances for purification, and, since the assembly needed a new incitement, by the death
of Miriam and Aaron in due time, and by the purification of Moses himself with the assem-
bly through great perturbation at the waters of Meribah (chap, xx.), the great conquests of
Jehovah (one had long before taken place) follow, though these are again interrupted by
new transgressions by the people (chap, xxi.-xxv.). The second enumeration of the people
marks the end of the preliminary foundation of the state (chap, xxvi.), and hence there fol-
low sketches of the political and ci-vil law (chap. xxvi. f ). The regulations of the festival
again occur here, because of their relation to the civil order of the state. All further di-
rections are merely outlines of the future typical state (chaps, xxx.-xxxvi.).
§6. THE ORQASISU OF THE THBEE BOOKS AS TO THEIR UNITY AND THEIR SEPARATE
PARTS.
The ethical and prophetic legislation of Exodus is based on the formation and redemp-
tion of the people of God : it is also the prophecy of the better legislation, the erection of a
true spiritual kingdom of God by the vivifying laws of the Spirit of Grod. The typical, sac-
GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE THREE MIDDLE BOOKS.
rificial rites of Leviticus are connected with this prophecy by internal relations. Then on
the basis of consecration through sacrifice, the army of God, according to the book of Num-
bers, comes together in order that, being led by God in its marches and purified by peculiar
judgments, it may execute judgment upon the world and lay the foundation of (jod's state.
In accordance with the three-fold division Moses appears most prominently in Exodus
(Exodus is therefore peculiarly the book of Moses), Aaron in Leviticus, and the princes and
leaders of the twelve tribes in Numbers. We have already mentioned that this three-fold
division becomes four-fold because we must distinguish in Exodus the general fundamental
portion (chaps, i. — xviii.) from that which is special.
The organism of Exodus — The theocracy as prophetic and ethical, or as the sole foundation of
worship and of culture.
Exodus is divided in general into two parts ; the first part (chaps, i. — xviii.) narrates the
formation and redemption of the people of God, more strictly, the formation of the people of
God and their redemption until the institution of God's state or the theocracy ; the second
part (chaps, xix. — xl.) narrates the institution of the covenant and the ethical and propheti-
cal law of God by itself, a compendium of the whole law as special training unto Christ, until
the completion of the habitation of the ever-present Law-giver.
The first larger division is divided again into the history of the typical origin and re-
demption of Israel (chaps, i. — xii.), and into the history of the confirmation of the redemp-
tion by the typical consecration (chaps, xiii. — xviii.). The fundamental thought of the first
part of the history of redemption is deliverance through suffering, a deliverance marked by
the institution and celebration of the passover, with the solemn exodus begun with the re-
past of the exodus, the passover (chap, xii.). The fundamental thought of the second part,
or of the history of the confirmation of the redemption, is the separation of Israel from the
Egyptians by the passage through the Red Sea, accomplished by means of the pillar of cloud
and of fire (chap, xiv.), celebrated in Moses' song of victory, and taking shape in the prepa-
ration for the theocratic covenant. The first part describes merely the pangs of birth until
the birth, the second describes merely separations or typical consecrations.
The second larger division (chaps, xix.— xl.) is divided into the history of the covenant
of the first legislation (chaps, xix. — xxiii.), of the institution of the covenant (chap, xxiv.),
and of the ordering of the tabernacle together with the reception of the written law (chaps.
XXV. — xxxi.) ; further into the history of the apostasy in the setting up of the golden calf,
of the restoration of »he covenant through chastisements, and of the law renewed partly in
severer, partly in mi der terms (chaps, xxxii. — xxxiv.) ; finally into the history of the erec-
tion of the tabernac! 3, by which Mount Sinai or the house and the revelation of the Law-giver
is brought within th congregation of God (chaps, xxxv. — xl.).
Remark. — Some commentators and writers of Introductions never give themselves the
trouble to discover the arrangement of these books, but, on the contrary, tell us the sources
whence they were compiled. This is plainly scientific aberration, the result of an ambitious
but owl-like criticism, an anatomical history of literature, which without right desires
to be called theology. However thoroughly one may pursue the question of the sources, that
will not release us from the duty of understanding 'the books aa they are according to their
logical structure and religious intention.
The organism of Leviticus — The theocracy as priestly; after the dedication of the covenant-con-
gregation to Ood follows the dedication of the covenant-people to Jehovah, the holy covenant-
Ood, by means of theocratic consecration, for the purpose of manifesting theocratic holiness.
The fundamental thought of this book is ofiering, but offering as atonement or the typi-
cal atonement with God (chap. xvi.). Both the principal divisions correspond with this.
First, the holy rites (chaps, i.— xvi.) ; second, the holy life (chaps, xvii.— xxvii.). In the
first section the various offerings are set forth in order, beginning with the burnt offering and
ending with the peace offering (chaps, i. — vii.). It is worthy of remark that in this book it
is repeatedly said, " when one brings an offering," whilst the ethical decalogue speaks abso-
I 5. ORGANISM OP THE THREE BOOKS AS TO THEIR UNITY, ETC. 7
lutely " tkou shalt." In the second section follow the directions concerning those appointed
to the oflfice of mediation by sacrifice, the priests, i. e., of those who in a typical sense are
worthy to draw near to God in behalf of the sinful people (Jer. xxx. 21) chaps, viii. — x.
Then follow the directions concerning the animals of the typical offering, clean beasts which
as distinguished from unclean beasts are alone fit for an offering (chap. xi.). Then is
described the typical cleanness or purification of the offerers, i. «., of the Israelites bringing
the offering. With these directions is reached the festival of the yearly offering for atone-
ment, the central point and climax of worship by offerings (chap, xvi.)
Hence there now follow in the second division the typical consequents of the typical
offering for atonement, the precepts for maintaining holiness, a. All killing and eating of
flesh becomes in the light of the offering for atonement a thank offering (chap. xvii.). b.
Since the table of the Israelite as a priest is hallowed, so is also his marriage (chap, xviii.).
This priestly holiness pertains to all the relations of life; first, positively (chap, xix.) ; second,
negatively (chap. xx.). Above all it demaads a typical positive maintenance of holiness in
the priestly ofiBce itself (chaps, xxi. — xxii. 16), as well as perfection in the very animals to
be offered (chap. xxii. 17-33). To the keeping holy the animals for offering is joined the
keeping holy the festivals on which the offerings are brought (chap, xxiii.) : so also the acts
of offering (chap. xxiv. 1-9). The keeping holy the name of Jehovah is inculcated by an
instance of punishment (chap. xxiv. 10-23). The very land of Israel must be kept holy by
the Sabbatic year and the great year of jubilee (chap. xxv.). The general law of the typical
holy keeping is then followed, as a conclusion, by the sanction or declaration of the holiness
of the law itself; the promise of the blessiog, the threatening of the curse (chap. xxvi.).
But why does ch. xxvii. speak of special vows ? Here also the law points beyond itself.
Vows are the expressions of a free, prophetic, lofty piety. They point to a higher plane, as
the consilia evangelica of the Middle Ages sought to do this, but could do no more because
they made the law of the spirit of Christ a mere external law of the letter, and just as the
longings inspired by the consilia evangelica found their solution in a life of evangelical faith,
so the desires expressed by Old Testament vows found their solution in the New Testament.
But under the law they were to be regulated according to law. Yet even in the great day
of atonement there were two ceremonies which pointed beyond the Old Testament ; first, an
offering for atonement in accordance with all legal offerings ; second, the putting of the un-
known, unatoned sins on Azazel * in the desert.
The organism of the Booh of Numbers — The theocraey as kingly in its relation to the world.
Tlie army of Ood. Its preparation. Its march to take possession of the inheritance of Qod.
Its transgressions, its defeat and rejuvenescence under the discipline of its king Jehovah and
under the leading of Moses to the border of the promised land.
The fundamental thought of the book of Numbers is the march of the typical army of
God at the sound of the silver trumpets, the signals of war and victory for directing the wars
of Jehovah, until the firm founding of God's state, and the celebration of the festivals of vic-
tory and blessing of Jehovah in the land of promise (chap. x. 1-10). Around this centre are
grouped the separate parts of the book.
The conscription and the order of the camp of the holy people form the first part : at the
same time the Levites are assigned to lead the army of God (in a symbolical sense as a banner,
not in a strategic sense, chap. iii. 22) ; they are also mentioned here as being the servants of
the ark of the covenant, the symbolic banner of the army, to precede the army (chs. i.-iv.).
Upon this in the second part follow the directions for the typical consecration of the
army, especially for putting away whatever would defile (chap, v.), and for self-denial on the
part of the army (chap. vi. 1-21) ; then the solemn blessing of the army (chap. vi. 22-27),
and the gifts and offerings which the leaders of the army brought for the tabernacle as the
central point (staff and head-quarters) of the army of God (chap vii.). Then in conformity
with this high purpose the splendid lights of the tabernacle and those who were to serve them,
the Levites, are spoken of (chap. viii.). In addition to these consecrations there are enact-
• [See note, p. 43].
8 GENEKAL INTRODUCTION TO THE THREE MIDDLE BOOKS.
ments for keeping clean the army by the feast of the passover and the supplementing of the
law of the passover by that of the second passover for those unclean at the first, stragglers in
the holy march, and by the law for strangers eating the passover (chap. ix. 1-14).
The third part, the central point of the book, forms a special section. It describes the
pillar of cloud and of fire over the tabernacle as the divine signal for the marches of Israel,
and the blowing of the silver trumpets as the human signal following the divine (chap. ix.
15— X. 10).
Then in the fourth part the departure of Israel from Sinai and the first division of its
marches, its chastisement by a series of calamities, transgressions and judgments, which
proves that this army of God is only symbolical and typical. This occasions the institution
of a new purification of the people by the sprinkling of water, mixed with the ashes of a red
heifer, which has been made a curse. This section ends with the death of Miriam and of
the high-priest Aaron (chap. x. 11— chap. xx.). This part includes the march to Kadesh
and the long sojourn there till the departure of the new generation for Mount Hor. Special
incidents are, the burning in the camp and the miraculous gift of food by manna and quails;
the boasting of Aaron and Miriam against Moses ; the dejection of the people at the report
of the spies and their defeat afterwards in their presumption ; a new regulation of the peace-
oflferings, which encloses a new prediction of the promised land ; a violation of the Sabbath
and the judgment accorded to it; the rebellion and destruction of Korah's faction; the mur-
muring of the people against the judgment which had overtaken the &ction, and the deliver-
ance of the people from the judgment intended for them by the incense offered by Aaron, at
which time the position of the priesthood is still higher advanced. And finally, apart by
itself comes the catastrophe at Meribah, when both Moses and Aaron sinned and were
punished.
The fifth part describes the second division of the march of the Israelites, which appa-
rently is to a large extent a return ; but it now begins to be a march of victory, though some
great transgressions of the people are followed by great punishments. On this march, which
begins at Mount Hor and continues through a great circuit around the land of the Edomites
to the encampment of the Israelites at Shittim in the plain of Moab, Eleazar the new high-
priest stands by the side of Moses ; at last Joshua comes forth more positively as the repre-
sentative of Moses (chaps, xxi. — xxv.). The two transgressions of Israel, their murmuring
because of the long journey, and their thoughtless participation in the revels of the Midi-
anites in the land of Moab, are punished by suitable inflictions, which are again followed by
theocratic types of salvation. The blessings of Balaam form the central point of the exalta-
tion of Israel now beginning.
With the sixth part begin the preparations for entrance into Canaan. First there is a
new enumeration of the now purified people, the new generation. Then an enlargement of
the law of inheritance, especially in reference to daughters who are heirs. Then the conse-
cration of Joshua as the leader of Israel. The directions with regard to the offerings which
are now made more definite are a presage of the march into Canaan, or of the beginning of a
time when Israel will be able to bring these offerings. The new law of the feasts given here
bears a similar signification. The seventh new moon, the great Sabbath of the year, is made
chief of all, as a sign that Israel now enters into its rest. Here also the sphere of the vow
appears as one of greater freedom, and above that of the legal offerings ; but at the same time
it must be brought under the rule of law. A last blow against the heathen, the campaign
for vengeance on the Midianites, by which Israel is purified, forms the conclusion of these
preparations (chaps, xxvi. — xxxi.).
The seventh part contains the commencement of the settlement of Israel in Canaan.
First, the settlement of the tribes of Reuben and Gad and the half tribe of Manasseh, are
described. This is followed by a retrospect of the wandering in the desert; and by an anti-
cipation of the future, consisting of an encouragement to enter the land, defining the bounda-
ries of the land and those who should allot the land, at the same time particularly mentioning
the cities of the Levites and of refuge. Finally the inheritance of the tribes is ensured against
division (chaps, xxxii, — xxxvi.).
I 6. RELATION OF THE THREE BOOKS TO HOLY SCRIPTURE IN GENERAL. 9
§ 6- THE BELATION OF THE THREE BOOKS TO HOLT SOEIPTUEE IN GENEEAL, AND TO
THE NEW TESTAMENT IN PAETICOLAB.
These three middle books are in an especial sense the law books, or the law of the Jewish
people. But even for the Jewish people they are not books of a mere external law for the
regulation of an external state. With such a view these books would be read as the heathen
law books of a powerful heathenism, and the Jewish people would be regarded as a heathen
people among the heathen. In fact the Jewish people who made the law a covenant of the
partiality of God and of righteousness by works, has been shattered as a, nation, and cast out
among all people.
In conjunction with the special legal and national signification, these books, as books of
revelation, have a symbolical side ; in their literal commands and historical features they
present in symbol lofty spiritual relations. The law of circumcision announced in Genesis
becomes the symbol of a circumcision of the heart. This symbolical side of the law in limited
construction, becomes further on through the law in broader construction, the larger revela-
tion of God in prophecy, till the latter passes away in the morning beams of the Spirit.
But, thirdly, the three books have a typical side ; they set forth the future real, i. e., spi-
ritual redemption and its fruit, the new covenant and the real kingdom of God, that is, the
New Testament in preparatory and fundamental outlines. If we regard merely the symboli-
cal and typical, that is the spiritual side of the three books, we have the New Testament in
the Old, the beginnings and foundations of the eternal revelation of salvation (Heb. xi. 1 f.);
if we regard only the exterior we have the national law of the Jews, whose burden and im-
possibility of fulfillment must lead to Christ (Acts xv.). But regarding both sides at once,
we have the picture of a strong concentration or contraction of the kingdom of God as a pre-
paration for its future unlimited expansion and catholicity.
The positive side of this history of legislation is the lofty spiritual aim and significance
of the law, its prophetical and Messianic bearing. Its negative side consists in its bringing
out prominently that the law as law cannot give life, but that under the law the people con-
stantly stumble and fall, and only by divine chastisements and grace, by priestly intercession
and atonement, by true repentance and faith, do they again reach the path of salvation.
Within this law — irrespective of its expansion in Deuteronomy — there is great progress
and growth, as is shown in the diflference of the relations before and after the setting up of
the golden calf, between the first and second tables of the law.
At the first giving of the law the people see the lightning and hear the thunder on the
mount, and in mortal fear hurry away. Moses alone must speak with God for the people.
But Moses was able so far to quiet the people, that after the giving of the law Aaron, Nadab,
Abihu, and seventy elders, with Moses, were able to approach the top of the mount, and there
behold God, and eat and drink (Exod. xxiv.). At the second sojourn of Moses on the mount,
we do not hear of these fearful signs. From mysterious concealment and silence, he comes
forth with shining face, before which Aaron and the princes, who at the first giving of the
law beheld God, retreat ; and their slavish fear, and that of the people, is again quieted by
covering Moses' face with a vail. Jehovah Himself, also, in order to reassure the people,
makes known from Sinai the meaning of the name Jehovah ; that He was " God, merciful
and gracious, long-suffering and abundant in grace and truth, keeping mercy for thousands,
forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin, but leaving nothing unpunished, and visiting the
iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third
and fourth generation." But on the other hand, it is now determined that Jehovah will
accompany the people, not as Jehovah Himself, in the midst of the people, but in the form
of an angel- before them, that is, in the form of Old Testament revelation and law. Asa
mark of this positive separation, Moses removes his tent as a provisional tabernacle outside
the camp ; an act which brings to mind John the Baptist in the wilderness ; and the congre-
gation in the camp is by that declared unclean.
10 GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE THREE MIDDLE BOOKS.
J 7. THE RELATION OF THE THREE BOOKS TO THE KECOKDS ON WHICH THEY WERE FOUNDED.
The logical connection and the organic unity of these three books are exhibited in unde-
niable precision, clearness, and beauty.
And not less clear is it that this whole complex of the Jewish national law is arranged
not according to the strict requirements of history but of religion ; a sacred tabernacle though
made of historical materials ; not a mere didactic composition, but a concrete didactic dispo-
sition strung upon the threads of history. Separating the historical from the didactic ele-
ments we find that the first historical portion (Exodus, chaps, i. — xviii.), makes a book by
itself. Joined to this, as a second book, is the second part of Exodus ; the book of propheti-
cal and ethical legislation. Leviticus contains no trace of historical progress ; it is simply the
law-book of Levitical worship. The first section of Numbers (chaps, iv. — x. 10), forms the
outline of the theocratic, kingly legislation. Then at the blast of the silver trumpets the
people depart from Sinai. And now follow, the second historical part of the whole
work, the march from Sinai to the plain of Moab, and various new legal precepts, as special
circumstances occasioned them. Thus the three books arranged according to theocratic pur-
poses make five books, a smaller Pentateuch in the greater. Though we raay not lay special
stress upon the sacred trinity of this law, yet it is worthy of remark, that the ethical legisla-
tion progresses through the stadia of development, that the legislation concerning worship
from beginning to end is a finished system, which is further on supplemented by the civil
legislation, while this last is enlarged as historical occasions required, in accordance with the
usual course of civil legislation. But that this concrete unity did not proceed from a single
human author under divine inspiration, appears from many proofs, as well as from the very
nature of these books. First of all, this is shown by the connection with Deuteronomy, in
which it is plain that previously-existing records were arranged by a subsequent editor. Such
records are also iu these books quoted or presupposed, for instance, the songs (Numb. xxi. 17
ff., 27 fi".) : the history and especially the prophecies of Balaam.
In general we cannot with certainty decide between those parts which had Moses for
their author (as for instance Bleek does in his Introduction, recognizing many such parts),
and those which are due to a later revi-sion or addition ; but from satisfactory proofs we make
the following distinctions : 1, Those originals which are fundamental, to wit, the primary,
traditional and written records of the genesis of the people — especially of Joseph — then the
outlines of the theocratic legislation (the passover, the decalogue, the tabernacle, the law of
offerings, etc., songs, forms of blessing, encampments) ; 2, the arrangement of the law into
three parts by the hand of Moses ; 3, a final later revision, which, by arrangement and addi-
tion, sought to present the complete unity of the Pentateuch.
That such collected originals were the foundation of these books needs no argument.
But that Moses himself distributed the materials into three parts, appears from the great sig-
nificance of this organic three-fold unity with its Messianic impress, from the designation of
the tabernacle, not for Levitical but for ethical legislation, as well as from the break in the
whole construction before the death of Moses. It is particularly to be remarked that the
three legislations manifest their theocratic truth by their interdependence ; either by itself
would present, judged by common rules, a distorted form.
That these three books were made by dividing up a larger book which enclosed within
itself that of Joshua, is a modern scholastic view without any proof. As regards the distinc-
tion between Elohistic and Jehovistic portions, it may have some importance for Genesis.
But maintaining the great importance of the revelation in Exod. vi., thenceforth the distinction
between the two names must rest only on internal relations, not upon portions to be critically
distinguished. For instance, when, from the calling of Moses (Ex. iii.) and from the inter-
course of Jehovah with him (Exod. vi.) it is asserted that this is a compilation from two dif-
ferent accounts, the assertioa is made at the expense of the internal relations of the text,
which plainly show a perfectly logical progress from one section to the other. In consequence
of the decided refusal of Pharaoh to let the people of Israel go for a religious festival in the
desert, and on account of the increasing oppression of the people which brought them to
g 8. HISTORICAL FOUNDATION OP THB THREE BOOKS. H
despair, Jehovah, aa the covenant-God of Israel comes forth in the full glory of His name.
With this new significance which He gives to His name, He repeats previous promises (Exod.
iii. 8-15) and assures the redemption of the people by great miracles and judgments, and
their admission into a peculiar covenant relation. That the first general account anticipates
some particulars of the second transaction is not an argument against it.
In view of the totality of the Mosaic legislation the fundamental law asserts itself, that
as already mentioned, the essential parts are in the highest degree interdependent. Mose«,
as the author of the decalogue only, would no longer be Moses ; but a system of offerings
which was not founded upon this ethical basis, would seem to be an institution of sorcery.
The preparations recorded in the book of Numbers, without these conditions precedent, would
have to be regarded as measures for a conquest of the world by war. The proof of this com-
pact organism of the Pentateuch is the complete interdependence of the separate parts.
For the sources of the Pentateuch, especially of these three books, see Bleek, Introd. to
Old Test. The various views, see in "Uebersicht der verschiedenen Vorsiellungen uber
Vrsprung und Zusammenaeizung des Pentateuchs," page 172. According to Ewald, the
Mosaic sources are diflBcult to disentangle. The defenders of a single authorship are
indicated in Haetwig's Tabellen, pp. 28, 29. Comp. Bunsen's Bibelwerk, 2 Abtheilung,
Bibelurkunden, p. 108.
§ 8. HISTORICAL FOUNDATION OF THE THREE BOOKS.
The Bange of this History.
Cheonology. — ^In these books of the Pentateuch we have narrated the history of the
birth of the people of Israel up to its complete development as a nation. As the typical his-
tory of the people of God, it is a miniature of the birth of Christianity. The course of the
history begins with the theocratically noble origin of the people, and continues until they be-
hold their inheritance, the promised land. Betwixt these is the history of an obscure embry-
onic condition, in which they gradually become a people, though at the same time they sink
deeper and deeper into slavery, and of a birth as a nation in the midst of severe pangs, by
which redemption is accomplished, and which is then confirmed by the discipline of the law
and God's guidance of them through the desert, where the old generation dies away and a
new generation grows up.
The narrative is joined to Genesis by the recapitulation of the settlement of Israel in
Egypt, and of the death of Joseph, and continues to the time of the encampment in the plain
of Moab, shortly before the death of Moses. According to Exod. xii. 40, the Israelites dwelt
in Egypt four hundred and thirty years. To this must be added the sojourn in the desert,
forty years (Numb. xiv. 33 ; xxxii. 13). The whole period of this history is therefore four
hundred and seventy years. But out of this long period only a few special points are marked.
The origin of the people dates from the death of Joseph to the commencement of the oppres-
sion. Of this interval we learn nothing. It is a period covered with a veil like that which
covered the birth of Christianiiy from the close of the Pauline epistles to the great perse-
cutions of the second century.
The duration of Israel's oppression cannot be accurately defined ; itbegan at an unknown
date, which preceded the birth of Moses and continued till his mission to Pharaoh. Then
Moses was eighty years old, and Aaron was eighty-three years old (Exod. vii. 7). To this
must be added the forty years of the march in the desert (besides the period in which Egyp-
tian plagues occurred), and accordingly Moses at his death was one hundred and twenty years
old (Deut. xxxiv. 7). That Moses was forty years old when he fled into the wilderness, and
then lived in the wilderness forty years with Jethro (Acts vii. 23-80) is the statement of Jew-
ish tradition. See Comm., 1. c.
The undefined period of the Egyptian plagues, which from their connection followed one
another quickly, is terminated by the date of the exodus. The period from the departure
from Egypt to Sinai, and from Sinai through the desert to Kadesh, is clearly marked. De-
parture on the 14th (15th) Abib or Nisan (Exod. xii. 17) ; arrival at Sinai in the third month
(Exod. xix. 1 ) ; departure from Sinai on the 20th day of the 2d month of the 2d year (NumU
12 GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE THREE MIDDLE JJOOHIS.
X. 11) ; arrival at Kadesh Barnea in the wilderness of Paran ia the 2d year (the spies' forty
days, Numb. xiv. 34) ; abode at Kadesh (Numb. xxi. 1 ; Deut. i. 46) to the arrival at the
East bank of the Jordan thirty-eight years. In the fortieth year of the exodus they came to
Mount Hor, where Aaron died on the first day of the fifth month (Numb. xxxiiL 38). On
the first day of the eleventh month of the fortieth year, Moses delivered his parting words to
Israel (Deut. i. 3).
Goethe was therefore right when he said thatlsrael might have reached Canaan in two
years. But he did not understand God's chastisement, nor, we may add, the human saga-
city of Moses, which together occasioned a delay of thirty-eight years. And so Goethe's de-
nial of Moses' talent as a ruler is a proof that he utterly misunderstood the exalted and sanc-
tified worldly wisdom of Moses. But quite in accord with Goethe the Israelites, against the
will of Moses, did make an attempt to take possession of Canaan (Numb. xiv. 40).
The endeavor to fill up the obscure interval between the death of Joseph and the history
of Moses by the supposition of revelations proceeds from the idea that Old Testament reve-
lation must be made continuous, agreeing with the continuity of the biblical books. But
this would obliterate the distinction between periods and epochs made in Old Testament
history, as well as the peculiar import of revelation at chosen times. It is only through a
perception of the spiritual rhythm in the history of the kingdom of God (of the distinction
between the XP^'^O'; in which a thousand years are as one day, and the nacpol^ in which a day
is as a thousand years) that we reach an understanding of the great crises of revelation.
Schiller's words : " es gibt im Mensohenleben Augenblicke" etc., may be paraphrased thus :
there are moments in human life when it is nearer than at other times to the spirit of reve-
lation, to eternity, to the other world. Concerning the strictures of De Wette, Vatke, and
BEtTNO Bauer on the "great chasm " in the chronology, see Kurtz's Hist, of Old Covenant,
VoL II., p. 21. Yet in that obscure interval came forth the special significance of the name
Jehovah as already mentioned.
On making the length of the sojourn in Egypt four hundred and thirty years, see this
Comm. on Gen. xv. 13. This Comm. on Gen. xiii. Delitzsch, Gen., p. 371. This Comm.
Acts vii. In relation to the various readings in the Septuagiut, Samaritan Codex, and in
Jonathan (the sojourn in Egypt 430-215 years), see Kurtz, Eiet. of the Old Covenant, Vol.
II., p. 135, as well as concerning the statement of Paul (Gal. iii.), which Kurtz explains
by his citation of the Septuagint, while we date from the end of the time of promise. The
objections which are made to the chronology of the Septuagint see examined in Kurtz as
above. On the amazing conjectures of Baumgarten, see Kurtz, Vol. II., p. 143. Accord-
ing to BuNSEN, the limit of the sojourn in Egypt is too short; according to Lepsius it was
only ninety years.
We compute as follows : the whole sojourn was four hundred and thirty years. The
thirty years were not counted because the oppression did not immediately begin ; therefore
four hundred years of oppression. But as the four hundred and thirty years (Gal. iii.) are
apparently counted from Abraham, it would appear that the period in which the promises
were made to Abraham and the patriarchs ended with the death of Jacob.
Egypt.
For the description of this land, where the Israelites became a nation, we must refer the
reader to the literature of the subject, particularly to the articles on Egypt in Winer's Bihl.
Bealworti-rbueh ; Zeller's 5i6/. WoHerbuch ['Egy^t) ; Herzog's Beal-Eneyclopadie ; Bun-
sen, Egypt's Place in History; Hengstenberg, Egypt and the Books of Mosts, with Appen-
dix, Berlin, 1841 ; Uhlemann, Thoth, odtr die Winsenschaften der alten Egypter, Gottingen,
1855 ; Ebeks, Egypten und die Bucher Moses', Vol. I., Leipzig, 1868 ; Brugsch, Reiseberichte
ausEgypten, Leipzig, 1855; Brugsoh, Die Egyptische Qrabervelt, ein Vortrag, Leipzig. 1868-
8am. Sharpe, History of Egypt, 2 Vols., London, 1870 ; A. Knoetel, Cheops, der Pyramiden-
erbauer, Leipzig, 1861 ; Travels, Schubert [see also the maps in the Ordnance Survey under
direction of Sir Henry James, F. E. 8.], Strauss, Sinai und Oolgotha, etc. Bee the bibliog-
? 8. HISTORICAL FOUNDATION OF THE THREE BOOKS. 13
raphy of the subject in Kurtz, Hist, of the Old Covenant, Vol. II., p. 380. Also, in Dans,
Egypt, Egyptians.
For a sound knowledge of the history of Israel in Egypt one must consult the maps, etc.
Eiepert, Atlas der alien Welt ; Henry Lange, Bible-atlas in Bunsen's Bibelwerk ; Chart and
Conspectus of the written characters in BauciflCH. £eiseberichte. Long's Classical Atlas,
New York, 1867.
God's providential arrangement that Israel should become a nation in Egypt is shown
by the following plain proofs :
1. The people must prosper in that foreign land, and yet not feel at home. This was
brought about, first, by a government which knew Joseph, that is, by national gratitude ; then
by a government which knew not, or did not wish to know Joseph, and which made the
sojourn in Egypt very oppressive to the people.
2. The rapid growth of the people was favored by the great fertility of Egypt, which
not only supplied abundant food, especially to a pastoral people living by themselves, but
also revealed its blessing in the number of births.
3. A people who were to be educated to a complete understanding of the great antithesis
between the blessing and the curse in divine providence could be taught in Egypt better
than elsewhere to know the calamities attendant upon the curse. Here too were found the
natural prerequisites for the extraordinary plagues which were to bring about the redemp-
tion of the people from slavery.
4. The capacity of Israel, to receive in faith the revelations of salvation and to mani-
fest them to the world, needed as a stimulus of its development, contact and attrition with
the various civilized nations (Egypt, Syria, Assyria, Phoenicia, Babylon, Persia, Greece,
Rome). The first contact was pre-eminently important; by it the people of faith were pre-
pared by an intercourse during centuries with the oldest civilized nation. Their lawgiver
was educated in all the wisdom of Egypt, and the conditions of culture for the development
of the religion of promise as a religion of law, the knowledge of writing, education in art,
possession of property, etc., formed a great school o£ instruction for the people of Israel.
The external culture of the theocracy and the Grecian culture of sesthetics grew from the
same stock in Egypt.
5. And yet the national as well as the spiritual commingling of the people with Egypt
must be precluded. The people were preserved from a national commingling by the antipa-
thy between the higher Egyptian castes and that of shepherds, and by Israel's separate abode
in Goshen, as well as by the gloomy, reserved character of the Copts and by the constantly
increasing jealousy and antagonism of the Egyptians. The spiritual commingling was ob-
viated by the degradation of the Egyptian worship of animals and the gloominess of their
worship of the dead to a people who had preserved though but an obscure tradition of mono-
theistic worship of God. That the people were not altogether free from the infection of
Egyptian leaven is shown by the history of the golden calf; yet this infection was in some
degree refined by a knowledge of the symbolic interpretations held by the more cultured
classes of Egypt, for the golden calf was intended to be regarded as a symbol, not as an idol,
as was the case in later times among the ten tribes.
Israel in Egypt, the JSyhaos, Pharaoh.
The date when the Israelites settled in Egypt has been, in earlier and later times,
variously given, and with this indeflniteness of times has been joined the relation of Israel
to the Hyksos mentioned by the Egyptian historians, who migrated into Egypt, and were
afterwards driven out.
For the Biblical Chronology we refer to the exhaustive article by Roesch in Herzog's
Beal-Eneyclopddie. "Among chronologists who accept the scriptural accounts Scaliger,
Calvisitjs and Jacob Cappbl place the exodus in 1497, Petavius in 1531, Marsham in
1487, Usher in 1491," etc. De Wette makes the sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt to be
from 1921 to 1491 B. C. [Bihlische Archdologie, p. 28). Various computations are found in
the treatises, Biblische Chronologic, Tubingen, 1857 ; Becker, Eine Zarte der Chronologic
14 GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE THREE MIDDLE BOOKS.
der Hdligen Sahnft, Leipzig, 1859 ; V. Gutschmid, Beitrage zur Geschichte des Alien Orients
zur Wurdigung von Bunaen's Egypten, Bd. 4 and 5. The chronology of Manetho is exhaus-
tively treated by Ungee, Chronologie des Manetho, Berlin, 1867.
Some chronologists of the present day by the combination of Egyptian traditions have
arrived at results very different from the above. According to Lepsius (see Kuktz, Vol.
II. 409), the Hyksos came into Egypt as conquerors about the year 2100 B. C, and after a
sojourn of five hundred and eleven years were driven back to Syria. " After this about two
hundred years pass away before the immigration of the Israelites into Egypt, which, as well
as their exodus about a hundred years after, took place under the nineteenth dynasty."
Sethos I. (1445-1394, by the Greeks called Sesostris) was the Pharaoh under whom Joseph
came to Egypt: his son Eamses II., Miamun the Great (1394-1328), was the king at whose
court Moses was brought up ; and his son, Menephthes (1328-1309), the Amenophis of Jose-
phus, waa the Pharaoh of the exodus, which took place in the year 1314. See the remarks
by Kurtz and this Comm., Introd. to Genesis.
According to BimsEN (Bibelwerk, Bibelurkunden Theil I., ? Ill), the Israelites lived in
Egypt many hundred years before their enslavement. Then a few centuries more passed
until the oppression culminated under Ramses II., and under King Menophthah (1324^1305)
the exodus took place. Here Biblical Chronology is made entirely dependent on conjec-
tures in Egyptology. It does not speak well for the infallibility of the research, that one
requires only ninety years, the other about nine hundred years, for the sojourn of the Israel-
ites in Egypt.
In this connection the following questions are to be considered :
1. What is the solution of the difference between the four hundred and thirty years as
given in Exodus and the period shortened by the two hundred and fifteen years of the patri-
archs, as given by the Septuagint and the Samaritan codex ?
2. What is the solution of the statement of the Bible that the building of Solomon's tem-
ple was begun four hundred and eighty years after the exodus of the children of Israel out
of Egypt (1 Kings vi. 1)?
3. What relation does the history of the Israelites bear to the account by Manetho of
the Hyksos and the lepers?
As to the first question, we refer to the explanation in this Comm., Genesis xv. 14.
Comp. Kurtz, Vol. II., p. 133. As to the second question, see this Comm. ; The Books of
Kings by Baehr, 1 Kings vi. 1. The reconciliation of this statement with other chronolo-
gical statements of the Bible is found, first, in the view that many of the periods mentioned
in the Book of Judges are to be regarded as contemporaneous ; second, in the indefiniteness
of the four hundred and fifty years of the judges (Acts xiii. 20).
The third question has become the subject of various learned conjectures. The account
of Manetho concerning the expulsion of the Hyksos and the lepers from Egypt seems hith-
erto to have obscured rather than illustrated the history of Israel in Egypt. According to
the first account of the Egyptian priest Manetho (Josephus, c. Apion I. 14), people from
eastern lauds invaded Egypt under King Timaus, conquered the land and its princes, and
ruled five hundred and eleven years. They were called Hyksos, that is, shepherd-kings.
At the end of this period they were overcome by a native king, and finally having capitu-
lated, were driven out of their fortress, Avaris, by the king's son Thummosis. They then
retreated through the desert to Syria, settled in Judea, and there built a city (Hierosolyma)
which could hold their entire host (240,000 persons). Josephus referred this tradition to
the exodus of the Israelites.
The second account of Manetho tells of an expulsion of the lepers (o. Apion, I. 26). Ame-
nophis, an imaginary king, desired to see the gods. He was commanded by another Ameno-
phis first to clear the country of all lepers. From all Egypt he collected them, eighty thou-
sand in number. The king sent them first into the eastern quarries, later into the city
Avaris, where the Hyksos were said to have entrenched themselves. A priest from Heliopolis,
chosen by them, taught them customs which were opposed to those of the Egyptians. Then
he called the Hyksos from Jerusalem to a united struggle against the Egyptians. King
i 8. HISTORICAL FOUNDATION OF THE THBEE BOOKS.
Amenophis marched against the united forces with 300,000 men. But fearing the gods, ne
retired to Ethiopia, while the enemy committed the greatest atrocities in Egypt. The priest
(Osarsiph) who led the lepers, now called himself Moses. After thirteen years Amenophis came
with Ethiopian confederates, defeated the shepherds and the lepers, and pursued them to the
Syrian boundary (see the full account in Kurtz, v. 2, pp. 380-429).
These utterly fabulous stories are well fitted as a stage for the higher learning. According
to Josephus and many others, the Hyksos were the Israelites, according to others the Hyksos
lived with the Israelites, and if so, according to one view, they were the protectors and de-
fenders of Israel, according to an opposite view, they were the oppressors of Israel (Kurtz,
vol. 2, p. 380). According to Lepsius, the Hyksos were expelled two hundred years before
the immigration of the Israelites. According to Saalschutz, the destruction of Pharaoh in
the Red Sea, and the destruction of the dynasty of the Hyksos, occurred at the same time ;
but the expulsion of the Hyksos took place later.
In a careful consideration of the stories of Manetho great difficulties arise against every
conjecture. If the Hyksos left Egypt for Jerusalem before the Jews, then history must show
some trace that the Jews in their march through the wilderness to Palestine came upon this
powerful people who preceded them in migration. If the Hyksos left Egypt after the Isra-
elites, then the Hyksos in their journey to Jerusalem must have met with the Israelites.
Finally, if these pastoral people were together in Egypt, the shepherd-kings could not have
preserved an entire separation from the Jewish shepherds. Kurtz supposes that the Hyksos
were Canaanites, and the immigration of Israel took place under their supremacy. He also
finds in the legend of the lepers a reference to the Israelites, a view which requires some
modification, if Manetho's connecting the lepers with the Hyksos points to the Mosaic ac-
count that a mixed multitude joined themselves to the departing Israelites.
Hbngstenbekg, in his work "Egypt and the Books of Moses,'' with an appendix, "Mane-
tho and the Hyksos," opposes the prevailing view that Manetho was the chief of the priesthood
in Heliopolis, the most learned in Egypt, and wrote the history of Egypt by order of king
Ptolemy Philadelphus, using the works which were found in the temple. His reasons are
the following : evidences of striking ignorance of Egyptian mythology, of geography, etc.,
remarkable agreement of his account of the Jews with the statements of writers like Chsere-
mon, Lysimachus, Apion, Apollonius Molo, all of whom lived under the Roman empire.
There are no other witnesses who corroborate his statements. Manetho was a forger of later
times, like Pseudo-Aristeas. In later times there was a large number of Jews who cast off
their nationality, only retaining the national pride and antipathies, of whom Apion was an
example. Accordingly Hengstenbeeg holds the view, " that the Hyksos were no other than
the Israelites, that no ancient Egyptian originals formed the basis of Manetho's accounts, but
that the history preserved by the Jews was transformed to suit Egyptian national vanity."
If we grant the statements concerning the historical character of Manetho it is still pos-
sible that there arose in Egypt false traditions of the sojourn of the Israelites and of their
exodus. It is easily conceivable that the national pride of the Egyptians did not perpetuate
this history, as it really was, on their monuments : and it is just as conceivable that the un-
pleasant tradition of this history was transformed in accordance with Egyptian interests and
with different points of view. The legend of the Hyksos intimates the origin, mode of life,
and power of the Israelites, that by them great distress came upon Egypt, and that they went
away to Canaan and founded Jerasalem, while the legend of the lepers, to please Egyptian
pride and hatred, has made of the same history a fable. The names Avaris and Hierosolyra ,
as well as other marks, prove that these two legends are very closely connected. A. Knoetei,
in his treatise " Cheops " presents a peculiar construction of Egyptian history, which pro-
ceeds upon the supposition of the untrustworthiness of Manetho. That the shepherd kings
came from Babylon, and imposed upon the Copts the building of the pyramids and the wor-
ship of the dead, is a surprising statement in a work showing great research.
That an intimate acquaintance with Egypt is shown in the Pentateuch, is proved by
Hengstenbeeg with great learning in the work quoted above. He has also manifested un-
deniable impartiality, as his departures from the orthodox traditions prove in his history of
16 GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE THREE MIDDLE BOOKS.
the sacrifice of Isaac, of Balaam, of Jephthah's daughter, and in the paragraphs on " The signs
and wonders in Egypt," " Traces of Egyptian customs in the religious institutions of the
books of Moses." That his purpose was apologetic cannot obscure the worth of these inves-
tigations.
The influence which Egyptian art and science must have exerted upon the culture of the
Israelites, as well as the antagonism between Israelitish and Egyptian character, has been
treated in a summary way by Sam Shaepb in his History of Egypt* How much the Israel-
ites owed to Egypt in respect to science and art is an interesting chapter in ancient history ;
and here something should be said on the relation of the religion of Egypt to that of Israel.
Moses, whose name is Egyptian, and means " son of water," was brought up in the neighbor-
hood of Heliopolis, the chief school of Egyptian philosophy, and, according to the legend,
received through Jannes and Jambres most careful instruction in all the wisdom of the
Egyptians, while many Israelites had given themselves to the idolatry and superstition of the
land. This is the reason, according to Manetho, why so many Egyptian customs are expressly
forbidden in the Mosaic law, whilst others, which were harmless, are accepted in it. A
comparison of the customs of both nations would throw much light upon their relative posi-
tions. The grand purpose of the separation of the Israelites from other nations was the un-
equivocal maintenance of monotheism. Moses therefore declared that the gods which were
commended to the veneration of the ignorant masses by the Egyptian priests were false gods.
The Egyptians worshipped the stars as the representatives of the gods, the sun by the name
Ea, the moon as Joh or Isis ; but among the Israelites a worshipper of any of the heavenly
bodies was stoned. Among the Egyptians sculpture was the great support of religion ; the
priests had the god hewn out in the temple, and there prayed to it ; they worshipped statues
of men, of irrational beasts, birds, and fishes ; but the Israelites were forbidden to bow down
before a chiseled or carved image. Egyptian priests shaved ofi" their hair, but the Israelites
were forbidden to make a bald place, or even to cut the ends of the beard. The inhabitants
of lower Egypt cut marks on their bodies in honor of their gods, but the Israelites were for-
bidden to cut their flesh or to make any marks in it. The Egyptians put food in the grave
with the corpses of their friends, and on their behalf sent presents of food into the temples ;
but the Israelites were forbiddenf to put any food with a corpse. The Egyptians planted
groves in the courts of their temples (like the later Alexandrine Jews in the courts of their
synagogues) ; but the Mosaic law forbid the Israelites to plant any tree near the altar of the
Lord. The sacred bull, Apis, was chosen by the priests of Memphis on account of black
color and white spots, and Mnevis, the sacred bull of Heliopolis, bore nearly the same marks ;
but the Israelites were ordered in preparing the water of purification to take a red heifer,
perfect and young. Circumcision and abstention from swine's flesh was common to both
Egyptians and Israelites; but the Egyptians ofiered swine's flesh to Isis and Osiris, and ate
of it once a month, on the day after the full moon, after the sacrifice.
In addition to their knowledge of nature, the Egyptian wise men were acquainted with
sorcery and magic, which they used for the deception of the common people. When Moses
came before Pharaoh with signs and wonders, their magicians imitated him in some cases"
The Egyptian sorcerers and magicians exerted a great and often injurious influence on the
spirit of the nation ; they spoke as if they were the messengers of heaven ; an abuse which
two thousand years after the law could hardly restrain, though it condemned to punishment
any who asked their advice. But the Mosaic law empowered the people to punish those who
would seduce them, and commanded them to stone any who practised magic or witchcraft.
We must now speak of some things which the Israelite law-giver borrowed from the land
he left. The Egyptians inscribed the praises of their kings and gods on the inner and outer
sides of the walls of their buildings, and in the same manner the Israelites were commanded
to write the chief commands of their law upon the posts of their doors and gates. The Egyp-
tians adorned the carved images of their gods with wings ; the Israelites were commanded to
place at each end of the ark a cherub with outstretched wings. In a picture of a religious
* [I have boea unable to veriiy this rererence in the last edition of Sbabpe's Egm^U—B.. 0.]
t Ps not the author mistaken as to any prohibition of this ?— H. 0.]
I 8. HISTORICAL FOUNDATION OF THE THREE BOOKS. 17
procession in the time of Eameses III., there is a representation of a statue of the god Chem
being carried, which measures two and a half cubits in length, and one and a half cubit in
height, agreeing in form and measure with the ark which the Israelites made for the taber-
nacle. When the Israelites in the desert were bitten by serpents, Moses made a serpent of
copper, and fastened it upon a pole, that those bitten might look upon it and be healed ;
similar serpents are often seen on Egyptian standards ; and finally, when the Israelites fell
into idolatry, and demanded that Aaron should make them a god, he made them a golden
calf, the same animal they had frequently seen worshipped at Heliopolis under the name
Mnevis, and which they themselves perhaps had worshipped.
The Israelites brought with them from Egypt a knowledge of the art of writing, and in
the perfection of the alphabet and the mode of writing, as well as the more important matters
of religion and philosophy, they soon surpassed their teachers. The Egyptian hieroglyphics,
at first representing syllables, made no further progress except that later they were used as
phonetic signs of syllables. In the enchorial character (current hand) on papyrus, the more
clumsy signs were omitted, and all strokes were made of equal thickness by a reed pen. Un-
fortunately Egyptian religion forbade all attempts at change or reform, and therefore in all
ornamental and important writings the hieroglyphics were retained, which otherwise would
probably have been changed to signs of letters. The enchorial writing was used only in cur-
rent hand ; but it never reached the simplicity of a modern alphabet. The Hebrew square
characters were derived directly from the hieroglyphics, and the world owes it to the He-
brews that instead of writing in symbols an alphabet was formed by which a sign expresses
a sound. The Israelites admired the grand buildings of the Egyptians, but made no attempt
to imitate them. They early saw the great pyramids, and might have known when and how
they were built, but they probably satisfied themselves with the remark, that giants built
them. That Israelite religion and philosophy were not derived from the valley of the Nile
appears from the following : among the Israelites there was no encouragement to trade, for
the taking of interest was forbidden by law; women were not permitted to be priests; the
reward of the good and the punishment of the wicked was not, as among the Egyptians, ex-
pected after death, but here on earth ;* religious mysteries were as foreign to the Israelites as
to the Egyptians the thought that the earth could be deluged by rain. In general, Helio-
polis, from its close connection with Chaldea, received far more science and instruction from
Babylon than it returned thither. On the similarity between Egyptian and Israelite cus-
toms comp. Thoth by UHLEMAins', p. 7. Ebbbs, Egypten und die Bucher Moses, Vol. I.,
Leipzig, 1868.
Orowlh of Israel in Egypt.
If we regard the sojourn of Israel in Egypt as so short in duration as Lepsius would
* [This i8 the common view, but it does not accord with some of the plainest facts of revelation. At the beginning of
the Pentateuch stands the account of the death of Abel by the hands of Cain. Accepted aa righteous by God (Gen. iv. 4;
Heb. xi. 4), the younger brother, for no crime on his part, is murdered by the elder; and this murderer, though under a
curse, lives to become the head of a long line of descendants, "who enjoy in rich abundance the good things of this world.
The righteous is cut off in early youth. The wicked lives in security and wealth. If there were no other revelation on
this subject in the Pentateuch, this account would be sufficient to teach every believer in God, who is just, that His re-
wards and punishments are not confined to this world, but must be expected beyond death. Enoch was righteous before
God, but he had not lived to half the age of the other patriarchs before the Flood when he was translated. Was his reward
here 1 Heb. xi. 5, 6. The expectations of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, as to their reward, were utterly deceived, if they were
confined to this world. And what was the reward of Moses on earth ? He tells us in the 90th Psalm that after three-score
years and ten the strength of man is "labor and sorrow;" and in Deuteronomy he rehearses to the people the panics of the
burden he had borne in leading the people, and declares that death on the eastern side of the Jordan was to be his punish,
ment for his sin at Meribah. No, all these patriarchs prove by their lives the truth of Paul's words respecting all believers
that "if in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable." Their latter days must have been
shrouded in impenetrable gloom if they looked for their reward here — and in that gloom the promise of God mu?t have var-
nished for them and for us. Bat the New Testament plainly says that all these men were men of faith. "Now faith is as-
surance of things hoped for, a conviction of tilings not seen. For by it the elders obtained a good report. ***** But
without faith it is impossible to please God ; for he that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a Bewarder
of those who diligently seek Him." Heb. xi. 1, 2, 6. Jesns says the doctrine of the resurrection was taught by Moses
(Matt. xxii. 32 ; Ex. iii. 6), and the Epistle to the Hebrews asserts that both Abraham and Moses believed it (Heb. xi. 13-
19, 26). The only rational solution of their lives is a belief in rewards and punishments after death. The earliest revela-
tion, in the first four chapters of Genesis, was enough by itself to establish this faith. — H. 0.]
2
18 GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE THREE MIDDLE BOOKS.
make it, then it would not have been possible in that time for Jacob's family to become a
great nation. But if, on the other hand, we accept twice the length of time given in the
Bible it would be questionable whether the people, through so long an oppression, could
have preserved their Jewish peculiarities and religious traditions, as in this interim, they
were left to natural development on the basis of patriarchal revelation. " It has been argued
from 1 Sam. ii. 27 that there was not an interruption of divine revelation during the stay in
Egypt. But the argument is unsound. The meaning of the words, ' I plainly appeared unto
the house of the fathers, when they were in" Egypt, in Pharaoh's house,' efc., is fully ex-
hausted if we suppose them to refer to the last year of the sojourn of the Israelites there.
At the same time it is a strong proof that religious consciousness was kept alive in the hearts
of the people, that in so many of the proper names which were given during that period
(Numb, iii.) the name of God la found as one of the component parts." Kurtz, Vol.
II., p. 177.
Moses found existing among his people an organization of the tribes, heads of tribes,
who as elders exercised authority in their tribes (Ex. iv. 29). The religious zeal which Levi
first manifested in fanaticism (Gen. xxxiv.) seems to have remained in a purer form in the
tribe of Levi, as appears from the call of Moses, from the course of the sons of Levi at the
punishment of the idolatry of the golden calf, and from the blessing of Moses.
A tendency of the Jews to dispersion, the opposite pole to their strong coherence in their
peculiarities, in its loftier motive prefigured by the emigration of Abraham (Gen. xii.), first
shows itself in the separation of Judah (Gen. xxxviii.), and seems to have been felt fre-
quently during the settlement of the Israelites in Goshen. Concerning an earlier emigra-
tion (1 Chron. vii. 21) of some of the sons of Ephraim to Canaan, and a colonization of some
of the sons of Judah in Moab (1 Chron. iv. 22), comp. Kurtz, vol. 2, p. 177. The Danites in
the time of the Judges (Judg. xviii.) left their home and conquered the city Lais in northern
Canaan, and gave to it the name Dan. Later the tribe of Simeon left their narrow bounds
within the tribe of Judah and disappear among the other tribes (1 Chron. v. ) : a circum-
stance which throws light on the last statement of the tradition in the blessing of Moses in
which Simeon's name is wanting. Even in Egypt many Israelites seem to have exchanged
their home in Goshen for settlements among the Egyptians, for in this way alone could arise
the familiar relations with Egyptian neighbors, which appear in the presents to the Jews of
articles of silver and gold. Similar to the tax-gatherers under the Romans in the time of
Christ were the Jewish scribes and bailifis whom the Egyptians obtained among the Jews
themselves to confirm their despotic rule over them. In like manner the two midwives, who
probably were the heads of a class of midwives (Ex, i. 15), are described as Hebrews.
? 9. MOSES.
Comp. the articles under this title in Winer, Heezog, Zeller (bibl. Worterbuch), and
the index of the literature further on. We regard as the peculiarity of Moses, legal consci-
entiousness in a highly gifted nature under the leading of the revelation of God. Hence he
stands in the history of the kingdom of God as /car' e^ox^, the servant of God in contrast to
the Son in the house, who in a yet higher, the very highest sense, was the servant of God
(Heb. iii.). Hence his renunciation of the world is based upon his " respect to the recom-
pense of the reward " (Heb. xi. 26). As a champion of the law, but in misunderstanding of
the law, he smote the Egyptian (Ex. ii. 12) ; then he became the protector of the oppressed
women in the desert. For forty years he maintained his faith clear ; then he thought he
had failed of the conditions of his call, and felt that by the wrath of God he was brought
near to death because his Midianite wife had probably long been a hindrance to the circum-
cision of his sons (Ex. iv. 24). It is specially remarkable that though he governed the people
in the desert with a strong hand by the law, he condemned himself because for an apparently
small omission or transgression (Numb. xx. 12) he saw' prescribed by Jehovah his great
punishment, which indeed he prescribed for himself,* that he should not with the people
• [There is no warrant for this in Numb. xx. 12; xxvii. 14; Deut. xxxii. 51, 62 j Psalm cvi. S3, or elsewhere, that I am
aware ot Moacs' death was not brought about by his remorse, but was accomplished as God had foretold and by Sod.— H. O.J
2 9. MOSES. 19
enter the land of promise. This is the legal conscience of an eminently ethical mind. Moses
thus stands in strong contrast to a fanatical spiritualization, which, like the company of
Korah, would anticipate New Testament relations, as well as to the soulless perversion of the
law into mere rules, else he could hardly have broken the iirst tables of the law, or have
come down with the second tables from Sinai with his face shining, or in the original docu-
ments forming the basis of Deuteronomy, have drawn the lines of a spiritual inter-
pretation of the law. Aaron, who could play the fanatic (Ex. xxxii. 5), as a man of mere
legal rules, together with Miriam, at times opposed Moses (Numb. xii.). As the faithful
steward of the law, Moses stands in harmonious contrast to the Gospel economy;
only a temporary and intermediate evangelist, who on Sinai (Ex. xxxiv.) had heard Jeho-
vah's exposition of His name ; the faithful theocrat, who by law and symbol pointed to
Christ (Numb. xi. 29).
As nature points beyond itself to the region of spirit, as the law points beyond itself to
the Gospel and its royal law of freedom (James i. 25 ; ii. 8), the law of the Spirit (Rom.
viii.), so the mediator of the divine law points beyond himself to the Prophet of the future
(Deut. xviii. 15). At the beginning and the end of his declaration of the ethical law in the de-
calogue there are the germs of the coming law of freedom, " who brought thee out of the
house of bondage," " thou shalt not covet."
Besides Moses' relation to Christ we must mark within the Old Testament his relation
to Elijah and Elisha. Elijah is the Old Testament counterpart of Moses on the side of legal
retribution ; but Elisha is the expounder of Moses as to the spirituality of the law, its gentle-
ness and mercy, the coming gospel.
The grandeur of the genius of Moses appears in striking contrasts, pre-eminently in the
contrast of his firm conscientiousness with his prophetic power as a seer ; then in the contrast
of his eminent worldly wisdom, with his inner spiritual life ; in the contrast of his delicacy
with his heroic vigor ; in the contrast of his deep sensitiveness to the signs of the curse and
the signs of the blessing ; and finally in the opposite traits of the mildest humanity, yea, of
priestly self-sacrifice (Ex. xxxii. 11, 31 ; Numb.: the laws of humanity) and of the inexora-
ble firmness of the law-giver (Ex. xxxii. 27; Numb. xiv. 28; chap. xiv.).
That Moses should not be identified with Jewish superficial legality, with the letter of
the law that " killeth," though as a national law-giver he was compelled to exercise specially
the ofiice of death (2 Cor. iii. 7), that this was not his whole oflSce (as Luther would lead us
to infer), is apparent from the fact that by the side of the ethical law he has placed the law
of atonement, the theocratic reform of the traditional law of ofierings. And that he did not
intend to establish a real hierarchy is proved by his laying the basis of civil rights, the first
article of which regulates the emancipation of slaves. We judge the Papacy too leniently
and wrongfully when we assert that it is a return to the Old Testament priesthood — a priest-
hood that would absorb utterly all prophecy and all political authority 1
Among the great law-givers of antiquity Moses stands in solitary grandeur. He alone
gave to others the two most popular offices in national life : the high-priesthood to Aaron,
the chief command of the army to Joshua. As prophet he points beyond himself and his
institutions to the future; he does not obliterate the hope of the future which Abraham had
impressed upon his religion, but filled it with life and unfolded it chiefly through symbols.
But it was the Spirit of God who, in addition to his great genius, and by means of special
direction, made him capable of these great things. The common characteristic of all mighty
men of God and of faith, who made known the revelation of God, unconquerable patience
aud endurance, the sign of the victorious perseverance of the kingdom of God, especially of
Christianity, as it appeared in many individuals, the firmness of Noah, Abraham, Jeremiah,
but pre-eminently the patient and long-suffering perseverance of the Lord, these also appear
in typical traits, and though imperfect, yet in peculiar beauty, as the special marks of the
character of Moses. Hence in his old age a single act of impatience, reflecting the severely
punished impatient act of his earlier years, was sorely requited, though this single false step
was so turned by God as to give to his life a solemn and glorious ending on the eve of enter-
20 GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE THREE MIDDLE BOOKS.
ing Canaan (Deut. xxxiv.). He was not allowed to pass into obscurity behind Joshua, the
general, or to close his life without solemnity at an unimportant time.
Finally there is one trait in the character of Moses to be considered which has been
almost entirely overlooked, because, in the interest of an abstract supranaturalism, or of a
criticism which resolves them into myths, his miracles have been discussed without respect
to their means. If we believe in a charisra, that is, that a gift of nature is always the basis
of a gift of grace, and this gift of nature becomes a charism by being purified and inspired
by the Spirit of grace, we will find this synthesis constantly appearing in heroic proportions
in the sphere of revelation. And accordingly it was a sense of nature grand and deep, an
instinctive sensibility for nature which Jehovah made the exponent of His revelations in
nature in Egypt and the wilderness, the miracles of Moses. For if every scriptural miracle
is a miracle both of knowledge and of power, then in the miracles of Moses there is surpass-
ing knowledge, a piercing into the depths of nature which the Spirit of the Lord opened to
him. His power is a dauntless trust in God, by which he lifts his rod, which accomplishes
the miracle, not as by magic, but as a symbol, pointing to the strong arm of the Lord. With
respect to Moses' knowledge of the deep things of nature, we can distinguish his knowledge
of natural history, of the earth, of geology, of psychology, and of the laws of health; but
each of these the Spirit of revelation had made a charism.
§ 10. THE DESERT AND THE MIDIANITES.
It seems to be a primary law of the divine economy and instruction that the people of
God should be born in servitude and brought up in the desert (Hos. ii. 14; ix. 10). For not
only did the nation of Israel come forth from the house of bondage and take its stamp in the
desert, but also Israel's reformation after the Babylonian captivity under Ezra, its second
Moses ; and Christians grew to be the people of God under the despotism of the old world
and in the great desert of asceticism, and the Christian Reformation was compelled to pass
through servitude and the desert. For the German Reformation the desert was prepared by
the devastations of the thirty years' war ; the French Reformation received its purification
in the Church of the desert.
As the land arose out of the earlier formation of the sea (Gen. i.), so the deserts, like the
steppes, appear to have come forth by changes in the formation of the sea, as though they
were bottoms of seas, rocky, stony, salt and sandy plains, without water or vegetation. The
old world is to a large extent covered with deserts, and the Arabian desert, with which we
are concerned, with its many parts and projections, is pre eminently the desert (see Winee,
Worterbuch), having, in connection with the great stretch of desert from the northwest
coast of Africa to northern Asia, two great wings, the desert of Sahara in North Africa and
the desert of Zobi in Northern Asia. The desert is nearly allied to the region of the dead,
to Hades ; it forms dead places of the living earth, and is the place of death to many pil-
grims who attempt to cross it. Yet water has won for itself many parts of the desert (as
the earth has won a portion of the sea by the formation of islands), steppe-like pasture-lands,
real shepherds' commons (I^HD) and spice-bearing oases. The most remarkable conquest
has been that of the Nile, the father of Egypt, over the desert on its right and left bank.
The Red Sea also intersects the desert.
As to the configuration of the Arabian desert, we refer to the articles in the lexicons on
the desert and Arabia, as well as to the most important narratives of travels and to maps.
The Midianites, to whom Moses fled, snd among whom he was prepared for his calling,
seem to have been a nomadic branch of an Arabian tribe, descendants of Abraham and Ke-
turah (Gen. xxv. 2-4), which had its home on the eastern side of the Elanitic gulf, where
the ruins of the city of Madian still testify to their settlement, and which carried on the
caravan-trade between Gilead and Arabia, from eastern lands to Egypt, whilst another
branch extended eastward to the plain of Moab. Thus they became closely interwoven with
the history of the Jews. Midianite merchants brought Joseph as a slave to Egypt ; with the
nomad Midianite prince, Jethro, Moses found a refuge for many years; and Jethro exerted
important influence even in the organization of the Mosaic economy, and assisted the mis-
J 10. THE DESERT AND THE MIDIANITEB. 21
sion of Moses by a fatherly care for his family (Ex. xviii.). On the other hand, it was the
Midianites who, in league with the Moabites, by means of their wanton idolatrous festivals,
almost brought the people of Israel to destruction (Num. ch. xxv. and xxxi.), so that Moses
found it necessary to take vengeance on the Midianites, that his people might be freed from
their customs, as they previously had been freed from Egyptian customs by the passage
through the Red Sea. Again, later in the time of the Judges they were a scourge of the
Israelites, from which the Israelites were delivered by the victory of Gideon (Judg. ch. vi.
and 8). In Isaiah Ix. 6 a nomad Midianite people is mentioned, part of whom were peace-
ful shepherds in the desert, and others formed a band of Arabian robbers. Comp. the art.
"Midian " in Winer and Kuetz II. 192.
The March through the Desert,
For a comprehensive synopsis of the literature, see Kurtz II. 860 ; BRiEM, Israels Wan-
derung von Oosen bis zum Sinai, Elberfeld, 1851 ; Ebers, Durch Oosen zum Sinai, Leipzig,
1872.
From the Indian Ocean the Arabian gulf stretches north-westwardly, and divides Asia
from Africa until it reaches the isthmus of Suez. Its eastern side bounds Arabia, and its
western side bounds Ethiopia, Nubia and Egypt. On the north it branches fork- like; the
left prong, the Sea of Sedge, or the Hero opolitanic Gulf, extends towards the Mediterranean
with which, as is shown by the Bitter lakes and a Mediterranean gulf, it is loosely connected,
while the right prong, the Gulf of Akabeh, or the Elanitic gulf, seems by a long reach to seek
the Dead Sea, with which it is connected by the long ravine of the Arabah. Between the
two gulfs is the Arabian desert, through which lay a great part of the journey of the Israel-
ites. This journey was first along the Gulf of Suez, and then by the west shore of the Ela-
nitic gulf, and through the Arabah to Kadesh ; then it returned to the head of the Elanitic
gulf. The smaller division of the journey begins with the crossing of the Arabah at the
head of the gulf, in order to pass around the mountains of Seir and in the plains of Moab to
exchange the toil of the pilgrim for the march of war.
In the adjustment of the minute, but not very clear accounts of the journey through
the desert (Ex. ch. xiv.-19; Deut. x. 12-21, 33), we must, as Von Eaumer rightly remarks,
distinguish between days' jotirneys and encampments or days of rest, as well as between
mere encampments and long settlements. So also we must distinguish between the stations
of the encampments of the people and the marches of the army.
It seems also very important to distinguish between the two sojourns of the array (not
of the mass of the people) in Kadesh. The true key for the solution of the greatest difficulty
in the determination of the stations appears to be in Deut. i. 46 : " So ye abode in Kadesh "
(again) "many days," " according unto the days that ye abode there,'' (0^?^] It^X D''a\3,
baa( nori ^fiipa; heK&-&Tja-9s). The Vulgate has only " multo tempore." According to Kno-
BEL this means: they remained still in Kadesh a long time, to wit, just as long as they did
remain. But we prefer to translate : equal to a time ye wished to make it your abiding resi-
dence. The two sojourns in Kadesh will not seem so improbable, if, as according to Von
Eaumer's map, the people twice went over the route from the Elanitic gulf to Kadesh. In
Deut. i. 46 we are told, the Israelites at the first time left Kadesh to pass into Palestine j but
when they were smitten by the Amorites, they settled in Kadesh (Num. xx. 1).
The first division of the whole journey in the Arabian desert extends to the first settle-
ment of Israel in Kadesh in the desert of Paran (Num. xiii. 1 ; Deut. i. 19). The sections
of this journey are as follows: 1. Journey from Barneses to Succoth and Etham, and turninar
in the direction of Pi-hahiroth on the sea-shore ; 2. Passage through the sea and journey to
the encampment in Elim ; 3. From Elim to Sinai, and encampment before Sinai (Ex. xiii.
17 — six. 1) ; 4. Departure from Sinai, and journey parallel with the western coast of the
Elanitic gulf to Hazeroth and to Kadesh in the desert of Paran (Num. x, 12 — xiii. 1) ; 5.
Certain incidents of the first settlement in Kadesh ; the spies ; the insurrection of the people
against Moses ; the decree of God that that generation should die in the desert, and that the
22 GENERAL INTKODUCTION TO THE THREE MIDDLE BOOKS.
wandering should last forty years (Num. xiv. 34) ; the fool-hardy march of the people and
their rout to Hormah, to which the supplementary account returns (Num xx. 1) : " And the
children of Israel, the whole congregation, carae into the wilderness of Zin ;" so that they
returned from Hormah back again to Kadesh. The second division of the journey through
the desert includes the obscure thirty-eight years' abode in Kadesh (Deut. i. 46). The de-
cree of Jehovah was fulfilled in this period. After this comes the journey to Mount Hor,
the chain of mountains forming the eastern boundary of the Arabah (Num. xx. 23), and
not lying in the land of Edom. After that Moses was compelled by the threatening attitude
of the Edomites to give up the attempt to reach the eastern side of the Dead Sea from Ka-
desh across the Arabah (Num. xx. 20). The death and burial of Aaron on Mount Hor (for
another name of the place, see Dt. x. 6) necessitated a longer sojourn (Num. xx. 29). It is
again related that the kiug of the Canaanites at Arad fought Israel when he heard that they
would force their way into the land by the way to Atharim. The Vulgate translates : " by
the way of the spies," and exegetically this is doubtless right; it is the same history which
is told in Num. xiv. 45, as appears from the locality, Hormah (Num. xxi. 3). But the fact
is again mentioned because with it is joined the assertion that Israel received satisfaction for
this defeat.
The first countermarch was from Etham to Pi-hahiroth, the second from Hormah to
Kadesh and Hor, and the third makes a complete return from Hor to the head of the gulf
of Akabeh, "to compass the land of Edom" (Num. xxi. 4; Deut. ii. 1). In the neighbor-
hood of Elath and Ezion-geber the road led them between the gulf of Akabeh and the end
of the Arabah onwards to the desert of Moab. With the crossing of the brook Zered the
decree of the wandering was accomplished, and therefore the whole period of this wandering
is stated at thirty-eight years (Deut. ii. 14). The words " the space " (of time) " in which we
came from Kadesh-barnea,'' plainly indicate the first departure from Kadesh towards south-
ern Palestine, and the second long sojourn in Kadesh is included in the thirty-eight years.
The Israelites were not to pass through the centre of Moab (Deut. ii. 18), or through the ter-
ritory of Ammon (ver. 19). From the wilderness of Kedemoth, near by a city of the same
name in what was afterwards the territory of Reuben, the conquests begin. The embassy to
Sihon at Heshbon asks permission for a peaceful passage through his land, though Moses
foresaw the hostile refusal aad its consequence, as he had when he asked Pharaoh to permit
the people to go into the desert to hold a feast (Ex. v. 1). This policy is justified by the
consideration that the grant, though highly improbable, would have obliged the grantor to
keep his word. After the conquest of Heshbon east of Jordan over against Jericho, northern
Gilead from Wady Arnon to Mount Hermon was the fruit of the victory over Og, King of
Bashan, who made the first attack (Num. xxi. 33 ; Deut. iii.). The conquered country was
apportioned, and the army returned to the "valley over against Beth-peor" (Deut. iii. 29;
Num. xxii. 1), where Moses gives his last orders before closing his course in mysterious soli-
tude on Mount Nebo (Deut. xxxiv. 6). Here at Beth-peor, or in the plains of Moab, the
people were brought into great danger by Balak, the King of Moab. He did not succeed in
cursing Israel, but in enticing them by the counsel of the false prophet Balaam, who had
just before been made to bless them (Num. xxxi. 8). In Beth-peor they were near to the
temple of their idol, where obscene idol feasts were held. The enticement was accomplished
by the Moabites and by that branch of the Midianites which had its home in the mountains
to the east ; but the war of vengeance which Moses ordered, and which was intended to pre-
vent the moral degeneracy of the young generation who had so grandly begun their mission
was called a war against the Midianites, perhaps in tenderness to Moab. The war was con-
cluded, and Moses' work was done.
There were the best reasons for the circuitous marches of the people. For the first cir-
cuit the reasons are given. Had they gone direct through the desert to Canaan, they would
have been compelled to fight with the Philistines, and they were not prepared for this (Ex.
xiii 17) In addition to this, there was a second purpose in the counsel of God ; Israel mast
2 10. THE DESERT AND THE MIDIANITES. 23
pass through the Red Sea, that thereby destruction might come on Pharaoh pursuing them
(Ex. xiv. 1).
For the second circuit there are also two reasons. As Israel at first would not venture,
even with Jehovah's aid, to enter southern Palestine, and then made the attempt presump-
tuously without Jehovah, and was punished with defeat, their courage, the courage of the
old generation, was broken. But when the new generation strove to march through Edom
to attack Canaan from the east, they were forbidden to do so on account of their relationship
to Edom ; and hence the motive for their great circuit and return to the Red Sea. And
again they must make detours in order to avoid war with Moab and Ammon. On this
march the way led them between Moab and Ammon, so that the capital of Moab was on the
left and the territory of Ammon on the right.
The desert through which Israel passed, Arabia Petrsea, is divided into a succession of
separate deserts, of Shur, of Sin, of Sinai, of Paran, etc., stretches of sand, of gravel, of stones
and rocky wastes.
For the geography of Edom and the lands east of Jordan, see the articles Seir, Moab,
Ammon, in the Bible Dictionaries ; and the numerous books of travel, Vosr Schubert,
Strauss, Palmer, Teistam, Porter, Burton; the geographical works of Bitter, Dan-
iel and others, especially the geography of Palestine by Von Raumbe, Robinson and
oth«rs.
On the differences in the indications of the lines of March, comp. Winer, Arabisohe
Wilste, though he does not adhere to the simplicity of the Biblical narrative. In order to
harmonize these statements, we must suppose that the list (Num. xxxiii.) contains not only
the encampments and day's journeys, but also lesser way-stations, and we must also remem-
ber the oriental custom of giving several names to the same object, and in addition, there
may be interpolations in places not well understood.
As has been remarked, there were two sojourns in Kadesh, but not as they are usually
conceived from a misunderstanding of Num. xiii. 1 ; xx. 1, and xxxiii. 36. The station
Moseroth (Num. xxxiii. 31) must be identical with Mount Hor, where, according to Num.
xxxiii. 88 (comp. Dent. x. 6 ; Num. xx. 22), Aaron died, and if we accept the list of stations
as without error (Num. xxxiii.), the sojourn in Kadesh must have been near Moseroth
(Num. xxxiii. 31). The verses 36 to 40 appear to be an explanation which perhaps was
taken from the margin into the text. According to Num. xxxiii. 31 the Israelites came from
Moseroth to Bene-jaakan ; but according to Deut. x. 6, they came from Bene-jaakan to Mo-
sera. This contradiction is solved by supposing that on their journey northward, they came
from Moseroth to Bene-jaakan, and marching southward, they removed from Beeroth Bene-
jaakan to Moseroth, which agrees with the shorter narrative. It appears then from the
parallel accounts that Aaron died at Mount Hor on the return march to Moseroth, and fur-
ther, that the sojourn in Kadesh is to be sought in the well-watered country of the sons of
Jaakan. It is also plain that we can speak as truly of the sojourns in Kadesh as of one.
There were two sojourns of the army in Kadesh, since after its march from Kadesh towards
Canaan, it was brought back to this encampment ; but the mass of the people had remained
there. The following is the list of stations (Num. xxxiii.) and the parallel statements:
1. From Rameses to Red Sea, Pi-hahieoth.
Ramesefi.
Suceoth.
Etham.
Pi-hahiroth.
i. Fbom Red Sea to Sinai.
Marah.
Elim.
Red Sea.
Desert of Sin.
Dophkah.
Altish.
Rephidim.
Sinai
Exodus.
Suceoth.
Etham.
Pi-hahiroth.
Desert of Shur; Marah.
Elim.
Desert of Sin, between Elim and Sinai
(Quails (anticipated on account of the mauaa, see
Num. xi.), Manna, Sabbath).
24
GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE THREE MIDDLE BOOKS.
5. Feom Sinai to Ezion-gebee, and thence to Bene-jaakan,
(Kadesh).
Kibroth-hattaavah.
Hazeroth.
Kithmah..
Bimmon-parez.
Libuah.
Rissah.
Kehelathah.
Mount Shapher.
Haradah.
Makheloth.
Tahatk.
Tarah.
Mithcah.
Hashmonah,
Moseroth.
Bene-jaakan (Kadesh).
4. Feom Kadesh to Ezion-oebeb.
Hor-hagidgad (Moseroth ?).
Jotbathaho
Ebronah.
Ezioa-geber (vers. 36-40, later addition).
6. From Ezionhsebeb oe Mount Sbir on its East Side to
boundary of moab.
Zalmonah.
Pun on.
Oboth.
Oboth.
Ije-abarim.
Ije-abarim.
Feom the boundabt of Moab to the plains ov Moab
Brook (Valley) of Zered.
opposite Jericho.
Arnon.
Dibon-gad.
Beer.
Almon-diblathaim.
Matt an ah.
Abarim near Nebo.
Nahaliel.
Plains of Moab, opposite Jericho.
Bamoth.
Mount Pisgah.
Plains of Moab.
Num. xi. Prom Sinai to Desert of Paran.
Taberah, Kibrotli-hattaavah (Qoalls).
Hazeroth.
Desert of Paran and Kadesii-barnea (Deut. i 19),
especially Zin (Kadesh, Deut. i. 46).
Kadesli-Hormah, Nam. xiv. 45.
Hormah-Kadesh.
Num. zx. 22. Kadesh,
Hor.
Bed Sea.
The statements of the Book of Numbers are more clearly defined by those of Deutero-
nomy.
1. General direction from Horeb or Sinai to the mount of the Amorites {Kadesh, Deut.
i. 6). March through the desert to Kadesh-barnea, ver. 19.
2. Sortie from Kadesh to the mount of the Amorites. Defeat and return to Kadesh.
Settlement there for a long time, ch. i. 43-46.
8. Return by Mount Seir to the Red Sea, chap. ii. I.
4. From Elath and Ezion-geber march northward on the eastern side of Mount Seir.
March through desert of Moab, chap. ii. 8. Passage of brook Zered. March through the
boundary of Moab. Avoidance of the territory of the Ammonites. Passage of the Arnon,
chap. ii. 24.
Special notice, chap. x. 6, 7, concerning Aaron and the priesthood. These verses appear
to be an interpolation, as ver. 8 refers to ver. 5. At this time, by the ordination of Eleazar,
son of Aaron, the tribe of Levi was entrusted with the priesthood, chap. x. 8. March from
Beeroth-jaakan (Kadesh) to Mosera (Mount Hor). Thence to the stations Gudgodah and
Jotbath (Hor-hagidgad and Jotbathah, Numb, xxxiii.).
The whole narrative is made clearer by the well-founded view that Mount Hor is used in
a wider and in a narrower signification. According to the first, it signifies the range of Seir,
while the Hor on which Aaron died is also called Moseroth, near Hor-hagidgad or Gudgodah.
Similarly Kadesh, in its narrower signification (Kadesh-barnea) must be distinguished from
Kadesh in its wider signification.
? 11. THE SOJOURN OF THIRTY-EIGHT YEARS IN KADESH. 25
The common interpretations make the people to have marched twice from Ezion-geber
to Kadesh, and twice from Kadesh to Ezion-geber. This contradicts Deuteronomy.
After the decree of Jehovah that the old generation should die in the wilderness, there
could be no purpose in the people's making long marches hither and thither. They must
have moved only so far in the desert of Paran around the central point, Kadesh, in the de-
sert of Zin, as the mode of life and the sustenance of a nomadic people required.
On the question, whether Horeb or Serbal, see Ebers, Burch Oosen zum Sinai, Leip-
zig, 1872.
§ 11. THE SOJOURN OP THIRTY-EIGHT YEARS IN KADESH.
In the midst of the marvellous journey through the desert there is a period, Hke that
between Joseph and Moses, hidden in obscurity. We only know that Jehovah left the peo-
ple to their natural development, so that the old generation trained in Egyptian servitude
died in the desert, and a new generation of brave sons of the desert grew up. The troubles
of Israel correspond to this difiference between the old and the new generation.
The sins of the old generation are pre-eminently sins of despondency : as the displeasure
of the Israelites in Egypt at the mission of Moses (Ex. v. 21; vi. 9); the lamentation of the
people at Pi-hahiroth (Ex. xiv. 10, 11) ; the murmuring at the bitter water of Marah (Ex.
XV. 23, 24) ; the longing for the flesh-pots of Egypt in the desert of Sin (Ex. xvi. 3) ; the
murmuring on account of the want of water at Massah and Meribah (Ex. xvii. 7) ; the flight
of the people from the mount of the law (Ex. xx. 18) ; the cowardly motive in setting up the
golden calf (Ex. xxxii. 1) ; the sin of impatience (Numb. xi. 1) ; the pusillanimous longing
for flesh to eat (Numb. xi. 4-10) ; the perversion of the law to a mere set of rules by Miriam
and Aaron (Numb. xii. 1) ; finally the faint-heartedness of the majority of the spies and of
the whole people (Numb. chap. xiii. — chap. xiv. 1 f ), which they sought to atone for by a
presumptuous attempt.
During the sojourn in Kadesh there occurred the rebellion of Korah's company (Numb.
xvi. If.), the rebellion of the whole people (Numb. xvi. 42), and the second rebellion on ac-
count of the want of water (Numb. xx. 11). Here appears a youthful, presumptuous self-
assertion. The old generation demanded a hierarchy (Ex. xx. 19) ; on the other hand, the
new generation would anticipate the universal priesthood.
The sins of the new, strong generation that marches from Kadesh have the impress of
presumption. At first they were vexed because of 'the way and the food (Numb. xxi. 4, 5),
and they were punished with fiery serpents. Then, later, in Shittim, they took part in the
idolatry of the Moabites, and committed whoredom with their daughters (Numb. xxv).
Soon after this the tribes of Eeuben and Gad make demands for separation, which only the
authority of Moses suflSces to direct aright (chap, xxxii.).
As regards the long middle period of the sojourn in Kadesh, Kurtz supposes a period
of defection or of exclusion for thirty-eight {Lehrbuch der heiligen Oeschichte, p. 89) or thirty-
seven years [Hist, of Old Covenant). " The theocratic covenant was suspended, and therefore
the theocratic history had nothing to record. Circumcision, the sign of the covenant, was
omitted ; they profaned the Lord's Sabbaths, despised His laws, and did not live according to
His commands (Ezech. xx.). Bumt-oflferings and meat-offerings they did not bring, but they
carried the tabernacle of Moloch and the star of their god Remphan (Saturn), figures which
they made (Acts vii. 43 ; Amos v. 25, 26). But the Lord had compassion on the outcasts, and
restrained His anger, so as not to destroy them. He fed them with manna, and gave them
water from the rock to drink." KuRTZ, in his History of the Old Covenant, rightly says, that
as the people could not have found food at one place for thirty-seven years, the mass of the
people must have been, after the decree against them, scattered in small bodies over the
whole (?) desert, and must have settled in the oases found by them until by the call of Moses
they were collected again at Kadesh.
But we must distinguish between falling away, exclusion, and repentance. A people
feUen away is not fed with manna and by miracle given drink from the rock. A peo-
ple under excommunication is not disburdened of the excommunication by a promised ter-
26 GENERAL INTRODDCTION TO THE THREE MIDDLE BOOKS.
mination of it. A repentant people is not one falling away. As regards the passage quoted
from Ezekiel, it speaks first of sins in Egypt (chap. xx. 8), which are not now under conside-
ration; the more general sins in the desert (ver. 13) do not belong here; not until the fif-
teenth verse is there an obscure hint of the time of punishment in Kadesh ; and ver. 21
speaks of a new generation, which was afterwards delivered to the service of Moloch (vers.
25, 26; comp. chap, xxiii. 37). But this corruption is joined with the worship of lust, and
hence we can suppose that the mention of it refers to the great sin in Shittim. To the same
great sin, in all probability, Stephen refers in his speech, Acts vii., where he quotes the pas-
sage in Amos. That the sins of omission of the sacrifices and meal-oflferings and circumcision
were general, is explained by the temptations of their trials in tbe desert. The worship of
Moloch and that of Saturn are allied as the gloomy antithesis of the more cheerful worship
of Baal or of Jupiter, and yet they are connected with them. The history of the company of
Korah, which occurs at this time, shows that the covenant of Jehovah with Israel was not
suspended at this period.
For the position of Kadesh, see the Lexicons and Travels in this region.
g 12. KELIGIOUS AND SYMBOLIC MODE OF EEPEESENTATION — ESPECIALLY THE POETICAL
AND HISTORICAL SIDE OF THE THB.EE BOOKS.
In general, we refer to what was said in this Comm. Introd. to Oenesis. But we
must reiterate that the religious mode of representation requires repetitions and insertions
which are foreign to a scientific exact treatise ; as, for instance, the mention of Aaron, Deut.
X.; the insertion of Kadesh, Numb, xxxiii. 36, etc.
More important is the consideration of symbolic expression. We have before (Comm.
OenesU, page 23) distinguished it plainly from the mythical and the literal. It cannot
be understood without a perception of its specific character, as it is used to define
clearly (e. g., the Nile became blood), to generalize (bringing the quails), to hyperbolize
(Egyptian darkness), but constantly to idealize (words of Balaam's ass), for the vivid repre-
sentation of the ideal meaning of facts. The mythical conception disregards not only the
essential constancy of the facts, but also their perennial religious effect ; the literal concep-
tion, on the other hand, disregards entirely their ideal meaning, as well as the spirit and the
mode of statement, the theocratic-epic coloring. Both are united in being opposed to
the peculiar mysterious character of revelation. This is specially true of the miracles of
the Mosaic period.
The highly poetic and yet essentially true history of the leading of Israel to Canaan cul-
minates on its poetical side in its songs (Sack, IHe Lieder in den historischen Buehem des
Alien Testaments, Barmen, 1864). The first lyrical note in Genesis is heard in God's words
on the destiny of man (Comm. Oen. i.), then in the song of Lamech and in other portions.
Again we hear it in Moses's song of redemption (Ex. xv.), and again, after the afflictions of
the old generation, it awakes with the new generation. In close connection with the original
poetic works [Book of the Wars of the Lord, Numb. xxi. 14) come the songs of victory and
festival (Numb. xxi. 14, 15, 17, 18, 27-30) ; the blessings of Moses (Numb. vi. 24-27 ; x. 35,
36) ; blessings even out of the mouth of Balaam, their enemy. Tbe crown of those lyrics is
formed at the close of Deuteronomy by the two poems, the Song of Moses and the blessing
of Moses, the solemn expression of the fundamental thought of the whole law, especially of
Deuteronomy, blessing and curse. The first poem is well-nigh all shadow, the last is full
of light.
The historical side of the three books culminates in the lists of generations, in the direc-
tions for building the tabernacle, in the list of encampments, in the statutes, and, above all,
in the decalogue. We must also remark that the history of Moses would be entirely misun-
derstood if we should regard it as the beginning of the history of the Israelites, or if we should
sunder it entirely from the history of the patriarchs. Moses and his legislation are only un-
derstood in connection with Abraham and the Abrahamitic basis of his religion. By this
measure those new theological opinions are to be judged which would commence this history
with Moses.
2 13. MIRACLES OF THE MOSAIC PERIOD. 27
^18. MIRACLES OF THE MOSAIC PEEIOD.
Abraham prayed to God under the name of El Shaddai, God Almighty. He learned to
know God's marvellous power by the birth of Isaac (Rom. iv. 17), and manifested his trust
in His omnipotence by his readiness to sacrifice his only son (Heb. xi. 17). Thus the foun-
dation was laid for belief in miracles under the theocracy.
The miracles of the Mosaic period appear as peculiarly the miracles of Jehovah. He is
ever present with His miraculous help in the time of need. All changes and events in the
course of nature He orders for the needs of the theocracy, for the people of God but lately
born, to whom such signs are a necessity. The prophet as the confidant of God has not only
the natural presentiment, but also the supernatural, God-given prescience of these great deeds
of God. Yet, since they are to serve for the education of the faith of the people, he is not
only to mate them known beforehand, but performs them in symbolical acts as the organ
of the omnipotence of Jehovah. Hence we may call these miracles double miracles (see
Life of Christ, Vol. II., Part 1, p. 312).
The whole series of miracles is begun by a glorious vision. Moses beholds the bush
burning with fire, and yet not consumed, but glowing in the bright flame. This was Israel,
his people, and how could he doubt that this vision would be fulfilled in the people of God
(Exod. iii.)?
Also the three miracles of attestation which Moses at this time received (Ex. iv.) appear
to be miracles in virion and served to strengthen the faith of the prophet. The second siga,
the leprosy and its cure, is not used by Moses afterward, and the third, the change of the wa-
ter into blood, became one of the series of Egyptian plagues. He only uses the miracle of
the rod ; doubtless it comprehends a mysterious fact in symbolical expression ; the swallow-
ing of the rods of the sorcerers being called " destroying their works." The natural basis of the
Egyptian plagues has been well explained by Hengstenberg. They were all plagues usual
in Egypt, but were made miracles by their vastness, their close connection and speedy se-
quence, by their gradation from stroke to stroke, by the prophetic assurance of their predes-
tination and intentional significance and use, and finally by their lofty symbolic expression.
In their totality they reveal the fearful rhythm in which, from curse to curse, great punitive
catastrophes come forth. Symbolic expression is also found in their number, ten. It is the
number of the historic course of the world. Their sequence corresponds to the course
of nature.
1. Water turned into blood.
2. Innumerable frogs.
3. Swarms of gnats (mosquitoes).
4. Dog-flies.
5. Murrain.
6. Boils and blains.
7. Storm and hail.
8. Locusts.
9. Darkness for three days (Hamsin).
10. Death of the first-born (pestilence).
For particulars see Hengstenberg, Egypt and the Boohs of Moses ; Kurtz, History of
the Old Covenant, Vol. II., 245-288.
The contest of theocratic miracle with magic represented by the Egyptian magicians is
very significant. It is an opposition of symbolic and allegorical significance, continued
through New Testament history (Acts viii.; Simon Magus; chap, xiii.; Elymas- 2 Tim. iii.
8 ; Jannes and Jambres), and still through Church history to its last decisive contest, when
the false prophet shall be destroyed together with his lying wonders (2 Thess. ii.;
Rev. xiii. 13).
To the miracles of the Egyptian plagues, which culminate in the overthrow of Pharaoh
and his host, is opposed the miracle of the passnge of the Red Sea, the typical baptism of the
typical people of God, by which they were separated from Egypt, a reminiscence of the flood
28 GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE THREE MIDDLE BOOKS.
and a type of Christian baptism (1 Cor. x. 1, 2; 1 Pet. iii. 20, 21). This miracle also has a
natural basis, as the Scriptures more than once mention. The Lord caused tbe sea to go
back by a strong east wind (Ex. xiv. 21). That a natural occurrence forms the basis of this
miracle is shown by the Egyptians pursuing the Israelites into the sea — for they would
hardly have ventured into it if there had been an absolutely miraculous drying up of the
sea; just as the natural explanation of the Egyptian plagues became the snare of Pharaoh's
unbelief. But on the other side, the Egyptians could hardly have made so great a mistake
in taking advantage of a natural occurrence : the ebb-tide* was miraculously great, just as
the sudden turn of the flood-tide was miraculously hastened, and therefore rightly celebrated
in the Song of Moses (Ex. xv.), and often afterwards (Ps. Ixvi. 6; cvi. 9; cxxxvi. 13-16;
Zech. X. 11).
In the investigation of the passage of the Red Sea there is a conflict between those who
seek to belittle the miracle and those who would enlarge it. Of those who take the first po-
sition, K. VON Raumer is one of the champions.
The leading of the people to the Red Sea is accomplished by the angel of the Lord in
the pillar of cloud and of fire. At the sea the cloud came between the Israelites and the
Egyptian host, so that they were separated by the cloud before they were separated by the
sea. For the distinction which the Hebrews made between this cloud and the pillar of cloud
see Ps. Ixviii. 8-10 ; 1 Cor. x. 2. The pillar of cloud was a mystery, in which were united
the manifestation of the angel of the Lord and the flame ascending from the sanctuary. Af-
terwards the ark of the covenant as a symbol led the people, and over it the glory of the Lord
was revealed in the cloud, and in New Testament times (Isa. iv. 5) it was to cover Zion with
its brightness. If we grasp these two miracles, the pillar of cloud and of fire and the Red
Sea, we shall gain some idea of the harmonia prmstabilUa between the kingdom of grace and
the kingdom of nature, as it emerges at great decisive epochs in iueflable glory.
The healing of the water at Marah from its bitterness is accounted for in the Scriptures
by natural means. The Lord showed Moses a tree (see the exegesis) by which the water was
made sweet. Here grace and nature work together, and here too a general idea, an ethical
law, is connected with the extraordinary fact; Jehovah will be the Physician of His people
if they will obey His voice (Ex. xv. 23-26).
The miracle of healing is followed by the miracle of feeding the people with manna.
The gift of quails appears to have been introduced into the account of the manna by a gene-
ralizing attraction (Ex. xvi. 11-13). In Numb. xi. 31 the gift of quails appears as an entirely
new event : and they were far past Sinai then. The miracle of the manna enclosed a special
mysterious occurrence, which was made the symbol of the true relation between the labor of
the week and the rest of the Sabbath. The law also was symbolized, in that the food of hea-
ven was common to all (Ex. xvi. 18). Concerning the natural basis of the miracle of manna
see exegesis.
* [By the plain and repeated words of Go 1 we are prohibited from assuming an extraordinary ebb and flood tide in this
miracle. The account is that " the Lord caused the sea to go (back) by a strong east wind all that night, and made the
sea dry land, and the waters were divided. And the children of Israel went into the midst of the sea upon the dry ground ;
and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand and on their left." " But the children of Israel walkrd upon
dry land in the midst of the sna : and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand and on their left." Ex. xiv.
21,22,29. J,'p3— here translated "divided"— is also used of "clearing" wood (Gen. xxii. 3; ISam. vi. U; Ps.cxli.7j
Eccles. X. 9). "the ground clave asunder" (Numb. xvi. 31), of "rending," "ripping up," making a breach in a wall, fte.
A very close parallel to the use of this word in Ex. xiv. 21, etc., is found in Zech. xiv. 4: "And the mount of Olives shall
cleave" (Niph. J'p^J— be cleft, divided) "in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a
great valley, and half of the mountain shall remov^^ toward the norfi, and half of it toward the south." The word is here
confined to this signification of division, cleaving asunder, by the additional and repeated statement that " the waters were a
wall unto thera on their right hand and on their left," which utterly excludes the idea of an ebb and flood tide, or that the
waters were driven out of a shallow arm of the sea by the wind. (Robinson's Raearohea, I. 64-69.) The same representa-
tion is thrice repeated in Ex. xv. 8: "With the blast of thy nostrils the waters were gathered together" (i.e., piled up);
• the floods stood upright as an heap, and the depths were congealed in the heart of the sea." See also in Ps. Ixxviii. IS.
Comp. with this the account in Josh. iii. 13-17, where it is said the waters of the Jordan to the north of the passing host
■■ stood and rose up upon an heap." It is vain to indulge in theories to explain a miracle. The division of the waters of the
Jordan, descending an incline of three feet to the mile, laughs at all theories to account for it In order to allow two or
three millions of people, men, women and children, to pass over (eaatwaid six or eight miles) in a night, there must have
been a cleft in the sea several miles in width from north to south.— H. 0.|
I 13. MIEACLES OF THE MOSAIC PERIOD. 29
At Eephidim, the last station before the encampment at Sinai, the faihire of water for the
murmuring peuple was the occasion of a miraculous gift of water from a rock in the Horeb
range of mountains. Paul, the Apostle, calls Christ the Kock from which Israel drank in
the desert (1 Cor. x. 4), and by this leveals the prophetic meaning of the springs from the
rooks and the desert. This event at Rephidim stands in a certain opposition to a similar mi-
racle which took place during the sojourn in Kadesh. At liephidim, Moses was ordered to
strike the rock ; at Meribah he was ordered, with Aaron, only to speak to the rock, and it
was accounted as his great sin that he twice smote it The victory also over the Amale-
kites was miraculous in its character, as it was obtained through the intercession of Moses
(Exod. xvii.).
There is also a striking contrast between the occurrences at the reception of the first and
of the second tables of the law. The reception of the first tables is introduced by the words :
"And all the people saw the thunderings and lightnings, and the noise of the trumpet and
the mountain smoking, and when the people saw it, they removed and stood afar oif," Ex.
XX. 8. But after the reception of the second tables, Moses descended the mountain, and his
face shone with a briglitness before which Aaron retired afirighted, and Moses was compelled
to put a veil upon his face that the people might draw near him (Ex. xxxiv. 30). The glory
of the holy law, so fearful in its majesty, shines out from Moses himself as soon as he heard
the explanation of the gracious name of Jehovah given by Jehovah on Sinai (Ex. xxxiv. 6) ;
but even in its human mediation and beauty the law affrighted the unsanctified people as
well as the externally sanctified priests.
The pillar of cloud and of fire over the tabernacle consecrated it as the typical house of
God (Ex. xl. 34). Over against this shining mystery is set the darkness of the death of the
sons of Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, by fire, because they brought strange fire in their censers
to the altar (Lev. x.). They died by fire {ver. 6 — Bunsen speaks of an execution) — and it is
remarkable that these words are addressed to Aaron : " Do not drink wine nor strong drink,
thou nor thy sons with thee, when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die."
Au extraordinary doom became forever afterwards the symbol of the putting away of all
strange fire; that is, of fanaticism, of extravagance, of mere sensual enthusiasm in the ser-
vice of the sanctuary, which required the pure flame of a holy inspiration. Miriam's leprosy,
the punishment of her fanatical rebellion against Moses, stands, in its spiritual significance,
on a plane with the doom of the sons of Aaron (Numb. xii.).
The departure of the children of Israel from Sinai is followed by the destruction of some
of the people by fire from the Lord at Taberah, to punish them for complaining to Jehovali
and longing for the flesh pots of Egypt. Then follows, in striking contrast to the manna,
the miraculous gift of flesh to eat, the flight of quails, which settle down over the camp.
While there was this murmuring among the people, there arose the opposite disposition on
the part of some near Moses : not only did the seventy elders, chosen by Moses to be his
helpers, begin to prophesy under the inspiration of the Mosaic spirit, but two other men in
the midst of the camp prophesied. This opposition of the inspired exaltation of chosen men
to the rebellious ill-humor of the people is well founded in the psychology of the theocratic
congregation. The greedy eating of flesh is followed by a new and naturally pecessary judg-
ment, from which the place itself takes its name, Kibbroth-hattaavah, the graves of lust.
In this increase of theocratic inspiration, the following events may have their founda-
tion. First, the legal, fanatical opposition of Aaron and Miriam to the mixed marriage of
Moses, whose wife is spitefully called a Cushite, but who was probably an Egyptian, a spi-
ritual disciple of the prophet (Num. xii. 2). Miriam is smitten with leprosy to mark her as
the one chiefly responsible for the opposition. Nevertheless this new agitation continued,
and was shown in the despair of the people at the report by the spies of the strength of the
Canaanites, and then in the presumptuous and disastrous attack by the people in opposition
to the command of God, which was followed by a second and greater commotion. After the
well-deserved defeat of the people, Moses drew the reins of government more tightly by a
series of legal precepts and by a stricter maintenance of the law of the Sabbath. It is again
in accordance with the psychological oscillation of the life of the people that this is followed
30 UJSJXEKAL IJNTilUUUUTlON TO THE THREE MIDDLE BOOKS.
by the insurrection of Korah'a company, which, in the interest of an universal inspiration,
threaened to put away the authority of Moses and Aaron (ch. xvi.). The revolt and the
miraculous de.-truction of Korah's company belong to the second sojourn in Kadesh ; and
connected with these is another punishment of the people and Aaron's staff that blossomed
(ch. xvi. 17).
The revolt of Korah's company was three-fold, and brought on one of the most danger-
ous crises in the history of Israel. The Korahites, as Levites, revolted especially against the
priestly prerogative of Aaron ; the sons of Eliab, descendants of Reuben, Jacob's first-born,
were offended at Moses' position as prince ; but the people themselves were so puffed up with
their fanatical claims that even after the destruction of the company, they murmured again,
and brought upon themselves a new chastisement. The Korahites seem to have been led
into temptation by great natural gifts ; at any rate, we find in later times, what was appa-
rently a remnant of them, the sous of Korah, employed as chief singers in the service of the
temple. The blossoming staff of Aaron indicated by an obscure, yet symbolic event the con-
firmation of the Aaronic priesthood, and even by this fact it was with difficulty that the
excited spirit of the people was pacified (ch. xvii. 12, 13). The most important fact was that
the staffs of all the princes of Israel paid homage to the staff of Aaron. It is a striking con-
trast to find the people who before had demanded a hierarchy now submitting to the estab-
lished hierarchy with impatience and ill-humor.
The second murmuring about water, the occasion of the second miraculous gift of water,
so momentous for Moses and Aaron (Num. xx. 12), occurred in the beginning of the second
sojourn in Kadesh. The narrative in Num. xx. 1 is retrospective, for the want of water in
the desert of Zin, the northern part of the great desert of Paran (see Bible Diet. Paran and
Zin) would be found out on their entrance, not after a long sojourn. Their entrance into
the desert of Zin is particularly recorded, because the name of the desert of Zin, the
assembling of the whole people, and the long settlement there bring into prominence the
want of water. The murmuring of the people and the impatience of Moses show that the
discord which arose at the defeat at Hormah and at the insurrection of Korah's company
still continued, but subsided in the darkness of the thirty-eight years over which the narra-
tive draws a veil.
The history of Balaam and his ass forms a miraculous episode in the narrative of the
exodus. It is in truth a double psychological miracle ; the miracle of the trance of a sordid
prophet, who by inspiration is lifted above his covetous intention, and beholds the ethical
relations of the future of the theocracy ; a fact which is repeated again and again in litera-
ture, and even in the pulpit ; and the miracle of the influence of spiritual powers on the
sensorium of animals, in order that they may make symbolic utterances. It is interesting
to observe how Baumgakten, in the second volume of his commentary (against Hengsten-
berg), adheres to the letter, as he had done earlier in the six days of creation.
The whole series of miraculous events, which made the exodus of Israel through the
desert one great miracle of providence, is grandly closed by the mysterious death of Aaron
on Mt. Hor and the mysterious death of Moses on Mt. Nebo. In both cases God's summons
home and the heart of the dying man agree ; freely and gladly he goes home. The mystery
of Moses' death recalls the passing away of Enoch, the taking up of Elijah, and the last
words of the dying Christ
? 14. THE LEGISLATION OP MOSES IN GENERAL.
We must ever remember that there is a distinction to be made between Moses the law-
giver and Moses the prophet, for the true prophet or philosopher is never lost in the law-
giver ; but his higher intelligence must accommodate itself to the culture and the moral
capability of his people as he finds them.
Further we must regard the legislation of Moses in general : 1, According to its three
divisions, which are plainly marked in the outline, Ex. xx.-xxiii., and are represented in
the three books, of the prophetical, of the sacerdotal, and of the civil law; but each of these
legislations, if considered by itself, would lose its theocratic impress. 2. According to its
i 15 THE TYPOLOGY OP THE WRITINGS OP MOSES. 31
three evolutions : a. the outline, Ex. xx.-xiiii. ; b. the distinct form of the three books ;
and also the just modification of relations between the first and second tables of the law
acccording to the Epistle of Barnabas. 3. According to the interpretation of the letter of
the law by prophetic inspiration in Deuteronomy as an introduction to the New Testament
law of the Spirit.
Literature. — Lakge, Mosaisches Licht und Btcht; D. Michaelis, Das Mosaische Becht;
Bertheau, Die aieben Qruppen mosaischer Gesetze ; general title, Zwr Oeachichte der hrael-
ilen, Gottngen, 1840; Bluhme, Cullati-o legum Romanorum et Mosaioarum, 1843; Saal-
BCHUETZ, Das mosaische Recht. Berlin, 1846 ; Riehm, Die Oeselzgebung im Lande Moab,
Gotha, 1854; George, Die dlterea judischen Feste mit einer Eritik der Qenetzgebung des Pen-
tateuch, Berlin, 1835; J. Schnell, Das isradiache Recht in seinen Orundzugen, Basel, 1855;
EoBERT KuEBEL, Dos alttestamentUche Oesetz und seine Vrkunde, Stuttgart, 1807 ; Franz
Eberhard Kuebel, Die soziale und volkslhiimliche Oesetzgebung det Alten Tentaments,
Wiesbaden, 1870 ; Mayes, Die Rechte der Israeliten, Athener und Romer, mit Ruckaicht auf
die neueren Oesetzgebungen, 2 vols., Leipzig, 1866.
g 15. THE TYPOLOGY OF THE -WRITINGS OF MOSES.
On the types and symbols of Scripture, see this Commentary on Revelation, Introd., and
Genesis, Introd. As this subject must be treated when we come to consider the Mosaic ritual
in Leviticus, we refer to that. For the works on the types, see Danz, p. 971. On the
brazen serpent, see this Comm., John iii. 14, 15. Hiller's work, Neues System aller Vor-
bilder Jeau Chriati durch das ganze Alte Testament und die Vorbilder der Kirche des Neuen
Testaments in Alten Testament, was reissued in a new edition by Albert Knapp, Ludwigs-
burg, 1857-8. It was written carefully and with a devout spirit, but defends some mistaken
views, e. g. that the scape-goat signified Christ's new life ; that the blood of the sacrifices was
burnt, and the significance of the red heifer is overstrained.
B. SPECIAL INTRODUCTION
TO THE THREE BOOKS.
1. EXODUS.— The first query, not only of this book, but of the whole trilogy of legist-
lation, as indeed of all the historical books of Holy Scripture, is the right determination of
the connection between the facts and their symbolic meaning. The symbolism of the books
of legislation by Moses must be distinguished from the general significance of symbolism in
all religious history. If Moses was the great instructor directing men to Christ, it follows
that his legislation must also be pre-eminently symbolic; for instruction has two sides — ^le-
gislative and symbolic. Hence, above all things, we must distinguish between the mere le-
gal force of the laws of Moses, and their symbolic significance ; and as respects the latter,
between a wider and a contracted symbolism, the first of which is divided into allegorical,
symbolical and typical figures.
EGYPT.
The history of Egypt has an especial charm, because Egypt was the earliest home of
culture in the old world, and because of its relation to the origin of the people of Israel, and
to the history of the kingdom of God. See the article on Egypt in Winer's Bihl. Worter-
32 SPECIAL INTRODUCTION TO THE THRBK BOOKS.
buck, and those of Lbpsius on Ancient Egypt, and of W. Hoffmann on Modern Egypt, in
Herzog's Real-Encyklopddie. In the last article there is a list of the later works of travels
in Egypt. There is also a full catalogue of the literature of the subject in Bbockhaus'
smaller Gonversationslexicon, p. 68. The article in Schenkel's Bihellexicon has specially
treated Egypt's place in Old Testament prophecy. Every comprehensive history of the
world, in treating the history of antiquity, must especially treat of Egypt. Hegel, in his
Lectures on the Philosophy of History, has enlarged on the history of Egypt ( Werke, Vol. IX.
p. 205) ; and on the religion of Egypt under the title "Die Religion des Bdthsels," in his
Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion ( Werke, Vol. XI. p. 343). It would be a superfluous
comment if, in a history of occidental philosophy, Egyptian mythology were spoken of as
dualistic, since no mythology has been found which had not a dualistic basis; and this
comment would be altogether erroneous if we should regard the worship of the dead and of
graves as an exotic growth imported into Egypt (Knoetel, Cheops). We have regarded the
Egyptian mythology as occupying a middle position between the Phoenician mourning for
the dead and the Grecian apotheosis of men. Bunsen's work, EgypCs Place in History, has
largely served to spread the knowledge of Egyptology. See also Gfboereb, Die Urgeschiehte
des Menschengeschlechts, Schaffhausen, 1855. Beugsch, Reiseberichte aus Egyplen, Leipzig,
1855. Uhlemann, Israelilen und Hyksos, Leipzig, 1856. G. Ebers, Egypten und die
Bucher Moses', Leipzig, 1868. G. Ebers, Durch Gosen turn Sinai, Leipzig, 1872.
HISTORY OF ISBAEL.
This history in the literature of the present day is obscured in a twofold manner. First,
by separating the religion of Moses from the promises to the patriarchs. But Moses, with-
out the religion of Abraham, cannot be understood (Rom. iv.; Gal. iii.). If the patriarchs
are remitted to the region of myths, Moses is made a caricature, a mere national lawgiver,
and nothing but a lawgiver, like Solon, Lycurgus, and other.i. On this theme, which, with-
out further notice, we entrust to the tlieology of the future, frivolous correctors of the history
of Israel's ancient religion may expend their thought at their pleasure. Secondly, this his-
tory is greatly disparaged by a severely literal interpretation of the narrative in entire disre-
gard of its historical and symbolic character. This severely literal interpretation is only a
detriment to orthodoxy, because it serves negative criticism as a pretext for invalidating the
sacred history. Bishop Colenso came to doubt the historical truth of the books of Moses
tiy the candid doubt expressed by one of his converts, who was assisting him in translating
the Bible. His first step was honest and honorable — he would not be a party to deception in
the exercise of his office. He sought counsel and help from his theological friends in Eng-
land — and received none. The German theological works which he ordered gave him no
help. And so he gradually passed from a noble unrest of candor to the tumult of skepticism.
He passed the line which runs between a discreet continuance within a religious community
that cannot reduce its treasure of truth to the capacity of a special period or of a single indi-
vidual, that is, between the continuance and quiet investigation of a pastor, a bishop, and
the tumble of an impatient spirit, which, after the first break with servility to the letter, finds
no rest in doubt. Yet, with all this, Bishop Colenso bears a very favorable comparison
w.th those novices who think they have reached the peak of critical illumination while they
really fall into the dense darkness of boumiless negation.
As regards later criticism, we refer to the distinction previously made between originals
or records and the final compilations which were also under the guidance of the prophetic
spirit. Joseph and Moses, the mediators between Egyptian culture and theocratic tradition,
are said to have written little or nothing. It is a similar supposition to the one that the
Apostle John never before his old age recalled the discourses of Jesus, nor ever used
records.
Theological criticism, like classical philology, should above all things free itself from
the mere idea of book-makiag, from all plagiarism and literary patch-work, and estimate
the books of Scripture in their totality, as well as make itself familiar with the idea of a
synthetic inspiration, one of the canons of which is, if the idea of the book is inspired and
MOSES AND IMMORTALITY. 88
the book itself appears in divine-human harmony as a literary organism, the whole book is
inspired. For the literature, see the bibliography, p. 49.
MOSES.
As in the life of Christ we must assume that there was no motion of Deity in Him with-
out a corresponding motion of His ideal humanity, so we must assume with respect to
Moses, though most persons rend asunder his mysterious personality ; some by making him
merely the servant of an absolutely supernatural divine revelation of law ; others by making
him only a human lawgiver of great political sagacity, or of great incompetence. For this
reason it is the more necessary to assert with respect to Moses the synthesis of the divine-hu-
man life. In this regard we must ascribe to him a deep sympathy with nature. Who among
the men of antiquity was more sensitive to the life of nature — ^its signs and omens? Who
had such clear vision of the harmonia prsestabilita between the course of nature and the
course of the kingdom of God ? As to the moral law, he was as firm and unyielding as the
mount of revelation, Sinai itself. That he should not enter Canaan, the object of his hope,
because in impatience he had struck the rock twice, is not only God's decree concerning
him, but also an expression of his heroic conscientiousness, the last subtle, tragical motive
of his lofty, consecrated life, a life which had been full of tragical motives, and whose crowni
according to the Epistle to the Hebrews, was a resolute self-denial, illumined by a steadfast
trust in the great reward. It was pre-eminently in this that Moses was a type of the
coming Christ.
MOSES AND IMMOETALITY.
This Moses, who, in the effulgence of the promise, passed from Mt. Nebo to the other
world, is said to have been ignorant of immortality, and his people are said to have remained
ignorant of it until in the Babylonian captivity they came in contact with the Persians.
This is Lessing's view in his Erziehwng des MenmshengescMechts. With respect to this fact,
"God winked at the times of this ignorance," Acts xvii. 30. The Jews came out of Egypt,
the land of the worship of the dead, where the doctrine of another world, a fancied immor-
tality, was taught, and yet they are said to have been ignorant of immortality. What this
derivation of Moses and his people availed is shown by the fact that even heathenism held a
defective doctrine of the other world ; and this reappears in the mediaeval teaching and in
the worship of the dead by the Trappists. It was all-important that Moses should guard
against Egyptian heathenism, and make the sacredness of laws for this world, the revelation
of Jehovah, of His blessing and His curse in the present, fundamental articles of faith. Be-
sides, Moses wrote of the tree of life, of Enoch, of Sheol, of the God of Abraham, Isaac and
Jacob, of the antithesis of prophecy in Israel to consultation of the dead, and of the resto-
ration of a repentant people from waste places of the world. In this matter we must distin-
guish between the metaphysical or ontological idea of immortality and the ethical idea of
eternal life, and then mark that the ethical idea is the main point for theocratic faith, but it
always presupposes the metaphysical idea of immortality. In the ethical view the sinner is
subject to death, the immeasurable sojourn in Sheol, because, in the metaphysical idea, his
continued existence is immeasurable. If this distinction is not made and maintained, con-
fusion is sure to arise, as in the work of H. Schultz, Die Voraussetzungen der christlichen
Lehre von der Unsierblichkeit,
LATEST ■WORKS ON SINAI.
See Die neue evangel EHrchenzeiMmg, Dec. 28, 1872, "Die neuesten Forschungen uber die
Lage des hiblisohen Sinai." Palmee, in his work. The Desert of the Exodus, has decided
against Serbal (Lepsius, Bartlett, Heezog) and for Sinai. So also the work of the Bri-
tish Ordnance Survey. The London Athenwum has said that the question is decided. Yet
Professor Ebers, in his work, Durch Gosen ztim. Sinai, maintains the hypothesis of Serbal.
Eitter and Ewald maintain that it is not yet decided. Eittee remarks : " Since the fifth
century there have been two opposite views — the Egyptian, which is for Serbal; and the
Byzantine, for the present Sinai."
3
34 SPECIAL INTRODUCTION TO THE THREE BOOKS.
THE LAW.
Since it is certain that the ethical law of the decalogue is identical with the law of the
conscience (Eom. ii. 14) — and it is also certain that the decalogue logically requires the law
of worship and sacrifice, as well as the law for the king, for the state, and for war it
follows that these last two legislations are symbols and types of the imperishable norms of
man's inner life, of the individual spirit as well as of the spiritual life of mankind. In the
New Testament the whole law of sacrifice is converted into spiritual ideas, and Christians
are represented as the spiritual host of their royal leader, Christ, or as the soldiers of God
who, through warfare with the kingdom of darkness, shall gain the inheritance of glory
(Eph. vi. 11 f.).
The law was always two-fold. On the one side it must develope as the law of the Spi-
rit ; on the other side, as a law of the letter, it could become a law of death — that is, in this
apparent contrast between its spirit and external form it must reveal itself. The solution
of this contrast is brought about by catastrophes which, on the worldly side, appear as the
consummation of tragedy; on the divine side, as the consummation of the priesthood.
The law as the principle of life is one, the law of love, of personality ; the law as the
principle of society is two-fold, the law of love of God and love of man, the harmony of wor-
ship and culture. The law as the statute of the kingdom is three-fold— prophetical, sacer-
dotal, royal. The law as the statute of the kingdom is given under ten heads, the number
of the complete course of the world, and from this basis spring its multiplied ramifications,
the symbolism of all doctrines of faith and life, a tree of knowledge and a tree of life ; rami-
fications which Jewish theology of the letter has attempted to number exactly.
Jehovah's law is in exact correspondence, not only with the natural law of morals, but
also with the moral law of nature ; and it is a one-sided view to regard these legal precepts
as either only abstract religious statutes, or as mere laws of health and of common weal, with
a religious purpose. In this respect there has been great confusion, as, for example, in
Hengstenbeeg's works.
The development of the legislation was in accordance with the need for it — a fact which
must not be overlooked. The hierarchical law of worship is required because the people
were afraid to enter into immediate communion with Jehovah (Ex. xx.). After the people's
fall into idolatiy, the law of the new tables is illustrated in two ways, by mildness and by
severity, by the announcement of Jehovah's grace, and by punishment. As the priests were
called to maintain the warfare of Israel within the people, so the array of God was called to
carry the law of God into the world as a priesthood ad extra. The unfolding of the spiritual
character of the law was provided for in Deuteronomy.
According to John vi.. Acts xv., and Jewish theology, the basis of Mosaic legislation was
a still more ancient law — 1, the so-called Noachic patriarchal law ; 2, the Abrahamic patri-
archal law of faith.
The so-called commands of Noah are a tradition connected with the general principle
of monotheism, which forbids idolatry, and with the fundamental law of humanity, which
forbids murder.
The first law of the Abrahamic covenant is circumcision, which, as a type of regenera-
tion, signifies the consecration of the family to regeneration (Gen. xvii.), and in Exodus this
law is renewed by means of a striking fact (Ex. iv. 24). In patriarchal faith it was the sa-
crament of consecration. It contains the germ of the monotheistic law of marriage. By
Abraham's great sacrifice, commanded and directed by Jehovah, Gen. xxii., the traditional
and corrupt ancient religious sacrifices were changed to a hallowed custom, and this takes
the form of law in the institution of the Passover, the sacred celebration of the covenant with
the house of Israel. The Passover is not only the central norm of all forms of sacrifice, but
it is also the basis of legislation ; for on it depend the ethical laws of the worship of God, of
the hallowing of His name, of the consecration of the house, of festivals, and of religious edu-
cation, of the consecration of the first-born and of the Levites, and lastly the civil law, by
the regulation of the festivals and of the principal offices of the theocratic state.
THE TABERNACLE. 35
The three phases of religion, its prophetic, sacerdotal, and voluntary or kingly charac-
ter, appear under peculiar forms in the sphere of law. Prophecy becomes command, resig-
nation becomes sacrifice, exaltation to royal freedom from the world and in communion with
God is the entrance into the army of Jehovah. It has been remarked above that these three
phases are logically dependent upon each other and inseparable.
The relation of the law to the ideal, the law of the Spirit, is three-fold. First, the law
bounds life with its plain requirements, and each one who is in accord with it receives its
blessing, — ^he is a good citizen. But as the law is the representative of the moral ideal, it is
impossible for sinful men to avoid coming short of its requirements. Before the transgressor
there are two ways ; if he continues in malicious transgression, the law spews him out, — he
becomes " cherem,'' accursed ; but if he confesses his transgression, the law accounts his guilt
as an error, and points him to the way of sacrifices of atonement. By the presentation of his
sacrifice he expresses in symbol his longing after righteousness. Yet through these very
sacrifices a consciousness is awakened in candid minds of the insuflSciency oi!. animal sacri-
fices, of the blood of beasts. On the part of the insincere, the bringing of a sacrifice was a
mere service of pretence, instead of an earnest prayer. The sincere offerer was directed to
the future, and in hope of the coming real expiation his sacrifice became typical, just as the
law itself seta forth this typical character in the great sacrifice of atonement. Thus the son
of the law becomes a man of the Spirit, a soldier of God for the realization of His Kingdom,
though only in typical form. The decalogue may be regarded as the sign-manual of Christ
in outline ; the law of sacrifice as the type of His atonement ; the march of Israel as the
leading of the people of God under His royal orders.
Considered as to its essential character, the law is a treasure-house of veiled promises
of God's grace, since every requirement of God is an expression of what He gave man in
Paradise, and what He will again give him in accordance with his needs.
In addition to the literature already given, see the articles in Herzog and in Schen-
kel's Lexicon. In Winbk's Beal- Worterhuch will be found a very full list of the lite-
rature.
THE TABEENACLE.
The idea that there was no central holy place before the Levitical tabernacle, gives rise
to certain critical assumptions. But one might as well doubt that there was a tabernacle in
the wilderness. The idea of the tabernacle arises from the relation of the law to the life of
Israel, or from the requirement of a three-fold righteousness or holiness. The requirement
of social or legal holiness, of legal civic virtue, is the requirement of the court. But as civic
virtue cannot be separated from the religious and moral intent which is its spiritual basis, so
the court cannot be separated from the sanctuary. The court where sacrifices were brought
was one with the Holy place and the Most Holy place. The theocratic court was possible
only in its relation to the sanctuary. The Holy Place by its conformation was imperfect, as
the place of self-renunciation, of aspiration, of prayers, of moments of enlightenment of the
soul, hence an oblong structure, which finds its complement in the square of the Most Holy
Place, the place where God reigned supreme, where were the cherubim, the place of the per-
fect satisfaction of the divine law or of atonement, and of a vision of God which did not kill but
made alive, the Shekinah. This gradation recurs in all sanctuaries. In Catholic, Greek, and
Eoman temples the most holy place is, after the manner of the ancient sanctuary, more or
less shut off. In the churches of radical Protestants the chancel as the place of the sacra-
mental assurance of atonement for those who partake of the Supper is made level with the
floor of the church, which has no court.
See W. Neumann: Die Stiftshutte in Bild und Wort, 1861. Riggenbach: Die mosa-
ische Stiftshutte, 1863. He treats of the tabernacle also in the appendix to his pamphlet :
Die Zeugnisse des Evangelisien Johannes, 1867. J. Poppbe : Der bihlische Bericht uber die
Stiftshutte, 1862. Wangemann : Die Bedeutung der Stiftshutte, 1866.
Concerning the form of the tabernacle and the symbolism of the colors, see this Comm.
on Eev. xiii. Wangemann calls the number five, which is the basis of the measurement
of the court, the number of unfulfilled longing after perfection. But this longing does not
36 SPECIAL INTRODUCTION TO THE THREE BOOKS.
reach perfection in the parallelogram of the sanctuary. We have called five the number
of free-choice, Rev. xi. On the materials of the tabernacle, see Wangemakn, p. 7 ; also
on the coverings, p. 8, where the relation of the hidden to the revealed, according to the law
of theocratic appearance, is to be emphasized. The taste of the world presents the best and
most beautiful side without ; the sesthetics of the theocracy turns the most beautiful side
within. For the symbolism of the three places, and of the priestly attire, we refer to
the exegesis.
2. LEVITICUS.
Biblical Allegory, Symbol and Type.— The theory of the figures of Holy Scripture
belongs in general to the hermeneutics of Scripture from Genesis to Eevelation, but in a special
sense it belongs to an introduction to Leviticus. To avoid repetitions we refer for the general
theory to this Comm. Introd. to Matt xiii.; for the special theory to Introd. to Eev. These
points will be touched upon in the exegesis of the three books. See also my Dogmatik, p. 360 f.
As the symbolism of Leviticus is largely treated by many authors, we append a list of
the more important works.
Spencer: De legibus Hebrseorum ritualibus earumque rationibus, Tubingen, 1732.
HiLLER, Die Yorbilder der Kvrche des Neuen Testaments (see above). Baehe: Die
symboKk des mosaischen Kullus, 1876. Baehr: Der salomonische Tempel, 1841.
Friedrich: Symbolik der mosaischen StifishvMe, 1841. Hengstenberg : Beitrage zur
Einleitimg ins Alte Testament. The same: Die Opfer der JSeiligen Schrift, 1852.
LiSCO: Das Oerem/mialgesetz des Alien Testaments. Darslellung desselben und Nachweis
seiner Erfullung im Neuen Testament, 1842. KasTz: Das mosaische Opfer, 1842. The
same: Beitrage zur Symbolik des mosaischen Kultus, 1 Bd. {Die Kultus-statte), 1851.
The same: History of the Old Covenant, Clark, Edinburg. The same: Der alUestament-
liehe Opferkultits, 1 Theil {Das Kultusgesetz), Mitau, 1862. The same : Beitrage zur Sym-
bolik des alttestamenllichen Kultus, 1859. Sartorius: Ueber den all- und neutesiamentlichen
KuUtis, 18f>2. The same: Die Bundeslade, 1857. Kliefoth: Die Gottesdienstordnungen
in der deuischen Kirche, 1854. Kabch (Cath.) : Die mosaischen Opfer als Grundlage der
Bitten im Vater- Unser, 1856. Kuepfer : Das Priesterthum des Alten Bundes, 1865. Wan-
GEMANN: Das Opfer nach der Heiligen Schrift, alien und neuen Testaments, 1866. Tholuck:
Das alte Testament im neuen Testament, 1868. Bramesfeld: Der alttestameniliche Ooltes-
dienst, 1864. Hoff : Die mosaischen Opfer nach ihrer sinnbildlichen und vorbildlichen Bedeu-
tung, 1859. Bachmann : Die Festgesetze des Pentateuch, 1858. Scholtz, Die heiligen Al-
terthumer des Volkes Israel, 1868. Sommee: Biblische Abhandlungen, 1846. Thiersch:
Das Verbot der Ehe innerhalb der nahen Verwandtschaft, 1869.
This part of Biblical theology is greatly in need of clear explanation to free it from the
confusion which frequently attaches to it. Allegorical figures ought to be carefully distin-
guished from those which are typical or symbolical. We are to avoid the confusion which
results from commingling the exegesis of real allegories with an allegorizing of histories that
are not allegorical. Nor, to satisfy our prejudices, are we arbitrarily to allegorize history
and precept, or interpret severely according to the letter unmistakable allegorical figures, — a
mode of exegesis in which Baur of Tiibingen excels. (See this Comm. Introd. to Eev.)
The distrust aroused by this arbitrary allegorizing has led to a long-continued misunder-
standing of all really symbolical and typical forms. But even when these forms are in gene-
ral rightly understood, the types may be permitted to pass away into mere symbols ; that is,
the classes of typical representations of the future into the classes of symbolical representa-
tions of similarity, although both sorts of representations should be carefully distinguished.
As an allegory, the priest was a pre-eminent representative of his people ; as a symbol, he
was the expression of their longing after righteousness in perfect consecration to God; as a
type, he was the forerunner of the perfect High Priest who was to come.
sacrifice or typical worship.
The antecedent and basis of sacrificial worship, of the typical completion of religious
consecration, is religion itself or the relation between God and man, who answers the end of
SACRIFICE OR TYPICAL WORSHIP.
his being by self-consecration to God. The expressed will of God ia therefore the foundation
of sacrifices, and He manifests Himself to the offerer by His presence, deciding the place
and time of sacrifice, and by His ritual of sacrifice and His word, which explains the
sacrifice.
The sacrifice needs explanation because in the life of the sinner it has taken the form
of a symbolic act. God, as the Omnipresent, primarily and universally demands the entire
consecration of man, the sacrifice of his will, as is proved by the sacrifice of prayer "the
calves of the lips," and by the daily sacrifice of the powers of life in active service of God
(Eom. xii. 1).
Man's religious nature, conscious of the imperfection of this spiritual sacrifice, has set
up religious sacrifices as a sort of substitution. Therefore, from the beginning they have been
only conditionally acceptable to Jehovah (Gen. i.) ; they had their influence on the natural
development of heathenism, and in heathenism sank to the sacrifice of abomination ; for this
reason, when Jehovah initiated the regeneration of man, He took them as well as man himi-
self under his care (Gen. xxii.). Hence in His first giving of the law He did not prescribe
but regulated by a few words a simple sacrificial worship (Ex. xx. 24) ; He accompanied the
sacrifice with His explanation, and gradually caused the antithesis between the external act
and the idea of sacrifice to appear (1 Sam. xv. 22 ; Psalm li.) ; afterwards he proclaimed the
abomination of a mere external sacrifice (Isa. Ixvi.), as he had from the beginning abhorred
the sacrifice of ,self-will (Isa. i.) ; but finally, with the fulfilment of all prophecy of sacrifice,
in the obedience and death of Christ, He made an end of all external sacrifices (Heb.
ix. 10, 14).
Sacrifice can no more be turned by man into a mere outward act than religion itself.
If he does not offer to God sacrifices that are well-pleasing, he offers sacrifices of abomina-
tion, even though they may not bear the name of sacrifices in the Christian economy. The
theocratic ritual of sacrifice was the legal symbolic course of instruction which was to edu-
cate men to offer to their God and Redeemer the true sacrifices of the heart as spiritual
burnt-offerings and sacrifices of thanksgiving.
The immediate occasion of sacrifice is God's manifestation of Himself by revelation and
personal presence, which arouses man to sacrifice. Its symbolic locality was indicated by a
sign from heaven. Gen. xii. 7; xxviii.'12, or was a grove. Gen. xiii. 18, a hill (Moriah), af-
terwards, when established by law, the sanctuary, the tabernacle, the temple.
The temple was not merely the place for sacrifice, but primarily the dwelling-place of
Jehovah, indicated by the laver in the court, by the golden lamp-stand in the Holy Place, by
the cherubim and the ark of the covenant in the Holy of Holies. But, secondarily, it was the
place for sacrifice, as was shown by the brazen altar, by the altar of incense in the Holy
Place, by the mercy-seat in the Holy of Holies. Thirdly, the temple was the place where
man came most closely in communion with God. In the court every priest, and so relatively
every Israelite (in the peace-offerings), had his part in the sacrifice; in the Holy Place this
communion with God was represented in the show-bread ; and in the Holy of Holies He
was granted the vision of the glory of God (the Shekinah).
The decisive act in the performance of the sacrifice was, on man's side, his approach to
God (Jer. xxx. 21), to God's altar with his sacrifice; on God's side, it was the reception of
the offering by fire ; the divine-human union in both acts was the burden of the temple
praises and of the priest's blessing.
As the temple was the holy place of sacrifice, bo the festival days of sacrifice were made
holy. Yet every week-day, according to the ideal, was a day of festival, over which the the-
ocratic festivals were exalted as epochs, the higher symbolic units of time, just as all Israel-
ite houses, from the tents of Abraham and Moses, were houses of God which weie united
and transfigured in the temple. The Passover was celebrated in houses, and so the principal
sacrifice, the burnt- offering, was offered daily, and not only on the Sabbath. The season of
festivals had its three ascents, just as the temple had its three courts ascending one from the
other. On the basis of the Sabbath appears the Passover in connection with the feast of
unleavened bread ; then the festival of weeks or Pentecost, and finally the great festival of
38 SPECIAL INTRODUCTION TO THE THREE BOOKS.
the seventh month, the feast of tabernacles, founded on the 'great day of repentance, the day
of atonement. In the Sabbatic year man and nature rested, and the great year of Jubilee
was a symbol of the restoration of all things. The year of Jubilee was a diminutive Eon.
THE OEIGIIJ OF SACRIFICE.
It is no more true that sacrifice was the product of the childlike conceptions of the ori-
ginal man, as a supposed means of obtaining the favor of God, than that it was intended by
man as a means of atonement, and contained a confes.iion of the sinner's guilt; nor is a
magical effect to be ascribed to it, so that it became the source of superstition. Comp. Winer,
Ueber die verschiedenen Deutungen des Opfers,
The basis of sacrifice is the use and waste of life in work and pleasure, both of which,
according to the original destiny of man, should be, but are not in reality, sanctified to God.
There is this consciousness in man, and external sacrifice, as a prayer and as a vow, ia the
confession of debt — a debt never paid.
But as the heathen, by reason of his carnal mind, changed God's symbols into myths
(Rom. i. 21), so also he changed sacrifice into a pretended meritorious service, and as he had
acted against nature and his myths, his sacrifices became abominable. On the contrary,
theocratic sacrifice was exalted until it found its solution in the holy human life of Christ.
This exaltation was accomplished by a clearer explanation of its spiritual meaning by the
word of God, whilst heathen sacrifice was covered with gross misinterpretation, and given
over to the corruption of demons. The first explanation of sacrifice is found in the revela-
tion and promise which precede sacrifice ; the second, in the principal of all sacrifices, the
Passover-lamb, the spiritual meaning of which is plainly told (Ex. xii. 26) ; the third, in
the distinctions and appointments of separate sacrifices in their relation to definite spiritual
conditions ; the last explanation, in prophecy accompanying the sacrifice.
As respects the significance of the sacrifices, we distinguish a legal, social and judicial,
a symbolic, with special purpose of instruction, and a typical, prophetic significance. The
legal aspect of sacrifice consists in the offerer's maintaining or restoring his legal relation to
the theocratic people. This maintenance of law as respects the people by sacrifice Pharisa-
ism charged to the acquiring of merit before God, and many in these days have attributed
this heathen conception to sacrifice.
The symbolic significance of sacrifice is the chief point of worship by sacrifice. The
offerer expresses by the sacrifice his obligation to render in spirit and in truth the same sur-
render which is represented by the animal to be sacrificed, that is, his sacrifice is a visible
act representing a higher and invisible act, to wit, his confession, his vow and prayer, as the
act of faith in hope with which he receives his absolution in hope [Trdpeai^, Rom. iii.). The
typical significance of sacrifice corresponds to the general character of the Old Testament.
The type is a description of that which is to come in prefigurative fundamental thought.
And since the religion of Israel was a religion looking to the future, all its aspects were pre-
monitions of its future. We distinguish typical persons, typical acts, typical customs and
mental types. At the centre stand typical institutions, whose inner circle is sacrifice, and
the ultimate centre the sacrifice of atonement on the great day of atonement. Mental types
form the transition to oral prophecy, and often surround oral prophecy with significant
expression as the calyx the bursting flower (Gal. iii. 16).
THE DESIGN OF SACRIFICE.
The design of sacrifice was its fulfilment in New Testament times. Similarly the law
of worship as well as the law of the state was not abolished by being destroyed, but was ele-
vated, exalted to the region of the Spirit.
Thus Christ, in the first place, is the High Priest (see Ep. to Hebr.), and the Temple
(John ii.), yea, the mercy-seat, llaarvpum, in the Holy of Holies, brought out of the Holy
of Holies, and set before all men, that all may draw near (Rom. iii., see Coram.). Every
kind of sacrifice is fulfilled in Him; He is the true Passover (John i. 29; 1 Cor. v. 7), the
THE PURPOSES OF SACRIFICE AND THE VARIOUS KINDS OF SACRIFICES. 39
great burnt-oflfering for humanity (Eph. v. 2), the altar of incense by His intercession (John
xvii. ; Heb. V. 7); He is the trespass-offering (Isa. liii.) and the sin-offering (2 Cor. v. 21;
Bom. viii. 3) ; on one side the curse (Gal. iii. 13), on the other the peace-offering in His Sup-
per (Matt. xxvi. 26), the sanctified, sacrificial food of believers (John vi.). As He by entrance
into the Holy of Holies of heaven has become the Eternal High Priest (Heb. ix. 10), so He
accomplished His life-sacrifice by the eternal efficacy of the eternal Spirit. In Him was per-
fected the oneness of priest and sacrifice.
The High Priesthood of Christ imparts a priestly character to believers (1 Pet. ii. 9).
By union with Christ they are built up a spiritual temple (1 Cor. iii. 16 ; 1 Pet. ii. 5), their
prayer of faith is an entrance into the Holy of Holies (Rom. v. 2), and they take part in the
sufferings of Christ in their spiritual suffering in and for the world (Rom. vi. ; Col. i. 24).
They keep the true Passover (1 Cor. v.), which is founded upon the circumcision of the
heart, regeneration (John iii.). They consecrate their lives as a whole burnt-offering to God
in spiritual worship (Rom. xii. 1), and offer the incense of prayer ; they are a holy, separate
people by their seclusion from the world, a sacrifice for others (Heb. xiii. 13), as opposed to
the unholy separation of the world &om God. By repentance they partake of the condem-
nation which Christ endured for them, and find their life in His sin-offering and atonement,
whilst they pray for deliverance from guilt, not only for themselves, but also for others (the
Lord's prayer) ; they enjoy their portion of the great sacrifice of peace and thanksgiving,
and in life and death present themselves as a thank-offering. This life grows more and
more manifest as life in the eternal priestly spirit, which is proved by obedience and conse-
cration.
THE PURPOSE OP SACEiriOE AND THE VAEIODS KINDS OF SACEIPICES.
The Purpose.
It must not be forgotten that the sacrifices of the Israelites were not derived from rude
and untaught men, but that they presuppose circumcision or typical regeneration, and com-
mence with the celebration of the Passover, that is, of typical redemption. Hence it is just
as one-sided to behold in each bloody sacrifice an expression of desert of death, on account
of the blood, which signifies life, and not death, and as sacrificial blood signifies the conse-
cration of the life to God through death, as it is to deny that each sacrifice, even of thanks-
giving, presupposes the sinfulness of man as a liability to death, and that therefore each the-
ocratic sacrifice is of symbolical significance.
Israel predestinated to be the holy people of the holy God, built upon a holy foundation,
the covenant with Jehovah, should ever be holy unto Him. This holiness presupposes typi-
cal purity. Hence this holy life must be surrounded with the discipline of the law of puri-
fication. This holiness consists on the one side in utter rejection of sin and of that which is
unholy ; on the other side, in positive consecration to God ; and both these aspects concur
in every sacrifice (John xvii.). We can distinguish between the negative, exclu.sive sacri-
fices (trespass-offering, sin-offering and atoning sacrifices), to which belong also the restora-
tive sacrifices, and the positive consecrating sacrifices (burnt-offerings, peace-offerings and
food-offerings). But the distinction between the ideas of sin and guilt must precede that
between the different kinds of sacrifices. Sin is opposition to law regarded as a purely spi-
ritual state ; guilt is sin conceived in its whole nature, in its consequences, a burdensome
indebtedness which calls for satisfaction, suffering, expiation or atonement. Sin of to-day is
guilt to-morrow, and perchance forever. The father's sin becomes the guilt of the family.
The sin of the natural man falls as guilt on the spiritual man. Sin is ever guilt, and, by
reason of the social nature of man, it falls not only on the transgressor, but also on his
neighbors. Guilt also is generally sin ; but in individuals it may be reduced to the minimum
of sin and indebtedness. In the sphere of love, through sympathy it falls as a burden
most upon the less guilty and the innocent through the medium of natural and historical
connection ; hence the touch of a dead body made one unclean. The sinner must suffer,
and his innocent companion must suffer; but the suffering of the sinner, while he persists in
Bin, is quantitative, dark, immeasurable, while the suffering of his companion is qualitative.
40 SPECIAL INTRODUCTION TO THE THKEE BOOKS.
illumined and efficacious expiation (CEdipus, Antigone), and thus there are innumerable
subordinate atonements in the history of the world which point to the only true atonement.
With sharper indication of their relations, we can distinguish three kinds of sin : 1. Sins,
which not only bring guilt upon the tiansgressor, but also cast a burden of guilt on others;
2 Guilt which arises from the connection of the sinner with the usages of the world ; 3.
Trangressions, in which both of the above kinds more or less inhere, yet so that the idea of
error is pre-eminent (nJJ?*). A certain degree of error and possible exculpation was com-
mon to all sins committed unwittingly, not in conscious antagonism (with uplifted hand);
these were objects of theocratic expiation, and did not make the transgressor a curse
(cherem).
As regards this curse (cherem), it may be asked, how far it belongs to the category of
sacrifice as it is the antithesis of all sacrifices? Doubtless just so far as it is made sacred in
accordance with the decree of God, and not aa an object given over to a miserable destruc-
tion. Hence this curse (cherem) is not an absolute destruction, but only a conditional de-
struction in this world. Among the first-born of the Egyptians who were made cherem on
the night of the Passover, there may have been innocent little children. The Canaanites
were made cherem because they were an insuperable stumbling-block to Israel. Even on
the great day of atonement, when all the sins of which the people were unconscious were to
be put away, there yet remained a hidden remnant of unpardonable sins, an anathema in
Israel which was sent away with the goat of Azazel to Azazel in the wilderness, not as a
theocratic sacrifice, but as a curse together with Azazel* under the decree of God (1 Cor. v.
3-5). Thus the curse in Israel sank out of sight into the depths of its life till it brought
Christ to the cross in spite of all Levitical expiations. Then by the ^dctory of grace the
vipeaii became afeaii.
THE VAKI0U9 KINDS OF SACRIPICES.
3%e Chief Sacrifices by Fire; the Burnt-Offering and the Lesser Sin-Offerings and Trespass-
Offerings. Lev. i. and Hi.
The bumt-ofiering derives its name from the fact that it was wholly burnt ( 'V^), only
excepting the excrement. So also the real sin-ofiering. Yet this distinction marks a con-
trast ; the bumt-ofiering, its fat and flesh, was burned on the brazen altar ; while of the sin-
ofiering of him who had brought guilt on others (Lev. iv. 3) only the fat, which, like the
blood (and the kidneys and caul), especially belonged to the sanctuary, was burned on the
altar; but of the sin-offering of a priest, or of the whole congregation, the entire body (the
skin, flesh, etc., ch. iv. 11) was burned without the camp on the ash-heap in a clean place.
The flesh of the sin-ofiering of a prince or of a common man was not burned (the priest
should eat it, ch. vi. 26) ; only the fat was burned. In thank-oflerings the fat, kidneys and
caul were burned. Of the meal-offerings only a handful was burned, the rest was for the
priest; but the meal-offering brought by a priest was wholly burned, as was all the incense
with each meal-offering. The lesser sin-oflerings were treated just as the trespass-offerings
(ch. V. 6) ; the poor man brought a pigeon or a dove for a burnt-ofiering, and one for a sin-
offering. In the class of trespass-offerings, in which trespass and sin coincide (ch. v. 15 f.),
the burning took place just as in the lesser trespass and sin-offerings ; the flesh was the
priests'. These offerings were also burdened with regulations of restoration and compensa-
tion. More prominent still is the burning on the day of atonement of the goat which fell to
Jehovah by lot ; as a sin-offering of the congregation it was wholly burned. The red heifer,
slaughtered and cut in pieces without the camp was also without the camp wholly burned
(Num. xix. 3). The extreme contrast to these is found in the burning of the remnants of
the Passover, which seem to have served in a certain way as an illumination of the Passover-
night.
The offerings by fire form a contrast to the offerings of blood, the offerings by death,
since they indicate the extinction of life by divine interposition. This interposition may be
that of love and of the Spirit, taking up Elijah in a chariot of fire, or that of condemnalion,
♦ See note, p, 43.
PEACE OFFERINGS. 41
burning up the cities wliich were accursed, the bodies of those stoned to death (Josh. vii. 26)
and the bones of malefactuis.
The burning of the red heifer was, by these flames of the curse (eherem), to the Israelites
a warning that the unclean must be cleansed with the water for purification, which was min-
gled with the ashes of the red heifer as a sin-offering (Num. xix. 9),
Either the one fire or the other, says Christ (Mark ix. 43-49). Hence it is the calling
of the Christian to offer his life as the burnt-offering of love and of the Spirit under God's
leading, not willfully, but willingly, in accordance with the symbolic representation of sac-
rifice.
THE OFFERINGS OF BLOOD, THE GEEAT SIN-OFFEEINGS, TEESPASS-OFFEKINGS AND
SACEIFI0E8 OF EXPIATION.
With some commentators the offerings by fire retreat in just the degree in which the
offerings of blood become prominent; with others the offerings by fire aod those of blood are
equally prominent.
Blood is the symbol of life and the soul ; hence the positive statement of the Lord con-
cerning life and death (Lev. xvii. 11). But the offering of blood expresses the giving up of
the sinful life to God through the death decreed by God, which is the wages of sin.
The gradations in the movement of the sacrificial blood towards the mercy-seat in the
Holy of Holies mark the solemn progress from devoted suffering of death to real atonement.
The blood of the burnt-offering remained in the court ; it was sprinkled upon the altar. The
blood of the lesser sin-offering was partly poured upon the brazen altar and partly put
upon the horns of the same altar. This appears to be the regulation also for the trespass-
offering.
The greater sin-offerings, the offerings for the priest who had sinned, or for the whole
congregation, seem to be the especial offerings of blood. In these only a part of the blood
is poured out on the brazen altar; the other part was carried into the sanctuary, and not
only were the horns of the golden altar touched with it, but the priest was to sprinkle of this
blood seven times towards the curtain before the Holy of Holies. With what reserve and
timidity is the hopeful longing after the perfected typical atonement expressed in this act
(ch. iv. 1-21).
On the great day of atonement the blood of atonement came into the Holy of Holies.
First, Aaron must atone for himself with the blood of the bullock by significant symbolical
sprinklings (ch. xvi. 14). Then he must atone for the sanctuary, because it, in a typical
sense, is answerable for the uncleanness of the children of Israel and for their transgression,
that is, this sacrifice was to supplement the imperfection of all ritual atonements, and by that
point prophetically to the true sacrifice.
PEACE -OFFEEINGS.
These offerings which are divided into the three classes, of thanksgiving and praiae-
offerings, of offerings because of vows, and of offerings of prosperity or contentment (ch. vii.),
have little in common with the offerings by fire or the offerings of blood. The fat on the
intestines, the two kidneys with their fat, and the caul upon the liver were to be burned.
The blood was sprinkled on the altar round about. The priest received his portion of the
fiesh as well as of the meal-offering, of which a part was burned on the altar. The remainder
was for the offerer and his friends to feast upon. The thank or praise offering was to be
held as especially sacred. None of it was to be left till the next day. This occasioned the
calling in of poor guests. Both the other offerings might remain for a feast on the second
day, but not on the third. All remains of the peace-offerings were to be burned ; they were
thus distinguished from common feasts. These individual solemn offerings point to the fes-
tival offerings in a wider sense. Festival-offerings in a wider sense are those in which com-
mnnion with God is celebrated. The first general festival-offering is the Passover, the offer-
ing of communion with God through redemption; the second general festival-offering ap?
42 SPECIAL INTRODUCTION TO THE THREE BOOKS.
pears at the extraordinary solemnization of the legislation on Sinai (Ex. xxiv. 11), and was
continued by ordinance in the new meal-offering at Pentecost (Lev. xxiii. 16), and then in
the weekly offering of the show-bread, which was brought every Sabbath in golden dishes
according to the number of the tribes of Israel (Ex. xxv. 30 ; Lev. xxiv. 5, 6 ; Num. iv. 7 ;
1 Sam. xxi. 6). The burnt offerings of usual worship were always attended by their
meal and drink-offerings (Lev. xxiii.). Besides these meal and drink-offerings of usual wor-
ship, there were also the special meal and drink-offerings.
THE CONCRETE FORMS OF OFFERINGS.
The originally simple or elementary forms of offerings become concrete forms of offerings
throu"-h the religious idea. In the bloody offerings man brings to Jehovah his possession ;
in the unbloody, the meal and drink-offerings, he brings the support of life. The best of his
possessions and the best of his food are the expressions of the devotion of his whole being,
with all that he possesses and enjoys. Hence each offering is, to a certain extent, an epitome
of all the other offerings. This universality appears most plainly in that offering, which is
the foundation of all the rest, the Passover lamb. The great fire-offering, or burnt-offering,
which forms the centre of all offerings, is supplemented by various kinds of meal-offerings,
which are again supplemented by oil, salt and incense. But since the meal-offering in great
part was given to the priest, it became a peace-offering, except the meal-offering of the priest.
The drink-offering is peculiarly an expression of this totality, for it was not drunk in the
temple-enclosure, but was poured out on the altar. On the contrary, in the Passover, the
cup is the centre of the feast. Even in the great sin-offering, the chief parts of which were
burned without the camp, as a cherem, besides the expiation by sprinkling of the blood, the
fat of the animal was made a burnt-offering; but of the lesser sin-offerings and trespass-offer-
ings a part was taken as food for the priest. Besides the concrete acts of sacrifice, the ele-
mentary forms are also represented ; the meal-offering with the drink-offering in the show-
bread, the fire-offering in the daily burnt-offering, the peace-offering in the slaughtering of
animals for food before the tabernacle finally the cherem in theocratic capital punishment.
Over the offering rose the offering of incense as the symbol of prayer.
It is plain from the distinct expressions of the Holy Scriptures (Ps. cxli. 2 ; Eev. viii.
4) that the offering of incense upon the golden altar is a symbolical and typical representa-
tion of the sacrifice of prayer. The basis of the incense-offering is the incense of the offer-
ings which rose from the sacrificial fires, "the sweet savor," Eph. v. 2, particularly of the
burnt-offering. There was no burnt-offering without incense, for no consecration to God is
complete without a life of prayer, and this life of prayer was the soul.of the offering. Hence
it is placed in a class by itself, in the incense-offering on the altar of incense (Ex. xxx. 7,
10). And for this reason also it accompanies the various offerings, the meal-offering and
drink-offering (Lev. ii. 16), and the offering of show-bread (Lev. xxiv. 7). Finally the offer-
ing of incense appears most prominently in connection with the offering on the great day of
atonement. Then the high-priest was to envelop himself in the Holy of Holies in a cloud
of incense lest he die (Lev. xvi. 13). Thus the offering of incense constantly pointed towards
the spiritualization of the offering, that is, from the law to prophecy.
THE ORGANISM OF SACRIFICIAL WORSHIP.
All the various phases are contained in the Passover-offering. The fact is important,
that in the offering of the Passover the father of the family acted as priest. The idea of the
universal priesthood therefore is the foundation of all the offerings, and this proves that the
office of the priesthood was only a legal and symbolical representation of the whole people.
The atoning blood, with which the door-posts of the house were smeared, was the tnost
important part of the Passover-offering. On one side of this was the cherem, the slaying
of the first-born of the Egyptians ; on the other side was the peace or thank-offering of which
the family partook in the Passover meal. On the one side were the slaughterings of animals
for food before the tabernacle and the use of them in the meal at home ; on the other, the
OFFERINGS EXPRESSIVE OF COMMUNION. 43
legal cherem of theocratic capital punishment extended in the death bringing curse which,
with the fall, came upon all men. The most important part of the Passover was concluded
by the burning of the remains of the feast.
From this basis are developed the various divisions of the offerings, to be united again
in the single apex of the great offering of atonement in connection with the feast of taberna-
cles. By this apex Old Testament offerings point beyond themselves, making a plain dis-
tinction by means of the goats between pardonable sin and unpardonable sin, which was
given over to the wilderness and Azazel.*
Between the basis and the apex of the offerings are found their numerous divisions. "We
distinguish between initiative, that is, offerings at times of consecration, and those expressive
of communion, and offerings at times of restoration, with a parallel distinction between ordi-
nary and extraordinary offerings. The distinction between bloody and unbloody offerings,
or meal offerings, belongs to the offerings expressive of communion. The meal-offerings and
drink-offerings may be regarded as the best expression of communion. They are connected
with the burnt-offerings. One of the chief distinctions is found between the usual offerings
in the worship of the congregation and the casual offerings. Op the other hand there is a
correspondence between the prohibition of unclean animals and that of some unbloody
objects (honey, leaven).
1. OFFEKINGS AT TIMES OF CONSECKATION.
1. The covenant-offering consisting of burnt-offerings and thank-offerings (Ex. xxiv. 5)
performed by young men from the people ; 2. The heave offering, or tax for the building of
the tabernacle (Ex. xxxv. 5) ; 3. The anointing of the tabernacle, its vessels, and the priests
(Ex. xl.: Lev. viii.); 4. The offerings at the consecration of the priests, consisting of the
sin-offering, the burnt-offering, and the offering of the priest for thanksgiving (Lev. viii.),
and, in connection with these, the offerings of the people as priests (Lev. ix. 3; ch. xv.) ; 5.
The offerings of the princes, as heads of the state and leaders in war, for the temple- treasury
(Num. vii. 1 ; the offerings at the consecration of the Levites (Num. viii. 6) ; the offerings
for the candlestick and the table of show-bread (Lev. xxiv.).
2. OFFERINGS EXPEES9IVE OF COMMUNION.
a. Continual Offerings in the Temple by the Congregation.
1. Daily offerings (the fire never to be put out, Lev. vi. 13).
2. Sabbath-offerings.
3. Passover, Daily offerings for seven days. The sheaf of first-fruits, Lev. xxiii.
4. Pentecost. The wave-loaves. A burnt-offering of seven lambs, two young bullocks,
one ram, a he-goat for a sin-offering, two he-lambs for a thank-offering.
5. Day of Atonement, the great Sabbath on the tenth day of the seventh month. Lev.
xxiii. The atoning offering of this day plainly belongs to the restorative offerings. The
feast of tabernacles on the fifteenth of the seventh month. Daily offerings for seven days
from Sabbath to Sabbath. Fruits, branches of palm trees, green boughs.
By the sabbatic year and year of jubilee the symbolic offerings pass into figurative ethi-
cal acts (Lev. xxv.). So also the tithes form a transition from the law of worship to the
civil law, or rather indicate the influence of ecclesiastical law in the state.
Offerings expressive of communion, closely considered, are those from which the priests
received their portion as food. Of these the principal was the show-bread ; then the meal-
offerings and various other offerings.
• [The ftnthor, togother with many commentators, reEttrds the word azazel, which oconrs only in Lev. xvi. 8, 10, 28 m
a proper name. Its position of antithesis to " Jehovah " lends some color to this assumption. But with equal exuctness of
philology, it may be a common noun, meaning " removal," or " utter removal." If we assume it to be a prop r name,
we enter into difflcalties of interpretation that are insuperable : if we take it as » common noun, the meaning and intep
pretation are very plain and simple. — H. 0.]
44 SPECIAL INTRODUCTION TO THE THREE BOOKS.
b. Individual, Casual and Free-will Offerings expressive of Communion.
The centre between the preceding and this division is formed by the Passover, supple-
mented hj the little Passover (Num. ix,), which was at the same time universal and indivi-
dual. Connected with it in universality is the offering of the Nazarite (Num. vi. 13 f., burnt-
oflFering, sin-offering, thank-offering).
In the middle stands the burnt-offering.
On one side of the burnt-offering stand the peace-offerings, of three kinds.
a. Offerings in payment of vows.
b. Thank-offerings.
c. Offerings of prosperity.
Beyond these were the slaughtering of animals for food before the tabernacle, which
bore some similarity to a sacrifice, and marked the food of flesh as a special gift from God.
On the other side of the burnt-offering stand the sin-offerings and trespass-offerings, of three
kinds.
a. Sin-offerings.
b. Trespass-offerings, related to trespasses that became sin.
c. Trespass-offerings in the strict sense.
Beyond these was the curse, the cherem. The transition to the cherem was formed by
the burnings without the camp, as of the great sin-offerings, and particularly of the red
heifer from which the water for sprinkling was prepared (Num. xix.).
3. KESTOSA.TIVE OFFERINGS, EBSTOEING COMMUNION.
The series of these offerings, which were preceded by purification, begins with the offer-
ing of women after child-birth (Lev. xii.). This was followed by the offering of the healed^
leper and the offering for houses cleansed of leprosy (Lev. xiii. and xiv.). All offerings of
restoration culminate in the mysterious offering of the great day of atonement (Lev. xvi.).
To the casual offerings of this kind belong the offering of jealousy and the water causing the
curse (Num. v. 12 f ) ; the offering of a Nazarite made unclean by contact with a dead body
(Num. vi. 10) ; the water mingled with the ashes of a red heifer (Num. xix.). The cherem
serves to distinguish the capital punishment with which those who sinned with uplifted hand
were threatened, from the offerings for atonement of those who sinned unwittingly, in order
to restore the purity of the people. Death is threatened against all conscious opposition to
the law, whether of omission or of commission ; the symbolic, significant putting away from
the congregation of the living.
The common offerings, the wave-offering and heave-offering, the tithes for the offerings,
and the supply of the oil for the light are closely connected with the life of the Israelite con-
gregation, in which everything becomes an offering, the first-fruits of the field, the first-born
of the house, the tithes of the harvest, the host for war. The extraordinary offerings exhibit
the tendency of the offering towards a realization in the ideal offering. The Passover and
the offerings at times of consecration, the offerings of the Nazarite, the offering of the red
heifer, and even the offering of jealousy, were designed to exhibit the ideal host of God
The offering of atonement, of all the offerings in this class, encloses within itself the most
complete types.
THE MATEEIAL OF THE OFFERINGS AND THE COEEESPONDENCE OF THE OFFEEING TO
THE GUILT.
The chief of these is the Passover-lamb according to the legal conditions (Ex. xii.). The
bumt-offeriiig was to consist of a male animal without blemish (Lev. i. 2). For spiritual
worship there was required the manly spirit of positive consecration (Rom. xii. 1). Even
when the offerer brought a sheep or a goat it must be a male (Lev. i. 10). But the poor,
instead of these, might bring doves or ynung pigeons. The sin-offering of the anointed
priest, as well as that of the whole congregation, was a young bullock. The sin-offerin^ of
THE PORTIONS OF THE OFfEEINGS FOB THE PKIESTS. 46
a prince must be a male ; when from the flock, it must be a he-goat. On the other hand,
one of the common people might offer a female, a she-goat; a very important scale of
responsibility for transgressions. The transgression of the high-priest was equivalent to the
transgression of the whole congregation, and greater than the transgression of a prince.
For the simple trespass-offering the least was required, a female of the flock, sheep or
goat; or, when from the poor, two doves or young pigeons; and, if he was not able to get
these, he might bring the tenth of an ephah of fine flour. But, for trespass-offerings, which
were ordained for great transgressions, a ram must be brought, and in addition to the resto-
ration of that which was unjustly acquired, the fifth part of the same must be given. This
tax is uniform as respects affairs of the Church, religious laws and private property. In
peace-offerings it was optional with the offerer to offer an animal of the herd or of the flock,
male or female, provided that it was entirely without blemish. The meal-offerings consisted
of fine flour, uncooked, or baked, or roasted, with the accompanying oil and frankincense
and salt. Honey and leaven were prohibited.
At the consecration of Aaron and his sons, at the beginning of the eight days of conse-
cration, a bullock was offered as a sin-offering and a ram as a burnt-offering ; in addition to
these, a ram of consecration (Lev. viii. 22) and " out of the basket of unleavened bread that
was before the Lord" "one unleavened cake, one cake of oiled bread and one wafer;" and
at the end of the eight days there was offered a young calf as a sin-offering and a ram as a
burnt-offering. The congregation of Israel also offered a he-goat as a sin-offering, and a calf
and a lamb of a year old as a burnt offering. And, as expressive of the estimation of the
priesthood by the congregation, they offered a bullock and a ram as a thank-offering. Even
on the great day of atonement the high-priest must first atone for himself with a young bul-
lock as a sin-offering and a ram as a burnt-offering. But the congregation, as a confession
of their subordinate and less responsible spiritual position, offered two he-goats as a sin-
offering, and a ram as a burnt-offering.
THE KITUAL OF THE OFFERINGS.
Por the ritual of the Passover, see this Comm., Matt. xxvi. 17-30. For the ritual of the
offerings generally, we refer to works on archaeology and our exegesis. The duties of the
offerer were : 1. The right choice of the animal ; 2. To bring it to the priest in the court of
the tabernacle ; 3. To lay his hand upon the head of the animal as the expression of his
making the animal the typical substitute of his own condition and intention ; 4. To slay the
animal; 5. To take off the skin. The duties of the oflSciating priest were : 1. The reception
of the blood and the sprinkling of it ; 2. The lighting of the fire on the altar ; 3. The burn-
ing of the animal, and with this, 4. Cleansing the altar and keeping the ashes clean. Spe-
cially to be marked are : 1. The gradations of the burning ; 2. The gradations of the sprin-
kling of the blood ; 3. The gradations of the solemnity of the feast ; 4. The gradations of
the cherem.
THE POBTIONS OF THE OFFERINGS FOR THE PRIESTS.
The greater part of the meal-offerings was given to the priest; but his own meal-offering
he must entirely burn up Lev. vi. 23. The flesh of the sin-offerings (except the great sin-
offering of a priest or of the whole congregation, Lev. vi. 20) was given to the priest who
performed the sacrifice ; only the holy could eat it in a holy place Lev. vi. 27. and the
same was true of the trespass-offering, Lev. vii. 7 ; comp. the directions concerning the meal-
offering, ver. 9. Of the burnt-offering the priest received the skin, Lev. vii. 8. Of the meal-
offerings connected with the peace-offerings the priest received his portion. Lev. vii. 14. Of
the thank-offering he received the breast and the right shoulder. Lev. vii. 31, 33. These
portions of the offerings could support only those priests who officiated in the temple, not
their families, or the priests who were not officiating. Their support they received under
the ordinance respecting payments in kind, particularly the tithes paid by the people.
46 SPECIAL INIRODUCTION TO THE THREE BOOKS.
THE STRICTNESS OF THE KITUAL OF THE CFFERIUaS AS THE EXPEESSION OF THE
DISTINCTNESS AND IMPORTANCE OF THE DOCTRINE OP THE OFFERINGS.
As respects the Passover, it is to be remarked, that the law threatened death to those
who should in the seven days of unleavened bread eat bread that waa leavened, and thus
typically obliterate the dividing line between light and darkness. The significance of the
unleavened bread is the separation of the life of the Israelites from the worldly, heathen,
Egyptian life. Leaven is also excluded from the meal-offerings, not because in itself it rep-
resents the unclean and the evil (see this Comm., Matt, xiii.), for at Pentecost two leavened
loaves were offered upon the altar. Lev. xxiii. 17, but because in the holy food all participa-
tion in the common worldly life even of Israel should be avoided. Thus too honey is strin-
gently prohibited from the meal-offering, probably as an emblem of Paradise, which was
typified by Canaan, the land flowing with milk and honey ; and so it was an expression of
the fact, that in Paradise offerings should cease, Lev. ii. 11. The assertion that leaven and
honey were prohibited, because of their quality of fermentation, is at variance with the per-
mission of wine. The portion of the meal-offerings accruing to the priests were to be eaten
only by them in the temple-enclosure ; for it represented communion with the Lord. There
was also a decided prohibition against eating of the thank-offering on the third day after it
was offered. Lev. vii. 18. Also no unclean person should eat of the flesh of the offering, nor
should one eat of the flesh of an offering which had become unclean ; it must be burned with
fire. A sacred feast of two days might easily become secularized by the third day. The
Passover-lamb must be eaten on the first day. There was also a stringent provision that
those about to be consecrated as priests should during the consecration remain seven days
and nights before the door of the tabernacle. Lev. viii. 35. The sons of Aaron, Nadab and
Abihu, were smitten with death because they brought strange fire on their censers before the
Lord. The service in the sanctuary excluded all self-moved and purely human excitation •
and for this reason the sons of Aaron were to drink neither wine nor any strong drink during
service in the sanctuary on pain of death. There was also a stringent provision that the high-
priest when he went into the Holy of Holies should surround himself with a cloud of incense
lest he die. The atonement was perfected only in the atmosphere of prayer. Lev. xvi. Even
over the common slaughtering of animals for daily food there was the threat of death.
Unthankful enjoyment of the gifts of God was punished with death, Lev. xvii. 4 • and so
with the eating of blood, Lev. xvii. 10, 11. Besides, not only must the offerer be typically
pure, and offer only that which was typically pure, but there was the constantly repeated
requirement that the animal must be without blemish and in exact accordance with the
requirements of gender and age.
Eating blood was forbidden because it bore the life, the life of the flesh, Lev. xvii. 10.
The fat also ofbeasts fit for sacrifice waa appointed for sacrifice; it belonged to the Lord,
Lev. iii. 17; vii. 23, 26; xvii. 6. As respects the offering for atonement particularly, we
must refer to the exegesis. The special point to be marked is the distinction between this
offering as the culmination of all purifications and of the series of festivals.
The typical contrast between clean and unclean, on which all the laws of purifications
rest, is of great significance. See the treatise of Sommer in the synopsis of the literature.
Uncleanness was the ground for all exclusions from the holy congregation, and delivering
over to the unholy world without. Cleanness was the warrant of adhesion to the holy con-
gregation. The particular means of purification waa lustration, the theocratic type which
developed into the prophetic idea of sprinkling with clean water, into John's baptism and
finally into Christian baptism. '
The heathen having been previously circumcised might by lustration become a mem-
ber of the theocratic congregation, and gradually, under the influence of this fact the court
of the Israelites was enlarged for a court of the Gentiles.* '
* [If by •■ lustration •■ the author me.na sprinkling, that wo^ ordainsd only in certain specifled cases for those already
wlthm the congregation, >. e„ at the cleaning of the leper. Lev. xiv.; at the consecration of the Levitee, Numb vili 7 Md
at the cleansing of the Israelites made unclean by touching a dead body, Numb, six.— H. O.J
THE STRICTNESS OF THE RITUAL OF THE OFFERINGS, ETC 47
Corresponding to the classification of clean and unclean men was that of clean and
unclean animals. The conceptions of the Pharisees concerning washing with unclean hands
as well as the antiquated ideas of Peter, Acts x., show us how the idea of cleanness, as well
as the idea of the law itself, might become materialized. It is not unimportant that the first
form of uncleanness, the uncleanness of a woman in childbirth, appears as a fruit of the
excess of natural life. With this excess of life correspond diseases. Among unclean ani-
mals are found, on the one side, those most full of life ; on the other side, those which creep'.
Cleanness by cleansing in water is only negative holiness ; it became positive only through
sacrifice. For holiness has two sides : separation from the unholy world and consecration to
the service and fellowship of the holy God. On the laws of purification see Joachim Lange,
Mosaisohes Licht und Recht, p. 673 f. That all the holy observances are connected with that
requiring purity of blood, and consequently of the relations of the sexes, is undeniably of
great significance. Concerning the forbidden degrees of intermarriage we must refer to the
exegesis and the works on this subject, especially to those of Spoendli and Thiersch. We
must also mention the noble codex of theocratic duties of humanity. Lev. xix. It is only in
the light of these laws of humanity that the punitive laws. Lev. xx., are rightly seen. They
are in the service of ideal humanity not less than the others. The theocratic sanctity of the
priest, Lev. xxi., is quite another picture of life, like the sanctity of the priest after Gregory
VII. and during the Middle Ages.
We must refer to the Exegesis and an abundant literature respecting the ordinances of
the beautiful festivals of Israel, and respecting the special emphasis of the sanctity of the
light in Jehovah's sanctuary and the prophetic and typical Jubilee of the year of Jubilee.
The antithesis of the proclamation of the blessing and the curse assures us, that here we are
dealing with realities which must continue though the religious interpretation of them should
entirely cease. The law's estimate of the vow points to the sphere of freedom, in which
everything is God's own, committed to the conscientious keeping of man.
NUMBERS.
The most important points in the first section of the book of Numbers are the following:
1. The typical significance of the Israelite army; 2. The significance of the service of the
Levites with the army and in the tabernacle ; 3. Rules for preserving the camp holy ; 4. The
offering of jealousy and the water which brought the curse, or the hindrances of married life
in the holy war ; 5. The vow of the Nazarite, or the significance of the self-denying warriors
in the holy war; 6. The free-will ofierings of the princes (chief men and rich men) ; 7. The
care of the sanctuary; 8. Worship in the wilderness and God's guidance of the host, ch. ix.;
9 The signals of war and of peace, the trumpets.
After the commencement of the march we are brought to see the sinfulness of God's
host, their transgressions and punishments in their typical significance ; especially the home-
sickness for Egypt ; the seventy elders to encourage the people as a blessing in this distress.
Against this blessing stands in contrast their calamity in eating the quails. Mixed marriage
on its bright side, ch. xii. Concerning the spies, the abode in Kadesh, the rebellion of Korah
and his company, the significance of the mediation of Aaron and of his staff that blossomed,
of the rights of the priests and Levites, the ashes of the red heifer, and the failure of Moses
at the water of strife, we must refer to the Exegesis.
For our views with respect to the second departure from Kadesh, which we trust will
serve to correct some errors, we must refer to the exegetical sections on the King of Arad,
the passage of the brooks of Arnon, the over-estimated prophecies of Balaam, the great dan-
ger of Israel's addiction to a worship of lust, and especially the revision of the views con-
cerning the stations of the march, ch. xxxiii.
The second census of the people illustrates the necessity and value of theocratic statistics.
The daughters of Zelophehad form a station in the history of the development of the rights
of women — rights which had been greatly marred by sin. The ordering of the festivals in
the book of Numbers shows us that the solemn festivals are also social festivals, and that
they are of great significance in the life of the people and in the state The subordination
of the authority of woman in respect to the family, to domestic ofierings, to external afiairs.
48
SPECIAL INTRODUCTION TO THE THREE BOOKS.
is of special significance for our times when woman has well-nigh freed herself. Concerning
the war for vengeance on the Midianites, we must also refer to the Exegesis. The treatment
of the tribes of Keuben, Gad, and the half tribe of Manaaseh was a master-piece of theocratic
policy, aa well as a strong testimony to the great blessing of the nation's unity. The Old
Testament limits and enclosure of the law by the boundaries of Cajiaan is also a testimony
against the claims of the absolute supremacy of the law. Concerning the legal signifi-
cance of the free cities, see^the Exegesis. The close of this book which treats of the
state significantly protects the rights of the tribes, and illustrates a doctrine of signal impor-
tance for churches, states and nationalities in strong contrast with the notion of old and new
Babel that the uniformity of the world is the condition and soul of the unity of the world.
The plan of encampment will be seen by the following sketch :
WJSST.
EPHEAIM, 40,600.
MANASSBH, 36,200. BENJAMIN, 36,400.
OS
o
QBBSON.
ta
s
a
H
i
TABi:RirACI.E.
^
M
•sisaiad
w
a
>
w
ZBBTJLON, T6,000. ISSAOHAK, 64,400.
.JUDAH, 74,000.
JEAST.
This, despite severe criticism, proves itself by certain marks to be a very ancient record.
Benjamin is separated from Judah, and is under the leading of Ephraim. Nothing is said
of a division of the tribe of Manasseh, and its position is far from that of Reuben and Gad.
Ephraim appears as one of the smaller tribes.
The abundant care for the poor in Israel has been treated at length by Zellek, Super-
intendent of the School for the Poor in Beuggen, in the Monatshlatt von Beuggen, August,
1845, No. 8. On Kadesh see Tuch on Gen. xiv. in Zeitschrifi der deutschen morgenlandischen
THEOLOGICAL LITERATURE OP THE THREE BOOKS. 49
Oesellschafi, 1847, p. 179 f. Also see the articles on Kadesh in Heezog's Enaychpeedie and
Schenkel's Bibellexicon. The most important works on the Book of Numbers are quoted
as occasioa requires; G. D. Kkummachek; Menken, Die eherne Sohlange; Hengsten-
BEEG, Balaam; Eiehm, et al. See also Danz, Universalworterbuch, p. 699. Winek, I.,
p. 202.
theological liteeatttee of the theee books.
See this Comm., Indexes of the Literature in Introduction to Gen. and to Matt. ;
Heideggee, Enchiridion, p. 15 ; Walch, Bihlioth. iv. 437 ; Winer, 134 ff., 202 ; Appendix,
p. 27-31 ; Danz, p. 745 ff.; Suppl. p. 81; Haetwig's Tabellen, p. 29; Hagenbach, pp 186,
199 ; Works by J. J. Hess, Kuinoel, G. L. Baube, De Wette, Jost, Leo, Beetheau,
E-WALD, Lengeeke and others. Later, Bunsen's Bibelwerh, DiECHSEL's Bibelwerk, Bees-
LAU, Duelfee. Comprehensive treatises on the three books are found in histories of Old
Testament religion, of the kingdom of God and in compendiums of biblical theology. We
must also include in this list the writings of JosEPHUS, Philo, Oeigen, Eusebius, Jeeomb
and others which refer to this subject.
Lexicons. — Schbnkel's Bibellexicon.
Biblical Theology. — Betjno Bauee, Religion des AUen Testaments: Vatke, Baue,
Schultz, von dee Goltz; Ewald, Die Lehre der Bibel von Gott, Vol. I.; Die Lehre vom
Worte Ooites, Vol. II. ; Die Olaubenslehre, erste haelfte, Leipzig, 1871 ; Diestel, Geschichte
des Alien Testaments in der Ghristlichen Eirche, Jena, 1869 ; Zahn, Ein Gang dureh die
Heilige Geschichte, Gotha, 1868 ; Baue, Geschichte der alttestamentlichen Weissagung, 1 Theil,
1861; ZlEGLEE, Bisforische EntwicMimg der gottlichen Offenbarvmg ; DeWette, Die biblisehe
Geschichte als Geschichte der Offenbarwng Gottes, Berlin, 1846.
Consult the works of earlier writers, as Aeetius, Beenz, Geotius, Osiandee, Dathe,
Vater, Haetmann. Mve Books of Moses, Berleburger Bibel, new ed., Stuttgart, 1856 ;
Clbeicos on Pentateuch, Amsterdam, 1693 ; Joachim Lange, Mosaisches lAcht und JRecht ;
Hengstenbbeg, Ohristology of the Old Testament, Egypt and the Books of Moses, Balaam, Die
Opfer der ITeiligen Schrift, Die Geschichte des Reiches Gottes ; Bleek, Introduction to the Old
Testament; Baumgaeten, Kommenlar zum Alten Testamient, 2 Theil e; Kuetz, History of
the Old Covenant, 3 vols.; Knobbl, Kommentare zu Exodus, Leviticus und Humeri; Keil
and Dblitzsch, Biblical Oommeniary, Pentateuch, T. & T. Clark, Edinburgh.
Works by Jev7s. — Salvadoe, Histoire des Institutions de Moyse et du peuple hebreux, 3
vols., Paris, 1828; Philippson, Die Israelitische Bibel, Der Pentateuch, Leipzig, 1858;
ZUNZ, Uebersefzung des Alten Testaments ; R. S. Hiesch, Der Pentateuch ubersetzt und erlau/-
tert, Frankfurt, a. m., 1867-9; Haezheimee, Die 24 Bucher d^r Bibel, Pentateuch, Leipzig;
Mandelbaum, Die Bibel neu ubersetzt und erkldrt, Mnleitung in dem Pentateuch, Berlin,
1864.
Historical Works. — AenAXTD, Jje Pentateuch mosaique, d^fendu contre les attaques de la
crUique negative, Paris, 1865 ; Fxteest, Geschichte der biblischen Literatur, 2 Bande, Leipzig,
1867 ; H. Weight, The Pentateuch with * * TranslaUon, specimen part. Gen. i.-iv., London,
1869 ; Beaem, Israel's Wanderung von Gosen bis zum Sinai, Elberfeld, 1859 ; Colbnso, The
Pentateuch, 1863 (a sample of traditional, abstractly literal interpretation). In opposition to
COLENSO, The Historic Character of the Pentateuch Vindicated, Lond.,1863; The Mosaic Ori-
gin of the Pentateuch, by a Layman, London, 1864 ; GeAP, Die geschichtlichen Bucher des
Alten Testaments, Leipzig, 1866; HiTZiG, Geschichte des Volkes Israel, Ijeipzig, 1869; Ebees,
EgypUn und die Bucher Moses; writings of Beugsch, Lipsius and Gtttsohmid, Beitrdgezwr
Geschichte des AUen Orients zur Wurdigung von Bunsen's Egyplen, 1857 ; J. Beaitn, Histo-
rische Landschaflen, Stuttgart, 1867 ; K. VON Eaumee, Der Zug der Israeliten aus Egypten
nach Kanaan, Langensalza, 1860 ; Voeltee, Das heilige Land und das Lan-I der israelitschen
Wanderung; Holtzmann und Weber, Geschichte des Volkes Israel und der Entstehung des
Christenthums, Leipzig, 1867 ; Noeldeke, Die alttestamentliche Literatur in einer Reihe von
Aufsdtzen, Leipzig, 1868; Bunsen, God in History; BuscH, Ur geschichte des Orients, 2
Banrle, Ijeipzig; Stier, Heilsgeschichte des Alten Testaments, Halle, 1872; Laboede, Com-
4
50 SPECIAL INTRODUCTION TO THE THREE BOOKS.
mentaire giograpUque sur VExode et lea Hombres, Paris, 1841; Faiebaibn, The Typology of
Scripture, Edinburgh, 1854 ; Mills, Sacred Symhology, or an Inquiry into the Principles of
the Interpretation of the Prophetic Symbols, Edinburgh, 1853 ; Beke, Origines Ublicae, Lon-
don, 1854.
Special Treatises. — Eanke, Untersuchungen ; 'S'ett'E.Ij'ES., Studien uber die ^chtheitdes
Pentateuchs, MUnster, 1867 ; Kohn, Samaritanische Studien, Breslau, 1866 ; Tbip, Tkeopha-
nien in den Oeschichts biichern des Alten Testaments, Leiden, 1858 ; TuCH, Sinaitische Inschrif-
ten, Leipzig, 1846 ; Appia, JEssai biographique sur Moyse, Strasburg, 1853 ; Chapptjis, De
Vandea Testament, considtri dan ses Rapports avec le Ghristianisme, Lausanne, 1858 ; Salo-
mon, Moses der Mann Ooties, 1835 ; Siegel, Moses ; Boettcher, Exegetische ^hrenlese zum
Alten Testament, Leipzig, 1864; Friederioh, Zur Bibel; Haetmann, Historisch Kritische
Forschungen. Berlin, 1831; Huellmann, Staats!verfa,ssung der Israeliten; Unqee, Chronolo-
gie des Manetho, Berlin, 1866; treatises of a popular character by Kiechlofee, Statjdt,
Steglich, Postel and others ; special articles in Herzog's Encyclopxdie and in the Jahr-
bucher fur deutsche Theologie from 1858-1872, and in the Studien und Kritiken, 1872.
On Hebrew art, see the Archaeologies by Keil and others. On Hebrew poetry Lowth,
Herder, Saalschuetz, Sack, Taylor.
On the relation of the Old Testament to Assyria, Scheader, Die Kdlinschriften und
das Alte Testament, Giessen, 1872.
EXODUS.
THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
(niOB' rhii); 'E^odo<:: Exodus.)
THE PB0PHETIC0-ME8SIANIC THEOCRACY— OR THE GENESIS, REDEMPTION
AND SANCTIFICATION OP THE COVENANT PEOPLE.
FIRST DIVISION: MOSES AND PHARAOH.
THE TTPIOAILT BIONIFIOAHT REDEMPTION OF ISEAEl OUT OF HIS SERVITUDE IN EGYPT AS PRELI-
MINART CONDITION OF AND PREPARATION FOE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE TYPICAL KINGDOM
OF GOD (the theocracy) BY MEANS OF THE MOSAIC LEGISLATION — OR THE THEOOEATIO
FOUNDATION FOR THE LEGISLATION OF ALL THE THREE BOOKS.
Chapters I.— XVIII.
FIRST SECTION.
The Qenesis of the Covenant People of Israel, of their Servitude, and of the Pore-
tokens of their Redemption as one people. An analogue of the Development of
Mankind as a unit, of their Corruption and the Preparation for their Salvation.
The calling of Moaes and his twofold Mission to bis people and to Pharaoh.
Chaps. I.— VII. 7.
A.— GROWTH AND SERVITUDE OP THE ISRAELITES IN EGYPT— AND
PHARAOH'S PURPOSE TO DESTROY THEM.
Chap. I. 1-22.*
1 Now these are the names of the children of Israel which [who] came into
2 Egypt; every man and his household came with Jacob: Reuben, Simeon, Levi,
3, 4 and Judah ; Issachar, Zebulun, and Benjamin ; Dan, and Naphtali, Gad and
5 Asher. And all the souls that came out of the loins of Jacob were seventy souls ;
6 for [and] Joseph was in Egypt already. And Joseph died, and all his brethren,
7 and all that generation. And the children of Israel were fruitful, and increased
abundantly, and multiplied, and waxed exceeding mighty, and the land was filled
8 with them. Now [And] there arose a new king over Egypt which [who] knew not
9 Joseph. And he said unto his people, Behold, the people of the children of Israel
10 are more and mightier than we. Come on [Come], let us deal wisely [pru-
dently'] with them, lest they multiply, and it come to pass that, when there falleth
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL.
* [Ver. 10. riD3nn3. Lange, Oesonins, Arnbelm, and Pbilippson, translate this uberUsUn, "outwit." But the Hithp.
■form occurs, besides here, only in Eccl. Tii. 18, and there has the signification proper to the Hithpael, viz., to deem one's-
• [The Authorized Version is followed in the translation from the Hebrew, except that " Jehovah " is everywhere sub-
stituted for " the Lord." In other cases, where a change in the translation is thought to be desirable, the proposed emen-
dation is inserted in brackets. — Tb]
EXODUS.
out any war [when a war occurreth], they join also [they also join themselves] unto
our enemies, and fight against us, and so get them up [and go up] out of the
11 land. Therefore they did set [And they appointed] over them taskmasters, to
afflict them with their burdens ; and they built treasure-cities [store-cities] for Pha-
12 raoh, Pithom and Eaemses. But the more [lit., And as] they afflicted them the
more [lit., so] they multiplied and grew [spread]. And they were grieved because
13 of [horrified in view of] the children of Israel. And the Egyptians made the chil-
14 dren of Israel to serve with rigor. And they made their lives bitter with hard
bondage [service] in mortar and in brick, and in all manner of service in the field;
all'' their service wherein they made them serve was [which they laid on them]^
15 with rigor. And the king of Egypt spake to the Hebrew mid wives (of'
which [whom] the name of one was Shiphrah, and the name of the other Puah),
16 And he said. When ye do the office of a midwife to [When ye deliver] the He-
brew women, and see them, [then look] upon the stools ; if it he a son, then ye
17 shaJl kill him ; but, if it 6e a daughter, then she shall live. But the midwives
feared God, and did not as the king of Egypt commanded, but [and] saved the
18 men-children alive. And the king of Egypt called for the midwives, and said unto
19 them. Why have ye done this thing, and have saved the men-children alive ? And
the midwives said unto Pharaoh,' Because the Hebrew women are not as the Egyp
tian, for they are lively [vigorous], and are delivered ere the midwives come in
20 unto' them [before the midwife cometh in unto them, they are delivered]. There-
fore [And] God dealt well with the midwives, and the people multiplied, and waxed
21 [grew] very mighty. And it came to pass, because the midwives feared Grod, that
22 he made them houses [households]. And Pharaoh charged all his people, saying,
Every son that is born ye shall cast into the river, and . every daughter ye shall
save alive.
self wise, to act the part of a wise man. Here, therefore, It is better to render it in nearly the same way. — njt^'lpri, a
plnral verb with a singular subject. Knobel, following the Samaritan version (UXTpH), translates wird \ms Ireffen, ''shall
befall us." But there is no need of this asBumption of a corrupt text. See Ewald, Ausf. Gram.^ g 191 c. — Tr.J.
^ [Ver. 14. Lange, with many others, takes HX here as a preposition, meaning " together with," "besides." and sup-
plies " other " before ** service." Grammatically this is perhaps easier than to take it (as we have done^ as the sign of the
Ace. But it requires us to supply the word on which the whole force of the clause depends. — Ta.].
8 [Ver. 19. Lange translates, nnaccoontably, nj?'13~ 7X as being equivalent to a genitive: die. Hebammen des Pharaoh,
" Pharaoh's midwives." — Tit.].
EXEQETICAi AND CEITICAL.
Vers. 1-'. Fulfillment of the promise, Gen.
xlvi. 3. Also fulfillment of the prediction of suf-
fering for the descendants of Abraham, Gen.
XV. 13.
Vers. 2-4. The names of the children are
given according to the rank of the mothers. So
Gen. XXXV. 23-'26.
Ver, 5. The small number of seventy souls
(vid. Gen. xlvi. 27) who entered Egypt, illustrates
the wonderful increase. At the exodus 600,000
men, besides children, etc. Vid. oh. xii. 87. On
the terms denoting increase, IX'IE'] ?1£) 13T_
see Gen. i. 28 ; viii. 17.
Ver. 8. A neiv king. — Dp'1 has a special
significanoe. He rose up, as a man opposed to
the previous policy. The LXX. translate ly^^
by Jrcpof. Josephus and others inferred the rise
of a new dynasty. — Who knew not Joseph,
«'. «., cared nothing for his services and the re-
sults of them, the high regard in which his peo-
ple had been held.
Vera. 9, 10. " They are greater and stronger
than we," says despotic fear, " Come, let us be
more prudent (more cunning) than they," is the
language of despotic craftiness and malice. Des-
potic policy adds, that in case of a war the peo-
ple might join the enemy. A danger to the
country might indeed grow out of the fact that
the Israelites did not become Egyptianized. The
power of Israelitish traditions is shown espe-
cially in the circumstance that even the descend-
ants of Joseph, though they had an Egyptian
mother, certainly became Jews. Perhajis it was
dislike of Egyptian manners which led the sons
of Ephraim early to migrate towards Palestine,
1 Ohron. vii. 22. An honorable policy would,
however, have provided means to help the Jews
to secure a foreign dwelling-place.
Ver. 11. Taskmasters. — The organs of op-
pression and enslavement. " That foreigners
were employed in these labors, is illustrated by
a sepulchral monument, discovered in the ruins
of Thebes, and copied in the Egyptological works
of Rosellini and Wilkinson, which repnesentg
laborers, who are not Egyptians, as employed in
making brick, and by them two Egyptians Vfith
rods, as overseers ; even though these laborers
may not be designed to represent Israelites, as
their Jewish features would indicate " (KpiI).
See also Keil's reference to Aristotle and Livy,
CHAP. II. 1-25.
3
(p. 422)* on the despotic method of enfeebling a
people physically and mentally by enforced labor.
Store-Cities. — For the harvests. See Eeil (p.
422) on Pithom (Gr. Tl&rovfioe, Egypt. Thou,
Thoum), situated on the canal which connects
the Nile with the Arabian gulf. Baemses, the
game as Heroopolis.
Ver. 12. Horror is the appropriate designa-
tion of the feeling with which bad men see the
opposite of their plans wonderfully brought
about. Hengstenberg: Sie katten Ekel vor ihnm.
"They were disgusted at them." But this was
the case before. On |'
t—TB.]. ' *' • "i ™"
CHAP. 11. 1-25.
22 and he gave Moses Zipporah his daughter. And she bare him a [bare a] son, and
he called his name Gershom, for he said, I have been a stranger [A sojourner have
23 I been] in a strange land. And it came to pass in process of time [lit. in those
many days], that the king of Egypt died ; and the children of Israel sighed by rea-
son of the bondage [service], and thw cried ; and their cry' came up to God by rea-
24 son of the bondage [service]. And God heard their groaning, and God remembered
25 his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob. And God looked upon
the children of Israel, and God had respect unto them [lit. knew them^J.
• Ver.23. DflJ^IE? "cry for help "—a different root from that of ths verb IpJ^rV— Te.].
T [Ver. 25. Lange translates : TJnd Gott mh an die Kinder IsraeU, und ah der GoUheit war's zhm bawuaat (er durchachauttt
Ik una Om SUualum). "And God looked on the children of Israel, and it was known by Him as the Godhead (He saw
through them and their situation)." This translation seems to be suggested by the emphatic repetition of D^n*7K. But
better to find the emphatic word in _J?^^1 " God haew (them),'' t. e., had a tender regard for them — a frequent use of IfT
Comp. Ps. cxliv. 3. Or, simply, "God knew," leaving the object indefinite, aa in the Hebrew. — Tr.]
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL.
Ver. 1. And there went. — ^/D, according
to Keil, serves to give a pictorial description.
Inasmuch as the woman had already borne Mi-
riam and Aaron, it vrould mislead us to take the
word in this sense. The expression properly
means that he had gone ; he had, in these dan-
gerous times which, to be sure, at Aaron's birth
had not yet reached the climax (he was three
years o'der than Moses) taken the step of enter-
ing the married state. — The descent of these pa-
rents from the tribe of Levi is remarked. Ener-
getic boldness had distinguished it even in the
ancestor (Gen. xlix. 5 ; Ex. xxxii. 26 ; Deut.
zxxiii. 8). Although originally not without fa-
naticism, this boldness yet indicated the quali-
ties needed for the future priesthood.
Ver. 2. She recognized it as a good omen, that
the child was so fair (3113 airmof LXX. ; vid.,
Heb. xi. 23), Josepbus traces this intuition of
faith, which harmonized with the maternal feel-
ing of complacency and desire to preserve bis
life, to a special revelation. But this was here
not needed.
Ver. 3. The means of preservation chosen by
the parents is especially attributed to the daugh-
ter of Levi. It is all the more daring, since in
the use of it she had, or seemed to have, from the
outset, the daughter of the child-murderer in
mind. The phrase T\2!^ designates the box as a
miniatwe ark, a ship of deliverance. On the pa-
per-reed, vid. Winer, Real-worterbuch, II., p. 411.
The hox, cemented and made wafer-tight by
means of asphalt and pitch, was made fast by the
same reed out of which it had b»en constructed.
This extraordinarily useful kind of reed seems
by excessive use to have become extirpated.
Ver. 4. And his sister. — Miriam (xv. 20).
The sagacious child, certainly older than Aaron,
early showed that she was qualified to become a
prophetess (xv. 20) of such distinction that she
could afterwards be puffed up by it.
Ver. 5. "The daughter of Pharaoh Is called
Qtpfiov&tQ (Josephus et al.) or Uep/ii;. . . . The
bathing of the king's daughter in (he open stream
is contrary indeed to the custom of the modern
Mohammedan Orient, where this is done only by
v/omen of low rank in retired places (Lane, Man-
ners and C'lstoms, p. 336, 5th ed.), but accords
with the customs of ancient Egypt (comp. the
copy of a bathing-scene of a noble Egyptian wo-
man, with four female attendants, in Wilkinson,
Ancient Egyptians, Vol. III., Plate 417), and be-
sides is perhaps connected with the notion held
by the ancient Egyptians concerning the sacred-
nessofthe Nile, to which even divine honors
were paid (vid. Henqstenberq, Egypt and the
Books of Moses, p. 113), and with the fructifying,
life-preserving power of its waters." (Keil).
Ver. 6. The compassion of Pharaoh's daughter
towards the beautiful child led her to adopt him ;
and when she did so, making him, therefore,
prospectively an Egyptian, she did not need, we
may suppose, to educate him " behind the king's
back" [as Keil thinks. — Tk.]. We might rather
assume that this event more or less neutralized
the cruel edict of the king.
Ver. 9. Nor is it to be assumed that the daugh-
ter of Pharaoh had no suspicion of the Hebrew
nationality of the mother. How often, in cases
of such national hostilities, the feelings of indi-
vidual women are those of general humanity in
contradistinction to those of the great mass of
fanatical women.
Ver. 10. She brought him unto Pha-
raoh's daughter. — The boy in the meantime
had drunk in not only his mother's milk, but
also the Hebrew spirit, and had been intrusted
with the secret of his descent and deliverance.
Legally and formally he became her sou,
whilst he inwardly had become the son of an-
other mother ; and though she gave him the
Egyptian name, " Mousheh," i. e., saved from the
water (Josephus II., 9, 6), yet it was at once
changed in the mind of Divine Providence into
the name " Mosheh ;" the one taken out became
the one taking out. (Kurtz). For other expla-
nations of the name, vid. Gesenius, Knobel, Keil.
Thus the Egyptian princess herself had to bring
up the deliverer and avenger of Israel, and, by
instructing him in all the wisdom of Egypt, pre-
pare him both negatively and positively for his
vocation.
Ver. 11. When Moses was grown. — Had
become a man. According to Acts vii. 23, and
therefore according to Jewish tradition, he was
then forty years old. He had remained true to his
destination (Heb. xi. 24), but had also learned,
like William of Orange, the Silent, to restrain
himself, until finally a special occasion caused
6
EXODUS.
the flame hidden in him to burst forth. An Egyp-
tian smote one of his brethren. — This phrase
BUggests the ebullient emotion with which he
now decided upon his future career.
Ver. 12. That Moses looked this way and that
way before committing the deed, marks, on the
one hand, the mature man who knew how to
control his heated feeling, but, on the other
hand, the man not yet mature in faith ; since by
this act, which was neither simple murder nor
iimple self-defence, and which was not sustained
by a pure peace of conscience, he anticipated
Divine Providence. It cannot be attributed to
" a carnal thirst for achievement " [Kurtz] ; but
as little can it be called a pure act of faith ; al-
though the illegal deed, in which he was even
strengthened by the consciousness of being an
Egyptian prince (as David in bis sin and fall
might have been misled by feeling himself to be
an oriental despot) was a display of his faith, in
view of which Stephen (Acts vii.) could justly
rebuke the Hnbelief of the Jews. Vid. more in
Keil, p. 431.
Ver. 14. The Jew who thus spoke was a repre-
sentative of the unbelieving spirit of which Ste-
phen speaks in Acts vii.
Yer. 16. The Midianites had made a settle-
ment not only beyond the Elanitio Gulf near
Moab, but also, a nomadic branch of them, on
the peninsula of Sinai. These seem to have re-
mained more faithful to Shemitio traditions than
the trading Midianites on the other side, who
joined in the voluptuous worship of Boal.
"Reuel" means: Friend of God. He does not
seem, by virtue of his priesthood, to have had
princely authority.
Ver. 16. By the well. — A case similar to that
in which Jacob helped Rachel at the well, Gen.
xzix.
Ver. 18. On the relation of the three names,
Reuel, Jethro (iii. 1) and Hobab (Num. x. 29)
vid. the commentaries and Winer. The assump-
tion that tnn, used of Hobab, means brother-in-
law, but useJ of Jethro ("preference," like
Reuel's name of dignity "friend of God") means
father-in-law, seems to be the most plausible.
Jethro in years and experience is above Moses ;
but Hobab becomes a guide of the Hebrew cara-
van through the wilderness, and his descendants
remain among the Israelites. Vid. also Judg,
iv. 11 and the commentary on it.
Ver. 22. Oershom. — Always a sojourner. So
he lived at the court of Pharaoh, so with the
priest in Midian. Zipporah hardly understood
him (vid. iv. 24). As sojourner he passed through
the wilderness, and stood almost among his own
people. Yet the view of Canaan from Nebo be-
came a pledge to him of entrance to a higher
fatherland.
Ver. 23. Also the successor of the child-mur-
dering king continued the oppression. But God
heard the cry of the children of Israel. He re-
membered his covenant, and looked into it, and
saw through the case as Ood.
C— THE CALL OF MOSES. HIS REFUSAL AND OBEDIENCE. HIS ASSOCIATION WITH
AARON AND THEIR FIRST MISSION TO THE PEOPLE OF ISRAEL.
Chaptees III., IV.
1 Now Moses kept [was pasturing] the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the priest
of Midian ; and he led the flock to the back side of [behind] the desert, and came
2 to the mountain of God, even to Horeb. And the angel of Jehovah appeared unto
him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a [the] bush ; and he looked, and behold,
3 the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed. And Moses said, I
will now turn aside [Let me turn aside] and see this great sight, why the bush is
4 not burnt. And when Jehovah saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto
him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses, Moses I And he said, Here am
5 I. And he said. Draw not nigh hither ; put off thy shoes from off [from] thy feet,
6 for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground. Moreover [And] he said, I
am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of
7 Jacob. _ And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look upon God. And Jeho-
vah said, I have surely seen the affliction of my people which [who] are in Egypt,
and have heard their cry by reason of their taskmasters ; for I know their sorrows;
8 And I am come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to
bring them up out of that land unto a good land, and a large, unto a land flowing
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL.
1 [Ver. T. ''33D may be rendered more literally "from before," tbe people being represented aa followed up in tUelr
work by the taakmasteiB.— Ta.].
CHAP. III. 1— IV. 31.
with milk and honey, unto the place of the Canaanites, and the Hittites, and the
9 Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites. Now therefore
behold, the cry of the children of Israel is come unto me, and I have also seen the
10 oppression wherewith the Egyptians oppress them. Come now therefore and I will
send thee unto Pharaoh, that thou mayest bring forth [and bring thou forth] my
11 people, the children of Israel, out of Egypt, And Moses said unto God, Who am
I, that I should go unto Pharaoh, and that I should bring forth the children of
12 Israel out of Egypt ? And he said, Certainly I will be with thee, and this shall
be a [the] token unto thee that I have sent thee : When thou hast brought [bring-
13 est] forth the people out of Egypt, ye shall serve God upon this mountain. And
Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall
say unto them. The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you ; and they shall say
14 to me. What is his name ? What shall I say unto them ? And God said unto
Moses, I AM THAT I AM. And he said. Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel,
15 I AM hath sent me unto you. And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou
say unto the children of Israel, Jehovah, God [the God] of your fathers, the God
of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you : this
is my name forever, and this is my memorial unto all generations [lit. to genera-
16 tion of generation]. Go and gather the elders of Israel together, and say unto
them, Jehovah, God [the God] of your fathers, the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and
of Jacob hath appeared unto me, saying, I have surely visited [looked upon] you,
17 and seen that [and that] which is done to you in Egypt. And I have said, I will
bring you up out of the affliction of Egypt, unto the land of the Canaanites, and the
Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites,
18 unto a land flowing with milk and honey. And they shall [will] hearken to thy
voice ; and thou shalt come, thou and the elders of Israel, unto the king of Egypt,
and ye shall say unto him, Jehovah, God [the God] of the Hebrews, hath met'' with
us, and now let us go, we beseech thee, three days' journey into the wilderness, that
19 we may sacrifice to Jehovah our God. And I am sure [know] that the king of
20 Egypt will not let you go, no [even] not' by a mighty hand. And IwUl stretch
out my hand, and smite Egypt with all my wonders which I will do in the midst
21 thereof; and after that he will let you go. And I will give this people favor in
the sight of the Egyptians ; and it shall come to pass that, when ye go, ye shall not
22 go empty. But [And] every woman shall borrow [ask] of her neighbor _ and of
her that sojoumeth in her house jewels [articles] of silver and jewels [articles] of
gold and raiment [garments] ; and ye shall put them upon your sons and upon your
daughters ; and ye shall spoU the Egyptians.
Chap. IV. 1 And Moses answered and said. But, behold, they will not believe me,
nor hearken unto my voice ; for they will say, Jehovah hath not appeared unto
2 thee. And Jehovah said unto him. What is that [this] in thine [thy] hand ? And he
3 said, A rod. And he said. Cast it on the ground. And he cast it on the ground,
4 and it became a serpent ; and Moses fled from before it. And Jehovah said unto
Moses, Put forth thy hand, and take it by the tail. And he put forth his hand,
5 and caught it, and it became a rod in his hand : That they may believe that Je-
hovah, God [the God] of their fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and
6 the God of Jacob, hath appeared unto thee. And Jehovah said furthermore unto
him. Put now thine [thy] hand into thy bosom. And he put his hand into his bo-
7 som'; and when he took it out, behold, his hand was leprous as snow. And he said.
Put thine [thy] hand into thy bosom again. And he put his hand into his bosom
again, and plucked [took] it out of his bosom, and behold, it was turned again as
« [Ver. 18. mp3 is taken by EosemnaUer, after Borne of the older versions, as = NT;pJi voaUw super rwa. But, aa
Winer remarks, ito mmm irOolerabUis ImUologia ineH in verbis Dn3;;n 'TlSX;" The LXX.' translate 7rpoo-/ce'«Ar)Tai ij^M,
—which makes better sense, but is grammatically still more inadmissible, as ill [33 is thus made = X1J5-— Tk-]-
a [Ter. 19. «h) is rendered by the LXX., Vulg., Luther, and others, "unless."' But this is incorrect. The more obvi-
oos translation may indeed seem to be inconsistent with the statement in the next verse, " after that he will let you go."
But the difficulty is not serious. We need only to supply in thought " at first " in this verse,— Ta.].
EXODUS.
8 Hs other flesh. And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe thee, neither
[nor] hearken to the voice of the first sign, that they will believe the voice of the
9 latter sign. And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe also [even] these
two signs, neither [nor] hearken unto thy voice, that thou shalt take of the water
of the river, and pour it upon the dry land; and the water which thou takest out
10 of the river shall become blood upon the dry land. And Moses said unto Jehovah,
O my Lord, [O Lord], I am not eloquent [lit. a man of words], neither heretofore,
nor since thou hast spoken unto thy servant ; but [for] I am slow of speech [mouth]
11 andof a slow [slow of] tongue. And Jehovah said unto him, Who hath made
man's mouth? or who maketh the [maketh] dumb, or deaf, or the seeing [or see-
12 ing], or the blind ? [or blind ?] Have [Do] not I, Jehovah ? Now therefore go, and
13 1 will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt say. And he said, O my
14 Lord [O Lord], send, I pray thee, by the hand of him whom thou wilt send. And
the anger of Jehovah was kindled against Moses, and he said. Is not Aaron, the Le-
vite, thy brother ? I know [Do I not know Aaron, thy brother, the Levite,] that he
can speak well ?* And also, behold, he cometh forth to meet thee, and when he seeth
15 thee, he will be glad in his heart. And thou shalt speak unto him, and put words
[the words] in his mouth; and I will be with thy mouth, and with his mouth, and
16 will teach you what ye shall do. And he shall be thy spokesman [shall speak for
thee] unto the people, and he [it] shall be, even Ithaf] he shall be to thee instead of
17 [for] a mouth, and thou shalt be to him instead of [for a] God. And thou shalt
18 taiie this rod in thine [thy] hand, wherewith thou shalt do signs [the signs]. And
Moses went, and returned to Jethro [Jether] his father-in-law, and said unto him.
Let me go, I pray thee,^ and return unto my brethren which [who] are in Egypt,
and see whether they be [are] yet alive. And Jethro said to Moses, Go in peace.
19 And Jehovah said unto Moses in Midian, Go, return into Egypt ; for all the men
20 are dead which [who] sought thy life. And Moses took his wife, and his sons, and
set them [made them ride] upon an [the] ass, and he returned to the land of Egypt.
21 And Moses took the rod of God in his hand. And Jehovah said unto Moses, When
thou goest to return into Egypt, see that thou do all those wonders before Pharaoh
which I have put in thy hand [consider all the wonders which I have put in thy
hand, and do thera before Pharaoh] ; but I will harden his heart that he shall [and
22 he will] not let the people go. And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith
23 Jehovah, Israel is my son, even my first-born. And I say [said]' unto
thee. Let my son go that he may serve me ; and if thou refuse [and thou didst
24 refuse]' to let him go : behold, I will slay thy son, even thy first-born. Audit came
25 to pass by the way in the inn, that Jehovah met him, and sought to kill him. Then
[And] Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut ofi'the foreskin of her son, and cast it
at his feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband [a bridegroom of blood]
* [Chap. IV. Ver. 14. We have ventured to follow the Vulg., Luther, Cranmer, the Geneva Version, De Wette, Gla''re,
and K.Hlisch, in tbia rendering ; for, tliongh grammatically the reading of the A. V. i.s more natural, yet it is difBcnIt to aae
the force of the question, " la not Aaron thy brochor ?' FUrst, Arnhoim, and Murphy, t-'V to «void the difQcoIty by rea-
dcriog, '• l8 there not Aaron, thy brother, the Levite?" etc. This, however, ia putting in what is not in the original. Kush,
following Bashi, trausla'es, "la not Aaron thy brother, the Levite?" and nnderstaude the question to in'imate that, in
consequence of Moses' reluctance to obey the divine commission, the pricsthooil, which otherwise would have been con-
ferred on him, will be given to Aaron. As nothing iasai'l about the prie8thood,it is hard to see how the phrase "the Le-
vite," at this time, before any priesthood had been established, could have been understood in this way. Kuobel, trans-
lating in the same way, nnderst«nds it as pointing forward to the doty of the priests to give public instruction. But the
same objection lies against this, as agaiLst the previous explanation ; Moses was a l>evite as much as Aaron was. Lanire,
translating also th > s.ime way, understands the meaning to be : Aaron is a more genuine Levite than Moses. But in tbia
cai,e the deiinite article is quite out of place ; and even without it such a thought would be very obscur.'ly expressed. Keil,
follovring Baumgarten, finds the significance of the question In the etymological meaning of 'iS, rfa., to join, associate
one's-selfto. This certainly has the advantage of snggeating a reason for the use of the phrase "the Levite," which on
othr theories seems to be superfluous. But the definite article is out of place on this hypothesis also. Besides, as the
special point here is Aaron's ability to toZft, the notion of asanciatifm is not just the one needed to bd suggested by the term,
to say nothing of the subtlety of the made of conveying either conception.— Tr.J.
6 [Ver. 18. NJ~nD7N 1^ not to be understood as a request, as the A. V. seems to imply, especially by the phrase, "I
pray thee," which corresponds to NJ. Wo have exactly the same form in ill. 3, where Mosos said SJ-TTIpN, " I will turn
aside," or, " Let me turn aside."— Ta.]. v •. t
" [Ver. 23. lpj "» being a verbal form inclu-
ding a pronominal element, an expression of personality :
I am — Sf. is. Jehovah is the living God, the God who
reveals Himself to His people, and holds a personal relation
to them. — 1£.]
of the psychological process. If Pharaoh grant ed
the request, he would be seen to be in a benevo-
lent mood, and they might gradually ask for
more. If he denied it, it would be well for them
not at once, by an open proposal of emancipa-
tion, to have exposed themselves to ruin, and
introduced the contest with his hardness of
heart, which the guiding thought of Jehovah
already foresaw. Moses knew better how to
deal with a despot. Accordingly he soon in-
creases his demand, till he demands emancipa-
tion, vi. 10; vii. 16; viii. 25; ix. 1, 13; x. 3.
From the outset it must, moreover, have greatly
impressed the king, that the people should wish
to go out to engage in an act of divine service;
still more, that they should, in making their
offering, desire to avoid offending the Egyptians,
viii. 26. But gradually Jehovah, as the legiti-
mate king of the people of Israel, comes out in.
opposition to the usurper of His rights, ix. 1 sq.
Moses, to be sure, even during the hardeniug
process, does not let his whole purpose distinctly
appear ; but he nevertheless gives intimationa
of it, when, after Pharaoh concedes to them the
privilege of making an offering in the country,
he stipulates for a three days' journey, and, in
an obscure additional remark, hints that he
then will still wait for Jehovah to give further
directions.
Ver. 19. Even not by a mighty hand. —
Although God really frees Israel by a mighty
hand. Pharaoh does not, even after the ten
plagues, permanently submit to Jehovah; there-
fore he perishes in the Bed Sea.
Ver. 20. Announcement of the miracles by
which Jehovah will glorify Himself.
Ver. 21. Announcement of the terror of the
Egyptians, in which they will give to the Israel-
ites, upon a modest request for a loan, the most
costly vessels (Keil : "jewels"). Theannounce-
ment becomes a command in xi. 2 sq. On the
ancient misunderstanding of this fact, vid. Keil,
p. 445 sq., and the references to Hengstenberg,
Kurtz, Beinke ; also Commentary on Genesis, p.
29. " Egypt had robbed Israel by the unwar-
ranted and unjust exactions imposed upon him ;
now Israel carries off the prey of Egypt. A pre-
lude of the victory which the people of God will
always gain in the contest with the powers of the
world. Comp. Zeoh. xiv. 14" (Keil).*
Chap. iv. 1. Four hundred years of natural
development had succeeded the era of patriarchal
* [The various explanations of this transaction are given
by Hengstenberg, i>i8seftatimii on the PelitaJeuch, p. 419 sqq.
Briefly they are the following : (1) That God, being the st>-
vereign disposer of all thinge, had a right thus to traof-fer the
property of the Egyptians to the Israelites. (2) Ttiat the Is-
raelites received no more than their just due in taking these
articles, in view of the oppressive treatment they bad under-
gone. I'd) That, though the Israelites in form asked for a
loau, it was understood by the Egyptians as a gift, thern being
no expectation that the Israelites would return. ^4) That the
Israelites borrowed with the intention of returninf;, being
ignorant of the Divine plan of removing them from the coun-
try so suddenly that a restoration of the borrowed articles to
their proper owners would be impossible. — These explana-
tions, uneatis&ctory as they are, are as good as the case would
admit, were the terms "borrow" and "lend," derived from
the LXX. and reproduced in almost all the translations, the
equivalents of the Hebrew words. But the simple fact is that
the Israelites are said to have asked for the things, and the
Eeyptians to have given them. The circumstances (xii. 33
sqq.) also under which the Israelites went away makes it
seem every way probable that the Egyptians never expected
a restoration of the things bestowed on the Israelites. — Tr.].
12
EXODUS.
revelations, and the people were no longer ac-
customed to prophetic voices. The more ground
therefore did Moses seem to have for his anxiety
lest the people vrould not believe him. Jehovah,
moreover, does not blame him for his doubts, but
gives him three marks of authentication^ The
symbolical nature of these miraculous signs is
noticed also by Keil.
Vers. 2-5. The casting down of the shepherd's
rod may signify the giving up of his previous
pastoral occupation. As a seemingly impotent
shepherd's rod he becomes a serpent, he excites
all the hostile craft and power of the Egyptians.
Pharaoh especially appears in the whole process
also as a serpent-like liar. But as to the ser-
pent, it is enough to understand by it the dark,
hostile power of the Egyptians which now at first
frightened him. It is true, the enemy of the
woman's seed, the old serpent, constitutes the
background of the Egyptian hostility ; but here
the symbol of the Egyptian snake kind is suffi-
cient. When Moses, however, seizes the serpent
by the tail, by its weaponless natural part, as is
illustrated in the Egyptian plagues, it becomes a
rod again, and now a divine rod of the shepherd
of the peoplo.
Vers. 6-8. The white leprosy is here meant.
Comp. Lev. xiii. 3. " As to the significance of
this sign, it is quite arbitrary, with Theodoret
and others, down to Kurtz, to understand the
hand to represent the people of Israel ; and still
more arbitrary, with Kurtz, to make the bosom
represent first Egypt, and then Canaan, as the
hiding-place of Israel. If the shepherd's rod
symbolizes Moses' vocation, it is the hand which
bears the rod, and governs. In his bosom the
nttendant carries the babe," etc. (Keil). The
leprosy has been explained, now as signifying
the miserable condition of the Jews, now as the
contagious influence upon them of Egyptian im-
purity. Through the sympathy of his bosom
with the leprosy of his people Moses' hand itself
becomes in his bosom leprous ; but through the
same sympathy his hand becomes clean again.
The actions of his sympathy cause him to ap-
pear as an accomplice in the guilt of Israel; and
he really is not free from guilt ; but the same
actions have a sort of propitiatory power, which
also inures to the benefit of the people. Jeho-
hovah raises the voice of this second, sacerdotal
sign above the voice of the first.
Ver. 9. As the first miraculous sign symbo-
lized a predominantly prophetic action, the se-
cond a sacerdotal, so the third a kingly kind. It
gives him the power to turn into blood the water
of the Nile, which is for Egypt a source of life,
a sort of deity ; i. e., out of the very life-force
to evoke the doom of death. Let us not forget
that a whole succession of Egyptian plagues pro-
ceeds from the first one, the corruption of the
Nile water.
As these miraculous signs are throughout sym-
bolical, so, in their first application, they are
probably conditioned by a state of ecstasy. Yet the
first miracle is also literally performed before
Pharaoh, and in its natural basis is allied with
the Egyptian serpent charming. Vid. Hengst.
[Egypt and the Books of Moses, p. 100 sqq.].
The third sign, however, is expanded in the
result into the transformation of the water of the
Nile into blood. This, too, has its connection
with Egypt ; therefore there must doubtless have
been some mysterious fact involved in the second
sign, inasmuch moreover as the text reports that
Moses did the signs before the people, and thus
authenticated his mission before them (iv. 30,
31), although indeed in iv. 17 the signs seem to
be reduced to signs done with the staff.
Vers. 10-12. There were wanted no more
signs, but, as Moses' modesty led him to feel,
more oratorical ability. How could Moses have
exercised his slow tongue in his long isolation in
the desert, associating with few men, and those
who could but little understand him ? This dif-
ficulty Jehovah also regards. He will impart to
him the divine eloquence, which from that time
through the history of the whole kingdom of God
remains different from that of the natural man.
He ordained for him his peculiar organs, and
the organic defect of a heavy tongue, as all or-
gans and organic defects in general, and will
know how to make of his tongue his divine or-
gan, as the history of the kingdom of God has so
richly proved.
Vers. 13, 14. It cannot be said (with Keil)
that now the secret depth of his heart becomes
open, in the sense that he will not undertake the
mission. If this were the case, Jehovah would
no longer deal with him. But the last sigh of
his ill-humor, of his despondency, finds vent in
these words, which are indeed sinful enough to
excite the anger of Jehovah, and so also to make
him feel as if death were about to overtake him.
We are reminded here of similar utterances of
Isaiah (ch. vi.), of Jeremiah, (oh. i.), of the de-
tention of Calvin in Geneva by the adjurations
of Farel, and similar scenes. The anger of Je-
hovah is not of a sort which leads him to break
with Moses : and in the further expression of it
it appears that the hesitation on account of the
slow tongue is still not yet overcome. — Is not
Aaron thy brother ? — "The Levite" means
probably a genuine Levite, a model of a Levite,
more than Moses.* With the cautious genius a
more lively talent was to be associated. Also he
seems, in reference to the affairs of the Israel-
ites, to be more prompt than Moses ; for he is
already on the way to look for Moses (doubtless
in consequence of divine instigation). Vid. ver.
27, where the sense is pluperfect. Moses, then,
has two things to encourage him : he is to have
a spokesman, and the spokesman is already
coming in the form of his own brother. For a
similar mysterious connection of spirits, vid,
Acts X.
Vers. 15, 16. The fixing of the relation be-
tween Moses and God, and between Moses and
Aaron, must have entirely quieted the doubter.
The relation between Moses and Aaron is to be
analogous to that between God and his prophet.
This assignment does not favor the notion of a
literal verbal inspiration, but all the more de-
cidedly that of a real one. It accords with the
spirit of Judaistic caution, when the Targums
tone down D'ilSx'? into S^S "for a master
or teacher. "!•
* [Oq this point comp. nnder " Textual and Grammatical."
— Te.I-
t [Ihe A. V. also softens the expr^ sslon by using the phrase
CHAP. III. 1— IV. 81.
13
Ver. 17. And this atafi. — Out of the rnstio
shepherd's staff was to be made a divine shep-
herd's staff, the symbolic organ of the divine
signs. This ordinance, too, must have elevated
his soul. Here there was to be no occasion to
say, " gentle staff, would I had ne'er exchanged
thee for the sword I"
Ver. 18. This request for a leave of absence is
truthful, but does not express the whole truth.
This Jethro could not have borne. His brethren
are the Israelites, and his investigating whether
they are yet alive has a higher significance.
Ver. 19. AH the men are dead. — This dis-
closure is introduced with eminent fitness.
Among the motives which made Moses willing to
undertake the mission, this assurance should not
be one. He had first to form his resolution at
the risk of finding them still living. Moreover,
he has on account of these men at least expressed
no hesitation.
Vers. 20-26. What is here related belongs to
Moses' journey from Jethro's residence to the
Mount Horeb, i. c, from the south-eastern part
of the desert.
Ver. 20. His sons. — Only the one, Gershom,
has been named, and that because his name
served to express Moses' feeling of expatriation
in Midian. The other, Eliezer, is named after-
wards (xviii. 3, 4). But his name is introduced
here by the Vulgate (according to some MS3.,
by the LXX.), and by Luther. Moses went on
foot by the side of those riding on asses, but
bears the staff of God in his hand. " Poor as
his outward appearance is, yet he has in his band
the staff before which Pharaoh's pride and all his
power must bow " [Keil].
Ver. 21. On the way from Midian to Horeb,
towards Egypt, Jehovah repeats and expands the
first commission, as it was in accordance with
Moses' disposition to become absorbed in medi-
tations on his vocation. All the '«7onders. —
D'naan-Sa. The repara, or the terrible signs
vthich are committed to him constitute a whole ;
and accordingly he is to unfold the whole series
in order (on miracles vid. the Comm. on Matt., p.
153). And why ? Because this is made neces-
sary in order to meet the successive displays of
obduracy with which Pharaoh is to resist these
terrific signs. But, that he may not on this ac-
count become discouraged in his work, he is told
thus early that God himself will harden the
heart of Pharaoh with his judgments, for the
purpose of bringing about the final glorious issue
( Vid. the Comm. on Bom., ch. ix.). The three
terms expressive of hardening, ptn, to make firm
(ver. 21), riiyp, to make hard (vii. 8), and 133,
to make heavy or blunt (x. 1), denote a gradual
progress. The first term occurs, it is true, as
the designation of the fundamental notion, when
the hardening has an entirely new beginning,
and a new scope (xiv. 4; xiv. 17). It is rightly
** instead ofi" whereas the Tlebrew would more exactly be
rendered, " He shall be a mouth to thee, and tliou shall be a
God to him." We have here languasn similar lo, and illus-
trated by, that in vii. 1, " See, I have madu thee a God to Pha-
raoh; and Aaron thy brother shall bu thy prophet." As the
prophet (irpoifi^Ti)! one who speaks /or another) is the spokes-
man (mouth) of God, so Aaron is to receive and communicate
messages from Hoses. — TE.j.
brought forward as a significant circumstance by
Hengstenberg, Keil, and others, that the harden-
ing of Pharaoh's heart is ten times ascribed to
God, and ten times to himself. Pharaoh's self-
determination has the priority throughout. The
hardening influence of God presupposes the self-
obduration of the sinner. But God hardens him
who thus hardens himself, by furthering the pro-
cess of self-obduration through the same influ-
ences which would awaken a pious spirit. This
he does as an act not mei^ely of permission, but
of judicial sovereignty. Vid. Keil, p. 458 sqq.
Ver. 23. Israel is my son, my first-born.
Comp. Deut. xiv. 1, 2 ; Hos. xl. 1. The doctrine
of the Son of God here first appears in its typi-
cal germinal form. Keil makes the choosing of
Israel begin with Abraham, and excludes from it
the fact of creation,* as well as the spiritual
generation, so that there remains only an elec-
tion of unconditional adoption and of subsequent
education, or ethical creation. But tbe applica-
tion of these abstractions to the Christology of
the N. T. would perhaps be difficult. Vid. Com.
on Bom. viii. The expression, first-born son, sug-
gests the future adoption of other nations. I
■will slay thy son. — This threat looks forward
to the close of the Egyptian plagues.
Ver. 24. Seemingly sudden turn of affairs.
Yet it is occasioned by a previous moral incon-
sistency, which now for the first time is brought
close to the prophet's conscience. He who is on
his way to liberate the people of the circumci-
sion, has in Midian even neglected to circumcise
his second son Eliezer. The wrath of God comes
upon him in an attack of mortal weakness, in a
distressing deathly feeling (Ps. xc). Proioably
Zipporah had opposed the circumcision of Eli-
ezer; hence she now interposes to save her hus-
band. She circumcises the child with a stone-
knife (more sacred than a metallic knife, on
account of tradition) ; but she is still unable to
conceal her ill-humor, and lays the foreskin at
his feet with the words: "A bridegroom of blood
art thou to me."f
Ver. 26. Zipporah seems to be surly about
the whole train of circumcisions. Probably
Moses is thereby led to send her with the chil-
dren back to her father to remain during the re-
mainder of his undertaking. For not until hij
return to the peninsula of Sinai does his father-
in-law bring his family to him.
Ver. 27. On the one hand, Moses is freed from
a hindrance, which is only obscurely hinted at,
by the return of Zipporah ; on the other hand, a
great comfort awaits him in the coming of his
brother Aaron to meet him.
* fliange's language is : "Eeil lUssI di', ErwtLWimg IsraeU
mil Abraham anfangea, und sehlieafil von ihr auB auf dv' Tliat^
aache dp.r Sclioj^fung" etc. In translating we have ignored the
preposition " ok/," which, if recognized, would require the
sentence to read: " Keil . . . infers from it [the fhoosiiig of
Israel] the fact of creation," ete. But this would certainly bo
a misrepresentation of Keil, even if it would convny anv cleat
sense in itself. We conclude that "auf" is inserted by a
typographical error.— Ta.].
f [The text and the commentary bo'h leave it somewhat
doubtful whether these words are addressed to Moses or thd
child; but there can be little douit that Moses is the one.
The meaning is that Moses had been well-nigh lost to hir
by disease. She regains him by circumcising th« son ; Imt
the bloody eifect excites her displeasure, and by fhn sav-
ing, "A bridegroom ot blood art thou to me," she means that
she has, as it were, regained him as a husband by tlie blo..J
of her child.— Tr. J.
14 EXODTTS.
"Ver. 29. They went. — This ia the journey
from Horeb to Egypt.
Vers. 30, 31. The elders of the people, after
hearing Aaron's message, and seeing his signs,
believingly accept the fact of Jehovah's oomiris.
sion, and bow adoringly before His messengers.
Thereby the people organized themselTes. They
accepted the vocation of being the people of Je-
hovah.
D— MOSES AND AAEON BEFORE PHARAOH. THE SEEMINGLY MISCHIEVOUS EF-
' FECT OP THEIR DIVINE MESSAGE, AND THE DISCOURAGEMENT OF THE PEOPLE
AND THE MESSENGERS THEMSELVES. GOD REVERSES THIS EFFECT BY SO-
LEMNLY PROMISING DELIVERANCE, REVEALING HIS NAME JEHOVAH, SUM-
MONING THE HEADS OF THE TRIBES TO UNITE WITH MOSES AND AARON,
RAISING MOSES' FAITH ABOVE PHARAOH'S DEFIANCE, AND DECLARING THE
GLORIOUS OBJECT AND ISSUE OP PHARAOH'S OBDURACY.
Chapters V. 1— VII. 7.
1 And afterward Moses and Aaron went in [came] and told [said unto] Pharaoh,
Thus saith Jehovah, God [the God] of Israel, Let my people go, that they may hold a
2 feast imto me in the wilderness. And Pharaoh said, Who is Jehovah, that I should
obey his voice to let Israel go ? I know not Jehovah, neither will I [and moreover
3 I will not] let Israel go. And they said. The God of the Hebrews hath met with
[met] us : let us go, we pray thee, three days' journey into the desert, and sacrifice
unto Jehovah our God, lest he fall upon us with the pestilence, or with the sword.
4 And the king of Egypt said unto them. Wherefore do ye, Moses and Aaron, let
5 [release] the people from their works ? get you unto your burdens [tasks]. And
Pharaoh said, Behold, the people of the land now are many, and ye make them
6 rest from their burdens [tasks]. And Pharaoh commanded the same day the
7 taskmasters of the people, and their officers [overseers], saying, Ye shall no more
give the people straw to make brick, as heretofore ; let them go and gather straw
8 for themselves. And the tale of the bricks which they did make [have been
making] heretofore, ye shall lay upon them ; ye shall not diminish aiigkt thereof:
for they be [are] idle ; therefore they cry, saying. Let us go and sacrifice to our
9 God. Let there more work be laid upon the men [let the work be heavy for' the
men], that they may labor therein [be busied with it] ;° and let them not regard
10 vain [lying] words. And the taskmasters of the people went out, and their officers
[overseers], and they spake unto the people, saying, Thus saith Pharaoh, I will
11 not give you straw. Go ye, get you straw where ye can find it ; yet [for] not aught
12 of your work shall be diminished. So [And] the people were scattered abroad
13 throughout all the land of Egypt to gather stubble instead of [for] straw. And
the taskmasters hasted [urged] them, saying, Fulfil your works, your daily tasks,
14 as when there was straw. And the officers [overseers] of the children of Israel,
which [whom] Pharaoh had set over them, were beaten, and demanded [were
asked]. Wherefore have ye not fulfilled your task in making brick both yesterday
15 and to-day as heretofore? Then [And] the officers [overseers] of the children of
16 Israel came and cried unto Pharaoh, saying. Wherefore dealest thou thus with thy
servants ? There is no straw given unto thy servants, and they say unto us. Make
brick ;* and, behold, thy servants are beaten ; but the fault is in thine own people
TEXTUAL AND QEAMMATICAI,.
1 [Ver. 3. This expression is the same as the one in ill. 18 (on which see the note), except that here we have NIpJ,
Instead of H^^pJ* But the interchange of these forms is so fV-equent that it is most natural to understand the two words
tI: ■
as equivalent in sense. — Tr.]
s [Ver. 9. Literally "upon," the worlt being represented as a burden imposed upon the Israelites. Tr.J
2 [Ver. 9, Literally, " do in it," i. e. have enough to do in the work given, — Tr.J
* [Ver. 10. If we retain the order of the words as thf^y stand in the original, we got a much more forcible translation
of the first part of this verse: "Straw, none is given to thy servants; and * Brick,' they say to us, 'matLe ye.' " This bringa
out lorcibly the antithesis between " straw " and " brick.' —TB.]
CHAP. V. 1— Vn. 7. 15
17 [thy people are in fault]. But he said, Ye are idle, ye are idle [Idle are ye, idle] ;
18 therefore ye say, Let us go and do sacrifice [and sacrifice] to Jehovah. Go there-
fore now [And now go], and work ; for [and] there shall no straw be given you ;
19 yet shall ye [and ye shall] deliver the tale of bricks. And the officers [overseers]
of the children of Israel did see that they were in [saw themselves in] evil case
[trouble], after it was said, Ye shall not minish [diminish] aught from your bricks
20 of [bricks,] your daily task. And they met Moses and Aaron, who stood in the
21 way [who were standing to meet them], as they came forth from Pharaoh : And
they said unto them, Jehovah look upon you, and judge ; because ye have made
our savor to be abhorred in the eyes of Pharaoh, and in the eyes of his servants,
22 to put a sword in their hand to slay us. And Moses returned unto Jehovah, and
said, Lord, wherefore hast thou so evil entreated [thou done evil to] this people ?
why is it that thou hast [why hast thou] sent me ? For since I came to Pharaoh
to speak in thy name, he hath done evil to this people ; neither hast thou delivered
thy people at all.
Chap. VI. 1 Then [And] Jehovah said unto Moses, Now shalt thou see what I will
do to Pharaoh ; for with [through]' a strong hand shall he let them go, and with
2 [through] a strong hand shall he drive them out of his land. And God spake
3 unto Moses, and said unto him, I am Jehovah. And I appeared unto Abraham,
unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of [as]' God Almighty, but by' my name
4 Jehovah was I not known to them. And I have also [I also] established my cove-
nant with them, to give them the land of Canaan, the land of their pilgrimage
5 [sojourn], wherein they were strangers [sojourners]. And I have also heard the
groaning of the children of Israel, whom the Egyptians keep in bondage ; and I
6 have remembered my covenant. Wherefore say unto the children of Israel, I am
Jehovah, and I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and
I will rid [deliver] you out of their bondage, and I will redeem you with a stretched-
7 out arm and with great judgments. And I will lake you to me for a people, and
I will be to you a God ; and ye shall know that I am Jehovah your God, which
8 [who] bringeth you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians. And I will
bring you in unto the land concerning the which [the land which] I did swear to
give it [to give] to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob ; and I will give it you for
9 an heritage [a possession] : I am Jehovah. And Moses spake so unto the children
of Israel : but they hearkened not unto Moses for anguish [vexation] of spirit and
10, 11 for cruel bondage. And Jehovah spake unto Moses, saying. Go in, speak unto
12 Pharaoh, king of Egypt, that he let the children of Israel go out of his land. And
Moses spake before Jehovah, saying, Behold, the children of Israel have not hear-
kened unto me; how then [and how] shall Pharaoh hear me, who am of uncircum-
13 cised lips [uncircumcised of lips] ? And Jehovah spake unto Moses and unto
Aaron, and gave them a charge unto the children of Israel and unto Pharaoh kine;
14 of Egypt, to bring the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt. These be [are}
the heads of their fathers' houses (their ancestral houses) : The sons of Reuben, the
firstborn of Israel ; Hanoch, and Pallu, Hezron, and Carmi; these be [are'] the
15 families of Reuben. And the sons of Simeon ; Jemuel, and Jamin, and Thad, and
Jachin, and Zohar, and Shaul, the son of a [the] Canaanitish woman ; these are
16 the families of Simeon. And these are the names of the sons of Levi according to
their generations [genealogies] ; Gershon, and Kohath, and Merari : and the years
17 of the life of Levi were an [a] hundred thirty and seven years. The sons of Ger-
18 shon : Libni, and Shimi, according to their families. And the sons of Kohath :
Amram, and Izhar, and Hebron, and Uzziel ; and the years of the life of Kohath
19 were an [a] hundred thirty and three years. And the sons of Merari : Mahali,
and Mushi : These are the families of Levi according to their generations [genealo-
20 gies]. And Amram took him Jochebed his father's sister to wife ; and she bare
' [Chap. VI. Ver. 1. I. e. by virtue, or in consequenoe, of Jehovah's strong hanci, not Pharaoh's, aa one might imagine.
— Tr.]
• (V.T. 3. Literally, "lappeared ... in Gori Almighty "—a case of 2 estmtial, meaning "in the capacity of. Vio
Ewald. Am/. Gr. J 299, b ; Ges. Heb. Or. i 154, 3 a (7).— Te.]
f [Ver. 3. Tlie original has no preposition. Literally: "My name Jehovah, I was not known.'' — Ta.]
5
15
EXODUS.
him Aaron and Moses : and the years of the life of Arnram were an [a] hundred
21 and thirty and seven years. And the sons of Izhar : Korah, and Nephez, and
22 Zichri. And the sons of Uzziel: Mishael, and Elzaphan, and Zithri [Sithri].
23 And Aaron took him Elisheba, daughter of Amminadab, sister of Naashon, to
24 wife ; and she bare him Nadab, and Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar. And the sons
of Korah : Assir, and Elkanah, and Abiasaph : these are the families of the Kor-
25 hites. And Eleazar, Aaron's son, took him one of the daughters of Putiel to wife ;
and she bare him Phinehas : these are the heads of the fathers of the Levites
26 according to their families. These are that Aaron and Moses, to whom Jehovah
said, Bring out the children of Israel from the land of Egypt according to their
27 armies [hosts]. These are they which [who] spake unto Pharaoh, king of Egypt,
to bring out the children of Israel from Egypt : these are that Moses and Aaron.
28 And it came to pass on the day when Jehovah spake unto Moses in the land of
29 Egypt, That Jehovah spake unto Moses, saying, I am Jehovah : speak thou unto
30 Pharaoh, king of Egypt, all that I say unto thee. And Moses said before Jehovah,
Behold I am of uncircumcised lips [uncircumcised of lips], and how shall [will]
Pharaoh hearken unto me ?
Chap. VII. 1 And Jehovah said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god [God] to
2 Pharaoh ; and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet. Thou shalt speak all that
I command thee ; and Aaron thy brother shall speak unto Pharaoh that he send
3 the children of Israel out of his land. And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and
4 multiply my signs and my wonders in the land of Egypt. But Pharaoh shall
[will] not hearken unto you, that I may [and I will] lay my hand upon Egypt,
and bring forth mine armies, and my people [my hosts, my people], the children
5 of Israel, out of the land of Egypt by great judgments. And the Egyptians shall
know that I am Jehovah, when I stretch forth mine [my] hand upon Egypt, and
6 bring out the children of Israel from among them. And Moses and Aaron did as
7 [did so ; as] Jehovah commanded them, so did they. And Moses was fourscore
years old, and Aaron fourscore and three years old, when they spake unto Pha-
raoh.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL.
Ver. 1. Afterward Moses and Aaron
went. — Their message is quite in accordance
with the philosophical notions of the ancients,
and especially with the Israelitish faith. Having
accepted the message from Horeb, Israel became
.Tehovah's people, Jehovah Israel's God; and as
Israel's God, He through His ambassadors meets
Pharaoh, and demands that the people be re-
leased, in order to render Him service in a reli-
gious festival. The message accords with the
situation. Jehovah, the God of Israel, may
seem to Pharaoh chiefly the national deity of
Israel; but there is an intimation in the words
that He is also the Lord of Pharaoh, of Egypt,
and of its worship. Under the petition for a
furlough lurks the command to set free ; under
the recognition of the power of Pharaoh over
the people, the declaration that Israel is Jeho-
vah's free people ; under the duty of celebrating
a feast of Jehovah in the wilderness, the thought
of separating from Egypt and of celebrating the
Exodus. The words seemed like a petition
which had an echo like a thunder tone. Per-
haps the instinct of the tyrant detected some-
thing of this thunder-tone. But even if not, the
modest petition was enough to enrage him.
Ver. 2. Who is Jehovah ? — As the heathen
had the notion that the gods governed territo-
rially, the Jews seemed to fall under the domi-
nion of the Egyptian gods. They had no land,
had moreover in Pharaoh's eyes no right to be
called a nation ; therefore, even if they had a
deity, it must have been, in his opinion, an
anonymous one. This seemed to him to be
proved by the new name, Jehovah (which there-
fore could not have been of Egyptian origin).
But even disregard of a known foreign deity
was impiety ; still more, disregard of the un-
known God who, as such, was the very object
towards which all his higher aspirations and
conscientious compunctions pointed.* Thus his
obduracy began with an act of impiety, which
was at the same time inhumanity, inasmuch as
he denied to the people freedom of worship.
He was the prototype of all religious tyrants.
Vei>. 3. He is glorified by us. — [This ia
Lange's translation of ^y/J^ K'\py].f The cor-
* [Thl8 is putting a rather fine point on Pbarnoh'a wick-
edness. A bad man cann<^t, as bucm, bo required to hava
aspirations towards anv hitli^rto unknown god of whom he
may chance to hear, and to have such aspirations just 6e-
cattse he has never before heard of him. It is enough to say
that, (IS a polytheist, he ought to have respected the religion
of the Hebrews.— Tr.]
t [See under " Textual and Grammatical." It is tnie that
iT^ p J would he the usual form for the meaning " has met;"
but on the other hand it is certain that Nip sometimes is
— mpi and the analogy ofiii. 18 points almost unmistakably
to such a use. Moreover, even if this were not the case, it is
hard to see how the Hebixw can be rendered : " He is glori-
fied by us." For NTpJ does not mean "is glorified," and
^ybj? does not mean " by ns." If the verb is to be taken
in its ordinary sense, the whole expression would read:
•He is called upon ns," i. e. we bnar his name, though evei
this would b - only imperfectly expressed. — Ts ]
CHAP. V. 1— vn. 7.
17
rectiou: "He hath met us" (mp), weakens
the force of a siguitioaiit word. They appeal to
the fact that Jehovah from of old has been their
fathers' God ; and also in their calling them-
selves Hebrews is disclosed the recollection of
ancient dignities and the love of freedom grow-
ing out of it. — Three days' journey. — Keil
says: "In Egypt offerings may be made to the
gods of Egypt, but not to the God of the He-
brews." but see viii. 26. In the "three days'
journey " also is expressed the hope of freedom.
— With the pestilence. — A reference to the
power of Jehovah, as able to inflict pestilence
and war, and to His jealousy, as able so severely
to punish the neglect of the worship due Him.
2Iat without truth, but also not without subtile-
neas, did they say, "lest He fall upon us;" in
the background was the thought: "lest He fall
upon thee." Clericus remarks that, according
to the belief of the heathen, the gods punish the
neglect of their worship.
Yer. 4. Wherefore, Moses and Aaron. —
He thus declares their allegation about a mes-
sage from Jehovah to be fictitious. He conceives
himself to have to do only with two serfs. —
Release the people. — And so introduce an-
archy and barbarism. The same objection has
been made against propositioos to introduce
freedom of evangelical religion. — Get you to
your burdens. — To all the other traits of the
tyrant this trait of ignorance must also be added.
As he thinks that Moses and Aaron belong
among the serfs, so he also thinks that servile
labor is the proper employment of the people.
Yer. 6. The people of the land (peasants).
The simple notion of countrymen can, according
to the parallel passages, Jer. lii. 25 and Ezek.
vii. 27, denote neither bondmen nor Egyptian
countrymen as a caste. Although both ideas are
alluded to in the expression, a people of pea-
sants, who as such must be kept at work, espe-
cially as there are becoming too many of tbem.
The perfect sense, " Te have made them rest,"
is to be ascribed to the fancy of the tyrant.
Yer. 6. The same day. — Restlessness of the
persecuting spirit. The D;?a D'fe'jj, or the
" drivers over them," are the Egyptian over-
seers who were appointed over them ; the
D'IBt!', or the scribes belonging to them, were
taken from the Jewish people, officers subordinate
to the others, in themselves leaders of the people.
Yer. 7. " The bricks in the old monuments
of Egypt, also in many pyramids, are not burnt,
but only dried in the sun, as Herodotus (II
136) mentions of a pyramid " (Keil). The bricks
were made firm by means of the chopped straw,
generally gathered from the stubble of the har-
vested fields, which was mixed with the clay.
This too is confirmed by ancient monuments.
Hengstenberg, Egypt, etc., p. 80 sq. — Hereto-
fore. — Heb. : "yesterday and the day before
yesterday." The usual Hebrew method of de-
signating past time.
Yer. 9. Regard lying words.— IpEJ n3^ —
Thus he calls the words of Moses concerning
Jehovah's revelation.
Yer. 10. Even the Jewish scribes yield with-
out opposition. They have become slavish tools
of the foreign heathen despotism.
Yer. 16. Thy people is in fault {or sin-
neth). — According to Knobel, the phrase "thy
people " refers to Israel ; according to Keil, to
the Egyptians. The latter view is preferable;
it is an indirect complaint concerning the con-
duct of the king himself, against whom they do
not dare to make direct reproaches. " nXDFI
is a rare feminine form for nSDn fsee on Gen.
T : T ^
xxxiii. 11) and D£ is construed as feminine, as
in Judg. xviii. 7; Jer. viii. 5" (Keil).*
Yer. tl. Ye have made our savor to be
abhorred (Heb. to stink) in the eyes. — The
strong figurativeness of the expression is seen
in the incongruity between odor and eyes. The
meaning is : ye have brought us into ill-repute.
Yer. 22. Augustine's interpretation : Hsdc non
contumacix verba sunt, vtl indignationis sed inquui-
tionis et orationis, is not a sufficient explanation
of the mood in which Moses speaks. It is the
mark of the genuineness of the personal relation
between the believers and Jehovah, that they
may give expression even to their vexation in
view of Jehovah's unsearchable dealings. Ex-
pressions of this sort run through the book of
Job, the Psalms, and the Prophets, and over
into the New Testament, and prove that the ideal
religion is not that in which souls stand related
to God as selfless creatures to an absolute des-
tiny.
Chap. YI. 1-3. Knobel finds here a new ac-
count of the call of Moses, and that, by the Elo-
hist. A correct understanding of the connec-
tion destroys this hypothesis. Moses is in need
of new encouragement. Therefore Jehovah, first,
repeats His promise, by vigorous measures to
compel Pharaoh to release Israel, in a stronger
form (comp. iii. 19; iv. 21); and then follows
the declaration that this result is pledged in the
name Jehovah, that the name Jehovah, in its
significance as the source of promise, surpasses
even the name God Almighty. If the fathers, in
the experience of His miraculous help, have be-
come acquainted with Him as God Almighty,
they are now to get a true knowledge of Him as
the God of helpful covenant faithfulness. This
is the reason why he recurs to the name Jeho-
hovah. Comp. Keil, p. 467. f
* [The opinion of Knobel, here rejected, is held also by
Glair-i, Arnheim, FUrst and othera. The meaning, according
to this, id: "Thy people (i. e, the Israelites) are treated as if
guilty." The LXX. understood nNIDH ^s «< ^erb in the
second person, and r-'n ered afiiK^trei? rov ^adr aov, " thou
doest wrong to thy people.*' Still other explanations have
been r sorted to ; but the one given by Lange is the most
natural, and is quite satisfactory. — Ta.J
f [Notice shouH be taken of the fact that from ver. 3 it
has been inferred by many that the name Jehovah had
actually (or, at least, in the opinion of the writer of this paB-
sage) never been known or used before this time; conse-
quently that wherever the name occurs in Genesis or Ex. i.-
T,, it is a proof fhat the passage containing it was written
after the time here iodlcated. This is hn important element
in the theories concerning the authorship of the Pentateuch.
Certainly if we press the literal meaning of the last clause
of ver. 3, it wuuld seem to follow th-it the name Jehovah
(Tahveh) was now for the first- time made known. But, to
say nothing of the fact that the name Jehovah is not only
familiarly used by the author of the book of Genesis, but is
also put into the mouths of the earliest T'atrinrchs (all which
might be regarded as a proleptic use of the word, or a careless
anachronism), it is perhtipa sufflcient to reply, that such an
inference from the papsage liefore us betrays a very superfi-
cial view of the siynifirance of the word " natue," as used in
the Bible, and especially in the Hebrew Scriptures. The
natne of a person was co ceived as repreaen io^ his character^
18
EXODUS.
Ver. 4. Tid. tbe promises, Gen. xvii. 7, 8 ;
xxvi. 3 ; XXXV. 11. 1'2.
Ver. 6. I am Jehovah. With this name He
begins and ends (ver. 8) His promise. With the
name Jehovah, then. He pledges Himself to the
threefold promise: (1) To deliver the people
from bondage ; (2) to adopt them as His people ;
(3) to lead them to Canaan, their future posses-
sion. With a stretched-out arm. A stronger
expression than nj:3m T. Comp. Deut. iv. 34 ;
T. 15 ; vii. 19.
Ver, 9. For vexation of spirit. Gesenma :
Impatience. Keil: Shortness of breath, i. e.,
anguish, distress.
Vers. 10, 11. While Moaes' courage quite gives
vpay, Jehovah intensifies the language descrip-
tive of his mission.
Ver. 12. On the other hand, Moses intensifies
the expression with which he made (iv. 10) his
want of eloquence an excuse for declining the
commission. — Of uncircumcised lips. Since
circumcision was symbolic of renewal or regene-
ration, this expression involved a new phase of
thought. If he was of uncircumcised or unclean
lips (lua. vi. 5), then even Aaron's eloquence
could not help him. because in that case Moses
could not transmit in its purity the pure word
of God. In his strict conscientiousness he sin-
cerely assumes that there must be a moral hin-
derance in his manner of speaking itself.
Ver. 13. This time Jehovah answers with an
express command to Moses and Aaron together,
and to the children of Israel and Pharaoh toge-
ther. This comprehensive command alone can
beat down Moses' last feeling of hesitation.
Vers. 14-27. But as a sign that the mission of
Moses is now determined, that Moses and Aaron,
therefore, are constituted these prominent men
of God, their genealogy is now inserted, the form
of which shows that it is to be regarded as an
extract from a genealogy of the twelve tribes,
since the genealogy begins with Eeuben, but does
not go beyond Levi.
Ver. 14. ni^N-iTa. "Father-houses, not fa-
ther-house" [Keil]. The compound form has
becnme a simple word. See Keil, p. 469. The
father-houses are the ramifications of the tribes.
The tribes bramch offfirat into families, or clans,
or heads of the father-houses ; these again branch
ofiF into the father-houses themselves. The Am-
ram of ver. 20 is to be distinguished from the
Amram of ver. 18. Seethe proof of this in Tiele,
Ohronologie des A. T; Keil, p. 469.* The text,
his personality. When .Tacoh's name was changed, it was
sai'i : " Thy name shall be c;Llled no more Jacob, but Israel ;"
anflth^' re;i3on given tor the chanjre is that lie has now
entered into a new relatiou with God. Yet, notwithstanding
ttie new appellation, the na-ne Jaco'i continued to be n=:e'l,
and even more frequently than Israel. In the case before
us, then, the statement respe'.ting the names amounts sim-
ply to this, that God had not been luidersttnd in the character
lepresented by the name Jehovah. Tlie use of the phrase
"my name" instead of "(ftc name,"' itself points to tiie pre-
vious use of the name. — Tr.]
* [The proof, as given by Tiele, is this: "According to
Num. iii. 27 sq., the Kohatbitea were divided (at the time of
to be sure, does not clearly indicate the distinc-
tion. " The enumeration of only four genera-
tions— Levi, Kohath, Amram, Moses— points un-
mistakably to Gen. XT. 16 " (Keil).
Ver. 20. His father's sister — Tliat was be-
fore the giving of the law in Lev. xviii. 12. The
LXX. and Vulg. understand the word Xrm of
the daughter of Ihe father's brother. According
(o ch. vii. 7, Aaron was three years older than
Moses; that Miriam was older than either is
seen from the history.
Ver. 23. Aaron's wife was from the tribe of
Judah. Vid. Num. ii. 3.
Ver. 25. HtaS ''t^NI. Abbreviation of 'tyST
T " T " T
nUX jTO ["heads of the father-houses"].
Ver. 26. These axe that Aaron and
Moses. — Thus the reason is given for inserting
this piece of genealogy in this place.
Ver. 28. Resumption of the narrative inter-
rupted at ver. 12. What is there said is here
and afterward repeated more fully. In the
land of Egypt. — This addition is not a sign of
another account, but only gives emphasis to the
fact that Jehovah represented Himself in the ver /
midst of Egypt as the Lord of the country, and
gave Mces, for the furtherance of his aim, a
sort of divine dominion, namely, a theocratic
dominion over Pharaoh.
Chap. VII. 1. What Moses at first was to be
for Aaron as the inspiring Spirit of God, that he
is now to be for Aarou as representative of God
in His almighty miraculous sway. So far Aaron's
position also is raised. It must not be overlooked
that, with this word of divine revelation, Moses'
growing feeling of lofty confidence and assunince
of victory corresponds ; it was developed in
Egypt itself, and from out of his feeling of in-
ability. " For Aaron Moses is God as the re-
vealer, for Pharaoh as the executor, of the divine
will" (Keil).
Ver. 2. That he send. — Keil's translation,
"and so he will let go," does not accord with
the following verse.
Ver. 4. My hosts. — Israel becomes a host
of Jehovah. Vid. xiii. 18, and the book of Num-
bers. This is the first definite germ of the later
name, God, or Jehovah, of hosts; although the
name in that form chiefly refers to heavenly
hosts; these under another name have been
mentioned in Gen. xxxii. 2.
Moses) into the fonr branches : Amramites, Izharites, He-
hronitps, and Uzzielites ; tuese together constituted 8,6un
men and boys (women and girls not being reckoned). Of
these the Amramites would include about one fourth, or
2,150. Moses himself, according to Ex, xviii. 3, 4, had only
tw. I sons. If, therefore, Amram, the son of Kohath, the an-
cestor of the Amramites, were identical with Amram. the
father of Moses, then Moses must have had 2,147 brothers
and brothers' sons (the brothers' daughters, the sisters aud
sisters' children not being reckoned). But this being quite
an impossible supposition, it must he conceded that it is de-
monstrated that Amram the son of Kohath is not Moses' f*.
th-r, but that I'Ptweon the former and his descendant of the
same name an indefinitely long list of eenerations haa fallen
out."— Tk.].
CHAP. VII. 8-25. 19
SECOND SECTION.
The miracles of Mosea, or the result of the nine Egyptian Plagues, preliminary to
the last. Pharaoh's alternate repentance and obduracy.
Chaps. VII. 8— X. 29.
A.— MOSES' MIKACULOUS EOD AND THE EGYPTIAN MAGICIANS. THE FIRST PLAGUE
INFLICTED WITH THE ROD: CHANGE OF THE WATER INTO BLOOD.
Chaptee VII. 8-25.
8, 9 And Jehovah spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying. When Pharaoh shall
speak unto you, saying, Shew a miracle for you [yourselves] : then thou shalt say
uuto Aaron, Take thy rod, and cast it before Pharaoh, and it shall become [let it
10 become] a serpent. And Moses and Aaron went in unto Pharaoh, and they did so
as Jehoff'ah had commanded: and Aaron cast down his rod before Pharaoh, and
11 before his servants, and it became a serpent. Then [And] Pharaoh also called the
wise men and the sorcerers : now [and] the magicians of Egypt, they also did in
12 like manner with their enchantments [secret arts]. For [And] they cast down
every man his rod, and they became serpents ; but Aaron's rod swallowed up their
13 rods. And he hardened Pharaoh's heart [Pharaoh's heart was hardened]', that
14 [and] he hearkened not unto them, as Jehovah had said. And Jehovah said unto
15 Moses, Pharaoh's heart is hardened [hard]^ he refuseth to let the people go. Get
thee unto Pharaoh in the morning ; lo, he goeth out unto the water ; and thou shalt
stand by the river's brink against he come [to meet him]; and the rod which was
16 turned to a serpent shalt thou take in thine [thy] hand. And thou shalt say unto
him, Jehovah, God [the God] of the Hebrews hath sent me unto thee, saying, Let
my people go, that they may serve me in the wilderness: and, behold, hitherto
17 thou wouldest not hear [hast not heard, i. e., obeyed]. Thus saith Jehovah, In this
thou shalt know that I am Jehovah : behold, I will smite with the rod that is in
mine [my] hand upon the waters which are in the river, and they shall be turned
18 to blood. And the fish that is in the river shall die, and the river shall stink ; and
19 the Egyptians shall loathe to drink of [drink] the water of [from] the river. Aud
Jehovah spake [said] unto Moses, Say unto Aaron, Take thy rod, and stretch out
thine [thy] hand upon the waters of Egypt, upon their streams, upon their
rivers [canals],' upon their ponds, and upon all their pools of water, that they may
become blood ; and that there may [and there shall] be blood throughout all the
20 land of Egypt, both in vessek of -wood, and in vessels of stane. And Moses and
Aaron did so, as Jehovah commanded ; and he lifted up the rod, and smote the
waters that were in the river, in the sight of Pharaoh, and in the sight of his ser-
21 vants ; and all the waters that were in the river were turned to blood. And the
fish that was in the river died ; and the river stank ; and the Egyptians could not
drink of [drink] the water of [from] the river ; and there was blood throughout
22 all the land of Egypt. And the magicians of Egypt did so with their enchant-
ments [secret arts] : and Pharaoh's heart was hardened, neither did he [and he did
23 not] hearken unto them; as Jehovah had said. And Pharaoh turned and went
TEXTUAL AND GEAMMATICAL.
> [Ver. 13. The same form here, pTp', as in ^er. 22, where the A. V. correctly renders it intransitively. Literally,
" was firm, or strong," i. «., unyielding, nnimpresBible.— Th.J. j ,.■ t m „„ „..h ™.„»„f
» [Verl 14. The Hebrew has here I different word, 133. Literally, ' heavy "-the same word which Moses used reapeotr
'°^ s'[Ve° W°'Dnni«^!piiral of the word which is used almost exclusively of the Nile. Here probably it signifies th«
artiflclal canals leading from the Nile —Tn.]. ^, ^ ^ _ii, nv.i
* [Ver. 23. Or, according to the English idiom : " nor did he lay even this to heart. — TB.J.
20
EXODUS.
into his house, neither did he [and he did not] set his heart to this also [even t(
24 this].* And all the Egyptians digged round about the river for water to drink
25 for they could not drink of the water of the rive^. And seven days were fulfilled,
after that Jehovah had smitten the river.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL.
On the whole series of Egyptian plagues, see
the Introduction. But we reckon not nine
plagues (with Keil), but ten, as a complete num-
ber symbolizing the history of the visitation.
Moses' miraculous rod forms the prologue to it ;
the destruction of Pharaoh and his host in the
Red Sea, the epilogue.
1. Moses' miraculous rod in contest with the
divining rods of the Egyptian wise men, vers. 8-] 3.
Vers. 8, 9. Shew a miracle for yourselves.
— It is a general assumption, shared also by the
Egyptians, that an ambassador of God must at-
test his mission by styns, miraculous signs. Ta e
thy rod. — Aaron's rod is Mosea' rod, whii h,
however, passes over into his hand, as Mosjs'
word into his mouth. — A serpent. The He-
brew is ['SO. LXX. Sp&Kuv. According to Keil
the expression is selected with reference to the
Egyptian snake-charmers. He says, " Comp.
Bochart, Hieroz. III., p. 162 sqq., ed. Rosenmiil-
ler; and Hengstenberg, Egypt and the Books, etc.,
p. 100 sqq. Probably the Israelites in Egypt
designated by t'^J^i which occurs in Deut. xxxii.
33; Ps. xci. 13, in parallelism with |n3, the snake
with which the Egyptian serpent-charmers chiefly
carry on their business, the Hayeh of the Arabs."
Of the so-called Psylli it is only known that they
are able to put serpents into a rigid state, and in
this sense to transform them into sticks. This
then is the natural fact in relation and opposi-
tion to which the sign, by which Moses attested
his mission, stands. The relation between the
mysterious miracle of Moses and the symbolical
development of it is rather difficult to define.
Ver. 11. " These sorcerers (D'SMD), whom
the Apostle Paul, according to the Jewish legend,
names Jannes and Jambres (2 Tim. iii. 8), were
not common jugglers, but D'pjn, wise men, . . .
and D'SP'in Ispoypa/i/iaTel;, belonging to the
caste of priests. Gen. xli. 8" (Keil).
Vers. 12, 18. Verse 13 does not stand in di-
rect relation to the close of ver. 12. The hard-
ening of Pharaoh cannot well relate to the fact
that Aaron's rod swallowed up the rods of the
sorcerers, although this is probably to be under-
stood metaphorically, but to the fact that the
Egyptian sorcerers do the same thing as Aaron
does. The essential difference between the acts
of God and the demoniacal false miracles is not
obvious to the world and the worldly tyrants.
2. The transformation of the water of the Nile
into blood, vers. 14-25.
Ver. 16. Lo, he goeth out unto the wa-
ter. To worship the Nile.
Ver. 17. " The transformation of the water
into blood is, according to Joel iii. 4 [ii. 31],
according to which the moon is changed into
blood, to be conceived as a blood-red coloring by
which it acquired the appearance of blood (2
Kings iii. 21), not as a chemical transformation
into real blood. According to the reports of
many travellers, the Nile water, when lowest,
changes its color, becomes greenish and almost
unJrinkable, whereas, when rising, it becomes
red, of an ochre hue, and then begins to be more
wholesome. The causes of this change have not
yet been properly investigated" (Keil). Two
causes are alleged: the red earth in Sennaar, or,
according to Ehrenberg, microscopic infusoria.
Even the Rhine furnishes a feeble analogue. The
heightening of the natural event into a miracu-
lous one lies in the prediction of its sudden oc-
currence and in its magnitude, so that the red
Nile water instead of becoming more wholesome
assumes deadly or injurious properties.
Ver. 19. That blood should come into all the
ramifications of the water, even to the stone and
wooden vessels, is evidently the result of the pre-
vious reddening of the Nile. Kurtz exaggerates
the miracle by inverting the order of the red-
dening of the water. His notion is refuted by
Keil, p. 479.*
Ver. 22. How could the Egyptian sorcerers do
the like, when the water had already been all
changed to blood ? Kurtz says, they took well-
water. But see Keil in reply.-j- According to
the scriptural representation of such miracles of
darkness, they knew how, by means of lying
tricks, to produce the appearance of having made
the water. In this case it was not difficult, if
they also used incantations, and Ibe reddening
of the water subsequently increased.
Ver. 26. Seven days were fulfilled. The
duration of the plague. The beginning of the
plague is by many placed in J une or July, ' ' accord-
ing to which view all the plagues up to the killing
of the first-born, which occurred in the night of
the 14th of Abib, ». e., about the middle of April,
must have occurred in the course of about nine
months. Yet this assumption is very insecure,
and only so much is tolerably certain, that the
seventh plague (of the hail) took place in Feb-
ruary (see on ix. 31 sq.) " (Keil). Clearly, how-
ever, the natural basis of the miraculous plagues
is a chain of causes and effects.
* [The point made by Keil is fhnt, according to Kurtz's
theory, the vessola of wood and of stone ou?ht to hare been
mentioned immediately after the " pools of water."— Te.].
.<• ' i;^*" "'^P'^ ™"'° ''y *■*■' (""^ avery pertinentone) is thut
if the Egyptians already had well wnter there would bave
been no need of their digging wells (ver. 24) in order to o'-
tain dnnkable water. Keil understands that the phnises in
ver. 19 are not to be interpreted so strictly as to imply that
absolutely all water, even what had already i een taken from
the JSile before the miracie, was turned intb l,lood. Mnrpliy
and Kalisch prefer to assume that the magicians dug wells,
and practiced their arts on the water drawn from them.— Tb.],
CHAP. VIII. 1-15.
21
B.— THE FROGS.
Chaps. VII. 26— VIII. 11 [in the English Bible, Chap. VIII. 1-15].
26 [1] And Jehovah spake [said] unto Moses, Go unto Pharaoh, and say unto him,
27 [2] Thus saith Jehovah, Let my people go, that they may serve me. And if thou
28 L3] refuse to let them go, behold, I will smite all thy borders' with frogs. And the
river shall bring forth frogs abundantly [swarm with frogs], which [and they]
shall go up and come into thy house, and into thy bedchamber, and upon thy
bed, and into ^he houses of thy servants, aud upon thy people and into thine
29 [4] ovens, and into thy kneading-troughs : And the frogs shall come up both on
thee, and upon thy people, and upon all thy servants.^
Chap. VIII. 1 [5]. And Jehovah spake [said] unto Mi ses. Say unto Aaron, Stretch
forth thine [thy] hand with thy rod ovtr the streams, and over the livers [ca-
nals], and over the ponds, and cause frogs [the frogs] to come up upon the land
2 [6] of Egypt. And Aaron stretched out his hand over the waters of Egypt, and
3 [7] the frogs came up, and covered the land of Egypt. And the magicians did .so
with their enchantments [secret arts], and brought up frogs [the frogs] upon
4 [8] the land of Egypt. Then [And] Pharaoh called for Moses and Aaron, and
said, Intreat Jehovah, that he may take away the frogs from me and from my
people; and I will let the people go, that they may do sacrifice [may sacrifice]
5 [9] unto Jehovah. And Moses said unto Pharaoh, Glory [Have thou honor]
over me :' when [against what time] shall I intreat for thee, and for thy ser-
vants, and for thy people to destroy the frogs from thee and thy houses, that
6 [10] they may remain in the river only? And he said, To-morrow [Against to-
morrow]. And he said, Be it according to thy word ; that thou raayest know
7 [11] that there is none like unto Jehovah our God. And the frogs shall depart
from thee, and from thy houses, aud from thy servants, and from thy people ;
8 [12] they shall remain in the river only. And Moses and Aaron went out trom
Pharaoh, and Moses cried unto Jehovah because of the frogs which he had
9 [13] brought against Pharaoh. And Jehovah did according to the word of Moses :
and the frogs died out of the houses, out of the villages [courts], and out of
10 [14] the fields. And they gathered them together upon heaps [piled them up m
11 [16] heaps] : and the land stank. But when Pharaoh saw that there was respite,*
he hardened* his heart, and hearkened not unto them, as Jehovah had said.
TEXTUAL AND GEAMMATICAL.
1 rVII. 27 (VIII. 2). 'jUi here, aa often, has a wider meaning tliau border ; it is equivalent to onr " territory."— la.].
2 [VII. 29 (VIII. 4). This' sounds more plennastio than the original, where the order of the words ia reversed : " Upon
thee, and upon thy people . . . shall the frogs com« up."— Te.]. , ^. . , ,. ,,, tth, <■
i rVIII. 6 (9). ^^(^i■^^ is variously rendered. Uesenius and JUrst assume a root aistmot from the one the Hithp. ol
which means to 6oa«(, and render it " prescribe," " declare." " Prescribe for me when I shall intreat," ete. The LXX. and
Vule Kive it the same meaning. Othi-rs understand the meaning t" be : " Take to thyselt honor ; forwh. n shall Imtre»r
efc it I will give thee the honor offlxing the time when the plague shall cease. These two explanations yield neatly
the same sense. Others have been resorted to (e. g., " Give glory over me," v. e., I will run the risk of a failure, by allowing
thee to fix the tiffl"), but are less plausible.— Tb.]. ..^„...-i
« rVIII. 11 (16). nniin has the article, and the sentence reads, "saw that the respite (literally, breathing-space)
tt: T_
"""''[VIII.*!! (15)!° 133rn""And he made heavy." Comp. note on vii. 14. The Inf. Abs. is used for the finite verb.
EXEGETICAL AND CEITICAL.
VTI. 26 [VIII. 1] sqq. The second plague;
the frogs. They come up out of the mire of the
Nile when the water falls, especially from the
marshes of the Nile. On the small Nile-frog
called rana Mosaka or NUotica by Seetzen, see
Keil.* How did the natural event become a mi-
racle? (1) By the announcement of the extra-
* [Keil gives no innn is poorly reproduced in the A. V. This verb in the Hithpael la
oJwajB followed by 3 with the name of a jperson. The meaning of it is, " to do one's pleasure with." Except here, and 1
Sam. vi. 6, the phrase is used in a bad sense, e. g^ 1 Sam. xxxi. 4, " lest these uncircumcised come and thrust me through,
and abate me." Oomp. Judg. xix. 25. Here, therefore, the meaning is, " how I did my pleasure with the Egyptians."— Te.].
30
EXODUS.
17 sinned against Jehovah your God, and against you. Now therefore [And now]
forgive, I pray thee, my sin only this once, and entreat Jehovah your God that he
18 may take away from me this death only. And he went out from Pharaoh, and
19 entreated Jehovah. And Jehovah turned a mighty [very] strong west wind, which
[and] took away the locusts, and cast [thrust] them into the Red Sea: there re-
mained not one locust in all the coasts [borders] of Egypt. But Jehovah hard-
ened Pharaoh's heart, so that he would not [and he did not] let the children of
Israel go.
20
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL.
Yer. 1. I have hardened bis heart. — Ac-
cording to shallow rationalistic views, this be-
trays a low state of intelligence; viewed from
the ethical relations of life, it indicates a very
high one. Pharaoh's acts of self-hardening pre-
ceded this ; but after the seventh one, his sen-
tence was determined; the following plagues,
therefore, must complete hia obduracy. Moses
must know this beforehand, in order that he may
not be discouraged respecting his mission. But
that, under divine revelation, he can foreknow
it, is characteristic of the man who, being emi-
nent in religious conscientiousness, has a won-
derfully profound insight into the justice and
judgments of God. The general prediction of
ch. vii. 3-5 is now for the first time completely
fulfilled ; hence it is here repeated.
Ver. 2. That thou mayest tell. — " How Is-
rael related these miraculous signs to children
and children's children, is shown in Ps. IxxWii.
and cv." (Keil).
Ver. 3. To humble thyself. — Jehovah speaks
now in a severer tone. After so many apparent
failures, this is a proof that Moses has his con-
fidence and his word from God. Analogous is
the heathen legend of the Sibyl who, for the
prophetical books twice reduced in number, kept
asking the same price.
Ver. 4. The antithesis is sharp. Similar
forms in ix. 17 and viii. 17 [21]. It is not merely
the antithesis between a divine and a human ac-
tion; the almighty personality of Jehovah con-
fronts the defiant personality of Pharaoh. The
assurance with which the locusts are predicted
for the morrow marks the miracle, as also after-
wards the sudden removal of them at Moses' in-
tercession.
Ver. 5. The face [lit. eye] of the land. —
" This phraseology, peculiar to the Pentateuch,
and occurring elsewhere only ver. 15 and Num.
xxii. 5, 11, rests on the ancient and genuinely
poetic conception, that the earth with its floral
ornamentation looks upon man " (Keil).
Ver. 6. Fill thy houses.— F«. Joel ii. 9.
On locusts finding their way into houses, vid. the
quotations in Keil.
Ver. 7. Pharaoh's servants. — The courtiers
begin to tremble. But they are governed by no
noble motive to intercede for Israel, but by the
fear that by resistance Egypt may go to ruin. —
A snare. — In whose fatal toils they are be-
coming entangled to their destruction.
Ver. 8. For the first time Pharaoh enters upon
negotiations before the plague; yet without con-
sistency. — Who are they? (lit. who and
■who) 'pi 'n. Immediately the timorous policy
of the tyrant withdraws more than half of the
concession.
Ver. 9. To make a festival are needed not only
the whole assembly, old and young, but also the
cattle and possessions in general, on account of
the ofi'erings. Pharaoh suspects that freedom
also is involved in the plan. According to
Keil, the women, who are seemingly omitted, are
designed to be included in the " we." They are
also included in the phrase "young and old."
Ver. 10. The thought, "Jehovah be with you
on your journey, ' is transformed by Pharxoh
into mockery : As little as I will let you go with
your children, so little shall ye go on your jour-
ney, 80 little shall Jehovah be with you. Inas-
much as he has been obliged to refer the pre-
ceding experiences to Jehovah, his audacity here
passes over into blasphemy.
Ver. 11. Go now, ye men. — Q'^^JH. The
expression forms an antithesis to the D'ttf JKH, ia
the use of which the servants proposed the re-
lease of the Israelites in general. But that he
is not even willing to let only the men go is
shown by the fact that the messengers of God
were at once driven out. The expression " ye
men," " ye heroes," may involve a scornful allu-
sion to the power with which they have risen
up against him. Also in the form X3 oS the
irony (according to Keil) is continued. — They
were driven out. — As we should say, they
were turned out of doors. " The restriction of
the right of departure to the men was pure
caprice, inasmuch as according to Herodotus II.
60 the Egyptians also had religious festivals in
which the women were accustomed to go out with
the men " (Keil).
Ver. 12. Stretch out thy hand.— Accord-
ing to ver. 13, with the rod in it. Was it in or-
der that they might rise up like a hostile military
force? More probably the idea is that they are
to rise up in the distance like clouds carried by
the wind. With the wind, brought by it, locusts
are wont to come. Vid. the citations in Keil.
Ver 13. And Jehovah drove.— Jehovah
Himself is the real performer of miracles. When
He seems in His government to follow Moses'
suggestion, while, on the other hand, the action
of Moses is only a symbolical one resting on pro-
phetic foresight, this all signifies that God's do-
minion in nature answers to God's dominion in
His kingdom, therefore, also, in the mind of
Moses. It is a pre-established harmony, in
which the outward things of nature are made
serviceable to the inward necessities of the spi-
ritual life. Vid. Matt, xxviii. 18.— An east
wind, D"1p^-nn. "Not vdm (LXX.), south
wind, as even Bocharl [merozoicon III,, p. 287)
CHAP. X. 21-29.
31
thought. For although the swarms of locusts
come to Egypt generally from Ethiopia or Libya,
yet they are sometimes brought by the east wind
from Arabia, as has been observed, among others,
by Denon, quoted by Heugstenberg, Egypt, etc.,
p. 12.5" (Keil).
Vers. 13—15. Further miraculous features:
(a) that the locusts come from so far (the
wind blew twenty-four hours) ; (6) that they
cover the whole land, whereas they generally
attack only particular regions. Among the va-
rious forms of the preludes of the final judgment,
(blood, fire, war, pestilence, darkness), the
plagues of lo(!U3t^ are also especially prominent.
According to Joel, the fundamental sigaificanco
of them is the incesdant destruction of the flesh
on all sides.*
* [This ia obscnre. It ia true that ttiQ invasioa of the lo-
cnsta is daacribed by Joel as the precuraor of " the d'iy of
Jehovah " (i. 15 ; ii. 1) ; but where or in what sense he ropr -
seats them aa destroying thejlfjih, it is impossible to see. Cer-
tainly if the literal language of Joel la referred to, there ia
nothing of the sort. Aa 1 no more ia there any indication
that Joel means to intimate that locusts symbolize the de-
struction of the fieah, Lan^e moreover leavei us in dou'it
whether be Ujiea the word "fleab " in the literal or figurative
sense. — ^Ta.].
Vers. 16, 17. And Pharaoh called in
haste. — This is his second confession of sin,
more distinct than the first, ix. 27. For (he third
time he implores Moaes' intercession ; viii. 24
(28), ix. 28, and here. His penitence, however,
again exhibits the character of an insincere sub-
mission, attritio; he begs Moses' forgiveness, but
wishes him to intercede with God to avert this
death, this deadly ruin, which he sees in the
plague of locusts. He condemns himself, how-
ever, for what follows, inasmuch as he anks for
exemption only this once.
Ver. 18. Moses' intercession has a twofold sig-
nificance: It is, first, an expression of divine
forbearance; secondly, I he attestation of the
miracle displayed in the plague of locusts.
Ver. 19. The east wind is changed to a west
wind, or, more probably, to a northwest wind.
" That the locusts perish in the sea is variously
attested. Oregatim aublatse vento in maria aut
slagna decidiml , says Pliny" (Keil). For Pha-
raoh the help may have been ominous, 'as he
himself afterwards with his host was to peristi,
like the locusts, in the Red Sea,
I.— THE DARKNESS.
Chap. X. 21-29.
21 And Jehovah said unto Moses, Stretch out thine [thy] hand toward heaven,
that there may be darkness over i;he laud of Egypt, even darkness which may be
22 felt. And Moses stretched forth his hand toward heaven ; and there was a thick
23 darkness in all the land of Egypt three days. They saw not one another,
neither rose any from his place for three days: but all the children of Israel had
24 light in their dwellings. And Pharaoh called unto Moses, and said. Go ye, serve
Jehovah ; only let your flocks and your herds be stayed [kept back] ; let your
25 little ones also [also your little oaes shall] go with you. And Moses said. Thou
must give us also [Thou shalt also put into our hands] sacrifices and burnt-offer-
26 ings, that we may sacrifice unto Jehovah our God. Our cattle also shall go with
us; there shall not an [a] hoof be left behind; for thereof [from them] must we
[shall we] take to serve Jehovah our God ; and we know not with what we muft
27 serve Jehovah until we come thither. But Jehovah hardened Pharaoh's hearr,
28 and he would not let them go. And Pharaoh said unto him, Get thee from me,
take heed to thyself, see my face no more ; for in that [the] day thou seest my face
29 thou shalt die. And Moses said, Thou hast Siioken well ; I will see thy face again
no more.
EXEQETICAL AND CRITICAL.
Vers. 21-2.3. The natural phenomenon under-
lying this mi»!ioulous infliction of Egyptian dark-
ness is generally taken to be the Chamsin, the
scorching hot south wind (in Italy the Sirocco,
in Switzerland the Fohn^, "referred to appa-
rently by the LXX., where they render "'^K'n
'T':??? ^y "tfirof Kol yv6(tioc, nal iJiieXXa. This
wind, which in Egypt is accustomed to blow be-
fore and after the vernal equinox, and generally
lasts two or three days, usually rises very sud-
denly and fills the air with such a mass of fine
dust and coarser sand, that the sun ceases to
shine, the sky is covered with a thick veil, and
the obscuration becomes so nocturnal that the
darkness of the thickest fog of our late autumn
32
EXODUS.
or wiater days is not to be compared with it (vid,
Schubert's Reise, II., p. 409)." (Keil). See fur-
ther citations in Keil. Hengstenberg interprets
the darkness in Egypt as the image of the divine
anger, the light in Goshen as image of the divine
grace. But the preceding plagues also were at
least signs of the divine anger. The judgment
of darkness doubtless expresses more specifically
the fact, that the wisdom of Egypt has become
transformed into a spiritual night, in which the
night of death soon to follow is pre-announoed,
whereas the light in Goshen in contrast with it
may signify the dawn of a higher wisdom which
finally brings freedom. The miracalousness of
it consisted, first, in its following the symbolic
action and prediction of Moses ; secondly, in
its intensity and the exceptional condition of
Goshen. — In their d^vellings. — Keil correctly
refers this, in opposition to Kurtz, to the coun-
try ; whereas the latter understands that the
Egyptians were even unable to illumine their
houses. But one might as readily infer that
the Israelites obtained light only by artificial
means. — Darkness ■which may be felt. —
Beautiful hyperbolic expression ; yet the dust
brought by the tornado could indeed be felt by
the hand.
Ver. 24. Pharaoh, frightened, makes a new
concession, but again with a shrewd reservation.
The concession consists, strictly speaking, of two
parts, and the reservation is very lurlively in-
serted between the two. — Go ye, he says at fii-st,
this time not only the strong men ; and at last,
as if with the intention of entrapping Moses by
the excitement of his emotions: Also your
little ones shall go with you. — Nevertheless
all their cattle were to be left in the hands of the
Egyptians as a pledge of their return. "JX\
aistatur, be stopped, kept in certain places under
the charge of the Egyptians as a pledge of your
return" (Keil).
Ver. 25. Moses invalidates Pharaoh's demand
by reference to the religious duty of his people.
They must make an offering, must therefore have
their cattle with them. But, together with the
claims of religious feeling, those of justice are
also insisted on, in the utterance which has even
become parabolical: " There shall not a hoof be
left behind." This bold utterance, on the other
hand, is softened by the declaration that they
did not know what offerings (and how many)
they would have to bring to Jehovah.
Ver. 28. The negotiation becomes more and
more unequivocal. The one intention has strug-
gled with the other in carefully chosen terms up
to the point of decision. The tyrant's' defiance
now flames up, and Moses, with a calm conscious-
ness of superiority, tinged with irony, assents to
the decree that he shall not again, on penalty of
death, appear before Pharaoh. It is an indirect
announcement of the last plague. But its first
consequence win oe that Pharaoh must take back
his threat, xii. 31.
THIRD SECTION.
Announcement of the last or tenth plague, the immediate miraculous interposition
of Ood. The commands respecting the indemnification of the Israelites, and
the Pacsover, as the festival preliminary to their deliverance. The midnight
of terror and of the festival of deliverance. The release and the exodus. The
legal consequences of the liberation : the Passover, the consecration of the
first-born, the feast of unleavened bread. Chaps. XI. 1 — XIII. 16.
A.— ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE LAST PLAGUE.
Chapter XI. 1-10.
1 And Jehovah said unto Moses, Yet will I bring one' plague more [One more
plague will I bring] upon Pharaoh and upon Egypt ; afterwards he will let you go
hence: when he shall let you go, he shall [will] surely thrust you out hence alto-
2 gether. Speak now in the ears of the people, and let every man borrow [ask] of
his neighbor, and every woman of her neighbor, jewels [articles] of silver, and
3 jewels [articles] of gold. And Jehovah gave the people favor in the sight of the
Egyptians. Moreover the man Moses was very great in the land of Egypt,
4 in the sight of Pharaoh's servants, and in the sight of the people. And Moses
said, Thus saith Jehovah, About [At] midnight will I go out into the midst of
5 Egypt: And all the first-born in the land of Egypt shsQl die, from the first-born
of Pharaoh that sitteth u"on his throne, even [throne], unto the first-boru of the
6 maid-servant that is behind the mill; and all the first-born of beasts. And there
shall be a great cry throughout [in] all the land of Egypt, such as thare was none
like it [the like of which hath not been], nor shall be like it [nor shall be] any
CHAP. XI. 1-10.
33
7 more. But against any of the children of Israel shall not a dog move [sharpen]
his tongue, against man or beast ; that ye may know how [know] that Jehovah
8 doth put a difference [doth distinguish] between the Egyptians and Israel. And
all these thy servants shall come down unto me, and bow down themselves [bow
down] unto me, saying, Get thee out, and all the people that follow thee : and after
that I will go out. And he -went out from Pharaoh iu a great [burning] anger.
9 And Jehovah said unto Moses, Pharaoh shall [will] not hearken unto you ; that
10 my wonders may be multiplied in the land of Egypt. And Moses and Aaron did
all these wonders before Pharaoh ; and Jehovah hardened Pharaoh's heart, so that
he would not [and he did not] let the children of Israel go out of his land.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL.
Ver. 1. And Jehovah said. — According to
Keil, Jehovali's address to Moses here reported
was made before the interview with Pharaoh re-
corded in X. 24-29, but is given here by the nar-
rator because it explains Moses' confident answer
in X. 29. But we cannot suppose that Moses
would have preannounoed the tenth plague be-
fore Pharaoh's obduracy in reference to the ninth
had showed itself. Also, it is clear from ver. 8
that the announcement made in vers. 4-8 imme-
diately follows Moses' declaration in x. 29. The
difference between this announcement and the
former ones consists in the fact that this last one
is made immediately after Pharaoh's obdurate
answer. By a sort of attraction other particu-
lars are added to this central part of the section :
Vers. 9 and 10 as a recollection which the theo-
cratic spirit loves to repeat. Vers. 1-3, how-
ever, are put before vers. 4-8, evidently from
pragmatic considerations ; in historical order
they form ihe immediate consequence of what is
there related. Only the matter of the silver and
gold articles seems to have been often talked of:
the idea is advanced as early as iii. 21.
Ver. 8. That follow thee. — Here for the
first time the thought appears, that the people
are to form a military host. — In a burning
anger. — Patience is exhausted, andtheprophet's
anger breakingforth is a foretoken of judgment.
Vers. 9, 10. What Jehovah has predicted (iv.
21; vii. 3) has thus far all been fulfilled. The
pause before the last thunder-bolt has inter-
vened, and occasions a review.
Vers. 4, 6. At midnight. — The day is not
fixed, only the dreadful hour of tlie niglit. Keil
correctly observes, in opposition to Bauaigarten,
that the institution of the feast of the Passover
does not come till after the announcement of the
last plague, and in accordance with this direc-
tion at least nine* days, according to xii. 3, must
*JProbably a misprint for "four," i. e., tho four days inter-
vening between the lOtli and tlie 14th of the month. Mur-
phy agrees with Baumgarten that the midnight liere spolten
of is the one foliowing the announcement of the plague,
which, therefore, according to xii. 6, 29, must have taken
place on the 14th. This of course requires us to assume that
the injunction of xii. 1-3 preceded this announcement. In
itself considered, however, there is certainly no more diffi-
culty in this than in the view held by Keil respecting xi.
1-3, vie., that chronologically it belongs before x. 24-29. — 1ft, j.
have preceded the Passover. Also the indefi-
nitely protracted expectation of the stroke must
have heightened the fear in Egypt, and made the
stroke the more effectual. At midnight will I
go out. — The servant with his symbolic action
retires; Jehovah will Himself step forth from
His hidden throne, and march through the whole
of hostile Egypt injudicial majesty. The judg-
ment will be BO severe that even Moses with his
rod must reverently retire, all the more, as in
this last scene there is to bo made manifest on
Israel's part also a relative complicity in guilt,
which can be expiated only by the blood of the
paschal lamb. Moses must here retire on ac-
count also of the infliction of death on the first-
born children of Egypt. — The maid-servant
that la behind the mill. — Prom the king's
son down to the lowest female slave. A still
stronger expression ii used for the latter extreme
in xii. 29.*— All the first-born.— The first-
born are the natural heads, representatives,
priests, and chief sufi'erers, of families ; and to
the first-born as priests correspond the first-born
of beasts as offerings [vid. xiii. 2). Here, it is
true, the oflfering spoken of is the curse-offering,
DT'.n. According to Keil, the beasts also are
mentioned because Pharaoh was going to keep
back the men and the cattle of the Israelites.
But this judgment goes so deep that the first-
born Israelitish children must likewise be atoned
for ; therefore also faultless lambs must be of-
fered. The first-born among lambs cannot have
been meant.
Ver. 7. Not a dx)g sharpen his tongue. —
A proverbial expression, signifying that not the
slightest trouble could be experienced. Hence,
loo, not even the cattle of the Jews were to suf-
fer the least disturbance (vid. Judith xi. 19).
The proverbial expression may seem strange in
this connection ; but the thought readily occurs,
that the Egyptians, in this great calamity which
they had to experience on account of the Israel-
ites, might come against them with revengeful
purpose. But even this will so little be the case
that rather all of Pharaoh's servants will fall at
Moses' feet and beg him to go out together with
his people.
* [Where prisoners are substituted for grinders. But, as
Keil remarks, according to Judg. xvi. 21 ; Isa. xlvii. 2, it
was not uncommon to employ prisoners aa grinders. — Ta.j.
31 EXODUS.
B.— THE DIVINE ORDINANCE OF THE PASSOVER.
Chaptek XII. 1-20.
1, 2 And Jehovah spake unto Moses and Aaron in the land of Egypt, saying, This
month shall be unto you the beginning of months ; it shall be the first month of the
3 year to you. Speak ye unto all the congregation of Israel, saying. In [On] the
tenth day of this month they shall take to them every man a lamb, according to
4 the house of their fathers [according to households], a lamb for a house : And if
the household be too little for the [a] lamb, let him and his neighbor next unto
his house take it according to the number of the souls ; every man according to his
5 eating, shall [shall ye] make your count for the lamb. Your lamb shall be [ye
shall have a lamb] without blemish, a male of the first year [one year old] : ye shall
6 take it out [take it] from the sheep, or from the goats. And ye shall keep it up
[keep it] until the fourteenth day of the same [this] month : and the whole assem-
7 bly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it in the evening. And they shall take
of the blood, and strike [put] it on the two side-posts and on the upper door-post
8 [the lintel] of the houses wherein they shall eat it. And they shall eat the flesh
in that night roast [roasted] with fire, and unl avened bread ; and [bread] : with
9 bitter herbs they shall eat it. Eat not [nothing] of it raw, nor sodden at all
[boiled] with water, but roast [roasted] with fire r his [its] head with his [its] legs,
10 and with the purtenance [inwards] thereof. And ye shall let nothing of it remain
until the morning; and that which remaineth of it until the morning ye shall burn
11 with fire. And thus shall ye eat it : with your loins girded, your shoes on your
feet, and your staff in your hand; and ye shall eat it in haste': it w the Lord's
12 pasaover [a passover unto Jehovah]. For [And] I will pass through the land of
Egypt this night, and will smite all the first-born in the land of Egypt, both man
and beast ; and against all the gods of Ejrypt I will execute judgment : I am Je-
13 hovah. And the blood shall be to you for a token [sign] upon the houses where
ye are : and when I see the blond, I will pass over you, and the plague shall not be
upon you to destroy you [there shall be no destroying plague upon you], when I
14 smite the land of Egypt. And this day shall be unto you for a memorial; and ye
shall keep [celebrate] it a feast to Jehovah ; throughout your generations ye shall
keep it a feast by an ordinance forever [celebrate it as a perpetual ordinance].
15 Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread; even [yea, on] the first day ye shall
put away leaven out of your houses ; for whosoever eateth leavened bread from the
16 first day until the seventh day, that soul shall be cut off from Israel. And in the
first day there shall be a holy convocation, and in the seventh day there shall be a
holy convocation to you [on the first day ye shall have a holy convocation, and ou
the seventh day a holy convocation] ; no manner of work [no work] shall be done
in them ; save [only] that which every man must eat [is eaten by every man], that
17 only may be done of you. And ye shall observe the feast of unleavened bread;
for in [on] this self-same day have I brought your armies [hosts] out of the land
of Egypt ; therefore shall ye [and ye shall] observe this day in [throughout] your
TEXTUAL AND GEAMMATICAL.
'[Ver, U. pisna. Lango translates: in Pluchlrbereitschaft, "in readiness for flight," condemning De Wette's tender-
ing, JSiV/rriigrSeif, "haste," "prGcipitation." But in the only other two pasaaares where the word ocourB, Lange's transla-
tion is hardly admiaaible. Dent. xvi. 3, " Thou earnest forth out of the land of Egypt in haste, Tir^nS-" It could not be
piiid, " Thon earnest forth in readiness for flight." So Isa. lii. 12, " Ye shall not go out with baste (VuSnB), t^°^ go liy
flight," Here the -word also denotes anxious haate. The verb TSn likewise everywhere conveya the notion of hurried-
n'3% or anxiety conne&ted with haato. — Ta.],
CHAP. XII. 1-20.
35
18 generations by [as] an ordinance forever. In tbe first month, on the fourteenth day
of the month at even, ye shall eat unleavened bread, until the one and twentieth
19 day of the month at even. Seven days shall there be no leaven found in your
houses : for whosoever eateth that which is leavened, even [leavened], that soul
shall be cut off from the congregation of Israel, whether he be a hiranger [sojourner]
20 or born in the land. Ye shall eat nothing leavened; in all your habitations shall
ye eat unleavened bread.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL.
Ver. 1 sqq. Institution of the Passover. As
ChristenJom reckons its years ao^ordiug to the
salvatioa in Christ, so the Israelites were to
reckon the months of the year from the first
month of their redemption. The first mouth,
in which the redemption took place, Abib (month
of green ears) or Nisau, was to become the first
mouth of tlieir year. Hereby likewise the feast
of the Passover was to be made the foundation
of all the Jewish feasts, and the Passover sacri-
fice the founlation of all the various kinds of
offering. The feast, however, becomes a double
one. The Passover, as the feast of redemption,
lasis, together with the day of preparation, only
one night; thefeastof unleavened bread (including
the Passover) seven days. Since the feant of
the great day of atonement also coalesces with
the feast of tabernacles which follows close upon
it, it wou'd seem that the feast of Pentecost, al-o,
as the feast of ingathering, requires to be cou-
pled with something. The institution of the
feast of the Passover, connected with the an-
nouncement of the destruction of the first-born
of Egypt, is narrated in vers. 1-14; in 15-20
the iostitution of the feast of unleavened bread
The two feasts, however, are so thoroughly
blended into one, that the whole feast may
be called either the Passover, or the feast
of unleavened bread. The festival as a whole
signifies separation from the corruption of
Egypt, this being a symbol of the corruption
of the world. The foundation of the whole con-
sists in the divine act of redemption celebrated
by the Passover. The result consists in the act
of the Israelites, the removal of the leaven,
which denotes community wi-h Egyptian princi-
ples ( Vid. Comm. on Matthew, pp. 245, 289).
We have here, therefore, a typical purification
based on a typical redemption.
Vera. 1,2. In the land of Egypt. — It is a
mark of the dominion of Jehovah in the midst
of His enemies, that He established the Jewish
community in the land of Fgypt, as al.^o the
Christian community in the midst of Judaism,
and the Evangelical ootnmunity under the domi-
nion of the Papacy. To the triumphant assu-
rance in regard to the place corresponds the
triumphant assurance in regard to the time:
the Passover, as a typical festival of redemption,
was celebrated before the typical redemption
itself; the Lord's Supper before the real redemp-
tion; and in the constant repetition of its cele-
bration it points forward to the final redemption
which is to take place when the Lord comes.
Keil calls attention to this legislation in the land
of Egypt, as the first, in distinction from the
legislation on Mt. Sinai and the fields of Moab.
— The beginning of months. — It does not
definitely ioiiow from this ordinance that tlf!
Jews before had a diffi;renl beginning of tlij
year; but this is probable, inasmuch as thu
Egyptians had a different one. Vid. Keil, Vol.
11.. p. 10. Nisau nearly corresponds to our
April.
Ver. 3. Unto all the congregation of
Israel. — As heretofore, through the elders. —
A lamb. — A Inmb or kid. — According to
households. — The companies were not to be
formed arbitrarily, but we?e to be formed ac-
cording to families. Vid. ver. 21. — On the
tenth day of this month. — Vid. ver. a.
Ver. 4. Of course more than two families
might unite, if some of them were childless.
Also perhaps the gaps in smaller families might
be filled by members from excessively large
ones. Later tradition fixed upon ten as the nor-
mal number of participants.
Ver. 5. Quality of the lamb: without blemish,
male, one year old. For divergent opinions,
see Keil, Vol. IT., p. 11.* That the lamb, as
free from blemish, was designed to represent
the moral integrity of the offerer (Keil), is a
very doubtful proposition, since moral integrity
needs no expiatory blood; it might, with more
propriety, be taken to represent theocratic in-
tegrity. Also the requirement that the lamb be
a male can hardly [as Keil assumes] have ex-
clusive reference to the first-born sons [for
whom the lambs were substituted]. The re-
quirement of one year as the age prob.ably is
connected with the necessity that the lamb be
weaned; furthermore, it was for a meal which
was to suffice for an ordinary family. The first-
born of beasts which were sacrificed on other
occasions than at the Passover needed only to
* [The age of tlie lamb is expressed ia Hettrew by the
phrrtse: " Bon of a year." The Eabbinical interpretation is
that this meand a > ear old or less, and in practice it has
been applied 1 1 lambs from the age of eight dayd to that uf
one year. Apparently our translators liad that interpret.a-
tion in mind in rendering: "of the first year." But not-
witlistanding the wide currency of this view (adcpted even
bv Ko^enniiiiler, Baunigarten, Mnrpby and other modern
commeutators), it seeais to be almost stupidly incorrect, hs
Knobel very clearly shows. Murphy says: "The phrase
'son of a year ' mefins of any age from a montii to a full
year," and refers to Gen. vii. 6, 11. i!ut why "from a
infmihf" Wny not "eight days" as well? Why not one
day, or one second, from the time of birth ? Isaac, we are
told in Gen. xxi. 4, waj circumcised whnn he was the "son
of eight days." How old was he? In Lev, xxvii, 6 we
read: "If it be fro u the sod of a month unto the son of five
>ears," where the A. V, reads correctly "a month old," ai.il
" five years old." It wou^d he a sinnular way of fixing two
limits, if both expre.-sioos are so indeterminate as the Rub-
biniial interpretation would make t lem. If the "son of a
vear" may be as young as eight days, and the "son oi a
month " may tie tw.'nty-nino days old, what is the use of the
phrase " son of a month " atall? Or what is the sen^e of
using the latter phrase as the eary limit? Why not say
simply: "If it be the sou office years?" whifh, accordini^
to the Rabbinical iuterpretalion, ought to cover the wuole
period. — Tr.]
86
EXODUS.
be eight dnys old. As the lamb was of more
value tliau the kid, it la natural that for this
occasion it became more and more predomi-
nantly used.
Ver. G. Ye shall keep it. — Does this mean
simply : ye shall keep it in store ? Probably it
is intimated that the lamb was designed either
to represent the persons, or to be held in custody
for them. Why did this keeping of the animal
last from the lOlh to the 14lh of Nisan ? " Which
regulation, however, Jonathan and Baschi re-
garded as applicable only to the passover slain
in Egypt" (Keil). According to Hofmann, the
lour days refer to the four generations spent by
the Israelites in Egypt. In that case the whole
analogy would lie in the number four. If the
10th day of Nisan was near the day of the com-
mand, and Moses foresaw that the last plague
would not come till after four days, it was natu-
ral for him not to leave so important a prepara-
tion to the last day ; the four days, moreover,
were by the ordinance itself devoted entirely to
wholesome suspense and preparation ; in ano-
ther form Fagius refers to this when he says: "ut
occasionem habermt inter se. colloquendi et dispu-
tandi," etc. Vid. Keil. — The whole assem-
bly of the congregation of Israel. — Although
every head of a family killed his lamb, yet the
individual acts were a common act of the people
in the view of the author of the rite. Israel
was the household enlarged ; the separate house-
hold was the community in miniature. Hence
later the lambs were slain in the court. — In
the evening {literally "between the two eve-
nings"). This regulation, which distinguishes
two evenings in one day, is explained in three
ways: (1) between sunset and dark (Aben-Ezra,
the Karaites and Samaritans, Keil and others) ;
(2) just before and just after sunset (Kimchi,
Kiisohi, Hitzig); (3) between the decline of the
day and sunset (Josephus, the Mishna, and the
practice of the Jews). Without doubt this is
the correct explanation; in favor of it may be ad-
duced xvi. 12; Deut. xvi. 6; Johnxiii. 2. Accord-
ing to this passage, preparation for the Passover
was begun before the sun was fully set. Consi-
derable time was needed for the removal of the
leaven and the killing of the lamb. According
to the Jewish conception of the day as reckoned
from 6 A. M. to 6 P. M., there was in fact a
double evening: first, the decline of the day of
twelve hours; secondly, the night-time, begin-
ning at 6 P. M., which, according to Gen. i. 5
and Matt, xxviii. 1, was always evening in the
wider sense — the evening of the day of twenty-
four hours — which preceded the morning, the
day in the narrower sense.*
* [GinaliurK in Alexander's Kitto'a Cyclopsedia, Art. Pasg-
over, hue shown that the second of the thrfe views about
" tlie two evenings " was not held by Kimchi and Raachl
(otherwise called Jarchi), but that they agreed with the
great mass ot Jewish comnientatoTS in adopting the third
view. Tile phrase itself is so vague that from it alone the
meaning cannot with certainty be gathered. Most modem
Christian commentators, it should he said, adopt the first
view. Deut. xvi. 6, where the time for sacrificing the Pas-
sover is fixed " at the going down of the sun," is quot' d as
fav-oring that view, while Lange quotes it on the other side.
Whatever msy have been the exact meaning of the phrase
originally, it is probable that the very early Jewish practice
corresponded with the Kabbinlcal interpretation. The trans-
actions recorded in 1 Kings xviii. indicate this. There we
read (ver. '2&) that the prophets of Baal called on Bual from
Ver. 7. Take of the blood. — The two door-
posts, as well as the lintel of the door, denote
the whole door; the threshold is excepted be-
cause the atoning blood should not be trodden
underfoot. " The door," says Keil, "through
which one goes into the house, stands for the
house itself; as is shown by the frequent ex-
pression: 'in thy giites,' for 'in thy cities,' cU.
XX. 10, etc." It is here assumed that every
house or tent had a door properly so called.
" Expiation was made for the house, and it was
consecrated as an altar" (Keil). This is a con-
fused conception. It was the household that was
atoned for; the buildino; did thus indeed be-
come a sort of sanctuary ; but in what sense
was it to be an altar? For here all kinds of
offerings were united in one central offering:
the D|in, or the slaughter of the Egyptian first-
born ; the expiatory offering, or the blood sprin-
kled by the hyssop-branch on the door-posts
(Lev. xiv. 49; Num. xix. 18), which, therefore,
as such represent the several parts of the altar;
the thank-offering, or the Passover-meal ; the
burnt-offering, or the burning of the parts left
over. Because the door-posts themselves stand
for the altar, the smearing of them was after-
wards given up, and, instead, the lamb was
killed in the court; and this change must have
been made as soon as there was a court.
Ver. 8. On that night. — The one following
the 14th of Nisan. Why only on the same night?
Otherwise it would not have been a festive meal.
Why roasted? The fire (itself symbolically sig-
nificant) concentrates the strength of the meat;
by boiling a part of it passes into the water.
The unleavened bread has a two-fold significance.
When eaten at the Passover, it denotes separa-
tion from the leaven of Egypt (Matt. xvi. 6, 12;
2 Cor. V. 8) ; as a feast by itself, the feast of
unleavened bread, called bread of affliction,
denotes remembrance of the afflictions which
were connected with the flight from Egypt
(Deut. xvi. 3). This is overlooked, when it is
inferred from ver. 17 that the ordinance of the
feast of unleavened bread was made at a later
time (as Keil does, U., p. 20). — With bitter
herbs. — D'l'lO, jrofpMef (LXX.), lactucse agnstet
(Vulg.), the wild lettuce, the endive, etc. Vid.
Keil II., p. 15, Knobel, p. 99. " According to
Russell," says Knobel, "tliere are endives in
Syria from the beginning of the winter months
to the end of March ; then comes lettuce in
April and May." According to Keil, "the bit-
ter herbs are not called accompaniments of the
meal, but are represented as the principal part
of the meal, here and in Num. ix. 11." For
morning till noon, and afterwards (ver. 29) from mid-day
" until tbe time of the offering of the evening sacrifice"
(more exaiitly, "until towards the time"). According to
Ex. xxix. 39 the evening sacrifice also was offered "between
the two evenings." If the meaning were " from mid-day till
sunset," there would seem to be no reason why it should not
have been so expressed. Besides, it is intrinsicEdly improba-
ble that the howlings of tbe false prophets continued through
the whole day. Especially Is it difficult, if not impossible,
to find time enough in the evening of that day for the events
which are narrated to have followed, viz. Elijah's prayer,
the consumption of the burnt-offering, the slaying of the
false prophets, the return from the Kishon, the prayer for
rain, the servant's going seven times to look, Elijah's going
to Jezreel.— Tb.] '
CHAP. XII. 1-20.
ST
7J^, he says, does nut mean almg with, together
with, but retains its fundamental meaning, upon,
over. In this way the following strange sym-
\)olic meaning is deduced : " The bitter herbs
are to call to mind the bitterness of life ex-
perienced by Israel in Egypt, and this bitterness
is to be overcome by the sweet flesh of the lamb."
If only the bitter herbs did not taste pleasant!
If only the lamb did not form a meal of thank-
offering, and in this meal were not the chief
thing! May not the lamb, according to the
usual custom, have lain upon a, setting of bitter
herbs? In the passage before us only the un-
leavened bread is said to be put upon the biiter
herbs. The modification of the arrangement in
Num. ix. 11 is unimportant. It Is a strange
noliua that the bitter herbs and the sweet bread
formed ■' the basis of the Passover-meal " (Keil).
In that case the "sweet" bread ought to have
made the "sweet" flesh of the lamb superfluous.
Moreover, the opposite of sweet is not bitter,
hut sour. According to Knobel, the bitter herbs
correspond to the frankincense which used to
accompany many offerings of grain, inasmuch
as they had, for the most part, a pleasant odor.
But frankincense has a special reference to
prayer. If the bitter herbs are to be interpreted
as symbolic, we may understand that they sup-
plement the negative significance of the unlea-
vened bread by something positive, as being
health-giving, vitalizing, conseoratory herbs.
Ver. 9. Its head with its legs. [" From
the head to the thighs," is Lange's translation.]
"I.e., as Basohi correctly explains, whole, not
cut in pieces, so that the head and legs are not
separated from the animal, no bone of him is
broken (ver. 46), and the inward parts together
with the (nobler?) entrails, these of course first
cleansed, are roasted in and with the body."*
The unity of the lamb was to remain intact; on
which point cjmp. Biihr, Symbolik des Mosaiachen
Cultiis II., p. 635, Keil, and others. -j- The sym-
bolic significance of the lamb thus tended to-
wards the notion of personality and inviolability,
that on which rested also the fact and continu-
ance of the unity of the family which partook of it.
Ver. 10. Let nothing of it remain, " But
what nevertheless does remain till morning is to
be burnt with fire" (Keil). But was any of it
allowed to remain till morning? Vid. my hy-
pothesis, Life of Christ, Vol. IV., p. 262.J
Ver. 11. And thus. The preparation for the
journey is here at once real and symbolic. The
readiness to start is expressed by three marks : the
loins girded (tucked up) ; the travelling shoes on
the feet ; the walking-stick in the hand. " That even
the 0. X. ritual was no rigid ordinance is proved
* [Ttiis sentence is markei ai a quotation by Lanire, but
the source, as very often in tlie German original, is not indi-
cated ; and in this case 1 have not been able to trace it
out.— Tr.J.
f [B'4hr, 1. c. say>i on this point : " This had no other o^jent
than that all who received a part of that one intact lamb,
i. e., who at-i of it, sliould regard themselves as a unit and a
whole, as a community, just like 'hose who eat the New Tes-
tament Passover, the body of Christ (1 Gor. v. 7), of whi«*
the Apostle, in 1 Cor. x. 17, says, 'For we b'^ing many are
one bread and one body ; for we are all partakers of that one
bread.' "— Tn.].
X [The hypothesis is that the remains of the paschal lamb,
if there were any, were burnt up the same night, and there-
fore were not allowed to remain till the next day. But this
seems to conflict with the plain language of the verse. — Ta.].
by the remarkable fact that at the time of Christ
they ate the passover lying on couches. — In
haste. [" In readiness for flight," Lange.] A
meal could hardly have been taken in " anxious
flight" (Keil), or in "anxious haste" (Knobelj.*
— It is Jehovah's Passover. Not the Puss-
over unto Jehovah, as Keil takes it, referring to
XX. 10, xxxii. 6. For the Passover designates
Jehovah's own going through, going hy, passini/
ooer (sparing), as symbolically represented and
appropriated by the Passover festival. The feast,
it is true, is celebrated to Jehovah ; but it cele-
brates Jehovah's act, and in the place where the
rite is first instituted, it cannot appear as al-
ready instituted. f The LXX. say: 7rao-;^o earl
Kvpl<^. TheVulg. "es< enim Phase (id est tran-
situs) domini. On the meaning of nD3 vid. the
lexicons, and Keil II., p. 17. The pesach is pri-
marily the divine act of "passing over;" next
the Iamb with the killing of which this exemp-
tion is connected; finally, the whole eight days'
festival, including that of unleavened bread
(Deut. xvi 1-6), as, on the other hand, the latter
feast also included that of the Passover. That
this first Passover was really a sacrificial feast,
Keil proves, in opposition to Hofmann, II., p. 17.
Comp. Hofmann's Schriflbeweis II., p. 271. J
Vers. 12, 13. Explanation of tlie Passover.
And I. The counterpart and prototype of the
Passover festival are historic facts. First, Jeho-
vah, as judge, passes through all Egypt. Se-
condly, He visits upon the young life in the
land a plague whose miraculousness consists
especially in the fact that the first-born fall, the
* [Why not in " anxious haste ?" A man can surely eat
in haste as well as do anythiog else in haste. That there
was to be a " readiness for flight" is sufficiently indicated
by the precept concerning the girdles, sandals, and staves.
Vid. under " Textual and Grammatical." — Ta.J.
f [We have let the A. V. reading stand ; neverthelpss it
is by no means so clear that Keil is not right. He certainly
is supported not only by many of the best versions aivt
commentators, but by the Hebrew, which literally rendered
can read only, " It is a Passover to Jehovah," or *' It is a
Passover of Jehovah." The latter ditfers from Lange's
translation as making " Pussover " indefinite, whereas " Je-
hovah's Paasover" is equivalent tn '^iJie Passover of Jeho-
vah." Furthermore, the subject of the sentence naturally,
if not necessarily, refers to the lamb ; but the lamb cannot
tie called Jehovah's passing over. The last point made in
opposition to Keil is not jnat, inasmuch as Keil does not
render (as Lange makes him) " the Passover unto Jebovah,"
but distinctly leaves the noun indefinite, so that there
is no implicit^on that it was an already existent institu-
tion.— Ta ].
J [HofJDaann takes n^T in xii. 27 in the general sense of
slaughter, instead of the ceremonial sense of Bocrifice, and
argues that, as the lamb was killed in order to be eaten, it
was in no proper sense an njfering to Jehovah, although ihe
killing and eating of it was divinely commanded. He dis-
tinguishes also between the original ordinance and the later
celebration of it. Keil, on the contrary, lays stress nn the
fact that n3T and nilT everywhere, except Pruv. xvii. 1,
and 1 Sam, xxviii. 24, denote s'icrijice in the narrow ceremo-
nial sense, and that the Passover in Num. ix. 7 is calli-d
T3"lp, offering. Knobel likewise says, " Without doubt the
Passover was a sort of offering." But he contends that it
was not fas Keil and others hold) a sin-offering, for the rea-
sons : (1) that the 0. T. gives no indication of such a charac-
ter ; (2) thar. the mode of observing the rite differed from
that belonging to the sin-offering, particularly in that the
lamb was eaten, whereas none of the animal constituting
the sin-offering was e.tten ; and (3) that it was a joyous fes-
tival, whereas everything connected with the sin-offering
was solemn. He classes it, therefore, rather with the burnt-
offering. But the latter was not eaten, and had {though not
exclusively, yet partially) an expiatory character. Fid.
Lev. i.4.— Tb.].
38
EXODUS.
infliction beginning with (lie house of Pharaoh.
The result is that all the gods of Egypt are judged
by Jehovah. What does that meau ? Keil says :
the gods of Egypt were spiritual powers, 6at/j.6via.
Pseudo-Jonathan : idols. Knobel compares Num.
xxxiii. 4, and says: "We are to think espe-
cially of the death of the first-born beasts, since
the Egyptians worshipped beasts as gods," (!)etc.
The essential thing in the subjective notion of gods
are the religious conceptions and traditions of
the heathen, in so far as they, as real powers,
inhere in national ideals and sympathies. Le-
gends in point, vid. in Knobel, p. 1»jO. Thirdly,
Jehovah spares the first-born of the Israelites. —
The blood shall be to you for a sign. The
expression is of psychological importance, even
for the notion of atonement. It does not read :
it shall be to me for a sign. The Israelites were
to have in the blood the sacramental sign that
by the ofi^ering of blood the guilt of Israel in
connection with Egypt was expiated, in that
Jehovah had seen the same blood. This look-
ing on the blood which warded off the pestilence
reminds us of the looking up to the brazen ser-
pent, and of the believer's contemolation of the
perfect atonement on the cross. Keil says, " In
the meal the sacrificmm becomes a sacramentum."
Ver. 14. The solemn sanction of the Passover.
— As an ordinance for ever. The Institution
of the Passover continues still in its completed
form in the new institution of the Lord's Supper.
Ver. 15. The solemn institution of the seven
days' feast of unleavened bread. It was con-
ti'mporaneous with the Passover ; not afterwards
appended to it, for this is not implied by ver. 17.
(See above on ver. 8). The real motive was the
uniform removal of the Egyptian leaven, a sym-
bol of entire separation from everything Egyp-
tian. Hence the clearing away of the leaven
had to be done on the first day, even before the
incoming of the 16th of Nisan, on the evening of
the 14th. Vid. ver. 18. Hence also every one
who during this time ate anything leavened was
to be punished with death. He showed symboli-
cally that he wished to side with Egypt, not
with Israel. The explanation, " The unleavened
bread is the symbol of the new life, cleansed
from the leaven of sin," (Keil), is founded on
the fundamentally false assumption, revived
again especially by Hengsteuberg, that the
leaven is in itself a symbol of the sinful life. If
this were the case, the Israelites would have
had to eat unleavened bread all the time, and
certainly would not have been commanded on
the day of Pentecost to put leavened bread on
the altar (Lev. xxiii. 17). The leaven is symbol
only of transmission and fellowship, hence, in
some cases, of the old or of the corrupt life.
" Leaven of the Egyptian character," says Keil
himself, II., p. 21.
Ver. 16. On the first day. This is the day
following the holy night, the second half of the
15th of Nisan. Like the seventh day it is ap-
pointed a festival, but to be observed less rigidly
than the Sabbath. According to Lev. xxiii. 7,
the only employments forbidden are the regular
labors of one's vocation or service, and food may
be prepared according to the necessities of the
day ; this was not allowed on the Sabbath.
Ver. 17. For on this self-same day. Strictly
speaking then, the days of unleavened bread
began with the beginning of the 15th of Nisan,
and in commemoration of the exodus itself,
whereas the Passover was devoted to the com-
memoration of the preceding dreadful night of
judgment and deliverance, the real adoption or
birth of God's people Israel.
Ver. 18. On the fourteenth day of the
month. This is the feast of unleavened bread
in the wider sense, including the Passover. The
Passover, according to the very idea of it, could
not be celebrated with leavened bread, i. e., in
connection with anything Egyptian, for it repre-
sented a separation, in principle, from what was
Egyptian.
Ver. 19. Also the foreigner, who wishes to
live among the Israelites, mustsubmit to this ordi-
nance, even though he has continued to be a fo-
reigner, i. «., h,as not been circumcised. The one
born in the land is the Israelite himself, so called
either in anticipation of his de.stined place of
settlement, or in the wider sense of nationality.
Keil approves Leclerc's interpretation: quia
oriundi erant ex Isaaco et Jacobo, [** because they
were to take their origin from Isaac and Jacob."]
Ver. 20. Eat nothing leavened. Again
and again is this most sacred symbolic ceremony
enjoined, for it symbolizes the consecration
of God's people, a consecration based on their
redemption.
C— THE INSTITUTION OF THE FIRST PASSOVER. THE LAST PLAGUE. THE RE-
LEASE AND THE PREPARATION FOR DEPARTURE.
Chapter XII. 21-36.
21 Then [And] Moses called for all the f Iders of Israel, and said unto them, Draw
[Go] out,' and take you a Jamb [take you lambs] according to your families, aud
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL.
1 [Ver. 21. " Draw out," as the rendering of Oli'D, is acquiesced in by Ltinge, De Wette, Wordsworth, Murphy, aad
Tanon Cook (in the Speaker's Commentary), and is d'-fendi^d by Kali-ich and Bush. The latter, in a note on Judg. iv. 6,
attiruis tliat "^"QJO never means *' to approacli." He assigns to it there the meaning "to draft," or *' enlist," ac. soldiei-p for
his army — a meaning which certainly is no where else (therefore not "frequently," as Bush says) to ho found. That "V^*^
CHAP. XII. 21-86.
39
22
23
kill the passover. And ye shall [And] take a bunch of hyssop, and dip it in the
blood that is in the basin, and strike the lintel and the two side posts [two posts]
with the blood that is in the basin ; and none of you shall go out at the door of his
house until the morning. For [And] Jehovah will pass through to smite the
Egyptians ; and when he seeth the blood upon the lintel and on the two side posts
[two posts], Jehovah will pass over the door, and will not suifer the destroyer to
24 come in unto [come into] your houses to smite you. And ye shall observe this thine;
25 for [as] an ordinance to [for] thee and to [for] thy sons fir ever. And it shall
come to pass, when ye be [are] come to the land which Jehovah will give you, at^-
2(5 cording as he hath promised, that ye shall keep this service. And it shall come to
27 pass, when your children shall say unto you, What mean ye by this service? That
ye shall say, It is the sacrifice of Jehovah's passover [the passover of Jehovah], who
passed over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt, when he smote the
Egyptians, and delivered our houses. And the people bowed the head [bowed
28 down] and worshipped. And the children of Israel went away [went], and did
29 [did so ;] as Jehovah had commanded Moses and Aaron, so did they. And it
came to pass that at midnight [at midnight that] Jehovah smote all the
first-born in the land of Egypt, from the first-born of Pharaoh that sat
on his throne unto the first-born of the captive that was in the dungeon ;
and all the first-born of cattle. And Pharaoh rose up in the night, he, and
all his servants, and all the Egyptians ; and there was a great cry in Egypt ;
for there was not a house where there was not one dead. And he called for Moses
and Aaron by night, and said , Rise up, and get you forth from among my people,
32 b )th ye and the children of Israel ; and go, serve Jehovah, as ye have said. Also
take your flocks and your herds, as ye have said, and be gone ; and bless me also.
33 And the Egyptians were urgent upon the people, that they might send them out
34 of the land in haste ; for they said, We be [are] all dead men. And the people
took their dough before it was leavened, their kneading troughs being bound up in
35 their clothes upon their shoulders. And the children of Israel did according to the
word of Moses ; and they borrowed [asked] of the Egyptians jewels [articles] of
36 silver, and jewels [urticles] of gold, and raiment. And Jehovah gave the people fa-
vor in the sight of the Egyptians, so that [and] thoy lent unto them such things as
they required [they gave unto them] : and they spoiled [despoiled] the Egyptians.
may be used intransitively, Bush does not deny ; and indeed in Judg. xx. 37 he himself follows the rendering " drew them-
selves along," and explains it as descriptive of a mass of men "stretching themselves out in a long tram and rapully
nriting their way to tho city." This certainly is not far from the meaning which he denies to the word. What signihcance
30
31
the lambs were not drawn by lot. It could mean only " take "—a meaning which, thouEh assigned to it here by K*liscn,
tho word no where else has, and which, if it had it, would be the same as that of the following word. There is theretore
little doubt that we are to understand the word, with the LXX., Vulg., Gesenins, Filrst, Bunsen, Amheim, Alford, Keil,
Enobel, and othere, as used intransitively. — Tr.]
None of you shall go out.— They are pro-
tected only in the house, behind the propitiatory
blood.
Ver. 23. The destroyer to come in. —
Comp. the blo^pciiov of Heb. zi. 28 with 2 Sam.
xxiv. 16; Isa. xxxvii. 36. So Keil and others,
whereas Knobel and others take l^nE/D as ab-
Btrack=deatruction. Knobel's reasons (p. 105)
are easily refuted ; e.ff., though Jehovah Him-
self goes through Egypt, yet it does not thence
follow that He might not make u-'o of an angel
of judgment in the judicial inflictions (to be un-
derstood symbolically, vid. Ps. Ixxviii. 49); Ho
Himself, however, distinguishes bel ween His peo-
ple and the Egyptians.
Vers. 24-26. The establishment of the Passovpr
festival is again enjoined, and at the same time
there is connected with it an injunction to in-
struct children concerning it. The Israelitish
child will not unthinkingly practice a dead wor-
ship; he will ask: What does it mean? And the
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL.
The narrative evidently transports us to the
14th day of Nisan, the days of preparation being
passed over.
Ver. 21. For this reason we do not translate
UK/D intransitively, "go hence," etc. The pas-
chal lambs have been for four days in a special
enclosure; now they are to be drawn out, seized
and slaughtered. Hence also the injunction pro-
ceeds at once to the further directions concern-
ing! tfifi transaction.
Ver. 22 A bunch of hyssop. — A handful,
says Maimonidea. Hys.-op "designates proba-
bly not the plant which we cill hyssop, not tlie
hyssopiis officinalis, it being doubtful whether this
is found in Syria and Arabia {vid. Ritter, Erd-
kunde, XVII., p. 686), but a species of the oriffa-
nwm similar to the hyssop" (Keill. — That is in
the basin — i. e., in which the blood was caught.
40
EXODUS.
Israelitish fathers must not suppress the ques-
tions of the growing mind, but answer them, and
thus begin the spiritualizing of the paschal rite.
Ver. 27. Worshipped. — Expression of faith,
allegiance, joy, and gratitude.
Ver. 28. Brief reference to the festive meal
of faith in contrast with the dreadful judgment
now beginning. At midnight.— According to
Keil, we have no occasion here to look for any
natural force as underlying the punishment, but
to regard it as a purely supernatural operation
of divine omnipotence, inasmuch as here the
pestilence is not named, as in 2 Sam. xxiv. 15.
Also (he says) Jehovah administers the last
plague without Moses' mediation. But here too
Moses' prophetic prediction has a place; and
also the teleological design of the facts. And
this was the main feature of all these punitive
miracles, provided we do not conceive Moses'
rod as having itself wrought them. According
to Knobel, the miracle consisted in the pestilence
" which from the oldest time to the present day
has had its chief seat in Egypt." He gives a
series of examples, p. 106. Also statemenis con-
cerning the season in which the pestilence is ac-
customed to appear in Egypt : December, Febru-
ary, March. " It is most destructive from March
to May." "Quite in accordance with the facts,
the series of plagues ends with the pestilence,
which generally lasts till the Nile inundation."
"The pestilence spares many regions, e.g., the
deserts (Pruner, p. 419)." On the death of the
cattle: "According to Hartmann [Erdbeschreibung
von Afriha, I., p. 68), the dogs in Cairo almost
constantly have the pestilence; and when it
rages among them, it ceases to prevail among
men." According to Knobel, the occurrence
was expanded by legendary tradition into a mi-
racle. But miraculous are: (1) The prediction of
the fact, its object, and its results; (2) the sud-
den spread of the plague over the younger gene-
ration, the first-born, especially the first-born
of the king, being singled out; (3) the fact that
both beasts and men suffered; (4) the liberation
of Israel. That the religious expression of this
great event has its peculiarity, that it makes ge-
nefalizations, and leaves out subordinate fea-
tures in accordance with its idealizing tendency
and symbolic design — on this point one must
shape his views by means of a thorough herme-
neutical apprehension of thereligious style. Even
Keil cannot quite adopt the assumption of Cor-
nelius a Lapide, that in many houses grandfa-
thers, fathers, sons, and wives, in case they were
all first-born, were killed. But literally under-
stood, the narrative warrants this. But the per-
fect realization of the object aimed at lifts the
event above the character of a legend.
Vers. 30, 31. The great lamentation which in
the night of terror resounds through Egypt be-
comes the immediate motive for releasing Israel.
And he called for Moses. — We need not, with
Calvin, lay any stress on the fact that Pharaoh,
X. 28, had commanded the men not to show them-
selves again to him, as if a humiliating incon-
sistency of the tyrant with himself were not cha-
racteristic, aud as if in the history of despotism
it were not a frequent feature. This crushing
humiliation Pharaoh could not escape. Moses
aud Aaron had to receive the permission from
his own month. And we cannot call it mere
permission. He drives him out by a mandate
which bears unmistakable marks of excitement.
Serve Jehovah, as ye have said. — These
words involve the promise of complete libera-
tion, and at the same time the intention to re-
quire the Israelites to return. As ye have
said — he repeats — and finally he even begs for
their intercession: "bless me also." According
to Keil, every thing, even the request for their
blessing, looks to a manifest and quite uncondi-
tional dismissal and emancipation. But this
thought is expressed more positively in the be-
havior of the Egyptians, who were the most ter-
rified."
Ver. 33. At all events the Israelites had a
right to understand the dismission as an eman-
cipation, although formally this right was not
complete until Pharaoh hostilely pursued them.
Keil refers to xiv. 4, 5. The report brought to
the king, that the people had fled, seems, how-
ever, to imply that in the mind of the Egyptians
there had been no thought of unconditional
emancipation, but only of an unconditional fur-
lough. And when Pharaoh was disposed vio-
lently to take back even this promise, that was a
new instance of hardness of heart, the last and
the fatal one. We are all dead men: as it
were, already dead. Expression of the greatest
consternation.
Ver. 34. And the people took their
dongh, before it was leavened. That is (ac-
cording to Keil): "The Israelites intended to
leaven the dough, because the command to eat
unleavened bread for seven days had not yet
been made known to them." But the text evi-
dently means to say just the opposite of this:
they carried, in accordance with the command,
dough which was entirely free from leaven.
They had already put enough for seven days
into the baking-pans, and carried these on their
shoulders, wrapped up in their outer garments,
or rather in wrapping cloths, such as might be
used for mantles or wallets.
Vers. 35, 36. Vid. iii. 21 and Comm. on Gene-
sis, p. 83.
D.— THE EXODUS FROM EGYPT. LEGAL ENACTMENTS CONSEQUENT ON LIBERATION.
Chaptek XII. 37— XIII. 16.
37 And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hun-
38 dred thousand on foot, that were men [the men] beside [besides] children. And a
mixed multitude went up also with them ; and flocks, and herds, even very much
CHAP. XII. 37— XIII. 16. 41
3y cattle. And they baked unleavened cakes of the dough which they brought forth
out of Egypt, for it was not leavened ; because they were tbrust out of Egypt, and
40 could not tarry, neither had they prepared for themselves any victual. Now the
SDJouriiing [d veiling, i. e. time ot dwelling] of the childien of Israel, who dwelt
41 [which they dwelt] in Egypt, was fiur hundred audthiny years. And it came to
pass at thi end of the [end of] four liuudred and thirty years, even [on] the self-
same day it came to pass, that all the hojts of Jehovah went out from the laud of
42 Egypt. It is a night to be ra.uch observed [of solemnities] unto Jehovah for bring-
ing them o it from the land of Egypt : this is that night of Jehovah to be observed
of [night of solemnities unto Jehovah for] all the children of Israel in [through-
43 out] their generations. And Jehovah said unto Moses and Aaron, This is the
44 ordinance of the Passover : There shall no stranger [foreigner] eat thei-eof : But
every man's servant [every servant] that is bought for money, wheu thou hast cir-
43 cumcised him, then shall he eat thereof. A foreigner [stranger] and an [a] hired
46 servant shall not eat thereof. In one house shall it be eaten ; thou shalt not carry
forth aught of the flesh abroad out of the house; neither shall ye break a b )ne
47, 48 thereof. All the congregation of Israel shall keep [sacrifice] it. And when a
stranger [sojourner] shall sojourn with thee, and will keep the [sacrifice a] passover
to Jehovah, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and
keep [sacrifice] it : and he shall be as one that is born in the land : for [but] no
49 uncircumcised person shall eat thereof. One law shall be to [shall there be for] him
50 that is home-born, and unto [for] the stranger that sojourneth among you. Thus
did all the children of Israel] ; as Jehovah commanded Moses, so did they.
51 And it came to pass the self-same day, that Jehovah did bring the children of
Israel out of the land of Egypt by their armies [according to their hosts].
Chap. XIII. 1, 2 And Jehovah spake unto Moses, saying. Sanctify unto me all the
[every] first-born, whatsoever openeth the [any] womb among the children of
3 Israel, both of man and of beast : it is mine. And Moses said unto the people.
Remember this day, in which ye came out from Egypt, out of the house of bondage :
for by strength of hand Jehovah brought you out from this place [ihence] : there
4 shall no leavened bread be eaten. This day came [come] ye out in the month
5 Abib. And it shall be, when Jehovah shall bring thee into the land of the Ca-
naanites, and the Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites,
which he sware unto thy fathers to give thee, a land flowing with milk and honey,
6 that thou shalt keep this service in this month. Seven days thou shalt eat unlea-
7 vened bread ; and in the seventh day shall be a feast to Jehovah. Unleavened
bread shall be eaten seven [the seven] days ; and there shall no leavened bread be
seen with thee, neither shall there be leaven seen with thee in all thy quarters
8 [borders]. And thou shalt show [tell] thy son in that day, saying. This is done
[It is] because of that tvhieh Jehovah did unto me when I came forth out of Egypt.
9 And it shall be for a sign unto thee upon thine [thy] hand, and for a memorial
between thine eyes, that Jehovah's law may be in thy mouth : for with a strong
10 hand hath Jehovah brought thee out of Egypt. Thou shalt therefore [And thou
li shalt] keep this ordinance in his [its] season from year to year. And it shall be,
wheu Jehovah shall bring thee into the land of the Canaanites, as he sware unto
12 thee and to thy fathers, and shall give it thee. That thou shalt set apart unto Jeho-
vah all that openeth the matrix [womb], and every firstling that cometh [every
first-born] of a beast [of beasts] which thou bast ; the males shall be Jehovah's.
13 And every firstling [first-born] of an ass thou shalt redeem with a lamb ; and if
thou wilt not redeem it, then thou shalt break his neck : and all the first-born of
14 man among thy children, shalt thou redeem. And it shall be, when thy son asketh
thee in time to come, saying, What is this? that thou shalt say unto him. By
strength of hand Jehovah brought us out from Egypt, from the house of bondage :
15 And it came to pass, when Pharaoh would hardly let us go, that Jehovah slew all
the first-born in the land of Egypt, both the first-born of man and the first-born of
beast : therefore I sacrifice to Jehovah all that openeth the matrix [womb], being
16 [the] males ; but all the first-born of my children I redeem. And it shall be for
a token upon thine [thy] hand, and for frontlets between thine eyes ; for by strength
of hand Jehovah brought us forth out of Egypt.
42
EXODUS.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL.
Ver. 37. And the children of Israel jour-
neyed. — On the journey see the Introduction,
Keil II., p. 26, the literature above quoted, and
Keil II., p. 28, Note, Knobel, p. Ill sq.— About
600,000 on foot. — " '/Jli as iu Num. xi. 21,
the Infantry of an army, is added, because they
■went out as a warlike host (ver. 41), and in the
number given only the men able to bear arms,
those oyer twenty years of age, are reckoned;
D'lJjn is added because of the following 13/
ntSD : 'besides the little ones.' HH is used here
in the wider significance of the dependent part
of the family, including wife and children, as in
Gen. xWii. 12 ; Num. xxxii. 16, 24, and often,
those who did not travel on foot, but on beasts
of burden or in wagons" (Keil). On the round
number, as well a- the increase of Israel in
Egypt, comp. Knobel, p. 121, Keil, I. c, and the
Introduction. On the fruitfulness of the land
of Goshen, tee Keil II., p. 29. Kurtz and Ber-
theau have suggested as an explanation of the
great number, that we may assume that the
seventy Israelites who emigrated to Egypt had
several thousand men-serynnts and maid-ser-
vants. Keil insists that only the posterity of
the seventy souls is spoken of. But compare
the antithesis in Gen. xxxii. 10: "one staff"
and "two bands." In Israel the faith consti-
tuted the nationality, as well as the nationality the
faith, as is shown by so many examples (Rahab,
Kuth, the Gibeonites, etc.), and Israel had iu its
religion a groat attractive power.
Ver. 38. And a mi:sed multitude. — D^J^
31. Vulg. ; vulgua promiscuum ; Luther: vlel
Pubelvolk, " a great rabble" — "In typical ful-
fillment of the promise. Gen. xii. 3, without
doubt stimulated by the signs and wonders of
the Lord in Egypt (comp. ix. 20; x. 7; xi. 3)
to seek their salvation with Israel, a great mul-
titude of mixed people joined themselves to the
departing Israelites; and, according to the gov-
erning idea of the Jewish commonwealth, they
could not be repelled, although these people
afterwards became a snare to them. Vid. Num.
xi. 4, where they are called 'IpiJpS, medley"
(Keil). Literally, a collection.' Comp. Dent,
xxix. 11.
Ver. 33. Vid. ver. 34. It does not mean that
they bad no time to leaven their dough, but that
they had no time to prepare themselves other
provisions besides. The deliverance came upon
them like a storm; they were even thrust out
of Egypt.
Ver. 40. Vid. the Introduction, Keil II., p.
80, Knobel, p. 121.
Ver. 41. On the self-same day. — Knobel
Bays very strangely, that the meaning is that
Jacob entered Egypt on the same day, the 14th
of Abib. Keil understands the day before de-
pignated, vers. 11-14. We assume that "day"
here denotes " time" in the more general sense.
Ver. 42. Keil renders: night of preservation.
Knobel: a festival. Both ideas are involved in
*ipty, and evidently the text aims to express the
antithesis indicated in our translation [Lange
renders: featliche Wacht, "festive vigil." — Tr.]
Vers. 43-45. The ordinance of the Pas-
sover. — npn, i. q. pn, law, statute. As Israel
now begins to become a people and a popular
congregation, the main features of their legal
constitution are at once defined. It all starts
with the Passover as the religious communion
of the people, for which now circumcision is
prescribed as a prerequisite. As circumcision
constitutes the incipient boundary-line and sepa-
ration between Israel and the life of secular peo-
ple, so the paschal communion is the character-
istic feature of the completed separation. First,
the congregation is instituted ; then follows the
preliminary institution of the priesthood in the
sanctification of the first-born ; then the first
tiace of the fixed line of distinction, in the ordi-
nance of the feast of unleavened bread; then
the first provision for the permnnent sacrificial
service, in Jehovah's claiming for Himself the
first-born of beasts, xiii. 12, while a distinction
is at the same time made between clean and
unclean beasts, ver. 13; and finally the intima-
tion is made that the natural sacerdotal duty of
the first born shall be redeemed and transferred
to a posiftVe priesthood. The circumstance that
Israel thereby came into a new relation to fo-
reigners, " that a crowd of strangers joined
themselves to the departing Israelites" (Keil),
can only be regarded as one of the occasions f"r
that fixing of the first features of the law which
was here quite in place. — No stranger. — What
is said of the "UJ'IS, or non-Israelite, in gene-
ral, is more particularly said of the sojourner
O^^Pi) and of the hireling, day-laborer ("I'D!!'}.
The latter, if not an Israelite, is a 1J who re-
sides a longer or shorter time among the Israel-
ites. Yet the exclusion is not absolute, except
as regards the uucircumcised; every servant,
on the other hand, who submits to circumcision
(for no one could be circumcised by force,
although circumcision was within the option of
all) assumes the privileges and obligations of
the communion. Thus, therefore, the distinc-
tion of classes, as related to the communion of
the people of God, is here excluded.
Ver. 46. In one house shall it be eaten,
— A new enforcement of the law that the com-
munion, as such, must be maintained. The sig-
nificance of the words: "Thou shalt not carry
forth aught of the flesh abroad," the mediseval
Church had little conception of.*
Vers. 50, 61. The next to the last verse de-
clares that this became a fixed custom in Israel;
and the last one recurs again to the identity of
the festive day with the day of the deliverance
of Israel from Egypt.
Oh. XIII., ver. 1. Sanctify unto me every
first-born. — ".The sanctification of the first-
born is closely connected with the Passover.
The Passover effects (?) the exemption of the
first-born of Israel, and the exemption has as
its aim their sanctification " (Keil). But the
thing meant is sanctification in the narrower
* [Tlie reference is to tlio Corpiis-Christi festival, charac-
terized by the public procest. ona whicii are lield in hooot of
the liost— Te.]
CHAP. XII. 37— Xr.I. 16.
48
seuse, the preparation of the sacerdotal order and
of the offerings ; for the general sanctification com-
prised the whole people. Here we have to do with
sanctification for the specific service of Jehovah.
It is assumed that the firiit-born are representa-
tives and sureties of the whole race, and that
therefore, without the intervention of grace and
forbearance, the first-born of Israel also would
have been slain. Accordingly, the phrase : "it
is mine," refers certainly not only to the fact
that Jehovah created the first-born, as Kurtz
maintains, but still more to the right of posses-
sion which this gracious favor establishes.
Keil denies this. It refers, he says, according
to Num. iii. 13 ; viii. 17, to the fact that Jeho-
vah, on the day when he slew the first-bora of
Egypt, sanctified the first-born of Israel, and
therefore spared them. An ultra-Calvinisti'o dis-
position of things, which seems to ground the
exemption on Jehovah's caprice. While the
sanctification cannot be dissociated from the
exemption, as little can the exemption be disso-
ciated from the creation. The election of Israel
is indeed the prerequisite of the exemption of
the Israelitish first-born; but this exemption
again, as an act of grace, is a condition of the
special sanctification of the first-born.
Ver. 3. Remember this day. " In vers.
3-10, the ordinance respecting the seven days'
feast of unleavened bread (xii. 15-20), is made
known by Moses to the people on the day of the
exodus at the station Succoth" (Keil). We
h*ve already above (on xii. 8) poinled out the
incorrectness of this view. It is all the more
incorrect, if, with Keil and others, we find in the
leaven a symbol of sinfulness. The leaven which
the Jews had heretofore had was connected with
the leaven of Egypt, and was thus fitted to serve
as a symbol of the fact that they were connected
with the sinfulness of Egypt, and that this con-
nection must be broken off. If now they had
not been driven out so hastily, they would have
had time to produce for themselves a pure
and specifically .Tewish leaven, and this perhaps
seemed the more desirable thing, as the un-
leavened bread was not very palatable. But for
this there was no time. With this understand-
iug of the case, we render the last clause of ver.
3, " so that nothing leavened was eaten." [This
trinslation, however, is hardly possible. — Tk.].
— The house of servants. Servants of private
persons they were not, it is true, but all Egypt was
made for them by Pharaoh one house of slaves.
Vers. 4, 5. The urgency in the enforcement of
this feast is doubtless owing to the fact that there
wai no pleasure in eating the unleavened bread.
Il^nce the festival is represented as chiefly a ser-
vice rendered to God. The meals accompanying
thank-offerings preserved the equilibrium.
Ver. 6. On the seventh day. In the line
of the feast-days the seventh day is specially
meationed as the festive termination ; on it
work ceased, and the people assembled together.
Ver. 9. For a sign upon thy hand. Ac-
cording to Spencer, allusion is made to the
heathen custom of branding marks on the fore-
head or hand of soldiers and slaves. Keil, re-
ferring to Deut. vi. 8 and xi. 18, assumes that
we are probably to understand bracelets or
frontlets. But in the passages quoted a much
more general inculcation of Moses' words is
meant. Inasmuch as the Jews were to observe
several great festivals, it is not to be assumed
that they were to be required to wear the signs
only on the feast of unleavened bread ; all the
less, as the day was so definitely fixed. We
therefore regard the expression both here and in
Deuteronomy as symbolic, but suggested by a
proverbial phrase borrowed from the nations
of antiquity. Our language has a similar pro-
verbial, but less elegant, expression. That the
Pharisaic Jews afterwards actually made them-
selves such phylacteries grew out of their slavery
to the letter of the law. See more in detail in
Keil, II. p. 37.
Ver. 12. Every first-born of beasts. First,
the text recurs to the common statute respecting
the first-born of men and beasts; hence: "all
that openeth the womb." According to Keil,
the term "^'^J^H, to set apart, offer, is used to
point a contrast to the Canaanitish custom of con-
secrating the first-born to Moloch ; he quotes
Lev. xviii. 21. But the verb seems to express a
more original and general separation of what is
offered from what is not offered ; or it means to
let depart. — The males. With this matter,
therefore, the female first-born have nothing to
do. The first-born son is the head of the young
house, the heir of the old house. As the heir
of the old house he also assumes its guilt ; as
the head of the young house he must represent
it. More particular specifications concerning
the first-born male clean beast are given in xxii.
29 (30), Deut. xv. 21.
Ver. 13. The germ of the distinction between
clean and unclean beasts. The substitution of a
sheep or kid for the ass is a proof that the unclean
beast signifies not the evil, but the profane, that
which is not fitted to serve as a religious symbol.
Ver. 14. 'When thy son asketh thee.
Even in the theocracy the ceremonial worship
is to be not a dumb one, repressing, or even
suppressing, questions and instruction, but is to
be spiritualized by questions and instruction.
Ver. 15. All the first-born of my children.
Keil opposes the view, very prevalent of old,
that the sanctification of the firet-born is to be
derived from the destination of the first-born to
be priests. But he afterwards (II., p. 30) himself
brings forwards reasons which refute his own
view, founded on that of Outram and Vitringa,
especially by citing Num. iii. Nothing cau be
clearer than Num. iii. 12.*
Ver. IB. Also in reference to the phylacteries
we hold to the symbolical interpretation of the
Caraites in opposition to the literal one of the
Talmudists; so Keil II., p. 37.
* [ Keil pays ; " In what way thpy ware to consecrate their
life to the Lord dep ncied on the Lord's dinction, which pre-
scribed that they should porfonn the non-sacerdotal labors
ronni'Cted with the fanctnary, and so be the priests' servants
in the sacred service. Yft fven this service was afterwards
transferred to the Levites (Num. ill.) ; but in place of it the
people were required to redeem their first-born sons from
the service which was incumbent on them, and which had
heen transferred to the Levitfs who were substituted for
them, i. e., to ransom them by the payment to the priests of
five shekels of silver for every person. Num. iii. 47 ; xviii.
16." Num. iii. 12, above referred to as confuting Keil's view,
says simply that the LmiUes were substitut d for the first
born, but does not say that the first-born were originally
destined to be prieals. Lange's statement, therefore, seems
to be unwarranted. — TE.J.
44 EXODUS.
FOURTH SECTION.
Direction of the Exodus. The Pursuit. The Distress. The Red Sea. The Song
of Triumph.
CHAPTEKa XIII. 17— XV. 21.
A.— DIRECTION OF THE MARCH. THE DISTRESS. PASSAGE THROUGH
THE RED SEA. JUDGMENT AND DELIVERANCE.
Chap. XIII. 17— XIV. 31.
17 And it came to pass, wlieii Pharaoh had let the people go, that G d led them
not through [byl ths way of the land of the Philistines, although [ior]' that was
near ; for God said. Lest peradventure the [Lest the] people repent, when they
18 see war, and they return to Egypt: But God led the people about ihrouyh [by]
the way of the wilderness of the K.ed Sea. And the children of Israel went up har-
19 nessed [armed] out of the land of Egypt. And Moses took the bones of Joseph
w.th him; for he had straitly [strictly] sworn the children of Israel, saying, God
20 will surely visit you, and ye shall carry up my bones away hence with you. And
they took their journey [they journeyed] from Succoth, and encamped iu Ethara in
21 [on] the edge of the wilderness. And Jehovah went before them by day in a pil-
lar of a cloud [of cloud], to lead them the way ; and by night in a pillar of fire,
22 to give them light ; to go by day and night. He took not away the pillar of the
cloud [of cloud] by day, nor the pillar of fire by night, from betbre the people.
Chap. XIV. 1, 2 And Jehovah spake unto Moses, saying. Speak unto the children
of Israel, that they turn [turn back] and encamp before Pi-hahiroth, between Mig-
dol and the sea, over against [before] Baal-zephon ; before [over against] it shall
3 ye encamp by the sea. For [And] Pharaoh will say of the children of Israel, They
4 are entangled [bewildered] in the land, the wilderness hath shut them in. And I
will harden Pharaoh's heart, that he shall [and he will] follow after them, and I
will be honored [get me honor] upon Pharaoh, and upon all his host; that [and]
5 the Egyptians may [shall] know that I am Jehovah. And they did so. And it
was told the king of Egypt that the people fled : and the heart of Pharaoh and of
his servants was turned against the people, and they said, Why have we done this
[What is this that we have done], that we have let Israel go from serving us?
6, 7 And he made ready his chariot, and took his people with him. And he took
six hundred chosen chariots, and all the chariots of Egypt, and captains over every
8 one [all] of them. And Jehovah hardened the heart of Pharaoh king of Egypt,
9 and he pursued after the children of Israel, and the children of Israel went out with
an [a] high hand. But [And] the Egyptians pursued after them, all the horses
and chariots [chariot-horses] of Pharaoh, and his horsemen, and his army, and
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL.
1 rXIII. 17. " For that was near." A. V., Mnrphy, Ealiecb, Gesenins. GJaire, Alford retain the rendering "although"
for ^3 in this sentence. But such a meaning tor ^2 cannot be well substantiated. Ps. xlix. 10, adduced by Fiirdt, is cei>
tainly not an instance of such use. Pa. cxvi. 10 is more plausible. The A. V. rendering : " I believed, therefore ['3] have
T spoken," is incorrpct. But it is not necessary, with some, to translate: "I believed, although I speak." The particle
here probably lia-i the meaning "when." In Ps. xlix. 19, adduced by Gesenius (Thesaurus), it means " because," the »ijo-
dosis following in ver. 20. The same may be said of Gen. viii. 21; .lob xv. 27-29; Zech. viii. 6. The rendering *'\vhen"
siifflces in Jer. iv. 30 ; xxx. 11 ; xlix. 16 ; 1. 11 ; li. 63 ; Mic. vii. 8 ; Ps xxvii. 10 ; xxi. 12. The rendering " for " snfficfs in
Hob. xiii. 15; Nab. i. 10; Deut. xviii. 14; xxix. 19; Jer. xlvi. 23; Ps. Ixxi. 10; 1 Chron. xxviii. 5. The rendering " where-
as," or " while," may be adopte t in Mai. i. 4 ; Bccl. iv. 14. Probably these comprise all the passages in which (he meaning
" though " can with any plausibility be maintained. ^J) can be assumed to have the meaning " although " only as being
equivalent to ^3 DX "even when." Even though this should be assumed sometimes to occur, still the case before us is
not of that sort. The true explanation of such constructions is to assume a slight ellipsis in the expression : " God led
them not by the way of the land of the Philistines, [as might have been expected], seeine that was near." Or": " for that
V as near [and return to Egypt in caau of danger Wuuld be more readily resorted to]." — Tr.]
CHAP. XIII. 17— XIV. 31. 45
10 overtook them encamping by the sea, beside Pi-hahiroth, before Baal-zephon. And
when Pharaoh drew nigh, the children of Israel lifted up their eyes, and behold,
the Egyptians [Eiiypt] marched after them ; and they were sore afraid : and the
11 children of Israel cried out unto Jehovah. And they said unto Moses, Because
[Is it because] there were no graves in Egypt, hast thou [that thou hast] taken us
away to die in the wilderness ? wherefore hast thou dealt thus with [what is this
12 that thou hast done to] us, to carry [in bringing] us forth out of Egypt? Is not
this the word that we did tell [spake unto] thee in Egypt, saying. Let us aloue,
that we may serve the Egyptians? For it had been [is] better for us to serve the
13 Egyptians than that we should die in the wilderness. And Moses said unto the
people. Fear ye not, stand still, and see the salvation of Jehovah, which he will shew
to [work for] you to-day : for the Egyptians whom ye have seen to-day, ye shall
14 see them again no more forever. Jehovah shall fight for you, and ye shall hold
15 your peace. And Jehovah said unto Moses, Wherefore criest thou unto me? speak
16 unto the children of Israel, that they go forward: But [And] lift thou up thy rod,
and stretch out thine [thy] hand over the sea, and divide it : and the children of
17 Israel shall go on dry ground through the midst of the sea. And I, behold, I will
harden the hearts of the Egyptians, and they shall follow them : and I will get me
honor upon Pharaoh, and upon all his host, upon his chariots, and upon his horse-
18 men. And the Egyptians shall know that I am Jehovah, when I have gotten [get]
19 me honor upon Pharaoh, upon his chariots, and upon his horsemen. And the an-
gel of God, which [who] went before the camp of Israel, removed and went behind
them ; and the pillar of the cloud [of cloud] went [removed] from before their face
20 [before them], and stood behind them: And it came between the camp of the
Egyptians and the camp of Israel ; and it was a cloud and darkness to them [and
darkness], but it gave light by night to these [it lightened the night] :^ so that [and]
21 the one came not near the other all the night. And Moses stretched out his hand
over the sea ; and Jehovah caused the sea to go back [flow] by a strong east wind
all that ni^ht, and made the sea dry land [bare ground]' and the waters were di-
22 vided. And the children of Israel went into the midst of the sea upon the dry
ground: and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their
23 left. And the Egyptians pursued, and went in after them to the midst of the sea,
24 even all Pharaoh's horses, his chariots, and his horsemen. And it came to pass that
in the morning watch Jehovah looked unto [looked down at] the host of the
Egyptians through [in] the pillar of fire and of the cloud [of cloud], and troubled
25 the host of the Egyptians, And took off [turned aside] their chariot wheels, that they
drave them [and made them drive] heavdy : so that [and] the Egyptians said, Let
us flee from the face of Israel ; for Jehovah fighteth for them against the Egyptians.
26 And Jehovah said unto Moses, Stretch out thine [thy] hand over the sea, that the
waters may come again [back] upon the Egyptians, upon their chariots, and upon
27 their horsemen. And Moses stretched forth his hand over the sea, and the sea re-
turned to his strength [to its course] when the morning appeared; and the
Egyptians fled against it ; and Jehovah overthrew [shook] the Egyptians in [into]
28 the midst of the sea. And the waters returned, and covered the chariots, and the
horsemen and [of]* all the host of Pharaoh that, came into the sea after them ;
> [XrV. 20. n'7''^n~r\N IK'I ^tJ^nni t^J'i^ 'T'- ''*' construction is difficult. The only literal rendering is :
"And it was (or, became) the clourand'the darkness, and' it illumined the night." The difficulty is gotten over by Knohel
and Ewald by altering IJK^nni into l]'2/nm, reading : " And it came to pass as to the cloud, that it made darkuew.
B-it even with this conjectural change, it is' no less necessary to assume an ellipsis of " to the one " and "to the other," or
" on the one side ' and " on the otiier," as is done by A. V. and the great majority of versions and coramentatorn. i lie arti-
cle may be explained as pointing bnck to xiii. 21 : "And it was the cloud and the darkness which have been already de-
scribed." Or it is even possible to take ^nSd (ver. 19) as the subject of the verb ; " And he became the cloud and dark-
ness: hut he illumined the night," TR.] , j„j J., J *T, ^ „4. «o.
8 [XIV.21. The Hebrew word here used, naiH, is ditferent from the one rendered « dry ground ' in the next verse ;
and there is a clear distinction In the meaning, asTs^uite apparent from a comparison of Gen viii. 13, where it is said that
on the first day of the first month the ground was 3in, with ver. 14, where it is said, tbat on the twenty-seventh day of
the second month the earlh was 1!;3'. The fir«t mean'^s : free from water, drained ; the second means : free from moisture,
dry. The distinction is generally, clear, though sometimes not exactly ohserved.—TE.I .• ,
« [XIT 28 The preposition 4 Ocriainly cannot here be rendered '-and;" but it may have a sort ot resumptive toice,
equivalent to "even," " namely," " in Ehort."'— Ta.]
46
EXODUS.
29 there remained not so much as one of them [of them not even one]. But the chil-
dren of Israel walked upon dry land in the midst of the sea ; and the waters were a
30 wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left. Thus [And] Jehovah saved
Israel that day out of the hand of the Egyptians ; and Israel saw the Egyptians
31 dead upon the sea shore. And Israel saw that [thtj] great work which Jehovah
did upon the Egyptians, and the people feared Jehovah, and believed in Jehovah
and his servant Moses.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL.
Cliap. xiii. 17. Not by the way of the
land of the Philistines. Decidedly wise,
theocratic polio? on llie part of Moses, rightly
ascribed lo God. The people, disheartened by
servitude, could not at once maintain a conflict
with the warlike Philistines, without being
driven back to Egypt. They must first acquire
in the wilderness the qualities of heroes. Aud
that, according to Goethe, was accomplished in
a few years ! On the exodus, comp. Introduc-
tion; Keil, TI. p. 42; Knobel, p. 131.
Ver. 18. Led the people about. It is a
quesiion whether the round-about way spoken
of has reference simply to the absolutely direct
route through the Philistine country, or to
another more direct one which they had al-
ready begun to take, but which they were to
give up. According to xiv. 2, the latter is to
be assumed. Moreover, reference is made not
only to the small distance to the Red Sea, but to
the whole distance through the wilderness along
the Red Sea, first southward along the Gulf of
ISuez, then along the Elanitio Gulf northwards,
(see Knobel, p. 131). For we have here to do
with an introductory and summary account. It
was natural that nothing but the prophetic
divine word of Moses should have the control
of the march, inasmuch as the people would
have rushed impetuously towards the old cara-
van road of their fathers. Moses himself was
further influenced by his former journey to
Sinai and tlie revelation there made to him.
'• From Raemses to the head of the Gulf would
be a distance of some 35 miles, which might
e.sily have been passed over by the Israelites in
three days" (Robinson I., 80). The deviation
from the direct way must, however, be taken
into con.^iilcration, even though it may have
added little to the distance. On the three routes
from Cairo to Suez, see Robinson, p. 73.— Of
the Red Sea. See the Lexicons, Travels,
Knobel, p. 131, sqq* — Especially as the chil-
dren of Israel went up armed for battle.
So we understand the force of the 1 before D'K'on-
A march in order of battle would have looked like
a challenge to the Philistines. Moreover, WOT\
signifies, among other things, to provoke to
anger.j-
* [Knnbfil nfter a leirned discussion comes to th^ conclu-
sion that the Hebrew name for the Red Sea, C]^D-D^ (lite-
rally " sea of sedge ") was probably derived from some town
on the sea, named from the abundance of sedge growinp;
near it. He tiikes this view in preference to the ono which
derives the name of the sea din^ctly from the sedge, for the
reason that the sedge is not a general feature of the sea, and
from the uuiform omission of the article before ci^Q. — Ta. I.
f [It is hardly possible to translat-^ the simple conjunction
1 by " cBpecialiy as." It any such connection of thought had
Ver. 10. The bones of Joseph. Another
testimony to the tenaciiy with which the Isra"
elites retained moral impressions and old tradi-
tions. The vow, 480 years old, aud the oath
which sealed it, were still fresh. Vid. Gen. i.
25. On the fruitfulness of the land of Goshen,
see Robinson, p. 76. "From the Land of Goshen
to the Red Sea the direct and onlyroute was along
the valley of the ancient canal" (Ibid. p. 79).
Ver. 20. From Succoth. Inasmuch as they
had already, according to chap. xii. 37, gone from
Raemses to Succoth in battle array, Succoth
(Tent-town, or Booths) would seem to designate
not the first gathering-place of the people (Keil),
but the point at which the first instinctive move-
ment towards the Philistine border was checked
by the oracle of Moses, and by the appearance
of the pillar of fire and of smoke. While they at
first wished to go from Succoth (say, by the
northern extremity of the Bitter Lakes, or even
farther on), directly to Palestine, they now had
to go along on the west side of the Bitter Lakes
towards the Red Sea. Thus they come from Suc-
coth to Etham. " Etham lay at the end of the
wilderness, which in Num. xxxiii. 8 is called
the wilderness of Etham; but in Ex. xv. 22, the
wilderness of Shur, that is, where Egypt ends
andthedesert of Arabia begins" (Keil). "Etham
is to be looked for either on the isthmus of Ar-
bek, in the region of the later Serapeum, or the
south end of the Bitter Lakes. Against the first
view (^ihat of Stickel, Kuriz, Knobel), and for the
second, a decisive consideration is the distance,
which, although Seetzen went from Suez to Arbek
in eight hours, yet according to the statement
of the French scholar, Du Bois Aym^, amounts to
60,000 metres (16 hours, about 37 miles), a dis-
tance such that the people of Israel could not in
one day have traveled from Etham to Hahiroth.
We must therefore look for Etham at the south
end of the basin of the Biiter Lakes, whither
Israel may have come in two days from Abu
Keisheib, and then on the third day have
reached the plain of Suez between Ajrud and
the sea" (Keil). Abu Keisheib is Heroopolia
near Raemses ; Ajrud is thought to be identical
with Pi-Hahiroth. Tid. Num. xxxiii. 5 sq.*
been intended ^3 would more probably have been used. Be-
sides, such a statement would be almost contradictory of that
in tlie preceding verse. The fact that they were armed,
would make them leas likely to be afraid of war than if they
were unarmed. The remark that U^DH siguifies, among
other things, to provoke to anger, bafi little force in this con-
nection, for the reasons : ( 1) that it is doubtful whether that
is its etymological sigiiiftcance ; (2) that, even if this were
its etymological significance, it ia a meaning nowhere found
in actual uae ; (3) that this meaning cannot possibly have
any application here, eince the participle is pasS'Ve, and we
should have to translate, " went up provoked to au-
g^r."— Ta.l.
* [Notice may here be taken of a theorv of the ExodM
propounded by Brugsch at the Internatlj'nal Congri'sa of
CHAP. XIII. 17— XIV. 31.
47
Ver. 21. And Jehovah went before them.
According to Keil this first took place at Etham;
but it is to be observed that the deoisive more-
ment began at Succoth. Keil says indeed that
in verse 17 it reads that Elohim [God] led
them, not till here that Jehovah went before
them. But Jehovah and Elohim are not two
different Gods. Jehovah, as Elohim, knew the
Philistines well, and knew that Israel must avoid
a contest with them. God, as Jehovah, was the
miracle-working leader of His people. — By day
in a pillar of cloud. — " This sign of the divine
presence and guidance has a natural analogue
in the caravan fire, viz. small iron vessels or
stoves containing a wood fire, which, fastened
on the tops of long poles, are carried as way-
marks before caravans, and according to Curtius
(de geatia Alex. mag. V. 2, 7), in trackless regions,
are also carried before armies on the march,
the smoke indicating to the soldiers the direc-
tion by day, the flame, by night. Gomp. Har
mar. Observations II., p. 278, Pococke, Descrip-
tion of the East, II., p. 33. Still more analogous
is the custom (mentioned by Curtius III. 8, 9)
of the ancient Persians, who carried before the
marching army on silver altars a fire quern ipn
sacrum et seternum vacant. Yet one must not
identify the oloudy and fiery pillar of the Israel-
itish exodus with such caravan or arnvy fires,
and regard it as only a mythical conception or
embellishment of this natural fact " (Keil). He
opposes Roster's view, that the cloud was pro-
duced by an ordinary caravan fire, and became a
symbol of the divine presence, thus setting aside
also Kuobel's theory (Comm., p. 184) of a legend
which was derived from this usage. Here too
Keil is concerned about supernataralism in the
abstract, and about something purely outward,
so that we do not need here to move in the
sphere of faith, of vision, of symbol and of
mystery. The internal world is left out of con-
fideration, while the inspired letter has to serve
as evidence for the miraculous appearance.
According to him the phenomenon was a cloud
which inclosed a fire, and which, when the
Orientalists in London, Sopt. 1874, also puolished at Alex-
andria in French ("ia S»-(i« ie« Bebreux d' EggpU et leu mnnw-
menti Egyjfliem"). T.ie theory is state! and criticised by
Dr. J. P. Thompson in the Bibliofheca Sacra for Jan. 1875.
In brief it is as follows : Rameses he identities with Zan, the
Zoan of the Scriptures, situated near the mo^ith of the Tnnitic
branch of the Kile Sa coth is idenifled with Thukut, a
place mentioned on the E^ptian monuments as lying to the
right of the Petusiac branch of the Nile. Etham is found in
the place knuwa by the Egyptians as Khat m, east of Lake
Menzaleh. Migdol is identified with the town called Mau-
dolos by the Urepks, a fortress on the elge of the desert, not
ar from the Mediterranein. Thus Brngsch holds that the
line of the journey lay much farther north than is com-
monly assumed. And tho ssa which the Israelites crossed
wai, according to him, not the Bed Sea, but Lake Serbonis
between wuich and the Mediterranean the Israelites
marched in their flight from Pharaoh, and in which the
latter with his host was destroyed. The principal objections
to thii theory are stated by Dr. Thompson : (1) In order to
n-aoh their rmdeimm, the Israelites, according to Brngsch,
must have travelled nearly twenty miles north, crossing the
PeliHiac branch of the Nile ; and then on the next day must
have recrossed it— a great improhahillty. (2) It would have
been a blunder in strategy for Moses to have led the people
Into the treacherous S=rbonian bog. (3) The sacred narra
tive plainly declares that the Israelites were commanded
not to go by the way towards the Philistine country (Ex.
xni. 17), whereas this way led directly towards it. (4) The
scriptures declare that it was by the wny of the Bed Sea that
J™ I'raelies were to go (Ex. xiii. 18). and that it wast
the Ked Sea through which they passed (Ex. XT. 4). — Tb.J.
7
Israelites were on the march, assumed the form
of motion [" a dark pillar of smoke rising
towards heaven," Eeil], but, when the taberna-
cle rested, " perhaps more the form of a round
ball of cloud," It was the same fire, be says
further, in which the Lord revealed Himself to
Moses out of the bush (iii. 2), and afterwards
descended upon Sinai amidst thunder and light-
ning. He calls it the symbol of the divine fiery
jealousy. Even the Prophets and Psalms are
made to share in this literalness (Is. iv. 5 sq. ;
xlix. 10; Ps. xci. 5 sq. ; cxxi. 6). A sort of
solution is cited from Sartorius in hia Medita-
tions, to the effect that God, by special ac'Jon on
the earthly element, formed out of its sphere
and atmosphere a body, which He then assumed
and permeated, in order in it to reveal His real
presence. But is not that Indian mythology as
much as is the modern theological doctrine of
the Khuaic ? We leave the mystery in its unique-
ness suspended between this, world atid the
other, only observing that the- problem will have
to be solved, how, in later timies, the smoke of
the ofi'ering which rose up from the tabernacle
was related to the pillar of cloud. Likewise the
question arises: What was the relation between
the light of the perpetual lamp, or the late ex-
piring and early kindling fire of the burnt-offer-
ing, and the pillar of fire ? Vid. Ex. xxix. 89 ;
Num. xxviii. 4. The burnt-offering derives its
name from the notion of rising ; comp. especially
Judg. xiii. 20. The ark, as the central object
in the tabernacle, which generally preceded the
host, retired in decisive moments behind the
host, according to Josh. iv. 11 ; so the pillar of
cloud here, xiv. 19. Rationalism finds nothing
but a popular legend in the religious and sym-
bolic contemplation of the guidance of the living
God ; literalism seeks to paint the letters with
fantastic, golden arabesques. Assumption (as-
cension) of a cloud in the form of a ball whose
interior consists of fire !
XIV. 2. Turn back and encamp before
Pi-hahiroth.* — In Num. xxxiii. 8 Hahiroth;
Pi is the Egyptian article. This camping-place
is identified by many with the place named
Ajrud or Agirud, " now a fortress with a well
two hundred and fifty feet deep, which, how-
ever, contains such bitter water that camels can
hardly drink it, on the pilgrims' road from
Cairo to Mecca, four hours' distance northwest
* [The significance of the term 3^E^, used here and in
Num. xxxiii. 7, is generally overlooked or unwarrantably
modified by the commentators. Knobel (on ch. v. 22 and here)
argues that It means here only to turn ; but the passages he
adduci'S (among them one, Ps.xxxv.ll (P^alm xxxv. 13?), in
which the word does not occur at all) are none of them in
point. The word uniformly means to turn back, return, espe-
cially when physical motion is intended. It merely turrdvg
mide ha I been meaut, 1^0 or riJi) would have been used.
TT
The use of this word is conclusive againRt the hypothesis,
that Etham lay on the west of the Bitter Lakes. Ewald
(Hist, nf the People of Israrl, II. p. 68) argues that the use of it
also disproves the more current view of Bobinson and others,
that it lay south of the basin of these laki s. Possibly, how-
ever, this is not necessary; for Etham, being in the "edge
of toe wildern''S8," may have been just east of the line of the
Gulf or canal (as Robinson snsgests); and if Pi-hahiroth is
to bo found in the present Ajrud, the people may, indeed, in
poing from Etham thither, have had to turn " back." Still
there is no ronclusive evidence that Etham may not have
been north or north-east of the Bitter Lakes, and that, in
stead of pa"8ing down on the e«st side of the basin, they
tnrnod hack, and went along the west side. So, among
others, Canon Cook (in the Speaker's Commentary).— lE.j
48
EXODUS.
of Suez, comp. Niebuhr, Eeiae I., p. 216 ; Burck-
bardt, Syria, p. 626, and Robinson, Researches
I , p. 68. From Ajrud there stretches out a
plain, ten miles loog and as many broad, towards
the sea west of Suez, and from the foot of the
Atakah to the arm of the sea north of Suez
(Robinson I., p. 65). This plain very probably
served the Israelites as a oamping-place, so that
they encamped before, i. e. east of Ajrud towards
the sea. In the neighborhood of Hahiroth (Aj-
rud) must be sought also the other places, of
which thus far no trace has been discovered"
(Keil). On Migdol and Baal-zephon, vid. Keil
II., p. 43. Since the names Migdol and Baal-
zephon are without doubt designed to mark the
line of travel, it is natural to assume that they
indicate the whence and the whither of the route.
According to Robinson (I., p. 64) a rooky defile
called Muntula leads to the region of Ajrud (Pi-
hahiroth) on the left, and Suez on the right, on
the Red Sea. Strauss {Sinai und Oolgotha, p.
122) called the defile Muktala, and identifies
Baal-zephon with Suez. The question about
the passage of the Israelites through the Red
Sea is obscured by theological bias in both
directions. It is regarded as a natural event,
raised by legendary tradition into a miracle, by
Knobel, p, 135 sq., where the historical remarks
on the Red Sea and the analogies of the passage
are very noteworthy. Karl von Raumer, on the
contrary (Paldstina, p. 478, under the head,
Zug der laraeliten aus Egypten nach Kanaan),
regards as rationalistic even the view of Nie-
buhr, Robinson and others, that the passage
took place at Suez or north of Suez, quoting the
opinion of Wilson and o'her Americana (p. 480).
He adopts the view of Schubert, Wilson and
others, that the Israelites marched south of Spez
by Bessantin to the Red Sea. Robinson's re-
mark, that the hypothesis that the Israelites
passed over from the plain of Bede (Wady Ta-
warik) is overthrown by the circumstance that
there the sea is twelve miles wide, and that the
people did not have but two hours for the pas-
sage, Von Raumer overthrows by means of a
dictum of Luther s concerning the miraculous
power of God. Von Raumer also will not hear
to any natural event as the substratum of the
miracle. "The Holy Scriptures," he says,
" know nothing of a N. N. E. wind, but say that
an east wind divided the waters, that they stood
up on the right and the left like walls; there is
nothing said about an ebb, hence the duration
of the ebb is not to be taken into account." He
seems even to be embarrassed by the fact that
there is an alternation of ebb and flood in the
Red Sea; and in places where others also, in
individual cases, at the ebb-tide have ridden
through, he holds that the passage could not
have take place, e. g. where Napoleon in 1799
crossed the ford near Suez, and thus endangered
his life (Robinson I., p. 85). Even the co-ope-
ration of the wind, he holds, can be taken into
account only in the interest of the magnified
miracle, although it is designated not only in
ver. 21 as the cause of the drying of the sea,
but the like fact is also referred to in Moses'
song of praise (xv. 8 ; comp. Ps. cvi. 9 and
other passages). Hence, too, he holds, the east
wind must not be understood as being, more
exactly, a north-east wind.* Similar biblical
passages are given by Knobel, p. 139. The
objection that north of Suez there is not water
enough to have overwhelmed Pharaoh's host, is
removed by the observation of Stickel and
Kurtz, that, according to travellers, the Gulf of
Suez formerly extended much farther north than
now, and in course of time through theJ}lowing
in of sand has become shorter, and hence also
more shallow (Knobel, p. 140). Also Strauss
(Sinai und Golgotha, p. 123) regards the hypo-
tbesis that the passage took place as far south
as below the mountain Atakah, where the sea
is nearly twelve miles wide, as inadmissible,
although he insists, on the other hand, that
natural forces are insufficient to explain the
event. While the subject has been very care-
fully examined in this aspect, two principal fac-
tors of the miracle have been too little regarded:
(1) the assurance and foresightof the prophet that
in the moment of the greatest need a miracle of
deliverance would be performed ; (2) the mira-
culously intensifitd natural phenomenon, corre-
sponding to the harmonia prsestabiliia between the
kingdom of God and the kingdom of nature,
such that an extiaordinary ebb, by the aid of a
continuous night-storm which blew against the
current, laid bare the whole ford for the entire
passage of all the people of Israel with their
flocks, and that an equally violent wind from
the opposite direction might have made the flood,
hitherto restrained, a high tide, which must
have buried Pharaoh. He who in all this sees
only a natural occurrence will of course even
press the letter of the symbolic expression, that
tlie water stood up on both sides like a wall.-|-
Ver. 3. For Pharaoh ■will say. — We must
here remember the law regulating the writing
of theooratic history, according to which, as the
record of religious history, it puts foremost the
divine purpose, and passes over the human mo-
tives and calculations, by means of which this
purpose was effected, yet without leaving, in
t be spirit of an abstract Bupernaturalism, sueh
motives out of the account. Here, accordingly,
Moses cannot from the first have had the inten-
tion, in marching to the Red Sea, of alluring
Pharaoh to the extreme of obduracy, and thereby
into destruction. But he may well have antici-
pated that Pharaoh, pursuing him on the high-
way around the sea, might be quite as danger-
ous to him as a collision with the Philistines.
As one long acquainted with the Red Sea, he
saw only a single means of deliverance, viz., the
taking advantage of the ebb for his people, who
then by means of the returning flood could get
* rHengstenbsrg also, Hvsbrry of the Kingdom of God, H. p.
292, wliile agreeing with Roliinsou, against Wilson, Von Ball-
mer, etc., in reg.ird to tlio place of tlie passage, rejects tbe
tlie ry of au ebb tide, aided by a nortbeast wind, asserting
that D^Tp never denotes anything but an east wind. — Tr.]
t [This seems at first sight almost self-contradictory.
Those who see in the events described only natural occur-
rences would seem to be just those who, disbelieving in Hiiy-
tliing supernatural, would not press, or would reject, tliB
Biblical statement, that the water stood up as a wall on both
sides. But probably Lange means that the literal, prosaiJ
cast of mind which could not discern the supernatural elp-
nient in the apparently natural phenomena, would also be
unable to discern In the Biblical style the poetico-symbolio
element, an'i sn, whether accepting the Biblical staicmenU
or n' it, would under»taiid them only in their most literal,
prosaic stnse. — Tk.J.
CHAP. Xni. 17— XIV-81.
49
a long distance ahead of Pharaoh, in case he
should follow them. So fur human calculation
could reach ; but it received a splendid trans-
formation through the Spirit of revelation, who
disclosed to the prophet, together with the cer-
tainty of deliverance, the ultimate object of this
form of deliverance, viz , the finul judgment on
Pharaoh, which was yet to be inflicted. — They
are bewildered la the land. — The round-
about way from Ethara to the sea might seem
like an uncertain marching hither and thither.
— The wilderness hath shut them in. —
They cannot jjo through, and are held fast. The
section vers. 1—4 is a comprehensive summary.
Ver. 6. That the people fled.— This state-
ment probably preceded Pharaoh's judgment,
that the people wished to flee but wer« arrested.
So much seemed to be proved, that they were
not thinking only of a three days' journey in
the wilderness in order to hold a festival. — The
heart of Pharaoh . . . was turned. — Pha-
raoh may have been stirred up alike by the
thought of a fleeing host, and by that of one
wandering about helplessly. For they seemed
to be no longer a people of God protected by
God's servants, but smitten at the outset, and
doomed to slavery. But the king and his cour-
tiers needed to use an imposing military force
in order to bring them back, seeing they were
at least concentrated and armed. All the more,
inasmuch as his pledge, their right, and the con-
sciousness of perjury, determined the tyrant to
assume the appearance of carrying on war
against them. Whatever distinction may in
other cases be made between camping-places
and days' journeys, the three stations, Succoth,
Etham and Pi-hahiroth, doubtless designate
both, that there may be also no doubt concern-
ing Pharaoh's injustice.* Useless trouble has
been takeu to determine when Pharaoh received
the news, and pursued after the Israelites ; also
where he received the news, whether in Tanis or
elsewhere. According to Num. xxxiii. 7 they
pitched in Pihahiroth; but this was probably not
limited to an encampment for a night. Here then
after three days' journey they were to celebrate a
feast of Jehovah in the wilderness in a much
highgr sense than they could before have ima-
gined.
Vers. 6, 7. And he made ready his cha-
riot. — The grot.e>,
"Strength, might; not praise and glory" (Keil).
But that strength which the poet experiences,
that which becomes in him a fountain of song,
is his inspiration. Jah, concentration of the name
Jehovah, perhaps a more familiar form of the
awe-inspiring name.
Vers. 3-8. Jehovah as a warlike hero in contrast
with Pharaoh. — A man of war.— As such he
had become Israel's consolation and reliance by
his annihilation of Egypt's dreadful military
power, which Israel alone could not have resisted.
Thy right hand, Jehovah (ver. 6) does not
form a contrast with what is said of Jehovah as
a man of war, but is a further celebration of the
warlike power of Jehovah as displayed against
his foes.
Vers. 9, 10. Pharaoh, Jehovah's enemy, as the
persecutor of Bis people, in his arrogance, in con-
trast with Jehovah. — I will pursue. — The spirit
of the eager enemy is pictured in a masterly way
by the incomplete sentences following one another
without the copula. — They sank (plunged).
^SSx is translated by Knobel : "they whirled."
But lead falling upon water does anything but
whirl around. Keil translates TTi here "sank
~T
into the depths," referring to TvlVi and n71J?D.
the abyss of the sea, and alleging that lead oast
into water can neither whii; nor whirl. Yet it
might cause the peculiar sound of water desig-
nated by the words dash, splash, etc. The ques-
tion might be asked, whether a new picturesque
expression would not be preferable to the repe-
tition of the thought of ver. 5. But this is de-
cided by the consideration that they did not fall
upon the water, but the water came over them.
Vers. 11-13. Jehovah therefore has shown Himself
to be the Qod of Bis people Israel. — Who is like
unto thee. — The germ of the name Michael.
Jehovah appears here as the exalted God of
God's people, before whom the god-s (the hea-
then — and anti-Christian — forms of religion)
cannot stand. — Who is like unto thee, again
in fine repetition, for now Jehovah is celebrated
as He who glorifies Himself (or is glorified) in
holiness. He is made glorious by His holiness, by
the august distinction of His personality from all
hostile elements, of His people from the Egypt-
ians by the waters of the Red Sea, of His ligl>t
from darkness. The passage through the Bed
Sea has made manifest the holiness of Jehovah,
who henceforward through His revelation will
sanctify His people, as was fii'St typically pro-
mised by the deluge; comp. Ps. Ixxvii. 14 [13].*
— Fearful in praises. — The obscure expression
ribnri XII'J means not only summe venerandus,
but also that "man, because God performs fear-
ful miracles, can sing to Him praises worthy of
his wonderful deeds only with fear and trem-
bling" (Keil). But can one sing praises with
fear and trembling ? Yet songs of praise them-
selves may disseminate fear and terror in the
kingdom of darkness ; at any rate, Jehovah can
reveal His dreadfulness so as to call forth songs
of praise from His people. — Doing wonders.
— The notion of the miraculous likewise here
first appears more marked, as that of something
new and extraordinary, which through God's
creative power transcends the extraordinary
phenomena of the ancient natural world. — Only
a stretching out of His hand, and the earth swal-
lows them up. The words, says Keil, have no-
thing more to do with the Egyptians, but with
the enemies of the Lord in general, since the
Egyptians were swallowed by the sea. But the
contrast is between God's outstretched hand in
heaven and the absolute subordination of the
whole earth, which certainly includes the sea. —
In thy mercy. — Here the notion of grace be-
comes more definite in connection with the typi-
cal deliverance. — Unto thy holy habitation.
— See above. According to Knobel, this expres-
sion indicates that the song was composed at a
later period. Noticeable is the expression
tynp nU. The Bed Sea being the boundary-
line between Egypt and God's people, the region
or pasture (HIJ) of holiness began on the other
shore of the sea. Keil refers the phrase to Ca-
naan, the leading of the people into that land
being now pledged to them, so that .the expres-
sion, like many others, would have to be under-
stood in a prophetic sense.
Vers. 14-16. The terrifying effect of this exploit
of Jehovah among the heathen. — Even the singers
at the Bed Sea could proclaim this effect as an
accomplished fact. Burners of wars and victo-
ries even in the East circulate rapidly, and the
facts, through the reports, assume an imposing
form. Vid. Josh. ii. 9 ; ix. 9. The ramification
of this eff^ect is entirely in accordance with the
plan of the journey, comp. Num. xx. 18 sqq. ;
xxi. 4; Deut. ii. 3, 8. See above.— Still as
* [Where EflpS, the same expresBino which in Ex. xv.
11 is rendered "in holiness," is in the A. V. incorrectly
rendered " in the sanctuary." — Ta.]
f,4
EXODUS.
:i atone. — DDH may mean either to ttand still,
or to be rigid and gilent. We regard the first
sense as the more probable. As Israel must
march among the stones of the wilderness, so he
wishes also to march through the nations clean
to his goal. To this refers also the two-fold
nj^^-n;; ["pass over"], which Knobel refers
to the crossing of the Jordan — a proof of the
degree of senselessness to which modern criti-
cism can attain in its prejudices.
Vers. 17, 18. Concluding prayer and doxolngy. —
A part of ver. 17, as an original conclusion,
could not be at all dispensed with. — Thou shalt
bring them in. — According to Knobel, the
futures are preterites ( ! ) ; according to Keil,
they should not be read as wishes, but as simple
predictions. Predictions in reference to Jeho-
vah's actions! — In the mountain of thine
Inheritance. — According to Knobel, this is the
mountain-region of Canaan ; according to Keil,
the mountain which Jehovah had chosen, by the
offering of Isaac (Gen. xxii.), as his dwelling-
place, his sanctuary, Ps. Ixxviii. 54. There is
no ground for regarding this expression as a
vaticinium post eventum ; it seems, however, also
very one-sided to refer the prophecy directly to
the definite locality of the sanctuary on Moriah.
How long the tabernacle first stood in Shiloh,
how often the ark changed its place 1 In sym-
bolical language a mountain is a secure height
on which the people of Israel, Jehovah's posses-
sion, gained a firm lodgment. The centre of
this mountain is, on the one hand, the dwelling-
place of Jehovah ; on the other, the sanctuary
of the Lord C'J'IS) for His people. The brief
concluding sentence forms a worthy close ; n.
simple expression of unlimited conQdence :
Jehovah shall reign for ever and ever.
Vers. 19, 20. Transition to the antiphimy of
Miriam. — The horses of Pharaoh. — Keil un-
derstands that Pharaoh rode on his horse in
front of the army. But this is neither ancient
nor modern custom. Moreover, DO evidently
refers to chariots and horsemen. — The pro-
phetess. — "Not ob poeticam et musicam faculta-
tern (Rosenmiiller), but on account of her pro-
phetic gifts " (Keil). It is not well to distinguish
the two kinds of endowment within the theocracy
so sharply, in so far, that is, as the question of
endowment is concerned. — The sister of
Aaron. — So in Num. xii. 1-6, where, together
with Aaron, she takes sides against Moses.
According to Kurtz, she is so called because she
was co-ordinate with Aaron, but subordinate to
Moses. She stood, as the leader of Jewish wo-
men, appropriately by the side of the future
conductor of the religious service. According
to the New Testament, it was also customary to
name younger children after the older ones {e.g.
Judas of James). — The timbrel in her hand.
— The tabor, tambourine. — And ^ith dances.
— Here first appears the religious dance, intro-
duced by Miriam with religious festivities, but
probably not without Aaron's influence. The
frequent occurrence of this dance is seen from a
concordance.*
Ver. 21. Sing ye to Jehovah. — From this
derives the antiphony in the Old Testament and
New Testament, t. g. Judg. xi 34; 1 Sam. xviii.
6; xxi. 11; xxix. 6. Is not the occasion great
enough in itself, that the orgin of the antiphony
should have been looked for in Egypt ? For the
rest, vid. on the ancient Egyptian female dancers
with tambourines, Keil, Archdologie, § 137,
Note 8.
* r According to some, tlie word here rendered "dances"
really denotes a musical instrument used in connection with
dances, bo, e.g.^ Pro£, Marks in Smith's BibU DiUionary^
Am. Ed., p. 638.— Tb. 1.
FIFTH SECTION.
The journey through the wilderness to Sinai. Want of water. Marah. Elim. The
Wilderness of Sin. Quails. Manna. Rephidim (Massah and Meribah). The
Amalekites. Jethro and his advice, a human prelude of the divine legislation.
Chap. XV. 22— XVIII. 27.
THE STATIONS AS FAR AS SINAI.
1. Marah.
Chapter XV. 22-26.
22 So [And] Moses brought Israel from the Red Sea, and they went out into the
■wilderness of Shur ; and they went three days in the wilderness, and found no
23 water. And when they came to Marah, they could not drink of the [drink the]
waters of Marah, for they were bitter ; therefore the name of it was called Marah.
24, 25 And the people murmured against Moses, saying. What shall we drink? And
he cried unto Jehovah, and Jehovah showed him a tree, which, when he had cast
[and he cast it] into the waters, the [and the] waters were made sweet : there he
26 made for them a statute and an ordinance, and there he proved [tried] them, And'
CHAP. XV. 22— XV III. 27. 65
said, If thou wilt diligently [indeed] hearken to the voice of Jehovah thy God,
and wilt do that which is right in his sight, and wilt give ear to his command-
ments, and keep all his statutes, I will put none of these [the] diseases upon thee,
which I have brought [put] upon the Egyptians: for I am Jehovah that healeth
thee.
2. Elim. Chap. XV. 27.
27 And they came to Elim, where were twelve wells [fountains] of water, and three-
score and ten palm trees : and they encamped there by the waters.
8. The Wilderness of Sin. [The Manna and the Quails.)
Chapter XVI. 1-36.
1 And they took their journey from Eliin, 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,
2 And the whole congregation of the children of Israel murmured against Moses and
3 Aaron in the wilderness. And the children of Israel said unto them. Would to
God [Would that] we had died by the hand of Jehovah in the land of Egypt,
when we sat by the flesh-pots, and [flesh-pots,] when we did eat bread to the full ;
for ye have brought us forth into this wilderness, to kill this whole assembly with
4 hunger. Then said Jehovah [And Jehovah said] unto Moses, Behold, I will rain
bread from heaven for you ; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate
[a daily portion] every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my
5 law, or no [not]. And it shall come to pass that on the sixth day they shall pre-
pare that which they bring in ; and it shall be twice as much as they gather daily.
6 And Moses and Aaron said unto all the children of Israel, At even, then shall ye
7 know that Jehovah hath brought you out from the land of Egypt. And in the
morning, then ye shall see the glory of Jehovah ; for that [since] he heareth your
murmurings against Jehovah: and what are we, that ye murmur against us?
8 And Moses said, This shall be, when [And Moses said. Since] Jehovah shall give
you ia the evening flesh to eat, and in the morning bread to the full ; for that
[since] Jehovah heareth your murmurings which ye murmur against him, and
[against him,] what are we? your murmurings are not against us, but against
9 Jehovah. And Moses spake [said] unto Aaron, Say unto all the congregation of
the children of Israel, Come near before Jehovah : for he hath heard your mur-
10 murings. And it came to pass, as Aaron spake unto the whole congregation of
the children of Israel, that they looked toward the wilderness, and, behold, the
11 glory of Jehovah appeared in the cloud. And Jehovah spake unto Moses, saying,
12 I have heard the murmurings of the children of Israel : speak unto them, saying,
At even ye shall eat flesh, and in the morning ye shall be filled with bread; and
13 ye shall know that I am Jehovah your God. And it came to pass that at even
[at even that] the quails came up, and covered the camp : and in the morning the
14 dew lay round about the host [camp]. And when the dew that lay [the layer of
dew] was gone up, behold, upon the face of the wilderness there lay [the wilderness]
15 a small round thing, as small aa the hoar frost on the ground. And when the
children of Israel saw it, they said one to another, It is manna [What is this?],^
for they wist [knew] not what it was. And Moses said unto them. This is the
16 bread which Jehovah hath given you to eat [for food]. This is the thing which
Jehovah hath commanded. Gather of it every man according to his eating, an
oraer for every man [a heafi], according to the number of your persons ; take ye
17 every man for them, which [that] are in his tents [tent]. And the children of
18 Israel did so, and gathered, some more, some less. And when they did mete [And
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL.
• fXVI. IB. Nin I'D' Gosenius and Knobel derive |D from [JO. *o ajjporfion ; FUrst (Concordmce) from the San-
Bcrit mani. But most scholars, following the evident implication of the narrative itself, regard ja as the Aramaic equiva-
lent of nn. Even Furst so renders It in his " lauslrirtt Fraoht-Bibel." Comp. Michaelis, Supplemmta ai Umm Eebraiea,
-Te.]
56 EXODUS.
they measured] it with an [the] omer, he [and he] that gathered much had no-
thing over, and he that gathered little had no lack ; they gathered every m-an
19 according to his eating. And Moses said [said unto them], Let no man leave of
20 it till the morning. Notwithstanding [But] they hearkened not unto Moses ; but
some of them [and some] left of it until the morning, and it bred worms,^ and
21 stank : and Moses was wroth with them. And they gathered it every morning,
22 every man according to his eating : and when the sun waxed hot, it melted. And
it came to pass, that on the sixth day they gathered twice as much bread, two omers
for one man [each man] : and all the rulers of the congregation came and told
23 Moses. And he said unto them, This is that which Jehovah hath spoken. To mor-
row is the rest of the holy sabbath [is a day of rest, a holy sabbath] unto Jehovah :
bake that which ye will bake to-day [bake], and seethe [boil] that [that which] ye
will seethe [boil] ; and that which [all that] remaineth over lay up for you to be
24 kept until the morning. And they laid it up till the morning, as Moses bade : and
25 it did not stink, neither was there any worm therein. And Moses said. Eat that
to-day ; for to-day is a sabbath unto Jehovah : to-day ye shall [will] not find it in
26 the field. Six days ye shall gather it ; but on the seventh day, which is the [on
27 the seventh day is a] sabbath, in [on] it there shall be none. And it came to pass,
that there went out some of the people on the seventh day for to [day to] gather,
28 and they found none. And Jehovah said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep
29 my commandments and my laws ? See, for that Jehovah hath given you the sab-
bath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days; abide ye
30 every man in his place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day. So the
31 people rested on the seventh day. And the house of Israel called the name thereof
Manna : and it was like coriander seed, white ; and the taste of it was like wafers
32 made [like cake] with honey. And Moses said. This is the thing which Jehovah
commandeth, Fill an omer of it [An omer full of it] to be kept for [throughout]
your generations ; that they may see the bread wherewith I have fed you in the
33 wilderness, when I brought you forth from the land of Egypt. And Moses said
unto Aaron, Take a pot [basket], and put an omer full of manna therein, and lay
34 it up before Jehovah, to be kept for [throughout] your generations. As Jehovah
35 commanded Moses, so Aaron laid it up before the Testimony, to be kept. And
the children of Israel did eat manna [the manna] forty years, until they came to
a land inhabited ; they did eat manna [the manna], until they came unto the bor-
36 ders of the land of Canaan. Now an omer is the tenth part of an ephah.
4. Rephidim. The place called Massah and Meribah.
Chapter XVII. 1-7.
XVII. 1 And all the congregation of the children of Israel journeyed from the
wilderness of Sin, after their journeys [journey by journey], according to the com-
mandment of Jehovah, and pitched in Rephidim : and there was no water for the
2 people to drink. Wherefore [And] the people did chide with Moses, and said.
Give us water, that we may drink. And Moses said unto them, Why chide ye
3 with me ? wherefore do ye tempt Jehovah ? And the people thirsted there for
water ; and the people murmured against Moses, and said. Wherefore is this that
thou hast [Wherefore hast thou] brought us up out of Egypt, to kill us and our
4 children and our cattle with thirst? And Moses cried unto Jehovah, saying,
What shall I do unto this people? they be almost ready to [a little more, and tliey
5 will] stone me. And Jehovah said unto Moses, Go on [Pass on] before the people,
and take with thee of the elders of the people; and thy rod wherewith thou smotest
« [XVI. 20. "And it bred worms;" D'JJ^l'JI D;1'1. T1"> Heb. word seems to be the Fut. of Dn defectively written,
and therefore to mean : " rose up Into (or with) worma," Kalisch says, that the form QTil is used instead of D^'l *«
(how that it comes from n:31 (DOT) in the sense of 2)!i/re/>. So Maurer and Ewttld (dr., § 281, (i). nut it is doubtfU
whether DDT (assumed as the root from which comes HBT " worm ") really means putre/i/ at all. FUret defines it by
" crawl." Moreover, it would be Inverting the natural order of things to say, that the manna herjime putrid with worms;
the worms are the consequence, not the cause, of the piitridneas. Ro-enmllller, Filrst, Arnheim and others render by
** swarm," •' abound," but probabh as a free rendering lor " rose up." De Wette : da wuchsen Wurmer The A Y ^onde^
ing may stand aa a subitantlally correct reproduction of the sense.— Tb.]. ' ' "
CHAP. XV. 22— XVIII. 27. 57
6 the river, take in thine [thy] hand, and go. Behold, I will stand before thee there
upon the rock in Horeb ; and thou shalt smite the rock, and there shall come water
out of it, that [and] the people may [shall] drink. Aad Moses did so in the sight
7 of the elders of I-rael. And he called the name of the place Massah, and Meribah,
because of the chiding of the children of Israel, and because they tempted Jehovah,
saying, Is Jehovah among us, or not ?
5. Amalek. The dark side of heathenism.
Chaptek XVII. 8-16.
8, 9 Then came Amalek, and fought with Israel in Rephidim. And Moses said
unto Joshua, Choose us out men, and go out, fight with Amalek : to-morrow I will
10 stand on the top of the hill with the rod of God in mine [my] hand. So [And]
Joshua did as Moses had said to him, and fought with Amalek : and Moses, Aaron,
11 and Hur went up to the top of the hill. And it came to pass, when Moses held
up his hand, that Israel prevailed : and when he let down his hand, Amalek pre-
12 vailed. But Moses' hands were heavy : and they took a stone, and put it under
him, and he sat thereon; and Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands, the one on the
one side, and the other on the other side; and his hands were steady until the going
13 down of the sun. And Joshua discomfited Amalek and his people with the edge
14 of the sword. And Jehovah said unto Moses, Write this for a memorial in a [the]
book, and rehearse [lit. put] it in the ears of Joshua : for [that] I will utterly put
15 [blot] out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven. And Moses built an
16 altar, and called the name of it Jehovah-nissi : For [And] he said. Because Jehovah
hath sworn that [For a hand is upon the throne of Jah ;'] Jehovah will have war
with Amalek from generation to generation.
6. Rephidim and Jethro. Tlie bright side of heathenism.
Chapter XVIII. 1-27.
1 When [Now] Jethro, the priest of Midian, heard of all that God had done for
Moses, and for Israel his people, and [how] that Jehovah had brought Israel out
2 of Egypt ; Then [And] Jethro, Moses' father-in-law, took Zipporah, Moses' wife,
3 after he had sent her back [after she had been sent away]. And her two sons ; of
which [whom] the name of the one was Gershom ; for he said, I have been an alien
4 [a sojourner] in a strange land : And the name of the other wots Eliezer ; for the
God of my father, said he, was mine [my] help, and delivered me from the sword
5 of Pharaoh : And Jethro, Moses' father-in-law, came with his sons and his wife
unto Moses into the wilderness, where he encamped [was encamped] at the mount
6 of God : And he said unto Moses, I thy father-in-law Jethro am come unto thee,
7 and thy wife, and her two sous with her. And Moses went out to meet his father-
in-law, and did obeisance, and kissed him ; and they asked each other of their wel-
8 fare ; and they came into the tent. And Moses told his father-in-law all that
Jehovah had done unto Pharaoh and to the Egyptians for Israel's sake, and [sake]
all the travail [trouble] that had come upon them by the way, and how Jehovah
9 delivered them. And Jethro rejoiced for [over] all the goodness [good] which
Jehovah had done to Israel whom he had delivered [in that he had delivered them]
10 out of the hand of the Egyptians. And Jethro said. Blessed 6e Jehovah, who hath
* fXVII. 16. We have giTen the most literal rendering of this difacult passage. But possibly ^3, instead of meaning
"for" (or "because "), may (as on oftpn in Grf»ek) be the mere mark of a quotation, to be omitted in the translation. The
meaning of the expression itself is very doubtful. The A. V., following some ancient a-ithorities, takes it as an oath; but
for this there is little ground. Kelt interprets : "The hand rais-d to the throne of Jehovah in heaven; Juhovah's war
aEalnst Amalek," i. e. the hands of the Israelites, like those of Moses, must be raised heavenward towafds Jehovah's
throne, while they wage war against Amalek. Others interpret: " Recause a hand (viz. the hand of the Amalekites) is
against the throne of Jab, the. efore Jehovah will torever have war with Amalek." This interpretation has the advantage
over Eeil's of giving a more natural rendering to 7 V, which indeed in a few cases does mean " up to." but only when it
is (ae ft is not here) connectud with a verb which requires the preposition to be so rendered. Others (perhaps tho miijority
of modern exegetes) would read DJ ("banner"), instead of 03 ("throne"), and interpret: ' The hand upon Jehovah'a
banner; Jehovah has war," ete. This conjecture is less objectionable than many attempted improvements of the text,
inasmuch as the name of thealt»ir, " Jehovah-ni^si " ("Jehovah, my banner "), seems to require an explanation, and would
receive it if the reading were QJ, instead of D3— Te.].
68
EXODUS.
delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians, and out of the hand of Pharaoh,
11 who hath delivered the people from under the hand of the Egyptians. Now I
know that Jehovah is greater than all [all the] gods : for [yea], in the thing
12 wherein they dealt proudly he was above [dealt proudly against] them. And
Jethro, Moses' father-in-law, took a burnt-offering and sacrifices for God: and
Aaron came, and all the elders of Israel, to eat bread with Moses' father-in-law
13 before God. And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses sat to judge the peo-
14 pie : and the people stood by Moses from the morning unto the evening. And
when Moses' father-in-law saw all that he did to the people, he said. What is this
thing that thou doest to the people? Why sittest thou thyself aloue, and all the
15 people stand by thee from morning unto even? And Moses said unto his father-
16 in-law, Because the people come unto me to inquire of God : When they have a
matter, they come unto me; and I judge between one and another, and I do make
17 [I make] them know the statutes of God, ^nd his laws. And Moses' father-in-law
18 said unto him, The thing that thou doest is not good. Thou wilt surely wear
away, both thou, and this people that is with thee : for this [the] thing is too
heavy for thee ; thou art not able to perform it thyself [able to do it] alone.
19 Hearken now unto my voice I will give thee counsel, and God shall be [God be]
with thee : Be thou for the people to God-ward [before God], that thou mayest
20 bring [and bring thou] the causes [matters] unto God : And thou shalt teach [And
teach] them ordinances and laws [the statutes and the laws], and shalt shew [and
shew] them the way wherein they must walk, and the work that they must do.
21 Moreover [But] thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear
God, men of truth, hating covetousness [unjust gain] ; and place siuih over them,
to he [as] rulers of thousands, and [thousands,] rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties,
22 and rulers of tens: And let them judge the people at all seasons [times]: and it
shall be, that every great matter they shall bring unto thee, but every small matter
they [they themselves] shall judge : so shall it be [so make it] easier for thyself,
23 and they shall [let them] bear the burden with thee. If thou shalt do this thing,
and God command thee so, then thou shalt [wilt] be able to endure, and all this
24 people shall also [people also will] go to their place in peace. So [And] Moses
25 hearkened to the voice of his father in-law, and did all that he had said. And
Moses chose able men out of all Israel, and made them heads over the people,
26 rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens. And
they judged the people at all seasons [times]: the hard causes [matters] they
27 brought unto Moses, but every small matter they judged themselves. And Moses
let his father-in-law depart ; and he went his way into his own land.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL.
General Survey of the Section. Israel's jour-
ney from the shore of the Red Sea to Mt. Sinai.
The host enters the wilderness of Shur (the same
as the wilderness of Elham), and its first camp-
ing-place is hy the bitter waters of Marah. The
second is Elim. Next comes the encampment on
the Red Sea recorded in Num. xxxiii. Still
later the entrance into the wilderness of Sin,
and the encampment in it. With this is con-
nected the sending of the manna and of the
quails. Then follows the stay in Rephidim with
three leading event'C the water from the rock,
the victory over Amalek, and Jethro's advice
concerning an orderly judicial system. Accord-
ing to Num. xxxiii. it must be assumed that the
people encamped on the Red Sea just as they
touched the wilderness of Sin; for it was not till
after this that they entered the wilderness (ver.
11 1, as they also at the first entered the wilder-
derness of Shur, on the borders of which they
found themselves at the Tery oatset. Between
the encampment on the Red Sea and that in Re-
phidim we find in the Book of Numbers Dophkah
and Alush ; and it is said that they journeyed
from the wilderness of Sin to Dophkah. Enobel
observes that these two stations, not mentioned
in Exodus, are omitted because nothing of his-
torical importance is connected with them. Also
about this journey from Ay un Musa to Sinai there
has been an immense deal of discussion, as well
as about the journey from Raemses to the Red
Sea. Vid. Robinson I., p. 90, Bi'am, Israel's Wan-
derung von Gosen bis zum Sinai (Elberfeld, 1859);
Strauss, Sinai und Golgotha, p. 124; von Bau-
mer, Palastina, p. 480; Tisohendorf, Aus dm
heiligen L'mde, p. 23 ; Kurtz, History nf the Old
Covenant III., p. 15sqq.; Bunsen V., 2, p. 155;
and the commentaries.
There is general agreement as to the locality
of the first stations. It is assumed that Israel,
after the passage of the sea, encamped at Ayun
Musa (the Wells of Moses), opposite the high
mountain Atakah, on the other side of the Red
Sea. The next camping-place, Marah (Bitter-
ness;, is found about sixteen and a half hours, or
CHAP. XV. 22— XVm. 27.
69
a iiree days' journey beyond, by the well Howara
or Hawara, of which Robinson says: "The basin
is six or eight feet in diameter, and the water
about two feet deep. Its taste is unpleasant,
saltish, and somewhat bitter. . . . The Arabs .. .
consider it as the worst water in all these re-
gions" {Pal. H., p. 96). Cf. Seetzen III., p. 117,
and Keil II., p. 58, who quotes divergent opinions
of Ewald and Lepsius. — The next camping-place,
EUm, is two and a half hours further south, in
what is now the Wady Qhurundel, with a beau-
tiful vegetation consisting in palms, tamarisks,
acacias, and tall grass. — a prominent stopping-
place on the way from Suez to Sinai. " The
way from Howara to this place is short, but the
camping-places of an army in march, lilce that of
the Israelites, are always determined by the sup-
ply of water" (Keil). The fourth stopping-place,
called in Num. xxxiii. 10 the one on the Bed Sea,
is found at the mouth of Wady Taiyibeh (Robin-
son I., p. 105), eight hours beyond Wady Ghu-
ruudi"l. From th'S point the route becomes less
easy to fix. In Nam. xxxiii. 11 we read: "They
removed from the Red Sea, and encamped in the
wilderness of Sin." * Here in Exodus it is said
that the wilderness lies between Elim and Sinai.
This addition seems designed not only to give
the general direction (since that would be quite
Buperfluons), but to designate the middle point
between EUm and Sinai. The chief question
here is, whether the wilderness of Sin as tra-
versed by the Israelites, is to be located further
south on a sea coast, where the plain is for the
most part a good hour wide, as is assumed by
many (not aU, as Br'am says), or whether the
high table land el Debbe, or Debbet en Nasb,
with its red sand and sand-stones, is to be talsen
for the Wilderness of Sin (Knobel). Accord-
ingly, there are two principal routes, of which
the first again branches into two. By the coast
route one can go along the coast as fir as Tur
(Gwald), and from that in a northeast direction
come to, Sinai; or more directly (i. e., at first in
an inland direction from the fountain Murkha)
enter through the waJies Shellal and Badireh
(Butera) into the wadies Mukatteb and Peirau,
and reach Mt. Horeb (de la Borde, von Raumer,
and others).-)- The other route, the mountain or
highland route (Burckhardt and others) turns
from Taiyibeh " suulheast through Wady Shu-
beikah over a high table-land, with the mountain
Sarbut el Jemel, then through Wady Ilumr upon
* Inasm'ioh as P^tusium, as being a marshy city, is called
S'W, an 1 S nai, heiiig a rocky moantain, is jnst tite opposite,
the que^tiim arise-) : Wtiat is the common feature of a marshy
wildomeas, and of a rocky mountain range? Possibly, the
points and den'iculations of tlie thorn-bush. An old inter-
pretation chUh Sinai itself a thorn-bush, fr tm the thorn-bush
\T\i^) in which Jehovah revealed Himself to Moses. The
Btony wilde-npsa may have the thorn-bush in common with
the marshy fens.
t f Lange omits another way which might have been taken,
UK., fro-n el-Murkhah along the coast, and thence up Wady
Feiran, instead of »he more direct way through the wadies
Shellal and Mulcatteb into Wady Feiran. This is the course
which the mnmbers of the Sinai Survey Expedition unani-
mously decided ti be the mist probable, inasmuch as the
road over the pass of Nagb Buderah, bitweon the wadi s Shel-
lal and Mukatteb, must have lieen consrructed at a time pos-
terior to the Exodus (B. H. Palmer: Tim Desert nfthe Exodus,
p. 276), Robinson also mentions this route as at least eqnallv
probable wiih the other (I., p. 107). Palmer is quite decided
that no other route afforded facilities for a large caravan such
afl that of the sraelites,— Tb.]
the wide sandy plain el Debbe, or Debbet en
Nasb " (Keil), and on through several wadies
directly to Horeb. For and against each of these
routes much may be said. Of Knobel, p. 162
sqq. ; Keil II. p. 61. According to the latter
view, advocated by Knobel and Keil, the camp-
ing-place in the wilderness of Sin is to be sought
in Wady Nasb, where among date-palms a well
of ample and excellent water is to be found.
The second seacoast route was taken by Strauss
and Krafft {Sinai und Golgotha, p. 127). Also
the last time by Tischendorf {Aus dtm hdligen
Lande, p. 35). The same way is preferred by
Bram in his work " Israel's Wanderung," etc.
Likewise Robinson regards this as the course
taken by the Israelites, though he himself took the
one on the table-land. To decide is not easy,
and is of little importance for our purpose. But
the following observations may serve as guides:
(1) If, as is most probable, the names Sin and
Sinai are connected etymologically, this is an
argument for the table-land route, especially as
it also seems to lie more nearly midway between
Elim and Sinai ; (2) the water seems here to be,
though less abundant, yet better, than in most of
the salty fountains on the seacoast, whose tur-
bidness also is easily to be explained by its situ-
ation on the coast {vid. Robinson, p. llO) ; (3)
on the table-land, in the depressions of which ve-
getation was everywhere found, there was cer-
tainly better provision for the cattle than on the
seacoast, where they were often entirely sepa-
rated from pasture land by mountain barriers ;
(4) if the encampment in the wilderness of Sin
was also an encampment on the Red Sea, the
preceding encampment could not, without causing
confusion, be designated by the term " on the
Red Sea." So much for the mountain route.
Ritter has argued against the view that the jour-
ney was made on the table-land through Wady
Ntsb, in the Evangeliseher Kalender. Vid. Kurtz
III., p. 61. For the rest, each way had its pecu-
liar attractions as well as its peculiar difficulties.
The mountain route allowed the host to spread
itself, as there was much occasion for doing ; it
presented grand views, and prepared the people
for a long time beforehand for its destination,
Sinai. It is distinguished by "the singular and
mysterious monuments of Surabit el-^hadim"
(Robinson I., p. 113; Niebuhr, p. 235). By the
way which runs half on the seacoast, half
through the mountains, we pass through the re-
markable valley of inscriptions, Mukatteb, and
through the grand valley Feiran, rich in tama-
risks, in whose vicinity lies the lofty Serbal, re-
garded by Lepsius as the mountain on which the
law was given. On the inscriptions on the
rocks and cliffs in the valley Mukatteb, see Ti-
schendorf, "Ausdemh. Lande," p. 39 sqq.; Kurtz
III., p. 64. By these they are ascribed for the
most part to Nabatsean emigrants and to pilgrims
going to attend heathen festivals. On the "rock
of inscriptions" see also Ritter's reference to
Wellsted and von Schubert, Vol. XIV., p 459.
On the former city Faran in Feiran, see Tischen-
dorf, p. 46. The camping-place in the wilder-
ness of Sin is, as follows from the above, vari-
ously fixed; according to some it is the plain on
the sea south of Taiyibeh, which, however, must
then be called the wilderness of Sin up to the
60
EXODUS.
mountain range, if (he camping-place is to be
distinguished from the one on the Red Sea; ac-
cording to Bunsen and others, the camping-place
was in the place called el Munkhah. According
to others, it is the large table-land el Debbe or
Debbet en Nasb. The camping-places in the wil-
derness of Sin being indeterminate, so are also the
two following ones at Dophkah and Alush (Num.
xxsiii. 12). Conjectures respecting the two sta-
tions beyond the wilderness of Sin are made by
Knobel, p. 174, and Bunsen, p. 156. The last
station before the host arrives at Sinai is Rephi-
dim. This must have been at the foot of Horeb,
for "Jehovah stood on the rook on Horeb, when
He gave water to the people encamped in Rephi-
dim (xvii. 6), and at the same place Moses was
visited by Jethro, who came to him at the mount
of God" (Knobel). This is a very important
point fixed, inasmuch as it seems to result from
it, that Serbal is to be looked for north of, or be-
hind, Rephidim and Horeb, but the Mt. Sinai of
the Horeb range in the south. * The great plain
at the foot of Horeb, where the camp of the Is-
raelites is sought, is called the plain er-Raha
(Knobel derives D'TSI, "breadth," "surface,"
"plain," from 131, to be spread). | For a refu-
tation of Lepsius, who finds Rephidim in Wady
Feiran, and Sinai in Serbal, see Knobel, p. 174.
On Serbal itself (Palm grove of Baal) vid. Kurtz
III., p. 67. Between Serbal and the Horeb group
lies Wady es-Sheikh. From the mouth of this
wady towards Horeb the plain of Rephidim is
thought to begin. Other assumptions : The de-
file with Moses' seat, Mokad Seidna Musa,
or the plain of Suweiri. Perhaps not very dif-
ferent from the last mentioned [vid. Keilll., p. 79;
Strauss, p. 131). The most improbable hypothesis
identifies Rephidim with Wady Feiran (Lepsius). J
1. Marah. Chap. xv. 22-26.
On the wilderness of Shur, vid. Keil II., p. 57.
Particulars about Howara [Hawara (Robinson),
Hawwai-a (Palmer)], Knobel, p. 160. — The bitter
salt water at Marah.^ The miracle here consists
* fThii is not perspicuona. Inasmuch as Serbal is not
mentioned in the Bible, no inference can be drawn from these
eircumatancea respecting its location. Moreover, Serbal is
not north of Sinai (Jebel Musa), bnt nearly east — a little
north only. And why is "north" called "behind' ? The
" hinder " region, according to Hebrew conceptions, is in the
went. — Tr.]
t [The theory that Rephidim is to be Bouffht in er-Raha
(advocated by Knobel, Keil, Lange, and others), is certainly
open to the objection that that plain is close by Mt. Sinai
itself, and is in all probability the camping-place " before the
mount," mentioned in xix. 1, 2, Palmer (p. 112) and Rob-
inson (T., p. T55) are emphatic in the opinion that the plain
of Set>ai' eh, south-east, of Jebel Musa, is quire insufjicient to
have accommodated the Israelitish camp. Repliidim, there-
fore, being (ac -ordmii to xix. 2) at least a day s march from
the place whence Moses weot up to receive the law, cannot
well have been er-Baha, Stanley (Sinai muL PaUsi'Tie, p. 40)
and Palmer defend the old vit^w that it is to be looked for at
Feiran, ne.ar Mt. Serhal, Palmer argues that the distance,
apparently much too great to have been traversed in a single
day, is no insuperable objection, provided that by "the wil
dernesB of Sinai" we understand the mouth of Nagb Hawa,
which may have been reached in a single day by the direct
route from Teiran. — Tr.]
t [On 1 his point see the last note. A good map of the whole
peninsula is to be found in Smith and Grove's Atlas of Ancient
Geography. — Tr.]
§ "The Arabs call the well exitiimi, intAritua, probably in
accordanr e with the nofiou rhat that which is bitter is deadly
(2 Kings iv. 40)." Knobel. The Arabs may make humorous
remarks about bad weils of water, like the Germans on bad
in great part in the fact that Jehovah showed
Moses a tree by which the water was made drink-
able. That the tree itself was a natural tree is
not denied by the strictest advocates of a literal
interpretation. A part of the miracle is to be
charged to the assurance of the prophetic act,
and the trustful acceptance of it on the part of
the people. Various explanations: The well was
half emptied, so that pure water flowed in (Jo-
sephus) ; the berries of the ghurlud shrub were
thrown in (Burokhardt). According to Robin-
son, the Beduins of the desert know no means of
changing bitter salt water to sweet. ■' In Egypt,"
as Josephus relates, "bad water was once puri-
fied by throwing in certain split sticks of wood"
(Bram). This leads to the question, how far
the salt water might have been made more
drinkable by Moses' dipping into it a crisp,
branchy shrub, as a sort of distilling agent.
For this the numerous clumps of the ghurkud
shrub which stand around the well, and whose
berries Burokhardt wished to make use of, are
very well suited. The distillation consists in
the art of separating, in one way or another,
salt, from water, especially by means of brush-
wood; generally, for the purpose of getting
salt; but it might be done for the opposite pur-
pose of getting water. In proportion as a bunch
of brushwood should become inerusted with the
salt, the water would become more free from the
salt. For the rest, Robinson observes, concern-
ing the water of the fountain Hawara, "Its
taste is unpleasant, saltish, and somewhat bitter;
but we could not perceive that it was very much
worse than that of Ayun Musa." It must fur-
ther be considered that the Jews had the soft,
agreBable Nile water in recollection. Kurtz has
even found an antithesis in the fact that Moses
made the undrinkable water at Marah drinkable,
as he had made the sweet water of the Nile un-
drinkable. We are here also to notice that the
effect of Moses' act was not permanent, but con.
siated only in the act itself, the sume as is true
of the saving eflFect of the sacraments in relation
to faith. Here, too, is another proof that Moses
had a quite peculiar sense for the life of nature,
a sense which Jehovah made an organ of His
Spirit. With the curing of the well Jehovah
connected a fundamental law, stating on what
condition He would be the Saviour of the people.
Bram (p. 114) points out, with reason, that the
Israelites, in drinking salty water, which has a
laxative effect, might well apprehend that the
much-dreaded sicknesses of Egypt, the pesti-
lence, the small-pox, the leprosy, and the inflam-
mation of the eyes, caused by the heat and the
fine dry sand, together with the intense reflection
of light, might attack them here also in the wil-
derness, the atmosphere of which otherwise haa
a healing effect on many diseased constitutions.
Therefore, in curing that well, Jehovah esta-
blished the chief sanitary law for Israel. It is
very definite, as if from the mouth of a very
careful physician well acquainted with his case.
General rule: perfect compliance with Jehovah's
direction ! Explanation of it: if thou doest what
is right in His eyes, and wilt give ear to His
commandments, and keep all His statutes (in re-
wines, in hyperbolical expressions wt.ioh are not to be taken
literally.
CHAP. XV. 22— XVIII. 27.
61
ference to the means of spiritual recovery, diet-
etics), then I will put none of the diseases
upon thee which I have put upon the
Egyptians, for I am Jehovah, thy physi-
cian. — But how can it be added, "and there he
proved them?" The whole history has been a
test of the question, whether the people would
obey the directions of Jehovah given through
Moses, and particularly whether, after the sin-
gular means employed by Moses, they would
drink in faith. Every test of faith is a tempta-
tion for sinful man, because in his habituation to
the common order of things lies an incitement
not to believe in any extraordinary remedy, such
as seems to contradict nature. But out of the
actual temptation which the people had now
passed through, proceeded this theocratic sani-
tary law, as a temptation perpetually repeating
itself. There is even still a temptation in the
principle of the theocratic therapeutics, that ab-
solute certainty of life lies in absolute obedience
to God's commands and directions. According
to Keil, the statute here spoken of does not con-
sist in the divine utterance recorded in ver. 26,
but in an allegorical significance of the fact
itself: the leading of the Israelites to bitter
water which the natural man cannot and will
not drink, together with the making of this water
Bweet and wholesome, is to be a pil, that is, a sta-
tute and a law, showing how God at all times will
lead and govern His people, and a BBU'D, that is,
an ordinance, inasmuch as Israel may continu-
ally depend on the divine help, etc. If this is so,
then the text must receive an allegorical inter-
pretation not obviously required.
Furthermore, it is a question whether, after the
tremendous excitements through which the peo-
ple had passed, bitter and salty water like that
at Marab, might not have been more beneficial
than hurtful to (hem. Salt water restores the
digestion when it has been disturbed by excite-
ment. Notice, moreover, the stiff-neckedness or
stubbornness peculiar to the disposition of slaves
just made free, as it gradually makes its appear-
ance and increases. It was in their distress at
Pi-hahiroth that they first gave utterance to their
moroseness; true, they cried to Jehovah, but
quarrelled with Moses. They seemed to have
forgotten the miracle of deliverance wrought in
the night of Egypt's terror. Here they even
murmur over water that is somewhat poorer than
usual. The passage through the Red Sea and
the song of praise seem to be forgotten. In the
wilderness of Sin the whole congregation mur-
murs against Moses and Aaron, i.e., theirdivinely
appointed leaders, from fear of impending fa-
mine, probably because the supplies brought
from Egypt were running low ; — the ample re-
freshment enjoyed at Elim seems to be forgotten.
In Rephidim they murmur on account of want of
water; — the miraculous supply of manna and
quails seems to be forgotten. On the other hand,
however, the wise augmentation of severity in the
divine discipline becomes prominent. At Marah
nothing is said of any rebuke uttered by Jeho-
vah, as is done later. Num. xi. 14, 20. Espe-
cially noticeable is the great difference between
the altercation at Marah, in the wilderness of
Sin, and the mutiny at Kadesh, J^um. zx. The
altercation there is expressly called a striving
with Jehovah, ver. 18.
2. Mim. Chap. xv. 27.
A fine contrast with Marah is afforded here,
both in nature, and in the guidance of the peo-
ple of God, and in (he history of the inner life.
In Elim, IBaumgarten and Kurtz find a place
expressly prepared for Israel, inasmuch as by
the number of its wells and palm trees it bears in
itself the seal of this people: every tribe having
a well for man and beast, and the tent of each
one of the elders of the people (xxiv. 9) having
the shade (according to Baumgarten, the date.q)
of a palm-tree. Even Keil finds this too su-
pernaturalistic; at least, he observes that, while
the number of the wells corresponds to the
twelve tribes of Israel, yet the number of the
palm trees does not correspond to that of the
elders, whiib, according to xxiv. 9, was much
(?) greater. On neither side is the possibility
of a symbolical significance in the numbering
thought of; without doubt, however, the em-
phasis given to the number seventy is as signifi-
cant as that given to the number twelve. Keil's
allusion to the 23d Psalm is appropriate. See
particulars about Elim in Knobel, p. 161 ; Tisch-
endorf, p. 36.*
3. The Wilderness of Sin. Chap. xvi. 1—36.
Notice first the aggravated character of the
murmuring. Now the whole congregation mur
murs. And not against Moses alone, but against
Moses and Aaron, so that the murmuring is more
definitely directed against the divine commission
of the two men, and so against the divine act of
bringing them out of Egypt, .that is, against
Jehovah Himself. Moreover, the expression of
a longing after Egypt becomes more passionate
and sensual. At first they longed resignedly
for the graves of Egypt, in view of the danger
of death in the desert. The next time, too, they
say nothing about their hankering after the
Nile water in view of the bitter water of Marah.
But now the flesh-pots of Egypt and the Egyp-
tian bread become prominent in their imagina-
tion, because they conceive themselves to be
threatened with famine. Corresponding to the
aggravation of the murmuring are the beginnings
of rebuke. Says Knobel, "What the congre-
gation had brought with them from Egypt
had been consumed in the thirty days which had
elapsed since their exodus (ver. 1), although
the cattle brought from Egypt (xii. 38) had not
jet all been slaughtered or killed by thirst (?),
since after their departure from the wilderness
of Sin they still possessed cattle at Rephidim,
which they wished to save from thirsting to
death (xvii. 3). For the herds had not been
taken merely to be at once slaughtered; and
meat could not take the place of bread. In their
vexation the people wish that they had died in
Egypt, while filling themselves from the flesh-
pots, 'by the hand of Jehovah,' i. e., in the last
plague inflicted by Jehovah upon Egypt, rather
than gradually to starve to death here in the
* [Wilson, (Lands of the Bible, Tol. I., p. 174), would iden-
tify with Elim, not Wady Ghurimdel, but Warty Waseit
(IJseit), five or six miles Bouth of Wady Ghurundel.— TK.].
62
EXODUS.
wilderness." In the verb used (|n Niph.) is
expressed a murmuring just passing over into
contumacy. Yet here too Jehovah looks with
compassion upon the hard situation of the peo-
ple, and hence regards their wealtness with
indulgence.
The natural substratum of the double miracle
of feeding, now announced and brought to pass,
is found in the food furnished by the desert to
nomadic emigrants. The manna is the miracu-
lous representative of all vegetable food ; the
quails denote the choicest of animal prey fur-
nished by the desert. The first element in the
miracle is here too the prophetic foresight and
assurance of Moses. The second is the actual
miraculous enhancement of natural phenomena ;
the third is here also the trustful acceptance of
it : the miracle of faith and the religious mani-
festation answering to it. The ultra-superna-
turalistio view, it is true, is not satisfied with
this. It holds to a different manna from that
provided by God in nature, and ought, in con-
sistency, to distinguish the quails miraculously
given from ordinary quails.
In this case, too, the trial of faith was to be a
temptation (ver. 4), to determine whether the
people would appropriate the miraculous blessing
to themselves in accordance with the divine pre-
cept, and so recognize Jehovah as the giver, or
whether they would go out without restraint
and on their own responsibility to seize it, as if
in a wild chase. Here, therefore, comes in the
establishment of the fundamental law concerning
the healing of life ; and this is done by the or-
daining of the seventh day as a day of rest, the
Sabbath. As man, when given over to a merely
natural life, is inclined to seek health and re-
cuperation without regarding the inner life and
the commandments of God, so he is also inclined
to yield himself passionately and without re-
straint to the indulgence of the natural appetite
fur food, and, in his collection of the meant)
of nourishment, to lose self-collection, the self-
possession of an interior life. As a token of this
the Sabbath here comes in at the right point,
and therefore points at once from the earthly
manna to the heavenly manna, (tiirf. John vi. ).*
The announcement of the miracle. I 'will lain.
The first fundamental condition of the feeding:
recognition of the Giver, comp. James i. 17. —
From heaven. Though this in general might
also be said of bread " from the earth," yet
here a contrast is intended. From the sky
above, i. e., as a direct gift. — The people shall
go out and gather. A perpetual harvest, but
limited by divine ordinance. — A daily portion
every day. Reminding one of the petition,
■"Give us this day,' etc. An injunction of con-
tentment. — On the sixth day. They will
find, on making their preparation of the food,
that the blessing of this day ia sufficient also for
the seventh. — At even. A gift of flesh was to
precede the gift of manna. Thereby they are
to understand that Jehovah has led them out of
Egypt, that He has provided for them a substi-
tute for the flesh-pots of Egypt. But on the next
* Further on follows the fundamental law of warfare in B"If-
defence ftirnlnat heathen enemies, as well a^ the fundamental
law for the unhes ta'ing appropriation of heathen wisdom.
morning they shall see the glory of Jehovah, i. e.
they shall recognize the glorious presence of
Jehovah in the fact that He has heard their mur-
muring against Moses and Aaron, and has ap-
plied it to Himself, in that He presents them the
manna. — For -what are we ? Thus do the
holy men retire and disappear behind Jehovah. —
But the people also mubt come to this same con-
viction, must repent of their murmurings, and
feel that they have murmured against Jehovah,
not against His servants. Thus with perfect
propriety is a sanction of the sacred office inter-
woven into the same history into which the his-
tory of the Sabbath is interwoven. Hence it
follows also that the true sacred office must au-
thenticate itself by miraculous blessings. Both
are sealed by a specially mysterious revelation.
It is significant that in this connection Aaron
must be the speaker (ver. 9), that he must sum-
mon the people before Jehovah to bumble them-
selves before His face on account of their mur-
muring. Equally significant is it, that the con-
gregation, while Aaron speaks, sees (he mani-
festation of Jehovah's glory in the cloud.
Especially significant, however, is it, that they
see this glory rest over the wide wilderness, as
they turn and look towards it. A most beauti-
ful touch ! With the wilderness itself the way
through the wilderness is transfigured at this
moment. If we assume (with Keil) thai the
summons to appear before Jehovah is equivalent
to a summons to come out of the tents to the
place where the cloud stood, then it must be
further assumed, that the cloud suddenly changed
its position, and removed to the wilderness, or
else appeared in a double form. Neither thing
can be admitted. Hereupon follows the last
solemn announcement of the miraculous feeding,
as the immediate announcement of Jehovah
Himself.
The double miracle itaelf. — The quails came
up. — This narrative has its counterpart in the
narrative of the quails in Num. xi. 4 sqq., just
as the chiding on account of want of water at
Rephidim has its counterpart in the .story of the
water of strife (Meribah), distinctively so-called
in Num. xx. The relation of the narratives to
one another is important. The murmuring of
the people in the beginning of their journey
through the wilderness is treated with the
greatest mildness, almost as a child's sickneiis;
but their murmuring towards the end of the
journey is regarded as a severe offence, and is
severely punished; it is like the offence of a
mature man, committed in view of many years'
experience of God's miraculous help. At the
water of strife even Moses himself is involved
in the guilt, through his impatience; and the
gift of quails in abundance is made a judgment
on the people for their immoderate indulgence.
Another difference corresponds to the natural
features of the desert: the quails do not keep
coming ; but the people find themselves accom-
panied by the manna till they are tired of eating
it. — Came up. — nSjf. The coming on of a host
of locusts or birds has the optical appearance
of a coming up. — l7t?n, " with the article of ft
word used collectively of a class " (Keil). LXX.
CHAP. XV. 22— XVIII. 27.
63
oprvyo/i^rpa, Vulg. cotumicei. Large quails,
whose name in Arabic comes from their fatness
— 17^, fat. SaysKnobel: "They become very
fat, increase enormously, and in the spring mi-
grate northward, in the autumn southward.
Here we are to conceive of a spring migration.
For the events described took place in the second
month, i. e. about our May (xvi. 1 ; Num. x. 11),
and the quails came to the Israelites from the
gouth-east, from the Arabian Gulf (Ps. Ixxviii.
26 sq. ; Num. xi. 31). In his journey from
Sinai to Edomitis in March, Schubert (II., p.
860 sq.) saw whole clouds of migratory birds,
of such extent and denseness as never before ;
they came from their southern winter quarters,
and were hastening toward the sea-coast (?).
Probably they were quails, at lenst in part."
Further particulars on the abundance of quails
in those regions, see in Knohel (p. 1G6) and
Keil {XI., p. 66). " They are sometimes so
exhausted that they can be caught with the
hand" (Keil). Some identify the fowl with the
kata of the Arabs [a sort of partridge]. Of course
it must be assumed that the Israelites in the wil-
derness were no more confined to the quails for
meat than to the manna for bread.
The mama. Vers. 13, 14. A layer of dew.
A deposit or fall of dew. — A dust, i. e. an
abundance of small kernels. If the OTraf Tie-/.
DSippn is explaiaed simply according to the
verb*'iDn, to peal off, scale off, we get the no-
tion of scaly or leaf-shaped kernels, but not that
of coagulated kernels. But perhaps the notion
of shelled kernels of grain is transferred, in ac-
cordance with appearance, to these kernels.
"According to ver. 31 and Num. xi. 7," says
Knobel, " the manna resembled in appearance
the white coriander seeds (small, round kernels
of dull white or yellowish green color) and the
bdellium (resin)." Again he says: "According
to the Old Testament, the dew comes from hea-
ven (Deut. xxxiii. 13, 28; Prov. iii. 20; Zeoh.
viii. 12; Hag. i. 10); with it the manna de-
scended (Num. xi. 9) ; this seems therefore like
bread rained down from heaven, and is called
'corn of heaven,' ' bread of heaven ' (Ps. Ixxviii.
24; cv. 40)," Further on Knobel relates that
the ancients also supposed, that honey rained
down from the air ; hence he should more
exactly distinguish between the notions of at-
mosphere and of heaven as the dwelling-place
of God, comp. John vi. 31, 32.— Man hu.— The
explanation that JD is to be derived from [JO.
to apportion, and that this expression therefore
means: "a present is that" (Kimchi, Luther,
Gesenius, Knobel. Kurtz), does not suit the con-
text, which would make Moses repeat what the
people had said before him, to say nothing of
the fact that the derivation of the notion " pre-
sent" from the verb is disputed. On the con-
trary, the interpretation of the LXX., Keil and
others, ri iari tovto, perfectly accords with the
connection. They said: "What is that?" be-
cause they did not know what it was. " ]n for
riD belongs to the popular language, and is pre-
served in Chaldee and Ethiopic, so that it is
indisputably to be regarded as an old Shemitic
form" (Keil).
8
The natural mnnna and the miraculous manna. —
Comp. the articles in the Bible UictioBarics.
Keil says: "This bread of heaven was given by
Jehovah to His people for the first time at a sea-
son and in a place where natural manna is still
found. The natural manna is now found in the
peninsula of Sinai usually in June and .luly,
often even as early as in May, most abundantly
in the vicinity of Mt. Sinai, in Wady Feiran and
Es-sheikh, but also jn Wady Ghurundel and
Tayibeh (Seetzen, Reisen, III., p. 76, 129), and
some valleys south-east of Mt. Sinai (Bitter,
XIV., p. 676), where it in warm weather oozes
by night out of the branches of the tarfa-tree, a
sort of tamarisk, and in the form of small glo-
bules falls down upon the dry leaves, branches,
and thorns which lie under the trees, and is
gathered before sunrise, but melts in the heat
of the sun. In years when rain is abundant, it
falls more plentifully for six weeks; in many
years it is entirely wanting. It has the appear-
ance of gum, and has a sweet, honey-like taste,
and when copiously used, is said to be a gentle
laxative (Burokhardt, Si/ria, p. 600 ; Wellsted in
Bitter, p. 674). There are thus presented some
striking points of resemblance between the man-
na of the Bible and the tamarisk manna. Not
only is the place where the Israelites first re-
ceived manna the same as that in which it is
obtained now, but the time of the year is the
same, inasmuch as the 15th day of the seco d
month (ver. 1) falls in the middle of our May,
01? even still later. Also in color, form and ap-
pearance the resemblance is unmistakable, since
the tamarisk manna, though of a dull yellow
color, jet when it falls upon stones is described
as white ; the resemblance is likewise seen in
the fact, that it falls in kernels upon the earth,
is gathered in the morning, melts in the sun,
and tastes like honey. While these points of
agreement indubitably point to a connection be-
tween the natural and the Biblical manna, yet
the differences which run parallel with all of
the resemblances indicate no less clearly the
miraculous character of the heavenly bread."
Thus Keil leaves the matter, without reconciling
the two positions. The miraculous manna, he
says, was enjoyed by the Israelites forty years
long everywhere in the wilderness and at all
seasons of the year in quantity equal to the
wants of the very numerous people. Hengsten-
berg's theory {Oeschichte des Bileam, p. 280) that
the natural manna which is formed on the leaves
of the tarfa-bush by the sting of an insect
(according to a discovery of Ehrenberg's), is
the natural substratum of the miraculous abun-
dance of manna, is combated by Kurtz III , p.
84. Kurtz can conceive that the people lived at
Kadesh thirty-seven years in apostasy, and that
nevertheless during all this time they received
regularly their portion of manna for every man.
By this method of distinguishing the miraculous
from the natural manna, we come to the hypo-
thesis, that the people of Israel were fed with
two kinds of manna ; for it will certainly not be
assumed that the natural fall of manna during
all this time was supernaturally suspended, as
in a similar manner Keil on xvi. 10 makes out
two pillars of cloud. Von Raumer and Kurtz,
we may remark, go as much beyond Keil,
64
EXODUS.
as Keil does beyond Hengstenberg. Vid
Keil, p. 72, and the note on the same page.
Between the baldly literal interpretation and
the embellishments of wonder-loving legends the
view above described recognizes nothing higher;
it does not understand the symbolic language of
the theocratic religion, nor see how an under-
standing of this lifts us as much above the mythi-
cal as the literal interpretation. The defect of
the latter consists, as to substance, in the circum-
stance that it identifies the conception of nature
with that of the common external world raised by
a Providential government only a little above a
material system: as to form, it is defective in
that it identifies the word and the letter, and can-
not understand and appreciate the specific dif-
ference between the heathen myth and the sym-
bolical expression of the theocratic spirit as it
blends together ideas and facts. Kurtz refers
to the miracle in John ii., without clearly appre-
hending that this miracle would be the merest
trifle, if his notion of the miracle of the manna
is the correct one, to say nothing of the evident
conflict of this with John vi. 32. Knobel, whose
learned disquisition on the manna (p. 171 egg.)
should be consulted, thus states the distinctive
features of the miraculous manna, which he re-
gards as a legendary thing: (a) The manna, ac-
cording to the Biblical account, "comes with the
mist and dew from heaven (xvi. 14) ;" — so Kurtz
III., p. 28 But since the mist does not come
down from the throne of God, the meaning is
simply that it comes from above, not from below,
(b) " It falls in such immense abundnnce that
every person of the very numerous people daily
receives an omer (vers. 16, 36)." The omer,
however, is a very moderate hand measure, the
tenth part of an ephah, originally hardly a defi-
nite quantity, vid. Keil II., p. 74. (o) Further-
more, " those who gather the manna collect al-
ways only just what they need, no more and no
less." This is clearly to be symbolically ex-
plained of contentedness and community, (d)
" The manna fills only on the six working-days,
not on the seventh day, it being the Sabbath
(ver. 26 sq.)." On this is to be observed that this
exlraordinaryfaot was needed only once, in order
to sanction the Sabbath; the fact may also be
explained by the circumstance that on the day
before an extraordinary, double fall of manna
took place, (e) "The manna which is kept over
from one working-day to another becomes wormy
and offensive (ver. 2 )), whilst that preserved
from the sixth day to the seventh keeps good
(ver. 24), for which reason, except on the sixth
day, the manna must always be eaten on the day
when it is gathered." This too is a singular,
enigmatical fiot; but it is cleared up by looking
at it in its rich i leal light. The supply which
heathen providence lieaps up breeds worms, de-
cays, and smells offensively: not so the supply
required by the Sabbath rest, sacred festivities,
and divine service, (f ) " It is ground in the
hand-mill, crushed in the moriar, and cooked by
baking or boiling, made e. g. into c:ikes (ver. 23,
Num. xi. 8). (g) It appears in general as a sort
of bread, tasting like baked food (ver. 31, Num.
xi. 8), and is always called DnS. even ]J1 (vid.
ver. 15), to say nothing of the miraculous dou-
bling of the quantity (vers. 5, 22)." This latter
feature comes at once to nothing, if we assume
that on the sixth day there was a double fall of
manna.* How far the manna, which contains no
farinaceous elements, but only glucose, was min-
gled with farinaceous elements, in order to be
used after the manner of farinaceous food, we
need not inquire; at all events the Israelites
could not afterwards have said, of a properly
farinaceous substance, and that too of a superior
kind, " Our soul loatheth this light food." The
splendor with which faith, wonder, and grati-
tude had invested the enjoyment of the miracu-
lous food had vanished. According to Keil, the
connection of the natural manna with the miracu-
lous manna is not to be denied, but we are also not
to conceive of a mere augmentation, but the om-
nipotence of God created from the natural sub-
stance a new one, " which in quality and quan-
tity as far transcends the products of nature as
the kingdom of grace and glory outshines the
kingdoms of nature." But Christ, in John vi.,
speaks of a manna in the kingdom of grace and
glory, in contrast with the Mosaic manna. — Ac-
cording to Kurtz, who, especially in opposition
to Karl Ritter, follows the opinion of Schubert,
the manna was prepared by a miracle of omnipo-
tence in the atmosphere; according to Schubert,
that "tendency to the production of manna which
at the right time permeated the vitalizing air,
and with it all the vital forces of the land, has
propagated itself still, at least in the living
thickets of the manna-tamarisks." The natural
manna, then, is a descendant of the Biblical
manna, but a degenerate sort, developed by the
puncture made by the cochineal insect in the
branches of the tarfa-shrubl
We are specially to consider further (1) the
preservation of a pot, containing an omer of
manna, in the sanctuary; (2) the specification of
the time during which the use of manna by the
Israelites lasted. As to the first point, the ob-
ject was to preserve the manna as a religious me-
morial; hence the expression of the LLX., OTiji-
voQ ;|;pi;aot)f, is exegetical. "The historian here
evidently anticipates the later execution of the
charge now given. Comp. Hengstenberg, Pen-
tateuch II., p. 169 sqq." (Kurtz). As to the se-
cond point, it is expressively said that Israel had
no lack of the miraculous manna so long as they
were going through the wilderness; but Kurtz
infers from Josh. v. 11, 12, that the Jews did not
cease to eat manna till after the passover in Gil-
gal, though they had other food besides The
correct view is presented in the Commentary oa
Joshua, oh. v. 12, where stress is laid on the con-
trast between Jehovah's immediate preservation
of the food of the wilderness, on the one hand,
and the historical development that took the
place of this, on the other hand, i. c, the natural
order of things which belongs to civilized life;
corresponding to the fact that the ark took the
place of the pillar of cloud and fire, as leader of
the people.
The question whether in this narrative the
fThis reply, apparently not very rlpav, is the same »!
the on« made abnvo to epecificatioii (d) of Knobd. L .iigo
distinguishes between a miraeid ms liill and an extraaraiaary
fill, and supposes Ijesldes that theoxtraordiuar.i (double) foil
may ha\ e been limiied to one occnsion.— Te.]
CHAP. XV. 22— XVIII. 27.
65
Sabbath is instituted for the first time (Heng-
Blenberg), or again renewed (Liebetrut), is thus
«ccided by Kurtz (III., p. 42): The observance
of the Sabbath was instituted before the law,
nay even in Paradise, but " the law of the Sab-
bath first received a legal character through the
revelation on Sinai, and lost it again through the
love whioh is the fulfilling of the law, in the new
covenant (Col. 11. 16, 17)." In the fulfilment
nothing indeed is lost, but every law becomes a
liberating principle. It is noticeable how in the
history of Moses, patriarchal customs, to which
also probably the Sabbath belonged, are sanc-
tiooed by miraculous events and receive a legal
character ; as has already been seen in various
instances (festivals, worship, sanitary laws, offi-
cial ranic, the Sabbath).
a. Bephidim and the place called Temptation
and Strife.
Following the route of the mountain road the
Israelites now came out of the region of the red
sandstone into that of porphyry and granite
(Knobel, p. 174). They came thither " accord-
ing to their day's journeys," i. e., after several
day's journeys. In ^um. xxxiii. 12 the two sta-
tions Dophkah and Alush are mentioned. On
the conjecture of Knobel (p. 174) concerning
these places, vid. Keil II., p. 76.
According to Knobel (p. 176), "popular tra-
dition transfers the occurrence here mentioned
tu Eadesb, therefore to a later time, (Num. zx.
8)." It is a universal characteristic of modern
scientists that, not being free from the propen-
»ly to give predominant weight to sensible
things, they are easily carried away with exter-
nal resemblances, hence with allegories, and so
may disregard the greatest internal differences
0f things. Thus as the external resemblance of
man to the monkey is more impressive to the
naturalist than the immense inward contrast, so
Biblical criticism often becomes entangled in this
modern allegorizing ; even Hengstenberg pays
tribute to it in identifying the Simon of Bethany
with the Pharisee Simon on the Lake of Galilee,
and so, the Mary of Bethany with the sinful
woman who anointed Jesus.
As the sending of the quails in Num. xi. 5
eqq., forms a companion-piece to that in Ex. xvi.,
so the water of strife in Num. xx. 2 sqq., to the
water of strife in Rephidim. There is a resem-
blance even in the sounds of the names of the
deserts Sin (pD thorn?), and Zin (|S low palm).
So also the want of water and the murmurs of
the people, ami in consequence of this the seem-
ingly identical designation of the place; also the
giving of water out of the rock. Aside from the
difference of time and place, the internal features
"t the two histories are also very different ; even
the difference in the designations is to be ob-
served, the place Massah and Meribah (temp-
tation and strife), and the water Meribah, over
which the children of Israel strove with Jehovah,
and He was sanctified (shown to be holy) among
them. In the first account Jehovah is only
tempted by the people ; in the second. He is
almost denied. In the one, Moses is said to
amite the rock, away from the people, in the
presence of the ciders; in the other, he and
Aaron are said to speak with the rock before all
the people. Also the summary description of
the journey in Dent. i. 37, leaves no doubt that
the second incident is entirely different from the
first. Likewise in Deut. xxxiil. 8, two different
things are mentioned, and the temptation at
Massah is distinguished from the strife at the
water of strife, (oomp. Ps. xcv. 8). It lies in
the nature of the case that the religious mind
would celebrate in » comprehensive way its
recollection of the most essential thing in the
two events, viz., the miraculous help of Jehovah,
Deut. viii. 15, Is. xlviii. 21, Ps. Ixxviii. 15, 20, cv.
41, cxiv. 8, Neh. ix. 15. Why chide ye with
me? — The true significance of this chiding with
him Moses at once characterizes : it is a tempt-
ing of Jehovah. This he could do after what he
had affirmed in xvi. 8, 9. After the giving of
the quails and the manna, designed to confirm
the divine mission of Moses and Aaron, they
had now to do with Jehovah, when they quar-
relled with Moses. But how far did they tempt
Jehovah? Not simply "by unbelieving doubt
of the gracious presence of the Lord" (Keil).
They sinfully tested the question whether Jeho-
vah would again stand by Moses, or would this
time forsake him. Hence their reproach against
Moses reaches the point of complaining that he
is to blame for their impending ruin — a com-
plaint which might well have been followed by
stoning. Jehovah's command corresponds with
this state of things. Moses is to go confidently
away from the people to the still distant Horeb,
but to take with him the elders of the people as
witnesses, and there to smite the rook with his
rod. But Jehovah is to stand there before him
on the rock. Does this mean, as Keil represents,
that God humbles Himself like a servant before
his master ? He rather appears as Moses' visible
representative, who rent the rock and produced
the miraculous spring The rock that followed
them, says Paul, was Christ (1 Cor. x. 4).
Thence again is seen the divine human nature
of the miracle, a mysterious synthesis of natural
feeling and prophecy of grace. On Tacitus' in-
vidious narrative of Moses' having discovered a
spring of water by means of a drove of wild
asses, see Kurtz III., p. 48.
b. Rephidim and Amalek. Hostile Heathen-
dom.
As in the account of Amalek we see typically
presented the relation of the people of God to the
irreconcilably hostile heathendom; so in that
of Jethro their relation to heathendom as mani-
festing a kindly disposition towards the theo-
cracy.
Exhaustive treatises on the Amalekites may
be found in the dictionaries and commentaries,
especially also in Hengstenberg (Pentateuch
IL,p. 247sqq., and Kurtz IIL, p. 48). In the way
nations used to be formed, Amalek, a grandson
of Esau, might quite well have become a nation
by Moses' time {vid.. Gen. xxxvi.),_ Edomite
leaders forming a nucleus around which a con-
glomerate multitude gathered. The Edomite ten-
dency to barbarism was perpetuated in Amalek,
and so in his descendants was developed a nation
of Bedouin robbers, who might have spread from
EXODUS.
Idumea to Sinai, and perhaps in their capacity
as waylayers had come to give name to a moun-
tion of the Amalekitea in the tribe of Ephraim
(Judg. xii. 15). Thua might a little people,
which was kindred to Israel in the same way as
Edom was, after Israel was regenerated to be
the people of God, be the first to throw them-
selves hostilely in their way, and thus become
the representative of all hostile heathendom, as
opposed to the people and kingdom of God. In
accordance with this was shaped the theocratic
method of warfare against Amalek. and the
typical law of war (see Keil II., p. 77). It is
significant that the Midianites in the branch
represented by Jethro should present heathen-
dom on friendly terms with Israel, although the
relationship was much less close. On the denial
of the identity between the Amalekites and the
above-mentioned descendants of Esau, see Kurtz
III., p. 49. The descendant of Esau might, how-
ever, have received his name Amalek by transfer
from the Bedouin horde which became subser-
vient to him.
Then came Amalek. According to Dent.
XXV. 18, the attack of the Amalekites was a des-
picable surprise of the feeble stragglers of the
Israelites. " We have to conceive the order of
the events to be about as follows: The murmur-
ing on account of want of water and the relief
of that want took place immediately after the
arrival at Rephidim of the main part of the host
which had hurried forward, whilst the rear,
whose arrival had been delayed by fatigue, was
still on the way. These were atiacked by the
Amalekites" (Kurtz). The several features in
the contest now beginning are these: Joshua
with his chosen men ; Moses on the mountain ;
the victory; the memorial of the fight; the altar
Nissi and its typical significance — eternal war
against Amalek!
Joshua. Jehovah is help, or salvation. Thus,
according to Num. xiil. 16, his former name,
ffoshea {help, or salvation) was enriched; and
perhaps the present war and victory occasioned
the change. — Choose us out men. It was
the first war which the people of God had to
wage, and it was against a wild and insidious
foe. Hence no troops of doubtful courage could
be sent against the enemy, but a select company
must fight the battle, with Joshua at the head,
whose heroic spirit Moses had already discovered.
Precipitancy also was avoided. They let the enemy
remain secure until the following day. The host
of warriors, however, had to be supported by the
host of spirits in the congregation interceding
and blessing, as represented by Moses in con-
junction with Aaron and Hur. See my pamphlet
" Vom Krieg undvom Sieg."
The completed victory was to be immortalized
by the military annals (" the book ") and by the
living recollections of the host ("in the ears of
Joshua"). — The altar JV/ssj (Jehovah my banner),
however, was to serve the purpose of inaugura-
ting the consecration of war by means of right
military religious service. Accordingly, the two
essential conditions of the war were, first, Jeho-
vah's summoning the people to the sacred work
of defense, secondly, Jehovah's own help. And
also the war against Amalek is perpetuated until
he is utterly destroyed only in the sense that
Amalek typically represents malicious hostility
to the people and kingdom of God.
" Hur comes repeatedly before us (xxiv. 14,
xxxi. 2) as a. man of high repute, and as an as-
sistant of Moses. Josephus [Ant. III. 2, 4), fol-
lowing a Jewish tradition, of the correctness of
which there is much probability, calls him the
husband of Miriam, Moses' sister" (Kurtz).
According to xxxi. 2, he was the grandfather of
Bezaleel, the architect of the tabernacle, of the
tribe of Judah, and the son of Caleb (Chron.
i. 17.)
It is clear that the transaction with the rod of
Moses was in this case too a symbolic and pro-
phetic, a divine and human, assurance of victory.
Therefore the rod must be held on high, and in-
asmuch as Moses' hands cannot permanently
hold it up, they must be supported by Aaron and
Hur. In the holy war the priesthood and no-
bility must support the prophetical ruler. Thus
is produced an immovable confidence in Jehovah
Nissi, afterw.ards called Jehovah Sabaoth (of
hosts). From His throne, through Moses' hand,
victorious power and confidence flow into the host
of warriors. The book begun by Moses, in which
the victory over Amalek is recorded, is important
in reference to the question concerning the autho-
rity of the Bible. " When Jehovah further com-
mands Hoses to intrust to Joshua the future ex-
tirpation of Amalek, it becomes evident eT*n
now that he is destined to be Moses' successor"
(Kurtz). A conjecture about the hill where
Moses stood may be found in Knobel, p. 177;
Keil, II., p. 79. Subsequent wars waged against
Amalek by Saul and David are narrated in 1 Sam.
XV., xxvii.,xxx. Kurtz regards the elevated hand
of Moses not as a symbol of prayer to Jehovah, but
only of victorious confidence derived from Jeho-
vah, III., p. 51. Keil rightly opposes the sepa-
ration of the bestowment of victory from prayer,
p. 79, but goes to the other extreme when he
says, " The elevated rod was a sign not for the
fighting Israelites, since it cannot even be made
out that they, in the confusion of battle, could
see it, but for Jehovah." In all human acts of
benediction prayer and the impartatiou of the
blessing are united.
c. Jethro, and heathendom as friendly to the
people of God.
Inasmuch as chap. xix. records the establish-
ment of the theocracy, or of the typical kingdom
of God, it is in the highest degree significant that
the two preceding sections fix the relation and
bearing of the people of God towards heathen-
dom. Out of one principle are to flow two op-
posing ones, in accordance with the twofold
bearing of heathendom. The heathen, repre-
sented by Amalek, who are persistently hostile,
wage war against Jehovah Himself; on them de-
struction is eventually to be visited. The hea-
ihen, however, represented by Jethro, who aie
humane and cherish friendship towards the peo-
ple of God, sustain towards Christianity, as it
were, the relation of catechumens. The people
of God enter into commercial and social inter-
course with then] under the impulse of religion
and humanity ; similarly James defines the rela-
tion of Christianity to Judaism. [There is no-
thing about this in his E[ istle. Is the reference
to Acts XV. 20, 21 ?— Tr.]
CHAP. XIX. 1-25.
(i.) The pious heathen as guest, relative, and
protector of Moses' family, and as gu-ardian of
the spiritual treasures of Israel. Vers. 1-4.
It seems like too legal a conception, when Keil
calls Jethro the "first-fruits among the heathen
that seek the living God," and incidentally ad-
duces his descent from Abraham. Jethro did
not become a Jevr, but remained a priest in
Midian, just as John the Baptist did not become,
properly speaking, a Christian, but remained a
Jew. It is more correct, when Keil says that
Amalek and Jethro typify and represent the two-
fold attitude of the heathen world towards the
kingdom of God. In opposition to the special
conjectures of Eurtz and Banke, especially also
the assumption that there was not time enough in
Bephidim for this new incident, see Keil, II. p. 84.*
fii.) The pious heathen as sympathetic friend
of Moses and of the people of God in their victo-
ries. Vers. 5-9.
Notice the delicate discretion which both men
observe, with all their friendship towards each
other. Jethro does not rush impetuously for-
ward; he sends word of his approach. Moses
receives him with appropriate reverence, but first
leads him into his tent; for whether and how he
may introduce him to his people, is yet to be de-
termined.
(iii.) Religious song and thank-oflfering of the
pious heathen. Vers. 10-12.
The lyrical,! festive recognition of the great-
ness of Jehovah in His mode of bringing the
Egyptians to confusion through their very arro-
gance does not involve conversion to Judaism ;
* [Kurtz's conjecture is that what led Jethro to visit Moses
was the report of the victory of the Ismelites over Amaielc ;
to which the reply is that uotbing is sai I of this, hut, on t'^e
contrary, that it was the report of the deliverance fr m
Dgypt that occasioned the visit. Banke's conjecture is that
Jethro'B visit took place after the giving of the law, on the
ground that the stay at Bephidim wa^ too short; to which it
is replied that, if (as is assumed from xvi. 1 and xix. 1) half a
month intervened between the arrival at the wilderness of
Sin and the arrival at the wilderness of Sioai, ample time is
afforded for all that is recorded in chap, xviii. — Te.]
f [Lauge regards xviit 10, IL as poetic In form. — Is.]
neither does the burnt-offering and the I hank-
offering: but they do indicate ideal spiritual fel-
lowship, aside from social intercourse.
(iv.) The religious and social fellowship of the
people of God, even of Aaron the priest, and of
the elders, with the pious heathen. Ver. 12.
A proof that the religious spirit of the Israelites-
was as yet free from the fanaticism of the later
Judaism is seen in the fact that Aaron and the
elders could take part in a sacrificial feast with
Jethro. Common participation in the Passover
meal would have been conditioned on circum-
cision.
( V. ) The political wisdom and organizing talent
of the pious heathen thankfully recognized andl
humbly used by the great prophet himself. Vers..
13-26.
Jethro' s advice given to Moses, like political
institutions and political wisdom, is not a gift of
immediate revelation, but a fruit of the sensus
communis. But observe that Jethro acknowledges
the prophetic vocation of Moses, and Jehovah's
revelation in regard to all great matters (ques-
tions of principle), just as Moses acknowledges
the piety of his political wisdom. Moses and
Jethro came nearer together than the mediaeval
church and ordinary liberalism. Vers. 17 and
18 contain very important utterances conoerning
the consequences of such a hierarchy. On the
distribution of the people according to the deci-
mal system, see Keil, II., p. 87. The decimal
numbers are supposed by him to designate ap-
proximately the natural ramifications of the people
[ten being assumed to represent the average size
of a family]. A further development of the in-
stitution (comp. Deut. i. 9) took place later, ac-
cording to Num. xi. 16.
(vi.) Distinct economies on a friendly footing
with each other. Ver. 27.
Analogous to this occurrence is the covenant
of Abraham with Abimelech; the friendly rela-
tions maintained by David and Solomon with
Hiram, king of Tyre, the queen of Sheba, etc.
SECOND DIVISION: MOSES AND SINAI.
FOUNDATION IN THE LAEGER SENSE.
Chapters XIX.— XXXI.
FIRST SECTION.
The Anival at Sinai and the Preparation for the Giving of the Law. The Covenant
People and Covenant Kingdom. Institution of the Covenant.
Chap. XIX. 1-25.
1 In the third month when [after] the children of Israel were gone forth out of
2 the land of Egypt, the same day came they into the wilderness of Sinai. For they
were departed [And they journeyed] from Rephidim, and were come [and came]
to the desert of Sinai, and had pitched [and encamped] in the wilderness, and there
3 Israel camped [was encamped] before the mount. And Moses went up unto God,
and Jehovah called unto him out of [from] the mountain, saying, Thus shalt thou
68 EXODUS.
4 say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel : Ye have seen what I did
unto the Egyptians, and how I bare you on eagles' wings, and brought you unto
6 myself. Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenent,
then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people [peoples] : for ail the
6 earth is mine : And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an [a] holy nation.
7 These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel. And
Moses came and called for the elders of the people, and laid before their faces
8 [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. And Moses
9 returned [brought back] the words of the people unto Jehovah. And Jehovah
said unto Moses, Lo, I come unto thee in a thick cloud, that the people may hear
when I speak with thee and believe [trust] thee for ever. And Moses tuld the
10 words of the people unto Jehovah. And Jehovah said unto Moses, Go unto the
people, and sanctify them to-day and to-morrow, and let them wash their clothes,
11 And be ready against the third day: for [for on] the third day Jehovah will come
12 down in the sight of all the people upon mount Sinai. And thou shalt set bounds
unto the people round about, saying, Take heed to yourselves, that ye go not up
[Beware of going up] into the mount, or touch [touching] the border of it : whoso-
13 ever toucheth the mount shall be surely [surely be] put to death. There shall not
an [no] hand touch it [him],' but he shall surely be stoned, or shot through; whe-
ther it be beast or man, it [he] shall not live : when the trumpet soundeth long, they
14 shall come up to the mount. And Moses went down from the mount unto the peo-
15 pie, and sanctified the people ; and they washed their clothes. And he said unto
the people. Be ready against the third day: come not at your wives [near a woman].
16 And it came to pass on the third day, in the morning [when morning came],
that there were thunders and lightnings, and a thick cloud upon the mount, and
the voice of the [a] trumpet exceeding loud ; so that [and] all the people that was
17 [were] in the camp trembled. And Moses brought forth the people out of the
camp to meet with [to meet] God ; and they stood at the nether part [the foot] of
18 the mount. And mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke [all mount Sinai smoked],
because Jehovah descended upon it in fire ; and the smoke thereof ascended as the
19 smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly. And when the voice of
the trumpet sounded long, and waxed louder and louder [And the voice of the trum-
pet waxed louder and louder], Moses spake [speaking] and God answered [answer-
20 ing] him by a voice.^ And Jehovah came down upon mount Sinai, on [to] the top
of the mount ; and Jehovah called Moses up to the top of the mount ; and Moses went
21 up. And Jehovah said unto Moses, Go down, charge the people, lest they break
22 through unto Jehovah to gaze [behold], and many of them perish. And let the
priests also, which [who] come near to Jehovah, sanctify themselves, lest Jehovah
23 break forth upon them. And Moses said unto Jehovah, The people cannot come
up to mount Sinai : for thou chargedst [hast charged] us, saying, bet bounds about
24 the mount, and sanctify it. And Jehovah said unto him. Away [Go], get thee
down ; and thou shalt come up, thou, and Aaron with thee : but let not the priests
and the people break through to come up unto Jehovah, lest he break forth upon
25 them. So Moses went down unto the people, and spake unto [told] them.
TEXTUAL AND GEAMMATICAL.
^ [Ver. 13. The repetition of the word " touch " (J,* J J) naturally suggestfl the thought th.it the olyect la the same as In
the preceding veree, viz., " mount." But this cannot be the case. For (1) if this were so, it is not probaMe that the wori
" hand " would be used, espscially after the more general prohibition. The second prohibition would be weaker than tbo
first, for one would most naturally touch the mountain with the foot, not the hand. But (2) more decisive still is the con-
Bideration that the conjunction ^2 does not admit of this construction. It can here only have tike meaning "but" in the
sense of the German " sondern," i. e, " but on the contrary." As the verse stands in A. V., a reader would most naturally
unders'and '* but" to be equivalent to " but that," and the meaning to b", " N > hand shall touch it without his bein)?
stoned," t-tc., which, however, cannot have been the meaning of the translators, and certainly not of the Hebrew author.
On the other hand, it makes no sense to say, "No hand shall touch the m'^untain, but on the contrarv he shall be stoned."
The meaning must be : " No hand shall touch him," t. «., the offender ; " but he shall be killed without such contact by
being stoned or shot." — Tr.].
^ [The last two verbs in this verae are in the Imperfect tense, and hence express continued action. The Hebrew does
not say, " when the voice .... waxed louder and louder, [then] Moses spake," etc., especially not, if " when " is under-
stood to be equivalent to " after." We have endeavored to give the true sense by the participial rendering. — TB.]
CHAP. XIX. 1-25.
69
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL.
1. Sinai and the Arrival there.
A full geographical treatise on the whole Ho-
reb group, and especially Sinai, is given by Ritter
VIII. 2, p. 627 sqq.; Robinson, 1., p. 140 sqq.;
■ Tisohendorf, Aus dem heiligen Lande. p. 61 sqq.;
Strauss, p. 133 sqq. See also the lexicons and
commentaries. We quote from Zeller's Biblisches
Worterbuch, II., p. 482: "A few remarks on the
question respecting the scene of the giving of the
law. There are two different localiiies which
have their advocates. Some find the place in
Sinai proper, .Tebel Musa and tUe plain es-Se-
baiyeh lying south of it; others, in the north-
ern terrace of Sinai, that which is now called
Horeb, especially the peak of Ras es-Safsafeh,
with the plain er-Rahah. which stretches out
before it in the north. Both plains would be in
themselves suitable for the purpose; for they are
about equally large, and furnish room for the
marshalling of a lirge multitude. Each is so
shiirply distinguished from the mountain rising
up from it that the latter might in the most literal
sense be said to be touched by one in the plain; —
which gives an excellent illustration of the ex-
pression used by Moses (Ex. xi?. 12): 'whoso-
ever touclielh the mount,' etc. Yet perhaps the
weight of the evidence is in favor of the southern
plain, es-Sebaiyeh. For (1) the mountains within
which the plain reposes, like a secluded asylum,
rise up from it in an amphitheatrical form and
very gradually, and therefore its slopes ooul I
have been used for the marshalling of the people
if at any time there was not quite space enough
in the plain itself; whereas the mountains bor-
dering on the plain er-Rahah are so abrupt and
steep that they could not have been used for this
purpose. (2) TnepIainer-Rahahhasawater-shed
from which the ground to the north falls away
more and more, so that to the view of those stand-
ing there, Ras es-Safsafeh must have become
less and less prominent, whereas the plain es-
Sebaiyeh rises higher and higher towards the
south, and Jebel Musa or Sinai becomes more
and more majestic in appearance. (3) The
view on the south side of Sinai, where this moun-
tain towers up perpendicularly nearly 2000 feet,
like an immense altar, is decidedly more grand,
(4) In Ex xix. 17 it is said that Moses brought
the people out of the camp to meet Qod. Now
we can hardly conceive a place better fitted for
a camping-place than the plain er-R#hah with
the valleys and pastures of the environs, espe-
cially the wady es-Sheikh closely adjoining it.
But if this was the camping place, and at the
same time the place where the people were drawn
up at the time of the giving of the law, how
are we to conceive of that bringing forth out of
the camp? This expression would have no mean-
ing. Whereas this expression becomes full of
appositeness, if we assume the plain er-Rahah on
the north of Horeb to be the camping-place, but
the plain es-Sebaiyeh south of Jebel Musa to be
the standing-place of the people when the law
was given. From that northern plain 600,000
men (for children and minors, as well as women
and old men doubtless remained behind in the
aamp) might well have gone in the course of a
day through the short wadies es-Sebaiyeh and
Shoeib into the southern plain, and back again
into the camp ; for the distance is only a short
hour's journey." — On the difficulties attending
the combination of both places, see Eeil, II., p.
91. The expression, "Israel camped before the
mount" (ver. 2), is certainly opposed to the as-
sumption of two camps over against two moun-
tains. Comp. the graphic description in Strauss.
On the relation between the names Sinai and
Horeb, oomp. Knobel, p. 188. Note: (1) that
the whole region is named, after the mountain
where the law was given, sometimes Sinai, some-
times Horeb; (2) that Horeb, being reached while
the people were in Rephidim, may include Sinai;
(3) that Horeb, as a separate mountain, lies to
the north of Sinai, and therefore was first reached
by the Israelites. See also Keil, p, 90, and Phi-
lippson, p. 403. — This group of lofiy granite
mountains cannot primarily be designed to serve
as a terror to sinners; it rather represents the
majesty and immovable fixedness of God's moral
revelation, of His law, in a physical form; it is
therefore a positive, imposing fact, which disse-
minates no life, yet on which the sinner's false life
may bedashed to destructijn. — "Lepsius' hypo-
thesis, that Sinai or Hoieb is to be looked for in
Mt. Serbal, has rightly met no approval. In op-
position to it consult Dieterici, Reisehilder, II., p.
53 sqq.; Ritter, ^/-f^Aunrfe, XIV., p. 738 sqq.; and
Kurtz, History, etc., 111., p. 93" (Keil).
The Arrival at Sinai. — In the third month.
Two months then have passed thus far, of which
probably the greater part belongs to the encamp-
ment in Elim and Rephidim. The same day. —
Aocording to the Jewish tradition this means on
the first day of the third month, but grammati-
cally it may be taken more indefinitely =j " at this
time."
2. Jehovah's Proposal of a Covenant, and the
Assent of the People. Vers. 3-8.
And Moses ■went up. — On Sinai Moses re-
ceived his commission from Jehovah to lead out
the people. Therefore he must now again appear
before Jehovah on Sinai, to complete his first
mission, and receive Jehovah's further com-
mands. It is a characteristic feature of the fol-
lowing transaction concerning the covenant, that
Jehovah calls out to Moses as he goes up. A
covenant is a coming together of two parties. It
has been said indeed, that iT'lS, (5iai?^/o/, testa-
mentum, means, not covenant, but institution. It
is true, the divine institution is the starting-
point and foundation, but the product of this in-
stitution is the covenant. This is true of all the
covenants throughout the Bible. They every-
where presuppose personal relations, recipro-
city, freedom ; i. e., free self-determination.
So here the people are induced by Jehovah's
proposal to declare their voluntary adoption of
the covenant (ver. 8), After this general adop-
tion of the covenant, there follows a special adop-
tion of the covenant law, xxiv. 8. Not till after
this does the solemn covenant transaction take
place, in which the people again avow their as-
sent, their free subjection to the law of Jehovah
(xxiv, 7). This relation is so far from being an
absolute enslavement of the human individuality
70
EXODUS.
by .the majesty of the divine personality, as He-
gel imagines (Vol. xi. 2, 4B), that on tlie basis
of this relation the notion of a bridal and conju-
gal relation between Jehovah and His people
gradually comes to view. But the characteristic
feature of the law is, that it rests, in general, on
B, germ of idealiiy, of knowledge, of redemption,
but, in particular, everywhere requires an un-
conditional, and even blind, obedience. Hence
it may be said: In general it ia doctrine (Thorah),
in particular it is statute. The ideal and empiri-
cal basis is the typical redemption : I am Jeho-
vah, thy God, that have brought thee out of
Egypt, Ktc, as a fact of divine goodness and
grace ; and the spirit of it is expressed in the
rhythmically solemn form in which the covenant
is proclaimed in vers. 3-6. The parallel phrases,
"House of Jacob," and "Children of Israel,"
pi-eseut in conjunction the natural descent of the
people, and the spiritual blessings allotted to
them. Ye have seen. — A certain degree of
religious experience is essential in order to be
able to enter into covenant relations with Jeho-
vah. This experience is specifically an experience
of the sway of His justice over His enemies, and
of His grace over His chosen people. Eagles'
vrings. — " The eagle's wings are an image of the
strong and affectionate care of God ; for the eagle
cherishes and fosters her young very carefully;
she flies under them, when she takes them out of the
nest, in order that they may not fall down upon
rocks and injure themselves or perish. Comp. Deut.
xxxii. 11, and illustrations from profane writers,
in Bochart, Hieroz. II., pp. 762, 765 sqq." (Keil).—
And brought you unto myself. — Knobel:
to the dwelling-place on Sinai. Keil; unto my
protection and care. It probably means ; to the
revelation of myself in the form of law, symbol-
ized indeed by the sanctuary of the lawgiver, viz.,
Sinai. But that is a very outward conception of
Keil's, that the pillar of cloud probably retired
to mount Sinai. No^y therefore, if ye Twill
obey my voice indeed. — According to Keil
the promise precedes the requirement, " for God's
grace always anticipates man's action; it de-
mands nothing before it has given." But here
evidently the requirement precedes the promise ;
and this is appropriate to the legal religion
of Moses in tlie narrower sense. In the pa-
triarchal religion of Abraham the promise pre-
cedes the requirement; under Moses the require-
ment precedes the promise, but not till after the
fulfilment of a former patriarchal promise, an
act of redemption, had preceded the requirement.
Tlie requirement is very definite and decided,
accordant with the law. — The promise is, first:
fe shall be a peculiar treasure unto me. —
Keil says : H^JD signifies not possession in gene-
ral, but a prec\ou3 possession, which one saves,
lays up ( 'JD), hence treasure of gold and silver,
1 Chron. xxix. 3, etc. Ckao^ irepiovaiog, etc. Mai.
iii. 17; Tit. ii. 14; 1 Pet. ii. 9). We translate,
"above all people," not, "out of all people," in
accordance with the tollowing words: for all
the earth is mine. — "This reason for choosing
Israel at once guards against the exolusiveness
which would regard Jehovah as merely a national
God" (Keil). It may be observed that the peo-
ple are to be as distinctively the lot [Kkijpnc;) of
Jehovah, as Jehovah desires to be the lot of His
people. — In the second place, the first promise,
or the n^Jp, is explained: "Ye shall be unto
me a kingdom of priests. — The LXX. trans-
late, paalTiUov IspaTev/ia ; so Peter, 1 Pet. ii. 9.
Onkelos: "kings, priests." Jonathan: "crowned
kings, ministering priests." According to the
Hebrew text, the kingdom as a unit, or the realm
as a body of citizens, is a nation of priests. The
individuals are priests ; the unity of their com-
monwealth is a kingdom, whose king is Jehovah.
It is therefore a kingdom whose royal authority
operates every way to liberate and ennoble, to
sanctify and dignify ; the priests are related to
the king; in their totality under the king they
constitute the priesthood, but only under the
condition that they offer sacrifice as priests.
The N. T. term, "a royal priesthood," derived
from the LXX., merges the several priests in the
higher unity of a single priesthood, whose attri-
bute, "royal," expresses the truth that the king,
through his royal spirit, has incorporated him-
self into the midst of his people. All this, now,
the Israelites are to be, in their general attitude,
first in the typical sense, which points forward
to the actual fulfilment, and prophetically in- •
eludes it. Keil, therefore, is wrong in saying
that " the notion of theocracy or divine rule (re-
ferring to the preceding explanations, II., p. 97),
as founded by the establishment of the Sinaitic
covenant, does not at all lie in the phrase r\yTOn
D'Jn3 ['kingdom of priests']. The theocracy
established by the formation of the covenant
(chap, xxiv.) is only the means by which Jeho-
vah designs to make His chosen people a king-
dom of priests." Whilst here the theocracy is
made not even a type, but only the medium
of a type, of the New Testament kingdom
of heaven, the people of Israel are raised
high above their typical significance (p. 98),
much as is done in the Judaizing theories of
Hofmann and others. The relations are rather
quite homogeneous: a typical people, atypical
kingdom of God, a typical law, a typical sacri-
fice, etc. On the other hand, Keil's sentiment,
that Israel, as a nation of priests, has a part to
act in behalf of other people, is every way acctvd-
ant with the Old Testament prophecy and with
the New Testament. (Isa. xlii. ; Rom. xi. 16;
XV. 16.) And a holy nation. — The notion of
the holiness of Jehovah first appears in chap. xv.
Here the Aotion of a holy people. The holiness
of Jehovah is the originating cause of the crea-
tion of a holy people. On the various explana-
tions of the notion of holiness, vid. Keil, p. 99.
Neither the notion of newness or brilliancy, nor
that of purity or clearness satisfies the concrete
import of holiness. Jehovah keeps Himself 7 nvt
in His personality. He protects His glory by Uis
purity. His universality by His particularity —
thus is He the Holy One. And so He creates for
Himself a holy people that in a peculiar sense
exist for Him, separated from the ungodly world,
as He in a peculiar sense exists for them, and
keeps Himself aloof from notions and forms of
worship that conflict with true views of His per-
sonality. The opposite of E'np is Sh, itoiviic,
CHAP. XIX. 1-25.
71
jtrofanua" (Keil). See the passages 1 Pet, i. 15;
somp. Lev. xi. 44 ; xix. 2. — And all the people
nns'wered together. Thus a historical, posi-
1176, consciouii obligation is entered into, rest-
iug, it is true, on an obligation inherent in the
nature of things.
3. ProvUiona for the Negotiation of the Covenant,
Vera. 9-13.
First : JehoYah will reveal Himself to Moses in
the thick cloud. The people are to listen while He
t'llks with Moses. Keil seems to assume that the
people also are to hear with their own ears the
words of the fundamental law. But vers. 16-19
show what is meant by the people's hearing.
The sound of thunder and of the trumpet which
the people hear sanctions the words which Moses
hears. In consequence of this the people are to
believe him for ever. The perpetual belief in
Moses is the perpetual belief in the revelation
and authority of the law. What follows shows
that mediately the people did hear the words.
Secondly : The people, in order to receive the
law, are to be sanctified for three days, i. e., are
to dispose themselves to give exclusive attention
to it. The symbolical expression for this con-
sists in their washing their garments, ceremo-
'nially purifying them. It shows a want of ap-
preciation of propriety to include, as Keil does,
the explanatory precept of ver. 15 among the im-
mediate requirements of Jehovah.
Thirdly : The people are to be kept back by a
fence enclosing the mountain. That is, the re-
straining of the people from profaning the moun-
tain as the throne of legislation serves to protect
tliem; comp. the significance of the parables in
Matt. xiii. The transgressor is exposed to capital
punishment ; but inasmuch as his transgression
fiads him on the other side of the limit, no one
could seize him without himself becoming guilty
of the transgression ; hence the direction that
he should be killed from a distance with stones
or darts.* Consistency requires that the same
should be done with beasts that break through.
Reverence for the law is thus to be cultivated by
the most terrifying and rigorous means. When
the trumpet. 'ja'D, S^'n pp^isW. "To draw
out the horn [as the Hebrew expresses it] is the
same as to blow the horn in prolonged notes"
( Keil). Vid. Winer, Realworterbuch, Art. Musilca-
liscke Inatrumente. It is a question when the pro-
hibition to come near the mountain was to be
terminated. According to Keil, a signal was to
be given summoning the people to approach, and
that then the people, as represented by the elders,
were to ascend the mountain. But nothing is
anywhere said of such » signal. It is simpler,
with Knobel, thus to understand the direction :
"When at the close of the divine appearances
and communications an alarm is sounded, and so
the people are summoned to start, to separate. "f
When the tabernacle was finished, this became
the sacred meeting-place of the people, to which
they were called. , Soon afterwards the trumpets
* This is perhaps in general the reason for stoning.
t [There aefms to be no iiiooosistency between Knobel's
view and that of Keil. Tne latt-^r understands the S'mad of
tlifi trumpet (ver. 13) to be the signal, and so does Knobel, And
bo'h assume that the signal wa^ to follow the promulgation
of the liiw.— Ta.].
summoned them to set forth, perhaps re-enforced,
on account of the importance of the occasion, by
the jubilee horn, or itself identified with it.
4. The Preparation of the People. Vers. 14, 15.
The direction given by Jehovah respecting the
sanctiflcation of the people is further explained
by Moses. The distinction between the divine
revelation and the human expansion of it appears
here as in 1 Cor. vii.
5. The Signa accompanying the Appearance of
Jehovah, the Lawgiver, on Sinai. Vers. 16-19.
And it came to pass on the third day.
Here is another prominent element in the mira-
cle of Sinai, that is generally overlooked, vii.,
the fact that Moses through divine illumination
80 definitely predicted that the miraculous occur-
rence would take place in three days. By iden-
tifying him all along with God's revelation the
miraculous mystery of his inner life is oblite-
rated. That there were thunders and light-
nings. — All this animated description of the
miraculous event Keil takes literally, and follow-
ing Dent. iv. 11, v. 20 (23), expands the account,
although if the mountain was burning in the
literal sense of the word so that its flame as-
cended up to heaven, there would be no place for
clouds and cloudy darkness. In a thunder-storm
are united both nocturnal darkness and fiaming
light. Keil quotes various conjectures concern-
ing the trumpet sound. No reference is had
to the trumpet sound made by the voice of
God in the ghostly sphere of the remorseful con-
science of a whole people. But comp. John xii.
29. That the darkness indicates the invisibility
and unapproachableness of the holy God who
veils Himself from mortals even when He dis-
closes Himself, is evident from all the analogies
of clouds up to the sacred one in which Christ
ascended. Fire has a twofold side, according to
man's attitude towards the divine government ;
it is therefore, as Keil says, at once the fire of the
zeal of anger and the zeal of love. To unite both
ideas in one, it is the fire of the power that sanc-
tifies, which therefore purges, transforms, vivi-
fies, and draws upward, as is shown by the as-
cension of Elijah and the phenomena of the day
of Pentecost. The same is true of thunder.
Since the law is now given for the first time, this
can have nothing to do with the thunder of the
last judgment. Vid. on Revelation, p. 197. —
All the people trembled. While in this mood
they are led by Moses out of the camp to the foot
of the mountain. It is, lo be sure, tiardly to be
supposed that this denotes a march from the plain
of Rahah into that of Sebaiyeh. " The people,
i.e., the men," says Keil, — a limitation for which
there is little reason. — And all mount Sinai
smoked. — The view of the scene is renewed
and intensified, the nearer the people come to the
foot of the mountain. Moses speaking, and
God ans'wering. — Glorious definition of the
nature of law 1 All of God's commands are,
BO to speak, answers to the commands and ques-
tions of God's chosen servant; they grow out of
a reciprocal action of God and the inmost heart
of humanity.
6. The Calling of Mosea alone up to the Mount,
etc. Vers. 20-25.
And Jehovah said unto Moses.— There
muit be some significance in the fajt that Mosea
EXODUS.
is required again to descend from Sinai, in order
repeatedly to charge the people not to cross the
limit in order to gaze, because by this sin many
might perish. This direction is now even extended
to the priests; and in accordance with their posi-
tion they are exposed to the sentence of death even
in the camp unless they sanctify themselves; only
Aaron is permitted to go up in company with
Moses. So sharp a distinction is made between
the theocratic life of the people, between the
sphere of eacerdo'al ordinances (which, there-
fore, already exist), and the sphere of revelation,
of which Moses is the organ. That Aaron is al-
lowed to acco'upany him when the first oral reve-
la'ion of the law is made, indicates that in and
with him the priests, and gradually also the
whole priestly nation, which begins to assume
a priestly relation to mankind in the near pre-
sence of the law, are to be lifted up into the light
of revelation. Various views of this passage,
especially a discussion of Kurtz's opinion, are to
be found in Keil. Knobel finds here "an interpo-
lation of the Jehovist."
Inasmuch now as the narrative makes the law
of the ten commandments follow immediately,
whilst Moses seems to be standing below with
the people, a literal interpretation concludes that
Jehovah communicated the ten commandments
down from Mt. Sinai immediately to the people,
and so " the fundamental law of the theocracy
has a precedence over all others" (Knobel; see
also Keil, p. 106). The fact that Jehovah has
already given answer to Moses on the mountain,
is overlooked; as also the passages xxiv. 16 sqq. ;
xxxiv. ; Dent. v. 5, xxxiii. 4, to say nothing of
Gal. iii. and other passages. It is true, the re-
presentation here is designed to make the im-
pression that the law of the ten commandments,
although mediated by Moses, has yet the same
authority as if Jehovah had spoken it directly to
the people from Sinai ; and no less does il ex-
press the pre-eminent importance of the ten
commandments. The following distinclions are
marked : As oral (or spiritual) words Moses re-
ceives the divine answers on the mountain (xix.
19), Then God addresses the same words from
Sinai in the voices of thunder to the people at
the foot of the mountain; and Moses who stands
below with the people, is the interpreter of these
voices, as is clearly shown by Deut. v. 5. This
oral, spiritual law of principle?, which is echoed
in the conscience of all the people, as if Jehovah
were directly talking with them, is the founda-
tion for the establishment and enforcement of the-
written law engraved on the stone tablets.
SECOND SECTION.
The Threefold Law of the Covenant for the Covenant People on the Basis of the
Prophetic, Ethico-religious Divine Law of the Ten Commandments. Histo-
rical Prophecy.
Chapters XX.— XXXI.
A.— THE TEN WORDS, OR THE ETHICAL LAW; AND THE TERRIFIED PEOPLE,
OR THE RISE OF THE NEED OF SACRIFICIAL RITES.
Chapter XX. 1-21.
1, 2 And God spake all these words, saving, I am Jehovah thy God, which [who]
3 have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou
4 shalt have no other gods before me [over against me].^ Thou shalt not make unto
thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL.
1 [The exact meaning of ' JjJ-Sj? here and In Dent. v. 7 is disputed. Tlie rendering " Ijefore me " was donbt ess meant
by our Translators to convey the notion, "in my presence" = ■'ish- Perhaps the ordinary reader is apt to understand it
- to mean, " in preference to me." Luther, Kalisch, Gedde-, Keil, Kno'hel, 'Bunsen, and Eiggs {Suggeslpd Emend(ama\ follow-
ing thu LXX. (irAijr e^oO), translate, " besides me." De Wette, Rosenmailer, Maurer, Philippson, FUrst, Arnheim, Bush,
Murphy, Cook (in Spealier's Commentaty), and Lange, following the Vulgate (" coram me "), translate " before me," ». e., in
my presence. In order to a satisfactory settlement of the question, it is necessary to investigate the use of the phrase
'Af '.!? '° general. An examination of all the passages in which it occurs yields the following result : The phrase, fol-
lowed by a Genitive or a Pronominal Suffix, occurs 210 times. In 125 of these cases, it has its I itnral si-a'K nf " upon the fice
(or surface) of:" at, e.g., % Sam. xvii, 19, " The woman took and spread a covering over the well's mouth ;' Gen. 1. 1, " Joaepb
fell upon his father's face j" or It is merely a longer form for the simpler ^7^ (upon) ; as, e. g.. Job T. 10, " Who . . . seudetli
waters upon the fields." The remaining 85 cases are divided as follows: (1) 28 times 'JS-Sj? is used in describing the
rOaUan of locaJitiei In e.ach other. R g., Judg. xvi. 3, " Samson .... carried them up to the top of an hill that is before He-
bron." Sometim»s (and more properly) in such cases the phrase is rendered "over against" In the A. V. The other pas-
CHAP. XX. 1-21.
5 that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou
shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I Jehovah thy God
am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto [upon]
6 the third and [and upon the] fourth generation of them that hate me ; And show-
7 ing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my command-
ments. Thou shalt uot take the name of Jehovah thy God in vain ; for Jehovah
sages in which 'J3-74? is thns used are Gen. xxiii. 19 ; xxt. 9, 18; xlix. 30; 1. 13; Num. xxi. 11; xxxiii. 7 ; Deut. xxxii.
49 J xxxiv. 1 i Josh. xiii. 3, 25 ; xv. 8 ; xvii 7 ; xvfH. 14, 1 6 ; xix. U ; 1 Sam. xt. 7 ; xxti. 1, 3 ; 2 Sam. ii. 24 ; 1 Kings xi. 7 ;
xTii. 3, 16 ;, 2 Kings xxiii. 13 ; Ezck. xlviii 10, 21 ; Zech. xiv. 4. It is a mistake to suppose, as some do, that in thi'So con-
nections ' jg-^^ means " to the east of," according to the Hebrew mode of conceiving of the cardinal points. For in Josh.
XTiii. 14 we read of " the hill that lietb before ('']3-'7_J?) Beth-horon smithuiard;" and in Josh. xv. 8, of " the top of the
mountain that lieth before the valley of Hinnom westward." We are rather to suppose that the phrase indicates such a re-
lation of two places as is expressed by *' over against," the physical conformation of the localities naturally suggesting such
a description/— (2) We observe, next, that 13 times ''JS-'?^? is used of the position of Odngi in relation to buildings. E. g.,
1 Kings vi. 3, " the porch before the temple.'* In the same verse 'J3~ 7^* occurs twice more in the same sense. The other
passages are 1 Kings vii. 6 (bis) ; viii. 8 ; 2 Chron. Hi. 4 (bis), 8, 17 ; v. 9 ; Ezek. xl. 15 j xlii. 8. In these cases the meaning is
obvious : " on the front of," " confronting."— (3) Six times ' J 3-'7_J? is used in the sense of " towards " or " down upon " after
verbs of looking, or (once) of going. E.g., Gen. xviii. 16, "The men looked toward CiS'h^, down upon)
Sodom." So Gen. xix. 28 (bis), Num. xxi. 20; xxiii. 28; 2 Sam. xv. 23. Here 'JS-Sj^ may be regarded as a fuller form
of 7j; as sometimes used after verbs of motion. — (4) Five times it is used after verbs signifying " pass by," and is rendered
" before." Kg ,'Ex. xxxiii. 19, " I will make all my goodness pass before thee." So Ex. xxxiv. 6 ; Gen. xxxii. 22 (21) ;
2 Sam. XV. 18 ; Job iv. 15. In these passages ^J3~7 V differs from ''JB 7 as used, e. g., in 2 Kings iv. 31, *' Gehazi
passed on before them;" where ^^37 indicates that Gehazi went on tnadvaTic? of the others; whereas, «. g., in 2 Sam. xv. 18,
the meaning is that the king stopped, and the others went by him. — (5) In 12 passages '*J3~7J7D is used after verbs meaning
to "cast out," and is usually rendered "from the presence (or sight) of." They are 1 Kings ix. 7; 2 Kings xiii. 23;
xvii. 18, 23 ; xxiv. 3, 20 ; 2 Chron. vii. 20 ; Jer. vii. 16 ; xv. 1 ; xxiii. 39 ; xxxii. 31 ; lii. 3. Possibly also Gen. xxiii. 3, "Abraham
stood up from b^ore his dead," i. e., went away from the presence of; but we may understand it more literally, viz., " stood
up from upon the fiice of." There is a manifest difference between *J3"7J^D and ^J370. The former is used of a remo-
val from a state of juxtaposition or opposition. The latter is used in the stricter sense of " from before." E. g., in Deut. ix.
4, "For the wickedness of these nations the Lord doth drive them out from before thee (?T^J37D)." Here it is not mfant
' VT : •
that the relation between the Jews and the other nations was to be broken up, but rather that it was nevpr to be formed ;
whereas, «. g., in Jer. vii. 15, " I will cast you out of my sight," the implication is that the people had been near Jehovah,
but were now to be banished. — (6) Pour times " J3-7J? is nsed with the meaning, " to the fece of." E. g.. Is. Ixv. 3, "A
people that provoketh me to anger continually to my face." So Job 1. 11 (parallel with ii. 6, where ']3-7N is used) ; vi.
28 (as correctly rendered); xxi. 31. Here the notion of hostiliii/, often expressed by the simple 7J?, is involved — Similar to
these are (7) the three passages, Ezek. xxxii. 10, Nah. ii. 2 (1), and Ps. xxi. 13 (12), where ■" J3~7J? is used after verbs descrip-
tive of hostile demonstrations, and means either, literally, " against the face of," or " over against," in defiance.— (8) In Ex.
XX. 20, where the A. V. renders, " that his fear may be before your faces," the meaning clearly is the same as in such ex-
pressions as Ex. XV. 16, where the simple Sj' i« used. So Deut. il. 26.— (9) In one case, Ps. xviii. 43 (42), ''iS'l^ is used
of the dust " before " the wind, just as 'JB^ is nsed in Job xxi. 18, " They are as stubble before the wind. '—(10) The pas-
sage, Job xvi. 14, " He breaketh me with breach upon ("J3~7J?) breach," has no precise parallel. But here, too. it is most
natural to understand ' JB-Sj? as a fuller, poetic form for ^p. Comp. Gen. xxxii. 12 (11), " the mother with (7^) the chil-
dren;" Amos iii. 15, "I will smite the winter-honse with (7J,', i. e., together with, in addition to) the summer-house."— (11)
There are three passages (possibly four), in which '33-*7J? has a pecnliar meaning, as denoting the relation of two persona
to each other. Haran, we are told, Gen. xi. 28, " died' before OiQ-hy) his iather Terah." This seems to mean, "died before
his iather did." But though such a priority is implied, it is not directly expressed. 'J37 is sometimes used to denote such
priority in time, «. J., Gen. xxx. 30; Ex. x. 14; Josh. ji. 14; but "jg-^iMs nowhere clearly used in this sense, so that it is
mot« natural to understand it (as the commentators do) here to mean either "in the presence of," or "during the life-time
of The next passage. Num. iii. 4, illustrates the meaning: "Bleazar and Ithamar ministered in the priest's office in the
Bight of Cjg-Sj?) Aaron their father." It is hardly possible that pains would be taken to lay stress on the fact that Aaron
•aw them acting the part of priests, especially as the verb [HS hardly means anything more than " to be priest." Not more
admisBibl.! is the interpretation of Gesenius and others, who here translate ' J3~7;^ " under the supervision of." There is
not the fcintest analogy for such a meaning of the phrase At the same time, It is hardly supposable that it can be lite-
rally translated, " during the life-time of." The notion of physical presence, or nearness, is so uniformly involved in ' J3"7J7
that we must, in strictness, here understand it to mean, " over against," " in view of," the point of the expression, boweve-,
not consisting in the circumstance that Aaron watched them in their ministrations, but that they performed theia over
against him, i. e., as coupled with him, together with him, (and so) during his life-time. Here belongs also probably Deut.
74 EXODUS.
8 will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain. Remember the eab-
9 bath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work;
10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of [a sabbath unto] Jehovah thy God : in it
thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy man-servant,
11 nor thy maid-servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For
in six days Jehovah made heaven and earth, the sea and all that in them is, and
rested the seventh day : wherefore Jehovah blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
xxi. 16 " He may not make the son of the beloTed flrst-bom before ('JS-^J?) the son of the hated." One might natDrallj
xmderatand "before" here to mean, " in preference to ;'' and this certainly would yield an appropriate sense— a sense cer-
tainly involved, yet probably not directly expressed. At least there is no clear analogy for such a meaning, unless we find
it in the passages now under consideration, «*., Ex. xx. 3 and Dent. v. 7. The best commentators understand 'ip'lp In
Dent. xxi. 16, to mean " during the life-time of." An analogous use of 'JST is found in Ps. Ixxii. 6, where it is said of the king,
"They shall fear thee as long as the sun and moon endure," literally "before CJS/) ^^^ ™o ^'^^ moon." Similarly ver.
17.— The other of the fonr passages above mentioned is Gen. xxv. 18. Thor» we read : " He (i. e., Ishmael) died (literally, fell)
in the presence of CJiJ^Sj?) his brethren." There is now, however, general unanimity in translating 733 here "settled"
rather than "died," so that the paspage is to bei-eckoned in the following class, in which also the relation of persons in
each other is expressed, but in a somewhat different sense.— (12) Knobel explains 'JS'^J.^ In Gen. xxv. 18 as = " to the
east of." So Del., Lange, Keil, Manrer, De W., and others. Bnt, as we have already seen, "33-7^? does not have this meaning.
This passage is to be explained by the parallel one, Gen. xvi. 12, where it is also said of Ishmael, " He shall dwell in the presence
of 033~Sy) all his brethren." Here the context is, " His hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against
him ; and he shall dwell ''J3~^J? all his brethren." Keil and Lange are nnable to satisfy themselves with the interpreta-
tion " east of" here ; and it is clear that that would not be a statement at all in place here, even if '*}2~J)J ordinarily
had the meaning " east of." Evidently the angel expresses the fact that the Ishmaelites were to dwell ot-er against their
brethren as an independent, defiant, nation. If so, then xxv. 18 is to be understood in the same way, as a statement of the
fulfilment of the prophecy here made. In addition to these two passages there are three others in which the relation of
persons to each other is expressed. They are Lev. x. 3, Ps. ix. 20 (19), and Jer. vi. 7. In the first we read that Jehovah
■aid, "Before {'^2~/V) ^H the people I will be glorified;" this is preceded by the statement, "I will be sanctified in them
that come nigh me." The verse follows the account of the dpstrnction of Nadab and Abihu. To render " in view of," or
" in the presence of," would makw good and appropriate sens^' ; and certainly it is implied that by the summary punirhment
of the presumptuous priests Jehovah intended to glorify Himself in the sight of His people. Yet, while men are frequently
represented as being or acting before CJS/) Jehovah, it is extremely unusual to speak of Jehovah as being or doing anything
before (in the sight of) men. And since, if that were here meant, ^J37 would probably have been used, it is much better
here to understand the meaning to be " over against," implying separation and contrast. Likewise Ps. ix. 20 (19) : '' Let
the heathen be judged in thy sight (T33~7,Jt)." Certainly the meaning cannot simply be : Let the heathen be judged,
while God looks on as a spectator, God is Himself the judge ; and the heathen are to be judged oticr against Him ; L «., in
such a way &>* to exhibit the contrast between them and Him. There remains only Jer, vi. 7, " Before me Ci3~lV) con-
-" T T
tinually is prief and wounds." The context describes the prospective destruction of .Terusalem. Her wickedness is described
in ver, 7: "As a fountain castetb out her waters, so she casteth out her wickedness ; violence and spoil is heard in her;
before me continually is grief and wounds (sickness and blows)." Undoubtedly this implies that the manifestations of the
wickedness of the people were in Jehovah's sight; but here, too, there Is implied the notion that these things are over against
Him : on the one side, Jehovah in His holiness ; on the other, Jerusalem in her wickedness. This conception is naturally
suggested by the representation that Jehovah is about to make wnr upon her.
Having now given a complete exhibition of the use of *J3*S>* in all the other passages, we are prepared to consider
what It means In the first commandment. Several things may be regarded as established : (i) ^J3-^l? is fer from being
synonymons with '33 7- The latter is used hundreds of times in the simple sense of " before " in reference U persons ; the
former is used most frequently of places, and in all cases Sj? has more or less of its ordinary meaning, " upon," or " against "
(over against), (ii) The phrase has nowhere unequivocally the meaning " besides." The nearest approach to this is in Job
xvi. 14, under (10), where 'J3~7J? may be rendered " in addition to." But this is not quite the same as " besides," and
the phrase has there evidently a poetic use. A solitary ra»e like- tlii", where too not person", bnt things, are spoken of, is
altog ther insufiiciBnt to establish the hypothesis that '33-7j; in the first commandment means " besides." (ill) The most
general notion conveyed by the phrase In question Is that'of one object cmfrnnUng another. Leaving out of account, as of
no special pertinency, those instances in which it verges npon the literal sense of " upon (or against) the face of," and those
in which the meaning of S;? predominates, (iiti., classes (3), (6), (7), (8), (10), we find that all others are sufliciently expluinsd
by this generic notion of crmfrmtting. Thus, in all the cases where places are spoken of as 'JB-^^y one another, class (l)i
where objects are described as in front of buildings, class (2) ; and where persons are spoken of 'as passing in fhint of othen,
clam (4).— So, too, in the cases in which 'JB-Sj^O is used, class (6), in every instance It follows a verb which implies a pie-
Tl n" state of hottiWy ; men are to be removed from being mar against Jehovah, from cmfrrmting Him with their ofrensiv"
deede,-So the instance In Ps xviii. 43 (42), class (9) ; the dust before the wind Is compared with God's enemies dostrojoil
CHAP. XX. 1-21.
75
12 Honor thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which
13, 14 Jehovah thy God give'th thee. Thou shalt not kill. Thou shalt not commit
15, 16 adultery. Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy
17 neighbor. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thoa shalt not covet thy
neighbor's wife, nor his man-servant, nor his maid-servant, nor his ox, nor his ass,
18 nor anything that is thy neighbor's. And all the people saw the thunderings, aud
the lightnings, and the noise of the trumpet, and the mountain smoking: and when
19 the people saw it, they removed [reeled backward], and stood afar off. And thev
said unto Moses, Speak thou with us, and we will hear: but let not God speak with
20 us, lest we die. And Moses said unto the people, Fear not; for God is come to
prove you, and that his fear may be before your faces [upon you], that ye sin not.
21 And the people stood afar off, and Moses drew near unto the thick darkness where
God was.
by Him ; the dust confronting the wind illnstrates the powerlessnesB of men bonfronting an angry God. — So the examplpa
nnder (12). The translation "over against" satisfies all of the ca^es. A relation of contrast and opposition is impl'ed. —
Likewise, also, the three paflaages under (11). The eon of the beloved wife (Deut. xxi. 16) is not to be invested with tlie
lighiB of pvimogevituT6 over against the sou of the hated one, z.e., in contrast with, distluction from, the other one, while yet by
natural right the latter is entitled to the privilege. The phrase 'JSJ-Sj? may here, therefore, be understood to mean "in
preference to," or " In the life-time of," hut neither one nor the other literally and directly, yet both one aud the other by
Implication, In Num. iii. 4 Aaron^s sons are represented as being priests aver against their father, i. e., not succeydieg him,
but together with him, as two hills, instead of being distant from one another, are, as It were, companions, confronting each
other. So In Gen. xl. 28 Haran is said to have died over agaimt his &ther. In his death he confronted his father, i. '., did
not, as most naturally happens, die after him, when his father would have been taken away from being with him By thus
anticipating his father in his decease he, as it were, passed in front of him, confronted him, so that this case is quite ana'o-
gous to those under class (4). In this case, therefore, as in some others, the meaning of \33~7J? closely borders upon that
of ^J37, yet is not the same.
The application of this discussion to Ex. xx. 3 and Deut. v. T is obvious. Israel is to have no other gods " over against "
Jehovah. The simple meaning " before," i. e., in the presence of, would have little point and force, and besides would have
been expressed by 'JsS- The meaning "besides" would have been expressed by n.J^Sa, 'flSu, or some other of the
phroaes having that m^eanlng. The meaning " over against," the usual meaning of the phrase, is perfectly appropriate here.
All false gods are opposed to the true God. The worship of them is incompatible with the worship of Jehovah. The com-
mand therefore is, " Thou shalt have no other gods to confront me," to be set up as rival objects of service and adoration.
All that is pertinent in the other two renderings is Involved here. Gods that are set up over against Jehovah may be said
to be before Him, in His sight ; that they are gods besides, in addition to, Him, is a matter of course : but, more than this,
they are gods opposed to Him. — Ta.J,
Tbia first legislation, the law or book of the
covenant in the narrower sense, is evidently the
outline of the whole legislation. The presenta-
tion of the piophetico-ethioal law is found in
the ten commandments (xx. 1-17); the outline
of the ceremonial law and the reasons for it fol-
low on (vers. 18-26); in conclusion comes the
third part, the outline of the social laws of the
Israelites (xxi -xxiii.).
Three questions are here to be settled: (l)
How are the several acts of legislation related to
the history? (2) How are the several groups of
laws related to each other? (3) How is there
indicated in this relation a gradual development
of legislation?
As to the ten commandments in particular we
are to consider: (1) the form of the promulga-
tion- (2) the relation of the law in lixodus to
the phase it presents in Deuteronomy; (3) the
analysis of th« ten commandments themselves.
That the laws are not artificially introducn,!
into the history of Israel, as e. g. Bertheau as-
sumes, is shown by their definite connection witii
the historical occasions of them. Thus, e. ., the
law of the ten commandments is occasioned by
the vow of covenant obedience made beforehand
bv the people. The ceremonial law as a lavf ot
atonement is occasioned by the fright and flight
of the people at the thunders of Sinai (chap, xx
21). Thus the ho'y nation is established; and
EXEGETICAL AND CKITICAL.
Analysis. — The whole Mosaic legislation is
typical and Messianic. Typical, as is evident
from the existence of Deuteronomy, inasmuch as
this presents the first instance of an interpreta-
tion which gives to the law a more profound and
spiritual meaning. Messianic, for the ten com-
mandments contain a description of Christ's ac-
tive obedience, whilst the sacrificial rites contain
the leading features of His passive obedience.
Everywhere in the three books are shadowed
forth the three otBcea of the Messiah. The first
book comprises, together with the prophetico-
ethical covenant law of the ten commandments,
also the outlines of the ceremonial and socLil
(civil) law, because those two subjects of legis-
lation flow as consequences out of the ethical
law. The priesthood (or the church) and the
slate depend, in their unity as well as in their
diversity, on the ethioo-religious legislation of
the life of the God-man.
The first form of elemental ethico-religious,
but therefore all-embracing legislation, com-
prises the law, the festivals, and the house, of the
covenant (chaps, xx.-xxxi.). It is different from
the second form of the legislation (chaps, xxxii.-
xxxiv. sqq ) on account of the breaking of the
covenant.
EXODUS.
not till now is there occasion for the theocratico-
Bocial legislation, according to which every indi-
vidual is to be recognised as a worthy member of
this nation. The setting up of the golden calf fur-
nished historical occasion for special precepts.
The gradually progressive legislation recorded
in the Book of Numbers moat markedly illus-
trates the influence of historical events. We
have before become acquainted with similar in-
stances. This is true in a general way of the
Passover and the unleavened bread. The com-
mands concerning the sanctification of the first-
born and concerning the reckoning of time refer
to the exodus from Egypt. The hallowing of the
seventh day is connected with the gift of manna ;
the bitter water occasions the fundamental law
of hygienics, ch. xv. The attack of Amalek is
the actual foundation of the ordinance concern-
ing holy wars. So in earlier times the Noachian
command (Gen. ix.) was a law which looked back
to the godless violence of the perished genera-
tion; it connected the command to reverence
God with the precept to hold human life sacred.
So the fundamental command of the covenant
with Abraham, the command of circumcision, as
a symbol of generation consecrated with refer-
ence to regeneration, appears after the history
of the expulsion of Ishmael, who was born accord-
ing to the flesh (comp. Gen. xvii. with Gen. xvi.).
But that the book of Deuteronomy — according to
the memorabilia on which it is founded — grew out
of the danger tbat Israel might be led by the giving
of the law to decline into observance of the mere
letter, we have already elsewhere noticed. It
may be remarked by the way that the Song of
Moses and Moses' Blessing at the close of Deu-
teronomy seem like the heart's blood of the whole
book, a song of cursing, and a song of blessing ;
in the Psalter and prophetic books scarcely any-
thing similar can be found.
How are the individual groups of laws related
to one another? That they essentially and un-
conditionally require one ano'her, and that ac-
cordingly they could not have appeared sepa-
rately, is not hard to show. The decalogue,
taken by itself, would lead into scholastic casu-
istry i the system of sacrifice, taken by itself,
into magic rites; the political marshalling of the
host, into despotism or greed of conquest. Com-
pare Schleiermacher's argument in his "Dogma-
tik," to show that the three offices of Christ re-
quire each o'her.
From what has been said it follows also that
the development of the legislation was gradual.
We may distinguish four stages in the Mosaic
period: (1) The Passover as the foundation of
the whole legislation, and the several special laws
up to the arrival at Sinai (primogeniture, reck-
oning of time, sanitary regulation, Sabbath) ; (2)
the covenant law, or book of the covenant, before
the covenant was broken by the erecting of the
golden calf; (3) the expansion and modification
of the law, on account of the breach of the cove-
nant, in the direction of the hierarchy, the ritual,
and the beginning of the proclamation of grace
in the name of Jehovah; (4) the deeper and more
inward meaning given to the law in Deuteronomy,
as an introJuotion to the ago of the Psalms and
Prophets.
The Form of the Promulgation of the Decalogut.
We assume that this form is indicated in xix,
19. The passage. Dent. v. 4, "Jehovah talked
with you face to face in the mount," is defined
by ver. 5, "I stood between Jehovah and you at
that time, to show you the word of Jehovah." In
spite of this declaration and the mysterious pas-
sages. Acts vii. 53, Gal. iii. 19, Heb. ii. 2, the no-
tion has arisen, not only among the Jews, but also
within the sphere of Christian scholastic theolo-
gy, that God spoke audibly from Mt. Sinai to the
wholepeople. Fid. Keil,II. p. 106sqq. Buxt.:''Bc.
brseorum interpretfs adunum psene omnes : de.umverba
deealogi per ee immediate locutum esse, dei nempepo-
tentia, non autem angelorum opera ac mim'sterio voces
in acre formatas fuisse." The interpolation of spi-
rits of nature by von Hofmann [vid. Keil, p. 108)
must be as far from the reality as from the literal
meaning of the language. It must not be forgot'
ten that Moses, at the head of his people in the
breadless and waterless desert, moves, as it were,
on the border region of this world. A sort of sym-
bolical element is without doubt to be found even
in the Rabbinical tradition, that God spoke from
Sinai in a language which divided itself into all
the languages of the seventy nations, and ex-
tended audibly over all the earth ; — evidently a
symbol of the fact that the language of the ten
commandments gave expression to the language
of the conscience of all mankind.
The Relation of the Law in Exodus to the Form of
it in Deuteronomy,
First of all is to be noticed that in the most
literal part of the Holy Scriptures, where every-
thing seems to depend on the most exact phrase-
ology, viz., in the statement of the law, there is
yet not a perfect agreement between the two state-
ments; just asis the casein theN.T. with the Lord's
Prayer, and in church history with the ecumenical
symbols, which, moreover, have failed to agree on
a seven-fold division of it. Keil rightlymnkes the
text in Exodus the original one ; whilst Kurtz, in
a manner hazardous for his standpoint, inverts
the relation, making the form in Deuteronomy
the original one. Both of them overlook the
fact that according to the spirit of the letter the
one edition is as original as the other. We have
already (Genesis, p. 92) attempted to explain the
reason of the discrepancies which Keil in note I,
II., p. 105, has cited. In the repetition of the
Sabbath law the ethical and humane bearing of
it is unmistakably made prominent (Deut. v.
15), as in relation to the tenth commandment the
wife is put before the house. In the form of the
command to honor father and mother, the bless-
ing of prosperity is made more emphatic. The
expressions KlBf 1;? for 'IpEf •\^_, HWriri for the
repetition of ionf) (in the second part of the
tenth commandment) savor also of a spiritual-
izing tendency. By the copula 1, moreover, the
commandment, "Thou shalt not kill," and the
following ones are, so to speak, united into oiu
commandment.
Furthermore is to be noticed the difference
between the first oral proclamation of the law
through the mediation of Mnses and the engraved
inscription of it on two tablets. This begins after
CHAP. XX. 1-21.
77
the solemn ratification of the covenant, xxiv. 15,
xxxi. 18, xxxii. 19, xxxiv. 1. Thus at this point
also in the giving of the law the oral revelation
precedes the written, althongh at the same point
the revealed word and the written word blend
intimately together, in order typically to ex-
hibit the intimate relation between the two
throughout the Holy Scriptures. A positive
command of Holy Scripture has already been
made. xvii. 14: eternal war against Amalek, in
a typical sense. The fact also is of permanent
significance, that Aaron the priest was making
the golden calf for the people at the same time
that Moses on the mount was receiving the tables
of the law. That the ten commandments were
written on the two tables, that therefore the
ethico-religious law of the covenant is divided
into ten commandments, is affirmed in Ex. xxxiv.
28, and Deut. x. 4. But on the question, how
they are to be counted, and how divided between
the two tables, opinions differ. Says Keil: " The
words of the covenant, or the ten commandments,
were written by God on two tables of stone (xxxi.
18), and, as being the sum and kernel of the law,
are called as early as in xxiv. 12 niXQni minn
[the law and the commandment]. But as to their
number, and their twofold division, the Biblical
text furnishes neither positive statements nor
certain indications — a clear proof that these
points are of less importance than dogmatic zeal
has often attached to them. In the course of the
centuries two leading views have been developed.
Some divide the commandments into two divisions
of five each, and assign to the first table the com-
mandmens respecting (1) other gods, (2) images,
(3) the name of God, (4) the Sabbath, and (5)
parents; to the second those concerning (1) mur-
der, (2) adultery, (3) stealing, (4| false witness,
and (5) oovetousness. Others assign to the first
table three commandments, and to the second,
seven. They specify, as the first three, the com-
mandments concerning (1) other gods, (2) the
name of God, (3) the Sabbath; which three com-
prise the duties owed to God : and, as the seven
of the second table, those concerning (1) parenis,
(2) murder, (3) adultery, (4) stealing, (6) false
witness, (6) coveting one's neighbor's house, (7)
coveting a neighbor's wife, servants, cattle, and
other possessions; as comprising the duties owed
to one's neighbor. — The first opinion, with the
division iuto two tables of five commandments
each, is found ia Josephus (Ant. III., 5, 8) and
Philo (Quis rer. divin. haer. g 35, De Decal. § 12
et al.). It is unanimously approved by the
church fathc-s of the first four centuries, and
has been retained by the Oriental and Reformed
ohurciies to this day. The later Jews also agree
with this, so far as that they assume only one
commandment respecting oovetousness, but dis-
sent from it in that they unite the prohibition of
images with the prohibition of strange gods, but
regard the introductory sentence, " I am Jeho-
vah, thy God," as the first commandment. This
method of enumeration, of which the first traces
are found in Julian, the Apostate, quoted by
fiyril of Alexandria, adv. Julianum, Lib. V. init.,
and in a casual remark of Jerome on Hos. x. 10,
is certainly of later origin, and perhaps pro-
pounded only from opposition to the Christians ;
but it still prevails among the modern Jews.
The second leading view was brought into fa-
vor by Augustine; and before him no one is
known to have advocated it. In Quxst. 71 in
Exod., Augustine expresses himself on the ques-
tion how the ten commandments are to be di-
vided : (" Ulrum quatmr sint usque ad prseceptum de
Sabbatho, qua ad ipium Dcum pertinent, sex auicm
reliqua quorum pHmum : Honora patrem et matrem,
qua ad Itominem pertinent: an potius ilia tria sint et
ista septem") after a further presentation of the
two views, as follows: '■^Mihi tamen videntur con-
gruentius accipi ilia tria et ista septem, quoniam Tri-
nitatem videntur ilia quse ad Dtum pertinent, insinu-
are diligentius intuentibm ;" and he then aims to
show, further, that by the prohiMtiou of images
the prohibition of other gods is only explained
"per/ectius," while the prohibition of oovetous-
ness, although " concupiscentia uxoris alienee et eon-
cupiscenfia domus alienm tantum in peccando dif-
ferant," is divided by the repetition of the "non
concupisces " into two commandments. In this
division Augustine, following the text of Deuter-
onomy, generally reckoned the command not to
covet one's neighbor's wife as the ninth, though
in individual passages, following the text of Ex-
odus, he puts the one concerning the neighbor's
house first (vid. GeSken, Veber die verschiedene
Eintheilung des Dekalogs, Hamburg, 1888, p. 174).
Through Augustine's great influence this divi-
sion of the commandments became the prevalent
one in the Western church, and was also adopted
by Luther and the Lutheran church, with the
difference, however, that the Catholic and Lu-
theran churches, following Exodus, made the
ninth commandment refer to the house, while only
a few, with Augustine, gave the preference to the
order as found in Deuteronomy.*
We have the more readily borrowed the lan-
guage of a decided Luiheran on this question, in-
asmuch as be, in distinction from some otiiers
who seem to regard adherence to the mediaeval
division as essential to Lutheran orthodoxy, dis-
plays a commendable impartiality. The leading
reasons for the ancient, theocratic division are
the following: (1) The transposition of the first
object of oovetousness in Exodus and Deuterono-
my, "thy neighbor's house," "thy neighbor's
wife." The advocates of the ecclesiastical view
would here rather assume a corruption of the
* In modem dlecns^iona of this subject, the Angustinian
division is defended by Sonntag, in tlae Thml. S^ien und
KrUVcm, 1836, p. 61 sqq. and 1837, p. 243 eqq., and by Kurtz
in his HUUyry of the Old Covenant, III., p. 123 sqq., and in the
Kirchl. Zdtschrift of Kliefoth and Meier, 1835, parti 4-6. The
Lutlieran view, by C. W. Otto, Dp^calng. Tjniermchungen, Halle,
1857. The Beformed view, as the original one, and the one
borne out by the text, by ZUIliGr, in ihe Theol Studien wnd
KrUiken, 1837, p. 47 sqq. ; J. Gefrkf n, in the above-mentioned
treatise, which fully treats the historical teitimony; Ber-
thean, Die 7 Grwppen mosaischar Gesetzc, GOttingen, 1840, p.
10 sqq. ; Oehler, in Herzog^s Jtealencyhlop'ddie, Art. Dflcahg ;
hv anonymous writers in the Evang. Kirchemeiiung, 1857, No.
62 sq., and in the Erlanger Zeitschrift fUr ProUtUmlismm,
Vol. 33, parts 1 and 2 ; finally, by F. W. Schultz, in a full,
thorough, and candid treatment of the question in Bndelbach
and Quericke's Zritgclirifl, 1858, part 1, and in his Comm. on
Deut. T. 6 sqq.— E. in the Erianffer ZeitscKHfl, Vol. 36, part 4,
p. 298 sqq. ; and Knobel on Ex, XX., enter the lists tor the
Babbinical view. Finally, E. Meier, Die ur^priingliche Form
den Dekalogs (Mannheim, 1836) launches out into arbil;rary
conjectures " (Keil). See more on Rabbini al and Catholic di-
visions in Keil II., p. Ill, and Bertheau, p. 13. [Corap. also
Stanley, Jewish Oharr-h, Leot. VII., and the Article Ten Cam-
mandmmts in Smith's Bi'}le DicliTnary, and Decalogue in
Eitto's Cgclopedia.—tli.]
78
J5X0DUS.
text, even in the tables of the law, (liau see in
this transposition a weaving of the two precepts
into one commandment. (2) The difference, am-
ply established by sacred history, as well as by
the history of religion in general, between the
worship of symbolic images, and the worship of
mythological deities: in accordance with which
distinction the two pi-ohibitions are not to be
blended into one commandment. (3) Of very
special importance is the brief explanation of the
law given by Paul in Rom. vii. 7 with the words,
"Thou shalt not covet." According to this ex-
planation, the emphasis rests on the prohibition
of covetousness, and the expansion "thy neigh-
bor's house," etc., serves merely to exemplify it.
But when the commandment is divided into two,
the chief force of the prohibition rests on the
several objects of desire, so that these two last
commandments would lead one to make the law
consist in the vague prohibition of external
things, and need to be supplemented by a great
"etc. ;" whereas the emphasizing of covetousness
as an important point leads one to refer the law to
the inward life, and, so understood, looks back
to the spiritual foundation of the whole law in
the first commandment, whilst a kindred element
of spirituality is found in the middle of the law,
connected with the precept to honor father and
mother. — As to the distribution of the law into
two ideal tables, the division into two groups of
five commandments each is favored especially by
the fact that all the commandments of the second
table from the sixth commandment on are con-
nected by the conjunction 1 ["and;" in the A. V.
rendered, together with the negative, ''neither"]
in Deuteronomy (ver. 17, etc). Moreover, in fa-
vor of the same division is the consideration that
parents in the fifth commandment stand as repre-
sentatives of the Deity and of the divine rule. As
the first commandment expresses the law of true
religion, and the second, the requirement to make
one's religious conceptions spiritual and to keep
them pure ; so the three following commandments
evidently designate ramifications of religious con-
duct: the duty of maintaining the sanctity of reli-
gious knowledge and doctrine; of religious hu-
manity (or of worship), ^nd of the most original
nursery of religion, the household, and of its most
original form, piety. Nevertheless, when one
would divide the ten commandments between the
two actual tables of Moses, he fails to find dis-
tinct indications; hardly, however, can the as-
sumption be established that only the precepts
themselves stood on the tables, but not the rea-
sons that are given for some of them.
As to the whole system of the Mosaic legisla-
tion, we are to consider the arrangement which
Bertheau has made in his work "Vie aieben Orup-
pen moaaischer Geselze in den drei mittleren Biichem
des Pentateucha" (Gottingen, 1840). According to
him, the number 7, multiplied by 10, taken seven
times, lies at the foundation of the arrangement.
We have already observed that we do not regard
as well grounded the dissolution of the Mosaic
code of laws from history as its basis. Moreover,
a clear carrying out of the system would show
that we could regard the origin of it only as in-
stinctive, not as the conscious work of Rabbinic
design. The ten commandments, Ex. xx. 1-17,
form the introduction of this arrangement. But
the ritual law follows immediately, beginning
with a group, not of ten, but of four laws, xx.
23 sqq.
1. The Lawgiver. That Jehovah is the lawgiver
does not exclude the mediation mentioned Qal.
iii. 19 and elsewhere. Comp. Comm. on Genesis,
vi. 18. Quite as little, however, does this me-
diation obscure the name of the lawgiver, Jeho-
vah. Keil (II. p. 114) inconclusively opposes
the view of Knobel, who takes the first words,
" I am Jehovah," as a confession, or as the foun-
dation of the whole theocratic law. Just because
the words have this force, are they also the foun-
dation of the obligation of the people to keep the
theocratic commandments. For the lawgiver
puts the people under the highest obligation by
their recognising him as benefactor and libera-
tor. An absolute despot as such is no lawgiver,
Israel's law is based on his typical liberation,
and his obedience to the law on faith in that
liberation. The law itself is the objective form
in which for educational purposes the obligations
are expressed, which are involved in its founda-
tion.
2. The first Commandment. The absolute nega-
tion SO stands significantly at the beginning.
So further on. Antithetic to it is the absolute
'D3N ["I"] of Jehovah at the opening of His
commandments. — D'il/X iTil], the gods becomr^
spring up gradually in the conceptions of the sin-
ful people, hence 'JT D""'.nx in connection with
D'ri/!* is to be explained as = irepot (according
to Gal. i. 6) with the LXX. and the Vulgate
{alieni, foreign), not = alii, other. ^i^S^ may
mean before my face, over against my face, againtt
my face, besides my face, beyond it. The central
feature of the thought may be : beyond my per-
sonal, revealed form, and in opposition to it — re-
cognizing, together with the error a remnant of
religiosity in the worship of the gods. — The "m-
ram me" of the Vulgate expresses ote factor of
the notion, as Luther's "neben mir" ["by my
side"] does another. [Firf. under "Textual and
Grammatical"].
8. The Prohibition of Image Worship, vers. 4-6.
Image, 7D3, from 7D3, to hew wood or stone.
It therefore denotes primarily a plastic image.
njlDD does not signify an image made by man,
but only a form which appears to him. Num.
xii. 8, Dent. iv. 12, 15 sqq.. Job iv. 16, Psalm
xvii. 15. In Deut. v. 8 (comp. iv. 16) we find
nj?Dri"73 7p3, "image of any form." Accord-
ingly njinil-TOl is here to be taken as explana-
tory of 7D3, and ) as explicative, "even any
form" (Keil). "Image" is therefore used ab-
solutely in the sense of religious representa-
tion of the Deity, and the various forms are con-
ceived as the forms of the image. Comp. Deut.
iv. 16, " for ye saw no manner of similitude [no
form] on the day that Jehovah spake unto you
in Horeb." The medium of legislation therefore
continued to be a miracle of hearing; it became
a miracle of sight only in the accompanying
phenomena given for the purpose of perpetually
preventing every kind of image-worsliip. — In
heaven. Keilsays: " on the lieaven," explain-
ing it as referring to tiie birds, and not the an-
gels, at the most, according to Deut. iv. 19, as
perhaps including the stars. The angels proper
oould not possibly have been meant as copies of
Jehovah, since they themselves appear only in
visions; and even if the constellations were spe-
cially meant, yet they too were for the most part
piotorially represented [and in this sense only is
the v^orship of them here prohibited]. The wor-
ship of stars as such is covered by the first com-
mandment. Comp. Rom. i. — Under the eatth.
Beneath, under the level of the solid land, lower
than it. Marine creatures are therefore meant.
This commandment deals throughout only with
religious conduct. The bowing down designates
the act of adoration ; the terving denotes the sys-
tem of worship. Keil quotes from Calvin : " qw^d
atulte quidam putarunt, hie damnari sculpiuras etpic-
iuiraa quasHbel, refutaiione non indiget," Still it is
clear from Rom. i. that the gradual transition from
the over-estimate of the symbolical image to the
superstitious reverence for it Is included.
According to Keil the threat and promise fol-
lowing the second commandment refer to the two
first as being embraced in a higher unity. But
this higher unity is resolvable in this way, that the
sin against the second commandment is to be re-
garded as the source of the sin against the first.
With image worship, or the deification of sym-
bols idolatry begins. Hence image worship Is
oondemned as being the germ of the whole suc-
ceeding development of sin. That which in the
classical writings of the Greeks and Romans is
signified by v^imq, the fatal beginning of a con-
nected series of crimes which come to a conclusion
only in one or more tragic catastrophes, is sig-
nified in the theocratic sphere by j V, perversion,
penersenesa. The evil-doing of the fathers has
a genealogical succession which cannot be broken
till the third or fourth generations (grandchil-
dren and great-grandchildren) are visited. This
is shown also by the Greek tragedy, and the third
and fourth generation is still to be traced in the
five acts of the modern tragedy. Now the image-
worshipper is worse than the idolater in that he
makes this fatal beginning. But as the v/3pic
proceeds from an insolence towards the gods
which may be called hatred, so also image-wor-
ship arises out of an insolent apostasy from the
active control of the pure conception of God,
from the control of the Spirit. In the Old Tes-
tament, it is the golden calves of Jeroboam at
Dan and Beersheba which are followed by such
catastrophes in Israel. It may also be asked:
What has the mediseval image-worship cost cer-
tain European nations in particular ? That the
hereditary guilt thus contracted forms no abso-
lute fatality, is shown by the addition, " of them
that hate me." This is a condition, or limita-
tion, which is echoed in the e^' 1} iravrec ^//oprov
of Rom. V. 12. But the condition cannot be made
the foundation, as is done by Keil, who says that
by the words 'KOt?^ and '?n«'? [" °^ *1"^™ ^^^^
hate me" and "of them tuat love me"] the
punishment and the grace are traced back to
their ultimate ground. This would vitiate the
force of what he afterwards says of the organic
9
CHAP. 7X.V2I.
79
relation^f humanity. The organic hereditary
oonditiows of guilt, of which even the heathen
know hoV to speak (vid. Keil, p. 117), are lim-
ited by mtrally guilty actions. Because refer-
ence is herb made to organic consequences, the
fathers themselves are not mentioned. Because
the transmission of the curse is hindered by the
counter Influence of ethical forces and natures,
checks grow up as early as between the third
and fourth generations. The sovereignty of
grace is concerned in this, as also in the oppo-
site parallel, "unto the thousands," i. e., unto
a thousand generations. This wonderfully sub-
tle and profound doctrine of original sin is not
Augustinian, inasmuch as it assumes special cases
of sin and individual and generic counteracting
influences within the sphere of the general con-
dition of sin. It is, however, still less Pelagian;
yet, as compared with the notion of guUt embo-
died in the Greek tragedians, it is exceedingly
mild. The hereditary descendants of such a
guilty parentage fill up the measure of the guilt
of their fathers. Matt, xxiii. 82. In this passage
also the notion of guilt, as distinguished from
that of sin, is brought out. Guilt is the organic
side of sin ; sin is ihe ethical side of guilt. The
whole judicial economy, moreover, is founded on
the jealousy of God; i. e., as being the absolute
personality. He insists that persons shall not dis-
solve the bond of personal communion with Him,
that they shall not descend from the sphere of
love into that of sensuous conceptions,
4. The third commandment. The sin against the
first commandment banishes the name of Jeho-
vah by means of idol names ; the sin against the
second obscures and disfigures it; the sin against
this third one abuses it. Here then the name,
the right apprehension, or at least knowledge
and confession, of the name, are presupposed ;
but the correctness of the apprehension' is hypo-
critically employed by the transgressor of this
commandment in the interest of selfishness and
vice. According to Keil DW HJifi does not mean
"to utter the name," and i^U does not mean
: T
"lie." But to lift up a name must surely mean
to lift it up by uttering it, though doubtless in a
solemn way; and though i^)ld signifies wasteness
and emptiness, yet it is here to be understood of
wasteness and emptiness in speech. The moral
culmination of this sin is perjury, Lev. xix. 12 ;
hypocrisy in the application of sacred things to
criminal uses, especially also sorcery in all forms.
— Here the punitive retribution is put imme-
diately upon the person who sins, as an una-
voidable one which surely finds its object, and
whose law rests on the nature of Jehovah Himself.
5. Vers. 9-11. Here is to be considered: (1)
The significance of the law of the Sabbath; (2) the
institution of the Sabbath; (3) the ordinance of the
Sabbath; (i) the reason for the Sabbath. The idea
of the Sabbath will never be rightly apprehended,
unless it is seen to be a union of two laws. The
first is the ethical law Of humanity, which here
predominates ; the second is the strictly religious
law, which is made prominent in Lev. xxiii.
The law of the Sabbath would not stand in the
decalogue, if it did not have a moral principle to
establish as much as the commandments not to
kill, commit adultery, or steal. The physical
80
'EXODUS,
nature shall no', be worn out, disho^jBed, and
slowly murdered by restless occupation: Hence
the specification: "No kind of work or busi-
ness ;" and that, not only in reference to son
and daughter, man-servant and muid-servant,
but also in reference to the beasto themselves
and the stranger within the gates of Israel (i. e.,
in their cities and villages, not in the houses of
the stranger), as the foreigner might imagine
that he could publicly emancipate himself from
this sacred humaue ordinance. This point is
brought out in Deut. v. 14, 15 ; Ex. xxiii. 12.
It is seen further on, in the sabbatical year and
in the great year of jubilee. Reference is made
to it in Deut. xvi. 11. — That there existed already
a tradition of the Sabbath rest, may be inferred
from the tradition of the days of creation ; so
also circumcision as a custom prevailed before
the institution of it as a sacrament. But that
circumcision, as a patriarchal law, symbolically
comprehending all the ten commandments, con-
tinued to outrank the Mosaic law of the Sabbath,
which was not till now raised to the rank of one
of the chief ethical commandments, is shown by
the Jewish custom as indicated iu Christ's decla-
ration, John vii. 22, 23. — The ordinance of the
Sabbath first specifies the subjects of the com-
mand: " Those who are to rest are divided into
two classes by the omission of the conjunction 1
before ■'l^^j;" (Keil). Next, the degree of rest:
"n3X7D, business (comp. Gen. ii. 2), in distinc-
tion from rn3J7, labor, means not so much the
lighter work (Schultz) as rather, in general, the
accomplishment of any task, whether hard or
easy; m3^ is the execution of a particular work,
whether agricultural (Ps. civ. 23), or mechani-
cal (Ex. xxxix. 32), or sacerdotal, including both
the priestly service and the labor necessary for
the performance of the ritual (Ex. xii. 25 sq..
Num. iv. 47). On the Sabbath, as also on the
day of atonement (Lev. xxiii. 28, 81) every em-
ployment was to cease ; on the other feast-days,
only laborious occupations, mi^ HDJAID (Lev.
xxiii. 7 sqq.), i.e., occupations which come under
the head of toilsome labor, civil business, and
the prosecution of one's trade" (Keil). — The
reason: "for in six days," etc. "This implies
that God blessed and hallowed the seventh day
because He rested on it" (Keil). According to
Schultz man should, in a degree, make the pul-
sations of the divine life his own. So much is
certainly true, that the rhythmical antithesis
between labor and rest in the divine creation
should be not only the prototype, but also the
rule for human activity. All the more, inas-
much as not only human nature, but nature in
general, needs intervals of rest to keep it from
being consumed with disquietude. Hence the
commandment contains an ethical principle, a
law designed to secure vigor of life, as the sixth
commandment protects life itself, xxiii. 12, Deut.
V. 14 sq. Furthermore is to be considered that
the seventh day of God has u, beginning, but
no end ; accordingly man's d.ay of rest should
have its issue, not in time, but in eternity (vid.
Heb. iv. 10, Rev. xiv. 13). Keil would here make
a distinction between the labor of Paradise and
labor after the fall ; but the typical days of cre-
ation preceded the fall. The positive side of the
day of rest, the solemn celebration, first appears
in the form of the ritual law of the Sabbath.
The ritual makes the day of rest a festival. Ami,
inasmuch as the festival is the soul of the day
of rest, a day in which man should rest, and keep
holy day in God, as on that day God rests and
keeps holy day in man, it could also be trans-
formed from the Jewish Sabbath into the Chris-
tian Sunday.
6. Ver. 12. l%e fifth commandment. This con-
cludes the first table, and forms at the same time
a transition to the second. " In the requisition
of honor to parents it lays the foundation for the
sanctification of all social life, in that it teaches
us to recognise a divine authority in it" (Oehler,
in Herzog' B Real-Enct/clopadie, under "Dehalog"),
In the parental house the distinction between
the dynamical majority that is to train and go-
vern, and the numerical majority which is to be
subject to the other, becomes conspicuous: one
pair of parents, and perhaps two, three, or four
times as many children. Here the government
of an absolute majority would be an absolute ab-
surdity. On the fifth commandment vid. Eeil,
p. 122.
7. The sixth commandment. The protection of
life in its existence. It is at the same time
the basis of all the following commandments.
Lev. xix. 18, " Thou sbalt love thy neighbor
as thyself." Hence killing, when permitted or
even commanded, is to be regarded as in prin-
ciple a consequence of the duty of the preserva-
tion of life in the higher sense. So the seventh
commandment serves to protect marriage as the
source of life and the means of keeping it pure;
the eighth commandment, to protect properly and
equity, as the condition of the dignity of life; the
ninth commandment, to protect truth and the ju-
diciary against falsehood and slander, as being
the spiritual vitiation of life; the tenth com-
mandment, to guard the issues of life from within
outwards. The progress from violence to seduc-
tion, and thence on to fraud, prepares the way
for the transition to the chief sin of the tongue
and the chief sin of the thought, primarily as
related to one's neighbor. On this "mirum el
aptum oTdinem," as Luther calls it, see Keil II.,
p. 123. Thus the circle is formed ; the law re-
turns to the beginning: only by the sanctifica-
tion of the heart according to the tenth com-
mandment can the worship of God according to
the first commandment be secured. — Not kill.
Every thing belonging here is taught in the cate-
chism ; vid. also Keil, p. 123 (comp. Gen. ix. 6).
In the exposition, suicide, the killing of beasts,
etc., are to be considered. By the omission of
the object the emphasis lying on the notion of
killing is strengthened. In so far as the beast
has no complete life, it cannot be killed in ths
same sense as a man can be. But every form of
cruelty to beasts is an offence against the image
of human life.
8. Not commit adultery. This command-
ment holds the same relation to the sixth as the
second to the first. Idolatry proper corresponds
with the murder of one's neighbor, the latter
being an offence against the divine in man. Im-
CHAP. XX. 22-26.
&1
age-worship, however, oorreeponds with adul-
tery, as this too rests on a subtle deification of
the image of man; it is spiritual idolatry, as
image-worship is spiritual adultery. Lev. xx. 10.
Here observe also the expansion of the thought
in the catechism, according to which simple
whoredom too in all its forms, as well as unchas-
tity, is included.
9. Not steal. Vid. the expansion, ch. xxi.
!or'8 wife, and coveting
his possessions, are two quite distinct sins; hence he regards
th« use of two distinct verbs for the two sins in Deuteronomy
as the most accurate fonu of the cmnmandzaents, and there-
relation between the fifth and the tenth com-
mandment is less marked, yet it may be said : a
genuine pupil of a pious house will not covet his
neighbor's house. The house of God in the pious
family keeps peace with the house of the neigh-
bor. Every house is to the pious man a house
consecrated by justice, like a house of God.
The Effect.
Vers. 18-21; Deut. v. 23-33. According to
Keil, the frightful phenomena under which the
Lord manifested His majesty made the designed
impression on the people. It was indeed de-
signed that the people should be penetrated with
the fear of God, in order that they might not sin ;
but not that in their fear they should stand off
and beg Moses as their mediator to talk with
God. Hence it is said, "God is come to try
you." A trial is always a test, which, through
the influence of false notions, may occasion a
twofold view of it. That; the Jews as sinners
should be startled by the p^henomena of the ma-
jesty of God, was the ihteotiof this revelation ; but
that they should retire trembling and desire a
mediator, was a misundferatanding occasioned by
their carnal fear and spiritual sluggishness.
Here, therefore, is the.- key to the understanding
of the hierarchy. The ftzy feeling of the people
desired a media,t\Tig grieathood, which the person
of Moses first had to represent. For the priest
is the man who can dare to approach God with-
out being overwhelmed with the fear of death
(Jer. XXX. 21). The people now, although they
have found out by experience that men can hear
God speak without dying, yet yield to the fear
that they will be destroyed by fire when in im-
mediate intercourse with God (Deut. v. 24, 26).
And because this is now their attitude of soul,
Jehovah complies with it (Deut. v. 28), just as
He afterwards gave to the people a kiog. This
origin of the Old Testament hierarchy explains
why immediately afterwards mention is made of
altars. In consequence of that arrangement,
therefore, the people now stood henceforth afar
off: Moses had for the present assumed the
whole mediatorship.
fore conjectures that through some copyist the text of Exo-
dus has been changed. He confesBes, however, that there is
no external evidence of any weight in favor of the conjec-
ture.— Tb.]
B.— THE FIRST COMPENDIOUS LAW OF SACRIFICE.
Chapter XX. 22-26.
22 And Jehovah said unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel
23 Ye have sesn that I have talked with you from heaven. Ye shall not make with
24 me gods of silver, neither shall ye make unto you gods of gold.' An altar of earth
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL.
• fTer. 23. If we follow the Ma^oretio punctuation, the literal translation would be : " Te shall not ™»''^„^''^.„^? '
gods of silver and gods of gold y,i shall not make unto you." With this dvviaion of the verse un obj.-ct must »" suPP"™ in
the first clause, e. g., " Te shall not make anything," i. e., any Rods, " with me," t. e., to be ob.iecr8 of worship together with
me. In fiiTor of tfiis construction ulso is the consideration that in Ih- renderina: of the A. V. an ""™'J™*™ f'™?";^^^^
seems to be made between " gods of silver " and " gods of gold." On the other hand, however the paluUehsm of the o auses
favors the rendering of the AT V. The latter 14 adopted by LXX. (where, however, we find v/iij. instead of av^ .^o.; ana
Vulg. (Where 'flX is left entirely untranslated). But the majority of sob lars prefer the other division.— in.,
82
EXODUS.
thou shalt make unto me, and shalt sacrifice thereon thy burnt-offerings, and thy
peace-offerings, thy sheep, and thine oxen : in all places where I record my name I
25 will come unto thee, and I will bless thee. And if thou wilt make [thou make] me
"an altar of stone, thou shalt not build it of hewn stone ; for if thou lift up thy tool
26 upon it, thou hast polluted it. Neither shalt thou go up by steps unto mine altar,
that thy nakedness be not discovered thereon.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL.
■We have to do here with an altogether peculiar
seotion, the germ of all Leviticus, or even of the
whole ritual law. This is too little recognized
when Keil gives as one division: chaps, xx. 22-
xxiv. 2, under the title, " Leading Features in
the Covenant Constitution," and then makes the
suhdivisiou: (1) The general form of Israel's
worship of God ; (2) The laws of Israel. Knobel
has observed the turning-point in one respect at
all events: "The frightful phenomena amidst
which .Jehovah announces the fundamental law
of the theocracy, fill the people with terror ;
hence another mode of revelation is employed for
the further divine disclosures. They beg that
Moses rather than God should speak with them,
inasmuch as they are filled with mortal diead
and fear for their lives. In this way the author
explains why Jehovah revealed the other laws to
Moses, and through him brought them to the
people, whereas He had addressed the ten com-
mandments immediately to the people." How
little more was needed in order to discern the
genesis of the hierarchical mediatorship.
Vers. 22, 23. Have talked with you from
heaven. — This is the b.isis for the negative part
of the theocratic ritual, and at the same time the
explanation of the worship of images and idols.
This rests on the fancy that Jehovah cannot ap-
proach men from heaven, and that man cannot
hear the word of Jehovah from heaven ; that
therefore images of gods and heavenly objects
are necessary as media between the Deity and
mankind. It is to be inferred from the forego-
ing that this prohibition does not exclude the
mediatorship of Moses, still less the mediatorship
of Christ in the New Covenant, for it is through
this real mediation that heaven is to be brought
to earth, and humanity united in the Holy Ghost.
Furthermore, it is to be noticed that this prohibit
tion la given here as a law respecting worship
wliereas in the decalogue it has a fundamental
ethical significance. Hence we read here: ''Ye
shall not make "nN, with me," by which is desig-
nated the adoration of images in religious ser-
vices, as involving the germ of idolatry. It Is
here incidentally suggested that images are pro-
hibited because Jehovah was veiled in a cloud,
and, " as a heavenly being, can be pictured by no
earthly material." (Keil.)
Ver. 24. The positive law of worship. Regard-
ing it as certain that there had been already a
traditional service of God, connected with sacri-
ficial rites, we cannot fiiil to discern here a design
to counteract extravagances, and to present in
the simplest pc^sible form this ritual devoted to
theocratic worship. It may be taken as signifi-
cant for the service of the Church also, that this
fundamental, simple regulation did not exclude
further developments, or even modifications. Of
course the modifications of this outward mani-
festation of piety must have an inward ground.
How then did tlie altar of the tabernacle grow
out of the low altar of earth or of unhewa
stones ? First, it is to be considered that the altar
of the tabernacle was threefold: the altar of
burnt-offering in the court (xxvii. 1); the altar
of incense in the sanctuary (xxx. 1); and tlie
mercy-seat in the Holy of holies (xxvi. 34; xxv.
21). The altar of burnt-offering was of acacia
wood, overlaid with copper, and three cubits
high. The altar of incense, also of acacia wood,
was overlaid with gold; finally, the mercy-seat
was of pure gold. This gradation points back
from the gold through the gilding and the copper
to the starting-point, the altar of earth or of
stone. This primitive form continued to be the
normal type for the altars which, notwithstanding
the fixed centre in the exclusive place of wor-
ship, were always prescribed for extraordinary
places of revelation (Deut. xxvii. 5; Josh. viii.
30; Judg. vi. 26). Not only the right, but also
the duty, of marking by altars real places of re-
velations, was therefore reserved ; the worship in
high places easily followed as an abuse. Only in
opposition to this abuse was the central sanctuary
the exclusive place of worship; but it was to be
expected that a permanent altar in the sanctuary
could not continue to be so much like a natural
growth, but had to be symbolically conformed to
its surroundings in the sanctuary.
An altar of earth. — "The altar, as an ele-
vation built of earth or unhewn stones, symbolizes
the elevation of man to the God who is enthroned
on high, in heaven" (Keil). Most especially it
is a monument of the place where God is re-
vealed; then a symbi)l of the response of a hu-
man soul yielding to the divine call, Gen. xii. 7;
xxii. 9; xxviii. 18; Ex. iii. 12, etc. Hence it is
said: ''In all places where I cause my name to
be remembered." "Generally," says Knobel,
"the passage is referre.l to the altar of the taber-
nacle, which subsequently was to stand now here,
now there. But this will not do. For (1) The
author in no way points to this single, particular
altar, but speaks quite generally of any sacrificial
worship of Jehovah, and gives no occasion to
bring in the tabernacle here contrary to the con-
nection. (2) The altar of burnt-offering in the
tabernacle was not made of earth, but consisted
of boards overlaid with copper (xxvii. Isq ).
(3) Jehovah could not say that He would come
to Israel at every pl.ace where the tabernacle
stood, because He dwelt in the tabernacle, and
in it went with Israel (xiii. 21 sq., etc.)." But
though the tabernacle denotes the legal and sym-
bolical residence of Jehovah, yet that does not
mean that Jehovah in a human way and perpe-
tually dwells in the tabernacle. The tabernacle
was only the place where He was generally to be
found, more than elsewhere, and for the whole
people; but Jehovah was not confined to the ta-
CHAP. XXI. 1— XXIII.
83
bernaole. The designation of the altar of burnt-
offering as one of copper shows that a rising scale
was formed : from the earth to stone, and from
stone to copper, and from this still higher to gold
plate and to solid gold. So in the way of self-
surrender, of offerings under the fire of Qod's
self-revelation, out of the man of earth is
formed the second man, the child of golden
light. On the original form of altars, earth en-
closed with turf, vid. Knobel, p. 211. As simple
as the original form of the altar are the original
forms of offerings: burnt-offerings and thank-
offerings. Both constitute the first ramification
of the Passover, which in the Levitical ritual
branches out still further.
Ver. 25. An altar of stone. — The aspiration
of religious men after more imposing forms of
worship is not prohibited by Jehovah, but it is
restricted. The stone altar was to be no splen-
did structure. By any sharp iron (S^n, gene-
rally sword) the stone is desecrated — i. e., under
these circumstances; for how can the worship-
per, when receiving a new revelation from God,
be thinking of decking the altar? "The precept
occurs again in Deut. xxvii. 6 sq.; and altars of
unhewn stone are mentioned in Josh. viii. 31 ; 1
Kings xviii. 32; 1 Maco. iv. 47. They were
found also elsewhere, e. g., in Trebizond." (Kno-
bel.) The opinion that hewn stone was looked
on as spurious can hardly be maintained, coua -
dering the recognition of culture and art in other
relations. But vid. Knobel, p. 212.* Connected
with the first restriction in regard to the splendor
of the stone altar is the second: Neither . . . by
steps. — The more steps, the more imposing the
altar; therefore no steps ! The reason is: "that
thy nakedness be not uncovered before it." Be-
fore it, as being the symbol of God's presence.
[But the Hebrew says: "on it." — Tb.] As the
sacrifice symbolically covers the sin of man be-
fore God, so the nakedness of the offerer should
remain covered, as a reminder of his sinfulness
before God and before His altar. The ethical
side of the thought is this: that a knowledge
of this exposure might disturb the reverence of
the offerer. But inasmuch as the later altar of
the ritual service in the tabernacle was three
cubits high and therefore probably needed steps
(Lev. ix. 22), the priests had to put on trowsers
(xxviii. 42).
* [" It would seem that the stone which waa unhewD, therp-
fore uninjured and unfashioned, found in the condition in
which the Creator left it, was regarded as unadulterated and
pure, and was therefore required to be used. Similar are tiie
reasons for the commands not to offer castrated animals (Lev.
xxii. 24), to receive into the congregation a mutilated man
(Deut. xxiii. 1), to propagate mongrel beasts and grain
(Lev. xix. 19), nor to put on the clothes of the opposite sex
(Deut xxii. 5)." Knobel, I. a. — Tb.]
C— FIRST FORM OF THE LAW OF THE POLITICAL COMMONWEALTH.
Chapteb XXI. 1— XXIII. 33.
a. Right of Personal Freedom [according to Bertheau, ten in number).
1 Now these are the judgments [ordinances] which thou shalt set before them.
2 If [when] thou buy [buyest] an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve : and in
3 the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he came [come] in by himself, he
shall go out by himself: if he were [be] married, then his wife shall go out with
4 him. If his master have given [give] him a wife, and she have borne [bear] him
sous or daughters, the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go
5 out by himself. And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife,
6 and my children ; I will not go out free : then 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 forever.
7 And if [when] a man sell [selleth] his daughter to be a maid-servant, she shall not
8 go out as the men-servants do. If she please not her master who hath betrothed
her to himself,Hhen shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation
9 he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her. And it he have
betrothed [betroth] her unto his son, he shall deal with her after the manner ot
10 daughters. If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty ot
TEXTUAL AND GEAMMATICAL.
I [Ver. 8. The Hebrew here, amirding to the K'thibh, is vh, and If this were followed, we should have to transla^
with G6dde8,RosenmUller and others: "so that he hath not betrothed (or will not betroth) her." The KM 'eads V7,
" unto him " or " unto himself." This yields much the easiest sense, and is especially confirmed by the consideration that
■}y^ of itself means, not "betroth," but "appoinV "destine." Followed by the Dative, it may in the connection convey
th7notion of betrothal ; but used absolutely, it cannot convey it.— Tb.]
84 EXODUS.
11 marriage [marriage due] shall he not diminish. And if he do not these three unto
her, then shall she go out free [for nothing], without money.
b. On Murder and Bodily Injuries. Sina againtt the Life of one') Neighbor. (Ten in number, accord-
ing to Sertheau.)
12 He that smiteth a man, 80 that he die [dieth], shall be surely put to death.
13 And if a man lie not in wait, but God deliver him into his hand [make it happen
14 to his hand^] ; 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
15 with guile ; thou shalt take him from mine altar, that he may die. And he that
16 smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death. And he that steal-
eth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to
17 death. And he that curseth [revileth]' his father, or his mother, shall surely be
18 put 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 keepetb
19 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
20 thoroughly healed. And if [when] a man smite [smiteth] his servant, or bis maid,
with a rod, and he die [dieth] under his hand; he shall be surely punished.
21 Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished : for he is
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 woman's husband will [shall] lay upon him :
23 and he shall pay as the judges determine.* And if any mischief follow, then thou
24 shalt give life for life, Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
25, 26 Burning 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 eye's sake. And if he smite
out his man-servant's tooth, or his maid-servant's tooth ; he shall let him go free
for his tooth's sake.
c. Injuries resulting from Relations of Property. Through Property and of Property. Acts of
Carelessness and Theft. {Ten, according to Bertheau.)
28 If [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
29 shaU be quit. But 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 kUleth] a man or a woman;
30 the ox shall be stoned, and his owner also shall be put to death. If there be laid
on him a sum of money [ransom], then he shall give for the ransom [redemption]
31 of his life whatsoever is laid upon him. Whether he have gored a son, or have
32 gored a daughter, according to this judgment shall it be done unto him. If the ox
shall push [gore] a man-servant or maid-servant, he shall give unto their master
33 thirty 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
34 ass fall therein ; The owner of the pit shall make it good, and [good; he shall] give
35 money unto the owner of them ; and the dead beast shall be his. And if [when] one
man's ox hurt [hurteth] another's, that he die [dieth] ; then they shall sell the live ox,
36 and divide the money [price] of it; and the dead ox also they shall divide. Or if
' [Ver. 13. nils 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 accldentnlly fall into his hand." The object to bo supplied is the indfr
finite one suggested by the preceding sentence, viz. homicide.— Xa.J
' [Ver. 17. 77p, though generally rendered "curse" in A. V , yet differs unmistakably from TIX 'n being used not
merely of cursing, but of evil speaking in general, e. g. Jndg, ix. 27 and 2 Sam. xvl. 9. The LXX. render it correctly Ij
KaKoAoyeu. And this word, where the passage is quoted in the Kew Testament, is rendered by the same Greek word, vs.
Matt. XV. 4.— Tk.]
* [Ver. 23. The Heb. reads 0^77533, lit. "with Judges" or " among judges." Some render "unto the Judges;" othen
"before the judges;" but the preposition does not naturally ronvey either of these senses. The A. V. probably
the true meaning; " with judges," i. e. the fine being judicially imposed.— Tb,]
CHAP. xxr. 1— xxiir. 33. 85
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. XXII. 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
2 for a sheep. If a [the] thief be f >und 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 he blood shed [blood-guiltiness] for him ; for
he [him ; he] should make full restitution ; if he have nothing, then he shall be sold
4 for his theft. If the theft be certainly found in his hand alive, whether it be ox,
5 or 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 man's field; of the best
6 of 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 kmdled the fire shall surely make [make full]
restitution.
d. Things Entrusted and Things Lost.
7 If [When] a man shall deliver unto his neighbor money or stuff to kee^, and it
be [is] stolen out of the man's house; if the thief be found, let him pay double.
8 If 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
9 neighbor's goods. For all manner of trespass [In every case of trespass], whether
it he 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
f 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
11 it: Then shall an [the] oath of Jehovah be between them both, that [whether] hw
hath not put his hand unto his neighbor's goods ; and the owner of it shall accept
12 ), which would well har-
monize 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 dis-
missed, especially if she has borne children who be-
long to the permanent members of the household.
4. On Murder, Homicide, and Bodilg Injuries.
(1) Homicide proper, vers. 12-14. (o) Sim-
ple homioide in consequence of beating ; (4) un-
intentional, resulting from misfortune and mis-
take ; (c) murder proper. (2) Spiritual homi-
cide, (a) Smiting of parents; (6) deprivation
of freedom (as spiritual fratricide) ; (c) cursing
of parents (spiritual suicide). (3) Bodily inju-
ries, (a) Of uncertain, perhaps fatal result ; (t)
to a free man ; (») a man-servant or maid-ser-
* [Tlie reasons are thus stated by Keil : " If tlie languige
in ver. 9 is referred to the son, so '8 to mean, * whm he take*
to liimself another wife,' then there must be assumed a
change of subject of which there is no indication ; but if ws
understand the language to mean that the father (the pn^
chaser) talces to himself another wile, then this precept
ought to have been given before ver. i)." — TB.]
CHAP. XX. 1— XXIII. 33.
89
-rant. ; (Hi) a pregnant woman, in which connec-
tion is to be noticed that the Jiia talionia is laid
down in close connection with an extremely hu-
mane law of protection, vera. 22-25 ; (6) local
injuries to men-servants or maid-servants.
Yer. 12. He that smiteth a man. — Says
Keil : " Higher than personal freedom stands
life." It may then be asked, why is capital
punishment prescribed (ver. 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 in-
stituted in Gen. ix. 6, underlies all this section;
but it is noticeable that this law is expressly
prescribed just where the protection of a preg-
nant woman is involved. It is repeated (Lev.
xxiv. 17) in connection with the ordinance that
the blasphemer shall be stoned. The reason for
the repetition is the piinoiple 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 blasphe-
mer was a Jew on his mother's side, but an
Egyptian on his father's side. So that he
dieth. — Three oases are specified : first, the se-
vere 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.
Yer. 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 cus-
tom, 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. xxxv. 11 ; Deut. xix. 1-10. Here
too the innocent homicide is expressly distin-
guished from the violent one. Num. xxxv. 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 com-
mitted 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 HJ' is not adequately re-
presented by "behave viciously, or arrogantly."
It denotes the act of breaking through, in ebul-
lient rage, the sacred restraints which protect
one's neighbor as God's image. Partioulnr
oases, Num. xxxv. 16, Deut. xix. 11. Murder
could be expiated only with death. Num. xxxv.
81. Examples of fleeing to the altar, 1 Kings i.
60; ii. 28. This was also customary among the
Ver. 15. Smiteth his father. — The simple
act of smiling, conamitted on a father or mother,
is made equivalent to man-slaughter committed
on one's neighbor. " Parricide, as not occur-
ring and not conceivable, is not at all mentioned"
(Eeil). Similar ordinances among the Greeks
Romans, and Egyptians are mentioned by Eno-
bel, p. 217. The two following provisions rest
on the same ground. The parents are God's
vicegerents for the children ; the neighbor is
God's image ; hence a violent abuse of his per-
son is equivalent to murder, vid. Deut. xxiv. 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 mo-
rally destroys himself, vid. Lev. xx. 9, Deut.
xxvii. 16. The order is: undutif ul ness, man-
stealing, self-destruction.'^ See various views
of ver. 16 in Keil, p. 133.
Yer. 18 sq. And when men strive. — The
section concerning bodily injuries as such is dis-
tinguished from the section beginning with ver.
12 in that there injuries are spoken of which re-
sult in death. The injuries here mentioned
would accordingly also be punished with death
if they resulted in death. This is shown espe-
cially by ver. 20. Here, then, an injury is con-
templated 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,
ver. 19. In the case of a man-servant or maid-
servant a different custom prevailed. If man-
slaughter took place, the manhood of the slain
one is fully recognized, i. e. the penal retribution
takes place. Probably sentence was to be ren-
dered by the court, which was to decide accord-
ing to the circumstances. According to Jewish
interpretations capital punishment was to be in-
flicted with the sword; but vid. Kuobelfor a dif-
ferent view.-)- 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. Prov. X. 13 ; the rod was also used on chil-
dren) ; 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 pun-
ishment then consists in the fact that the slave
was his money, i.e. that in injuring the slavehehas
lost his own money. The Rabbins hold that this
applied only to slaves of a foreign race, accord-
ing to Lev. XXV. 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 un-
conditionally, Num. xxxv. 16, Lev. xxiv. 17, 21,
* [This pxplanatinn of the order of the verses can hardly
he regarded as satisfactory. In fact, any attempt to discover
deep metaphysicul or psjohologlral reasons for the order
and number of these laws is open to suspicion as implying a
degree of subtlety ani regard for logical order which w;ia
qoite alien from the Hebrew spirit — Ttt J
f [Tin. that the omission of the direction, " he shall surely
be put to death," implies that his punishment was something
milder ; aa does also the spirit of the precept in ver. 21.— TB.J
90
EXODUS.
Deut. xix 1 i sqq. On the Egyptian, Greek, and
Koman legislation, see Kuobel, p. 219.*
Vers. 22-26. Special legal protection of preg-
nant women. It might often happen that in
quarrelling men would injure a pregnant woman,
since wives on such occasions instinctively inter-
pose, Deut. XXV. 11. In the latter passage the
rudenesses which the woman, protected by law,
might indulfje in are guarded against. — So that
her fruit depart. Literally : so that her chil-
dren 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 expres-
sion mT 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 in-
dividual cases denotes indefiniteness I Accord-
ing to this view, the moat, 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,' t. e., in company with, on application to
them, in order that excessive demands may be
suitably reduced. The amount of indemnity de-
manded doubtless was determined by the consi-
deration, whether the injured man had many or
few ohildrea, was poor or rich, elc. 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 be-
longing to, and, as it were, a part of, the mo-
ther" (Knobel).— Ver. 23. And if any mis-
chief follow. It is to the credit of the legisla-
tion that the law of retaliation {vid. Lev. xxiv.
19, Deut. xix. 21) is here bo 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 ex-
plication of the law of retaliation must be guarded
from a lifeless literalism, as is shown by the pro-
visions in vers. 26 and 27. It would surely have
been contrary to nature to put out the eye of a
master who had put out his servant's eye, or to
make him lose tooth for tooth. Keil says, " The
principle of retaUation, 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 talionu
in the ancient heathen world, and generally in
the Orient, vid. Knobel, p. 220.
c. Injuries resulting from Property relations
Spedally from acts of Carelessness. Chs. xxi.
28— xxii. 6.
* [According to whom, the Bgyptians punished nil mnrdera
with death ; the Greeks pnniahed all murders, but punished
the mnrdor of a si ive only hy requiring certain expiatory
rites; tbeEom m law, however, until thetimeof the**nipf*ror8,
allowed musters to treat their slaves as they pleased.— Tit.]
We follow in general Bertbeau's classiScatioo,
which makes property the determining thought.
Keil and Knobel divide otherwise. Keil with
the words, " Also against danger from cattle is
man's 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 signifi-
cance that there is here no trace of hof ses ; also
the dog is not mentioned. At the time of Solo-
mon and Ahab the case was quite different.
First are to be considered the accidents occa-
sioned by oxen that hook, vers. 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 care-
lessness and those resulting from theft, ver.
3.3-xxii. 4. Then follow injuries done to fields
or estates through carelessness in the use of cat-
tle or of fire, vers. 5 and 6. Then the criminal
misuse of goods held in trust constitute a sepa-
rate section, vers. 7-17, which we do not, like
Bertheau, make a subdivision of the division (c),
but must distinguish from it.
Ver. 28. First case. And if an oz. — The in-
stinct 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 " lainted
with capital crime" (Keil), but that he has In-
come the symbol of a homicide, and so the vic-
tim of a curse (D.'in). It is therefore an appli-
cation of Gen. ix. 6 in a symbolical sense, on
account of the connection of cattle with men.
Comp. also Lev. xx 15. Similar provisions
among the Persians and Greeks vid. in Knobel,
p. 220.
Ver. 29. Second case. The owner has been
cautioned that his ox is given to hooking. In
this case be 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 tbe injured family; as in general the guilt
was only that of carelessness, not of evil inten-
tion, 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 ver. 2i. Refer-
ence to the Salio law made by KnobeL Ran-
som. — "^33, covering, expiation.
Ver. 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.
Ver, 32. Fourth case. The ox gores a man-
servant 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 stiekels of silver. "Pro-
bably the usual market price of a slave, since
the ransom money of a free Israelite amounted
to 50 shekels, Lev. xxvii. 3." (Keil). On tha
CHAP. XXI. 1— XXIII. 33.
91
Talne of the shekel (/pBf iri/cAof) vid. Winer,
RealworteTbuch, p. 433 sqq.* The result of the
perplexing investigation is that its value is 25 or
26 silver groschen.f 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 con-
sideration that the capital punishment inflicted
on the owner formed an offset to the revenge
to which otherwise the relatives of the mur-
dered man might resort. But this revenge
for bloodshed was in no danger of being exer-
cised 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.
Comp. Clerious 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 myste-
rious solidarity of the Hebrew household (" thy
man-servant, nor thy maid-servant, nor thy cat-
tle"), a unity which was not taken into account
where a more atomistic view of liberty prevailed.
Vers. 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 re-
ceives the dead beast, of which he could only
use the skin and other such parts, since the
flesh was unclean.
Ver. 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.
Ver. 86. 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 oompeasatiou for the
loss with a live ox, in return for which he re-
ceives the dead beast.
Chap. xxii. 1-4. Eighth case. The cattle-
thief Five-fold indemnity for the stolea 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
* [See also Smith's MbU Dklirmary, Art. Weights avd Mea-
mirei.— Ttt.]
t |I. e., about 60 or 62U cents. Mr. Poole, in the article
ahove referred to, mak^s the silver shekel ■= 220 grains, i. e.,
about 63}^ cents, or 2 shillings and 2 ponce.— Ttt.].
guilt of the greater theft. "The four-fold re-
stitution is also mentioned in 2 Sam. xii. 6 : the
seven-fold, Prov. vi. 31, is not to be understood
literally, but only in a general way as manifold"
(Knobel). From the five-fold and four-fold re-
stitution 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. 187.* In the latter case the thief had not
carried out his purpose to the full extent, espe-
cially as he has not put the object of his theft
out of the way. The case differed therefore ma-
terially from the other. Vid. Knobel on the Bo-
man laws. Others indicating the value set on
ploughing oxen, Knobel, p. 222.
Vers. 2, 3. If the thief be found break-
ing in. — This is obviously an incidental interpo-
lation, which properly belongs to the class (6).
There shall be no blood to him; i. e. no
blood-guiltiness is incurred by the homicide;
vid. Num. xxxv. 27; Deut. xix. 10; Job xxiv. 16.
One might understand this chiefly of an attack
on the fold, since the topic is the stealing of cat-
tle; at all events a nocturnal irruption is meant,
vid. ver. 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 re-
cognize the thief, or frighten him away unre-
cognized, 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. xxi. 20. For Calvin on the
" ratio disparitatis inter furem nocturnmn et diur-
num," vid. Keil, p. 137. The real punishment
for the thief is determined by the law concern-
ing restitution, xxii. 1, 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 buver 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. 2;i3. Likewise laws concerning
theft, p. 224. The thief could not be sold to a
foreigner, according to Josephus, Ant. XVI. 1 , 1.
* [" The difFerenci"," says Keil, I. c, " cannot be eiplained
by the considerfttion ' that the animal slaughtered or sold was
lost to it^ 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 regainnd by purchase j
nor bv the consideration that the thief in that case baa rar-
ried his crime to a higher point (Baumgarten), for the main
thing was the stealing, not the dispoiition 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 sto-
len."— IB.]
92
EXODUS.
Ver. 5. Ninth eaae. A field or a vineyard
to be fed upon. — There are various views of
this. (1) Si Iseserii 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^eld or a
vineyard, and lets his cattle loose." Vnjt) 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 as-
sume an incidental carelessness to be meant.
The beast feeds on his field (perhaps also on the
grass between the grape-vinesj ; from this pas-
ture ground he lets him pass over so that he
does damage to his neighbor. Knobel even af-
firms 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 Kuobel's
theory. Talmudic provisions on this point are
found in Saalschiitz, Mosaisches Recht, p. 875 sq.
Ver. 6. Tenth case. This is about a fire in a
field, which might the more readily sweep over
into the neighbor's 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. Is. v. 5. He that bath kin-
dled the fire. — The carelessness is imputed to
him as a virtual incendiary, because he did not
guard the fire.
d. Things entrusted and lost.
Ver. 7. First case. The money or articles or
stuff (on D'70 see Deut. xxii. 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. ver. 4.
Ver. 8. Second case. The thief is not disco-
vered. 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 es-
teemed a divine court, hence the expression,
DTI^Nn-TX. 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.
Ver. 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 Kal b/ieiTai, etj'urabit. In all
cases in which the concealer made a confession,
an oath was unnecessary. Also dishonesty re-
specting 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.*
Vers. 10, 11. Third ease. This is about beasts
put in others' care, which die in their possession,
or are mutilated in the pasture, or injure them-
selves, or are driven away by robbers. Here
the oath is positively required, in case the guar-
dian alone has seen the thing ; but it is also de-
cisive. On a similar Indian law vid. Enobel.
Ver. 12. Fourth case. Stolen from him.—
It is assumed that the thief is not found.
" Here," says Knobel, " restitution is prescribed,
but not in ver. 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 ex-
actly a watchman." But according to ver. 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 house-
hold to God and the attitude of his con-
science formed the main ground for the judicial
sentence. In the case described in vers. 10 and
11 the oath determines the main decision; in the
present case the simple restitution is prescribed
upon the simple declaration : "stolen."
Ver. 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 La-
ban who, according to Gen. xxxi. 39, required
his son-in-law in such cases to make the loss
good. Comp. 1 Sam. xvii. 34, Amos iii. 12. On
the Indian law, vid. Enobel, p. 2J7.
Ver. 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.
Ver. 15. Seventh case. The owner is present
when the accident occurs. In that case it be-
longed especially to himself to prevent the acci-
dent, 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 wltli
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 en-
trusted. TJiJ^ 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.*
I * [This is a mistake. Knnbel translates ; " If G'xi makes
(one) a malefactor, (i. e. if the court decides that a mla^e-
mt;anor has been comm'tted), then he shall restore double to
his neighbor." And in opposition to the translation. " whicti-
ever one God condemn", he shall restore double," he aayaj
" How could the plaintiff be condemned to make resUlvtion,
if he, eV'-D though the complaint was ungrounded, had y"
taken nothing from the other f '* — Tr.]
* [The miijority of interpreters (like the A. V.) regsri
^32/ as referring to the beast, not the borrower. Kuobel
explains thus : " If the beast was not merely lent out of Idnd-
ness, but let for pay, the loss comes upon the hire by the ifr
ceipt of which the owner is paid. In fixing the hire he hid
regard to tho danger of the loss, and, when the lose t»W
place, must content himself with the hire." So Keil. 1"'
explanation of Knobel's al>ove referred to by Livngei i^^
second one, evidently not preferred by Knobel, but merely
stated as possible, especially in view of the fact that T3ff
everywhere else is used of men.-— Tr.]
CHAP. XX. 1— XXIII. 33.
93
Ver. 16. Ninth case. The seducer of an unbe-
trothed virgin (the case is different with the
sedaction of a betrothed one (Deut. xxii. 23),
who has entrusted to him the wealth of her vir-
ginity, valuable not only in a moral, but in a
oivil point of view, must make restitution to her
by marrying her, and to her father by giving a
dowry.
Ver. 17. Tenth ease. The seducer himself can-
not 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. xxxiv. 12), with which she is,
in a sort, reinstated as a virgin, and as after-
wards a legally divorced woman. The case is
not differently provided for in Deut. xxii. 28, as
Enobel affirms. There only the price of sale is
fixed, viz., at 60 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 ver. 18 and onwards," says
Keil, " differ in form and contents from the fore-
going laws; inform,by the omission of "3 [when],
with which the foregoing are almost without ex-
ception introduced ; in substance, by the fact
that they impose on the Israelites, on the ground
of their election to he the holy people of Jeho-
vah, requirements which transcend the sphere of
natural law." Yet the two divisions are not to
> be distinguished as natural and supernatural.
j But Keil has correctly found a new section here,
whilst Knobel begins :>. new section, poorly de-
fined, with ver. 16.
e. Unnatural Crimea. Abominations committed
against Religion and Humanity.
Ver. 18. First offence. The sorceress is con-
demned to death. This term is not to be made
synonymous with witch, as Knobel makes it.
The medieval witch may practice, or wish to
practice, sorcery; but she may also be a calum-
niated 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 demo-
niacal powers co-operate with her, and so she
promotes radical irreligion. She injures her
neighbor in body and life, as being the instru-
ment of hostile passions, which she nourishes ;
or, when she enters into the mood of the ques-
tioner, 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 in-
stead of the sorcerer, as Calovius says, not be-
cause 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 fliat 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 re-
garded as seducing to such things.
B Ver. 19. Second offence. Sexual intercourse
with a beast. Comp. Lev. xviii. 23 ; xx. 15 ; Deut.
szvii. 21. This unnatural thing also was pun-
ished with death, like the kindred one of sodomy,
a prominent vice of the Oanaanites, Lev xx. 13.
Ver. 20. Third offence. Idolatry. Keil's expla-
nation, " 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 tole-
rance for their offerings. Opposed to this con-
ception is tne Sabbath law, and the ordinance in
xxiii. 24. In both cases, however, the explana-
tion 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 coun-
tenanced by the Mosaic law. The words are:
" whosoever sacrificeth unto any god." The ad-
dition, "save unto Jehovah only" (as likewise
XX. 24), is a mild expression also as regards the
theocratic offerings, and also secures a right un-
derstanding of the word "Elohim." — He is to
be devoted, i. «., to the judgment of Jehovah
sentencing him to death. Here the notion of
D'ln {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, re-
moved the offering away from the truedivine 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 se-
cures 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. xxvii.
28 sq. ; 1 Sam. xv. 3." But only when it was a
case of hherem, vid. Deut. xiii. 12 sqq.
Ver. 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. (Matt.
vii. 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 Miohaelis and Saalschiitz. Vid.
iii. 9, Dent. xxvi. 7. Knobel says, " The per-
sons meant are the Canaanitish and nonCa-
naanitish strangers who staid as individuals
among the Israelites ; the Canaanites as a whole
are, according to this lawgiver also, to be extir-
pated (vid, xxiii. 83)." It belongs to the defini-
tion of the "stranger," that he is dissociated
from his own nationality, and has become sub-
ject 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 gra-
titude was probably depended on to secure its ful-
filment.
Vers. 22 24. Fifth offence. Against widows
and orphans. On this point see Knobel's collec-
tion 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
94
EXODUS.
children. And because, through the selfishnese
of the strong, widows and orphans were so liable
to be oppressed, being easily despoiled on ac-
count of their impotence, chief prominence is
given to the significance of their crying. This
need not always be a conscious prayer uttered in
one's 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 con-
nected 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.
ix 17.
Ver. 25. Sixth offence. Prohibition of usury,
by which the exigency of the poor is abused,
Lev. XXV. 36. Two grounds : the poor man be-
longs to the people of God as a free man, and
has lost his freedom through his troubles. By
usury he is burdened.
Vers. 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. Deut. xxiv.
6 sqq. The compassion which J ehovah here pro-
mises to the helpless ones that cry has an ob-
verse side for the pitiless. The expression in
ver. 27 becomes even a rhetorical plea for the
poor. Matt. v. 7, James ii. 13. "The indigent
Oriental covers himself at night in his outer gar-
ment. Shaw, Travels, p. 224, Niebuhr, Arabien,
p. 64" (Knobel). On the pawning of clothes,
see Amos ii. 8, Job xxii. 6, Prov. xx. 16, xxviL 13.
Ver. 28. Eighth offence. Contempt of the Deity
and of princely magistrates. Keil says, "Elo-
him means neither the gods of the other nations,
as Josephus (Avt. IV. 8, 10, contra Apionem II.
33), Philo (vita Mos. III. 864) and others explain
the word in their dead and Pharisaic monothe-
ism; 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 Jehovah's command3,and should
be honored in the person of the prince. Comp.
Prov. xxiv. 21; 1 Pet. ii. 17," etc. So Knobel.
This explanation is certainly favored by the con-
text, 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 Philo's
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 .lude). There are two reasons for it :
first, the element of truth which, underlies the
errors; secondly, the moral injury of the reli-
gious 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 posi-
tive reviling of Jehovah (Lev. xxiv. 15, 16). The
world of to-day would perhaps invert the order
of guilt in this relation. Luther's translation
transposes the meanings of the verbs \_"Den Got
tern .... nicht fluehen, und den Oberiten . . ,
nicht Idstern," " not curse the gods, and not re-
vile the magistrates"]. The princes are under
God as His vicegerents. Passages relative to the
defamation of princes are given by Knobel. The
word 77p comprehends all forme of evil-speaking
of God.
Vers. 29, 30. Ninth offence. Holding back of the
natural products due to the sanctuary. "nxSo
means the produce of grain (Deut. xxii. 9), and
the word i^p'l, which occurs only here, properly
'tear,' something flowing, liquor atillans, is a
poetic designation of the produce of the wine-
vat, the wine and the oil, comp. daupvov tOv 6h-
rf/DUV. Theoph.: arhorum laerymse; Pliny XI. 6."
(Keil.) Firf. xxiii. 19; Deut. xxvi. 2-11 ; Num.
xviii. 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-Tjorn to Jehovah, xiii. 2, 12.
In the passage before us, however, the precept
is put under the point of view of the civil com-
monwealth. 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.
Ver. 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 charac-
teristic here appears. Comp. xix. 6 ; Lev. xvii. 15,
/. Legal Proceedingt.
Chap, xxiii. 1. First precpt. Against rashness
in cherishing and uttering suspicions. Comp.
Lev. xix. 16 ; Deut. xxii. 13 sqq. Vid. the refer-
ences to Michnelis and Saalscbiitz in Knobel.
Second precept. No one shall allow himself to
be misled by wicked men into the utterano of
false witness.
Ver. 2. Third precept. Base compliance with
the judgment of the multitude.
Ver. 3. Fourth precept. Not to favor the poor
man in his suit. Atieolation in sympathy with
the lowly. The error of many modern minds.
Against Knobel's conjecture, vid. Keil.*
Ver. 4. Fifth precept. To keep even an enemy
from suffering loss. One's enemy is in this case
a brother, according to Deut. xxii. 1. Neglect
of this duly is positive and culpable violation
of law.
Ver. 5. Sixth precept. It is still harder to la-
bor in company with the enemy (the hater), ui
* [Knobel's conjecture ia that iDBtsHd of ^Tl (" a"* » 1"°'
man ") we should read 7*1J (" a great man ")— since in lev.
xix. 15 It is the " might; " who is not to be " honored," anj
partiality to the poor " was not to be anticipated, and neeaea
not to be forbidden." Keil r pltes thsit this is HiifBclentlj an-
swered by the fact that the same passage hiis a command not
to " respect the person of the poor." — 'Te.]
CHAP. XX. 1— XXIII. 83.
95
order to help him in his extremity. In this case
the inclination to avoid the enemy must be over-
come. On the pun see Gesenius under 213>.
Comp. Bertheau, p. 41. The neglect of this dif-
ficult self-denial also comes into the category of
violation of law.
Ver. 6. Seventh precept. Of thy poor. — The
poor must be the- protegS of the rich. But the
temptations to violate his rights, to pervert it
this way and that, is strong, since he is defence-
less. Hence Moses puts him specially under the
protection of the law. Comp. Deut. xxvli. 19; 1
Sam. viii. 3; Lam. iii. 36.
Ver. 7. Eighth precept. This looks like the
first. But there the subject is false testimony —
here, 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, di-
viding this one precept into two, fails to make
out the tenth — wherefore Keil is led to pro-
nounce his hypothesis of decades to be arbitrary
throughout.
Ter. 8. Ninth precept. Prohibition of the
taking of presents in law-suits. Out of such
presents corruption grows. They pervert the
cause of the righteous — make right wrong.
Ver. 9. Tenth precept. This is not identical
with the general precept in xxii. 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. Deut,
ixiv. 17; xxvii. 19.
g. Ordinance concerning Featt-days and Days
of Rest.
Vers. 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 God's creation,
and look forward to the Sabbath of the genera-
tion, the great year of jubilee, the type of the
future foundation and completion of the Sabbath
by Christ. The civil side of the religious ordi-
nances here made should nut be overlooked, as
is done by Keil and Knobel. In Lev. xxv. the
ordinance bears a predominantly religious as-
pect. What the land produces of itself, without
euUurfe, 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 ob-
served 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 signi-
ficance, however, it belcngs to all times: not only
the field, but also the forest, the river, and the
mine, may be spoiled by unintermittent labor.
Vers. 12, 13. Second ordinance. Man and beast
must rest on the seventh day. The humane ob-
ject of the Sabbath in its civil aspect comes out
prominently in the text. Mention is first made
10
even of the rest needed by the ox and the ass, then
of the hand-maid's son, i. e., the one born a
slave, and the stranger; they must on the Sab-
bath have a breathing-spell, as the verb properly
means. Ver. IB enjoins the proper celebration
for this sacred list of feast-days, strictly ex-
cluding the names of all heathen deities, and
containing a suggestion for the revision of the
Christian calendar in view of the medieval deifi-
cations. Says Knobel: "The most important
point is the exclusive adoration of Jehovah. The
Hebrew is not even to mention — i. e., utter — the
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 (Ps xvi. 4; Hos. ii. 17; Zech. xiii. 2). Ac-
cordingly the Hebrew was to swear only by Je-
hovah (Deut. vi. IB; X. 20; J«r. xii. 16). So
the Phenician could not swear bpKovg ^evMoiig
(Josephus c. Apionem I. 22)." But we must dis-
tinguish between the proper meaning of this
command and the superstitious Jewish interpre-
tation of it, which has even imposed a penalty
on the utterance of the name of Jehovah. The
so-called "killing by silence" ITodtschweigen],
generally a sin, has therefore here, too, its mo-
ral side.
Ver. 14. Third ordinance. Three annual festi-
vals are to be celebrated in accordance with the
wants of God's people in their civil capacity. At
the head stands the feast of unleavened bread, as
the festival of freedom ; then follow the two prin-
cipal 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.
xxxiv. 23 ; Deut. xvi. 1 6 ; 2 Chr. viii. 13. "Other-
wise," says Knobel, "the Elohist, on which
point see Lev. xxiii." But it must be observed
that there the festivals are spoken of in their re-
Isition to religion and religious rites. Therefore,
at that place special prominence is given to the
Passover and the day of atonement. The arrange-
ment 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. xxiii. 10.
Ver. 15. Fowth ordinance. The feast of un-
leavened bread as the birth-day festival of the
people and of their freedom; whereas the Pass-
over stands at the head of their religious offer-
ings, uirf. xii. 40 sqq. On Hitzig's view in his
"Oatern und Pfingsten," vid. Knobel,* 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 people — a fact which
Knobel seems to overlook; to these were adiled
the peace-offerings madfe by individuals. So the
Oriental never came before his king without pre-
sents; vid. the citations from .^lian and Paulsen
in Keil. The offering is the surplus of the gain
« FHitzig I. c. holds that aUNn E?n'n meuns the new
moon, of the month of grpen cars— to which Knobel replies
that in that case the' phlrase " time appointed " would be hu-
perflnoas ; that the Hebrew expression, if W'Vn means " new
moon," would have to be retldered " new moon of the green
ears " — a very improbable translation ; and that according to
Lev. xxiii. 6 the festival was to begin on the fifteenth day
of the month, i, e.,' at the time of the full moon,— Tb.]
96
EXODUS.
which God has blessed, and by the effort to se-
cure this surplus a barrier is built against want
in civil life. While the offerings serve to main-
tain the religious rites, they also serve indirectly
to maintain the common weal. The same holds
of the true church and of its wants.
Ver. 16. Fifth ordinance. The feast of har-
vest. — Here named for the first time, as also the
third feast, vid.. Lev. xxiii. 15 : Num. xxviii. 26.
Also called the feast of weeks, because it was
celebrated seven weeks after the feast of unlea-
vened 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, xxxiv. 22. On the Pentecost, see the
lexicons.
Sixth ordinance. — The feast of Ingathering.
— Gathering or plucking characterizes this har-
vest: 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.
xxiii. 34, Num. xxix. 12, Winer, Realworterbuch,
Art. Laubhutienfest, [Smith's Bible Dictionary,
Art. Tabernacles, Fea.it of]. In the end of the
year. — Knobel, on account of this passage, as-
sumes 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 for-
mer, 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 contra-
diolion of the Elohist, who puts the beginning of
the year in the spring (xii. 2), is not perspicu-
ous ; neither, on the other hand, is Keil's — that
reference is here made only to the agricultural
year, by which he must mean the natural sea-
sons, 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 Been especially from Num. xxix. 12. That
in Lev. xxiii. 34 the date is religious, is self-evi-
dent.
Ver. 17. Seventh ordinance. Three times In
the year; i. e. of course at the three above-
mentioned feasts. The place where the Israel-
ites 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 thii, shows the civil side of this
legislation. 10T for 131, thy males. "Proba-
bly," says Keil, "from the twentieth year and
upwards, those who were included in the census,
Num. i. 3. But this does not prohibit the ad-
mission of the women (comp. 1 Sam. i. 3 sqq.)
and boys (Luke ii. 41 sqq.)." More exactly:
by the side of the civil ordinance the religious
custom was developed in a natural way. Kno-
bel thinks he finds here another discrepancy, p.
235.
Ver. 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
(xii. 15, 20). In reference to the future, the
fatty parts of the paschal offering, which alsu
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 fatiy
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 moat
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. ii. 11, etc. As the Passover was to be con-
trasted 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 of-
fering of life (Passover); (3) the beginning of
the new life (unleavened bread).
Ver. 19. Ninth ordinance. Precept in refer-
ence chiefly to the feast of weeks, or the first feast
of harvest, but with a more general significance.
" The Pentecostal loaves (Lev. xxiii. 17) are
meant," says Knobel. Keil with reason under-
stands the precept of a bringing of firstlings in
general, vid. Num. xviii. 12, Ut. xxvi. 2 sqq. " The
sheaf of barley which was to be offered on the
second day of the feast of unleavened bread (Lev.
xxiii. 10) belongs to the same" [Keil]. It niay
be asked how the expression '1133~n''E'!<'l 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, accord-
ing 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 chro-
nological element in the term " first," however,
takes precedence, and forbids every delay and
sequestration, according to xxii. 29. The mean-
ing of these offerings is seen from the liturgical
forms prescribed for them in Deut. xxvi. 3 sqq.,
13 sqq. Everything is a gift from Jehovah; there-
fore the first fruits are brought back to Him, and
their acceptance is effected by the priest, vfho,
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 Je-
hovah in the 0. T. symbolically pictures Himself
as in a human state of want, in the priests
under whose protection all, especially all needy
CHAP. XX. 1— XXIII. 33.
97
ones stand. So then the church ought conti-
nually to care for the poor, as a religious du.y.
Ver. 19. Tenth ordinance. Not boil a kid. —
This precept seems strange, probably for the
reason that it may be in a high degree symboli-
cal. First, we must pronounce incorrect Lu-
ther's translation : "Not boil the kid while it is
at its mother's milk" [vid. 1 Sam. vii. 9). Other
incorrect interpretations see in Enobel: (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 re-
ference 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, Eeisen, 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 pro-
hibiting the practice itself. If we assume that
the precept in ver. 18 referred to the first feast,
and was designed to prevent the profanation of
the offering, and that the one in ver. 19 referred
to the second one, and was designed to prevent
the neglect of the peace-offering and the priest-
hood 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 joy-
ous feast of the Israelites, it is furthermore pro-
bable that this prohibition was designed to pre-
vent a luxury which was inconsistent with sim-
ple 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 haul goat;
vid, Deut. xiv. 21, where the same prohibition is
connected with the one before us. Keil's expla-
nation, that the practice marked a reversal of
the divine order of things in regard to the rela-
tion between old and young, is less intelligible
than that the kids were a very favorite article of
food, according to Gen. xxvii. 9, 14; Jndg. vi. 19,
xiii. 15 ; 1 Sam. xvi. 20. To be sure, the usage
considered in its symbolical aspect was a sort of
unnature such as the keen sense of natural fit-
ness which characterized the Mosaic laws re-
jected 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. xix. 19, 20.
h. The Promises. Vers. 20-33.
That this last division also of the religio-oivil
legislation relates to the political commonwealth,
is seen from the whole contents of it, especially
from vers. 22, 24 sqq., 27, 33. Knobel calls
them " Some more promises ;" Keil, " The con-
duct of Jehovah towards Israel." The promises
here given are not some, but a whole ; not, how-
ever, the whole of .Jehovah's promises, but the
sum of the civil and political blessings condi-
tioned on good behavior. (1) Protection of an-
gelic 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 con-
trol 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.
Vers. 20-22. Mrst promise. I send an angel.
— That which the people, as the religious con-
pregation of God, afterwards have imposed upon
them as a check on account of their misbeha-
vior (chap, xxxiii.), 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 narra-
tor" who calls this angel DiiT \33. For in
xxxiii. 2, 8 two forms of revelation are clearly dis-
tinguished. In xxxiii. 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. Jehovah's
face, but can see its reflected splendor as it
passes by in sacred obscurity (ver. 23). It is
therefore a private relation between Jehovah
and Moses, when Jehovah speaks with him face
to face (xxxiii. 11), and hence in Moses' con-
sciousness the two degrees of revelation go to-
gether. The prophet Moses stands as Abra-
ham's son higher than Moses the lawgiver. So
Paul (in Gal. iii.) distinguishes positively be-
tween the form of revelation which Abraham re-
ceived and the form of revelation by which the
people of Israel received the law (vers. 16 and
19). This difference in degree is presented an ■
tithetically as early as in Jer. xxxi. 32-34. It
harmonizes entirely with this distinction, when
the angel of Jehovah first appears to Hagar,
Gen. xvi. 7 ; also in the circumstance that he
directs her to return to the household to which,
she legitimately belonged. Comp. Gen. xxi. 17.
Later also the immediate revelations made by God
to Abraham are distinguished from the appear-
ance of the angel of Jehovah in a legal aspect.
Gen. xxii. 1, 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 rela-
tion; hence also the form of the political theo-
cracy as it is instituted through the mediation
of Moses and Aaron, chiefly of Moses. The sal-
vation of the people will depend on their obedi-
ence 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 counte-
98
EXODUS.
Dance in the theocratic legal institutions is
turned towards Israel ; Jehovah's name, the re-
velation of His essential being, is within him,
under the cover of this angelic form. He re-
quires awe ; he can he easily offended ; he pun-
ishes acta of disloyalty, for he is legal ; hence
he goes before Israel as the terror of God to in-
timidate 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, xxxiii. 9.
Vers. 23, 24. Vid. Gen. xv. 18 sqq. Annihila-
tion of the public heathen worship in Canaan af-
ter 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. 2-38.
Ver. 25. The pure service of Jehovah is the
condition of well-being and health; vid. xv. 26;
comp. Lev. xxvi. 16, 25; Deut. xxviii. 20. Bread
and water, the most important articles of nutri-
tion, symbols of all kinds of welfare.
Ver. 26. Prevention of miscarriages. Only
one item in a whole category: diminution of the
population through miscarriages, unohastity,
conjugal sins against procreation, exposure of
children, f,tc.; oomp. Lev. xxvi. 9; Deut. xxviii.
11; XXX. 9; virf. Is. xxv. 8 ; Ixv. 23. Respecting
the blessing of long life, vid. chap, xx.; Deut. v.;
1 Cor. XV. 51.
Ver. 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 (ver. 28) represent the ter-
rifying or destructive effects of this power in
particular. Vid. Gen. xxxv. 5; Ex. xv. 14; Ps.
xviii. 41 (40); xxi. 13 (12); Josh. vii. 8, 12.
Ver. 28. Hornets.— Firf. Deut. vii. 20; Wis-
dom of Solomon xii. 8. Says Knobel: "Accord-
ing to Josh. xxiv. the kings of the Amorites, Si-
hon and Og, were driven out not by Israel's wea-
pons, but by the ni>")!t. Elsewhere neither the
word nor the thing occurs in the 0. T." Differ-
ent 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 Augus-
tine, has correctly observed. It is a question
even whether the hornets are not meant to repre-
sent the same thing as the bees, Deut. i. 44; Ps.
cxviii. 12 ; Isa. vii. 18. The bee frightens by the
multitude of the irresistible swarm; the hornets
by the frightful attack and sting of the indivi-
dual insect. In the petty religious and moral
conflicts between Judaism and heathenism, civil-
ized 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 Canaan,
itish nations which are here named denote the
totality; perhaps, however, in the heathen tri-
nity may be found a reference to the spiritual
impotence of heathenism.
Ver. 29. Not in one year. — Comp. Deut. vii.
22; Lev. xxvi. 22; Ezek. xiv. 15, 21 ; 2 Kings
xvii. 25; Josh. xiii. 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 di-
minishing 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 na-
ture, which without them would lapse into wild-
ness. 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. Judg. i. and ii.
Ver. 31. Set thy bounds. — Vid. Gen. xv.
18. The Bed Sea on the south — the sea of the
Philistines, or Mediterranean Sea, on the west —
the Arabian desert on the east (Deut. xi. 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 al-
liances 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 drawu into idola-
try 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.
CHAP. XXIV. 1-8.
99
D.— THE FEAST OF THE COVENANT COMMANDED.
CffAP. XXIV. 1-2.
1 And he said unto Moses, Come up unto Jehovah, thou, and Aaron, Nadab, and
2 Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel ; and worship ye afar off. And Moses
alone shall [let Moses alone] come near Jehovah : but they shall not [let them not]
come nigh ; neither shall [and let not] the people go up with him.
darknesa of the mountain; by which, however, is
not exactly meant that he waa on the mountain
(xx. 21). It ia therefore not to be supposed
(with Keil and Knobel) that Moaea, according to
XX. 21, had again betaken himself to the mountain ;
for in thia case it would have to be assumed that
the descent bad been forgotten. But no wan ascend-
ing to Jehovah takes place, with most significant
distinctions. lUoses, the prophet, alone is per-
mitted to go to the top of the mountain, and ap-
proach Jehovah. At the declivity of the moun-
tain the priests must stop, represented by Aaron
and his sons, Nadab and Abihu; and with a like
limitation, but also with a like right, the state,
the popular assembly, represented by the seventy
elders. They occupy a middle position between
the prophet above and the people below. On
Nadab and Abihu vid. Lev. x. 1 sqq.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL.
The connection of this passage with the fore-
going is correctly stated by Keil in opposition to
Knobel. In xx. 22 God spoke through Moses to
the people. What He now speaks at the end of
the giving of the law iafor Moses himself, al-
though he must communicate with the people
about it. After Jehovah has proclaimed the law
of the covenant to the people, the feast of the
covenant must be celebrated. It is presupposed,
first, that Qod has spoken from Hinai the ten
commandments to Moses and the people at the
foot of the mountain (xix. 26). Then that He
gave the ceremonial laws and the civil laws for
the people, while the latter had removed from
the mountain, but Moses was standing in the
E.— RATIFICATION OF THE COVENANT.
Chap. XXIV. 3-8.
3 And Moses came and told the people all the words of Jehovah, and all the judg-
4 ments [ordinances] : and all the people answered with one voice, and said, All the
words which Jehovah hath said [spoken] will we do. And Moses wrote all the
words of Jehovah, and rose up early in the morning, and builded an altar under
5 the hill [mountain], and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel. A.nd
he sent young [the young] men of the children of Israel, which [and they] offered
burnt-offerings, and sacrificed peace offerings of oxen [bullocks] unto Jehovah.
6 And Moses took half of the blood, and put it in basins ; and half of the blood he
7 sprinkled on the altar. And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the au-
dience [hearing] of the people: and they said, All that Jehovah hath said [spoken]
8 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.
evidently the report must have included the
whole threefold law (therefore not only the deca-
logue), because the covenant now to be con-
cluded was to relate to the whole law. But it is
also self-evident that Moses was a better hearer
of the ten commandments than the people were,
and had to be for them a mediator of the law
which they th^maelves had heard. Once more
the assent of the people ia given to the law of
the covenant unanimoualy — with one voice ; prac-
EXEQETICAL AND CRITICAL.
Ver. 8. And Moses came. — That is, ont of
the darkness of the mountain, not exactly from
the mountain itself. And told the people. —
" Not the decalogue (as Delitzsch holda, JBehrder-
brief, p. 414), for the people had beard this im-
mediately from the mouth of God, but the words
of XX. 22-26, and all the laws" (Keil). But
TOO
EXODUS.
tieally, the third expression of compliance (vid.
XX. 19 and xix. 8). How then can there be any
more thought of despotic subjection of the peo-
ple ? Thus far everything has been done orally ;
aud for the first time Moses makes a provisional
copy of the law. — Ver. 4. The covenant is con-
cluded, and DOW it is sealed by the feast of the
covenant. Moses builds early on the follow-
ing morning an altar (for Jehovah), and in addi-
tion twelve pillars for the twelve tribes of Israel.
"As the altar,-' says Keil, "being the place
where the Lord comes to bless His people (xx.
24), indicates the presence of Jehovah, so the
twelve pillars, or signal stones, were not to serve
as mere memorial signs of the ratification of the
covenant, but, as the dwelling-place of the twelve
tribes, to represent their presence." Vid. Gen.
xxviii. 18, xxxi. 45 (Knobel on Gen. xxi. 31),
Josh. iv. (memorial stones). Josh. xxii. 11 sqq.
(the altar a symbol of unity).
Ver. 6. And be sent the young men.
The young men must officiate in offering the sa-
crifices of ratification. Why ! Different views :
(1) As first-born children, who constitute the
natural basis for the priesthood (Onkelos), or
even the sons of Aaron (Augustine). (2) Vigor-
ous men, as Moses' assistants in making the
offering (Knobel: first-born youths). (3) As
representatives of the youthful people (Kurtz
III., p. 143). The young men of the nation
stand midway between the children and the
men ; they share with the first their innocence,
and with the latter their strength, and, as being
the bloom of the national life, are the fittest re-
presentatives of an incipient national life. When
the national life is to be restored by wars of
liberation or defence, the young men enter the
lists. Thus Israel concludes its covenant with
Jehovah through the bloom of its national life,
the young men — according to a general law of
the life of nations, which Kurtz has at least sug-
gested (but criticised by Keil, note 1, p. 157).*
It is, however, an observation needed only by
the high-churchly, when Kurtz lays stress on the
fact that the bringing and slaying of the victims
was not a sacerdotal function. For as yet " the
universal priesthood" officiates, although Moses
alone as yet exercises the function of high-priest.
Archaeological notes on the young men offering,
vid. in Knobel, p. 242. — Burnt-oSerings and
peace -ofierings. The burnt-offerings symbol-
ize Jehovah's part of the festive solemnities ; the
peace-offerings that of the people. — Bullocks.
The great covenant cannot be ratified by the sa-
crifice of sheep or goats. — Half of the blood.
On the division of the blood, djU Keil, p. 158. f We
* The English edition omits the note. Keil argues that
there is nowhere any indication that a nation in general ap-
proaches Jehovah through an offer! ne. These young men
nl-ficiated, he thinks, merely ns Moses' assistants, as is indi-
cared hy the circumstance that he nent them (ver. 5). — Ta.
t fKeil, ;. c. says ; " The halving of the blnod has nothing
in couiraon with the heathen customs rited by Bahr (Sym-
boh'kf II., p. 421) and Koobel (on this passage) according to
which the contracting parties mingled their own blood. For
it is not two different kinds of blood that are mixed together,
t'Ut oiu blood, and that, sacriQcial blood, in which animal
life is taken away instead of human life Inasmuch ob
the blood is divided only because what is sprinkled on the
altar cannot be taken up again from the altar and sprinkled
have no hesitation, in spite of superstitious in-
terpretations of the Lord's Supper and of the
ritual, to conceive of the one-half of this blood
as a sacrifice, and the other as a sacrament typi-
cally foreshadowed. In accordance with this
reference the sacrificial element is traceable in
the burnt-offering, the sacrament in the D'D7B',
peace-offerings, or thank-offerings. Keil, refer-
ring to Bahr and Knobel, rightly opposes the
adducing of the analogy of heathen usages, in
so far as thereby an ideniification of the usage
is intended [vid. Knobel, p. 243) ; but an affinity
of the profane with the theocratic sacrificial
usages cannot be denied. Keil is also incorrect,
when, in reference to these offerings, he speaks
of expiation in the proper sense of the word.
This could least of all be applied to the peace-
offerings, or festive-offerings. The offerings in
general, it is true, rest on the consciousness of
the sinfulness which leads man. with his good
will, and in symbolic form, to bring to God, as con-
fession, prayer, and vow, what in his real condi-
tion as sinful in his spiritual life he cannot bring
Him — in the burnt-offering the sinless consecra-
tion of his whole life, in the peace-offering the
sinless consecration of all his prosperity and en-
joyment. It is quite in accordance with the
legal stand-point that Moses at first pours out the
blood designed for God at the altar of God;
thereby he symbolically effects a general and
complete surrender of the people to God. But
not till after he has read the book of the cove-
nant, the laws of chs. xx.-xxiil., and the people
have given their fullest assent {vid. the transla-
tion), does he sprinkle the people with the other
half of the blood of the offering, which till then
was kept in the basin, while he calls it the blood
of the covenant that has been completed. It
can hardly be correct, with Keil, to understand
the blood to have been halved only because the
blood sprinkled on the altar could not be again
taken from it and sprinkled on the people ; but
he is right in assuming that the halves belong
together. Clearly there is formed out of the
identity of the blood a contrast in actu. In this
contrast, however, the thought comes out that
surrender in general, in accordance with the
conditions of grace, must precede obedience in
particular, according to the law. This is the
patriarchal and evangelical seal impressed on
the law, such as also introduces the decalogue —
the language about the redeeming God. The
expression, "blood of the covenant," is, it is
true, a marked one, denoting an ideally symboli-
cal exchange of blood, as a foundation for blood
relationship. But no human blood is here used,
and still less can there be any thought of real
blood of God, although, as sacrificial blood, it
comes from God (and so far forth is a typical
mystery), and is sprinkled upon men, symholi-
cally expiating them and devoting them to aano-
tification, vid. xxix. 21, Lev. viii. 30.
on the people, the two halves of the blood are to be regarded
as belonging together and so forming fme blood, which is firlt
sprinkled on the altar and then on the people, as was really
done at the consecration of the priests, xxix. 21, Lev. Till.
30."— TB.|
CHAP. XXIV. 9-11.
101
P.— FEAST OF THE COVENANT.
Chap. XXIV. 9-11.
9 Then went up Moses, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders
10 of Israel : And they saw the God of Israel : and there was under his feet as it were
a paved work of a sapphire stone [as it were work of bright sapphire], and as it
11 were the body of heaven [the very heaven] in his clearness [for clearness]. And
upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand : also [and] they saw
God, and did eat and drink.
covenant, and the subsequent darkening of the
mountain by cloud and fire which took place when
the law was drawn up. The Tision of Jehovah in
its several stages of development is marked by Isa.
vi. 1 and Ezek. i. 26, Dan. vii. 9-13 (comp. Num.
xii. 8). During the feast of the covenant at the
declivity of the mountain (according to ver. 1
prescribed before the covenant was formed) the
representatives of Israel saw the God of Israel.
It was a vision, for which no objective image is
furnished. But the sign of the objective image
is called the image of a work or footstool under
God's feet, of brilliant sapphire, of sky blue there-
fore, like the heaven in its full brightness, as is
added by way of further explanation. This
ethereally delicate picture of the vision of the co-
venant God of Israel in His grace and covenant
faithfulness has been coarsened and obscured in
two directions. According to Knobel, the figure
under God's feet is "like a work of sapphire
slabs ;" and he refers to Ezek. i. 26, and reads
njab, vid. p. 244. According to Baumgarten
there was no image of God, because the vision of
the men was imperfect. According to Hofmanu the
fire was separated from the cloud and turned into a
form. According to Keil they saw also a form of
God, which, however, is not described, "inas-
much as Moses, according to Num. xii. 8, saw
the form of Jehovah." But here we are told of
a vision of the supermundane God as the God of
Israel, not of a vision of Jehovah becoming in-
carnate. This is the first contrast. The second
is the fact that at the feast of the covenant the
cloud and the darkness are entirely gone, that
the heavens open themselves, as it were, to the
transported gazers in the full splendor of the
heavenly blue, as at the baptism of Jesus; whereas
immediately afterwards, at the beginning of the
drawing up of the law, the mountain was obscured
again, even more than before, as was the case when
the ten commandments were first proclaimed. This
is now again a phenomenal image of the glory of
Jehovah as a law-giver, the same one who also in
ch. xxxiii. does not show Moses, the law-giver, the
face of His glory, but only its reflected splen-
dor. The exegetical assumption that an external
image must correspond to a vision of God, or
that the sight must always be an external seer
ing, has no Biblical basis, although even here
the inward vision is connected with the sight of
an outward corresponding sign.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL.
A wonderfully beautiful, sublime, but also
mysterious feature of the history of the giving
of the law. In it we see the significance of the
sprinkling of the blood further carried out. It
is the communion festival of the law — a commu-
nion of the Israelites, in the persons of their no-
blest representatives, with Jehovah, — the other
side of the picture presented by the communion
of Moses, his brother Aaron, and the elders, with
Jethro, Moses' heathen father-in-law, after the
latter offered burnt-offerings and sacrifices, and
doubtless also, as here, peace-offerings, xviii.
12. — A prophetic form of the communion feast
is given by Isaiah, ch. xxv. 6-8. The first reali-
zation of it, the celebration of the Lord's supper,
frequently made to point figuratively to the last
supper of the kingdom of Christ (Matt. xix. 28),
finds its last fulfilment in the marriage of the
Lamb, Rev. xix. 7-9.
Ver. 9. Therefore the representatives of Israel
went up, according to the prophetic, ceremo-
nial, and political elements of the community.
Aaron's sons mark the genealogical succession
of the Levitical priesthood ; the prophets have
no genealogical succession ; the elders must
grow up to attain their dignity, and from the
whole of them seventy are chosen as representa-
tives, according to the sacred number seventy.
Vid. Gen. xlvi. 27.
Ver. 10. And they saw the Ood of Israel.
It is not said that they saw Jehovah, though He
is meant ; for Jehovah is the God of Israel.
Therefore not niiT' 1'I33, as Knobel conceives,
referring to xvi. 10. He says, "According to the
chief narrator this favor was shown only to
Moses, and that too later than this, and at his
special request." Two discrepancies are said
to be found here : (1) That Moses " does not see
the glory of Jehovah till afterwards, xxxiii. 18;"
(2) That "according to the chief narrator the
people themselves at the proclamation of the ten
commandments perceived only thunder, light-
ning, clouds, noise of trumpets, and the voice of
Jehovah;" but here also the ninnf33 [glory of
Jehovah], according to ver. 17 1 The narrative
evidently brings out two marked contrasts. The
first is the seeing of Elohim, and the seeing of
Jehovah; the second is the heavenly clear-
ness above the mountain during the feast of the
102
EXODUS.
Yer. 11. He laid not his hand. It ia dan-
gerous for sinful man to approach God, because
the holiness and justice of God repel him ; hence
the true priest is he who can summon courage
to approach God (Jer. xxi. 21). But the view
of the countenance of Jehovah annihilates, as it
were, the sinful man (slays the old man) ; hence
the Jewish popular saying, that no one can see
God without dying, vid. Judg. xiii. 22. At that
very place the error in the popular notion is cor-
rected by Manoah's wife; yet the full revelation
of Jehovah is still dangerous and agitating even
for one who sacerdotally approaches and sees
Him (yid. Rev. i.). Hence to the legal mind of the
narrator it is an astonishing and joyous wonder of
grace that the God of Israel did not punish the no-
bles of Israel for their temerity. In the enjoy-
ment of this theocratic peace of God " the nobles
of the children of Israel" received a pledge that
the people of Israel themselves were also called
to this dignity. They received this peace for
the benefit of Israel, And they saw God. —
Luther's translation makes the sentence describe
two successive events: "and when they had seen
God, they ate and drank." But the two are
simultaneous ; the seeing of God and the eating
and drinking are intimately connected, forming
a prelude of sacramental enjoyments. Fear
might report: "they saw God and died;" but
instead of that faith reports: "they saw God,
and ate and drank." In ver. 14 is found an in-
dication that the nobles of Israel were on a de-
clivity of the mountain, which, as contrasted with
the summit, might be regarded as in the valley,
and from which they could keep up their con-
nection with the people. According to Keil,
Moses also had first left the mountain with them,
and afterwards ascended it again. This assump-
tion may be favored by the fact that Joshua
now comes into company with Moses. Moses
needed his servant, since there was now to be a
longer stay on the mountain. Knobel also under-
stands the command, " Tarry here," of the stay
at the foot of Sinai.
O.— THE SUMMONS TO COMMIT THE LAW TO WRITING.
Chapter XXIV. 12-18.
12 And Jehovah said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount, and be there :
and I will give thee [thee the] tables of stone, and a [the] law, and commandments
[the commandment] which I have written, that thou mayest teach [written, to
13 teach] them. And Moses rose up, and his minister Joshua: and Moses went up
14 into the mount of God. And he said unto the elders, Tarry ye here for us, until
we come again [back] unto you : and behold, Aaron and Hur are with you : if anv
15 man have any matters to do [whosoever hath a suit], let him come unto them. And
16 Moses went up into the mount, and a [the] cloud covered the mount. And the
glory of Jehovah abode upon mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it six days : and
17 the [on the] seventh day he called unto Moses out of the midst of the cloud. And
the sight [appearance] of the glory of Jehovah was like devouring fire on the top
18 of the mount in the eyes of the children of Israel. And Moses went into the midst
of the cloud, and gat him up into the mount : and Moses was in the mount forty
days and forty nights.
was added a new, grand task : the construction
of the tabernacle. The law (or, the instruc-
tion) and the commandment. Not as two
parts, but as two fundamental forms of the legisr
lation. The law is originally oral instruction
(tiiutions
of the temple, not one of the special offerings of
the people. "The table," says Knobel, "stood
in the holy place on the north side (xxvi. 36),
while the candlestick belonged on the south side
(ver. 85), and the altar of incense in the mid-
dle (XXX. 6)." Archaeological observations vid.
in his Comm, p. 266, especially on the dishes.
On the use to which the pitchers and the goblets
or bowls were put, Keil and Knobel come to op-
posite conclusions, the latter with grammatical
proofs.*
8. The Golden Candlestick. Vers. 81-40.
First is to be considered the form of the golden
* [Their conclusions are diflferent only as regards the nityp
and tV^yO, Keil making the first mean the bowls from
which the wine was poured out as a drink-offering ; the se-
cond, the pitchers in which the wine stood on the table.
Knobel reverses this relation, arguing that H^pJD is derived
from npj, to pour out. With him agree Gesenius and
'''' -
rarBt.— Tr.].
116
EXODUS.
candlestick; next, its use; finally, its signifi-
oanoe. The candlestick has been often described
and pictured (vid. Thenius, Bucher der Konige,
Tab. IIL, 11)- Comp. Winer, RealUxieon; Zel-
ler's Worterbuch, and the Commentaries. [More
especially, Eeland, de Spoliis templi Hieroaolymi-
tani in arm Titiano, Tr.]. On the base, which
must necessarily have had feet, stood the can-
dlestick, first as a single thing. It extended
upwards in the form of a middle shaft, which
had on each side three shafts in one plane, bend-
ing around in the form of quarter-circles,— a
unit, therefore, branching out into the sacred
number, seven.
The general form is easily pictured: a base ; a
perpendicular central shaft, the trunk, as it were,
of the luminous tree; and proceeding out of it at
regular distances three branches on either side.
The description is made obscure or difficult by
the ornaments. The principal feature of the
ornamentation is the almond-shaped cup; it is
divided into the knob, or apple, and the flower.
The main shaft has four such cups ; out of the
lowest proceeds the shaft itself, as well as the
first pair of branches. Out of the second pro-
ceeds the second pair of branches ; out of the
third, the third ; its fourth cup is its top. The
six branches, or side shafts, have each three
cups. The one forms the top ; the second may
have been in the middle of the curve of the
branch ; the third seems to have lain against
one of the three divisions, or cups, of the main
shaft. The seven cups which form the top stand
in a horizontal line ; the lamps are set up into
their flowers. But the explanations of the diffi-
cult passage are various.*
But the main shaft is distinguished by having
four cups. So the one unit branches into the
three, the three into the seven, and the seven
into the twpnty-two. " The golden candlestick
was placed on the south side in the holy place
of the tabernacle. For the south is the direction
from which the light comes, and is therefore
called also DITH. The seven lamps of the candle-
stick were set up every evening at the time of
the evening incense offering, and were kept burn-
ing until morning" (Knobel). They lighted the
whole sanctuary, but cast their light especially
* [According to some («. g.^ Philippson) the line connect-
ing the seven lamps formed a curve, not a straight line. It
wonld Beem probable that the ornamental flowera were not
crowded together on the central abaft, os Lange conceives,
but put at equal intervals from one another. It is fllso pro-
bable that there wpre three flowers on each branch bi^tween
the main shaft and the lamp, and that the fourth flower of
the main shaft was between its lamp and the upper branch.
— TlJ.
northwards towards the altar of incense and the
table of shew-bread ; for the life of prayer and
the communion of salvation are conditioned on
the light of revelation, enlightenment. Keil's
explanation of the candlestick is, in our opinion,
as mistaken as that of the table: "In the shining
lamps, as receivers, bearers of light, Israel is to
present itself continually to Jehovah as a people
that lets its light shine in the night of this world."
Did tbe nocturnal darkness of the sanctuary
symbolize " the night of this world ?" Israel is
indeed appointed to bear light, but the light
which it is to diffuse is the light of the revela-
tion of Jehovah, and the bearers of the light are
primarily the select ones, the prophets of God.
Keil himself urges that the oil is a symbol of
God's Spirit, as also the olive-tree described in
Zech. iv., and the seven candlesticks in Rev. i,
20. The significance of the saored numbers, as
well as that of the pure gold, is obvious. On
the almond flowers, comp. Keil and Knobel. On
the appurtenances of the candlestick see Knobel
4. The Tent, or the Dwelling itself. Chap. xxvi.
1-30.
i. The Component Parts of the Tent as to Form.
a. The tent itself. (1) Ten curtains of byssuB
each 28 cubits long, and 4 cubits wide. (2) Fifty
loops to each curtain, to connect together five
curtains. (3) Five times fifty golden clasps, to
connect the loops *
b. The covering of the tent. First covering, of
goats' hair: eleven curtains, each 30 cubits long,
and 4 cubits wide, divided into sets of 5 and 6.
For them 60 [or rather, 100] loops and 50 copper
clasps. One curtain is folded double on the front
side of the tent. The surplus cubits hang over on
the two sides. A similar excess hangs over on the
back end of the tent. — Second covering, rams'
skins dyed red. — Third covering, the outer one,
seal-skins.
c. The supports of the tent. The boards of
acacia wood. Each board 10 cubits long, IJ
cubits wide. Two tenons in each board. Twenty
boards on the south side resting on forty silver
sockets (feet). — Twenty boards on the north side
with the same number of sockets. Six boards
for the rear. Two boards for the corners of the
rear. In addition, the bars (cross-bars or con-
necting bars), 5 for each side, the middle ons
passing the whole length of the framework. The
bars and boards gilt. Also the rings for the
bars.f
* [This is incorrect. Fifty loops to each curtain would
make five hundred loops, whereas there were only one I ui>
dred. For these loops were not to connect the flve cnrtaiM
to one another, as Lange says, but to connect the one c"*'"
made up of five (coupled together we are not told how) witu
the curtain made up "f t'le other five. Accordinely, »ls».
there were only fifty clasps, not two hundred and flfty.-^Xll.J
t [Lange says nothing about the shape of the tabsrnado, m
about the manner in which the curtains are arranged. ItiB
a vexed question. Tbe following are the principal views: (1)
It being clear and undisputed that the board framework m"
30 cubits long, 10 broad, and 10 high, one theory is that IM
ten curtains, called "the tabernacle" in xxvi. 1, w«K "J
joineil toge'her si'Ie to side »s to form two curtains of e?"*'
size, each 28 cul.its long, and 20 cubits broad; that these two
were looped 'ogetlier (ver. 5), and the whole was spread nnti-
zontally over the top-t of the boards, thus hanging down it
cubits on eHCli side, ». e., within one cubit of the ground, sinM
the two sides (each 10 cubits) and the width (10 iubito).ti>
I gather are equal to 30 cubits. The breadth of both cultaii»
CHAP. XXV. 1— XXXI. 18.
117
ii. The Component Parts as to material. Bys-
sus, linen, goats* -hair, and the two kinds of skin.
Acacia wood, gold, silver, copper.
ili. The Colors. Especially significant. The
covering proper of the lent contains the four co-
lors: white, purplish-blue, purplish-red, crimson.
being 40 cubits, and the leniith of the woofien structure nnly
30, ai)'l tbe entrance ("CcordinE to vera. 9 and 36) being pro-
vided with a special cuitaiu, it follows that 10 cubits must
havf^ hung down un the west (back) end, and so the curtaia
just reached the ground. (2) Another view (brought into
favor by Bahr) differs from this in that the lower (linen) cur-
tttind are conceived aa hanging down Inside, not outs de, of
the boards. (3) SaalschlUz supposes that tbe curtains formed
{t roofed tf-tU above the boards, the bottom of the uudtr^cur-
tain juBt touching the top of the boards. This roof would
reach about 13 cubits above the top of the boards, tlie ridpre
having an angle of about 40°. Paine's theory is somewhat
similar, but in its details is so fiiutastical and arbitrary aa
hardly to merit a full statement. (4) Fergusson (in Smith'rt
Jiible Dictionary, Art. Temple) also holds that there was a
ridge above the boards and half-way between tht-m, so that
the goats'-hair curtain formed a tent proper (as it is called in
xxvi. 7, where A. V. mistranslates, "covering"). But his
view differs from that of Saalschiitz, in that he makes the.
angle at the ridg« a right angle (the more natural angle for
a roof), so that the two sides of the roof projected beyond the
boards, the lower point being 5 cubits above the ground and
5 cubits horizontally from the boards. He also assumes that
the roof extended 5 cubits beyond the boaids in the front
and in the rear, so that the extra 10 cubits did not hang down
at all over the west end. The accompanying diagram exhibits
a section of the tabernacle according to Fergusson's theory.
The apparent absence of all allusion to a ridge-pole Ferguason
would supply by explaining "the middle bar" of ver. 28 as
.^9
vy
(A
*v
y
t
ca
ID
\
«
OB
3
O
6 CUBITS
10 CUBITS
referring not to a bar like the otln ya at the side, but to the
ridge-pole. He supposes also (though no express mention is
made of it) that the sides of the verandah and the western
end were enclosed with curtains, and that the ridge-pole must
have been supported at the middle by a pillar. — The princi-
pal reasons urged by Mr. Fergusson for this theory are the
following : (1) According to the common view only about one-
third of tbe inner or ornamental curtain would have been visi-
ble. Bahr's theory obviates this aifficulty, but creates ano-
ther, viz., by making out that the gilded boards were aliriost
entirely covered up. If so, why so expensively constructed ?
(2) The curfaini spread flat over the boards would have
been no protection against the rain. ThH skins above tbe
cloth and hair curtains would, when wet, only have depressed
the centre and torn the curtains under them. (3) The com-
mon view contradicts the description in xxvi. 9, 12, 13, ac-
cording to which oniy two cubits of the goats'-hair curtain
hung over at the went end, and onK one cubit at ear.h side ;
whereas the other theory assum'S that 10 cubits hung down
on every side but the front.— The latter arKument may be
met by the supposition that the Biblical statements referred
to only assert that the goats'-hair curtain hung over the
tabemaole^ i. e., the linen curtain, half a cubit at the we^t
end, and one * ubit at each side. — The second reason is un-
doubtedly the strongest one. The tabernacle, according to
tbe traditional view, is «n ungainly structure, ill protected
against rain or snow, and unlike either house or tent ; white
yet a partof it is distinctly culled a tent.— Mr. Atwater points
out rhe most obvious objection to Mr. Fergussou's theory, viz..
that, according to xxvi'. 33, the veil of the Holy of holies w»s
hung under the clasps that connect the two parts of the co-
vering. Thes'i must have been 20 cubits from the front of the
building, and 10 cubits from the rear, according to th« tra-
diUoDol view, entirely in accordance with the supposed posi-
iv. The Work of the Curtains. The work of
skilful weavers, i. e., with figures interwoven, v?2.,
with figures of cherubim.
V. The different kinds of woven work.
5. The Veil. Vers. 31-37.
The division between the holy place and the
Holy of holies. Accordingtomodern notions there
is no difference between the wide, savage world
and the court, no difference between the court
and the holy place, none, in fine, between the
holy place and the most holy. The Biblical no-
tions are infinitely purer and finer. Even be-
tween the holy place and the most holy hangs a
thick curtain, as between the Old and New Tes-
tament. The passage from the holy place into
the Holy of holies has been made free to Hia
people by Christ.
As the heaven of heayens is to be conceived as
a high heaven consisting of individual heavens,
the age (xon) of ages [seons) as an age which
consists of individual ages, the Sabbath of
Sabbaths as one whose several week days
are seven Sabbaths; so the Holy of holies is a
sanctuary of sanctuaries, D^K'lp. ^IPt ^"^ so,
most holy. Especially is it to be obsrrved that the
three principal features of the holy piace, viz.,
the table of shew-bread, the candlestick, and the
altar of incense, here coalesce into one.
As there were three altars, so three curtains.
The first screened the court ; the second, the
holy place; tbe third, the Holy of holies. The
latter was the principal one. Keil and Knobel
give details about the construction and arrange-
ment of the curtain, as also about the Arab tents
and Egyptian temples.*
tion of the veil, the Holy of holies being in tbe form of a
cube, 10 cubits in every direction, while the holv place was
20 cubits long. But Fergusson's theory would bring thn
clasps 15 cubits frooa each end, though lie distint-tly ad pt-i
rhe view that the veil was 10 cubits fnioi the western (nil.
This difficulty seemK entirely to have esca^ied his atteurion.
Mr. Atwater calls it " fatal," and deems it uselews to cousiiii-r
rhe theory any further, remarking that "nothing is mo'e
certain in regard tn the tabernacle, than that the two apart-
ments into which it was divided by this partition-veil were
of unequal pize, the eastern being thirty feet long and fifteen
wide, and the western an exact cube of fifteen feet in dimen-
sion." It might be asked, however, how is it ma le so cer-
tain that the two apaituients were of the size specified?
The Bible nov/heie gives the slightest information respecting
this matter, excepting the statement of xxvi. .S3 above cited.
Where the clajps were, depends on what disposition was
made of the curtains ; and it we choof e to adopt Mr. Fergus-
son's theory ^e^,d.— Tb.]
living God, who was the King of Israel, and after
whose will Israel was always to inquire. Hence
it was the high-priest's duty, when the prophetic
voice was wanting, always to give answer when
the people asked what was to be done. Herein
the priest was the vicar of the prophet, as iu
other cases the reverse happened. But because
the priest was a hereditary one, he was as such
neither prophet nor king, and could therefore
give answer only through a special medium, the
oracle of the Urim and Thummim. In many
cases the answer of Jehovah was at once light
and right; in favorable cases, when the inquirers
were pious, as is assumed in the case mentioned
in Num. xxvii. 21, it was Urim ; also in the worst
case, such as is implied in John xi. 61, the de-
cision, necessary in all cases, took the form of
Thummim in bringing on judgment. It was re-
garded as a condition of peculiar distress when
there was at hand neither a prophet, nor a king,
nor the priest with Urim and Thummim (Ezra
ii. 63; Neb. vii. 65), or when the oracle Urim
gave no answer — a circumstance which might
grow out of the institution itself (1 Sam. xiv. 37)
or out of a variance between the high-priest and
the inquirer. As to the question what the Urim
and Thummim were, they could not have consisted
in the stones of the breast-plate themselves,
which, as Josephus and Saalschiitz suppose, in-
spired the high-priest as he looked down upon
them ; still less in two small oracular images, te-
raphim, which, as Philo probably or perhaps con-
ceives, were inserted in the orifice of the breast-
plate. The Urim and Thummim must certainly
have been an object distinct from the breast- plate
itself, and something which Moses was to put into
it. The Rabbins conceived that in the inside of
the breast-plate was the sacred tetragrammaton
(Jehovah), and that this illuminated the names
on the breast-plate; the Cabbalisis assumed, in-
stead of this, two similarly efficacious names of
God. Ziillig understands the object to have been
two diamond dice to be used in drawing lota
(Apokalypae, I. p. 408). So much is established,
that the phrase " to ask of Jehovah " may be ex-
plained both by the phrase "ask of the Urim and
Thummim," and by the notion of decision by
lot (1 Sam. X. 20 ; xiv. 36). It is noticeable that
in 1 Sam. xxviii. 6 the lot is not mentioned in
connection with Urim. Comp. on the lot Winer,
Realworlerbuch, II. p. 31. On the derivation of
the Urim and Thummim from an Egyptian judi-
cial symbol, vid. Winer, II. p. 644 [and Smith's
Bible Dictionary, Art. Urim and Thummim]. Re-
ference can only be assumed to something ana-
logous in the Egyptian institnticn. The main
point is that the resolute spirit of the Holy Scrip-
tures regarded hesitation as the evil of evils—
e. g., in the life of Saul and of Judas. Hence the
lot, hence the need of decision. In accordance
with his coarse anthropopathic conceptions. Kno-
bel holds that the precious stones were in the
proper sense to remind Jehovah of Israel, p. 287.
The directions concerning the Urim and Thum-
mim seem to have been intentionally made very
brief and kept mysterious. Vid. more in
Knobel.
The outer robe, ver. 31. Luther's translation
is here very arbitrary, but was probably occa-
sioned by the desire to leave the breast-plate
CHAP, XXV. 1— XXXI. 18.
121
unoovered : " Thou shalt also make the silk robe
under the uoat all of yellow silk." For if a
'j'^n, a covering (not to be absolutely confounded
witii the ordinary /'J^D), was made for the ephod,
such an over-garment must necessarily have co-
vered the breast-plate also, if it was a long robe
closely fitting (according to Keil), reaching to
the knees, and, according to the Alexandrians,
even reaching, as nodiipriq, to the feet. Against
both assumptions is not only the fact that in that
case the breast-plate would have been covered,
but also the manner in which the robe was put
on, via., over the head, by means of an opening
(as in the case of a coat of mail) — which also
implies the absence of sleeves. Besides, there
would then come two girdles at nearly the same
place, since the coat had its own ■girdle, vid. ver.
39. The representation in Lev. viii. 7 seems, it
is true, somewhat inexact.* The significance
of this hyacinth-colored, dark-blue, purple orna-
ment may be sought in this, that the burden of
the high-priest symbolized by the ephod was not
to be made a spectacle to the world, but was to
be hidden by a symbol of the royal splendor of his
vocation. Two questions are raised by this con-
ception of the covering for the ephod. First :
If the robe was so short, what was the case with
the rest of the garments? This is answered by
ver. 39 and the parallel description, xxxix. 27.
They made the coats (^i^3r\) of white byssus.
Secondly : How could the bells ring, if they lay
so high up that even the breast-plate was to be
exposed? This question Is solved if we take
I'SlE' ["its skirts"] in its original sense, i.e.,
not as its hem, but its train, and assume that the
robe was so cut that it left the breast-plate free,
while it flowed out sidewise in trains.
On the various interpretations of the bells and
pomegranates, vid. Keil.f According to Keil or
Bahr, the pomegranates are symbols of the word
and testimony of God ; the bells, with their ring-
* [Lange's notion of the robs Beems to be rather ppculiar,
w!2.,that it was a very short garment, covering the Khoulder-
piecea of the ephod, but leaving the breast-pUte exposed un-
der it. He se»ms to assume that the ephod and breast-plate
were to be put on before the robe, though for what reason it
is difiicult to imagine. The reason cannot be found in the
circumstance that the robe is described aft&r the ephod and
breast-plate; tor the coat is described still later, and the
linen breeches last of all. Besides, we have in Lev. viii. Y a
clear indication of the order in which these articles were put
on. .losephus {Ant. IH. 7, 4) s«ys that the robe, though
without sleeves, had arm-'>oles, and this sufficiently harmo-
nizes nil the apparent dilficulties. — Tr.]
t [Keil rejects the view propounded by the son of Sirach
ixlv.9, "that as he went there might be a sound, and a noise
made that might be heard in ttie temple, for a memorial to
the children of the people "), on the ground that the last
clause of the verse is evidently borrowed from Ex. xxvlii.
12, where the stones of the epliod are spoken of, and aiso on
the ground that the clause " tnat he die not " is not explained
by tnis hypothenis ; for the assumption is that the high-
priest's life would be endangered if he went into th*- Holv of
holies without being accompanied by the prayers of his peo-
ple—which would make his life depend on their capri' e, ir-
resppctive of his own character. He also rejects as trivial the
notion that the ringing of the bells was intended to lie equi-
valent to rapping at the door, so as not to enter into the pre-
sence of Jehovah unannounced, as well as Knobel's notion
that the sound was to stand for a reverential greeting and a
musical ascription of praise. Keil holds that the reason
for Aaron's not dying lies " in the signiflcauce that belongs
to the ringing of the bells or the garments of Aaron, witli
their appendages of artificial pomegranates and ringing
bolls."— Te. J
ing, symbols of the sound of this word. But in
this case Moses the prophet would have abdi-
cated his functions to Aaron the priest. The sym-
bolic meaning of the pomegranate is very hard to
fix (vid. Friedrich, Symbolik und Mythologie der
Natur); perhaps the most natural assumption is
that in the alternation of pomegranates and bells
is to be discerned the connection of nature, as
represented in its abundance and beauty by the
pomegranate, with the theocracy as designed to
manifest itself in the sacrificial vocation of the
high-priest through holy time, and through the
awakening voice of the thunder, the trumpet, and
the bells. The gifts of nature and of grace are
the offerings which the high-priest brings to Je-
hovah over his shoulders.
The clause, " that he die not," can hardly
mean that sudden death would follow the neglect
of the precept, but that this would be an ofBcial
misdemeanor worthy of death, an offence con-
sisting chiefly in contempt of Jehovah and of the
customs of the sanctuary, but also particularly in
the fact that the connection between Jehovah
and the congregation is not only effected in
general by means of these bells, but is also
enlivened by the sacred moment [the advent
of which they announce]. From the farthest
distance, as it were, the sound of the bells is
heard, indicating holy time (as the organ indi-
cates the holy place), although the large bell is not
immediately derived from an enlargement of these
small ones.
The plate of gold for the forehead, ver. 36. A
plate of gold fastened to the turban by a dark-
blue purple string, with the inscription, " Holi-
ness (or holy) to Jehovah," and designated iu
xxxix. 30 as the holy crown. The meaning is
that Aaron is to bear the expiation ([1^,, i. e., ex-
piation of the guilt) of the gifts of the sanctuary,
which the children of Israel shall hallow, etc.
That is, the high-priest has to effect the expia-
tion of the expiations before Jehovah. The chil-
dren of Israel also bring expiatory offerings of all
kinds before Jehovah ; but guilt cleaves even to
their offerings; the high-priest, however, is
symbolically to accomplish the expiation of all
these guilt-stained expiations. Thus, then, the
high-priest's plate of gold points to the chief
function which he was to discharge on the great
day of atonement, on which day, even on his en-
trance into the Holy of holies, he had, if not ex-
actly to supplement, yet to complete, the whole
abundance of the expiatory offerings of the chil-
dren of Israel, to cleanse them from the stain
of guilt (the negative guilt of deficiency, and the
positive guilt of wrong-doing) which cleaves
to them. How rich in instruction this sym-
bol is in its relation to the high-priesthood
and sacrifice of Christ! From the instituting
of this plati to the fulfilment of the prophecy in
Zech. xiv. 20 is a great distance. The general
fulfilment is announced in John xvii.: the eseha-
tological fulfilment is pictured in Revelation, oh.
jxi. Knobel, referring to ancient heathen cus-
toms, resolves the thing itself wholly into sensu-
ous conceptions, speaking of "external lapses
of the children of Israel in connection with their
offering of gifts— the conciliatory appearance of
the high-priest," and referring to a custom of
the ancients, in offering sacrifices to put garlands
122
EXODUS.
on themselves and on the victims. But vid. the
quotation from Calvin in a note in Keil, II. p.
204 : ['' The iniquity of the saored offerings was
to be borne and cleansed by the priest. It is a
frigid explanation to say that whatever error
crept into the ceremonies was remitted through
the prayers of the priest. For we must look
further back, and see that the iniquity of the of-
ferings was obliterated by the priest for the rea-
son that no offering, so far as it is man's, is wholly
free from defect. It sounds harsh and almost
paradoxical to say that holy things themselves are
unclean, so as to need pardon ; but it is to be held
that there is absolutely nothing so pure but that
it contracts some stain from us. . . Nothing is more
excellent than the worship of God; and yet the
people could offer nothing, even when it was pre-
scribed by law, without the intervention of pardon,
which they could obtain only through the priest."]
Aaron's coat, ver. 39. The tunic proper, with
which also his sons were clothed. It reached to
the ankles, and was also provided with sleeves.
It was made of white byssus ; but Aaron's coat
was di-stinguisbed by being more artistically
wrought. The girdle of his coat was also of
variegated work. According to Josephus {Ant.
III. 7, 2) purple and crimson flowers were woven
into the linen girdles of the priests.
The clothing of the sons, ver. 40. Of Aaron's
assistants, or the ordinary priests. It consisted
in the coat of white byssus, the girdle, and the
cap. These articles are not included in the de-
scription of Aaron's clothing, because there were
differences. The sons do not receive the preroga-
tives of the high-priest; and Aaron's head-gear
is the turban with the gold plate, while the sons
receive caps. " nU3J0 is only used of the head-
dress of the common priests, xxix. 9; xxxix. 28;
Lev. viii. 13. The word is related to JTiJ, gob-
let, cup (rxv. 31), so that these head-tires
seem to have had a conical form. This was also
customary in reference to other sacerdotal per-
sons of antiquity" (Knobel). The passage, 1
Sam. xxii. 18, seems to merge the whole family
of priests into one, as inheriting in that capacity
the high-priesthood, and therefore the ephod.
A different point of view would lead critics to
make a sharp distinction between the time of the
original giving of the law and the time of Samuel.
The investment, anointing, and consecration of
the priests, ver. 41. This equipment is common
to all, but conferred wholly by Moses, not even
in part by Aaron after he himself has been
equipped. Nor does Aaron anoint even his sons,
but the prophet does it. That which was genea-
logically tranimitted from Aaron to his de-
scendants must therefore be continually sup-
plemented by the transmission of spiritual
life in the theocracy. The clothes denote
the dignity and burden of the oflBee; the an-
ointment is a symbol of the Spirit; the hands
filled are the signs of the sacrificial giftsfurnished
by the congregation, — of the emoluments which
they themselves first of all have to bring as an
offering to Jehovah, With this investment is
completed the potential sauotifioation or conse-
cration; the strict, actual consecration of the
priests is yet to follow.
The breeches and the object of them, vers. 42, 43,
This ordinance forms a transition to the actual
consecration of the priests. It is significant
that it follows the official investment. The offi-
cial clothing in the narrow sense conferred dig-
nity and ornament; these, on the other hand,
were only to avert dishonor and disgrace. The
reason for this covering, according to Baumgar-
ten, lay in the fact that "the sins of nature have
their principal seat in the 'flesh of nakedness!' "
According to Keil the physical membiTB men-
tioned, " which subserve the natural secretions,
&Te pudenda, or objects of shame, because in these
secretions is made evident the mortality and cor-
ruptibility of the body which througli sin has
permeated human nature." Neither the first
theosophic explanation, nor the latter, most pe-
culiarly orthodox one, can be derived from
Gen. iii. The organs of the strongest impulses,
those which through sin have been morbidly
deranged, belong, even physiologically, to the
dark side of life, and are therefore to be kept
mysterious, like births themselves, in conuec-
nection with which there can be no thought of
lust ; but in an ethical respect, affecting the whole
human race, they are not objects of a dispassion-
ate aesthetic contemplation, but confusing to the
senses, for which reason also there is a difference
between naked children and naked adults ; reli-
giously considered, finally, they are indeed signs
of the moral nakedness of man, of his natural and
hereditary guilt. Furthermore, " religious reve-
rence demands that, when they officially approach
the altar, they should cover still more the above-
mentioned parts, which, even in common life,
through natural bashfulness are carefully covered,
whereas for the rest of the body a single cover-
ing suffices" (Knobel). But in a sense the altar
also becomes to the mind of the priest, accord-
ing to chap, xxiii., u symbol of God as seeing.
This duty, too, is declared to be most holy for
ever, and so it obtains also a symbolic character,
signifying that everything sexual is to be avoided
in the service of the sanctuary. Itmarks the oppo-
site extreme of thevoluptuousritesof the heathen,
and of the commingling of sexual passion with the
religious fanaticism. But as shamelessness in
worship is particularly designated as a capital of-
fence, so in general every other shameless act,
3. The Consecration of Hie Priests, xxix. 1-36.
The direction here given for the actual conse-
cration of the priests is not carried out till Lev.
viii.-x. This raises two questions : First, why
does not the execution of the precept, as of all
the preceding ones, follow in Exodus, where it
might be regarded as simply omitted in ch. xxxix. ?
Secondly, why nevertheless are the calling and
investment of the priests, which have been here-
tofore considered, described in Exodus ? As to the
first question, we see from oh, xl. that even the
sanctuary had to be erected and arranged, and con-
secrated by the first-fruits of the offerings, not by
Aaron, but by Moses, the royal prophet himself,
j ust as he had also called and invested, or prepared^
the priests. For the tabernacle was designed in a
universal sense for Jehovah as presiding over
all three forms of revelation, the prophetic, the
ritual or Levitical, and the princely or royal, i.e.,
Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers; but the initia-
tive belonged to the prophetic office. This rela-
CHAP. XXV. 1— XXXI. 18.
123
tion would have been wholly altered if the actual
consecration of the priests had preceded the erec-
tion of the tabernacle. Thus is answered also the
second question, why the actual consecration of
the priests is prescribed so early? The answer
lies in the fact that the priesthood has a, more
universal significance than the merely ritual
one. In relation to the prophetic ofBce the
priesthood has to represent symbolically reli-
gious ideas in itself, in its clothing, and in its
functions; in relation to the ritual worship, how-
ever, it has not only to symbolize the ethical
idea's of sacrifice, but also to conduct the edu-
cational training of the people of Israel — in the
Middle Ages of the Old Testament — by means of
the sacrificial service and the administration of the
laws of purification; but in relation to the politi-
co-theocratic side of the theocracy, the high-priest
carries on his breast, for times of exigency, the
oracular Urim and Thummim, which make
good the temporary failure of the prophetic
word and the royal government; and the Levites
as bearers of the ark of the covenant have to at-
tend to the banners of the host of the Lord. But
since nevertheless the sacrificial worship is the
chief vocation of the priests, the actual consecra-
tion of the priests serves to introduce the sacrifi-
cial system as developed in Leviticus. — Keil finds
it most Suitable to his purpose not to explain
the consecration of the priests till Lev. viii. On
this point, however, Knobel has yielded to the
requirements of the text.
The preparation of the offerings which Aaron and
his sons are to bring, vers. 1-3. The three fun-
damental forms of offering, already involved in
the Paschal rites, are here indicated by the ani-
mals specified in the command : (1) The bullock
is appointed for a sin-offering, the great sin-offer-
ing such as the guilty priest has to bring accord-
ing to Lev. iv. ; in this sin-offering the more spe-
cific sin-offering, the trespass-offering and the sin-
offering of a lower grade, are implicitly included.
The first ram is then made the centre of all the
offerings. (2) The burnt-offering has likewise its
ramifications, viz., in the morning and evening sa-
crifices, in daily offerings, in offerings for the Sab-
bath and feast-days, according to Num. xxviii.
The other ram is designed for an offering of abun-
dance or heave-offering of the priests from the
peace-offerings of the children of Israel, i. e., it
is the peace- or thank-offering of the priest, who
has no property or means of earning it, and
whose hands must therefore be filled by the con-
gregation with a heave-offering or sacred tribute
which is regarded as a surplus from the peace
offerings of the people. (3) The peace-offering
also is subdivided into three parts : the thank-
offering, the vow, and the free-will offering (Lev.
vii.). A basket holds the three principal formi
of the meal-offering or bloodless offering, aa
originally connected with the burnt-offering.
The principal material of the three kinds of
baked articles is wheat flour, prepared in three
ways, but always unleavened. The bread and
the cake are mixed with oil ; but the wafer or
flat cake is to be smeared with oil (on the prepa-
ration of them vid. Lev. ii. 4 sqq.). The meal-
offering is subdivided still further into the
meal-offering in the narrow sense, the drink-
offering, and the offering of baken flour and of
roasted fruits, and is to be as scrupulously sup-
plemented with salt, oil, and frankincense, as it
is to be kept free from honey and leaven, the
last being excepted in case of the feast of har-
vest; on which point more hereafter.
The washing and the investment. Moses has to
bring Aaron and his sons to the door of the tent,
i e , into the court, and there administer to them
a symbolic ablution. It is an interpolated notion
of Eeil's, that Moses had them wash themselves;
and he also misconceives the symbolic nature of
the initiatory act, when he says: " without doubt
the whole body, not only the hands and feet."
Were they to bathe themselves, or at any rate
exhibit themselves naked, in the presence of the
iisaembled congregation in the court? The wash-
ing is the symbolic expression of purification
from the stains and defilement incurred in real
life, whilst the sacrifices removed not only the
daily weaknesses, but also the guilt of life down
to its foundation in the sinful nature; vid. John
xiii. 10. In the description of the investment
every article is specially mentioned, and its im-
port emphasized.
The unction. As the clothes symbolize the
burden and the dignity of ofEce, so the anointing
with oil, profusely poured out on the high-priest's
head, symbolizes the promises of official grace,
of endowment with the Spirit of God. The
anointing of Aaron's sons is not here treated of,
as Keil assumes. Nor in Lev. viii. 10, where yet
further on reference is made to a sprinkling of
the sons of Aaron with the blood of the ram of
consecration and with anointing oil, in connection
with the sprinkling of their father, ver. 30. It is
also a strange notion of Keil's (II. p. 337) that the
vessels of the sanctuary were by the sprinkling
made media and vessels of the blessings of grace
and salvation.
Still harsher seems Keil's explanation of the
notion of sanctifying. Even of the altar of burnt-
offering, he says : " To sanctify means not merely
10 set apart to sacred uses, but to endow or fill
with powers from God's sanctifying Spirit."
Here is not only all distinction between the 0. and
N. Testaments obliterated, but also all distinc-
tion betw een the altar and the priest, to say nothing
of the distinction between the different altars.
The investiture of Aaron and his sons as priests,
vers. 8 and 9. The characteristic garment of the
common priest is the white wrought coat, and
with it the girdle of the coat, of embroidered
work ornamented with the four colors of the
sanctuary, and the white cap of the priest. In
the girdle is exhibited the likeness of the com-
mon priest to the high-priest; in the white coat
and the conical cap* is exhibited the likeness of
the high-priest to the common priest. The dress
in which, according to Lev. xvi. 4, the high-
priest is to enter the Holy of holies is even )ntV-
rior to that of the common priest. And thougli
Aaron is distinguished by having the high-
priestly unction, yet at the sacrifice by whicli
he is purified and consecrated he must he aa-
* [This can refer only to the materiiit of the cap, not its
form. At least, the head-iear of the high-prieBt is always
called by adiffereat name (nSJVO) from "lat "f "i« '=°'^-
mon priest (n;;3JD). The former is commonly (also by
Lange) called a tiirhan, and therefore can hardly be con-
ceived as conical. — Tr.J
124
EXODUS.
sociated with his sons. Also his bands must be
filled together with those of his sons. ["Fill
the hands of" — the literal translation of the
Hebrew phrase rendered in A. V. " consecrate,"
e.g., xxviii. 41]. For the poor priest has nothing
of his own; the congregation must provide for
him, and, first of all, even the sacrificial gifts which
he needs to offer. Thus then the hands of him
and his sons are filled, they being declared to
be the owners of the objects of sacrifice. And
so Aaron does not make himself a priest. Moses,
the servant of God, commissioned by Jehovah,
must consecrate him to the office. The prophet
stands as high priest over against the candidate
for the priestbood; the future high-priest stands
over against the prophetical Levite almost in the
attitude of a layman.
The bullock for the sin-offering, vers. 10-14. Not
every sacrifice ia a confession of mortal guilt ;
but every sacrifice is a confession of such a culpa-
bility of the life as makes it unable, in real spi-
rituality, to satisfy the righteousness of God ;
for which reason the symbolic representation of
satisfaction by means of sacrifice is introduced, —
sacrifice as a confession of guilt, as a longing
after willingness to surrender one's self to the
divine judgment, as a prayer for pardon, and as
a vow. But as soon as the congregation of God
is organized as symbolically holy, sacrifices as-
sume a threefold purpose. (1) As national off'er-
ings, they assume the form of the discharge of a
legal obligation, the expiation of a violated na-
tional law ; and iu this sense they may also be
said to work justification. (2) As Mosaic off'er-
ings, they become a symbolic expression of moral
offences against the law, and of the need of ex-
piatory surrender. (3) As the continuation and
symbolic expression of the Abrahamic faith, they
become a typical adumbration of the absolute
realization of the sacrificial idea in the future
kingdom of the Messiah. Vid. Comm. on Oene-
sis, pp. 256, 470.
In the act of laying his hand on the victim
the offerer confesses as his own the debt of guilt
which the animal pays for him as his symbolic
substitute. The loss of the animal, the animal's
innocence, its dying pain, form in their union an
emphatic expression of his condition ; the ani-
mal symbolically takes the place of his life.
In all oases he lays symbolically his guilt and
his deficiencies upon the animal — even in the case
of the peace-offering. The hand in this con-
nection is the symbolic and mystical conductor
of the soul's life; as in other cases, of its spiritual
fulness, so here, of its defects and need of ex-
piation.
The killing of the animal is done by Moses be-
fore the Lord, i. e., before the door of the taber-
nacle. But even the sin-offering is not the sym-
bol of a death-sentence, but the expiation of a
guilt which would have led to death if it had
not been atoned for before the gracious Jehovah.
For a known mortal sin (Num. xv. 30) is not
expiated by offerings, but is punished with death ;
it makes the sinner a hherem. The system of
sacrificial expiation in general is instituted only
for sins committed in weakness (Lev. iv. 2, 27).
Hence the sin-offering is composed of different
elements. First, the offering of blood. With-
out the shedding of blood there is no expiation
(Heb. ix. 22) ; it designates the deathly earnest-
ness, the death-defying courage, by means of
which all the disorders of the religious and moral
nature are rectified. A part of the blood of the
sin-offering is put on the horns of the altar, thus
perfecting the sinner's refuge: the greater part
of it is poured out at the base of the altar; i. t.,
submission to the judgment of God constitutes
expiation. It is an incorrect representation of
Keil's that, "whereas, according to the general
rule for the sin-offerings whose flesh was burned
outside of the camp, the blood was brought into
the holy place itself (Lev. vi. 23 [30]), it is here
only put on the altar of burnt-offering, in order to
give this sin-offering the character of a consecra-
tory offering." Tuis is contradicted by Lev. iv.
7, 18, 25, 30. The blood was always poured out
at the foot of the altar of burnt-offering, while
only a little of it comes into the holy place, espe-
cially upon the horns of the altar of incense, vH.
Lev. iv. 7 sqq. The difference, therefore, can be
only that here the blood of sprinkling was put
upon the horns of the altar of burnt-offering, and
it is to be remarked that nothing has yet been
said of the altar of incense. — And the fat.
The bloom of life, even iu the case of the tragi-
cally guilty, — that which is deposited on his
entrails, his physical nature, on his liver or on
his nobler affections, on his reins, which through
their effects might symbolize the conscience (Ps.
xvi. 7), — this falls to Jehovah as His part; that
it has ministered to Him in His actual govern-
ment of men, is expressed by their being offered
to Him in fire on the altar. Thus one feature of
the burnt-offering belongs also to the sin-offer-
ing. The fat of the offering, or the bloom of
life, all falls to Jehovah as His part (Lev. iv. 31,
85). But the sin-offering has also one feature
that belongs to the hherem: the flesh, skin, and
dung of the sin-offering are burnt outside before
the camp; they are given back to the old earth of
the old man as a symbol of the sinner's outward
mode of life. — It is a bnrnt-oSering, vers. 15-
18. The first ram denotes the offering up to
Jehovah of the whole conduct of life, not through
death, but in life itself (Bom. xii. 1). Here the
blood is sprinkled round about on the altar: this
expresses one's complete, voluntary surrender,
and readiness to die while yet living. The whole
ram (after the removal of the skin and the un-
clean parts) is cut in pieces and burnt upon the
altar together with the inwards and thighs; it all
goes up in the fire of that gracious sovereignty
which saves while it judges ; and surely such an
offering of life is a sweet savor, a fire-offering to
Jehovah. The other ram, designed as an offering
of consecration, or as Aaron's peace-offering, or
as a welfare offering (vers. 19-28), is likewise
offered in accordance with its design. The blood,
or the readiness for death, is first of all put upon
the ear-lap of Aaron and his sons: obedience,
as spiritual hearing, is the first duty, especially
of the priests. Next, the hand, as symbolizing
human activity, is specially consecrated by being
sprinkled with blood; finally, the great toe of
the right foot, as symbolizing the walk of life in
general. After this the blood, which in this case
also is sprinkled around the altar, in order to
express the most complete surrender, is taken
again in part from the altar, and together with
CHAP. XXV. 1— XXXI. 18.
125
Bome of the anointing oil is sprinkled upon Aaron
and his clothes, and on his sons and their clothes.
Devotion to Ood and to a spiritual life is to con-
secrate, first of all, the priests' character, tut
also their official life. Next follows the burnt-
offering as a fiictor in the conseoratory offering
of the priests. Together with the fat already
specified, the ram's tail also and the kidneys
themselves are devoted to the fire; i. e., the vigor
of life, comfort, and conscientiousness are conse-
cratea to God, being united with a part of the
meal-offering, closely related as it is to the
peace-offering, viz., with three different articles
from the basket. These sacrificial gifts, how-
ever, are not at once burnt up. It must be made
evident that they are offerings of the priests;
hence they are laid upon their hands. But, to-
gether with their hands, they are waved, i. e.,
moved to and fro. What does that mean? It
costs labor, a struggle, a shaking loose, before
the priests are ready voluntarily to give back
their emoluments, their fulness, to Jehovah ; as
history teaches. All the more then what is really
offered is a sweet savor before the Lord, a fire-
offering to Him. But now Moses himself gets
his part of the priestly offering, the breast of
the ram. History also amply proves that this
part of the fulness of the sacerdotal revenue that
is given back to the prophet and prince, to the
spiritual and political lite in the theocracy, must
be waved, must be shaken loose. The thigh,
however, falls to Aaron and his sons; in this
connection the waving is less prominent than the
heaving, or is altogether given up. As nothing
is said of the disposition of other parts of the
ram, it is probable that the neck and head were
joined with the breast for Moses, and that all
the rest of the body went with the tliigh. In
this sense the heave-offerings were to revert to
Jehovah; they are tKken away from the peace-
offerings and heave-offerings of the children of
Israel, and He gives them to His priests. Vid.
also ver. 3'2.
The prerogatives of the priests, vers. 29-35 (vid.
also ver. 28.) In the foregoing verse the reversion
of the greater part of the conseoratory offering
to the priest is designated as also belongiug to
the sacerdotal prerogatives. It is the central
item in his revenue, the particvilars of which are
specified afterwards. In what now follows the
hereditary prer gatives of the priests are first
named. The sacerdotal dignity of Aaron passes
over, with its symbol, the sacred garments, to
his sons, according to the right of primogeniture
of course, and gives them a right to the anoint-
ing and to the filling of the hands. The rite of
consecration is to last seven days. During this
time Aaron and his sons live on the offering of
consecration in the court; their food is exclu-
sively sacred food belonging to priests and to fes-
tivals; hence what is left over is burnt. Further-
more one bullock a day is slaughtered as a sin-
offering.
4. The Sanctification of the Altar. Vers. 36-46.
The consecration of the priests is acRompanied
by that of the altar. When Moses brings the sin-
offering for the priests, he at the same time
niakes atonement for the altar, which, although
hnly in itself, was built by sinful men, and in a
tyiuboiic sense is to be cleansed from defilement.
( Vid. Keil on Lev. viii. 15) [who explains the cere-
monial uncleanness of the altar as caused by the
sinfulness of the officiating priests]. But as yet
there can be no reference to this source of im-
purity; for in that case how could the priests
ever make atonement for the altar ? It was to
be consecrated by two acts: negatively, by the
atonement, positively, by the anointment. The
anointment of the altar can signify only that it is
to be dedicated exclusively to the spiritual life,
to the spiritual object of the altar service. At
the same time the altar is declared to be designed
for permanent use. Two yearling lambs are
offered each day, one in the morning, the other
at evening, i. e., in their tender youth the peo-
ple of God are to dedicate themselves to Jeho-
vah, not only for the life of the day, but also for
that of the night. The meal-offering, like the
sacrifice, is the same for the morrjing as for the
evening. The tenth part (of an ephah), or the
issaron (an omer), as a measure of grain or flour
is variously reckoned (vid Knobel, p. 295): pro-
bably, according to Knobel, somewhat more than
a Dresden measure, or 2\ Dresden pounds.* The
oil with which the flour is mingled is to be ob-
tained by pounding. "In the case of no other
offering is beaten oil prescribed " (Knobel). The
hin, as a liquid measure, is the sixth part of a
bath, and contains 12 logs, reckoned by Thenius
(Studien und Kritiken, 1846) as equivalent to 3
Dresden cans [such a can containing nbuut 71
cubic inches, or about 1 English qiiartj. The
wheat symbolizes vital force, or even fat; the
wine always symbolizes joy. This burnt ottering
is the whole-offering, signifying that the life all
goes up in self-surrender to Jehovah; hence
also this will be responded to by a complete si-lf-
communication of Jehovah, a revelation of His
glory, this itself having been in fact the cause of
Israel's self-surrender or holiness (vers. 43, 44).
The text plainly distinguishes a higher kind of
panctiflcation from the symbolic one of the law,
which proceeds from man. That higher sancti-
fication is to proceed from Jehovah Himself. The
place of the offering is to be sanctified by the glory
of Jehovah; in particular, the tent, the altar, the
high-priest and his sons. The aim of this institu-
tion points on into the N. T. and the Apocalypse:
Jehovah desires to dwell in the midst of Israel
and to be the God of His people.
5. The Altar of Incense Chap. xxx. 1-10.
The reason why the directions concerning the
altar of incense are given so late is seen in the
design of it, which puts it among the things
direc'ly connected with the ritual worship; also
in the fact that it marks the last point iu the
movement of the priest towards the Holy of ho-
lies, the highest point in the ritual before the
entrance into the Holy of holies. This eminent
position is even indicated in the circumstance
that, being slender in form, gilt all over, adorned
besides with a golden rim, furnished with golden
rings, even with golden staves to carry it with,
it stands at the middle of the veil of the Holy of
holies, bearing a direct relation to the mercy-
seat. For this reason we would rather find a
* [Accordinff to Smitti*B Bible Diotioimry, Art. Weights and
JtfflfWMrejt, pnibably H litile )eP8 ihan two quarts. But Jo»e-
phua makoH it about twice as much. — Tr.].
126
EXODUS.
theological idea than an arohseologioal error in
that passage of the Epistle to the Hebrews (;x.
4) which puts it in the Holy of holies. For this
is the altar which by its incense symbolizes the
prayer of the high-priest (Rev. t. 8; Heb. v. 7J.
On the day of atonement (according to Lev. xvi.
13) the incense is to be carried into the Holy
of holies and fill the whole room. The morning
and evening sacrifice on the altar of burnt-ofi'er-
ing are here to find their higher expression in
the fragrant incense which Aaron has to offer
morning and evening in the holy place ; and it
is not without significance that this incense is
intimately connected with those sacrifices. In
the morning he is to burn incense when he
(rims the lamps, and in the evening when he
lights them; for without illumination and the
light of knowledge even his prayer does not
attain its higher form of sacerdotal intercession.
The incense, moreover, is to be a perpetual one
before Jehovah, and so to continue throughout
the future generations. This implies the exclu-
sion, in the first place, of common incense, for
not all prayers are true prayers, e. g. those of
selfishness and fanaticism ; secondly, of the
burnt-oflFering, for here the material point is the
offering of the heart, not mortifications of the
body ; finally, of meal-offerings and drink-offer-
ings, for prayer requires abstemiousness. Fi-
nally, the altar of prayer is to have its horns
sprinkled once a year with the blood of the sin-
offering as an atonement. This doubtless was si-
multaneous with the sprinkling of the mercy-seat,
but had not the same meaning. The expiation is
offered to the mercy-seat; the altar of incense is
covered with the expiation newly dedicated by it.
6. The Assessments for the Temple. Vera, 11-16.
It should be here observed that in this section
there is no reference to the temporary work of
building the tabernacle, but to those things
which enter into the regular ritual service which
is to continue through future time. It is there-
fore certainly an error when Keil and Knobel
start out with the notion that the shekel or half-
shekel of the sanctuary is to be expended once
for all on the erection of the tabernacle. The
tabernacle itself was to be built from voluntary
contributions (xxxv. 5), not from legally imposed
taxes, and in this voluntary way more was given
than was needed (xxxvi. 5 sqq.) Moreover,
the designation of the use of the money,
•\ym Sns rmy_-^yi_ ["for the service of the
tent of meeting," ver. 16], does not mean: for
the work of the building, but : for the perpetual
service of God in the building. This is implied
also in Luther's translation [and in the A. V.].
Moreover, it is said, that this tax is to be col-
lected from the Israelites when the census of the
adult males is taken. But such an enumeration
did not take place till after the tabernacle was
erected (Num. i. 1-18).* These enumerations,
too, had to be repeated from time to time. The
question is easily solved when we reflect on the
* [Keil and Knobel infer from xxxviii. 26 that a census
was talteo before tlie tabernacle was flnlsbed, and that the
one mi-Titioned in Num. i. la the same thing more formally
executed and recorded. The identity of the numbere in
xxxviii. 26 and Num. i. 46 aeems to favor tliis supposition.
—IE,]
continuous pecuniary demands made by the
sacrificial service. Besides the personal occa-
sions for special offerings (Lev. i. sqq. ), a per-
pelual sacrificial service was ordained. For
this service (xxix. 38 and in this place.),
which is to be distinguished from the great
offering at the dedication of the tabernacle
(Num. vii.), and not less from the consecratory
offerings or heave-offerings for the priests
(Ex. xxix. 9sqq. ). a legally-imposed tax for the
temple was necessary ; for the priests had them-
selves no means for it. This explains also hoir
this contribution serves for expiation (ver. 12) ;
it did not do this directly, but because it served
for the permanent expiation of the people by
means of the offerings. In this connection it is
important to observe the directions, that only
adult men make the contribution for this expia-
tion, and that every man, as representative of
the whole congregation of the people, without
distinction of poor and rich, contributed the
same amount, vii. half a shekel. As a conae-
quence of the census this tax had also to be
paid by the Levites. The sacred shekel, differ-
ent from the common one, is afterwards more
exactly defined; and as the half-shekel amounted
to 13 groschen [t. e., 31 cents, or 1 shilling and
3 pence ; but vid. note on p. 91], the tax could
not fall heavily on any man able to bear arms.
Only it is to be remarked, that the taxation—
as well as the census itself — is imposed on the
adult members of the political congregation of
the people. By this payment the consecrated
congregation of the people is distinguished from
a people in the unoonsecrated state of nature.-
133 is the term applied to the payment on
account of the nse for which it was designed.
So also the enumeration is indirectly an enume-
ration, or review, which Jehovah institutes with
His people. It is true that in the voluntary
gifts of silver for the building of the sanctuary
the precept concerning the half-shekel was taken
as a standard.*
7. The Laver. Vers. 17-21 (xxxviii. 8).
The command concerning the copper laver is
not, as some would think, to be regarded as a
supplementary direction: it is connected with
the foregoing as being the last thing through
the medium of which the regular services of the
tabernacle were carried on. The expiation
which the Israelites have to pay for with the
half-shekel applies to the Levites and priests
(comp. Matt. xvii. 25, where no exception seems
to be made). Besides this there were special
expiations for the priests, when they were con-
secrated, and on the day of atonement. But all
this was not sufficient to make them appear as
pure men in reference to their daily deportment.
They were obliged on penalty of death to wash
their hands and feet, when they were about to
enter the inner sanctuary, or even only to ap-
proach the altar of burnt-offering to minister.
* [This refers to the abovG-mantioned correspondence Iw-
tween xxxviii. 26 and Num. i. 46. Lange apparently nw^«8
tlie fni mer describe the voluntary contributions of the people
lor the construction of the tabernacle. But if it was, it w
sinaular that a purely volumary contribution, when BnmmM
up, should have proved to amount to exactly one-half a ehekel
for each adult male. — Tr.]
CHAP. XXV. 1— XXXI. 18.
127
This washing symbolizes a purification from the
daily (even unconscious) defilements. Later
the Pharisees applied the practice of washing
the hands also to preparation for the daily meals
(Mark yii. 3 sqq. ); and little as Christ sanc-
tioned this ordinance, He yet made the washing
of the feet a highly significant transaction be-
fore the Passover meal and the first Lord's sup-
per, — Ah to the base (|3) of the laver in parti-
cular, the passage xxxviii. 8 has led to extended
discussions. The expression nS")D3, etc., may
mean "from [of] the mirrors,'' as the LXX.
and Vulg. translate. This explanation is re-
duced to an ascetic or pietistic form by Heng-
stenberg, who says that what heretofore had
served as a means of gaining the good-will of
the world was henceforth to become a means of
gaining the good-will of God. According to
this, then, there ought to be no mirrors in pious
households, and especially none in a pastor's
robing-room. We would confidently [witli Bahr]
render : " [provided] with women's mirrors,"
were it not that brass itself had been used for
metal mirrors, and that 3 might also mean
"as," "in the chiracter of," according to which
the passage would mean: "to serve as mirrors
for women."* — Observing here again the general
connection, we see that the topic is not the erec-
tion of the tabernacle, but life in the tabernacle
as marked by the sacred utensils permanently
belonging to it. Firrthermore, it is clear that
reference is made to crowds of women who were
to come into the cciurt. Keil, it is true, observes
with regard to the character of these women:
"The ni53il are indeed, according to 1 Sam. i. 22,
women; not washer-women, however, but women
who devoted their lives to pious exercises," etc.
But, it may be asked, might not the pious exer-
cises consist just in the washing of the sanctuary
and keeping it clean ? Or could not the women
who did the washing be pious women ? Luther,
it is well known, thought otherwise. Knobel
remarks, with entire correctness, that before
the erection of the tabernacle there could be
nothing said of women coming into the court of
the tabernacle; but he adds a most singular
explanation of the passage. Furthermore, we
must ask, what could here be the use of the ex-
* [This certainly is not a Batisfactory explanation. Not
to meDtion ttiat grammatically it is the lea«t probable, it is
almost inconceivabln that it should be sai'i, that the laver
was made of brass in order thai it might sene as a mirror
for the women who ministered at the tabernaclel If Ileng-
stenberg'a interpretation partakes of a pietintio spirit, surely
this is the opposite extreme. Knobel renders nJ<"1D, etc.,
by " Anblicken," i .e., views, or flgnrcs, "of women marking
np to the door of the tabernicle." He adds: "Pmbahly
they were Levite women who nt particular times preiented
themselves in a sort of procession at the sanctuary, in order
there to wash, to clean, to furliish." But we can hardly
agree with him that "such figures were appropriate on the
vessel which was for the priests to wash from. Grammati-
rallv too this ri-ndering is open to the same objection as tha,t
ofBahr's, Ufa. that 3 cannot naturally tie rendered "with,
in the sense of "accompanied tiy" or "furnished with."
Keils statement, that 3 "never signifies vnth m the sense
of ontward addition," Is too stron? (comp. Ps. Ixvi. 13) ; but
certainly that is a rare use of the preposition. The transla-
tion, " made the laver of brass .... of the mirrors, etc., is
the eapio»t ; but it is not necessary in adopting it to adopt
■aangatenberg's theory of the significance of the thing.
•>-TB.l
12
pression, "out of the mirrors of the women,"
since it is related beforehand that all the mate-
rials for the building and its furniture were fur-
nished voluntarily and in the mass?* The LXX.
seem first to have invented this ascetic notion —
one which in the connection has no sense at all.
As to this ciinnection, however, , we are to ob-
serve that this base sustained the laver of the
priests. If now they had to cleanse themselves
in preparMtioQ for their service, is it uot to be
expected that a similar command was imposed
on the women who kept the court in order?
To be sure, they could not wash themselves in
the court, at least not their feet, from considera-
tions of modesiy; and they did not need to do
it, since they did not have to touch the altar.
But they were quite fittingly reminded of their
duty to appear comely by the mirrors of the
base,f on which the laver rested, and in which
the priests were to cleanse themselves. It is
easy to see that this use of the base was for the
purposes of symbolic admonition rather than
of the toilette. We also find it more natural
that the mirror, at its first appearance in the
Scriptures, should receive this higher symbolic
significance, according to which the law is al-o
called a mirror, than that it should at the outset
be proscribed with the remark, that henceforth-
the pious women used no more mirrors. In its-
spiritual sense the washing of the priests is alsoi
a perpetual ordinance.
8. The Holy Anointing Oil. Vers. 22-33.
In the case of the anointing oil, it is at once
obvious that it is not designed to be used simply
at the erection of the tabernacle. In the first
place, direction is given of what materiuls and
in what proportions it shall be compounded ;
next, the use of the oil is stated, i. e., to anoint
the several parts of the sanctuary; finally, there
is enunciated the sternest prohibition against
any imitation of this sacred anointing oil for
common use. The number four being the mun-
dane number [the four points of the Compass],
the union of four fragrant spices with olive oil
indicates that the sanctuary is to be dedicated
with the noblest of the world's products, as com-
bined with the oil of unction, the spirit of the
sanctuary. If one were to look for pairs of op-
posites. myrrh and cinnamon might be taken as
related to one another; so calamus and cassia.
It might be said of the myrrh, that it denotes that
fine, higher kind of pain which enables one to
overcome natural pain ; cinnamon denotes the
warmest feeling of light and life; the bitterness
of calamus might also be noticed; but the signi-
ficance of the cassia is difficult to determine.
* [The use of the observation was to state a fact. And
this supposition is in no way interfered with by the circum-
stance that the cootributions for the tabernacle were maile
Toluntirily.— Tr.]
t [Lange understands that only the base, not the whole
laver, was made to serve for this purpose. The attempt
made in what follows to meet the obvious objection to his
theory, viz that the use attributed to this copper base is
quite out of keeping with the tenor of the narrative, is rather
strained. The symb-)lic use certainly cannot exclude the
lite al use. The declaration, therefore, must stand that the
base (or the whole laver) waa made in order to serve for the
purpose of mirrors for the attendant women. But if the
symbolic use was the chief or only oue, why confine it to the
women ? Did not the priests need such admonition as well aa
they* -e, should bo adopted only as a last resort. Against both the others it is to be said : (a.) The phrase " the tent '' is
not easily to be accounted for. If it was Atoses' teut, why not i7^^{, "bia tent?" If another, nowhere else hinted at,
T: t
why BO indefinite a desiKnation of it? As Rosenmuller pertinently observes, it cannot well be Mobpb' own tent, since he is
represented as '^oing iulo it only for the sp-cial piirpo-.n of commuuing with God. (b) B»ou on either of these two hypo-
tbes -ti there is an interruption in the narra ive aa real, if not as strange, as on the theory that we have here an account of
what was dnne with the real tabernacle before it was built. Ver. 12 is clearly a resumption of ver. 3— Moses' iiitercees on
with Jehovah. That vern. 7-11 should here intervene, not by way of an announetment on Jehovah's part of Ui^ purpose^ but
as a kistfincal account of the ordinary subsequentyac/, is extremely unnatural, especially as at the close of it, the same tone
of entreaty and personal intercourse is resumed, (cj It seems improbable that anything bur the real Tent of meeting Bhould
have het-u called 8uch before the real one was built, (d) The fact that the verbs in this section are future furnishes a natu-
ral solution of the whole difficulty. So far as I have observed, no one baa noticed this fact at all except Knobel and Bottcher
(Lehrbuch der Hub. Spraehe., II., p. 162). Knot)el simply refers to the case in xv. 5 as a parallel. But there, bt^ says cor-
rectly, the Kuture is used as a graphic form lor the Present. This is an explanation not satisfa'tory here, where there is
DO pottry, and where the very uuifi^rmity and frequency of the Tuture verbs are sufficii-nt to overthrow tiny sut;h theory.
B6ttctier more plausibly classes this amont; the instances in which cu-tomary past actions are described by the use of the
Future. But even on this assumption we get no reli^^f from the vaious p rplexities above described.
Now by simply translating tbe Futures as Futures we at once see light. We thus make ita continuation of ver. 5 (ver.
6 being pureath' tical). The reasons for so translating are simple and cogent : (l)Itis the most natural and obvious way
to render the verbs. The burden of proof rests with those who render them otherwise. (2) It relieves us of the necessity
of supposing thac the section is out of place. (3) It relieves us of the necessity of drawine on our imagination for ''the
tent" so mysteriously introduced. It is neither " his (Moses') tent," nor some unheard-of old tent with sacred associations,
but simply " the tent " which has been so minutely described and which is soon to be built. (4) The section thus translated
is in excellent ha.mony with the context. In ver. 5 God says to the people, *'Put off thy ornaments from thee, that I may
know what to do unto thee." What follows in vers. 7-11 is a description of what God will do unto ihem. It contains a
general direction concerning tbe way in which God is to lead the people. This is the question considered in xxxii. 34-xxxiii. 3.
In what now follows (ver. 12 sqq.) the same theme is still discusspd. Moses* language, " See, ihou sayest unto me, Bring up
thin people," obviously points back to vers. 1-3. What intervener is only an expansion of tbe statement of ver. 3, " I will
not go up in the midst of'thee." The antithesis is between going in the midet of^ and going far ffffrorri: According to ver.
7 the tent was to be pitched " afar off from the camp ;" there J'hovah mip;ht be sought and found : and there (v r. 9) Jeho-
vah talked with Moaes. We thus see thac the angel spoken of in xxxii. 34 and xxx ii. 2 is not s«^t over against Jehovah as
a 8U,hBtitute for Him : tbe angel himself is not to go "in the midst of," but '■ before" tbe people.
It remains to notice some objections: (1) Joshua was to remain in the tent, whereas, according to Num. iii. 10, 38,
xviii. 7, only the pri* sts besides Moses could enter it.— But lo this it may be replied that, ir Joshua, as Moses' confidential
servant, could go with him to the mountain top whf n the law wns to be given, he might accompany him into theaancfuary;
and this fact would ueed no special mention in the pa'-sages just referred to. — (2) The object of this tent f-eema to be dif-
ferent from that of the sanctuary ; no m'^ntion is ma^ie of Aaron and the sacrifices, but only of Moses and the people going
to it to meet with Gr 'd.— But this ia all that it is necessary or proper to mention in this connecti'in. A nd the same thing U
a'po said of the real Tent of meetinir ; e. g., xxv. 22, " There [by the mercy-seat] I will meet with thee [Moses "J ; xxix. 43,
"And there fat tbe tabernacle] I will meet with the children of lBrael."~(3) These verses do not seem to be the language
of Jehovah, being immediately preceded by the historical statement (v^r. 6), " the children of Israel stripped themselves of
their ornaments." — This difficulty is easily removed by regarding ver. 6 as parenthetical, thus making ver. 7 sqq. a con-
tiniialinn of the direi^tion-i b' gun in. ver. 5. Examples of such a construction, in which a historical statement immediately
cotinccted with the topic treated of is interpolated in the midst of language quoted from another, are abundant. An exact
parallel is found in Ex. iv. 4, 5, " And the Lord said unto Moses, Put forth thine band, and take it by the tail. (And he put
forth his hand, and caught it, and it became a rod in his hand:) That they may believe that the Lord bath appeared
unto thee." Precisely ao, iv. 7, 8; Matt. ix. 6; Mark ii. 10; Luke v. 24. In the paseage before us the statement of ver. 6 is
naturally introduced in immediate connection with the corresponding command of ver. 5.— (4) The preceding objection
seems to be strengthened by the consideration, th»t if vers. 7-11 are the words of Jehovah it is unnatural that both Jehovah
and Moses should be spoken of here in the third pf.rson. — But such changes of person are too numerous in Hebrew to occa-
sion any serious perplexity. In ver. 5 itself we have an instance of a looseness of this sort. We read: "Jehovah said unto
Moset, Say unto the children of Israel, Ye are a stiflf-necked people:wereI [t. e., Moaes is to aay to the people, 'werel']
to go up in the midst of thee,*' €(c. The prophetical writings are full of similar instances of interchange of persoas. Ia
138
EXODPS.
C —JEHOVAH'S DETERMINATION MODIFIED IN CONSEQUENCE OF MOSES' INTER-
CESSION. THE PEOPLE HAVE A isHARE IN THE GEACE SHOWN TO MOSES.
Vers. 12-23.
12 And Moses said unto Jehovah, See, thou sayest unto me, Bring up this people:
and thou hast not let me know whom [him whom] thou wilt send with me. Yet
thou h^st said, I know thee by name, and thou hast also found grace in my sight.
13 Now, therefore, I pray thee, if [Now therefore, if indeed] I have found grace in thy
sight, show me now [I pray thee] thy way, that I may know thee, that I may find
] 4 grace in thy sight : and consider that this nation is thy people. And he said, My
15 presence shall go with thee, and I will give thee rest. And he said unto him, If thy
16 presence go not with me, carry [take] us not up hence. For wherein shall it be
known here [whereby now shall it be known] that I and thy people have found
grace in thy sight? is it not in that thou goest with us? so shall we be [with us,
and that we shall be] separated, I and thy people, from all the people that are upon
17 the face of the earth ? And Jehovah said unto Moses, I will do this thing also
that thou hast spoken : for thou hast found grace in ray sight, and I know thee by
18 name. And he said, I beseech thee, shew me [said. Shew me, I pray thee] thy glorv.
19 And he said, I will make all my goodness [excellence] pass before thee, and 1 will
proclaim the name of Jehovah before thee : and will [I will] be gracious to whom
20 I -nill be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy. And he said,
Thou canst notsee my face,for there shallnoman[forman shall not]see me, and live.
21 And Jehovah said. Behold there is a place by me, and thou shalt stand upon a [the]
22 rock : And it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in
23 a cleft of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand while I pass by: And I will
take away mine [my] hand, and thou shalt see my back parts [back] : but my face
shall not be seen.
Ex. xxxiv,, J18 frfqxiently elsewhere, we have also instances of Jehovah speaking of Himself in the third person, vid. vers. 10,
14, 23, 24, 2G. — (ii). The real tabernacle was not in fact sot up at a distance irom the camp, but in the centre of it, according
to Num. ii. 2 sqq. But if we assume, as we must, that the sternness of Jehovah's regulations was relaxed ia consequence
of Moses' imporiunato petition in ver. 12 sqq., there is no difQculty in the case. — T£.]
EXEGETICAL, AND CRITICAL.
This is one of the most mysterious chapters in
all the three books of the covenant. It charac-
terizes the Mosaic Middle Ages in the Old Tes-
tament as essentially a theocratic conflict of the
pure lave with the guilt incurred by the people
through their idolatry. The people are par-
doned; but their pardon is hierarchically condi-
tioned. The first limitation consists In the fact
that Jehovah will not go in the midst of the peo-
ple to Canaan, because in that case they would
expose themselves to condemnation through their
transgressions; but that He will go before them
by sending, or in the form of, an angel. The
second limitation consists in the fact that Moses
removes the provisional tabernacle out of the
camp, by which act even the camp of the people
of God, as being a place needing purification, is
distinguished from the sanctuary. The third
limitation consists in the fact that Moses himself,
needing on account of his vocation a more dis-
tinct revelation, is to behold, in the angel, the
face of Jehovah — the gracious form in which Je-
hovah reveals Himself; yet only in such a way
that he is to see the glory of Jehovah in this apo-
calyptic form not in a front view, as the face of
the fnce, but from behind, i. «., in the after-splen-
dor of the sudden phenomenal effects produced
by Jehovah, and rapidly passing by the prophet's
covered eyes. The first of these limitations marks
the veiled revelation; the second, the increased
difiiculty of holding communion with God; the
third, the fact that the knowledge of sacred things
is removed from the sphere of intuition, — is to be
not so much an original perception as a matter
of practical experience. — In his hunt for contra-
dictions Knobel imagines that he has discovered
several contradictions in this chapter. — "Accord-
ing to the Elohist," he says, "Jehovah was going
to dwell in the midst of Israel in the tabernacle;
otherwise this account." According to the Elo-
hist, he says again, the tabernacle was made
from contributions; whereas here the ornaments
delivered up were used in building the taber-
nacle (!). Here, then, the real tabernacle is im-
plied to be in existence before the time when it
was afterwards built. According to the Elohist
only the priests, besides Moses, could enter the
tabernacle; here Joshua is represented as dwell-
ing in it, etc.
a. — Appointment of the Angel. Vers. 1-6.
Ver. 1. ATway, go up. — Since the tables of
the law were broken, and the tabernacle was
not yet built (for the erection of it presupposed
the existence of the new tables), the pardon of
the people appears again in this command as a
very limited one. God still says, "Thou and the
people which thou hast brongiit up out of the
land of Egypt," etc. (as in xxxii. 7). And be-
CHAP. XXXIII. 1-23.
139
cause Jehovah is still determined to keep His
word and to give the laud of Canaan to Abraham's
seed, He will also help them to conquer it. He
will send an angel of terror before the marching
host to drive out the Canaanites, so that they
shall come into the land that flows with milk and
honey (md iii. 8). But it is not said that this
angel is to be the angel of Jehovah in the most
special sense of that term, the angel of His pre-
sence, or of the covenant (the one in whom Je-
hovah's name is, according to xxiii. 21); for the
revelation of God has veiled itself again. The
people obtain primarily only life, the ailvantnge
over the Canaanites, and the promise of the land
of Canaan "flowing with milk and honey," to
shame them for their ingratitude. Ou the other
hand Jehovah declares, "I will not go up in the
midst of thee," etc. This, too, like the promise
of the angel, is an obscure utterance. At all
events, it implies the temporary suspension of
legislation and of the building of the tabernacle.
But after the people repent, the form of the
angel becomes richer in significance, and access
to the tabernacle is refused to the people only
as a common matter. The reason assigned is,
that the people in their stifF-neckedness cannot
endure the immediate presence of Jehovah with-
out incurring a sentence of destruction through
their continual transgressions. This announce-
ment of the obscuration of revelation — of the
curtailment of the promise — falls on the people
as a heavy infliction. Therein is recognized Is-
rael's religious temperament, as also in the first
pyinboUo expression of the common repentance
of the people, ver. 4. How many heathen na-
tions would have rejoiced, if God had declared
that He would not dwell in the midst of them!
This recognition of the fact that the people are
in mourning and do not put on their ornaments as
at other times, is not followed (in ver. 5), as Keil
conceives, by another threat from Jehovah. It is
nearly the same language as that in ver. 3, but
yet is now used to give comfort. It would be
the destruction of them, if He should go with
them in the fullness of His revealed glory, in full
fellowship, because this is simply beyond their
copaoily, because they are born and grown up
as a sliff-necked people. Here is found a key
to the understanding of the Catholic Middle
Ages, and of the parables of our Lord in Matt,
xiii. How many a pietistic Christian, in conse-
quence of an excess of religious fellowship and
edification, in connection with a coarse nature,
has fallen! — Nevertheless Jehovah gives them
hope by turning into a precept their repentant
act of laying off their ornaments. So then the
children of Israel strip themselves of their orna-
ments. TVe translate the words 3']l.in ino, "on
account of mount Horeb," i. c, on account of
the guilt here contracted, and of the divine
punishment denounced from Horeb.* Horeb
rests on them now as a burden. As to the
explanation, "from mount Horeb onwards,"
* [This aeems to be an original interpretation of the phrase.
Some understand it to mean: "returning from Horeb to
tlieir camp;" others (with A. V.): "by Mount Horeb;" but
the most; "from IMount Horeb onwards," i, e., the people
from this tim.» on refrained from usins; them. To say, " from
Mount Horeb," is certainly avery enifymatical way of saying
" on account of the sin committed at Mt. Horeb." — Tb.J
one cannot but ask, what is the terminus ad
quern ? The terminua a quo also would be open to
misunderstanding. " They put on none of th^ir
rings, bracelets, jewels, or other ornaments, as
was done on festive occasions, but went about as
mourners. During the time of mourning it was
customary to avoid all pomp, au'l not to deck
one's self again till it was over (Ezek. xxiv. 17 ;
xxvi. 16; Judith i. 8 sq ) " (Kuobel).
6. Removal of the Tent of Revelation, or Central
Tent, as a sort ofTradint nal Tabernacle, before the
Camp. The Theocratic Chastisement. Vers. 7-11.
The people are not restored to full communion
with God ; but in the person of Moses this is re-
served even for the people. Hence the new, pro-
visional order of things. Moses removes his
tent outside of the camp. Emphasis is laid on
the fact thdt it was set up far from the camp,
and also, that it was called by Moses the tent of
meeting, showing that it was not the tabernacle
iiself which had been before prescribed. The
same is also shown by the fact that Joshua re-
mains permanently in this tent to keep guard,
and that Moses keeps up the oonnpction between
the camp and the t-nt by remaining a part of
the time in the camp, doubtleiss to maintain
order, and a part of the time in the tent
of meeting with Jehovah, to receive His reve.
lations and commands.* Thus Moses has se-
cured a new standpoint design!-d to bring the
penitent people to a renewed life. The people
must go out to him outside of the camp (Heb.
xiii. 13), and there seek Jehovah. The effect of
this is shown, first, in the fact that individuals
among the people go out in order to seek and
consult Jehovah at the tent of meeting (ver. 7) ;
next, in the expression of reverence with which
all the people accompanied Moses' going to the
tent (ver. 8) ; but especially in tlie fact that all
the people cast themselves on their faces, when
the mysterious pillar of cloud appeared before
the tent, i. e., where at a later time the .altar of
burnt-offering stood, and beyond the cloud Je-
hovah talked with Moses face to face, i. e., in
the perfect intercourse of God with the friend of
God, not in the full revelation of His glory (vid.
ver. 19). Thus the people are consecrated in
preparation for the restoration of the covenant,
vid. Num. xii. 8; Deut. v. 4. Knobel finds here
again a contradiction. He says, " Reference is
made not to Moses' tent (LXX., Syr., Jarchi,
Aben Ezra, Piscator, Baumgarten), or to another
sanctuary used before the completion of the ta-
bernacle (Clericus, J. D. Michaelis, Vatablus,
Rosenmiiller), but the tabernacle," etc. That the
camp must from the first have had a central tent,
religious head-quarters, is in this chase after
contradictions never dreamed of.f A strange
assumption it is, too, that the people delivered
up their ornaments to Moses to build the taber-
nacle with.
c. Modification of JehovaKs Determination in con-
sequence of Mose^' Intercession. Vers. 12-23.
Moses' humble request that Jehovah would
* [But where did he sleep and eat ? Where was his proper
abiding-place, if his own tent could be used only when he
needed special revelations? — Tr.]
t [On this point vid, under " Textual and Grammatical."
— Te.]
140
EXODUS.
express Himself more definitely respecting the
promise of angelic guidance is founded partly
on the progress of repentance manifested by his
people, but partly and especially on the assu-
rance of lavoi- which he had personally received.
As before he would not hear to a destruction of
the people in which he should not be inTolved,
so now lie cannot conceive that he has found
grace in Jehovah's eyes for h-mself alone; ra-
ther, in this personal favor he finds a reference
to his people — a hopeful prospect which he must
become acquainted with. But he at once draws
the inference that Jehovah must again recognize
ns His people those whom He has before called
thxi (Moses) people [xxxii. 7]. If I am Thine,
1ft tiie people be Thine also — this is again the sa-
cerdotal, mediatorial thought. Here [ver. 13]
is to he noticed the difi^erence between 'U ["na-
tion"] and □;> [" people"]. The former term,
derived from nU, denotes a feature of nature, in
which is involved the contrast of mountain and
valley; the latter, derived from QiD;;, denotes a
commonwealth ethically gathered and bound to-
gether. In reply to this petition Moses receives
the declaration, " My presence [lit. face] shall
go." The indefinite angel (ver. 2), therefore,
now becomes the face of Jehovah, i. e., at least,
the angel by whom He reveals Himself, the oneof-
ten manifested in Genesis and afterwards (angel of
God, angel of Jehovah, an angel, Jehovah's face,
vid. Comm. on Genesis, p. 386 sqq.) ; for which
reason Isaiah combines both notions and speaksof
theangelof Hisface["presence" A.V.]inlxiii.9.
In Mai. iii. 1 occurs the expression, ''uugel [A.V.
"messenger"] of the covenant." Moreover God
here no longer says, "He shall go before thee,"
but "heshallgo,"gooutandgivethee rest. Here,
then, the discourse is about something more than
mi'k and honey. But the form of revelation is
still obscure, and the promise is connected with
the person of Moses, though now the people are
at the same time included. But Moses is con-
sistent with himself, and firmly seizing hold of
Jehovah's promise, he again at once gives it a
turn in favor of the people. He takes it for
granted that, with him, the people also have
found grace with Jehovah; thereon he founds
the entreaty that this may not remain concealed,
that Jehovah may make it manifest by distin-
guishing him and his people, in His guidance of
them, from all other nations on earth. To this
also Jehovah assents, but explains that He does
it for Moses' sake. But Moses in his prayer
grows bolder and bolder, and now prays, "Let
me see thy glory!" Heretofore all of Moses'
requests have had almost more reference to the
good of the people than to his own. We must there-
fore conjecture that there is such a reference
here. But it is entirely excluded by Keil, when
ho says, " What Moses desires, then, is to behold
the glory, i. e., the glorious essence of God."
But the two notions, glory and glorious essence,
must not be confounded. The glory (1133 66^a)
is the apocalyptic splendor of the divine essence,
and is to be distinguished from this essence it-
self; it is the revelation of God in the totality of
Sis attributes, such as that of which a dim vision
terrified Isaiah (Isa. vi.), and such as was ma-
nifested in its main features in Christ (John i.
14). According to Keil, Moses desires a view such
as cannot be realized except in the other world;
but there is nothing about that here. Yet it is
true that the revelation of Jehovah in His glory
is fulfilled in the N. T. in Christ. And Mosee
unconsciously aims at this very thing, and as
much in behalf of his people as of himself. For
only in the fulfilment of the promises can Jeho-
vah's glory be revealed. This seems indeed to
be contradicted by Jehovah's declaration, "Thou
canst not see my face, for man shall not see me,
and live." But we are to infer from this that
the notion of the perfect revelation of God's glory
in the future life, of the great Epiphany, is to he
sharply distinguished from the revelation of the
glory in its original form. This distinction, ne-
vertheless, belonged to a later time than that of
Moses. But this original form of the glory, the
grace revealed in the N. T., which is what Moses
must have had chiefly in mind, he was to behold
at least in a figure. So then his petition is
granted according to the measure of his capa-
city, while at the same time he is made to under-
stand that God's glory in its perfect revelation
transcends his petition and comprehension. —
And be said, I mt-IU make all my goodness
pass before thee (should we render "beauty"
instead of "goodness?" The Greek includes
the good in his notion of the beautiful; the He-
brew, the beautiful in the good — but not first or
chiefly the beautiful*). Accordingly He will
expound to him Jehovah's name, whose most es-
sential significance is eternal fidelity in His eter-
nal grace — a second promise, whose fulfilment is
related in xxxiv. 5 sqq. When now Jehovah
further says, " Thou canst not see my face," re-
ference is made to His face in the highest sense,
as also to His glory, which means the same thing,
or even to the visibility of God Himself. — "For
man shall not see me, and live." That here
there is an occult intimation of existence in an-
other world, should not be overlooked. A glory
which no one in this life sees, or a view which
can be attained only by losing this life, certainly
could not be spoken of, if it were not man's goal in
the future life to attain it. Preparation is now
made for the vision which Jehovah is going to
vouchsafe to Moses. Moses is to stand in a ca-
vity of a rock. Jehovah's glory is to pass by.
But while it is coming and passing by, Jehovfih
is to hold. His hand over his eyes until His glory
has passed by, lest he be overcome by the sight,
and perish. But then he may look after the
glory that has passed, and see it on the back side
in the lingering splendor of its effects, i. <>., see
all the goodness of Jehovah, the eternity of HiB
grace. Who, moreover, could see Him in His
frightfully glorious appearance and dominion
without being crushed and snatched away from
earth! When Christ, uttering* the. words, "Itis
finished," saw the full glory of God on His cross,
He bowed His head and died. Over His eyes,
too, was gently placed the hand of Omnipotence,
as He cried out, " My God, my God, why hast
Thou forsaken me ?" So the hand of Omnipo-
* [2^Q is nsecl unquestionably in both Beusea ; but as onr
word "goodness" liaa a limited e -nse, we have substituted
"excellence'' in the tranelati'm, ua rompreheD iing both tlie
notion of moral goodness and that of majesty.— Tft.J
CHAP. XXXIII. 1-23.
141
tenoe covers the eye of the pious man with fear
and terror, with sleep and faintness, with night
and darkness, whilst the heavenly day of God's
glory passes over the world's stage in His light
and in His judgments; afterwards faith discerns
that everything was goodness and grace.
On the realization of the vision, which took
place after Moses ascended the mountain, vid.,
chap, xxxiv. Probably Moses saw beforehand
in images the glorious meaning of Jehovah's pro
clamation. Of Jehovah's grace in its manifesta-
tion nothing more can he said than that Moses
himself saw only the after-gleam of the mysteri-
ous revelation ; yet It wag the after-gleam of the
glory. But it is a wonderfully grand and beau-
tiful fact, that Moses the law-giver, and Elijah
the zealot for the law, both received in a cave in
frightful Sinai the vision of the fulness of good-
ness and grace, the vision of the gentle rustling*
— the vision of the Gospel. Is this the same
Sinai which has been so often pictured by me-
diaeval doctors and ascetic*? "How He loved
the people, with His fiery law in His hand," we
read in Deuteronomy xxxiii. 3.f
Ver. 12. Thou hast said, IknoTv thee by
name. — Not every word of Jehovah to Moses
neeils to have been reported beforehand. Ac-
cording to Knobel, interpreting as usual with a
literalneas amounting to caricature, this means,
" Thou art my near and intimate acquaintance."
The name is in God's mind the idea of the being,
and accordingly this declaration of Jehovah's
expresses a very special, personal election of
Mosi'S. But Moses knows also, according to ver.
13, that his election and the grace shown to bim
involve a determination to promote the good of
his people.
Ver. 15. He will be led to Canaan only under
the direction of the gracious countenance, or not
at all. Better to die in the wilderrieas than to
reach his goal without that guidance.
* [This phrase, des savftPn Sausens^ is from Lather'a trans-
lation of npT nODT Sip in 1 Kings xix. 12, ein stales
It- tt; 1
tanffes Somen; in the A. V., "a s'ill small voice;" literally,
"a voice of gentle rttillueaa.*' — Tr.]
t [A somewhat free "trans'ation and inversion of the last
part of ver. 2 and the fir^t part of ver. 3, the former, more-
over, of very doubtful meaaing.— Tb.]
Ver. 18. On the climax in reference to the
seeing of Jehovah comp. Keil, II. p. 236; but ob-
serve the distinction between God's glory and
His essence, as also between the primary vision
of His glory in the New Testament and the vision
of His glory in the other world.
Ver. 19. I will be gracious to whom I
will be gracious [Lange : I have been gra-
cious, or I am gracious to whom I shall be
gracious]. The LXX. invert the order of lime;
" I will be gracious to whom I am gracious "
The Vulg. led to Luther's translation [ Wnn ich
gnddig bin, dem bin ick gnddig — " I am gracious
to him to whom I am gracious "] by rendering,
''miserebor cui voluero." Paul, in Rom. ix. 15,
follows the LXX. At all events the text, taken
literally, does not involve an expression of abso-
lute freedom of choice, still less of caprice. It
distinguishes two periods of time, and thus be-
comes an interpretation of the name Jehovah,
which compreliends the three periods of time.
Accordingly the Hebrew expression affirms:
" My grace is in such a sense consistent and per-
sistent that, wherever 1 show it, it is based on
profound reasons belonging to the past.' The
expression in the LXX. implies essentially the
same: "As I am gracious to one to-day, so will
I show myself gracious to him continually."
Luther's translation restores the distinction be-
tween grace and compassion, which the Vulgate
has obliterated.* Concerning the cave on Sinai,
as well as the smaller one situated lower down,
in which Moses, according to tradition, and Eli-
j*h, according to conjecture, stood, vid Keil, 11.
p. 239.f
* [This discussion is singularly infelicitous. The two verhs
are in rhe Hebrew both Future (the first made such by the
Vav Ooiispcutive), so that Lange's stAtement, that the text
" distinguishes two periods of time," and his own translation,
*' I have been (or am) gracious to whom I shall be gracious,"
convey a misrepresentation which it is \et impossible to im-
pute either to his ignorance ol" Hebrew or to conscious un-
liiiruess. His comment on tho analogous exprf-ssion in iii.
14 is open to the same critici *m. Vid. the note on p. 11. Ap-
parently Lange's theo y of the meaning of the name mn^
and of the nature of the divine attributes has led him uncon-
sciously to put into the Hebrew what cannot be got out of
it.— Tr.]
f [This makes the impression, for which Keil is not respon-
sible, that both Moses and El^ah have been supposed to have
stood in the lower cave. There is no evidence of this. Comp.
Bobinson, I., p. 152' Palmer, Desert of the Exodus^ pp. 106,
130.— TE.J
142 EXODUS.
THIRD SECTION.
The New Tables of the Law for the People prone to a Hierarchy. Clearer Revela-
tion of God's Grace. Sterner Prohibition of Idolatry. Stricter Commands
concerning the Passover, the First-born, the Sabbath, and the Feasts. Return
of Moses with the Tables. Moses' Shining Pace and his Veil.
Chap. XXXIV. 1-35.
A.— THE NEW STONE TABLES FOR THE DIVINE VVRITINa.
Vers. 1-4.
1 And Jehovah said iinto Mosos, Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first:
and I will write upon th'-se [the] tables the words that were in [on] the first table.?,
2 which thou brakest. And be ready in the morning, and come [go] up in the morn-
ing unto mount Sinai, and present thyself there to me in [on] the top of the mouDt.
3 And no man shall come [go] up with thee, neither let any [and also let no] man
be seen throughout [in] all the mount ; neither let the flocks nor [also let not the
4 flocks and the] herds feed before that mount And he hewed two tables of stone
like unto the first ; and Moses rose up early in the morning, and went up unto
mount Sinai, as Jehovah had commanded him, and took [him : and he took] in his
hand the [hand] two tables of stone.
B.— .TEHOVAH'S GRAND PROCLAMATION OP JEHOVAH'S ORACR ON MOUNT SINAI-
HENCEFORTH AN ACCOMPANIMENT OF THE TABLKS OF THE LAW.
Vers. 5-10.
5 And Jehovah descended in the cloud, and stood with him there, and proclaimed
6 the name of Jehovah. And Jehovah passed by before him, and proclaimed, Jeho-
vah, Jehovah God, merciful [Jehovah, a God merciful] and gracious, long-suffer-
7 ing, and abundant in goodness [kindness] and truth, Keeping mercy [kindness] for
thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will [sin: but he
will]' by no means clear the guilty ; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the
children [of fathers upon children] and upon the [upon] children's children, unto
8 [upon] the third and to [upon] the fourth generation. And Moses made haste, and
9 bowed his head toward [himself to] the earth, and worshipped. And he said. If
now I have found grace in thy sight, O Jehovah, let my Lord [the Lord], I pray
thee, go among us ; for it is a stiff-necked people ; and pardon our iniquity and our
10 sin, and take us for thine inheritance. And he said, Behold, I make a covenant;
before all thy people I will do marvels, such as have not been done in all the earth,
nor in any nation : and all the people among which thou art shall see the work of
Jehovah : for it is a terrible thing that I will do with thee.
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL.
1 [Ter. 7. The A, V. here entirely Deflects the ncf^entuation, and thup almost creates a paradox out of these antithetic
clauses. By translating np31 "8 a relative clause (and that will, etc.), it makes the impression that the same conBtruotion
is continued, whereas not only does the Athuach precede it, bnt, instead of the p'irticiple of the preceding clause, we haW
here a finite verb without the Relative Pronoun. The A. V., moreover, makes the chief division of the verse before " 'i'lt*
ine," contrary to the Hebrew accentuation, which, quife in accordance with the sense, connects the last clause with the
declaration : " he will not clear," etc.; the contusion of thought is thus made complete.— TR.J.
CHAP. XXXIV. 1-35. 143
C— THE GOLDEN CALF AN OCCASION FOR A MOST STRINGENT PROHIBITION OF
INTERCOURSE WITH THE HEATHEN CANAANITES. THE MORE DEFINITE ES-
TABLISHMENT OP THE ISRAELITISH COMMONWEALTH IN ITS NEGATIVE RE-
LATIONS.
Vers. 11-17.
11 Observe thou that which I command thee this day : behold, I drive out before
[from before] thee the Amorite, and the Canaanite, and the Hittite, and the Periz-
12 zite, and the Hivite, and the Jebusite. Take heed to thyself, lest thou make a co-
venant with the inhabitants of the land whither thou goest, lest it be for [become]
13 a snare in the midst of thee: But ye shall destroy [tear down] their altars, break
14 their images, and cut down their groves [Asherim] :^ For thou shalt worship no
other God : for Jehovah whose name is Jealous, is [Jehovah — his name is Jealous ;
15 he is] a jealous God: Lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land,
and they go a whoring after their gods, and do [and] sacrifice unto their gods, and
16 one call thee, and thou eat of his sacrifice ; And thou take of their daughters unto
thy sons, and their daughters go a whoring after their gods, and make thy sons go
17 a whoring after their gods. Thou shalt make thee no molten gods.
D.— LEADING POSITIVE FEATURES OF THE RELIGIOUS COMMONWEALTH OF IS-
RAEL. SUPPLEMENTARY LAWS LIKEWISE OCCASIONED BY THE NEWLY ARISEN
NECESSITY OF EMPHASIZING THE DISTINCTIONS.
Vers, ia-24.
18 The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep. Seven days thou shalt eat un-
leavened bread, as I commanded thee in the time [set time] of the month Abib :
19 for in the month Abib thou camest out from Egypt. All that openeth the matrix
[womb] is mine : and every firstling among thy cattle, whether ox or sheep, that is
20 mak [all thy male cattle, the first-born of ox and sheep]. But the firstling of an
ass thou shalt redeem with a lamb : and if thou redeem him not, then shalt thou
break his neck. All the first-bom of thy sons thou shalt redeem. And none shall
21 appear before me empty. Six days thou shalt work, but ou the seventh day thou
22 shalt rest : in earing [ploughing] time and in harvest thou shalt rest. And thou
shalt observe the feast of weeks, of the first-fruits of wheat harvest, and the feast
23 of ingathering at the year's end. Thrice in the year shall all your men-children
24 [thy males] appear before the Lord God [Jehovah], the God of Israel. For I will
cast out the nations before [from before] thee, and enlarge thy borders : neither
shall any man desire thy land, when thou shalt go [goest] up to appear before
Jehovah thy God thrice in the year.
E.— THE THREE SYMBOLIC PRINCIPAL RULES FOR THEOCRATIC CULTURE.
Vers. 25, 26.
25 Thou shalt not oflfer the blood of my sacrifice with leaven [leavened bread] ;
neither shall the sacrifice of the feast of the passover be left unto the morning.
26 The first of the first-fruits of thy land [ground] thou shalt bring unto the house of
Jehovah thy God. Thou shalt not seethe [boil] a kid in his [its] mother's milk.
F.— MOSES' LOFTY AND INSPIRED MOOD AT THE RENEWED GIVING OF THE LAW.
CONTRAST BETWEEN THE PRESENT AND THE OTHER DESCENT FROM THE
MOUNTAIN.
Vers. 27-35.
27 And Jehovah said unto Moses, Write thou these words : for after the tenor of
28 these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel. And he was there
' [Yer. 13. The word HIE'X, here ^d elsewhere rendered "groves" in the A. V., always refers either to a heathen
goddeSa or to images representing her— commonly the latter, pspecially when (as here and most frequently) it ia used in
the plural (DniffK)- It must denote the goddess, e. g. in 1 King< xv. 13, whore it is said: "She had made an idol for
Aaherah'VA T " in a grove "). This goddess sometimes seems to be identical with Ashtaroth. For particnlars i»d. the
lexicons and'Encyclopedins. That the word cannot mean "grpvo" is sufflaenlly shown by such passages as 2 Kings xvii.
10, where ihe Asherim are said to have been set up in every high hill and under ever;/ green tree; and 2 Kings xxip. b,
Where it is said that Jobiah " brought out the Asherah frcm the lumae of the Lord. — Ta.J.
13
144
EXODtJS.
with Jehovah forty days and forty nights ; he did neither eat bread nor drink wa-
ter. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten command-
29 ments. And it came to pass, when Moses came down from mount Sinai with the
two tables of [of the] testimony in Moses' hand, when he came down from the
mount, that Moses wist [knew] not that the skin of his face shone' while he talked
30 [because of his talking] with him. And when [And] Aaron and all the children
of Israel saw Moses, behold [and behold], the skin of his face shone ; and they were
31 afraid to come nigh him. And Moses called unto them ; and Aaron and all the
rulers of the congregation returned unto him : and Moses talked with [spake unto]
32 them. And afterward all the children of Israel came nigh ; and he gave them in
33 commandment all that Jehovah had spoken with him in mount Sinai. And till
Moses had done speaking [And Moses left off speaking] with them, he [and he]
34 put a veil on his face. But when Moses went in before Jehovah to speak with
him, he took the veil off, until he came out. And he came out and spake unto the
35 children of Israel that which he was commanded. And the children of Israel saw
the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses' face shone: and Moses put the veil upon
his face again, until he went in to speak with him.
8 [Ver. 29. Thp verb |1p occurs only in this section in Kal ; it is used otice (Pa. Ixix. 31) in Hiphil, where it means
"to have horns," while the noun |"^p ordinarily means "horn." Hence originated the Latin translation of the Talgate
"comuta," "horned;" and this arcnunta for the notion, incorporated in art representations of Mos'-s, that he had homa
growing out of his face The point of reuemblance is in the appearance of the rays of a lumiuary shooting out lilie faoros.
— Tb.].
presupposed the preparation of the tables of
the law and a covenant-feast. Since now nothing
is said of a new covenant-feast, Keil's assump-
tion may in some sense be admitted. For the
covenant is not simply restored ; it is at the
same time modified. The law is now made to
rest on pardon, and is accompanied by Jehovah's
proclamation of grace ; yet nevertheless in many
of its provisions it is made stricter in this chap-
ter. The relation between the tabernacle and
the camp is made more hierarchical; and in
relation to His form of revelation, Jehovah dis-
tinguishes more sharply between His face and
the display of His essence. But with the notion
of the face* is introduced ali ; the
weaver who works together the different colors
(Dp'l) ; and the plain weaver (J^.**)-
Chap, xxxvi. 6. And they spake unto
Moses. — On all sides there is a superfluity of
building material, so that Moses has occasion
to cause a proclamation to be made in the camp,
asking the contributions to be suspended. A
rare instance in the history of collections, though
also mediseval and evangelical institutions have
often attained an excess gf prosperity. Knobel
remarks on this point: "The Elohist has a more
favorable opinion of Israel in Moses' time than
the later narrator has." But his archaeological
knowledge ought surely to have presented him
here too with examples of how a nation in great
crises is lifted above its ordinary level.
FOURTH SECTION.
The Work of the Building and the Priests' Ornaments.
oal Sacred Structure.
The Elements of the Typl-
Chapteks XXXVI. 8— XXXIX. 31.
A.— THE CURTAINS OF THE TENT AND THE COVERINGS.
Vers. 8-19.
8 And every wise-hearted man among them that wrought the work of the taber-
nacle made ten [work made the tabernacle with ten] curtains of [curtains : o/] fine-
twined linen, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, with cherubims [cherubim] of
9 cunning work [the work of the skilful weaver] made he them. The length of one
[each] curtain was twenty and eight cubits, and the breadth of one [each] curtain
10 four cubits ; the curtains were all of one size [had all one measure]. And he cou-
pled the five curtains one unto another : and the other five curtains he coupled one
11 unto another. And he made loops of blue on the edge of one [the on^] curtain
from the selvedge in the coupling [at the border in the first set] : likewise he made
in the uttermost side of another curtain, in the coupling of the second [the same
] 2 made he at the edge of the outmost curtain in the second set]. Fifty loops made
be in one [the one] curtain, and fifty loops made he in the edge of the curtain which
was in the coupling of the second [which was in the second set] : the loops held one
13 curtain to another [were opposite one to another]. And he made fifty taches
[clasps] of gold, and coupled the curtains one unto another with the taches [clasps] :
so it became one tabernacle [and the tabernacle became one].
152 EXODUS.
14, 15 And he made curtains of goats' hair for the [a] tent over the tabernacle; ele-
ven curtains he made them. The length of one [each] curtain was thirty cubits,
and four cubits was the breadth of one [each] curtain : the eleven curtains were of
16 one size [had one measure]. And he coupled five curtains by themselves, and six
17 curtains by themselves. And he made fifty loops upon the uttermost edge of the
curtain in the coupling [upon the edge of the outermost curtain in the owe set], and
fifty loops made he upon the edge of the curtain which coupleth the second [cur-
18 tain, the second set]. And he made fifty taches [clasps] of brass [copper] to couple
19 the tent together, that it might be one. And he made a covering for the tent of
rams' skins dyed red, and a covering of badgers' skins above thoA [seals' skins
above].
B— THE FRAME-WORK OF THE TENT.
Vebs. 20-34.
20 And he made boards [the boards] for the tabernacle of shittim [acacia] wood,
21 standing up. The length of a board wcw ten cubits, and the breadth of a [each]
22 board one cubit and a half. One [each] board had two tenons, equally distant one
23 from another : thus did he make for all the boards of the tabernacle. And he made
boards [the boards] for the tabernacle ; twenty boards for the south side southward:
24 And forty sockets of silver he made under the twenty boards ; two sockets under
one board for his [its] two tenons, and two sockets under another board for his [its]
25 two tenons. And for the other side of the tabernacle which is toward the north
26 corner [tabernacle, the north side], he made twenty boards. And their forty sockets
27 of silver ; two sockets under one board, and two sockets under another board. And
28 for the sides [rear] of the tabernacle westward he made six boards. And two boards
29 made he for the corners of the tabernacle in the two sides [the rear]. And they were
coupled beneath, and coupled together at the head thereof, to one ring [double be-
neath, and they were together whole up to the top of it, unto the first ring] : thus
30 he did to both of them in [at] both the corners. And there were eight boards ;
and their sockets were sixteen sockets of silver [sockets of silver, sixteen sockets],
31 under every board two sockets. And he made bars of shittim [acacia] wood; five
32 for the boards of the one side of the tabernacle. And five bars for the boards of the
other side of the tabernacle, and five bars for the boards of the tabernacle for the
33 sides [rear] westward. And he made the middle bar to shoot through [pass along
34 at the middle of] the boards from the one end to the other. And he overlaid the
boards with gold, and made their rings of gold to be [for] places for the bars, and
overlaid the bars with gold.
C— THE VEIL AND THE SCREEN.
Vers. 35-38.
35 And he made a [the] veil of blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine-twined linen:
with cherubims made he it of cunning work [cherubim, the work of a skilful weaver
36 made he it]. And he made thereunto [for it] four pillars of shittim [acacia] wood,
and overlaid them with gold : their hooks were of gold ; and he cast for them four
37 sockets of silver. And he made an hanging [a screen] for ••the tabernacle door
[door of the tent] of blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine-twined linen, of needle-
38 work [linen, embroidered work] : And the five pillars of it with their hooks : aad
he overlaid their chapiters [capitals] and their fillets [rods] with gold ; but [and]
their five sockets were of brass.
D.— THE ARK AND THE MEBCY-SEAT,* AND THE CHERUBIM.
Chap. XXXVII. 1-9.
1 And Bezaleel made the ark of shittim [acacia] wood : two cubits and a half wm
the length of it, and a cubit and a half the breadth of it, and a cubit and a half the
* [Lange renders JTli] J " lid of expiation," and remarks that the term " is as difflonit to translate with one word "
is the name H'lnV" Luther's rendering, OnademtuM (" mercy-seat "), he commends as conyeying substantially the right
impre'sion. But it is questionable whether one can properly combine the literal and the topical in a translation, as langs
does.— Tn.]
CHAP. XXXVI. 8— XXXIX. 31. 153
2 height of it : And he overlaid it with pure gold within and without, and made a
3 crown [rim] of gold to [for] it round about. And he cast for it four rings of gold,
to be set by [gold, on] the four corners of it [its four feet] ; even two rings upon the
4 one side of it, and two rings upon the other side of it. And he made staves of shit-
5 tim [acacia] wood, and overlaid them with gold. And he put the staves into the
6 rings by [on] the sides of the ark, to bear the ark. Aud he made the [a] mercy-
seat o/pure gold: two cubits and a half was the length thereof, and one cubit and
7 a half the breadth thereof. And he made two cherubims [cherubim] of gold, beaten
out of one piece [of beaten work] made he them, on [at] the two ends of the mercy-
8 seat. One cherub on the end on this side [at the one end], and another [one] che-
rub on the other end on that side [at the other end]: out of [of one piece with] the
9 mercy-seat made he the cherubims on [at] the two ends thereof And the cheru-
bims [cherubim] spread out their wings on high [upwards], and covered [covering]
with their wings over [wings] the mercy-seat, with their faces one to [towards] ano-
ther: even to the mercy -seatward [towards the mercy-seat] were the faces of the che-
rubims [cherubim].
B— THE TABLE AND ITS VESSELS.
Vers. 10-16.
10 And he made the table o/shittim [acacia] wood : two cubits was the length thereof,
11 and a cubit the breadth thereof, and a cubit and a half the height thereof: And he
overlaid it with pure gold, and made thereunto a crown [for it a rim] of gold round
12 about. Also [And] he made thereunto [for it] a border of an [a] handbreadth
round about; and made a crown [rim] of gold for the border thereof round about.
13 And he cast for it four rings of gold, and put the rings upon [in] the four corners
14 that were in [on] the four feet thereof. Over against [Close by] the border were the
15 rings, the places for the staves to bear the table. And he made the staves o/shit-
16 tim [acacia] wood, and overlaid them with gold, to bear the table. And he made
the vessels which were upon the table, his dishes [its plates], and his spoons [its cups],
and his [its] bowls, and his covers to cover withal [its flagons to pour out with], of
pure gold.
P.— THE CANDLESTICK AND THE UTENSILS BELONGING TO IT.
Vees. 17-24.
17 And he made the candlestick of pure gold : of beaten work made he the candle-
stick ; his shaft, and his branch, his bowls, his knops, and his flowers, were of the
same [the candlestick, its base, and its shaft : its cups, its knobs, aud its flowers were
18 of one piece with it] : And six branches going out of the sides thereof; three
branches of the candlestick out of the one side thereof, and three branches of the
19 candlestick out of the other side thereof: Three bowls made after the fashion of
almonds in [Three cups made like almond-blossoms on] one branch, a knop
[knob] and a flower; and three bowls made like almonds in [almond-blossoms en]
another branch, a knop [knob] and a flower : so throughout [for] the six branches
20 going out of the candlestick. And in [on] the candlestick were four bowls [cups]
made like almonds [almond-blossoms], his knops [its knobs], and his [its] flowers :
21 And a knop [knob] under two branches of the same [of one piece with it], and a
knop [knob] under two branches of the same [of one piece with it], and a knop
[knob] under two branches of the same [of one piece with it], according to [for]
22 the six branches going [that go] out of it. Their knops [knobs] and their branches
were of the same [of one piece with it] : all of it was one beaten work of pure gold.
23 And he made his [its] seven lamps, and his [its] snuflTers, and his [its] snufi'-dishes,
24 of pure gold. Of a talent of pure gold made he it, and all the vessels thereof.
G.— THE ALTAR OF INCENSE AND ITS APPURTENANCES.
Vers. 25-29.
25 And he made the incense altar [altar of incense] of shittim [acacia] wood : the
length of it was a cubit, and the breadth of it a cubit ; it was foursquare ; and two.
cubits was the height of it; the horns thereof were of the same [of one piece with
26 it]. And he overlaid it with pure gold, both [gold,] the top of it, and the sidea
154 EXODUS.
thereof round about, and the horns of it : also he made unto [for] it a crown [rim^
27 of gold round about. And he made two rings of gold for it under the crown [rim'
thereof, by the two corners [on the two flanks] of it, upon the two sides thereof, to
28 be [for] places for the staves to bear it withal. And he made the staves o/ shittim
29 [acacia] wood, and overlaid them with gold. And he made the holy anointing oil,
and the pure incense of sweet spices, according to the work of the apothecary [spices,
the work of the perfumer].
H.— THE ALTAR OF BURNT-OFFERING WITH ITS UTENSILS, AND THE LAYER.
Chap. XXXVIII. 1-8.
1 And he made the altar of burnt-offering o/ shittim [acacia] wood : five cubits wag
the length thereof, and five cubits the breadth thereof; it was foursquare; and three
2 cubits the height thereof. And he made the horns thereof on the four corners of
it ; the horns thereof were of the same [of one piece with it] : and he overlaid it with
3 brass [copper]. And he made all the vessels of the altar, the pots, and the shovels,
and the basins, and the fleshhooks, and the fire-pans : all the vessels thereof made
4 he of brass [copper]. And he made for the altar a brazen grate of network [a
grating of network of copper] under the compass [ledge] thereof beneath unto the
5 midst of it [reaching to the middle of it]. And he cast four rings for the four ends
[corners] of the grate of brass [copper grating], to be [for] places for the staves.
6 And he made the staves of shittim [acacia] wood, and overlaid them with brass
7 [copper]. And he put the staves into the rings on the sides of the altar, to bear it
8 withal ; he made the altar [made it] hollow with boards. And he made the laver
of brass [copper], and the foot [base] of it of brass [copper], of the looking-glasses
of the women assembling, which assembled [the serving women, who served] at the
door of the tabernacle of the congregation [tent of meeting].
I.— THE COURT.
Vers. 9-20.
9 And he made the court : on [for] the south side southward the hangings of the
10 court were of fine-twined linen, an [a] hundred cubits : Their pillars were twenty,
and their brazen [copper] sockets twenty ; the hooks of the pillars and their fillets
11 [rods] were o/ silver. And for the north side the hangings were an [side a] hundred
cubits, their pillars were twenty, and their sockets of brass [copper] twenty ; the
12 hooks of the pillars and their fillets [rods] of silver. And for the west side were
hangings of fifty cubits, their pillars ten, and their sockets ten ; the hooks of the
13 pillars and their fillets [rods] o/ silver. And for the east side eastward fifty cubits.
14 The hangings for the one side of the gate were fifteen cubits ; their pillars three, and
15 their sockets three. And for the other side of the court gate, on this hand and
that hand [So for the other side ; on this hand, and on that hand, by the gate of
the court], were hangings of fifteen cubits ; their pillars three, and their sockets
16 three. All the hangings of the court round about were of fine-twined linen.
17 And the sockets for the pillars were of brass [copper] ; the hooks of the pillars and
their fillets [rods] of silver ; and the overlaying of their chapiters [capitals] of silver ;
18 and all the pillars of the court were filleted with [joined with rods of] silver. And
the hanging [screen] for the gate of the court was needlework [embroidered work],
of blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine-twined linen : and twenty cubits was the
length, and the height in the breadth was five cubits, answerable [corresfionding]
19 to the hangings of the court. And their pillars were four, and their sockets of brass
[copper] four; their hooks o/ silver, and the overlaying of their chapiters [capitals]
20 and their fillets [rods] of silver. And all the pins of the tabernacle, and of the
court round about, were of brass [copper].
J.— AMOUNT OF THE METAL USED.
Vers. 21-31.
21 This is the sum of [These are the amounts for] the tabernacle, even the tabernacle
of [of the] testimony, as it was [they were] counted, according to the commandment
of Moses, for the service of the Levites, by the hand of Ithamar, son to Aaron the
CHAP. XXXVI. 8— XXXIX. 31, 155
22 priest. And Bezaleel the son of Uri, the son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah, made
23 all that Jehovah commanded Moses. And with him was Aholiab, son of Ahisa-
mach, of the tribe of Dan, an engraver, and a cunning workman [a skilful weaver],
and an embroiderer in blue, and in purple, and in scarlet, and fine linen.
24 A-ll the gold that was occupied [used] for the work in all the work of the holy
place [sanctuary], even the gold of the offering, was twenty and nine talents, and
25 seven hundred and thirty shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary. And the silver
of them that were numbered of the congregation was an [a] hundred talents, and n
thousand seven hundred and threescore and fifteen shekels, after the shekel of the
26 sanctuary : A bekah for every man, that is, half a shekel, after the shekel of the
sanctuary, for every one that went to be [passed over to them that were] numbered,
from twenty years old and upward, for six hundred thousand and three thousacid
27 and five hundred and fifty men. And of the hundred talents of silver were cast
the sockets of the sanctuary, and the sockets of the veil ; an [a] hundred sockets of
28 [for] the hundred talents, a talent for a socket. And of the thousand seven hun-
dred seventy and five shekels he made hooks for the pillars, and overlaid their chupi-
29 ters [capitals], and filleted them [joined them with rods]. And the brass [copper]
of the offering was seventy talents, and two thousand and four hundred shekels.
30 And therewith he made the sockets to [for] the door of the tabernacle of the con-
gregation [tent of meeting], and the brazen [copper] altar, and the brazen grate
31 [copper grating] for it, and all the vessels of the altar. And the sockets of the court
round about, and the sockets of the court gate [gate of the court], and all the pins
of the tabernacle, and all the pins of the court round about.
K.— PEEPAEATION OF THE PRIESTS' TEBTMENT.
Chap. XXXIX. 1-31.
1 And of the blue, an purple, and scarlet, they made cloths [garments] of service,
to do service [for ministering] in the holy place and made the holy garments for
Aaron ; as Jehovah commanded Moses.
1. TheEphod.
2 And he made the ephod of gold, blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine-twined
3 linen. And they did beat the gold into thin plates, and cut it into wires [threads],
to work it in the blue, and in the purple, and in the scarlet, and in the fine linen,
4 wUh cunning work [linen, the work of the skilful weaver]. They made shoulder-
pieces for it, to couple it together [joined together] : by [at] the two edges was it
5 coupled [joined] together. And the curious girdle of his ephod [the embroidered
belt for girding it], that was upon it, was of the same [of one piece with it], accord-
ing to the work [like the work] thereof; of gold, blue, and purple, and scarlet, and
6 fine-twiaed linen ; as Jehovah commanded Moses. And they wrought onyx stones
inclosed in ouches [settings] of gold, graven as signets are graven [graven with the
7 engravings of a signet], with the names of the children of Israel. And he put them
on the shoulders [shoulder-pieces] of the ephod, that they should be stones for a me-
morial to [ephod, as memorial stones for] the children of Israel; as Jehovah com-
manded Moses.
2. The Breaat-plate.
8 And he made the breast-plate of cunning work [with the work of the skilful
weaver], like the work of the ephod; of gold, blue, and purple, and scarlet, and
9 fine-twined linen. It was four-square; they made the breast-plate double:
a span was the length thereof, and a span the breadth thereof, being doubled.
10 And they set in it four rows of stones: the first row was a sardius, a topaz,
and a carbuncle: this was the first row: [stones: a row of sardius, topaz,
11 and emerald was the first row]. And the second row, an emerald [a car-
12 buncle], a sapphire, and a diamond. And the third row, a ligure, an agate,
13 and an amethyst. And the fourth row, a beryl [chrysolite], an onyx, and a jasper:
14 thenj were inclosed in ouches [settings] of gold in their inelosings. And the stones
were according to the names of the children of Israel, twelve, according to
166
EXODUS.
tteir names, like the engravings of a signet, every one with his name, according to
15 [for] the twelve tribes. And they made upon the breast-plate chains at the ends
16 [chains like cords] of wreathen work of pure gold. And they made two ouches
[settings] of gold, and two gold rings [rings of gold] ; and put the two rings in [on]
17 the two ends of the breast-plate. And they put the two wreathen chains of gold
18 in [on] the two rings on [at] the ends of the breast-plate. And the two ends of
the two wreathen chains they fastened in [put on] the two ouches [settings], and
19 put them on the shoulder-pieces of the ephod, before it [on the front of it]. And
they made two rings of gold, and put them on the two ends of the breast-plate, upon
20 the border of it, which was on [toward] the side of the ephod inward. And they
made two other [two] golden rings, and put them on the two sides [shoulder-pieces]
of the ephod underneath, toward [on] the forepart of it, over against [close by] the
other [the] coupling thereof, above the curious girdle [embroidered belt] of the
21 ephod. And they did bind the breast-plate by his [its] rings unto the rings of the
ephod with a lace [cord] of blue, that it might be above the curious girdle of [em-
broidered belt] the ephod, and that the breast-plate might not be loosed from the
ephod; as Jehovah commanded Moses.
3. The Robe.
22, 23 And he made the robe of the ephod of woven work, all of blue. And there
was an hole in the midst of the robe, [And the opening of the robe in the middle
of it was] as the hole of an habergeon [like the opening of a coat of mail], tirith a
band [binding] round about the hole [opening], that it should not rend [might, not
24 be rent]. And they made upon the hems [skirts] of the robe pomegranates of blue,
25 and purple, and scarlet, and twined linen [scarlet, twined]. And they made bells
of pure gold, and put the bells between the pomegranates upon the hem [skirts]
26 of the robe, round about between the pomegranates ; A bell and a pomegranate,_a
bell and a pomegranate, round about the hem of the robe [upon the skirts of the
robe round about], to minister in; as Jehovah commanded Moses.
4. The Coat, Breeches, and Oirdle.
27 And they made coats [the coats] of fine linen of woven work for Aaron and for
28 his sons. And a mitre [the turban] of fine linen, and goodly bonnets [the goodly
29 caps] o/fine lineo, and linen [the linen] breeches of fine-twined linen, And 'a [the]
girdle of fine-twined linen, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, of needle work [scar-
let, embroidered work] ; as Jehovah commanded Moses.
5. The Plate of Gold.
30 And they made the plate of the holy crown of pure gold, and wrote upon it a
31 writing, like to the engravings of a signet, HOLINESS TO JEHOVAH. And
they tied unto it a lace [cord] of blue, to fasten if on high upon the mitre [turban];
as Jehovah commanded Moses.
b. The Frame-work of the Tent, vers. 20-84;
vid. xxvi. 15-30.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL.
a. The Curtains of the Tent and their Cover-
ings. Chap, xxxvi. 8-19. Vid. chap. xxvi. 1-14.
Jaoobi, in his pamphlet, Die Lehre der Irvingiten
(Berlin, 1853), p. 52sqq., has told how the Ir-
vingites interpret, in a fantastic, allegorical way,
the curtains of the tabernacle as pointing to
their offices; and, in general, their arbitrary
trifling with Old Testament symbols. In a simi-
lar way they deal with the Apocalypse. Vid.
Stockmeyer, Kurze Nachricht Uber den Irvingis-
mm, p. 18. Keil observes that the verbs TiW}}
in ver. 8, latTI in ver. 10, and iJ'^Jl in ver. il,
etc., a,re in the third Pers. Sing, with an indefinite
subject. But this is not borne out by ver. 8,
where Hiffj; first stands in the plural. It is more
likely that the whole work is called BezaleeVs.
c. The Veil and the Screen, vers. 35-88; vii.
xxvi. 31-37. Ver. 38. Not the whole of the pil-
lars of the screen was overlaid with gold, but
only the tips, and the rods running across the up-
per ends. The other pillars of the court only had
their tips and cross-rods overlaid with silver.
a. The Ark, the Mercy-seat, the Cherubim,
xxxvii. 1-9; md. xxv. 10-22. It is called the
master-workman Bezaleel's own work.
e. The Table of Shew-bread and its Vessels,
vers. 10-16 ; vid. xxv. 23-80. In the direction the
dishes are called n'i;;?p, T\33, rttop, and nVpjS!
the same here, except that the order of the last
two is inverted.
CHAP. XXXIX. 32-43.
167
f. The Candlestick and the Utensils belonging
to it, vers. 17-24; vid. xxv. 31-40.
g. The Altar of Incense with its Appurte-
nances, vers. 25-29; vid. xxx. 1-10. The An-
ointing Oil and the Incense, xxx. 22-28.
h. The Altar of Burnt-offering, with its Im-
plements, and the Laver, xxxviii. 1-8. On the
Altar vid. xxvii. 1-8. On the Laver vid. xxx.
17-21. Knobel's notion about ver. 8 is very
strange [vid. above, p. 127]. He thinks that on
the base there were fashioned figures of the wo-
men who, as Levite women, came into the court
to wash and furbish. [But Enobel does not re-
present the figures as on the 6a»e.]
i. The Court, vers. 9-20: vid. xxvii. 9-19.
j. Summation of the Metal used, vers. 21-31.
"The eslimatious" (ver. 21). Keil, "The enu-
merated things." The duty of counting the
amount was committed to the Levites under the
direction of Aaron's son, Ithamar.
Ver. 24. The Gold. Thenius and Keil reckon
it at 87,730 shekels, or 877,300 Thaler,— a, gold
shekel being estimated as =r 10 Thaler [ = 7 Dol-
lars and 20 cents. Poole, in Smith's Bible Dic-
tionary, makes it a little more. — Te.]
Vers. 25-28. The Silver. "Of the silrer
there is reckoned only the amount of the atone-
ment money collected from those who were
numbered, a half-shekel to every male, the vo-
luntary gifts of silver not being mentioned"
(Keil). It is not to be supposed that amidst the
voluntary contributions of gold, copper, etc., a
legally imposed tax would hv specified. But it
may well be conjectured that (he standard, after-
wards fixed for the tax for the sanctuary, served
as a guide in the voluntary contributions, as has
been already remarked [p. 126] Ou the abun-
dance of gold and silver among the ancient Ori-
entals, as showing the possibility of the actual
correctness of these accounts in opposition to
modern doubts, vid. Keil, page 261; Kuobel,
page 383.
k. Chap, xxxix. 1-31. "The preparation of
the priestly garments, to the description of which
a transition is formed by a statement of the ma-
terials for them and of the design of them. Tlie
ephod, vers. 2-7, corresponds to xxviii. 6-12;
the breast-plate, vers. 8-21, to xxviii. 15-29 — the
Urim and Thummim, which needed no special
preparation, being passed over. The robe, vers.
22-26, answers to xxviii. 31-34; the coats, head-
pieces, breeches, and girdles for Aaron and his
sons, vers. 27-29 to xxviii. 39, 40 and 42. The
head-covering of the common priests in xxviii. 40
Cni;;3JD) is here (ver. 28) called nj?3J0n nN3
ornamental caps" (Keil). Vid. Knobel for ar-
chaeological notes, p. 334.
FIFTH SECTION.
The Religious Presentation of all the Component Parts of the Sanctuary, and
Moses' Blessing.
Chaptee xxxix. 82-43.
32 Thus was all the work of the tabernacleof the tent of the congregation [tent of meet-
ing] finished: and the children oflsrael did accordingto all thatJehovah commanded
33 Mos°s, so did they. And they brought the tabernacle unto Moses, the tent, and
all his [its] furniture, his taches [its clasps], his [its] boards, his [its] bars, and his
o4 [its] pillars, and his [its] sockets, And the covering of rams' skins dyed red, and the
35 covering of badgers' [seals'] skins, and the veil of the covering [screen]. The ark of
36 the testimony, and the staves thereof, and the mercy-seat, The table, and all the
37 vessels thereof, and the shew-bread. The pure randlestick. with the lamps thereof,
even with the [thereof, the] lamps to be set iu order, and all the vessels [utensils]
38 thereof and the oil for light [the light]. And the golden altar, and the anointing
oil, and the sweet incense, and the hanging [screen] for the tabernacle-door [door
39 of the tent of meeting]. The brazen [copper] altar, and his grate of bras^ [its cop-
per grating], his [its] staves, and all his [its] vessels, the laver and his foot [its
40 base], Th°, hanginss of the court, his [its] pillars, and his [its] sockets, and the
hanging [screen] for the court-gate his [its] cords, and his [its] pins, and all the
vessels [furniture] of the service of the tabernacle, for the tent of the congregation
41 [of meeting]. The cloths [garments] of service to do snrvice [for ministering] in
the holy place, and the holy garments for Aaron the priest, and his sons' garments,
42 to minister in the priest's office [to minister in as priests]. According to all that
Jehovah commanded Moses, so the children of Israel made [did] all the work.
158
EXODUS.
43 And Moses did look upon [saw] all the work, and, behold, they had done it as
Jehovah had commanded, even [commanded,] so had they done it: and Moses
blessed them.
EXEQETICAL AND ORITIOAL.
Besides the minute enumeration of the several
parts of the tabernacle, is especially noticeable
the repeated observation that they had done
everything according to Jehovah's command-
ment, vers. 32 and 43. The enthusiasm and the
joy in making offerings was at the same time a
punctilious obedience to the law — an obedience
which, being rendered primarily to Moses,
shows that the new order of things, or the Old
covenant, is again established.
Vers. 33, 34. "By '^HSn are meant the two
tent-cloths composed of curtains, the purple one
and the one made of goats' hair, which made the
tabernacle (JSE'O) a tent (7ns). It thence
follows beyond a doubt that the variegated cur-
tains formed the inner walls of the tabernacle,
or covered the boards on the inside ( ? how then
could they be stretched?). On the other hand,
the goats' hair curtains farmed the outer cover-
ing" (Keil). The colored curtains formed the in-
side even if they were stretched over the boards.
Ver. 43. "The readiness with which the peo-
ple had brought in abundance the requisite gifts
for this work, and the zeal with which they had
accomplished the work in half a year or less
{vid. xl. 17), were delightful signs of Israel's
willingness to serve the Lord ; and for this the
blessing of God could not fail to be given"
(Keil).
SIXTH SECTION.
The Erection of the Tabernacle and its Dedication as the Place of the Revela-
tion of the Glory of Jehovah. (Analogies: Abraham's Grove at Mamre;
Jacob's Bethel ; Solomon's Temple ; Zerubbabel's Temple ; Temple Dedication
of Judas Maccabeus; Christ in the Temple.)
Chaptek XL. 1-38.
A.— THE COMMAND.
Vers. 1-15.
1, 2 And Jehovah spake unto Moses, saying. On the first day of the first month
3 shalt thou set up the tabernacle of the tent of the congregation [of meeting]. And
thou shalt put therein the ark of the testimony, and cover the ark with the veil.
4 And thou shalt bring in the table, and set in order the things that are to be set in
order upon it [set it in order] ; and thou shalt bring in the candlestick, and light
5 [set up] the lamps thereof And thou shalt set the altar of gold for the mcense
[golden altar of incense] before the ark of the testimony, and put [set up] the
6 hanaing [screen] of the door to [of] the tabernacle. And thou shalt set the altar
of the [of] burnt-ofiering before the door of the tabernacle of the tent of the con-
7 gregation [of meeting]. And thou shalt set the laver between the tent of the con-
8 gregation [of meeting] and the altar, and shalt put water therein. And thou shalt
set up the court round about, and hang up the hanging at the court-gate [put up
9 the screen of the gate of the court]. And thou shalt take the anointing oil, aud
anoint the tabernacle, and all that is therein, and shalt hallow it, and all the ves-
10 sels furniture]thereof: anditshallbeholy. And thou shaltanointthealtarofthe[of]
burnt-offering, and all his vessels [its utensils], and sanctify the altar : and it shall
11 be an altar most holy [and the altar shall be most holy]. And thou shalt anoint
12 the laver and his foot [its base], and sanctify it. And thou shalt bring Aaron and
his sons unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation [tent of meeting], and
13 wash them with water. And thou shalt put upon Aaron the holy garments, and
[garments; and thou shalt] anoint him, and sanctify him : that [hmi, that] he may
14 minister unto me in the priest's office [be priest unto me]. And thou shalt bring
CHAP. XL. 1-38.
169
15 his sons, and clothe them with coats : And thou shalt anoint them, as thou didst
anoint their father, that they may minister unto me in the priest's office [be priests
unto me] : for [and] their anointing shall surely be [shall be to them for] an ever-
lasting priesthood throughout their generations.
B.— THE EKECTION OF THE BUILDING (NOT THE CONSECRATION OF IT).
Vbks. 16-33.
16 Thus did Moses: according to all that Jehovah commanded him, so did he.
17 And it came to pass in the first month in the second year, on the first day of the
18 month, that the tabernacle was reared [set] up. And Moses reared [set] up the
tabernacle, and fastened his [its] sockets, and set up the boards thereof, and put
19 in the hars thereof, and reared [set] up his [its] pillars. And he spread abroad
[spread] the tent over the tabernacle, and put the covering of the tent above upon
20 it; as Jehovah commanded Moses. And he took and put the testimony into the
ark, and set the staves on the ark, and put the mercy-seat above upon the ark :
21 And he brought the ark into the tabernacle, and set up the veil of the covering,
and covered [screened] the ark of the testimony ; as Jehovah commanded Moses.
22 And he put the table in the tent of the congregation [of meeting], upon the side of
23 the tabernacle northward, without the veil. And he set the bread in order upon it
24 before Jehovah ; as Jehovah had commanded Moses. And he put the candlestick in
the tent of the congregation [of meeting], over against the table, on the side of the
25 tabernacle southward. And he lighted [set up] the lamps before Jehovah ; as
26 Jehowah commanded Moses. And he put the golden altar in the tent of the con-
27 gregation [of meeting] before the veil: And he burnt sweet inctnse thereon; as
28 Jehovah commanded Moses. And he set up the hanging at [put up the screen of]'
29 the door of the tabernacle. And he put the altar of burnt-offeriug hy the door oF
the tabernacl^ of the tent of the congregation [of meeting], and offered upon it th.*'
burnt-ofiering, and the meat-offering [meal offtring] ; as Jehovah commanded
30 Moses. And he set the laver between the tent of the congregation [of meeting]
31 and the altar, and put water there, to wash udthal. And Moses and Aaron and
32 his sons washed their hands and their feet thereat [therefrom] : When they went
into the tent of the congregation [of meeting], and when they came near unto the
33 altar, they washed ; as Jehovah commanded Moses. And he reared [set] up the
court round about the tabernacle and the altar, and set up the hanging [screen]
of the court-gate. So Moses finished the work.
C— THE DIVHE DEDICATION OF THE TABEaN.iCLE ANTERIOR TO THE HUMiN
DEDICATION.
Vers. 34-38.
34 Then a [the] cloud covered the tent of the congregation [of meeting], and the
35 glory of Jehovah filled the tabernacle. And Moses was not able to enter into the
tent of the congregation [of meeting], because the cloud abode thereon, and the
36 glory of Jehovah filled the tabernacle. And when the cloud was taken up from
37 over the tabernacle, the children of Israel went onward in all their journeys : But
if [whenever] the cloud were [was] not taken up then they journeyed not till the
38 day that it was taken up. For the cloud of Jehovah was upon the tabernaile by
day, and fire was on [in] it by night, in the sight of all the house of Israel, through-
out all their journeys.
of the arrangement of the parts. As to the time,
the first day of the first month, Nisan (of the ?e-
cond year of the exodus) is selected, as if in order
that it might be ready for the first Passover fes-
tival in the middle of Nisan.
Ver. 3. The ark of the testimony is the
real soul of the sanciuary. It represents the
presence of Jehovah. Next to it the veil is the
most important, since it expresses the unap-
EXEGETICAL AND CEITICAL.
0. The Command to Erect the Building.
Chap. xl. 1-15.
Ver. 1. Though Moses knows that the taber-
nacle is to be erected, yet he must receive .Teho-
Tah's command in reference to the time and order
14
ICO
EXODUS.
proaohabltneas of Jehovah, and protects the ark
from profanation, but still more protects from
the sentence of destruction those who approach
without authority.
Ver. 4. Next comes the table. With the table
Jehovah comes, in a limiieddegree, outof theHoly
of holies into the holy place. By this symbolic
communion with the priests He discloses to the
people the hope of fellowship with Him, the fel-
lowship of His Spirit, of His blessings. Then
the lamps are lighted as if for a feast; for en-
lightenment is dependent on the communion of
the heart with God.
Ver. 5. As Jehovah comes, with the table, in
a sense into the holy place, so the priesthood of
Israel on its part comes in a sense into the Holy of
holies with the altar of incense which symbolizes
prayer. These holy things, too, which denote
and illustrate communion with Jehovah, must be
screened by the curtain of the holy place.
Ver. 6. As the altar of incense bears a relation
to the door of the Holy of holies, so the altar of
burnt-offering to the door of the holy place.
The laver stands nearer the holy place than the
altar does, because it is for the priests, and con-
tains, in the water, the means of purification for
the sacrificial service — in which circumstance is
disclosed an adumbration of the N. T. baptism,
which separates animal offerings from the
temple.
Ver. 8. The court also has its screen, for the
court, too, is an enclosed vestibule of the holy
pjace, as contrasted with the profane heathen
world aiHl dttiled Israelites, or even such as
approach wi'h empty hands.
Ver. 9. The anointing of the dwelling and all
of its individual parts expresses the truth, that all
the worship in this house depends on the life of
the spirit — is from the spirit and for the spirit.
But in what sense is the altar of burnt-offering,
standing as it does in the court, most holy, [lite-
rally, "holy of holies"]? Because the offering of
sacrifice, and the self-surrender which consists in
trustful obedienc, and which underlies the offer-
ing, are the fundamental condition of the genu-
ineness of the whole ritual worship. According
to Keil, the phrase designates the fact that the
allar is not to be approached by the people who
offer sacrifices.*
Ver. 1ft. Aaron's sons also are anointed to-
gether with hun, because they represent the
iierediliiry perpetuity of the priesthood. Keil
holds that the consecration of the priests was
not contemporaneous with the erection of the
tabernacle, hut took place later. But here too
aly the rommand is first given, and then the
i-ection of the tabernacle precedes its execution,
nobel says: The statement [of ver. 1(5] antici-
iites Lev. viii. If we distinguish between oom-
and and cicecution, the anticipation is only
;eming, or at least only grows out of the Bum-
ariness of the narrative.
b. The Ertction of the Building. Vers. 16-33.
Ver. 17. And it came to pass. — "Inasmuch
I from the arrival of the Israelites at Sinai in
* \I. e., aa beinjt, on account of its position, more exposed
the contact of laymen than tlie other sac od objects, whicu
?re where no layman was allowed to come at all.— Te.]
the third month after the exodus (xix. 1) until
the first day of the second year, when the work
was delivered to Moses complete, not quite nine
months elapsed, all the work of the building was
done in less than half a year" (Keil).*
Ver. 19. He spread the tent over the ta-
bernacle. — By the "tent" here Keil correctly
understands the two principal coverings; by the
" covering," the two outer coverings.
Ver. 20. The testimony. — The tables of the
law, as records which were to bear perpetual wit-
ness to the divine will orally revealed to the people.
Knobel refers it to the whole revelation so far
as then existent — which Keil rightly disputes.
Ver. 23. On the arrangemi-nt of the twelve
loaves in two rows, vid. Lev xxiv. 6.
Ver. 30. Bet'vireen the tent of meeting
and the altar. — "Probably more to one side,
so that the priests did not need to go around the
altar" (Keil.).
The offering of sacrifice, ver. 20, and the
burning of incense, ver. 27, are to be regarded
as extraordinary acts of Moses, the founder
of the system of worship, and not belonging to
the ordinary worship of the people, which pre-
supposed the anointing of the sanctuary, and
which began with » sin-offering, whereas here
only burnt-offerings and meal-offerings are
spoken of.
Ver. 33. The court was not only a court; it
enclosed the tabernacle. According to Josepbus
{Antq. III. 6, 3) the tabernacle stood in the
middle of the court.
c. The Divine Dedication of the Bvilding Ante-
rior to the Human Dedication.
Vers. 34-38.
Ver. 34. If anything is fitted to exhibit (he
LeviticHl ritual as a transitory one, as an edu-
cational institution designed for the training of
the people up to the time of their maturity, it
is the fact that the completed tabernacle forms
the conclusion of Exodus, not the beginning of
Leviticus; that Moses offered sacrifices and
burned incense in it before Aaron the priest
did; but especially that Jehovah Himself conse-
crated the sanctuary by His manifestation of
Himself in the sacred cloud before it was conse-
crated by the priesthood. In the Middle Ages
it was a saying that a church was consecrated
by angels in the night before it was going to be
consecrated by priests. Perhaps the saying was
a reminiscence of the mystery here recorded.
For Jehovah's manifestation ot Himself is some-
thing very mysterious, a holy token, viewed
only by the eyes of faith. Above the tabernacle
the cloud appears, and covers it, in order to
remove the glory of Jehovah, which fills lite
dwelling, from the view of all, even of Moses,
It is not said that this condition became a per-
manent one; on the contrary, the tabernacle
soon afterwards became accessible, except as
regards the regulations concerning the Holy of
holies. But up to that time it was unapproach-
* [This is made ont by dednciing from the nine monllil
the eighty days (xxiv. 18 ; xxxiv. 28) spent by Moses on tie
mounl^in, the time spent in preparation'for the giving of
the law, and in the ratification of the covenant (xix. 1— xxi''
11), and the interval between Moses' first and his second Bl»;
on the mountain (xxxii. and xxxili.).— Tk.]
DOCTRINAL AND HOMILETIC APPENDIX.
161
able, locked up, aa it were, and had to be un-
locked by sacerdotal expiations according to
the Levitical rites.
At the close is given a general atatement con-
cerning the future of the tahernaole, which,
however, also discloses' the design of it. "The
Future verbs designate the action as a rppeated
and perpetual one " (Knobel). ft was designed
ns a divine token for the people on their march.
When the cloud rose up from the tabernacle,
this was the signal for starting — an expressive
signal; for the divine token then visibly sepa-
rated itself from the sacerdotal dwelling; Jeho-
vali seemed to abandon it, as He in truth in the
strictest sense did leave the temple in the Jew-
ish war. It was the signal for the people to
break camp and move onward. But the cloud
only showed the way, in order, at a new stop-
ping-place, to rest down again on the tabernacle,
and thus to order a halt. Thus the book closes
with the profoundest thought concerning the
history of the kingdom of God, expressed in a,
symbolic form and so graphically as to be ap-
prehensible by a child. The pillar of cloud above
the tabernacle by day; the fiery brightness in it
by night — before the eyes of all Israel; — thus
was made sensible lo the people that presence
of their covenint-God which accompanied them
in all their journeyings. Comp. the consecra-
tion of the temple, 1 Kings viii. and Ezek. xliil.
4; Num. ix. 16.
DOCTRINAL AND HOMILETIC APPENDIX.
FIRST DIVISION: DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL REFLECTIONS.
PRELIMINARY REMARKS.
The division of the Bible of which we are
treating, the Thorah (law) in the narrow sense,
was in former times used much more as a source
of doctrinal and ethical rules and of homiletical
observations than now-a-days. The cau'ies of
this changed attitude of theology and the Church
to the Law lie in the change of views on Old
Testament Judaism and the Old Testament itself,
on inspiration, on hermeneutics, and on the
wants of the Christian Church.
The disregard of the Old Testament scheme
of revelation, which prevailed almost universally
among the Gnostics, drove the Church in the
other direction, to an over-estimation of the
stage of religious development exhibited in the
Old Testament, so that it was almost put on an
equality, and in many ways was confounded,
with the New Testament. The common warfare
which heathen and Jewish Christians had to
wage against heathenism tended very early to
beget Judaizing forms of Christianity in theo-
logy, forms of worship, and polity. To this
opposition between the Jewish and the heathen
was added the opposition between the divine
and the human, which through the unconscious
influence of heathen conceptions so emphasized
the divine side as to lead to a onesided theory
of inspiration, which caused the Old Testament
to appear as substantially one with the New
rather than as contrasted with it. But the dif-
ficulties which thus arose were bridged over by
the allegorical style of interpretation. This
was done in two ways : In the form of a philoso-
phical allegorizing of the heathen myths, it
mediated between the ancient superstitious hea-
thenism and the later skeptical heathenism; in
the form of the Alexandrian allegorizing of
.Jewish history, it mediated between the Old
Testament and the Hellenic literature and style
of thought. Thus then Christian theology also
was led to make a bridge, by allegorical means,
between the Old and the New Testament. By
this means the Old Testament, already in great
part Christianized, was made wholly Christian,
the children of the two Testaments in a sense
exchanging forms. For just as far as the Jews
were pushed forwards and made Christians, the
Christians were pushed backwards and made a
sort of Jews.
On account of the manifold confusion of ideas
which thus arises, let it be here remarked that,
by the allegorizing method of interpretation, we
do not mean the thorough explanation of passages
really intended to be allegorical, but the style of
exposition which perverts the historical and di-
dactic meaning of the Scriptures into what is
claimed to be a higher and more spiritual one
by sporting with analogies.
In consequence of this Judaizing theology the
Old Testament, and particularly the three books
of the law, became a deep fountain of Christian
and religious reflections, especially an inex-
haustible mine for Christian mysticism and the-
osophy.
Following, however, the extreme legal ten-
dency, which transformed Christian ministers
into Levites, bishops into descendants of Aaron,
the Christian churches into laymen, the eucha-
rist into a sin-offering, churches into temples.
1^2
EXODUS.
and which w:is destroyed only in its central
features by the theology of the Reformation,
came the great reaction of the critical school,
which passed over more and more into the ex-
treme of rationalism.
Now, therefore, the Old Testament, and with
it the Old Tesl.iment religion itself, was more and
more degraded and caricatured by many mon-
strous disfigureujenis bearing witness to arrogant
ignorance. lu connection with this there grew
out of the single product of Old Testament, inspi-
ration a meagre mesh of human legends, fictions,
historic i-erainiscena-'S and errors, with the de-
struction of winch the youthful criticism carried
on its child's play. But the science of herme-
neutics rejected, logetlier with the allegorizing
theory, more and more decidedly also the sym-
bolism and typology which were veiled in it ;
and while it rightly laid down the law of gram
maticu-historical interpretation of the Scrip-
tures, it yet at once, and more and more, fell into
the mistake of taking the letter according to the
narrowest literal sense, and the historical matter
as only an unessential modification of earlier be-
ginnings of history. For this new theology there
were no new spirits, no new things, no new words.
Side by side with this theological revolution
there has, to be sure, maintained itself the work-
ing of the old allegorizing spirit — sometimes
carried even to the pitch of absurdity. What,
e. g. have not the Irvingites been able to make
out of the skins which covered the tabernacle!
But n new epoch has dawned in theology and
the Church, an.l is gradually taking shape in a
more successful attempt correctly lo estimate the
Old Testament. The general statement of the oor-
rectrelatinn between the Old and the New Testa-
ment may be made in a few words: Oneness of
substance, contrast in the form of development
as regards both ihe records and the tacts of re-
velation underlying them.
Yet as, in this view, the Old Testament is
Christianity in the germ, so thus far the correct
theology and exegesis of the Old Testament are
in a germinant condition — a condition subject to
many oscillations connected with defective dis-
tinctions.
In the first place, not distinction enough is
made hetween the .Judaism of Ihe Jewish people,
as the vehicles of ihe Old Testament revelation,
and the sacred history of the revelation itself.
So the French Encyclopedists identified Ohrw-
tendom and Christianity, especially Roman Catho-
lic Christendom.
Again, not distinction enough is made between
the symbolic forms of the Old Testament and the
mythical forms of the heathen world [iiid. Comm.
on Genesis, p. 23sqq.).
This is connected with the fact that, on the
other hand, still less distinction is made between
the Hebrew (theocratic) and the Hellenistic (clas-
sic) mode of conception and description. Ac-
cording to the latter, history is a presentation
of facts in their outward relation of cause and
eflfeot for the gratification of a love of knowledge ■
poetry is its own object, and ministers to the
enjoyment of the beautiful; and didactics minis-
ters to scholastic knowledge ; whereas theocratic
history presents historic facts in the light of
eternal ideas, and hence in symbolic significance ;
theocratic poetry allows art to be merged in the
service of holiness; and didactics does not deal
with abstract formulas, but with concrete con-
ceptions, because it aims not at developing a
school, but at building up a church.
Very imperfect also is frequently the distinc-
tion made between the prophecy of events or of
types and the prophecy of ideas or of words. That
ihese two forms depend on one another; that
without the actual reference of Israelilish his-
tory to the future of the work of salvation, there-
fore without the line of prophetic formations or
lypes unknown to man, but well known to the
Spirit of God, there could also be no conscious
ideal or verbal prophecies; and that, conversely,
the forward movement of the actual mental life
of the people in typical persons, experiences,
instilulious and emotions, is conditioned on ideal
guides, i t. on verbal prophecies; — this fact is
founded on the indissoluble interaction between
an ideal and a life. According to a young man's
ideals, his life's aim is shaped; and his ideals,
rising up out of his life's aims and attainments,
assume a form more and more distinct and pure.
Most of all do men misunderstand those forms
in which the verbal prophecy is still inclosed
like a bursting bud. in the integument of typical
significance. E.g. that mankind, in his hostility
to the serpent, shall bruise its head, is a verbal
prophecy; but the expression respecting the
woman's seed is in a high degree typical. So
the passage about the son of the virgin in Isa.
vii. must be divided into elements of verbal pre-
diction and those of typical meaning. But in
general there is connected with every blossom
of verbal prophecy a leaf of lypical foliage, as
also, on the other hand, over all typical repre-
sentations there floats a meaning full of prophetic
presentiment — The theology of the present time,
however, would suffer a complete relapse, should
that confusion become stationary which often
appears with regard to the distinction between
the different periods of development in the Old
Testament, particularly between the patriarchal
and the Mosaic periods. Especially, when the
whole patriarchal period is consigned to a vague
tradition, and the Israelilish religion is made to
begin with Mosaisra, there is an end of a tho-
rough under-'-tanding not only of the Old Testa-
ment, but of all Ihe Bible, and in fact of the
whole kingdom of God. Without the foundation
laid in Abraham's faith in the promises, Mosa-
ism also, according to Rom. iv. and Sal. iii., is
entirely unintelligible, as also the legality of the
Middle Ages is made into a gloomy caricature,
unless it is conceived as a process of training
for the people, based on the apostolic and an-
cient Catholic Church. The consequence of this
one-sidedness is seen in the fact that the normal
progress of Mosaism towards Messianic prophecy
cannot be appreciated, but is misinterpreted,
just as the Reformation of the Middle Ages is
denounced as a revolution.
But if the periods of Old Testament revelation
are correctly appreciated, then one will be able
to determine more accurately the difference be-
tween the canonical and the apocryphal periods
of the Old Testament, according to their charac-
teristic features. The one characteristic feature
of the apocryphal literature is the national ele-
DOCTRINAL AND HOMILETIU APPENDIX.
163
ment which abandons the theocratic classicalness
or canonioity ; a form such as in ita way ap-
peared in the Grseoo-Roman literature, and in
modern literature threatens to appear every-
where. In the period of the Hebrew popular
literature, Judaism and Alexandrianism fall
apart; and inwardly faith is blended with fana-
ticism, superstition, and sliepticism, while out-
wardly the Messianic anticipations retreat be-
hind the contrasted elements of Alexandrian
spiritualism and Jewish literalism.
A right estimate of the Old Testament periods
will also disclose the great significance of the
difference between the epochs and the periods
of the time of revelation, and much that is in-
comprehensible will become more nearly intelli-
gible, «. q. the great difference between the
epochs abounding in miracles and the periods
in which there were none — a difference the reflex
of which is still perceptible in the contrast be-
tween ihat half of the age of the church which
was characterized by festivals and that which
was without them.
The theology of the present will therefore still
have coQsiderable obstacles to overcome. But
it cannot possibly return to the medisBval and
early Protestant style of dealing with the Old
Testament, and must none tlie less leave behind
the rationalistic relapses of negative criticism
anil of pseudo-hiHtorioal exegesis. It will set
forth tlie divine and miraculous revelations as
they gradually made their appearance, according
to the degrees of the human development on which
they rested, in the fulness and beauty of their
successive factors.
, So then in the service of a new method of in-
terpreting the .Mosaic law, a method which may
be briefly termed the Christologieal. as being the
due appreciation of divine truth in a human
coloring and form, the old shafts of this rich
mine, in various ways filled with obstructions,
will be re-opened; and instead of the merely
glistering half metals of exegetical disquisitions
there will be found for Christian instruction and
edification a yield of the richest metals.
A. QENEEAL KBMARKS ON THE DOCTRINES OF
THE LAW.
As to the law of Moses as a whole, we cannot
go back to the old position, that it still serves as
a moral law in its entirety, i. e., entirely in this
its oulward form especially the law of the Sab-
bath, and many also of the civil laws, e. g,, the
law of tiihes, and of capital punishment for the
blasphemer; but the New Testament truth, that
the law is done away by the law for the Chris-
tian (Gal. ii.), must not be so interpreted as to
imply that the Mosaic law is wholly abrogated.
It will rather be seen that it has been freed by
Olirist, as to its spiritual elements, from the
limitations and forms of the Jewish economy,
that it in this very way has become a type de-
signed to represent and illustrate the funda-
mental principle of Christianity in its details
(vid. Mitt. vi. ; Rom. iii. 31).
In like manner the Jewish people are no more
to be regarded as, abstractly considered, the
people of God overtopping all the other nations,
as even yet in the New Testament period they
are sometimes looked on as a nation of priests
which has lost its privileges, but which is destined
to become again the nobility of Christendom.
But little as the whole nation is to be estimated
according to its elect ones, so little should it be
estimated according to the appearance of its
degenerate masses, as is often done by rational-
ists, and in general by modern writers. As the
first-fruits in the religious development of tbe
nations, Israel must become more an t more a type
for elect nations of the New Testament era, for the
idea of election in all nations, for the significance
of nationalities, of national life within the king-
dom of God, and of the shape given by Chris-
tianity to national institutions.
This process of two-edged or two-sided antag-
onism against the extremes will have to be car-
ried on in all the points in which biblical theolo-
gy, in a Ohristologioal aspect, relates to the law.
The dogmatic peculiarity of the Mosaic law is
its crystalline distinctness of form and its trans-
parency, or its unpoetic precision and its sug-
gestive symbolicalness. The absence of figures
in the Mosaic law also marks its style, which
everywhere and in the smallest details avoids tha
obscurity of an imaginative diction. This pro-
saic precision is all the more striking, inasmucli
as it is here and there interrupted by high'iy
poetical passages, and finally is supplemented by
the lofty'style of the prophetic book of Deut«!-
ronomy. But out of thij very distinctness, seem-
ingly related only to civil affairs, there shin?
forth everywhere the suggestive thoughtfulne.-a
and symbolicalness which gives to Mosaism the
character of a typical institution throughout.
The fundamental doama of Mosaism is this:
Elohim is .Jehovah, or, Jehovah is Elohira, as the
fundamental dogma of the New Testament is this:
Jesus is the Christ, or, the Christ is Jesus. The
God of all the worlds. Elohim, is Jehovah, the
covenant God of Israel; the covenant God of
Israel is .also none the less the God of all the
worlds. Religious catholicity and religious par-
ticularism thus complement each other, although
a narrow view of things keeps trying to bring
them into antagonism.
On the basis of this dogma come first of all
into clear prominence the idea and the law of
personality. Jehovah is holy, i. e., He keeps His
personality, in which idea and essence are one,
pure and unmixed, and for this reason He trains
up Lsrael to be His holy people, a people of per-
sonal worthiness. Again and again this covenant
fellowship between the absolute and the limited
personality is emphasized, also, therefore, the
sonship for which Israel is called into existence.
The idea that Israel, or humanity, is akin
with God, is more conspicuous in the stern ma-
jesty of the lav than even in the dogmatics of
the church. The Canaanites are rejected for the
reason that tbey have ruined the worthiness of
personality in the double form of voluptuous rites
and of offerings to Moloch.
With the notion of personality and holiness to
which Israel is called in his fellowship with God
are inseparably connected the necessity of expia-
tion and the consecration of sacrifices. The con-
secration of sacrifices ; for man always follows
the impulse to make expiatory offerings. If he
does not do this in a manner pleasing to God, he
does it as a heathen in horrid caprice. To bodily
l'3i
EXODUS.
suicide corresponds iu this respect intellectual
suicide, ibe total deuiai of immortality, respect-
ing whicli it. is falsely asserted that Moses knevr
noiliiiig of it. Moses, who had brought his peo-
ple out of figypt, out of the laud where men wor-
ship the dead and the other world, had first of
all to wean the people from Egyptian coucep-
tious, aud to train tlieui chiefiy to sanctify, as
they ought, the things of this world, as being the
proper foundation for a true view of the oacred-
ness of the other world. The idea of immorta-
lity, as someihing presupposed, is sufficiently
obvious in the Mosaic religion.
As to the law itself, we must not overlook its
divisions, nor the various e-oinbinaiions that re-
sult trom Iheai. Altnough the law is a unit, yet
the old tiistinction between the moral, ceremo-
nial, aud civil law is well founded. Hence thj
command of the day of rest is given in two con-
nections : as an etnical law of humanity in the
decalogue, and as a ceremonial law among the
regulations lor festivals in Leviticus. If this
connection is overlooked, the Levltical ceremo-
nial Sabbath will be transferred to the ten com-
mandments, and on the other hand the Sabbath
law of Leviticus will be treated as a mere Jewish
ceremonial law. A similar combination is found
in the ordinance of the day of atonement. Le-
vitically it was the culrainntion of all the feasts;
socially it was the fast-day of priparalion for
the feast of tabernnoles.
The Messianic seal of the three books (Exo-
dus, Leviticus, and Numbers), which is discerned
in the various institutions of the law, is found
unmistakably impressed on the three books :
Exodus is the book which sets forth the Messiah as
prophet; in Leviticus the MessiRtiic high-priest-
hood is typically portrayed : while the book of
Numbers describes the organization, appearance,
and guidance of God's host, whose military and
victorious prince is Jehovah in His Messianic
future. See details in the Introduction.
Iiiterature.
Here belong, besides general commentaries,
works on biblical theology (wiW. Coram, on Genesis,
p. 62Fqq.). Vid. a list in VonCoWn'sBiblische Theo-
Itffie, I. p. 19. Likewise in Hagenbach's-Bncycfo/ja-
dif, p. '214. [Darling's Ci/clopedia, Smith's Bible
Dirjionary , Am. Ed.]. Hagenbach puts here Ilof-
mann's Sckriftbeiveis deft Glauhevs. — On the King-
dom of God, and, in particular, Christology, vid.
Comm. on Genesis.
Most recent works: Von d. Golz: GnWs Of-
feribarung durch heilige Geschicht', liasel, 1868.
Ewald, Die Lehre von Gntt. oder Theolngie des Al-
ten und Neum Textamenis, Vol. I. Die Lehre vom
Worte Goltes. Leipzig, 1871. Oehler, Theology
of the Old Testament [Clark's Foreign Theological
Library, 1875, 2 vols.].
Here belong works on special dogmatic and
ethical questions, on the Israelitish character
and beliefs, especially on the Jewish belief in im-
mortality, on typology, and on Jewish laws.
In reference to the general character of the
Israelites, there are, in opposition to the scoffs of
Feuerbach and the depreciatory judgment of Re-
nan, Richard Wagner, and others, to be consi-
dered both Jewish and Judaislio over-estimates
(e. g., of Baumgarteu and others), aud likewise
correct estimates.
Monographs. On the name Jehovah vid. Tho-
luck, Vermiachle Sehriften. I., p. 377 sqq. The
article by Oehler, in Heizog's Real-enajclopddie ;
Danz, p. 425. [Reland, Decas exerciiationumj etc. ;
Keiuke, Philognsc/i-historiscke Abhandlung iiber den
Gottesnamen Jehooah; the above-mentioned arti-
cle by Tnoluck, translated by Dr. Robinson in
the Biblical Repository, Vol. IV., 89-108; E. Bal-
lautine, Interpretation of Ex. vi. 2, 3; ibid., Vol.
Ill , p. 730 sqq. See also Hengstenberg, Authen-
ticity of the Fentateuch, I., p. 213 sqq. ; Kurtz, Die
Miahdt der Generis, p. xliii. sqq. ; Macdonald,
Introduction to the Pentateuch, I., p. 165 sqo
— Te.].
On the Mosaic law. Vid. the older writings ia
Walch's Bibliotheca, I. p. 119. Also the article oa
this topic, and a list of works, in Herzog'si?ea/-en-
cyclopadie. Langen, Mosaisehes Licht und Recht,
Halle, 1732; Salvador, Gesehichte der mosaischen
Institutionen ; Bluhme, CoUatio legum Romanarum
et Mosaicarum, 1843 Schnell, Das israelilische
Recht in seinen Grundziigen dargestellt, Basel, 1853 ;
Bunsen, Inhali und Epochen der moeaiscken Geseizge-
bung {Bihelurkunden, I. p. 229) : R'ehm, Die (ie
setzgebung in Lande Moab, Goiha,, 1854. [Micbaells,
Laws of Moses; Saalschiitz, Das ■mosai.iche Reck;
Wines, Commtntary on the Laws uf the Ancient
Hebrews. — Tb.].
R. Kiibel, Das alltestamentliche Gesetz und seine
Urkunde, Stuttgait, 1867; F. E. KUbel, Die
soziale und volkswirthschaftliche Gesetzgebung des
Alten Bundes, Wiesbaden, 1870.
On the Mosaic doctrine of immortality, Oehler,
Veteris Testamenti sententia de rebus post mortem
futuris, Stuttgart, 1846; Brecher, Die Unslerb-
lichkeitslehredesisraeldiichen Voiles, Leipzig. 1857;
Engelbert, Das negative Verdienst des Alten Testa-
ments urn die Vnsterblichkeitslehre, Berlin, 1867;
Hcrm. Schultz, Die Voraussetzungen der christ-
lichen Lehre von der Unsterblichkeit, Gottingen,
1861; K.\osternia.nn, Hoffnung kiinftiger Eribsung
aus dem Todeszustande beaviest; (8) in the miraci:-
loua augmentation of natural calamities peou-
liar to the earth and the country, and in tkz
oonneolion of these with the movements of the
world of mind, the joyful testimonies of the
pious, the bad conscience and horror of the
'odless; (4) in the correspondence between
the sudden precipitation of the crises of the
earth's physical history, and that of the crises
)f the kingdom of God; (5) in the exalted
symbolic form of God's deeds in sacred his-
tory. The false miracles by which the Egyp-
tian sorcereis soueht to neutralize the effect
of Moses' miracles nave their reflex in the most
various forms eveu in New Testament times
and in the history of the Church (2 Tim. iii. 8).
So Julian instituted an anti-Christian order of
preachers and similar things. So in modern
times the itinerant preaching of the Gospel, the
oliuroh-holidays, and religious associations have
been imitated in one direction and another. But
the unholy imitations can never keep pace with
the holy originals. — This, too, remains true in the
spiritual world, that God's plagues as such are
limited entirely to the enemies of His people. —
The institution of the Passover-meal on the night
of Egypt's terror is a type of the institution of
the Lord's Supper on the momentous night of
the betrayal of Christ. This lofty festival of
victory in the midst of the terrors of death and
of the abyss is one of the most unmistakable
of God's grand thoughts of love and of peace,
and would never have been conceived, still less
carried out, by the selfish heart of man.
6. The Passover.
In the Passover all the forms of offering are
concentrated and explained. First, it takes the
place of the curse-offering, the hherem, which
was inflicted on the Egyptian first-born ; secondly,
it is a sin-offering made by the act of sprinkling
the blood, by which the door is marked with the
divine direction, " Pass over," for the angel of
destruction ; thirdly, ho wever, it is most emphati-
cally a peace-offering, as being the Old Testa-
ujent eucharist, for which reason also the passo-
ver was slain by all the heads of houses, and
eaten by all the inmates of the house ; finally, it
is made complete, as a burnt-offering, in the burn-
ing of all the parts which are left over from the
sacred meal. — On the significance of carrying
away the silver and gold articles, vid. Comm. on
Genesis, p. 83. In every great judicial crisis a
part of the goods of this world, or of a spiritual
Egypt, falls to the people of God, as, e.g., at the
time of Constantine, the time of the Reformation,
and other times; — not by cheating and robbery,
but through mental agitation; agitated souls cast
it into the hands of the representatives of the
victorious spirit.
7. The Feast of Unleavened Bread.
Together with the Passover is instituted the
feast of unleavened bread, characterized, on the
cue hand, as a denunciation of the world, and,
on the other, as a renunciation of worldliness, or
yoluntary abstinence for the sake of the Lord.
This does not make leaven as such a symbol of
evil (vid. Comm. on Malt. xiii. 33), but it makes
the leaven which is qualified by some reference
to the world (the Egyptians, the Pharisees, etc.),
a symbol of the contagious and overpowering in-
fluence of participation in an injurious enjoy-
ment. As the Passover feast obligates to a tem-
porary festival of unleaveuod bread, so the Lord's
Supper obligates to a permanent avoidance of
ruinous associations. — Participation in the Pass-
over is conditioned on circumcision xii. 48) ;
and a participation in the Lord's Supper on the
rite of baptism. — The religious education of the
young has from the outset a connection with the
sacraments (xiii, 14), and finds itself at once
enjoined, whenever a religious congregation is
formed. — To guide the weak young cougregaiion
of God through the wilderness is safer than tc
guide them through the land of the Philistines.
Here is figuratively represented the import of
asceticism (xiii. 17, 18).
8. Joseph's Bones.
A boundary line between the theocracy and
the world is formed not only by the sacraments
and feasts, but also by the consecrated burial.
So the church-yard has also its ecclesiastical
significance. But as the political community
has a part in the bells in the tower, so also in a
church-yard as God's field, and only Christian
wisdom, not fanaticism, can correctly apprehend
the distinction.
9. The Pillar of Cloud and Fire.
As the same pillar over the sanctuary is a pil-
lar of cloud by day, and a pillar of fire by night,
so it stands now before the host as a sacred van-
guard, now behind them as a protecting rear-
guard separating Israel from the pursuing ene-
my. To this divine separation of Israel from the
world, following the sacramental separations, is
next added the greai actual separation by means of
the Red Sea. It is a double protection lor the con-
gregation of God, that not only the congregation
is hidden from the pursuing worldly power, but
also the frightful equipments of this power are
in great part hidden from the congregation by
the miraculous phenomenon of the pillar of cloud
and fire. By day the pillar of cloud is more
visible than the fiery pillar; by nighi the fire is
more visible than the cloudy pillar. When one
walks in the light of knowledge, he needs to be
made secure by the symbolical obscurity of the
mysteries of the church ; when one walks through
the night of temptation, he is made secure by thi
fiery tokens of the animating presence of the
Lord. — The policy of falsehood, of selfishness,
of arrogance, and of treachery, has plunged more
than one Pharaoh into destruction from the ear-
liest times down to the history of Buonaparte.
10. The Bed Sea.
In their extreme distress the Israelites cast
themselves in view of the oppressors into the Red
Sea, but do so at the bidding of God and of the rod
of Moses. Here, too, the natural substratum is to
be taken together with the divine deed. (Ex. xiv.
21; Ps. cvi. 9). The terrestrial crisis is united
with the crisis of the kingdom of God, Moses'
prophetic spirit with his symbolic miraculous
170
EXODUS.
agency. The Red Sea stands midway between
the deluge (1 Pet. iii. 20) and baptism (1 Cor. x.
2) In all three cases the redemption of the new
man is effected through judgment on the old;
there takes place a separation, by means of which
the destructible part falls a prey to real or appa-
rent destruction, and the salvable part is trans-
ferred to a condition of life and salvation. The
first separation constitutes a universal historical
type, and in its magnitude, as the destruction of
the firat world (in a sense also as a sequel of the
catastrophes of creation), points to the second and
third separations, but also beyond them to the
last great separation at the end of the world. The
second separation is a theocratic typical institu-
tion, which makes the .Tews Israelites; the third
constitutes a symbolic and real dividing line be-
tween the church and the world, and, in so far
as it is inwardly expressed and realized, be-
tween the kingdom of God and the kingdom of
darkness. The seeming downfall of the church
of God is always succeeded by a higher rise, as
the seeming triumph of the power of darkness
indicates its actual overthrow.
11. Tht Song of Moses.
The song of Moses is the first form of reli-
gious service in the church of God, proceeding
from the experience of the first miraculous typi-
cal redemption, and hence is of perpetual signi-
ficance for nil worship celebrating redemption
and for all songs up to the last redempt on at
the end of the world (Rev. xv. 3) The Old Tes-
tament is acquainted with two great redemptive
facts: the redemption out of the bondage in
Egypt, and out of the Babylonish captivity; the
New Testament proclaims the two greatest: the
primal redemption accomplished by Christ, and
the final one in the other world which He will
accomplish at His appearing. It is noticeable
that in the song of Moses the attribute of God's
holiness ia for the first time celebrated together
with others. This indicatestheearly origin of the
fong, and particularly the period of holiness,
which from this time on becomes Jehovah's most
characteristic attribute; the attribute of justice,
which predominates more at a later time, here
appears only incidentally, as it were, in a con-
fession of sin on Pharaoh's part. The freedom
which even in the Old Testament appears in its
first free form of worship, in spite of its re-
straints, is especially evidenced by the fe-
male choir, which Miriam leads, particularly
by the instrumental music of the tambou-
rines, and even the festive dance. What a sorry
Bpeoiacle certain restrictions in the worship of
the old Reformed Church present by the side of
this, while yet that church professes to be of an
eminently New Testament type.
12. The First Stopping-places.
The first encampment of the children of Israel
by the twelve fountains and under the seventy
palm-trees at Elim makes, with Moses' triumphal
song after the deliverance, one whole. But a
preliminary goal reached in the way of salvation
heralds a new contest. The great weakness of
the new congregation is dispLayed in the fact
that, in spite of those rich experiences of deli-
verance, as soon as they begin to suffer want,
they begin again to murmur. But just because
the congregation is so young auJ so weak,
Jehovah is indulgent towards them, and presents
them in the wilderness of Sin with the miracu-
lous bread of manna (the gift of quails seems
here to be anticipated, xvi. 13), and at Rephidim
with water from the rock. Both facts are closely
related to one another and to the foregoing pas-
sage through the Red Sea. At a later time
Jehovah cannot exercise the same indulgence
towards the old and more experienced company
when they murmur in like manner; even Moses'
subtle error is now severely punished (Num. xi.
31 sqq. ; xx. 1 sqq.). Repetition in the divine
training of children is no more a tautology than
in the human training of them.
13. Amalek and Jethro.
The first war of the Israelites is a war of de-
fence against the Amalekiles ; but the victory
depends on three forces: the people's recent
experience of deliverance, Moses' intercession,
and Joshua's generalship (vid. my pamphlet,
Vom Kricg und vom Sieg). Amalek ttius becomes
u type of the anti-theocratic worldly spirit, as
Egypt was before (xvii. IB). But that tliere are
two kinds of heathenism, and accordingly a two-
fold relation of the people of God to it, is shotvn
by the deportment of Jethro, Moses' lather-in-
law and a Midianite priest, as compared with
Amalek. He has kept Moses wife and sons in
his charge during Moses' mission in Egypt ; he
brings them to him now, and rejoices in Israel's
redemption and God's great deeds with hearty
sympathy; nay, his confession that the glory of
Jehovah is abovn all the gods is enough even to
warrant Aaron and the elders in holding reli-
gious communion with him ; they eat bread with
him before God, as also Moses at the very first
had received him with reverence and cordiality
— -a circumstance fitted to put to shame those
Christians who like to seek for the essence of
communion in the excommunication which is
appended to it. Nay, the great law-giver even
adopts at the suggestion of this Midianitish priest
a reform (xviii. 13 sqq.), which, as being a tes-
timony of superior human reason against the
dangers of a one-sided centralization in govern-
ment, even significantly precedes the giving of
the law itself.
14. Israel's Voluntary Assent to the Covenant with
Jehovah at Sinai.
Thus the congregation has come to Sinai, and
here the people are summoned to enter, by means
of a voluntary covenant with Jehovah, into a
peculiar relation to Him, to become Jehovah's
people under His theocracy. Here now the
sacred history itself stands clearly opposed to a
series of distortions of it. In the first place, we
see that the giving of the law on Sinai is not the
beginning of the Old Testament; Israel, rather,
came to Sinai as a typical, consecrated peoplCi
in whose rise and redemption Jehovah has pro-
visionally fulfilled the promise given to Abra-
ham (mrf. Gal. iii. 16 sqq.). Secondly, we see
that the people were by no means involuntarily
DOCTRINAL AND HOMILETIC APPENDfX.
171
made slaves under the law (as Hegel con-
ceives). Thirdly, we see that even the rigorous
fencing off of the lofty mountain, the thunder
and lightning, and the cloud on the mountain,
are not to be pronounced so one-sidedly a mani-
festation of Jehovah's angry jealousy aa was
often done by tlie older theologians, and as was
charged upon the Old Testament in gross carica-
tures in the rationalistic period. Even Deutero-
nomy has presented a more catholic, free, and,
one may say, New Testament view of the mani-
festation of the divine majesty, power, and holi-
ness which encompasses the origin of the law,
anil which is continually to attend it in its
pvvay (Deut. xxxiii. 1-3). As to the covenant
(which is not merely an institution, as Hofmann
holds), there should be specially noticed the
repeated questions put to the people and their
answers of assent (xix. 7, 8; xxiv. 3). The
revelation of Jehovah's holiness in order to the
sanctificalion of Israel to he His people makes
Mount Sinai a symbolic sanctuary. This is
expressed by the mountain's being made in-
accessible to men and beasts (chap. xix. 12
6qq ). Even the priests must not be in haste
to pa»s the boundary (ver. 24). With the
holy place is connected a holy time of three
days, and for the consecration of this time there
are also special prescriptions. There is deve-
loped further on a two-fold distinction of degree :
the people remain in the valley; Aaron and his
sons, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy elders cele-
brate the feast of the covenant on the slope of
the mountain ; Moses alone loses himself in the
darkness of the summit (xxiv. 9 sqq.). So high
does the prophetic here stand above the priestly
office.
15. The Oiving of the Law.
The legislation on the mountain is to be divided
into three groups. The first is the law as an
outline, as the summary of the words of the law;
tlie second is the law as legislation (xxiv. 12 —
xxxi. 18) ; the third is a modified restoration of
the law. and the fixing of it by means of the
building of the tabernacle (to the end of Exo-
dus) The first group comprises the whole law
in its outlines ; and the division into three parts,
moral law (xx. 1-17), ritual and sacrificial law
(XX. 18-26), and civil law (xxi. 1 — xxiii. 33),
appears distinctly. This group is concluded by
the ratification of the covenant (xxiv. 1—11).
Before the covenant was concluded^ the law was
enacted only in oral words; not till after the cove-
nant was concluded was it written on the tables
of stone; and not til) then could the building of
the tabernacle be ordered, as the place where
the stone-tables were to remain, and where
■lehovah was to be enthroned ; for Jehovah can
dwell as a covenant-God only among a people
that have voluntarily surrendered themselves to
Him, But the tabernacle is not simply a temple
or place of sacrifice; It is likewise, and first of
all, the palace of the King Jehovah, the central
place for all the three groups of laws, the place
of the covenant and of the meetings between
Jehovah and the people. This legislation re-
quires Moses to remain forty days on the moun-
tain. But the people cannot endure this invisi-
bility of their religion, and make themselves the
golden calf for their symbolic sanciuary. Thus
a restoration of the law becomes necessary,
through (1) a great expiation, (2) a severe
modification, (3) the actual erection of a visible
sanctuary, the tabernacle.
II. The Outline of the Law.
1. The Ethical Law in Outline. Ch. xx. 1-17.
Here is concentrated a heavenly fulness of
divine thoughts, hence also an immense treasure
of expositions, an account of which is given in
the commentaries, theological systems, cate-
chisms, sermons, and hymns. The law of the
tn commandments is to be considered in its
relations to the natural law of the conscience
(Rom. ii.) and to the law of the Spirit (Rom.
viii.), especially as a transition from the one to
the other. Analytically and literally considered,
the law is incomplete (2 Cor. iii. ; Epistle to the
Hebrews), especially in the hands of human ad-
ministrators ; as a type of the law of the Spirit,
it is complete — the description of man as he
should be, of humanity, of the living image of
Christ. Analytically considered, it is predomi-
nantly educational ; symbolically considered, it
is an outline of Christian ethics. That it is
a law for the inner life appears unmistaka-
bly in the preface, as also in the first, se-
cond, and tenth commandments, but especially
in the law: "Thou shalt noc covet" [vid.
Comm. on Rom. vii.). As the foundation of the
whole legislation, it is divided into laws that are
predominantly religious or ceremonial, and laws
that relate predominantly to social or moral
life — a proof that it itself, as being the thto-
cratic doctrine of life, or outline of rules for
the sanctificalion of personal life, comprises the
elements of dogmatics and ethics. In its practi-
cal application, Christian dogmatics has rightly
ascribed to it three uses, of which the first
\usus civilis'] is permanent in the Christian
state, the third \usus normativus'] is permanent
in the Christian Church, and the second [msus
elenchticus'] declares the permanent connection
between the other two. The integrity of the
ten commandments must be maintained with all
earnestness. The prohibition of images is by
no means a mere prohibition of idols; the com-
mand respecting the Sabbath is by no means
merely identical with ihe ceremonial law of
Leviticus; it is an imperishable law of humanity
as much as is the law: "Thou shalt not kill."
As to the division into two tables, the enumera-
tion of the commandments, the distinction be-
tween the prohibitions in the commandments,
and the commandments in the prohibitions, the
reduction of the ten commandments to two fun-
damental ones (Matt. xxii. 38), and of the two
to one (Rom. xiii. 10; James ii. 10), we refer to
the appropriate theological discussions, only
remarking further, that as early as in Deutero-
nomy the spiriiualization of the ten command-
ments, in the direction of the prophets, is begun.
We may also refer to the feature presented in
an exegetical view of the narrative, that Moses,
when the ten commandments were sounded oui,
stood as an interpreter amongst the people ;
according to which, this moment is to be re-
172
KXODUS.
garded as myatcrious in the highest degree. —
The ten cnrnmnndments as tlie ten words (of the
Spirit, nngelic words). As the ten fundamental
doctrines of heavenly wisdom. The ten words
as the ten commandments of God : ten rocks of
the earth, ten lightnings of heaven. — As the ten
thunders which resound through all spaces and
times. As the testimonies of God in behalf of
the dignity and high destiny of man, but also as
the testimonies against his sin. As the testimo-
nies both of his (formal) freedom and his (mate-
rial) bondage.* As characteristic features of
personality.
2. Outline of the Sacrificial Rites. Chapter xx.
18-26.
The enslaved feelings of the people in their
terror at the manifestations of the majesty and
justice of God, are, primarily, the source of
the lay order, the desire for a mediator between
th m and God ; secondly, the source of an out-
ward sacrificial system; thirdly, the source of the
hierarchy. Fleeing from God and standing afar
otf, in other words, slavish fear, makes laymen.
" Speak thou with us, and we will hear." And
the reason is: "lest we die." The true priest
runs the hazard of dying as he approaches God.
Thus Aaron stands with his censer of incense
between the dead and the living (Num. xvi. 48).
But the perfect higb-priest comes near to God
tlirough the fiery flame of the great judgment
(.ler XXX. 21). — Also the lay feeling looks on the
protective terrors of the law as deterrent terrors
(vcr. 18). The fear of death is, to a certain de-
gree, wholesome, but is also a dangerous source
of a slavish disposition (Heb. ii. 15). — In the
terrors of the law lies an element of temptation
on account of man's fear of death ; but in them-
selves these terrors are designed only to test men
and to fill them with the pious fear of God which
avoids sin. Moses emers, as a true mediator of
his people, into the darkness before God. That
he is a true priest without priestly dignity, much
more than Aaron is, he has shown by his inter-
cessions. The same holds of all true prophets,
even in the philosopher's mantle; they have
more sacerdotal worth than all merely nominal
priests. Nevertheless the enthralled state of the
people's heart necessitates the institution of sa-
crifices and of priests. Yet it is strictly limited.
Firft, the people are never to forget that Jeho-
vah has spoken with them immediately from
lieaven, that He therefore may so speak again in
the future, and that therefore all mediation must
have for its object this immediate intercourse.
Hence most of all the false, pretended mediation
through idols must be rejected. Sacrifices, how-
ever, are mediatory. But a simple altar of earth
is declared to be sufficient for the sacrificial ser-
vice. Extravagance is excluded from the sacri-
ficial rites. Here, moreover, there is nothing
caid, by way of anticipation, about sin-offer-
ings. But all places at which Jehovah manifests
Himself as a covenant and redeeming God are
to be sanctuaries. As an enhancement of the
* [By formal freedom U meant the natural ability to choose
between right and wron^; hy material (otherwise called by
German writers real) freedom, is meant the actual confor-
iiiity of the will to the requirements of duty. Material bon-
d.iKe ( Unfreihp.it, " imfreedora ") therefore means a state of
disinrliDHtioa to obey the law. — Te.J
dignity of the altar, it is allowed to be made of
stones, but this permission is limited in two par,
ticulars (vers. 26, 26). The Spirit of revelation
has foreseen that men's disposition to make a
merit of works may transform the altar, the place
where God holds sway as a Judge and a Saviour,
into a theatrical stage for the exhibition of hn-
man pomp. So unostentatiously does the Levitical
sacrificial system begin, and begins with the
assumption that the people have long before felt
the need of offering sacrifices, and that this feel-
ing is to be checked rather than increased, ffe
must, however, everywhere distinguish between
the sacrifi ial rites and the priesthood whicli
Jehovah takes under His charge, and the barba-
rous outgrowths which have in fact sprung from
these religious impulses.
•3. Outline, of the Civil Law for the Regulation of thi
Social Life of the People. Chaps, xxi -xxiii.
It is a noticeable feature of this law that U
begins with a regulation concerning the emanci-
pation of the Hebrew serf. While the idea of
emancipation is conditioned and limited by the
traditional customs and laws, yet it is evident
from the first breath of the law that it breathes
freedom, that freedom is its end and aim. To
this corresponds also the heading. Though the
first verse may be translated, " These are the
legal ordinances, or the punitive regulations"—
yet through the whole section the idea prevails,
" These are the rights." It is not acts of injus-
tice that are chiefly treated of, but rights, the
protection of human worth, the sanctity and
inviolability of life, as opposed to the assaults of
sin and unrighteousness. Thus then this section
also, like the ethical law and the ritual law,
points to the New Testament, the New Testa-
ment freedom.
a. Men-servants' and maid-servants' rights of
freedom, xxi. 1-11.
b. Inviolability of life, especially as relates to
regard for parents and pregnant women, vers.
12-23.
c. Inviolability of the body and its members,
vers. 24-27.
d. Protection against injury to life, to ser-
vants, and even to cattle, caused by the careless-
ness of others, vers. 28-36.
«. Protection of property against theft, injury
to fields, and infidelity to trusts; and the settle-
ment of collisions and distinctions thus arising,
xxii. 1-15.
/. The rights of a seduced virgin, vers. 16, 17.
g Maintenance of theocratic morals, or pro-
tection of the moral dignity of the Israehtes.
vers. 18-20.
h. Inviolability of strangers, widows, and or-
phans, vers. 21-24.
i. Protection of the poor against usurers, vers.
25-27.
J. The rights of magistrates andof the sanc-
tuary, vers. 28-30.
k. Sanctity of the use of flesh for food, ver. 3..
I. Saoredness of courts and testimony, even
to the exclusion of a false philanthropy towaril'
the poor, xxiii. 1-3.
DOCTRTNAL AND HOMILETIC APPENDIX.
173
m. Self-respect as shown in noble-minded con-
duct towards enemies and the poor, in the avoid-
ance of fellowship with the persecutors of the in-
nocent, and in abstaining from bribery, and from
contempt for strangers, vers. 4-9.
n. Sanctity of the theocratic land, of the Sab-
bath, of religious speech (avoidance of the names
of the gods), of the three great annual feasts,
vers. 10-17.
0. Preservation of the purity of the sacrificial
rites, of the harvest, of the eating of flesh (par-
ticularly by avoiding lieatheuish luxury, oj'rf. the
exegesis), vers. 18, 19.
p. Sacredness of the angel of revelation, or of
the divine guidance of Israel, vers. 20-22.
q. Sacredness of the promised land. Strict
exclusion of all idolatry, accompanied by all
kinds of blessings from Jehovah (abundance of
food, health, blessing of children, long life, dread-
fulness and invincibility for enemies), and the
gradual expulsion, through superior moral force,
of all enemies, vera. 23-31.
r. Avoidance of ruinous religious fellowship
with the heathen, vers. 32, 33.
These laws are evidently all rich in religious
and moral lessons which can, when generalized,
be homiletically appropriated without taking
away from them the poiiitedness of the concrete
expressions. Thus, un the basis of this section,
one may speak of the leading features of the dig-
nity and rights of man, of the right of freedom,
and the limitations of it (referring to Paul's state-
ment of domestic duties), and of the inviolability
of bodily life. Also of reverence for woman, the
protection of virgins, of carefulness, of the law
of moral distinctions. It will not be necessary
to call special attention to all the individual ideas
of the section. In the exegetical remarks we
have already observed that the much misunder-
stood law of retaliation ("eye for eye," etc.)
does not here appear to be dictated by a judi-
cial demand for punishm'Ut, but by a desire
strongly to express the inviolability of the dig-
nity of man.
4. Ratification of the Covenant. Chap. xxiv.
The legal coven.ant among the covenants be-
tween Jehovah and His people (Rom. ix.4). — The
common feature of all covenants. All proceed
from God as institutions of free grace. All pre-
suppose a voluntary compliance on the part of
men. In all of them God's faithfulness and
free gift tower up ahove man's unfaithfulness
and needinesa. But all of them may, througii
human unfaithfulness, be invalidated for genera-
tions. All have a peculiar character in reference
to the divine promise and human obligation,
although the promise is always God's word, and
the obligation assumed by man is faith. In all
of them the general object is heavenly salvation,
but in every covenant this object has a special
form. The series of successive covenants indi-
cates the successive developments of revelation,
or of the foundation of the kingJom of God.
a. The great sacredness of the covenant, indi-
cated by the several degree"? of nearness of ap-
proach to Jehovah, vers. 1 and 2. It is one
of the lofty strokes of Old Testament descrip-
tion, that Moses in his approach to God is made
to disappear from the woild. The priests
do not attain the height of the prophet; they
mast worship fnim afar, and do not ascend one
step higher than the seventy elders, the repre-
sentatives of the people. 'I' he people who are
represented by this Old Testament mediation are
primarily represented by the prophetic media-
tion of Moses.
b. The voluntary assent of the people. In the
church of God there should be no thought of a
traditional, or of an enforced, assent; none espe-
cially of one violently compelled or secured by
craft. The unanimity of the covenant comicunity
is a beautiful picture, but soon darkened.
t. The covenaat agreement, ver. 4. Riligious
I ovenants have to do nut with merely vague
feelings, but with definite (even written) words,
vows, and decisions.
d. The ratification of the covenant, vers. 4-8.
The altar, with the twelve pillars, denotes an
expression of faith embracing the whole of God's
people. Only young men, only spiritual youth,
are fitted to negotiate a new form of faith and
covenant. They begin their sacrifices not with
sin-offerings, for here is nothing factitious, but
with burnt- offerings and peace-offerings, — with
the feeling, "To God alone in the highest be
honor !" But on the basis of so sacred a covenant
the need of sin-offerings will soon appear. — The
covenant offering is spiritualized by reading from
the book of the law. Where the intelliuibie word
of God is wanting, true sacrifices also are want-
ing. The blood of the covenant, too, is effica-
cious only when a half of it is sprinkled on the
congregation, i. <-., on their conscience (Heb. x.
22). What else is meant by the sprinkling of
the altar with the blood, than that man promises
to Jehovah a surrender of himself with his pos-
sesnions and his blood?
e. Feast of the covenant, vers. 9-11. A glo-
rious type of the New Testament. Here Moses,
the priests, and the elders are united. When
will the time come when the prophets and priests
and elders of the church of God are wholly
united? They ascend together to the heights of
the mountain; but how high? A mystery of
blessed experience for God's church! They see
the God of Israel, and do not die. Under His
feet is no cloud, no thunder and lightning, but
the crystal-clear, blue groundwork of God's abso-
lute fidelity. They do not die from the sight of
God; they eat and drink, they celebrate a sacred
festive meal before God — a testival introductory
to the festivals of thousands of years.
/. The forty days and forty nights which Moses
spent on the mountain, or the covenant writing,
vers. 12-18. The dayti, or hours, of the first in-
spiration pass by; then begins the sacred work,
which is to transform inspiration into disposi-
tion. This law of life holds for the church of
God in general, as well as in particular. Moses
seems to have disappeared in the darkness of
the mountain. Jesus seems to have disappeared
in the wilderness, the Spirit of the church in the
monasteries, Luther on the Wnrthurg. Thisisthe
time of trial. He labors on the height of the moun-
tain, in the depths of prophetic souls. Meantime
Aaron and Hur attend to the duties of their subor-
dinate office at the foot of Sinai. But again the top
of the mountainis now concealed. Moses seems to
be lost in the cloud, as if in the other world, and the
174
EXODUS.
glory of the Lord on the lop of the mountain
seems again to the people like a consuming fire.
Meanwhile Moses, the genius of the congrega-
tion, goes into the midst of the cloud. But very
often does the dangerous waiting time of forty
days and nights recur.
III. The Idea (or Vision) and the Ordinance
of the Tabernacle. Chaps, xxv.-xxxi.
1. The Spiritual and Elementary Prerequisilps for
the Tabernacle or Dwelling-place of Ood.
Vers. 1-8.
The one fundamental requisite is the heave-
offering, the contributions furnished by Israel,
at Jehovah's suggestion indeed, but the free gift
of faith and love. Voluntariness is to be, and
continue to be, the soul of the house of God.
The material requisites represent all nature,
as the fundamental requisite represents the una-
nimity of the congregation.
The noblest materials from the mineral king-
dom: gold, siver, copper, precious stones. The
noblest from the vegetable kingdom : acacia
wood, cotton, oil, spices, incense. The noblest
from the animal kingdom: costly skins and hair-
cloths. Thus the finest materials, together with
the most beautiful and significant colors, are to
be used on the building.
Jehovah wishes His people to honor themselves
also by giving Him tiis honor in a decent dwell-
ing. But lie also wishes to have a dwelling not
essentially better than those of His people,
namely, provisionally a tent (vid. 2 Sam. vii.
7). It ia an extreme, therefore, when a church
dishonors itself in its style of wo-ghip, and gives
no indication that the Lord is its .ring; but it is
also an extreme, when the pomp of the worship
or of the temple divests the Lo.'d of His loving-
kindness. For, that He desires to dwell amongst
His people is another way of saying that He
wishes to exhibit the reconciliation of His abso-
lute majesty with His kind condescension.
2. The Image or Pattern on the Mount. Ver. 9.
Here, where theocratic art most closely bor-
ders on the general idea of art, appears distinctly
the thought of the ideal image as the real soul
of art. The tabernacle is to rest on an ideal:
this is the idea of art. But the ideal is one
given by God ; and this is the iJea of sacred art.
In this, however, theocratic art is distinguished
from that of common men, that it makes beauty
subserve a sacred purpose. But the object of
the tabernacle, in so far as it is a symbol, is to
serve as the image of the kingdom of God ; in
so far as it is a type, it is the seed-kernel out of
which the New Testament kingdom of God is to
grow. It is a fundamental law of all religious ar-
tistic and architectural plans, that beautifulforms
must be blended with religious and moral ends.
3. The Organic Development of the Tabernacle.
Chaps. XXV. 10-xxx.
The essential thing, as well as that towards
which everything points, in the sanctuary, is
the ark of the covenant, the symbol of the cove-
nant, of the re-union of the people with God, the
place where Jehovah makes His abode and His
revelations. It has two meanings: it is Jeho-
vah's throne, but it is also Israel's highest altar.
From the throne the movement is downwards to
the table of shew-bread and the candlestick.
Corresponding to this direction of Jehovah's
descent is the dwelling, the tabernacle itself, S3
divided into the holy place and the Holy of ho-
lies. To this descent of Jehovah from above
towards the people corresponds the move-
ment of the people from below upwards. Their
starting-point is the altar of burnt-offering,
whose place was in the court. From here the
priests in the name of the people approach
Jehovah in the symbolic sacerdotal garments, in
consequence of their consecration. From the
altar of burnt-offering they go out with the sac-
rificial blood and with the incense into the holy
place as far as to the altar of incense. From
this point only the high-priest can go further,
and approach Jehovah in the Holy of holies
with the blood of atonement on the day of atone-
ment. But the movement of the priest depends
not only on this chief condition, the sacrificial
blood, but also, first, on his filled hand, tbe
heave-offering of the Lord ; secondly, on the
priestly ablution, and the laver serving this end;
thirdly, on the anointing of the sanctuary and
of all its utensils, and on the incense. — Jeho-
vah's temple, therefore, is a composite thing,
the place of meeting between Jehovah and His
people, ideally the residence of Jehovah as well
as of the people. So also every church. But
before everything else the manifestation of God
is there, — the foundaMnn before any human ser-
vice is rendered. So, in the church, the sacra-
ments and the word of God. Jehovah lets the
people >feel His nearness by His dwelling in the
Holy of holies. Here is accomplished the sym-
bolical union with the people through the high-
priest. At the table of shew-bread is accom-
plished the symbolical fellowship or communion
of the priests under the divine illumination of
the seven-fold candlestick. — The three altars in
the temple of the Lord, and their significance,
viz. the altar of burnt-offering, the altar of in-
cense, the mercy-seat over the ark. — The three
rooms of the sanctuary and their significance:
the court, the holy place, and the Holy of ho-
lies. — The three sacred things in the court, and
their significance: the laver, the mirrors, and
the altar of burnt-offering. — The three sacred
things in the holy place, and their significance;
the altar of incense, the table of shew-brend.
and the golden candlestick.— The three sacred
things in the Holy of holies, and their signifi-
cance: the cherubim, the ark of the law, and
the mercy-seat. — The three acts of the religious
festivals: the offering up of the most valuable
things in the court, the surrender of the heart
at the altar of inocnsa, of prayer, and the pro-
phetio representation of a surrender of the life,
of the expiatory hiood for the effecting of re-
union with God and of a vision of God.— The three
significations of sacrifices : sacrifices as something
rendered to tbe laws of the congregation, sacri-
fices as a symbol of the movement of the heart,
sacrifices as a type of the future perfect saorifioe.
As the cherubim hover over the ark of the l»w,
so does God's dominion in the world protect His
law. His law and His Gospel, the latter repre-
sented by the mercy-seat. The mercy-seat de-
DOCTRINAL AND HOMILETIO APPENDIX.
175
notes the ezpiatioa of the law by means of the
sacrificial blood. The altar of incense stands
midway between the altar of burnt-offering and
the mercy-seat ; for prayer, symbolized by the
incense (the sacrifice of the lips), is the living
soul of all sacrifices. — The one general signifi-
cance of the whole temple : the symbolico-typi-
cal arrangement and educational use of the ritual
for the whole congregation. — As such in all its
features exposed to misunderstanding : as if the
notion of a local dwelling-place of God excluded
His omnipresence, the feeling of which alone
can give significance to that notion (1 Kings viii.
27) ; as if the court were designed to exclude those
who are not Jews, when it is designed to attract
them (Isa. Ivi. 7); as if sacrifices were a meri-
torious service, and not rather a confession of
poverty of spirit; as if the priests were to keep
the people far away from Jehovah, and not
rather train them up for Him. — The significance
of the forms of the tabernacle, of the utensils,
especially of the colors; vid. the Introduction to
Kevelation.
4. Sezaleel, the Religious Master-Workman.
Chap. xxxi.
The gift of art, of artistic genius, a gift of
God. A gift of God in the narrower, but also
in the wider sense. — The cultivation of the gift
till mastery is attained. The assistants of the
master-workman. The artist's vocation, akin to
that of the priest. — The law of artistic creation :
it must in everything proceed from the funda-
mental thought of the work, from its end and
object, ver. 7. — The Sabbath as a condition of
the building of the holy sanctuary. — Even the
most common work is not to be profaned through
the want of the Sabbath. Through the Sabbath
all the works of believers are to acquire a festal
character, a Sunday brightness.
5. The Tables of the Law. Ver. 18.
These were not the beginning, but the conclu-
sion, of the covenant-transaction. Their two-
sidedness: of stone, and yet full of myterious
writings of God; pieces of rock, breaths of hea-
ven; inexorable demands, God's thoughts of
peace. One law, and yet two tables, compre-
hending all duties to God and to man. — The
law a work of God, a gift of God, a testi-
mony of God.
IV. The Breach of the Covenant, or ike
Oolden Calf. Chap, xxxii.
In the history of the kingdom of God is
always found this contrast of mountain and
valley (Moses lost, as it were, on the
mountain, the rush for the false worship
of the golden calf in the valley; the
prophets in their visions, the people wavering
between apostasy and legality; Christ on the
mount of transfiguration, the disciples at their
wits' end; and the scene of apparent defeat at
the foot of the mountain, Luther on the Wart-
Ijurg, and the inhabitants of Zwickau, Carlstadt,
even Master Philip in the valley). Whenever
the people are making themselves a golden calf,
mysterioua things are taking place on the moun-
tain between God and His elect. Whenever Moses
seems on the mountain to be lost in God, the
people at the foot of the mountain prepare for
themselves a golden calf. — He delayed on the
mountain: things do not move fast enough for
the spiritually sluggish people. " Make us gods,"
images of God. Apostasy always begins with the
religious worship of images ; it is the first step
on the downward road of apostasy. Therefore,
also, the second commandment must continue to
be distinct from the first. According to Bom. i.,
moreover, idolatry results from the downward ten-
dency of the use of symbols. This does not im-
ply the prohibition of everything symbolic in re-
ligion, but it does show that it should be put
under the control of God's Spirit. But from the
earliest times pictorial representations of God,
as well as the religious veneration of sacred images
in general, have led to idolatry. — " For we know
not." They wish to know when they ought to
believe; hence they fall a prey to a superstitious
belief when they ought to know. Weak priests
have always been inclined to help a sensuous
people in their tendency to image-worship. — The
priest in vain seeks to suppress the demands of
the people by the crafty policy of requiring great
sacrifices. Bad priests increase these require-
ments of offerings of gold and silver and pennies
till they become enormous, and the darkened
spirits of the people acquiesce in the extremest
demands made upon them. Weak priests ima-
gine that in the requirements of offerings they
impose a restraint on the idolatrous propensity.
Faithful priests sacrifice themselves in heroic
resistance ; but they are rare. Sensuous men
will make contributions to false systems of wor-
ship a thousand times rather than to a true one.
The golden calf grows out of the memories of
Egyptian heathenism. The Israelites, it is true,
do not intend, like the Egyptians, to worship the
image of the ox, but only to have in it a symbol
of Jehovah. Immediately, however, they cry out,
" These are thy gods," not, •" That is a symbol of
thy God." Aaron, on the other hand, calls out
and proclaims a feast of Jehovah. So in a degene-
rate religion that craves images there are always
two opinions and two religions : the theologian
talks in one way; the people talk in another. In
this worship, as in heathenism, chief emphasis
is given to the worldly carousal which follows
the religious ceremonies : eating, drinking, dan-
cing, etc. — Jehovah's utterance respecting this
unseemly conduct is, " Thy people have cor-
rupted." Corrupted what? Nothing less than
everything. "Thy people," not "My people.''
Jehovah does not recognize Himself in the object
of the image-worship, ver. 8. God's judgment
on the people after this seemingly very religious
festival, ver. 9. " Let me alone, that I
may consume them." This is the normal conse-
quence of the carnal transformation of religion
into outward forms : if the people are not soon
enough healed of it, they must infallibly go to
ruin religiously, morally, and physically. — "I
will make of thee a great nation." The value of
a people consists in their choice men, those that
are faithful to God; and it is natural to think of
a holy race of elite men. But mercy rejoiceth
against (glorieth over) judgment.— In Moses'
intercession the true priest appears. Moses (like
170
EXODUS.
Abraham and Ju Jab) ia his intercession, a type of
Christ. Analysis of Moses' intercession. "Jeho-
vah repented," e. «., through Moses' intercession
the situation had been essentially altered. In
human repentance is mirrored a seeming ohange-
ableness in the unchangeable God. — Moses' de-
scent from the mount compared with the subse-
quent descent, chap, xxxiv. Here Moses is sad,
whilst the people below are jubilant; there he de-
scends with radiant face to the mourning people. —
The tumult of the people, and the two interpreta-
iations of it, that of Joshua versed in war, and that
of his master versed in the workings of men's
hearts. — Moses' anger, and the expressions of it.
First, the breaking of the tables. For such a
people, so fallen away, God's revelation has uo
more value. Next, the destruction of the golden
calf Bather no religion, if possible, than such
a caricature! From this negation a neiv life
must proceed. — Aaron's miserable excuse. The
miserable excuses of weak priests. — Lastly, the
greac punitive infliction, ver. 25 sqq. Its relative
necessity at that time, and the spiritual application
of this fact. But only the choice part of the
congregation can punish the congregation. And
the punishment continues to be sacred only
through repeated intercession before God. —
Moses' offer, ver. 32, and Jehovah's answer.
Suffering in behalf of others is conditioned on the
hope of their fellow-suffering. Forgiveness con-
ditioned on a previous visitation.
V. The Miidified Restoration of the Covenant.
Chaps, xxxiii., xxxiv.
The Israelites must break camp and wander,
in order in the future to find again their salva-
tion, to reach the promised land. So Chris-
tians must break loose from the world and wan-
der, in order to gain the new Paradise (home —
native land). So Adam and Eve had to enter on
their long pilgrimage. So Abraham (and the
patriarchs generally^. So the Christians from
Jerusalem. So the church from the East to the
West. So the Reformation. And so faith again
and again. God's summons to Israel was a so-
lemn token of grace. (1) The promise of Ca-
naan was thus renewed. But (2) indication was
given of God's future visitations destined to
attend their course. So the man of faith must
wander in order to be refined, but also in order
to be perfected. — The three great chastisements
inflicted on the fallen Israelites. — Moses' three
great intercessions, and the answer to them. —
Jehovah' s three great tokens of grace.
1. The Chastisements. Vers. 1-11.
a. The greatest and severest. The Israelites
must go to Canaan without Jehovah's going in
the midst of them. b. They must for a season
lay off their ornaments, o. The preliminary
tabernacle, Moses' tent, is moved out of the camp,
80 that the people seem to be put under a sort of
ban (of the first degree). — Because they wished
to see God with the eyes of sense in the golden
calf, they are now made dependent on the gui-
dance of the angel of God's face, the visions of
His prophet. Because they wasted the splendor
of their golden ornaments ou image-worship.
they must no longer appear before Jehovah even
with simple decorations. Because they wished
arbitrarily to institute their own form of divine
service, they must now look from afar, with awe
and longing, towards the tabernacle of God. —
The impression of the declaration of God, "Iwill
not go up in the midst of thee:" (1) The people
dimly felt that it was an evil announcement, a
punishment for their guilt. (2) Wherein lay the
punishment? In God's refusal to go with them
in the relation of immediate spiritual fellowship,
" Thy religion," He says, " cannot yet be a re-
ligion of the Spirit, for thou art a stiff-neoked
people," 1. e., intractable and refractory towards
the easy yoke of the word, of the spirit, of love.
(3) And yet there was clemency in the punish-
ment. The spiritual condition of the people of
God was such that they could be led only by the
angel of God's face in the form of the Ian
and the divine tokens received through the
media of visions. An immediate and unlim-
ited manifestation of God would have scattered
and annihilated the people. Even at the Chris-
tian Pentecost the religion of the Spirit involved
the people in the danger of ruin. So also many
Christian nations have remained for a long time
shut up under the guidance of visions, and they,
too, not without positive fault on their own part.
So also to many Protestants a spiritual religion
has become dangerous. — The sentence requiring
ornaments to be laid aside seems to have been
suspended when Aaron was clothed with the sa-
cerdotal ornaments. So also the ban of the
provisional tabernacle seems to have ceased with
the erection of the tabernacle proper. The pious
and humble deportment of the people under chas-
tisement is an indication of their re-adoption«-
The reconciliation of the three utterances, " My
face shall go with thee;" ''Jehovah talked with
Moses face to face;" "Thou canst not see my
face," ver. 20. — In the first case the face is the
angel of the face, the vision form (Tro^wpiiiruf).
In the second case, the duiinctne»» comprehmiibh-
nese, and familiarity of God's words (TroAti/iEpuf).
In the third case the real beholding of the divine
glory is meant (vid, the exegesis). — Joshua, the
faithful guardian of the sanctuary.
2. Moaea' three new great intercetsory Petitioni.
Vers. 13-23.
The first petition: "Show me thy way," efc
Also in behalf of Jehovah's people. Answer:
My face, as guide to the way, shall be the liying
way (John xiv. 6). — Second petition : Make it
evident that Thou Thyself art going with us,
when Thy face guides us before all the world by
distinguishing signs. Answer: Divine assent on
the ground of Moses' intercession and acoepts-
bleness. — Third petition : Let me see Thy glory.
The divine answer : Conditional assent [vH. tte
exegesis). Observe the refusal in the assent,
and the assent in the refusal (Gethsemane?).
The old saying: Man cannot see God without
dying, (1) true in the sense of divine revelation;
(2) always false as conceived by the popular su-
perstition. Only by this dying of the natural
man under the sight of God does man come to
the true life — Observe how God's answers mako
the human petitioner bolder and bolder* hov.
DOCTRINAL AND HOMILETIC APPENDIX.
177
nevertheless, even the boldness of the human
petition is continually controlled by divine wis-
clom and that, for the petitioner's owd good.^
The believer stands on the rock — even in the
protecting cleft of the rook close to God, and sees
all His goodness pass by. Not iu one single
view, but piece by piece, does the believer behold
the glory of the Lord. Even the faint impres-
sion of the manifestation of the glory of God in
the sphere of our life's vision might overpower
and kill us, if Jehovah did not place us in a cleft
of a rock and hold His hand over ua (the roek-
olefts of joyous youth — of dark night— of civil
security— of childlike freedom from care, e(c.).—
The great afterward. The sequel of experience,
of the hour of death, of the end of the world.
Not till the evening of the world do all the pe-
riods of the world back to its morning come truly
to light. "At evening time it shall be light. '
3. The Three great Transformations of Anger to
Grace. Chap, xxxiv. 1-35.
a. Tke gift of new tables of the law, in connec-
tion with which Moses' co-operation is more
positively brought out. b. Sinai glorified by
Jehovah's proclamation of Jehovah's grace, c.
Moses' shining face upon his return from the
mountain with the new tables of the law. — The
new tables of the law in their relation to the
first. (1) They are as to contents entirely like
the first, as if nothing had happened in the mean-
time. (2) They are not like the first in their
relation, for they presuppose the apostasy that
has taken place. Hence they are supplemented
by the proclamation of grace. — Jehovah's grand
proclamation of Jehovah's grace. Jehovah pro-
claimed not only His law from Sinai, but also
His grace. The history of this fact is an eter-
nal testimony against all distortions of the Old
Testament Jehovah, of the law, of Sinai. Like-
wise the erroneous notion of many favorably in-
clined to the church and to Christianity, that
Sinai and the law proclaimed only a curse, is
corrected in this history. True, this grand pro-
clamation of grace does not annul the law, jus-
tice, and judgment, but it puts this revelation of
God's severity in the right light. — ^The two parts
of the grand proclamation of Jehovah from Sinai.
The first part, concerning Jehovah's mildness:
merciful, gracious, long-suffering, etc. The se-
cond part, concerning His severity: He lets no
one go unpunished (and so, nothing unpunished),
and visits the misdeed of fathers upon children
and children's children, etc. {vid. chap. xx. ). —
The threefold expression for the forgiveness of
sin: He forgives iniquity (perverseness), trans-
gression (apostasy, desertion), and sin (failure).
— The surprise of the lawgiver, to whom at this
moment Sinai has become a throne of graoe ; and
his humble prostration and adoration. Compare
Elijah's gesture, when Jehovah passed by him
with a still, small voice (1 Kings xix.). After this
experience Moses comes back once more to his pe-
tition, " Jehovah, go with us, in the midst of us "
Jehovah's reason for not doing so, viz., that He
cannot go in the midst of them because they are
a stiff-necked people, Moses reverses: just be-
cause they are stiff-necked, he prays Jehovah to
go with them. He almost forgets for awhile
Jehovah's character as lawgiver under the im-
pression of the proclamation of grace, as was also
the case with many at the time of the Ueforma-
tion, and as is still often the case, when there is
a deficiency of spirituality. But Jehovah, while
denying the request, offers a rich compensation.
Instead of the quiet religion of the spirit, which
cannot yet come, they are to be distinguished by
a grand religion of miracles (which is a prere-
quisite of the future religion of the spirit, in no
sense a contradiction of it). But the greatness
of this promise is limited by the demands on
which the theocratic covenant is founded, vers.
11-26 {vid. the exegesis). — In conclusion it is
said, " Write thou these words;" for every cove-
nant with God, especially this one, is a very
definite thinj;. — Moses' marvellously exalted mood
on the mountain. The forty days and nights, which
lire fast-days only because they are feast-days
(vid. Comra. on Matt. iv.). — Again ten words. The
law infiniiely simple, but in its very simplicity in-
finitely profound. — The glorious picture of Moses
descending from the mount. Comparison of this
wilhthefirstdescent. The situation ischangediu
two respects : the people have repented, and Jeho-
vah has proclaimed His grace (at the first descent
he may have had, to speak dogmatically, the
usus primus of the law iu mind; at this descent
there was a presentiment of the usus tertius; the
usus secundus he -prohsMy had in roindboth times).
He did not know that the skin of his face shone.
The effect of his shining face, ver. 30 sqq. For
the people this reflection of Moses' intercourse
with Jehovah seemed almost more puoitive than
the gloomy expressions of the law. For the
common people and for rude sensibilities in all
classes this is still the case: monastic rules
rather than evangelical joy (oomp. 2 Cor. iii.).
With such a radiant face should preachers espe-
cially descend from the pulpit. But how many
afterwards appear as if they had spoken in a
state of somnambulism or a factitious ecstasy.
But with all the faithful the feeling always is,
"How lovely are the feet," even the feet, still
more the peaceful splendor on the countenance.
VI. TTie Erection of the Tahemacle.
Chaps, xxxv.-xl.
The erection of the tabernacle pre-supposes
the restoration of the covenant between Jehovah
and His people, and therefore the integrity of
the theocratic religion. This prerequisite is iu
substance fulfilled at every erection of a house
of God, But there are splendid temples which
are in a true sense founded on the decay and
disfiguration of religion; and the tendency to
such establishments appears also in our own
time. — The three parts of the tabernacle have a
permanent significance: the court is continued
in the room for catechetical instruction, in bap-
tism and confirmation ; the holy place is repre-
sented by the nave and the sprmon; the Holy of
holies by the mystery of the choir. The mediae-
val church sought to shut off the choir again, as
if it were an Old Testament Holy of holies;
modern Protestantism tends to reduce the choir
to a mere part of the nave and to abolish church
disoipliue and the distinction between auditors
and communicants. — The sacred forms symbo-
178
EXODUS,
lize the legal ordinances of the kingdom of God ;
the sacred colors symbolize the moods and cha-
racters which animate that kingdom (blue=:
fidelity, purple=royal splendor, scarlet^blood
and devotion, white=purity and righteousness).
On the constituent parts of the temple, vid. the
exegesis. As the tabernacle became a temple,
so ought the temple in the New Testament times
to become again a simple tabernacle (Amos ix.
11, 12). — The tabernacle as the original form
and mother of all true temples, churches, cha-
pels, and houses of prayer. All golden things
denote that which is pure, permanent, eternal;
all silver things, that which is valuable and
glittering to human view; all brazen things,
that which is strong and durable.
1. The Sabbath as the prime requisite of all festi-
vals, all religious fellowship, all houses of God.
Without the Sabbath, no church. Ch. xxxv. 1-3.
2. Voluntariness, especially the voluntary of-
ferings and co-operation of all, is the basis on
which the house and service of God are founded.
Vers. 4^29.
3. Consecrated art in the service of religion, vers.
80-35. It is not itself religion. Nor does it
domineer over religion. But it is also not di-
vorced from religion, least of all hostile to it.
Immoral painting, music, poetry: the most odi-
ous mockery of true art. True art with its
works, a great gift of God.
The noble industry of the laborers on the
house of God, xxxvi. 1-7. "The people bring
too much," a censure, and yet a praise.
4. The preparation of the dwelling, vers. 8—38.
According to the divine idea, the ark was the
first thing, the dwelling the last. In the human
execution of it, the dwelling takes precedence.
5. The ark, xxxvii. 1—9. The staves of the
ark: the ark is transportable, it is not abso-
lutely fixed to any place. The cherubim, which
protect the law, represent the fundamental forms
of God's sovereign rule (are certainly not repre-
sentative forms of terrestrial creatures). The
cherubim hold sway over not only the law, but
especially also the mercy-seat (the Gospel).
6. The table, vers. 10-16. A table for hea-
venly food (certainly not for human works).
7. The candlestick, vers. 17-24. The spiritual
flower of earth adorned with the spiritual stars
of heaven.
8. The altar of incense, y era. 2h-29. In prayer
the heart is dissolved, as it were, through sighs,
renunciations, vows, home-sickness, and tears,
into a cloud of smoke ascending to God.
9. The anointing oil, ver. 29. Symbol of the
Spirit, mild, soft and healing; burning, con-
suming, refining. Designed for the anointing
of all the objects in the sanctuary, since every-
thing is to be consecrated to the Spirit.
10. The altar of burnt-offering, xxxviii. 1-7.
The place where the fire of the divine authority
consumes human offerings is a holy place. But
it is a wild notion that it signifies the fire of
hell, or perchance the fires of the Inquisition.
Rather might we invert the thing, and see even
in the fire of hell a work of divine compassion ;
yet we are not to obliterate the distinction : fire
of the loving, and fire of the judicial, visitation.
11. The laver, and the mirrors of the women on its
base, xxxviii. 8. The priests, like the women,
should present themselves in a worthy manner
before God; these purified from the dust of
worldliness, those adorned with a consecration
which can appear before the eyes of God.
12. The court, vers. 9-20. The court is larger
than the sanctuary ; it embraces the whole. But
fanaticism recognizes only fanum and profanum,
no intermediate transitional space ; yet it deems
itself able violently to extend its fanum over all
space, and conceives that it transforms the court
itself into a fanum by its market for sacrifices.
13. The estimation of the expenses of the sanctuary,
vers. 21-31. Church-property, church-taxes,
church-accounts, the work of church-architects,
should be kept away from the control of hierar-
ehical caprice and hypocritical misuse, and ex-
amined and consecrated as if before the eyes of
God.
14. The priestly garments, xxxix. 1-81.
15. The completion of the work, and the presenta-
tion of it, vers. 32-41. The joy over a well-
finished house of God. The inspiring event of a
church founded without defects, and at last
completely erected. Not always are churches
constructed without defects (falling arches,
towers out of line, disproportions). With all
changes of forms the idea of the sanctuary
should always continue to be the regulating
principle. Yet the abundance or splendor of the
symbolic element may imperil the spirituality of
worship itself.
16. The erection of the tabernacle, and its mira-
culous dedication, ch. xl. Three particulars are
clearly distinguished: u. The erection itself, in
connection with which the date is significant:
on the first day of the first month (of the second
year). The ark again takes precedence in the
order, and the sacerdotal ornamentation comes
last. b. The human dedication begins very
significantly with the jurning of incense;
then follows the burnt-offering with the sin-
offering, c. But the completion of the dedica-
tion proceeds from Jehovah; in symbolic forms
He conies down over and into the dwelling.
And this same sign, the pillar of cloud and fire,
represents the life and movement of the taber-
nacle, its theocratic dignity and sacredness,
vers. 36—38. On the other hand, temples aban-
doned by God and the spirit of worship are the
most desolate of houses. Thus Christ designated
the temple, while it was being re-built, as a tem-
ple going to ruin. Flourishing temples of the
heart make flourishing temples; and these really
flourish when in turn they make flourishing
temples of the heart.
ADDITIONAL HOMILETICAL HINTS FROM
STAEKE.
IVom the Preface to Exodus.
The use of this book and of its contents is
described by Dr. Luther, in his Preface to the
Old Testament, as follows: There are three
kinds of pupils of the law: (1) Those who hear
the law and despise it, and lead a profligate life
without fear. To these the law does not come,
and they are denoted by the calf- worshippers in
the wilderness, on whose account Moses broke
the tables in two, and did not bring the law lo
them (ch. xxxii. 6, 19). (2) Those who under-
DOCTRINAL AND HOMILETIC APPENDIX.
179
take to fulfil it with their own strength, without
grace. These are denoted by those who could
not look on Moses' face when he brought the
tables the second time (xxxiv. 30). To these
the law comes, but they cannot bear it ; there-
fore they put a veil over it, and lead a hypocri-
tical life with outward works of the law, which
life, nevertheless, is all made sin by the law
when the veil is taken away; for the law shows
that our power is nothing without Christ's grace.
(3) Those who see Moses clearly without a veil.
These are those who understand the meaning of
the law, how it demands impossible things.
There sin walks in its strength ; there death is
mighty; there Goliath's spear is like a weaver's
beam, and his spear's head weighs six hundred
shekels of iron, so that all the children of Israel
flee before him, except that David alone, Christ
our Lord, redeems us from all Here faith
and love must have the mastery over all laws,
and hold them all in their power.
The main goal of this book is, in general,
Christ, who Is the man about whom it all has to
do. He is in this book portrayed before our
eyes by many types, as e. g. by the redemption
out of Egypt, by the Passover-lamb, by the
manna, by the rock which gave the water, by
the tabernacle and its many utensils. For all
these images were to serve more distinctly to
image forth the future character and office of
the promised Redeemer. It is Christ for whose
sake the Israelites enjoyed so many divine bene-
fits, were preserved during oppression, led out of
Egyptian bondage, fed with manna in the wilder-
ness, and furnished with water from the rock,
saved from ruin, notwithstanding their idolatry,
and received back into the covenant; the sanc-
tuary of God was erected among them, and their
frequent murmuring and disobedience borne by
God with great patience and long-suffering.
(From H. E. Rambach.) In particular, the ob-
ject of this book is: (1) to exhibit the truth of the
divine promise of the increase of Abraham's seed,
in its fulfilment; (2) to promote God's honor,
which revealed itself in the case of Pharaoh by
frightful angry judgments, in the case of the
Israelites, by manifold miracles in their exodus
from Egypt, in their preservation in the wilder-
ness, and at the giving of the law: (3) to
strengthen the faith that God knows how to save
His church from complete suppression and to
deliver it from temptation ; (4) to give an ont-
line of the future experiences of the church in
this world. For why should God have had the
bondage and oppression of the Israelites in
Egypt, their redemption from it, and their being
led in the wilderness, so particularly described,
and the tabernacle with its instruments and ves-
sels even twice described, except in order the
more distinctly to portray Christ's work of re-
demption, and the redemption and guidance of
His church in general, and of a soul in particu-
lar, out of the spiritual Egypt? For the church
of the New Testament after Christ's death first
had rest, and was edified, and multiplied greatly
(Acts ix. 31), like the Israelites after the death
of Joseph. Thereby it came into a state of op-
pression, and had to endure tea persecutions •
when it had been refined thereby, and cried for
deliverance, it was delivered in the time of Con-
stantino the Great, saw its enemies overthrown
and itself exalted, was refreshed with manna,
the bread and water of life. But in its prosper-
ous days it did not long remain pure in its doc-
trine, lapsed finally even into idolatry and ordi-
nances of men, till God by the Reformation
destroyed such idolatry, and the pure doctrine
and the true divine service was erected as the
proper sanctuary of God So it is with a soul
which lives at first in outward rest and peace : but
if God begins mightily to call it out of the domi-
nion of sin and of Satan, then Satan begins to
rage and to oppress more violently.
Oa i. 11 (from the Hallische Biblische Ges-
chichte). Egypt had heretofore been «, good
refuge ; now it became to them a prison ; and
they at last perceived what their forefathers
had brought on them in selling Joseph into
Egypt as a slave: they themselves are there
made slaves. Those who before had been honored
as lords are now despised as slaves ; those whom
one Pharaoh raised up the other sought to op-
press. They were divided into certain gangs:
over ten Israelites, as it seems, was put an Is-
raelitish ofEcer, and over ten such officers an
Egyptian task-master. The Israelitish officer
had to control his gang, keep them at work,
daily secure the required amount of work and
tale of bricks, and deliver it over with the reck-
oning to the Egyptian task-master, or be re
sponsible for it (chap. v. 14). At first they
must have had to pay heavy taxes in mo-
ney, and after they were impoverished, they
had to do servile labor. — Pithom* was the name
of a monstrous serpent which came forth out of
the marshy morass of the Nile, and wrought
great destruction of men and beasts. This city
(Raemses) is said to be the same as was after-
wards called, and known in ancient geography,
as Pelusium, According to some, the new Egyp-
tian king was named Raemses, and gave his name
to the city. Whether this city was newly built,
or enlarged, or only fortified, cannot certainly
be said. The taxes and the servile labor were
employed in so preparing the two cities that in
case of need there might be kept in them the
treasures of the kingdom, the armory, and a
strong garrison. And because both cities lay
in the land of Goshen where the Israelites dwelt,
these two strongholds were built against the
Israelites themselves, in order that they might
be the better kept under and retained in the
land. It was praiseworthy indeed in the peo-
ple, that, whereas they were under so great and
almost intolerable oppression, and at the same
time were almost superior to the Egyptians in
number, and hence might have risen up in arms
and freed themselves, or at least have gone
away armed, they did no such thing, but under
the government of God, who had destined for
them an extraordinary redemption, calmly en-
dured all their trouble.
* [Spelled Fithon in Luther's Bible, and apparently con-
founded with the classical Pj/^Aon.— Te.J
THE END.
LEVITICUS:
OE,
THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
BY
FREDERIC GARDINER, D.D.,
PKOFESSOE OP THE LITERATURE AND INTERPRETATION OP THE OLD TESATMENT
IN THE BERKELEY DIVINITY SCHOOL, MIDDLETOWN, CONN.
IN •WHICH IS INCORPORATED
A TEANSLATION OF THE GEEATER PART OF THE GERMAN
COMMENTARY ON LEVITICUS,
BY
JOHN PETER LANGE, D. D.,
PROFESSOR OP THEOLOGY IN THE UNIVERSITY OP BONN.
NEW YOEK:
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS,
743-745 BROADWAY.
COPIEIGHT, 1876.
Bt SOEIBNEB, ABMSTEONG & CO.
LEVITICUS.
THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
( K1p*5 ' ^ ^utrtxov ; Leviticus. )
" Thi Book of the Sacerdotal Theocracy, or of the Priesthood of Israel, to set forth its typical HollnesB.*
" The religious observances by which God's people might be made holy, and kept holy."— Lanqe.
INTRODUCTION.
i 1. NAME, CONNECTION, OBJECT, AND AUTHOESHIP.
The writings of Moses have reached us in a five- fold division, the several parts of which
have come to be commonly known by the names given to them in the Septuagint and Vul-
gate. In the Hebrew the whole Pentateuch is divided, as one book, into sections [Paraghi-
yoth) for reading in the synagogues on each Sabbath of the year, and the several books are
called by the first word of the first section contained in them. Thus the present book is
Klpjl = and he called; it is also called by the Eabbins in the Talmud D'jrisn B^IB ^ Law
of the Priests, and ^i^^lj? n^'in 130 =; Booi of the Law of offerings. In the Septuagint and
Vulgate this central book of the Pentateuch is called AevtnKiv [pip'Kiov) and Leoiticus (liber)
because it has to do with the duties of the priests, the sons of Levi. The Levites, as distin-
guished from the priesta, are mentioned but once, and that incidentally, in the whole book
(xxv. 32, 33).
As appears from the Hebrew name, the connection of this book with the one immedi-
ately preceding is very close. The tabernacle had now been set up, and its sacred furniture
arranged ; the book of Exodus closes with the mention of the cloud that covered it, and the
Glory of the Lord with which it was filled. Hitherto the Lord had spoken from the cloud
on Sinai ; now His presence was manifested in the tabernacle from which henceforth He
made known His will. It is just at this point that Leviticus is divided from Exodus. The
same Lord still speaks to the same people through the same mediator ; but He had before
spoken from the heights of Sinai, while now He speaks from the sacred tabernacle pitched
among His people. At the close Leviticus is also closely connected with, and yet distinctly
separated from, the book of Numbers. It embraces substantially the remaining legislation
given in the neighborhood of Sinai, while Numbers opens with the military census and other
matters preparatory to the march of the Israelites in the second year of the Exodus. Yet on
the eve of that march a number of additional commands are given in Numbers intimately
associating the two books together.
The whole period between the setting up of the tabernacle (Ex. xl. 17) and the final
departure from Mt. Sinai (Num. x.ll) was but one month and twenty days. Much of this
was occupied by the events recorded in the earlier chapters of Numbers, especially the offer-
ings of the princes on twelve days (Num. vii.) which must have almost immediately followed
the consecration of the priesta and the tabernacle (Num. vii- 1 with Lev. viii. 10, 11), and the
celebration of the second Passover (ix. 1-5) occupying seven days, and begun on the four-
teenth day of the first month. All the events of Leviticus must therefore be included within
less than the space of one month.
INTRODUCTION TO LEVITICUS.
The object of the Book is apparent from its contents and the circumstances under which
it was given, especially when considered in connection with the references to it in the New
Testament. Jehovah, having now established the manifestation of His presence among His
people, directs them how to approach Him, Primarily, this has reference, of course, to the
then existing people, under their then existing circumstances ; but as ages rolled away, and
the people were educated to higher spiritual capacity, the spiritual meaning of these direc-
tions was more and more set forth by the prophets ; until at last, when the true Sacrifice for
sin had come, the typical and preparatory character of these arrangements was fully declared
Lange (Hom. in Lev. General) says " Leviticus appears to be the most peculiarly Old Tes-
tament in its character of all the Old Testament books, since Christ has entirely removed all
outward sacrifices. It may certainly be rightly said that the law of sacrifice, or the ceremo-
nial law has been abrogated by Christianity. But if the law in general, in its outward his-
torical and literal form has been abrogated, on the other hand, in its spiritual sense, it has
been fulfilled (Gal. ii. ; Eom. iii. ; Matt, v.) ; and so it must also be said in regard to the law
of sacrifices. The sacrificial law in its idea has only been fully realized in Christianity ;— in
its principle fulfilled, realized, in Christ, to be realized from this as a basis, continually in the
life of Christians." In the Epistle to the Hebrews the character of the sacrificial system in
general, and particularly of that part of it contained in Leviticus, is clearly set forth as at
once imperfect and transitory in itself, and yet typical of, and preparatory for, " the good
things to come." A flood of light is indeed thrown back from the anti-type upon the type,
and for this reason the Old Testament is always to be studied in connection with the New;
yet on the other hand, the converse is also true, and Leviticus has still a most important
purpose for the Christian Church in that it sets forth, albeit ia type and shadow, the will of
an unchangeable God in regard to all who would draw nigh to Him. Much of the New
Testament, and especially of the Epistle to the Hebrews, can only be fully understood
through a knowledge of Leviticus. To this general object of the book may he added the
special purposes, already necessarily involved, of preserving the Israelites alike from idolatry
1 y the multiform peculiarity of their ritual, and of saving them from indolence in their wor-
ship by the exacting character of the ceremonial. The Christian Fathers, as Eusebius, SS,
Augustine, Leo, Cyril, as well as Origen and many others, speak of the book as setting
forth in types and shadows the sacrifice of Christ ; while many of them also, as Teetullian,
HS. Clement, Jerome, Chrysostom, and others, speak of the inferior purpose just men-
tioned.
Of the authorship of this book there is little need to speak, because there is really no
room for doubt. This is not the place to combat the opinions of those critics who, like Ki-
I.ISCH, hold the whole Pentateuch to have been a very late compilation from fragments of
various dates, and the Mosaic system to have been one of gradual human development. The
portions assigned by Knobel to another author than the "Elohist" are x. 16-20; xvii.-ix.f
xxiii , part of ver. 2 and ver. 3, vers. 18, 19, 22, 29-44; xxiv. 10-23 ; xxv. 18-22 ; and xxvi.j
but the reasons given " are too transparently unsatisfactory to need serious discussion."
Generally, it may be said that even those critics who question most earnestly the Mosaic
authorship of some other portions of the Pentateuch are agreed that Leviticus must have
proceeded substantially from Moses. There is really no scope in this book for the Jehovistie
and Elohistic controversy ; for although Knobel delights to point out the distinct portions
by each writer, yet the name D'il /K never occurs in Lev. absolutely, but only with a pos-
sessive pronoun marking the Deity as peculiarly Israel's God. (It is however once used,
xix. 4, for false gods). The book contains every possible mark of contemporaneous author-
ship, and there are constant indications of its having been written during the life in the
wilderness. The words used for the sanctuary are either ]3pa (4 times) or f^)0 ^i^<^ (36
times) and never any term implying a more permanent structure. For the dwellings of the
people, n'a in the sense of a house, is never used except in reference to the future habitation
of the promised land, which is the more striking because it occurs thirty-seven times in this
sense, and in all of them with express reference to the future, except xxvii. 14,15, where this
reference is implied; Sui. ]i;>a, and T^}: do not occur at all ; Srix tent, occurs once, while the
J 2. UNITY AND CONTENTS OP LEVITICUS.
indefinite word 3B''lO is found eight times ; nsp, which is neither house nor tent, but booth,
occurs four times in the commands connected with the observance of the feast of tabernacles,
and with especial reference to Israel's having dwelt in booths at their first coming out from
Egypt (xxiii. 43). The use of all these terms is thus exactly suited to the wilderness period,
but not to any other. The use of S'H for the feminine, so frequently changed in the Sama-
ritan to '''H, and so pointed by the Masorets ; the use of ^^J^? for the people, so common in
Ex., Lev., Num., and Josh., and so infrequent elsewhere ; the usual designation of them as
the children of Israel, a phrase so largely exchanged for the simple Isrotel in later writers ;
and many other marks point to the earliest period of Hebrew literature as the time of the
composition of this book. The book itself repeatedly claims to record the laws which were
given to Moses in Mount Sinai, or in the wilderness of Sinai (vii. 38 ; xxv. 1 ; xxvi 46 ; xxvii.
34), and in one instance (xvi. 1), the time is sharply defined as after the death of Aaron's
two sons, and sometimes (xxi. 24 ; xxiii. 44) the immediate publication of the laws is men-
tioned. There are frequent references to the time " When ye be come into the land of Ca-
naan" as yet in the future (xiv. 34; xix. 23; xxiii. 10) ; and laws are given for use in the
wilderness, as e. g., the slaughter of all animals intended for food at the door of the tabernacle
as sacrifices (xvii. 1-6), which would have been impossible to observe when the life in the
camp was exchanged for that in the scattered cities of Canaan, and which was- actually abro-
gated on the eve of the entrance into the promised land (Deut. xii. 15, 20-22)v In this abro-
gation no mention is made of the previous law, but its existence is implied, and the change
is based on the distance of their future homes. There is frequent reference in the laws to the
" camp " (iv. 12, 21 ; vi. 11 ; xiii. 46 ; xiv. 3, 8 ; xvi. 26, 27, 28), so thiat in after times it
became necessary to adopt as a rule of interpretation that this should' always be understood
in the law of the city in which the sanctuary stood. Throughout the book Aaron appears as
the only high-priest (although this term is never used) and provision is repeatedly made for
his son, who should be anointed, and should minister in his stead ; and Aaron's sons appear
as the only priests. The Levites have not yet been appointed, nor are they ever mentioned
except in one passage in reference to their cities in the future promised land (xxv. 32, 33).
Not to dwell further upon particulars, it may be said in a word that we have here, and here
only, the full sacrificial and priestly system which is recognized as existing in the two fol-
lowing books of the Pentateuch, and all subsequent Hebrew literature. For an excellent
summary of the evidence, see Warrington's "When was the Pentateuch written?" (London:
Christian Evidence Oom. of Sac. P. O. K ).
The only passage presenting any real difficulty in regard to the date of the book is xviii.
28, "That the land spue not you out also, when ye defile it, as it spued out the nations that
were before you." For the true sense of these words, see the commentary; buc even taking
it as it stands in the A. V., and supposing the whole exhortation, vers. 24-30, to have been
added by divine direction when Moses made his final revision of the work on the plains of
Moab, we can easily understand the language. Already, the conquest of the trans- Jordanic
region was accomplished, and that of the rest of the land was to be immediately entered upon
with the clearest promise of success. God warns the people through Moses, when all shall
be done, not to follow in the ways of the Canaanites, lest they also themselves suffer as their
predecessors had sufl'ered. It is simply a case of the Lord's speaking from the stand-point
of an accomplished work, while the work was in progress, and assuredly soon to be com-
pleted. It is to be noted that in the book itself the claim to Mosaic authorship is distinctly
made in the last verse of chap, xxvi., and again of the appendix, chap, xxvii. (comp. Num.
xxxvi. 13).
\ 2. UNITY AND CONTENTS OF LEVITICtTS.
The Book of Leviticus is marked on the surface with these elements of unity : it is all
centred in the newly-erected tabernacle ; and only a few weeks passed away between its be-
ginning and its close. There is necessarily much variety in so considerable a collection of
laws, and something of historical narrative in connection with the immediate application of
those laws ; but the main purpose is everywhere apparent and controlling — the arrangements
INTRODUCTION TO LEVITICOS.
whereby a sinful people may approach, and remain in permanent communion with a holy
God. This will better appear in the following table of contents. The arrangement of the
book is as systematic as the nature of its contents allowed. In regard to one or two alleged
instances of repetition (xi. 39, 40 compared with xxii. 8, and xix. 9 with xxiii. 22) it is suffi-
cient to say that they were intentional (see the commentary) ; and in regard to several
chapters supposed to be placed out of their natural connection, (as e. g., chaps, xii. and xv.,)
it simply does not appear that the thread of connection in the mind of Moses was the same
as in that of the critic. In fact, in the instances alleged, the great Legislator seems to have
taken especial pains to break that connection which is now spoken of as the natural one, and
has thus, for important reasons, separated the purification after child-birth from all other
purifications which might otherwise have seemed to be of the same character. Such points
will be noticed in detail in the commentary. Nevertheless, it is to be remembered that Le-
viticus was given at Sinai in view of an immediate and direct march to Canaan, which should
have culminated in the possession of the promised land. When this had been prevented in
consequence of the sin of the people, a long time — above thirty-eight years — passed away
before the encampment on the plains of Moab. During this period the law was largely in
abeyance, as is shown by the fact that its most imperative requirement, circumcision, was
entirely omitted to the close (Josh. v. 5-8). After this long interval, it is not unreasonable
to suppose that the writings of Moses would have been revised before his death, and such
clauses and exhortations added as the changed circumstances might require. These passages,
however, if really written at that time, so far from being in any degree incongruous with the
original work, do but fill out and emphasize its teachings.
The contents of Leviticus are arranged in the following table in such a way as to show
something of the connection of its parts.
BOOK I.— Of approach to Qod. (Chaps. I. — XVI.).
FiEST Paet. (i.^vii.) Laws of Sacrifice.
i 1. General rules for the Sacrifices, (i. — vi. 7).
A. Burnt offerings, i.
B. Oblations (Meat offerings), ii.
C. Peace offerings, iii.
D. Sin offerings, iv. — v. 13.
E Trespass offerings, v. 14 — ^vi. 7.
1 2. Special instructions chiefly for the Priests, vi. 8 — vii. 38.
A. For Burnt offerings, vi. 8-13.
B. " Oblations (Meat offerings), vi. 14r-28.
C. " Sin offerings, vi. 24-30.
D. " Trespass offerings, vii. 1-6.
E " the Priests' portion of the above, vii. 7-10.
P. " Peace offerings in their variety, vii. 11-21.
G. " the Fat and the Blood, vii. 22-27.
H. " the priests' portion of peace offerings, vii. 28-36.
Conclusion of this Section, vii. 37, 38.
Second Part. Historical, (viii.— x.).
g 1. The Consecration of the Priests, viii.
2 2. Entrance of Aaron and his sons on their office, ix.
I 3. The sin and punishment of Nadab and Abihu. x.
J 8. THE RELATION OF THE LBVITICAL CODE TO HEATHEN USAGES. 5
Thied Paet. The Laws of Purity, (xi.— xv.).
g 1. Laws of clean and unclean food. xi.
? 2. Laws of purification after child-birth, xii.
I 3, Laws concerning Leprosy, (xiii., xiv.).
A. Examination and its result, xiii. 1-46.
B. Leprosy in clothing and leather, xiii. 47-59.
C. Cleansing and restoration of a Leper, xiv. 1-32.
D. Leprosy in a house, xiv. 33-53.
B. Conclusion, xiv. 54-57.
§ 4. Sexual impurities and cleansings. xv.
FouETH Paet. The Day of Atonement, xvi.
BOOK II. — Of continuance In communion with God. (Chaps. XVII. — ZZVI.),
|. FiEST Paet. Holiness on the part of the people, (xvii. — xx.).
Iv' 2 1. Holiness in regard to Food. xvii.
: ■ i 2. Holiness of the Marriage relation, xviii.
§ 3. Holiness of Conduct towards God and man. xix.
' 4. Punishment for Unholiness. xx.
Second Paet. Holiness on the part of the Priests, and holiness of the
Offerings, xxi., xxii.
Thied Paet. Sanctification of Feasts, (xxiii. — xxv.).
§ 1. Of the Sabbaths and Annual Feasts, xxiii.
i 2. Of the Holy lamps and Shew-bread. xxiv. 1-9.
2 3. Historical. The punishment of a Blasphemer, xxiv. 10-23.
2 4. Of the Sabbatical and Jubilee years, xxv.
FoTJETH Paet. Conclusion. Promises and Threats, xxvi.
Appendix, Of vows, xxxvii.
2 3. THE EELATION OF THE LEVITICAL CODE TO HEATHEN USAGES.
Widely divergent views have been held by different writers upon this subject. Spencee
{De legibus Hebrceorum) was disposed to find an Egyptian origin for almost every Mosaic in-
stitution. Babhe [Symbolik des Mosaisehen Oultus) has sought to disprove all connection
between them. The d, priori probability seems well expressed by Maesham {in Can. chron.
^ypf; P- 154, ed. Leips.) as quoted by Eosenmuellee {Pre/, in Lev., p. 5, note). " We
know from Scripture that the Hebrews were for a long time inhabitants of Egypt ; and we
may suspect, not without reason, that they did not wholly cast off Egyptian usages, but
rather that some traces of Egyptian habit remained. Many laws of Moses are from ancient
customs. Whatever hindered the cultus of the true Deity, he strictly forbade. Moses abro-
gated most of the Egyptian rites, some he changed, some he held as indifferent, some he per-
mitted, and even commanded." Yet this legislation by its many additions and omissions,
and the general remoulding of all that remained became, as Eosenmtjellee also remarks,
peculiarly and distinctively Hebrew, adapted to their needs, and sharply separating them
from all other people.
INTRODUCTION TO LEVITICUS.
It can scarcely be necessary to speak of what the Mosaic law taught in common with
the customs of all people at this period of the world's history. The aim of the law was to
elevate the Israelites to a higher and better standard, but gently, and as they were able to
bear it. Certain essential laws were given, and these were insisted upon absolutely and with
every varied form of command which could add to the emphasis. The unity of God, and
His omnipotence, were taught with a distinctness which was fast fading out from the world's
recollection, and which we scarcely find elsewhere at this period, except in the book of Job,
which may itself have been modified in Mosaic hands. So, too, the necessity of outward sacra-
mental observances for the whole people, whereby communion with God through His Church
should be maintained, were strongly insisted upon, as in circumcision and the Passover, and
other sacrifices. But when we come to consider the conduct of the ordinary life, we find the
universally received customs of the times not abrogated, but only restrained and checked
according to the capacity of the people. All these checks and restraints were in the direction
of, and looking towards, the higher standard of the morality of the Gospel, as may be seen in
the law of revenge, where unlimited vengeance was restricted to a return simply equal to the
injury received; in the laws of marriage, which imposed many restrictions on the freedom
of divorce and of polygamy ; in the laws of slavery, which so greatly mitigated the hardships
of that condition. But in these, as in many other matters, their Heavenly Father deaK
tenderly with His people, and "for the hardness of their hearts" suffered many things which
were yet contrary to His will.
The same general principles apply to the retention among them of very much of Egyp-
tian custom and law. It is more important to speak of these because the Israelites lived so
long and in such close contact with the Egyptians from the very time of their beginning to
multiply into a nation until the eve of the promulgation of the Sinaitic legislation. Par-
ticular points in which this legislation was adapted to the already acquired habits and ideas
of the people, will be noticed in the commentary as occasion requires. It is only necessary
here to point out on the one hand how apparent laeuncB in the Mosaic teaching may thus be
explained, and on the other, how largely the Egyptian culius itself had already been modified,
in all probability, by the influence of the fathers of the Jewish people. By consideration of
the former it is seen, e. g., why so little should have been said in the Mosaic writings of
immortality and the future life. This doctrine was deeply engraven in the Egyptian mind
and interwoven as a fundamental principle with their whole theology and worship. It passed
on to the Israelites as one of those elementary truths so universally received that it needed
not to be dwelt upon. The latter is necessarily involved in more obscurity; but when we
consider the terms on which Abraham was received by the monarch of Egypt ; the position
occupied at a later date by Jacob ; the rank of Joseph, and his intermarriage with the high-
priestly family ; and remember at the same time that the priesthood of Egypt was still in
possession of a higher and purer secret theology than was communicated to the people— we
see how Israel could have accepted from the land of the Pharaohs an extent of customs, (to
be purified, modified, and toned by their own Sinaitic legislation) which it might have been
dangerous to receive from any other people. Yet plainly, whatever of detail may have been
adopted from Egyptian sources, it was so connected and correlated in the Mosaic legislation
that the whole spirit of the two systems became totally unlike.
? 4. LITERATUEB.
The ancient versions are of great value in the interpretation of the technical language
of the law. The Samaritan text and version (which however sometimes betray a want c£
familiarity in detail with the ritual as practised at Jerusalem) often give valuable readings;
so also the Septuagint, the Chaldee Targums, and of later date, the Syriac and the Vulgate.
The New Testament, especially the Epistle to the Hebrews, supplies to a large extent an
inspired commentary upon Leviticus. The various treatises of Philo, and the antiquities or
Josephus, give also fully the ancient explanations of many single passages and views oi
larger sections.
Since their time the literature of Leviticus is voluminous, consisting of commentaries,
J 4. LITERATURE.
of special treatises upon the subjects with which it is occupied, and of archaeological investi-
gations illustrating it. Of special treatises sufficient mention will be made in connection
with the subjects to which they relate, and it is unnecessary here to particularize works of
arohseology. Of commentaries the following are those which have beea chiefly used in the
preparation of the present work : Okigen : iSeleeta in Lev and Horn, in L' v. Theodoret,
Qmst. in Lev. Augustine, Qucest. in Lev. Biblia Max. versionum, containing the annota-
tions of Nicolas de Lyea, Tikinus, Mekochius, and Estius, Paris, 1660. Calvin,
in PentcUeuahum. Critici Sacri, London, 1660. PoLl, Synopsis, London, 1689. Michaelis,
Bibl. Hebr., Halle, 1720. Calmet, Wircesbur^ii, 1789. Patrick, London, 1842, and freq.
RosENMUELLEE, Leipsic, 1824. Of more recent date, Knobel (of especial value), Leipsic,
1858. BooTHROYD, Bibl. Hebr., Pontefract (no date). Barrett's Synopsis of Criticisms.
London, 1847. Kalisch, Leviticus, London, 1872. Otto von Gerlach on the Pentateuch,
translated by Downing, London, 1860. Wordsworth, London, 1865. Keil and Db-
litzsch on the Pentateuch; (Keil), translated by Martin, Edinburgh, 1866. Murphy
on LeuitiaiM, Am. Ed., Andover, 1872. Clark, in the Speaker's Commentary, New York,
1872. Girdlestone, Synonyms of the Old Testament, London, 1871. To which must be
added, as containing much of commentary on large portions of this book, Baehr, SymboUk
del Mosaischen Cultus, Heidelberg, 1837-39, 2te Aufage, Erster Band, Heidelberg, 1874.
OuTRAM on Sacrifices, translated by Allen, London, 1817. Hengstenberg, Die Op/er
des heil. Schrift, Berlin, 1839. Kurtz on Sacrifice, Mitau, 1864. Hermann Schultz,
AUtestamentliohe Theologie, Frankfurt a M.. 1869, 2 vols. GEhlee, Iheologie des Alien Testa-
ments, 2 vols., Tubingen, 1873-74 (a translation is in the press of T. & T. Clark). Of Langb's
own commentary (1874) as much as possible, and it is believed everything of importance, has
been introduced into this work, which was already well advanced before its publication. Such
portions are always distinctly marked. In several of the chapters his commentary is given
in full; in others, nearly so.
PRELIMINAET NOTE ON THE LEVITICAL SACRIFICES.
PRELIMIMRY NOTE ON THE LEVITICAL SACRIFICES.
Leviticus properly opens with the law of sacrifice, because this was the centre and basis
of the Divinp service in the newly-erected tabernacle. But since sacrifices have to do with
the relations of man to God, they can only satisfactorily be considered in connection with
the established facts of those relations. Of these facts three are fundamental : the original
condition of man in a state of holiness and of communion with God ; the fall, by which he
became sinful, and thus alienated from God ; and the promise, given at the very moment of
man's passing from the one state to the other. The promise was that in the future the wo-
man's Seed should bruise the serpent's head — that in the long straggle between man and the
power of evil, one born of woman should obtain the final victory. This promise was ever
cherished by the devout in all the following ages as the anchor of their hope, audits realiza-
tion, as seen at the birth of Cain and of Noah, was continually looked for. The expectation
of a Deliverer, Redeemer, Messiah, became the common heritage of humanity, although as
time rolled away, it tended to become faint and obscure. Therefore there came the call in
Abraham of a peculiar people, in whom this hope should not only be kept -alive, but, as far
as possible, saved from distortion and misconception. It was distinctly the blessing of Abra-
ham's call, the birthright renewed to his son and grandson, and the reason for the choice and
the care of a peculiar people.
From the circumstances under which this promise was given, and the way in which it is
constantly treated in Revelation, it is plain that the restoration of man to fall communion
with God could only be brought about by the restoration of man's holiness ; it was only in
obedience to the Divine will that man could obtain at-one-ment with his Maker. This might
seem to be sufficiently plain as a truth of natural religion, but it was also abundantly taught
in history and in Scripture. Not only was it shown by the great judgments upon transgres-
sion in the deluge, in Babel, in the overthrow of Sodom, etc., but constantly the relative and
partial attainment of holiness, as in the case of Enoch, Noah, and others, was made the
ground of a relatively larger bestowal of the Divine favor. Abraham's acceptance was ex-
pressly grounded upon his faith — necessarily including those works without which faith is
dead— and so with the other heroes recounted in the eleventh chapter of Hebrews. Later,
Moses in his parting exhortations in Deuteronomy, constantly and strongly urges the neces-
sity of a loving obedience springing from the heart, and this is more and more fully unfolded
by the prophets from Samuel down, as the people were able to bear it.
Meantime from the first, in the case of Cain and Abel, and probably still earlier, and
then among all nations as they arose, sacrifices were resorted to as a means of approach to
God. From their universality, it is plain that they were looked upon as in some way helping
to bring about that restoration of communion with God which should have been reached by
a perfect holiness ; but since man was conscious he did not possess this holiness, sacrifices
were resorted to. As they never could have been offered by a sinless being, they necessarily
involve confession of sin. Whether sacrifice in its origin was a Divine institution, or whether
it sprang from a human consciousness of its propriety, is here immaterial. Lange takes the
latter view. It speedily received the Divine sanction and command. Theoretically the sa-
crifice could have had no intrinsic value for the forgiveness of sin. The author of the Epistle
to the Hebrews (ix. 13 ; x. 4) has abundantly shown that while sacrifices might have in
themselves a certain absolute value for purposes of ceremonial purification, there was yet no
16
10 LEVITICUS.
congruity or correlation between the blood of bulls and goats and the removal of human sin.
Hence, theoretically also, sacrifices, while they received the Divine approbation, must have
been a temporary institution, in some way useful to man for the time being, but looking for-
ward to the true atonement by the victory of the woman's Seed over evil. Thus sacrifices
are in their very nature typical ; having little force in themselves, and yet appointed for the
accomplishment of a result which can only be truly attained in the fulfilment of the primeval
promise. How far this true nature of sacrifices may have been more or less dimly perceived
by man from the outset, it is not necessary here to inquire. It is obvious that from this point
of view the intrinsic value of the sacrifices was entirely a secondary matter ; their whole
efficacy resulted jfrom the Divine appointment or approbation of them.
The tendency of man apart from Revelation to corruption in his ideas of God and of the
means of approaching Him is nowhere more marked than in regard to sacrifice. The gods
of the heathen were, for the most part, deifications of nature or her powers ; they represented
natural forces, and instead of originating are themselves governed by natural laws. This is
true, whether their creed were polytheistic, as that of the Greeks and Romans, or pantheistic^
as that of Buddhism. In Hebrew law, on the other hand, God appears " as the Creator and
omnipotent Ruler of the universe, a personal Lord of an impersonal world, totally distinct
from it in essence, and absolutely swaying it according to His will; but also the merciful
Father of mankind." "Therefore the sacrifices of the Hebrews have a moral or MM,
those of other nations a purely cosmical or physical character ; the former tend to work upon
mind and soul, the latter upon fears and interests ; the one strives to elevate the offerer to
the sanctity of God, the other to lower the gods to the narrowness and selfishness of man."
Kalisch. Moreover, among the heathen, God was regarded as alienated, and to be propi-
tiated in such ways as man could devise ; sacrifices were considered as having a certain satis-
fying power in themselves, as in some sort a quid pro quo, and as an opus operafum, inde-
pendent of the moral life of the offerer. Hence as the occasion rose in importance, the value
of the sacrifice was increased even to the extent of sometimes using human victims. Among
the Israelites, sacrifices were known to be of God's own appointment as a means of approach
to Him. They had a shadow, indeed, of the heathen character, as offering actual compensa-
tions for certain offences against the theocratic stat«, but this was very secondary. Their
main object was to bridge over the gulf between sinful man and a holy God. Although the
law of sacrifices necessarily stands by itself, yet the same Legislator everywhere insists upon
the necessity of a loving obedience to God. Hence, however costly sacrifices might be allowed,
and even encouraged as Free-will, and Peace, and Thank-offerings, and more numerous vic-
tims were required at the festivals and on other occasions for burnt-offerings, the Sin-offering
must (except in certain specially defined cases) be of the commonest and cheapest of the
domestic animals, and even this always, as nearly as might be, of a uniform value. There
was no gradation in the value of the offering in proportion to the heinousness of the offence;
the atonement for all sins, whatever the degree of their gravity, was the same. Even the
morning and evening sacrifice for the whole people which, although not strictly a sin-offering,
yet had a somewhat propitiatory character, was still the single lamb. By this the typical
nature of sacrifice as a temporary and, in itself, ineffectual means, was strongly expressed.
That the ancients had the idea of sin as a moral offence against God, has indeed been
called in question ; but seems too certain, at least among the Egyptians, the Hindoos, and
the Israelites, to require proof. It is abundantly expressed in the book of Job. It may be
well, however, to point out some of the heads of the evidence that sacrifice was regarded as a
propitiation for such sin, i. e., as a means for obtaining the Divine pardon for its guilt. Pro-
minent in this evidence is the fact just mentioned, that there was no proportion between the
offence and the value of the sacrifice ; since the idea of compensation was thus excluded, it
remains that what was sought for was forgiveness. Calvin (in Lev. i.) justly remarks that
the idea of reconciliation with God was connected under the old dispensation with sacrifice
after a sacramental fashion as with baptism now. Historically, this idea of sacrifice as a
means of obtaining forgiveness is clearly brought out in the sacrifices of Job, both for his
children in the time of his prosperity (Job i. 5), and for his friends after his affliction (xliL
PRELIMINAEY NOTE ON THE LEVITICAL SACRIFICES. 11
8). Tholuck, following Scholl, has shown (Diss. II., App. Ep. Hebr.) that the idea of
Buch propitiation was prevalent throughout all antiquity ; that clean animals were changed
in their stoiiw on the express ground of their being " a sin-offering," ''an atonement," so
that the parts of them not consumed upon the altar might be eaten only by the priests, and
their remains must be burned, or else the whole burned, without the camp (Ex. xxix. 14 ;
Lev. iv. li; 12, 21 ; vi. 30 ; xvi. 27, 28, etc.) ; that the idea is distinctly brought out in Lev.
xvii. 11, and in parallel passages. " The life of the flesh is in the blood : and I have given it
to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls;'' that in the case of a murder by
unknown hands (Deut. xxi. 9) the guilt of the crime must rest upon the whole neighborhood
until the people had symbolically transferred that guilt to a victim, and this had been
offered in sacrifice ; and finally, that the ritual of the day of atonement necessarily involves
this idea. (See on chap, xvi.) " The notion of internal atonement .... formed a distinctive
feature of the theology of the Pentateuch." Kalisch, I. p. 161.
On passing from these more general considerations to the particular system of the Levi-
tical sacrifices, it needs to be constantly borne in mind that these, far from being a new
institution, were in fact a special arrangement and systematizing of one of the most ancient
institutions known to man. The change from the one to the other was strictly parallel to
the course of divine operations in nature. The earlier is ever the more general and compre-
hensive ; the later the more specialized both in structure and functions. At the same time
the law was not merely an evolution, a normal development of Divine teaching previously
received, but it was distinctly " added because of transgressions until the promised seed
should come." We must therefore be prepared to find in it especial safeguards for the
chosen people against those misconceptions which became common among the heathen, and
also a constant relation to its final cause and its terminus when " the Seed should come."
It will help materially to a clear idea of the Mosaic sacrificial system if we examine the
various words used for sacrifice before and under the law, having regard also to the subse-
quent usage of the same words and to their various translations in the ancient versions.
The earliest word that occurs is also the most general in its original sense, though under
the law it acquires a strictly technical signification : nnJD, given by the lexicographers as
from a root not used, n3n=nJ0==fo distribute, to deliver, and hence to make a present of, to
give. IntheLXX.it is' translated before the law only by the words d&pov (Gen. iv. 4;
xxxii. 13, 18, 20, 21, etc.) and Bvaia (Gen. iv. 3, 5 only) ; in the law, where it occurs very fre-
quently, only by evaia or by the combination iapov Bvaia, and this is the case also in Ezekiel
(although twice. Lev. ii. 13; Num. xviii. 9, the form is evalaa,ia), except in the single in-
stanceoice^idaXii, Lev. ix. 4. After the books of the law both these translations are fre-
quently employed, and also ^po<,opi once (Ps. xxxix. 9), f^'o^ three times, and frequently
the Hebrew word is simply expressed in Greek letters i^amd. The Vulg. translates by mu-
nus, mmusculum, ablatio, oblatio sacrificii, and sacrificium ,■ but in the law ablatio and sacri-
fldum are the terms commonly employed. In the A. V. meat-affering, or simply offering, is
the only translation in Ex., Lev., Num. and Ezek.; \,vit present, gift, sa,crifice and oblatwn
are used elsewhere as well as these, usually according to the sense implied by the context.
The word is used outside of the law in the general sense of a propitiatory gift or tribute to
any one, and hence of such a gift to God, or sacrifice in its most general sense. It is used
of the offerings of both Cain and Abel, the one unbloody, the other bloody. In the prophets
it is used as a word for sacrifice in general. It is used frequently in the historical books of
gifts or tribute from man to man as from Jacob to Esau, to Joseph in Egypt, of the Moab-
ites and Syrians to David, and distinctly of tribute, 2 Kings xvii. 3, 4, etc. In the law (Ex.,
Lev., Num., to which must be added Ezek.) it has a strictly defined technical signification
and is applied only to the oblation (A. V. meat-offering) except in Num. v where it is used
(six times) of the unbloody jealousy-offering of barley. It is always therefore in the law a
bloodless offering, and being nearly always an accompaniment of a bloody offering may be
regarded in its original sense of a gift to God, offered along with a sacrifice more strictly so
called. In the few instances in which it stands alone it never appears as offered for the pur-
pose of atonement. In the case of the sin-offering of flour allowed in extreme poverty ^Lev.
12 LEVITICUS.
V. 11-13) this is expressly distingaished from the nhprp in that the remainder should belong
to the priest, nnpSS.
The word which comes next in the order of the record is nSj', derived from iy!V, to
ascend, to glow, to bum. It means uniformly throughout the Old Testament: the whole
burnt-sacrifice, so specifically indeed that twice (Deut. xxxiii. 10 ; Ps. li. 19 [21] ) ''73=
whole is substituted for it. In a few cases it is variously translated by the LXX. (once each
admia avd^aat;, avafopa, six times Bvaia, thirteen times Kapn-ufia, three times mpTcaaig), but in
the vast majority of cases by some term signifying the holocaust, S^KapTra/^a (three times),
dXonaoTruais (eleven times), dloKaiiru/ja (most frequently), i'XoKavraai.t (seventy-three times).
In the Vulg. the only renderings are holooaustum (seldom holocautoma) and hostia, except a
very few times obkUio ; in the A. V., always either burnt-offering or bwnirsaerifice, which
are used interchangeably, and seem to have been intended to convey the same meaning. It
is first used in Gen. viii. 20 for the sacrifices offered by Noah, and throughout Gen. xxii. It
is also used three times in Exodus (x. 25 ; xviii. 12 ; xxiv. 5) in relation to sacrifices previous
to those of the Levitical system. In the law itself it occurs very frequently, and also in the
subsequent books. It constitutes the daily morning and evening sacrifice for the congrega-
tion. It was always an animal sacrifice and was wholly consumed, except the skin, upon
the altar. In signification it was the most general of all the sacrifices, and in fact was the
only unspecialized bloody sacrifice of the law. It must be regarded therefore as including
within itself, more or less distinctly, the idea of all other sacrifices ; it wad a means of ap-
proach to God in every way in which that approach could be expressed. It was not dis-
tinctly a sin-ofiering ; yet the fact that it should be accepted for the offerer " to make atone-
ment for him" C??'?, Lev. i. 4) is prominent in its ritual, and the same idea is distinctly
brought out in the (probably earlier) sacrifices of Job (Job i. 5; xlii. 8). There is a rabbin-
ical maxim : " the burnt offering expiates the transgressions of Israel," and this idea is fclly
expressed in the Targums. "The burnt-offering, as it is the most ancient, so also is it ihe
most general and important in the Mosaic culius, apicrri d'iarw ij 616mvTog (Philo de vict., p.
838)." Tholuck (Diss. II. in Hebr.). Yet Tholuck afterwards separates this sacrifice
quite too absolutely from the sin-offering. The latter indeed, as specializing one feature of
the burnt-offering, had a different ritual, and was without the oblation ; as offered only for
the expiation of sin, it carried with it to those who bore its unconsumed flesh a defilement
which could not attach to the burnt-offering, since this included other ideas also within
itself. But all this by no means forbids that in its general, comprehensive character, the
burnt-offering should include the idea of expiation for sin which is distinctly attached to it
in the law. It was often offered also as a praise or thank-offering (2 Sam. vi. 17, etc.). As
already said, it was the one comprehensive sacrifice daily offered upon the altar of the taber-
nacle (Ex. xxix. 38-42) ; it was doubled on the Sabbath (Num. xxviii. 9, 10), and multi-
plied, with added victims of higher value, on the first of each month [ib. 11) ; and so also at
the great yearly festivals {ib. 16 -xxix. 39). So far as the burnt-offering had a specific sig-
nification of its own, its meaning is generally assumed by theologians to have been that of
entire consecration to God. Such a meaning is certainly sufficiently appropriate; but ia
never distinctly attributed to it in the Scriptures either of the Old or New Testament. It is
however constantly described in the more general sense of a means of approach to God.
n3I is used not so much for any particular kind of sacrifice aa for the victim for any
sacrifice. It is frequently coupled with some other word determining the kind of sacrifice
intended, especially Q'vha n_3j. When not so identified, it may mean any kind of sacrifice
(although most frequently used of the peace-offerings), and does not therefore require parti-
cular consideration. It occurs first in Gen. xxxi. 54 and xlvi. 1, and is generally rendered
in the LXX. and Vulg. Bvaia and hostia. The verb is the technical word for slaughtering
animals in sacrifice, nor is it ever used in any other sense in the Pentateuch except in Deut
xii. 15, 21, where permission is given to those at a distance from the sanctuary to slay sacri-
ficial animals simply for food. In the later books there are very few other exceptions to
this usage: 1 Sam. xxviii. 24; 2 Chron. xviii. 2; Ezek. xxxiv. 3. From this word is derived
PRELIMINARY NOTE ON THE LEVITICAL SACRIFICES. 13
the Hebrew name for the altar, natp, not, as sometimes asserted, because sacrifices were
originally slain upon the altar ; but because this was the place of destination for them.
No other words for sacrifice occur until the time of the Exodus. There the various spe-
cialized forms of the Mosaic sacrifices are described ; but before speaking of these the word
TW^ must be mentioned, which is frequently rendered (chiefly in Lev. and Num.) offer or
taerifice. It is not, however, properly a sacrificial term ; but merely a word of very broad
signification— like jroiea or do — which is adapted in sense to its connection. It first occurs
in the meaning sacrifice in Ex. xxix. 36. Therefore passing by this, the earliest especial
sacrificial term of the law is ilDS, ndaxa, pascha, passover. It occurs first in Ex. xii. 11, and
frequently afterwards, although only once in Lev. (xxiii. 5). The noun always means the
lamb slain by the head of each house in Israel on the 14th Nisan, and eaten by him and his
family the following evening, or at least the seven days' feast of which this was the begin-
ning, and the characteristic feature. The history of its institution is fully given in Ex. xii.
From the abundant references to it in the New Testament it was plainly designed as an
especial type of Christ. It was distinctly a sacrifice, being reckoned a ]^'!\l in Num. ix. 7,
13, and slain in the place of sacrifice (Deut. xvi. 5, 6), and its blood, after the first institu-
tion, was sprinkled by the priests (2 Chron. xxx. 16; xxxv. 11), as affirmed by all Jewish
authorities ; indeed, it is in connection with the Passover that the mention of the treatment
of the blood of sacrifice first occurs. It is classed by Outram among the Eucharistic sacri-
fices, and is assimilated to them by the fact that its flesh was eaten by the offerer and his
household ; but is distinguished from them in having nothing of it given to the priest. It
was really a sacrifice appointed before the institution of the priesthood in which each head
of the family oflered, and thus it perpetuated the remembrance that, by their calling, the
whole nation were a holy people, chosen " to draw near to God." Its historic relations are
always most prominent, and it was in fact the great sacrament of the covenant by which
God had delivered Israel and constituted them His chosen people. Its celebration consti-
tuted the chief of the three great annual festivals, and was the only one of them having a
fundamentally sacrificial character. It thus became a fit type of the new covenant and of the
deliverance through Christ from the bondage of sin.
The aW (from OjUi) or peace-offering, is first mentioned Ex. xx. 24, in reference to
the future offerings of the law, but in a way that seems to imply a previous familiarity with
this kind of sacrifice. It is rendered in' the LXX. sometimes by dpijvuid;, but more generally
by aorfipioVj and in the Vulg. by paeificua and salutare ; in the A. V. uniformly peace-offering.
Under the law it was separated into three varieties : the thank, the vow, and the free-will
offering. See under vii. 12. In Lev. vii. 12, 13, 15; xxii. 29, the thank-offering has the
distinct name, mip, which does not elsewhere occur in the law, though frequent afterwards.
This variety included all the prescribed thank-offerings. The idea of propitiation was less
prominent in this than in any other sacrifice, although the sprinkling of the blood — which
was always propitiatory— formed a part of its ritual ; but it was especially the sacrifice of
communion with God, in which the blood was sprinkled and the fat burned upon the altar,
certain portions given to the priests, and the rest consumed by the offerer with his family
and friends in a holy sacrificial meal. In the wilderness no sacrificial animal might be used
for food except it had first been offered as a sacrifice. It naturally became one of the most
common ofall the sacrifices, and the victims for it were sometimes provided in enormous
numbers, as at Solomon's dedication of the temple (1 Kings viii. 63). Peace-offerings were,
for the most part, voluntary, but were also prescribed on several occasions, as at the fulfill-
ment of the Nazarite vow (Num. vi. 17), and are constantly expected at the great festivals.
"The peace-offering was always preceded by the piacular victim, whenever any person of-
fered both these kinds of sacrifices on the same day. Ex. xxix. 14, 22; Num. vi. 14, 16, 17."
Outram. Although the dW is not mentioned under its distinctive name before Ex. xx.
24, yet it cannot be doubted that sacrifices of the same character are included in the more
general term, na?, at a much earlier period (see Gen. xxxi. 54 ; Ex. x. 25 ; xviii. 12), aa
*ey were certainly common at all times among the heathen. In the New Testament they
are alluded to in Phil. iv. 18 and Heb. xiii. 15, 16.
14 LEVITICUS.
nxan (from the Pihel of KOH) in the sense of sin occurs in Gen. iv. 7 and frequen
but in the sense of sin-offering is not found before the establishment of the Levitical syst
The first instance of this sense is in Ex. xxix. 14, after which it is very frequent both in
law and in the later books. Besides a variety of occasional translations, the usual rendei
in the LXX. is d/japria^ and in the Vulg. peccatum. In the A. V. it is variously transli
punishment, punishment of sin, purification for sin, purifying, sinner, sin and sin-offering;
the last two are by far the most common. It is the distinctive, technical word in the
for the piacular offering for sin. For its ritual see iv. — v. 13. The sin-offerings of wh
the blood was carried within the sanctuary, and whose bodies were burned without the cai
are particularly referred to in the New Testament as typical of Christ ; but more gent
references to Him as our Sin-offering are frequent. Sin-offerings were prescribed (a) at ei
new moon. Num. xxviii. 15 ; (J) at each of the three great festivals, Num. xxviii. 22, 1
xxix. 16, 19, 22, 25, 28, 31, 34, 38; (c) at the feast of trumpets on the first day of the sevei
month, and on the tenth day of the same, ib. 5, 11 ; (d) the sin-offering, tor' i^ox^ on (
great day of atonement, ch. xvi. ; (e) private sin-offerings, for a woman after child-birth, )
6, 8 ; for the leper at his cleansing, xiv. 19, 22, 31 ; for a person cleansed of an issue, xv.
30 ; for the Nazarite accidentally defiled, Num. vi. 11, and at the time of the fulfillment
his vow, ib. 14, 16 ; and on other special occasions, Num. vii. 16, 22, 28, 34, 40, etc.; besic
the ordinary sin-offerings of Lev. iv. The ordinary victim was a she-goat or a ewe, replac
for the high-priest or for the whole congregation by a bullock, and for a prince by a he-gc
for reasons given in the commentary on Lev. iv. In case of poverty, for the ordinary ofi!
ing might be substituted turtle-doves or young pigeons, or even an offering of flour. B
besides regular victims, there were various others prescribed for those exceptional occasio
which from their nature required some such discrimination. Thus at Aaron's entrance np(
his sacred functions his sin-offering was a calf (Lev. ix. 1-8) ; at the end of the Nazarih
vow (Num. vi. 14), and at the recovery of a leper able to bring this offering (Lev. xiv. 1
19), a ewe-lamb was the prescribed victim. Though not strictly sin-offerings, yet to tl
same general category belong the red heifer whose ashes were used for purifications (Nui
xix. 2-22), and the heifer to be slain in case of an unknown murder (Deut. xxi. 1-9). Y
these were all peculiar and exceptional cases, and the rule remains that the ordinary sii
offering was always the same.
t5?i^ is first used Lev. i. 2, occurs very frequently in Leviticus and Numbers, and
never used elsewhere except twice in Ezekiel. (With the pointing, |3"lp, it is also four
twice in Neh.) There are but one or two variations from the translation^ iapov, in the LXX
and donum in the Vulg. In the A. V. it is generally translated offering, but sometimes obli
lion, and once (Lev. xxvii. 11) sacrifice. Its meaning is perfectly clear — ^that which is o
fered (brought nigh) to God, whether as a sacrifice or as a dedicatory gift ; if, however, tt
thing offered be a sacrificial animal, then of course it necessarily means a sacrifice. In eithf
case, it is something given to God.
Om, like the nearly related nxBn, has the double sense of trespass or guilt and trespm
offering. It occurs once in Genesis (xxvi. 10) in the former sense, but is not found in ti
latter earlier than Lev. v. 6. It is frequent in Leviticus, and less so in subsequent books i
both senses. In the LXX. and Vulg. it has a considerable variety of renderings; hut th
most frequent are LXX. ■K^/iiitXeca, and Vulg. delictum. For the distinction between tlii
and the sin-offering, see iv. 1 and v. 14.
There remains, as belonging to the list of the sacrifices, the incense, for which two word
are used, neither of which occur before the giving of the law. nj'iaS first occurs Ex. xx)
34, and is uniformly translated in the LXX. Xi^owf (once, however, Xi^avuriif), and in th
Vulg. thus ; it is always /rareAiwcera«e in the A. V. except in Isa. and Jer. where it is alway
incense. It is "a costly, sweet-smelling, pale-yellow resin, the milky exudation of a shrub'
(FuERST). rnpY^ which first occurs Ex. xxv. 6, on the other hand, is an incense com
pounded of frankincense and various sweet spices (Ex. xxx. 34). It is usually translated ii
the LXX. and Vulg. ffv/iiafm, thymiama, but sometimes aiivBcai^, compositio. In the A. V. i
IB rendered either incense, or sweet incense, or a few times perfume. This incense was to b
PRELIMINAET NOTE ON THE LEVITICAL SACRIFICES. 15
burnt only within the sanctuary, twice daily on the golden altar (Ex. xxx. 7, 8), and also by
the high-priest in the holy of holies on the day of atonement (Lev. xvi. 12, 13). The frank-
incense was offered by the people as a part of their oblations, and was mostly burnt in the
court. The burning of all incense was a strictly priestly act, and is constantly spoken of in
the Scriptures as symbolical of prayer (e. £r. Eev. v. 8; viii. 8, 4). Pre-eminently does it
typify the intercession of the true High Priest in heaven itself.
The word nm=offerings made by fire, is not so much the name of a sacrifice as a de-
scription of all sacrifices burned upon the altar. It is applied to various kinds of sacrifices,
Lev. i. 9 ; ii. 3 ; iii. 5, ete. '^OJ=drink-offerinff is first used Gen. xxxv. 14, and is not pro-
perly a sacrifice itself, but an accompaniment of other sacrifices. n3?3n=wave-offering, and
nnn]Jl=heave-offering, refer to particular modes of presentation of certain offerings.
The animals used for victims were either " of the flock or of the herd," or in case of
poverty, doves or pigeons. These were all clean animals, and were consequently among
those commonly used for food; the quadrupeds were from domestic animals, aud the birds
thosemost easy of capture. (Domestic fowls are said not to have been known before the
time of Solomon.) The ease and certainty of procuring these various victims seems a more
likely reason for their selection than either their tameness— which certainly does not apply
to the bull -or their value as property, since the cost of procuring wild animals would usually
have been far greater. The idea that these animals were especially appointed for sacrificial
victims because they were held sacred among heathen nations, and particularly among the
Egyptians, although often advanced, is unsatisfactory for two reasons: first, because on this
ground there is no reason why the number of sacrificial animals should not have been greatly
enlarged ; secondly, because these very animals, for the most part, were used in sacrifice by
the nations that also worshipped them. Whatever typical significance they may have had,
this can hardly be considered as the reason for their selection, since in the typical language
of the prophets various other animals (e. g. the lion and the eagle) are so largely used. la
fact the lamb seems to be the only one of the sacrificial animals typically employed in pro-
phecy, the dove being only an alternative victim for the poor.
The public animal-sacrifices of the Israelites may be broadly separated into three great
classes, according to the prominent purpose of each. I. The Burnt-offerings, or offerings of
approach to God. The main idea of these, in so far as they had any especially distinctive
idea, is generally considered to have been consecration to God's service as the necessary con-
dition of approaching Him, and yet also including in a subordinate way the idea of expia-
tion, without which sinful men might not draw near to God at all. This idea is represented
outwardly and once for all in the Christian Church by baptism, and in its continual repeti-
tion by the various acta of worship and efforts to conform the life to Christ's example. With
the burnt-offering belonged the unbloody, eucharistic oblation, together with its incense
gymbolizing prayer. II. The sin-offering, in its various forms, expressly provided for the
purpose of atonement. Having no inherent efficacy, this yet clearly pointed forward to the
only effectual atonement made by Christ Himself upon the cross. This sacrifice, as is most
clearly shown in Hebrews, being efficacious for the forgiveness of all sin, can never be re-
peated ; yet according to Christ's own command, we are to show forth His death until He
come again in the Lord's supper, and thus historically the great sacrament of the Christian
Church points back to that which the Levitical system prefigured. The central point of
both dispensations is the same, but in the one case prophetic, in the other historic. III.
The Peace-offerings were the ordinary means of communion with God through an external
rite, and of expressing outwardly thanksgiving for His mercies, or supplication for His favors.
They are to be considered not so much as typical definitely of any one thing in the new dis-
pensation, but rather as meeting under the old a need which is now otherwise supplied ; yet
still in common with all sacrifices, they serve to set forth in shadow Him " who is our peace,"
and on whom feeding by faith we now have peace with God.
Besides these great classes of sacrifices, there were a multitude of others, mostly for indi-
viduals, some of which are distinctly included under one or the other of these classes, while
Others share the character of more than one of them, and others, like the Passover, have a,
16 LEVITiuua.
character peculiar to themselves. These will be treated in their appropriate places. The
is one of them which must be mentioned on account of its great importance — the red heii
— but its treatment belongs in the following book, Num. xix. 1-10. In general it may 1
said, that as God's works will not conform very precisely to any human classification, sia
each creature is an individual entity to the Infinite, but always there will be characteristi
in one group allying the genera in which it is found to some other widely se parated grou
so also in the works of the Divine word, we can only classify broadly and having regard i
the most salient features, while, in view of less important characteristics, we might often 1:
compelled to change the best classification that can be formed.
The vegetable sacrifices, or oblations, were correspondingly varied. These were usuall;
accompaniments of the animal-offerings, but sometimes were independent. This was th
case not only with the alternative sin-offering (Lev. v. 11), and the jealousy-offering (Nnm
V. 15), but also with the shew-bread, the Passover sheaf of barley and the Pentecostal wheatei
loaves. Incense also was at times an independent offering. Drink-offerings appear excln
sively as accompaniments of the animal sacrifices, and were of wine; but their ritual is no
where prescribed.
The mineral kingdom was represented in the sacrifices only by the salt with which al
other offerings were to be salted.
The ritual of the various sacrifices will be treated as they occur in the text. Suffice i
here to say that three essential points are to be observed in all : First, that the victim shoulc
be solemnly offered to God. This, as Outram clearly shows (I. xv. 4), was accomplishec
by presenting the living victim or the oblation before the altar, and was the act of the offerer
Second, that the offerer should lay his hand upon the head of the victim thereby personallj
identifying himself with what he did. The exceptions to this are in the case of birds, foi
obvious reasons, and in the case of the Paschal lamb, instituted before the Levitical system,
and when this act was unnecessary as the offerer acted himself in some sort as priest. Third,
the intervention of a priest, as the mediator between God and man, who must sprinkle the
blood and burn the parts required upon the altar ; and in the case of the ordinary sin-offering
as well as of many of the oblations, he must himself, as the representative of God, consume
the remainder.
It appears from constant Rabbinical tradition, as well as from the probability of the
case, that prayer or confession on the part of the offerer always accompanied the sacrifice.
Indeed, this is often spoken of in particular cases in Scripture itself, and language is there
used in regard to the sacrifices which implies the universality of the custom. When the
patriarchs built altars, they "called upon the name of the Lord" (Gen. xii. 8, etc.). Con-
fession is required in connection with the sin and trespass-offerings (Lev. v. 5 ; Num. v. 7),
and especially with the great propitiation on the day of atonement (Lev. xvi. 21). A form
of prayer is prescribed for the oblation of the first fruits (Deut. xxvi. 3-10), and of the tithes
(ib. 13-15). Sacrificing and calling upon God are often used as equivalent terms (1 Sam.
xiii. 12; Prov. xv. 8, etc.), and the temple is indifferently called "the house of sacrifice" (2
Chron. vii. 12, etc.), and " the house of prayer'' (Isa. Ivi. 7, etc.), and frequently prayer and
confession are mentioned in connection with sacrifice on particular occasions, or in a general
way as showing that the one accompanied the other as a matter of course (1 Sam. vii. 9 ; Job
xlii. 8 ; Ezra vi. 10 ; 1 Chron. xxi. 26 ; xxix. 10-21 ; 2 Chron. xxx. 22 ; Ps. Ixvi. 13-20 ; cxvi, 13,
17, etc.). For further details of the ritual, and especially for the Eabbinical traditions on the
subject, the reader is referred to Otjtram, Kalisch, and other special treatises on sacrifice.
Of the purpose and design of the whole sacrificial cultus, but little need be added to
what has already been said. That in a theocratic state the expiatory offerings had, as an
incidental object, the compensation for minor offences against that state, and the doing away
with ceremonial hindrances to worship is undeniable ; but that they had also a farther and
higher object is plain both from the study of the Mosaic legislation itself and from their
treatment throughout the New Testament, especially in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Besides
their typical value, they had a powerful educational use. " As we survey the expiatory
offerings of the Hebrews, which for purity stand unrivalled in the ancient world, we are
PRELIMINARY NOTE ON THE LEVITICAL SACRIFICES. 17
bouod to admit that they were pre-eminently calculated to keep alive among the nation
those feelings on which all religious life depends, and from which it flows as its natural
source, the feelings of human sinfulness and the conviction of the divine holiness, by the
standard of which that sinfulness is to be measured; they fostered, therefore, at once humi-
lity and an ideal yearning ; and they effectually counteracted that sense of self-righteousness
natural indeed to the pride of man, but utterly destructive of all noble virtues. They were
well suited to secure in the directest and completest manner that singleness of life and heart
which is the true end of all sacrifices. * * * Though bearing the character of vicarious-
ness, the sin-offerings were far from encouraging an external worship by lifeless ceremonies ;
in themselves the spontaneous offspring of religious repentance, and thus naturally helping
to nourish the same beneficent feeling, they were the strongest guarantee for a life of honesty
and active virtue." Kalisch I., p. 187 sq.
It is, however, to be remembered that while sacrifices were abundantly provided for him
who sinned inadvertently, on the other hand no sacrifice was allowed for him who sinned
" presumptuously '' (Num. xv. 30, 31 ; Deut. xvii. 12), that is, with deliberate and high-handed
purpose ; for the offender thus declared that he did not desire to be at one with God ; there
was in him no -internal disposition to correspond with the outward act of sacrifice. Certainly
nothing could show more clearly that the efficacy of sacrifice is connected with the disposi-
tion of the heart. It was natural that many of the fathers, in the strong re-action of early
Christianity from Judaism, should have thought the Jewish sacrifices were " instituted be-
cause the people, having been long accustomed to such modes of worship in Egypt, could
scarcely have been confined to the worship of the one true God without the indulgence and
introduction into their religion of those rites to which they had been long habituated and
were exceedingly attached " (Justin Martyr, Irenseus, Tertullian, Theodoret, Cyril of Alex-
andria, as referred to by Otjteam). Nevertheless, they saw in them distinctly a typical
reference to Christ, and Oeigen is elsewhere quoted as showing that this belonged to all the
sacrifices because they all ceased with His sacrifice.
Lange [Dogmatik in Lev.), after showing the connection between this and the prece-
ding book, continues : " Leviticus then is right in treating first of the sacrifice. Nothing is
clearer than that the sacrifice is not herein a new, positive. Divine command, but is a ground-
form, true of natural religion, which as such depends originally on a spiritual impulse. It is
said of Cain and Abel, that they offered sacrifice, but not that sacrifice was commanded them.
Noah in the same way sacrificed from free inclination." [Is not something more implied in
the command to take into the ark of the clean animals by sevens?] " It seems significant
that only after the performance of the sacrifice is the divine satisfaction mentioned. Thus
the theocratic sacrifice is the consecration of the natural sacrifice existing before. * * *
This then is the meaning of the symbolic sacrifice ; it is the expression of the fact that the
offerer, in his sin and sinfulness, feels his need of an inward resignation and confesses it with
the offering of the symbolic sacrifice and requests that the grace of God may supply his need,
t. e. may lead him by the sacrificial teaching to the completion of the sacrificial offering in
faith. So there lies in the idea of sacrifice, as in the law, the spring of a positive movement;
and as Christ is certainly the final cause of the law as the objective requirement of sacrifice,
so is He of the sacrifice as the subjective law of life. The law and the sacrifice come toge-
ther inseparably in the fulfillment which the life of Jesus Christ tas brought. * * * *
On the various theories which concern sacrifice, compare the dictionaries, particularly Winee ;
also the archseological works ; especially also the article by Oehlee in Herzog's Bealency-
elopMU, entitled OpfercuUm im Alien Testament. For more detailed treatment of the sub-
ject, see also my Positive Dogmatik. * * * First of all, the legal sacrifices are indeed,
in the sacrificial system of worship, themselves real satisfactions, that is, the discharge of
duties and the reparation for transgressions against the social law. But the social law would
be entirely arbitrary if it had no higher sense ; this sense is the prayer for grace to complete
it, for perfection. It does not come finally to a satisfactory end if it does not attain to the
granting of the prayer, to the peace of Gnd, to expiation. In the first particular, the sacri-
fice is a real performance in the court, which can be misconceived to be self-righteousness;
18 LEvmcns;
in the second, it is a symbolic treatment of prayer as incense in the temple ; in the high
particular, it is an act of the typical hope of faith, of the atonement in the holy of holi
which the priest accomplished with hazard and inward resignation of his life under the fa
effect of the sight of the majesty of God.
" These three particulars are displayed in the three different forms of sacrifice, euehar
fica, impetratoria, piacularia ; but so that whatever form predominates, the others are sb
posed with it. The trunk-root or fundamental form, however, is furnished by the bun
offering, for which reason all sacrifices are burnt-offerings in a narrower or wider sense; i
are God's fire, God's bread, on the altar; hence, in the first case the Fire, as the symbol i
the Divine power, may consume the whole sacrifice ( ''73) ; in the second case the Bh
may signify the prevailing thought in sacrifice, as the symbol of the resignation of the soi
the life ; the third case is the Holy food, the sacrificial meal, as a symbol of the consecratii
of life's enjoyment in the midst of life itself. These three particulars are found fully co
nected in the Passover, which forms the general theocratic hallowing of the natural prin(
pie of sacrifice, and pre-supposes the symbolical new birth, i. e. the circumcision or physio
cleansing. So too in reference to the curse-sacrifice : cherem." • * *
The sacrifices " are themselves divided into pure and applied forms of worship. Tl
pure cultus-sacrifices are divided into universal, fixed and carnal. The first are the Sabbai
and the Feast-day sacrifices, normal sacrifices of all Israel ; the last are those occasioned 1
and commanded in various circumstances. Both kinds, however, are often interchange!
absolutely as antitheses of the sacrifice of destruction, the Cherem.
"1. The hallowed fundamental form of the sacrifice — the Passover.
" 2. The central point of all sacrifices, the imperishable symbolical idea, the burnt-offerin]
" 3. On the left hand of the burnt-sacrifice we find the sin and trespass-offerings, i
which also the transition-forms come into consideration (see the Exegesis) ; on the rigl
hand is the prosperity or salvation-offering — in the forms of the praise-offering, the voti\
(the prayer) offering, and that of the simple well-being — and besides generally, the hallowe
slaying and the consecration of the blood.
" 4. The summit of all sacrifices, the great propitiatory sacrifice, in which the antithesi
of the salviition-offering with the curse-offering is rendered especially prominent in the hf
goat of the Azazel." [But on this see the Exegetical, ch. xvi.]
" As forms of the applied sacrifice, appear the covenant-sacrifice, the sacrifices at th
consecration of the priests, the various sacrifices of purification, the central sacrifice of pari
fication, or the ashes of the red heifer, and in antithetical position the jealousy-sacrifice an
the sacrifice at the festival of a completed vow." * * *
Lange then describes the sacrificial material and the sacrificial act, which are sufficient!
treated in the commentary. In conclusion, he adds : " The line of the three altars, the alta
of burnt-offering, the altar of incense, and the mercy-seat, is completed by still a fourth.hal
lowed place of sacrifice without the camp, that is, the ash-heap of the red heifer, for th
meaning of which Heb. xiii. 13 is a passage especially to be considered. Out beyond thi
place lay the wilderness, also the place of death for the cherem, the curse-sacrifice.
" With the gradations of the altar, the gradations of the sprinking of the blood ar
parallel even to the sprinkling " [before] " the mercy-seat in the holy of holies. They stani
in contrast to the gradations of the burning whose minimum appears in the meat-offering'
[which was, however, in some cases wholly consumed (Lev. vi. 22)], "and whose maximut
is in the burnt-offering. In the blood is expressed the entire resignation of man to death
in the fire, the complete consuming, power of God over man's strength of life.
" In the whole matter of sacrifice the idea of communion, of the feast of fellowship
between God and man becomes prominent in many ways, and is especially represented h;
the table of shew-bread, and by the portions of the priests. In reference to this communioii
however, Jehovah has exclusively reserved to Himself the blood and the fat, and has excln
sively forbidden leaven in the offering (though not in what was presented before God forth
use of the priests) and honey. But the people are represented, too, in the whole priestl;
communion, and receive the whole effect of their service : the blessing of Jehovah, which als
PRELIMINARY NOTE ON THE LEVITICAL SACRIFICES. 19
rises in distinct gradations, from the absolution in the court, the light in the temple, to the vi-
sion of God in the holy of holies ; and thence comes back to the people under corresponding con-
ditions : confession, prayer, consecration by means of death ( Tbdesvriehe). Thus also the fur-
ther relations of the sacrifice are explained. The sacrifice of the heart unfolds itself in the
sacrifice of the lips, in prayer, and in the sacrifices of the respective death-consecrations, or
of the renunciation and dedication in vows by which the Nazarite was connected with
the priests."
In his Homiletik in Lev., Lange further says : " The Israelitiah sacrifice is taken into
the care of Jehovah, is the sanctified offering, the symbol of the internal sacrifice, the
type of the future completed sacrifice, the instruction which prepared for the sacrifice of
Christ and the sacrifices of Christianity. The difference between the outward and the in-
ward sacrifice, between the symbol and the thought it expresses, is rendered definitely pro-
minent even in the Old Testament.
"Literature. — See Keil, Handbuch der biblischen Archaologie. Die gottesdiemtlichen
Verhdttnisse der Israeliten, p. 47 ss. Das mosaische Opfer, p. 195 ss. Baehe (see above).
Bramesfeld, Der alttestamentliohe Oottesdienst in seiner sinndbildlichen und vorhildlichen
Bedeutung. Gutersloh, 1864. Hestgstenbeeg, Die Opfer der heil. Schrift. Berlin, 1859.
Keil, Die Opfer des Alien Bundes (Guebicke's Zeitschrift, 1836, 37). Kliefoth, Die
wsprungliche Gottesdiemtordnung der deutschen Kirche. 1. Bel. Schwfrin, 1858. Kurtz,
Der alltestamentliche Opfereultus. Mittau, 1864. Neumann, Die Opfer des Alten Bundes.
Oehler, Der Opfereultus, in Hbbzog's Realeneyclopddie. Sartobius, Ueber den ali-und
nmtestamentlichen Kultus. Stuttgart, 1852. Tholuck, Das Alte Testament in Neuen
Testament. Hamburg, 1849. LiSKO, Das Ceremonialgesetz des Alten Testaments, seine
ErfHUung im Neuen Testament. Berlin, 1842. Wangemann, Die Opfer der heiligen
Schrift naeh der Lehre des Alten Testaments. 2 Bde. Berlin, 1866. (Worthy of especial
note is the catalogue of literature. Gen. Introd. A. I 5, B., and the statement in reference to
the development of the ecclesiastical idea of sacrifice, ib. J 6)." Add: Philo de Victimis.
OuTRAM, De sacrifieiis. London, 1677 (translated by Allen, London, 1817). Spencee,
De legibus Sebrceorum, Tubingen, 1732. Maimonides, De sacrifieiis, London, 1683. CuD-
WORTH, De Goena Domini, Leyden, 1773 (Vol. II., translation of Intel. System, Andover,
1837). A. A. Sykes, Essay on the Nature, Design and Origin of Sacrifices 1748. J. D. Ml-
CHAELIS, Commentaries on the Laws of Moses (translated by A. Smith, London, 1814).
EOSENMUELLEE, Exewrsus II. in Lev., Leipsic, 1824. Fabeb, On the Origin of Saerijice,
London, 1827. J. Davison, Inquiry into the Origin and Intent of Primitive Sacrifice
{Bemains). Tholuck, Diss. II. in App. to Ep. to the Heb. (Trans, by Eyland, Edinb.,
1842). F. D. Maurice, The Doctrine of Sacrifice deduced from Scripture, Cambridge, 1854.
Kalisch, Lev., Pt. I., London, 1867. Clabk, Introd. to Lev. (Speaker's Corn.), London and
New York, 1872. Also further authorities cited by CONANT in Smith's Bih. Diet. Art
Lev., Am. £d.
LEVITICUS.
THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
:b tk'
plu^a^
1' Ver. 16. nnS J3 (Sam. Ifl— ) Is variously translated. In the LXX. and Vulg., as in the A. V., it is rendered fffl-
T T :
there ; in the Sam. Vers., however, the Chald. of Onkelos, of Jonathan, and of Jerusalem, and in the Syr,, the idea i» l*J
food in the crop, or the filth connected therewith, as is expressed in the margin of the A, V. By Oeseidus and Faeist It
is translated as filth or excrement in the crop ; "they consider it a contracted form of Part, Niph, of i_ of the person
and IP of the thing (iv. 26, etc.) ; seldom with
3 of the thing (ch. xvii. 11). The phrase is used
chiefly in reference to the sin and trespas*
CHAP. I. 1-17.
29
offerings (chs. iv., v., vi. ) and but rarely in con-
neotioa witli I lie burnt-oflferings. It is tiere used
ia connection with the laying on of the hand of
the offerer, not as in the case of the sin-offering
[iv. 20, 26, 35) and the trespass-offering (v. 6, 10,
18, 18; vi. 7, etc.), witb the act of the priest,
although in all cases the mediatorial function of
the priest was, as here, necessarily involved.
Ver. 5. He shall kill. — The killing, skin-
ning, washing and preparation of the victim,
were the duty of the offerer, or, according to
Outram, of some clean person appointed by him.
Lange : " This is also an expression of the free-
will of the sacrificer. He must indeed slay his
own offering himself, just as the devout can offer
his will to God only in free self-determination.
Only false priests took the sacrifice by craft or
force into the court, and slew it themselves, or
had it slain at their command. ' The functions
of the priest were concerned with the presenta-
tion and sprinkling of the blood, and the burning
of the victim upon the altar. In the case, how-
ever, of national offerings, the offerer's part also
was undertaken by the priests assisted by th *
Levites {'1 Chr. xxix. 24, 34), apparently not in
consequence of their office, but as representa-
tives of the whole people. So also in the case
of the Passovers of Hezekiah (2 Chr. xxx. 17)
and of Josiah (i6. xxxv. 10, 11) the Levites
performed these duties on behalf of the people,
because many of them were disqualified by uq-
cleanness. Hence, as appears in the ancient
versions, there has arisen a difference of opiniou
as to the part performed by the offerer.
Kill. — tsnty is a general word exactly ren-
dered, and is frequently used for killing in sa-
crifice. It does not therefore need to be changed.
The teehnical word used only for sacrifice ia
031, while fl'DH = to put to death is never used
in this connection.
The bullock. —"Ip3 ]3 = lit, son of an ox,
applied to a calf (ix. 2) and to a mature young
bull (13 iv. 3, 14). ,
Before the Lord — i. »., in immediate view
of the place where His presence was especiaDy
manifested. Knobel {in loco) notes how the
slaughtering of the victim where it might be con-
sidered h bijiBakijmlg tov Beov was provided for
among the heathen.
And the piiests. — With the blood began the
exclusively priestly functions. In the case of
very numerous sacrifices the Levites might catch
the blood and pass it to the priests (2 Chr. xxx.
16). but the "sprinkling" was always done by
the priests alone.
Sprinkle. — The word p^I is a different one
from the T\U (more common in the Hiphil form
^'l\^) generally used of sprinkling with the finger
or with hyssop, and refers to the throwing of the
blood by a jerk against the sides of the altar from
the plJD or bowl in which the blood of the vic-
tim was caught. Bosenmiiller shows that the
word cannot be translated, as some would have
it. by pour. The LXX. usually, but not always,
renders the former by wpocxe'tv, the latter by
palvuv. There seems, however, no sufBoient rea-
son for changing the translation of the A. V.
17
The priest was to sprinkle the blood against all
the sides of the altar ; and this was done, ac-
cording to Jewish tradition, by throwing it from
the bowl successively against the opposite cor-
ners of the altar, so that it sprinkled against
each of the adjoining sides. The same law held
for the peace-offerings (iii. 2, 8, 13 ; ix. 18), and
trespass-offerings (vii. 2) ; but noc for the sin-
offering (iv. 5-7). Lange: "The blood is the sym-
bol of the spiritual life which is given up to
Jehovah (at the door of the tabernacle of the
congregation) but which may not be consumed
with the body of mortality by the fire of God's
appointment. As it is said ttiat it is * to be
brought up,' it follows that the slaying belongs
between the altar and the door of the court,
where the station of the sacrificer is. That it
must be poured out on the altar before the burnt-
offering can be kindled, tells us plainly that no
offering up of life or body is profitable unless the
soul has first been given to Jehovah. But this
lias been given up to the God of the altar, not
surrendered to the altar -fire to destroy or
change."
Before the door of the tabernacle. — The
altar was in full view of the gate-way or door,
as it is expressed Ex. xl. 6 nr)3 'Jp^
Ver. 6. He shall flay. — The offerer skinned
the animal, and the skin was the perquisite of
the officiating priest (vii. 8). Kalisob, however,
says that " the flaying was probably performed
by a Levite under the direction of the officiating
priest." Lange says, " With the slaying the
life departs, with the skin goes the old appear-
ance of life, under the conventionally commanded
division disappears also the old figure of life, in
the burning disappears the substance of the body
itself. Only the blood, the soul, does not disap-
pear, but passes through the purifying process
of sacrifice, and goes hence into the invisible,
to God. The pouring out, of the blood at the
foot of the altar round about, can in no case
mean 'the convenient disposal of the blood.'
The blood goes through the sanctified earth to
God."
Cut it into his pieces — i. e., properly divide
it according to custom.
Vers. 7-9. The priests. — We here again
come upon those essential parts of the sacrifice
which could be performed by the priests alone.
The direction to put fire upon the altar is under-
stood by Knobel and others to refer only to the
first sacrifice upon the newly-erected altar, as it
was required afterwards (vi. 13) that the fire
should be kept always burning upon the altar ;
or it may be understood of po arranging the fire
— when not in use, raked together — as to con-
sume the sacrifice. The head is especially men-
tioned in order that the whole animal may be
expressly included, sin.-ie it would not be con-
sidered one of the "pieces" into which the ani-
mal was divided. The/a< 113 used only in con-
nection with burnt-offerings (vers. 8, 12 ; viii.
20) probably means tbe fat separated from the
entrails and taken out to wash. Boohart, a(f(?;;s
a came sejunctua. All was to be laid in ordrr upon
the wood; everything about the sacritioe must
have that method and regard to propriety be-
coming in an act of worship. According to Jew-
26
LEVITICUS.
ish writers, the parts were so laid upon one an-
other as to have the same relative positions as in
the living animal. Outram I. 16, J 13.
His inwards and his legs, which were to
be washed, are generally understood of the lower
viscera and the legs, especially the hind legs,
below the knee ; it is doubtful whether the wash-
ing was required for the heart, the lungs and the
liver — LXX. iymiXia Kal ol nods;; Vulg., intes-
tina et pedes. Lange: "Head and Fat. The
knowledge of earth and its prosperity must first
pass into the fiery death ; then also the purified
organs of growth, nourishment, and motion,"
Shall burn. — "''E'pn ^ to cause to ascend in
smoke, as incense. The word is used only of the
burning of incense, of the sacred lamps, and of
sacrifices, and is a very different one from 'llj?
the word for common burning, which is applied
to the victims, or parts of victims burned with-
out the camp (iv. 12, 21, etc.). It connects the
bloody sacrifice with the incense, and shows that
the object of the burning was not to destroy the
victim, hut rather, as declared just below, to
cause its essence to ascend as a sweet savor unto
God.
An offering made by fire. — H^N a word
applied exclusively to sacrifices (although some-
times to the parts of them eaten by the priests.
Bent, xviii. 1 ; Josh. xiii. 14), in xxiv. 7 applied
to the incense laid upon the shewbread. The
appearance of tautology, hardly to be avoided in
the translation, does not exist in the original.
The word is usually associated, as here, with the
phrase "a sweet savour unto the Lord"
(LXX. oaiiil Evucliac). This phrase is applied to
all sacrifices, hut belongs peculiarly to the burnt-
offering ; as the phrase to make atoneTnenthelonga
peculiarly, but not exclusively, to the sin- offer-
ing. Its intent is plainly to describe the divine
pleasure in the sacrifice offered. Theodoret
( Qusest. 62 in Ex.) : " By human things he teaches
Divine. As we delight in sweet odors, so he
calls the sacrifice made according to the law a
Bweet savor. But that this is not to be taken in
the naked letter is shown both by the Divine na-
ture which is incorporeal, and by the ill smell
of the burnt bones. For what can smell worse
than these?" Lange: "The conception is not
exhausted in the conception of a sweet, pleasant
smell. As in a pictorial sense, anger is repre-
sented by the snorting of the nostrils, bo the re-
signation of self to God and His rule is called a
eavnr well-pleasing to the nose."
Vers. 10-13. The burnt-offering from the flock.
The law here being essentially the same as for
the bullock is more briefly given, except in re-
gard to the place of slaying. The offering might
be either from the sheep or goats, but the former
were probably more esteemed.
Ver. 11. On the side of the altar north-
vrard. — So also the table of shew-bread with
the continual meat-offering stood on the north
side of the holy place (Ex. xxvi. 35) The east
side of the altar was the place for the heap of
ashes on the side towards the door by which they
must be carried out; the west side would have
been inconvenient, being towards the holy place
with the laver between; the south side had pro-
bably (as Josephus says was the case in the se-
cond temple. Bell. Jud. V. 5, 6, a-rrb /iea^/iPptafJ:
ctt' avrov avoSog) the ascent to the' altar whicfc '
must be kept clear ; so that the north side alone
remained. Lange : " Death is something be-
longing to the mysterious night, and belongs as
a night-side of life, to the night-side of the earth;
just as also the priestly eating of the shew-bread
must be considered as a night meal." In the
same place were also to be slain the sin-offerings
(iv. 24, 29, 33) and the trespass-offerings (vii. 2).
There being ample room in the court for the sa-
crifice of the smaller victims, which also required
less time in their preparation, they were killed
near the altar instead of at the door. Nothing
is said of the peace-offerings which, acooriiingto
Mishna, might be killed in any part of the court.
When not too numerous, however, they would
have been more conveniently slain in the same
place.
Ver 12. His head, etc. — is to be connected
per zeugma with he shall cut, i. e., he shall out
it into his pieces and (sever) his head and
his fat.
Vers. 14-17. The burnt-offering of fowls.
From chap. v. 7-11 ; xii. 8, it is probable that
this offering was for those who were unable to
bring the more costly offerings. It might be
either of turtledoves, or of young pigeons; but
only one bird was required. The turtledoves
(iurtur auritus) appear in vast numbers in Pales-
tine early in April, and are easily captured;
later in the season they entirely disappear. The
common pigeon has been bred in the country
from time immemorial, and also is found wild,
at all seasons, in great abundance ; but when full-
grown is difficult of capture. It has, however,
in the course of the year, several broods of two
each, which may be easily taken on the nest.
Hence, in the case of the pigeon, the mention of
the age. Knobel observes that the allowing of
doves or pigeons in sacrifice was quite excep-
tional among the ancient Orientals, and distin-
guished the Hebrew law from others. We have
then in this a fresh instance of the especial care
for the poor in the Divine law.
Ver. 15. And the priest shall. — In this case
the offerer's part must be performed by the priest
to prevent the loss of the small quantity of blood
contained in the bird. No mention is made of
the laying on of hands which was perhaps omit-
ted on account of the diminutive size of the
victim.
Pinch off his head. — p'lD occurs only here
and in v, 8, and its precise meaning has been
much questioned. In v. 8 it is expressly limited
by the provision that the head was not to be en-
tirely separated from the body in the case of the
bird to be eaten by the priest ; in regard to the
other bird (v. 7, 10), it was to be treated as the
bird for a burnt-offering. As there is no such
limitation here, as it is implied that the treat-
ment was different from that of the bird in v.
8, and as the head was to be immediately burned
on the altar, while something further was to be
done to the body, the precept must be unders'oi''
to require an entire separation of the head. So
Outram, following the Mishna and other Jewish
authorities. Lange, however, considers from
the analogy of v. 8, that the head was not to
CHAP. I. 1-17.
27
be disjoined from the body. He translates pSp,
" cleave in two, so that death is produced and the
blood can flow out as from a vessel. The closely
related Vho means apparently to tear off; the
closely related njS means to cleave, cut into."
The LXX. has avoKvi^eiv in both places. The
exact sense seems best expressed by tlie margin
of the A. V. — pinch off the head with the nail.
Pressed out against. — The small quantity
of blood made it practically impossible to deal
with it as in the case of the larger sacrifices.
The sense of 'U1 nsOJ is that the blood of the
T ; •
bird should be thoroughly squeezed out against
the side of the altar.
Ver. 16. His crop with its filth. The ob-
scure word nnVJS has occnsioned much differ-
TT :
ence of opinion ; see Textual Notes. The ren-
dering here given is ably supported at length
by Rosenmiiller. This was to be flun» on the
heap of ashes and refuse east of the altar.
Ver. 17. He shall cleave. — The priest was
to split the binl open, (by its wings, or by means
of its outspread wings, Lange), but so as not to
separate the parts ; in the same way a fowl is
now prepared for broiling. Lange : " The di-
rection was given to take the place, as tar as
possible, of the cutting in pieces of the burnt-
offering, i. e., the destruction of the figure of the
body."
A sweet savour. — The repetition of the same
words as in ver. 9 and ver. 13, shows that this
humbler sacrifice of the poor was acceptable
equally with the more costly sacrifice of the
rich.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL.
I. The ofi'erings mentioned in this chapter
were purely voluntary ; yet when offered, the
law in regard to them was strict and sharply
defined. In this the Israelites were taught
a general principle of the Divine will. Who-
ever seeks to draw near to God must do so
in the way of God's own appointment. That
worship only is acceptable to Him which is in
accordance with His will. Not that which may
seem most effective, not that which may be
thought best adapted to man's needs; but sim-
ply that which God approves may be offered to
Him.
II. These offerings must be " perfect," 1i. «.,
without blemish, and the most scrupulous clean-
liness was required in offering them. These re-
quirements were of course necessary in view of
the typical relation of the sacrifices to Christ ;
but they also taught the general principle that
in his offerings to God man may not try to put
off upon Him what is of inferior value — the light
coin, or the scraps of unoccupied time. God is
to be served with the best that man can com-
mand. And in this service regard must be had
to the infinite purity and holiness of Him with
whom we have to do.
III. The sacrifice might not be completed by
the offerer. Man, being sinful, was unworthy
to offer propitiation to God for himself. The
priest must intervene for the sprinkling of the
blood and the burning of the victim. In view
of the peculiar virtue everywhere attributed
to blood as "the life" (Gen. ix. 4, etc.), and
the especial office of that "life" in connec-
tion with the disturbed relations between God
and man (oh. xvii. 10-12, etc.), and of the ap-
pointment of the priest to this duty, it is plain
that he here acts in a mediatorial capacity. As
Cajvin (in loco) notes, "ministers of reconcilia-
tion must be sought, made competent to their
high function by Divine anointing. This points
to Christ not only as the Victim offered for sin,
but also (as is shown at length in the Ep. to the
Heb.) as Himself the Priest." In general it es-
tablishes the principle that they only may exer-
cise authority on God's behalf whom He has
commissioned for the purpose.
IV. In the provision for a less costly burnt-
offering, we see that while in His providence
God distributes unequally the means of offering
to Himself, He yet provides that an equally ac-
ceptable offering shall be within the reach of all.
The poor widow's two mites were greater in His
eyes than the costly gifts of the rich. The same
thing is true when the propitiatory character of
the offering is considered. Before God all souls
are alike precious, and all equally have the op-
portunity of drawing near to Him.
V. In the New Testament certain words and
phrases are applied to Christ which are the Sep-
tuagint translations of the technical words here
and elsewhere used of the sacrifices. Thus He
is called (Eph. v. 2) irpoaijiopav Kal Bvaian t( fef
£if bidducees : Mark ix. 49, 50, Every sacrifice
shall be salted with salt Have salt in
yourselves, and have peace one with another;
1 Cor. v. 7, 8; Col. iv. 6, Let your speech be
alway with grace, seasoned with salt ; Heb. xiii.
15, through Christ, Let us offer the sacrifice of
praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our
lips giving thanks to His name.
HOMILETICAL AND PEACTICAL.
The oblation to God, though unbloody and
among the least of the sacrifices, must still be
the best of its kind, of fine flour. It must have
upon it the oil of an act of the Spirit, and the
sweet frankincense of prayer. That it may be
truly a gift to God, and acceptable, it is only
necessary that a mere handful of it be actually
burned upon His altar ; the rest is still a gift to
Him, although consumed by those who minister
in His service. ** It is joined with the burnt-
offering like blessing with faithful discharge of
duty." Lange.
Every variety of food, fit for the altar, must
be sanctified by an oblation. We ever ask:
"Give us this day our daily bread," and re-
ceiving it, we are called upon to acknowledge
the Giver by giving to Him an offering of that
which is His own. Even the leaven and the
honey, which, from their fermenting properties,
may uot go upon the altar, may yet be offered
as first-fruits. There is none of God's gifts
which we may use ourselves, with which we
may not show our gratitude to the Giver.
In the worship of God " we may not adopt
our own inventions, though they may be sweet
and delicious as honey to our own palates. . . .
Honey is good in its proper place, and heaven
itself is typified by 'a land fiowing with milk
and honey' (Ex. iii. 8; xiii 5); but if God for-
bids it, we must abstain from it, or we shall not
come to tbat heavenly Canaan." Wordsworth.
That seasoning of salt which the apostle re-
quires for our conversation (Col. iv. 6), may not
be wanting from our gifts to God. They are not
to be insipid, but having " that freshness and
vital briskness which characterizes the Spirit's
presence and work." Alford.
Of first-fruits especially is an oblation to be
brought. Not only should we give to God as
He blesses us all along; but especially with
each new harvest received from His bounty
should a first portion be laid aside for His ser-
vice.
CHAP. III. 1-17. 33
C— PEACE-OFFERINGS.
Chap. III. 1-17.
1 And if his oblation [offering'] be a sacrifice of peace-offering, if he offer it of the
herd ; whether U be a male or female, he shall offer it without blemish before the
2 LoEB. And he shall lay his hand upon the head of his offering, and kill it at the
door of the tabernacle of the [om. the'] congregation: and Aaron's sons the priests
3 shall sprinkle the blood upon the altar round about. And he shall offer of the
sacrifice of the peace-offering an offering made by fire unto the Lord ; the fat that
4 covereth the inwards, and all the fat that is upon the inwards, and the two kidneys,
and the fat that is on them, which is by the flanks, and the caul above the liver,
5 with [on'] the kidneys, it shall he take away. And Aaron's sons* shall burn it on
the altar upon the burnt-sacrifice, which is upon the wood that is on the fire : it is
an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the Lord.
6 And if his offering for a sacrifice of peace-offering unto the Lord be of the flock ;
7 male or female, he shall offer it without blemish. If he offer a lamb [sheep°] for
8 his offering, then shall he offer it before the Lord. And he shall lay his band
upon the head of his offering, and kill it before^ the tabernacle of the [om. the^]
congregation : and Aaron's sons shall sprinkle the blood thereof round about upon
9 the altar. And he shall offer of the sacrifice of the peace-offering an offering made
by fire unto the Lord ; the fat thereof, and the whole rump [fat tail'], it shall he
take off hard by the back-bone : and the fat that covereth the inwards, and all the
10 fat that is upon the inwards, and the two kidneys, and the fat that is upon them,
which is by the flanks, and the caul above the liver, with [on*] the kidneys, it shall
11 he take away. And the priest shall burn it upon the altar: it is the food of the
offering made by fire^ unto the Lord.
12, 13 And if his offering be a goat, then he shall offer it before the Lord. And he
shall lay his hand upon the head of it, and kill it before the tabernacle of the [om.
the''] congregation : and the sons of Aaron shall sprinkle the blood thereof upon
14 the altar round about. And he shall offer thereof his offering, even an offering
made by fire unto the Lord ; the fat that covereth the inwards, and all the fat that
15 is upon the inwards, and the two kidneys, and the fat that is upon them, which is
by the flanks, and the caul above the liver, with [on'] the kidneys, it shall he take
16 away. And the priest shall burn them upon the altar : it is the food of the offer-
ing made by fire for a sweet savour : aU the fat is the Lord's [as food of an offer-
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL.
I Ter. 1. |3'lp=off6ring, as in ch. ii.
' Ver. 2. See on i. 3, Text. Note ».
1 Ver. 4. Si> must here be translated on, not imlh, since the kidneys have just been mentioned.
« Ter. 5. The Sem., LXX. and one MS. add the prietts. So also the LXX. and one MS. in ver. 8, and the Sam. and
LXX. in Tor. 13. r
« Ver. 7. 2\a3—^^3, according to Bochart (Bieroz. I. 33), a sheep of intermediate a?e between the n7t3-=lanib
and the S'N of three years old. It is, however, often applied to the sheep of one year in which case the age is mentioned,
as xiv. 10; Nnm. yii. 15, 17, 21, etc. In ProT. xivii. 26 it is described as yielding wool. In the A. V. the form W2^ is
uniformly rendernd tamft.excf pt in Ex. xii. 5, while the other form is translated »*«ep nine times, and lamb four times.
There is no ground for this distinction.
« Ver.8. The locality for killing the victim is made' more definite by the insertion in one MS. and in the Syr.: "be-
fore the Lord at the door of." The LXX. makes the samb insertion in vr. 13.
' Ter. 9. H'Sn, according to all interpreters the fat tail of the ovia latiamdala, a variety common in Arabia and
Syria, but in mJdern Palestine -aid to be the only variety. The tail i» descrbed a^ of rich marrowy '"*! »''„*!'% !^'''tU °i-
the hind quarter-, and often trailing on the ground. Th« worl occurs onlv in this connection (Jix. xxix. iji, i. • . ,
viii. 25; ix, 19), and is rendered by all the ancient versions, except the LXX. (6(r((.i;!), tail. So also JOJ. •»-'"^- '"•_'.• '•
• Ver. 11. Tbe senne is expressed by the addition in 2 MS8. and in the LXX. of the words from i. 9, 13, 17, ninJ-n T
(Ml Bweet-s-oelling savor.)
34
LEVITICUS.
17 iug made by fire for a sweet savour, shall all the fat he the Loed's']. It shall be a
perpetual statute for your generations throughout all your dwellings, that ye eat
neither fat nor blood.
9 Ver. 16. The A. V. seemB unnecessarily complicated, as there are but two clauses in this verse. After "saYour" the
Sam., LXX , and some JMSS. add " to the Lord.'
EXEGETICAL AND CEITICAL.
The peace-offering, like the offerings of the
preceding chapters, is spoken of as already in
common use, and the law is given for its proper
regulation. The offerings of this, as of the pre-
vious chapters, were voluntary. The peace-
offering differed from the oblation in being ani-
mal, and from the burnt-offering in not being
wholly consumed, but after a small portion had
been burned, and a portion given to the priest,
the remainder reverted to the offerer for a sac-
rificial mpal (vii. 11-21) ; a further difference is
in that the burnt- offerings were only male, the
peace-offerings either male or female; and still
further, doves were not allowed in the peace-
offerings, because they were too small for the
necessary division, and for the sacrificial feast.
The full form D'dSk' n3I used here, is nearly
always employed in Leviticus ; but the peace-
offering is probably intended by the simple n3I
of xxiii. 37 (vii. 16, 17 docs not, and xvii. 8
may not mean peace-offering), and it certainly
is by D'oSttf in ix. 22. The latter, as the de-
termining word, is frequently used elsewhere
alone, as Ex. xx. 24; xxxii. 6; Dent, xxvii. 7;
Josh. viii. 31, etc. The word is variously de-
rived and has various shades of signification
attached to it: (1) Thank- offering, Gesenius,
Fiirst, Luther, Rosenmiiller, Winer, Bahr,
etc., 6vaia ;fapiiTT!?p/a, Jos. Ant. iii. 9, 2 ; (2)
Meat-offering, Zunz ; (3) Salvation-offering, auTfj-
piov, LXX. most frequently (i. e. in the Pent.,
Josh., Judges, Chron., Ezra, Amos), Pnito;
(4) Peace-offering, eip?)VM6(, LXX. (in Samuel,
Kings, Prov.), Aq., Sym., Theod., Vulg., A. V.
The last two senses are very similar; the first
seems less appropriate, partly because the
strictly thank-offering appears as a special variety
of this more general class (vii. 11, 12); partly
because the O'tphw were offered not only in
thanks for benefits received, but also in times
of distress and in supplication for the divine
help (Judg. xx. 26; xxi. 4; 1 Sam. xiii. 9; 2
Sam. xxiv. 2-5). Outram says: Sacrificia salu-
taria in sacris Uteris shelamim dicta, ut gum semper
de rebus prosperis fieri solerent. impetratis utique
aut impctrandis. Lange brings together the
several meanings in the name Heilsopfer, salva-
tion or saving offering "in the common sense
of blessing or prosperity-offering." In English
the already accepted peace-offering seems to ex-
press sufficiently the same sense, and is there-
fore retained. The law (vii. 12-16) distinguishes
three kinds of peace-offerings — thanksgiving,
vow and free-will offerings ; the only difference
in their ritual being in the length of time during
which their flesh might be eaten.
The peace-offerings are not called "most
holy" like the oblation, but only "holy," and
the priests' portion might be eaten by their
families in any "clean place" (vii. 31 with i,
14; xxiii. 20). The portion which reverted to
the offerer to be eaten as a sacrificial feast
might be partaken of only by those who were
legally "clean" (vii. 20, 21). The peace-offer-
ings were prescribed on a variety of occasions,
and as they were the necessary offerings of sac-
rificial feasts, and hence of all solemn national
rejoicings, they were the most common of all
sacrifices. From Num. xv. it appears that, like
the burnt-offering, they were always accompa-
nied by the meat and the drink-offering. —
Lange: " The peace-offering refers to prosperity
as Jehovah's free gift in past, present, and future.
As regards the past, it is a simple praise and
thank-offering (an Eben Ezer, Amos v. 2i), In
reference to a happy present, it is a content-
ment, joy, or feast-offering. As it relates to a
future to be realized, to an experience of salva-
tion yet to come, to a deliverance or an exhibi-
tion of mercy that is prayed for with a vow, it
is a votive offering. The prescriptions in regard
to the various kinds are different. Here it is
said, that the animal to be slain may be either
male or female, only it must be without blemish.
In ch. vii. 15 sq. nothing of the praise-offering
might be left over until the next day, whereas
the vow, or free-will offering might be eaten also
on the next day, but not on the third day."
Lange then points out that in the case of those
vow, or free-will offerings which were to be
burnt-offerings, a male was required, xxii. 19,
without blemish. "Even an abnormal forma-
tion of the victim, too long or too short legs of
the animal [vii. 22, 23] was enough to make it
unsuitable for the vow-offering, but still not for
the free-will offering. So every kind of pros-
perity was to be hallowed to the Lord."*
Sacrificial feasts were at least as old as the
time of Jacob (Gen. xxxi. 54), and became com-
mon among all nations; but the distinoti?e
name of peace-offering first appears when Moses
came down with the law from Mt. Sinai (Ex.
xxiv. 5). The thing signified, however, must
have been already familiar to the people, for
the word recurs in connection with the idola-
trous sacrifice of Aaron when Moses had again
gone up into the Mount (Ex. xxxii. 6).
Two kinds of victims were allowable: of the
" herd," or of the " flock."
Vers. 1-5. The peace-offering of the herd, !. «•
a bullock or a cow.
* In reisard to the question whether the peaoe-offMing
embraces also the supplicatory offering, Lange says: *'It u
understood that the vows themselves were supplicatioi s,
irom which the accompanying offering might also be lalleo
a supplicatory offering ; but a peculiar supplicatery offinng
to strengtiien the supplication would have been priyadicial
to the freedom of the divine hearing. It shows a tine dis-
tinction that the free praise and thank-offeringa {Thorn),
which were preceded by no vows, were exalted abo?e tbe
vow-offerings and free-will offerings, inasmuch as theae l»t^
ter mghc be accompanied by a suit! h feeling."
CHAP. III. 1-17.
35
Ver. 1. The viotim both in this and in the
other kind (ver. 6) might be of either sex. Ac-
cording to Herodotus, this was directly contrary
to the Egyptian law, which forbade offering the
female in sacrifice: 6i)lela^ m aiere it is required, and here worse than useless to the sense. It should be omitted as in nearly all the ancient ver-
Bious. The 7:3 in both clauses is to be taken partitively.
^ Yer. 3. nOE'N / Prop. in£ const. Kal., and there used as a noun = io hring guilt upon. So most of the ancient ver-
s'ons and the modern expositors generally.
• Ver. 5. To anointed the LXX. and Sam. Vers, add whoae hand is conxecrated. The Sam. text has a similar addition.
^ Yer. 7. The Sam. and 8 MS3. prefix the article to □*!, while the Sam., 3 MSS., and Yulg., omit the hulloch.
• Yer. 8. 2'^pT\~hy- This is translated in the A. V. and in the ancient versions as if it were "T\~r\i^ as in iii. 14.
So it must be translated, and such is actually the reading in the Sam. and many MSS.
' Yer. 12. The Sam. and LXX. here have the plural. Of course th i high-priest did not do this with his own hands, but
is said to do that which he caused to be done, according to common usage of all languages.
s* Yer. 9. On. See iii. 4, Textual Note 8.
8 Yer. 13. Vd^'hs {congregation) Slip {assembly) the two words used here, and IjJlO Num. xvi. 2 and freq. have
no difference in signification which can be recognized in translation. They are used in apposition.
• Yer. 13. njE'. In the A. Y. em always in Lev. is the translation of NC3n. This being the only exception, should be
XT T T
changed. , ,
'» Ver. 13. D7J^3 has dagesh in the 7 here and in v. 2, 4 According to Delitzsch it is an old rule of pointing " that
every consonant which followed a syllable terminating with a guttural should be pointed ^^ith dageih, if the guttural was
to be read with a quiescent thma and not with chateph." Oomp. "IDX'l Gen. xlvi. 29 ; Ex. xiv. 6, D'7J?jT (according to
some copies) P(<. x. 1.
" Yer. 14. The Sam. and LXX. here add the " without blemish " so frequently expressed, and always to be un-
derstood.
12 Yer. 14. nXtan'?. the word is used in both senses— a sin, and a sin-offering. The context requires the latter here.
It has no article.
" Yer. 14. The LXX. and Yulg. add the door of, which is implied.
88 LEVI..^
15 And the elders of the congregation shall lay their hands upon the head of the b
lock before the Lord : and the bullock shall be killed [one shall kill the bullocl
16 before the Lokd. And the priest that is anointed shall bring of the bullock's bio
17 to the tabernacle of the [omi< the] congregation: and the priest shall dip hisfinj
in some of the blood, aud sprinkle if^^ seven times before the Lord, even before t
18 vail. And he shall put some of the blood upon the horns of the altar'" which
before the Lord, that is in the taberuacle of the [omit the] congregation, and shi
pour out all the [other] blood at the bottom of the altar of the burnt offering, whi
19 is at the door of the tabernacle of the [omit the] congregation. And he shall ta
20 all his fat from him, and burn it upon the altar. And he shall do with the bi
lock as he did with the bullock for a [the"] sin offering, so shall he do with thi
and the priest shall make an atonement for them, and it shall be forgiven thei
21 And he shall carry forth the bullock without the camp, and burn him as he bumi
the first bullock : it'* is a sin offering for the congregation.
22 When a ruler [prince"] hath sinned, and done somewhat through ignorance [ii
advertence'] against any of the commandments of the Lord his God eoncemh
23 things which should not be done, and is guilty ; or if [if perhaps™] his sin, wherei
he hath sinned, come to his knowledge ; he shall bring his offering, a kid [a buck'
24 of the goats, a male without blemish : and he shall lay his hand upon the head c
the goat, and kilP^ it in the place where they kill the burnt offering before tl
25 Lord : it is a sin-offering. And the priest shall take of the blood of the sin offerii)
with his finger, and put it upon the horns of the altar of burnt offering, and sha
26 pour out^ his blood at the bottom of the altar of burnt offering. And he sha
burn all his fat upon the altar, as the fat of the sacrifice of peace offerings : an
the priest shall make an atonement for him as concerning his sin, and it shall 1
forgiven him.
27 And if any one of the common people [any soul of the people of the land^] si
through ignorance [inadverttiice' J while he doeth somewhatagamut auy ot the commaLi
28 mentsofthe Lord concernm^i/im^s which ought not to be done, and be guilty; orif[
perhaps™] his sin, which he hath sinned, come to bis knowledge : then he sha
bring his offering, a kid of the goats [a she-goat^] a female without blemish, forh
29 sin which he hath sinned. And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the si
30 offering, and slay the sin offering in the place of the burnt offering. And tt
priest shall take of the blood thereof with his finger, and put it upon the horns o
the altar of burnt offering, and shall pour out all the [other] blood thereof at tl
" Ver. 15. The subject of OVWS is one of the elders.
i» Ver. 17. The ellipsis supplied by U in the A. V. is filled out in the Sam., in one MS., and in the Syr., by "of tl
blood," comp. yer. 6. Several other words are filled out lu the same yerdion in the following yei-ees from the precedii
pani graph.
18 Ver. 18. The Sam. and LXX. unnecessarily specify " altar of incense."
17 Ver. 20. The article of the original shonld be retained as the reference is to the sin-offering of the high-priest.
18 Ver. 21. The Sam. and many MSS. have here again the later feminine form NTI-
18 Ver. 22. X^E^J. This word yariously rendered in the A. V. captain, chief, governor, prince, and ruler, occurs in U
only here, but very frequently in Num., where it is translated cayfain in ch. ii. 02 times), chief in cbs. iii., iv. (5 timei
once ruler, xiii. 2, and prince tliroughout the rest of tlie book (42 times) as well as tlironghout Gen. and Josh. lu Ex.
occurs four times uniformly translated ruhr. In nearly all these places it refers to persons of subsiantially the same ras
and it would be better therefore that its translation should be uniform. It means literally, an exalted persoti, andisapplt
to the head of a tribe, or other large division of the people, whether of Israel or of other nations. Lange interpret it
" the tribe chieftain," referring to Num. iii. 24. As prince is on the whole the most common rendering of the A. v., ai
expresses very well the sense, it is retained here.
» Ver. 23. The conjunction IK should be rendered if perhaps, Fuerat, Gesenins. The Syr. renders by if, the IX
Kai, Vulg. et postea.
21 Ver. 23. Tj^Jy = o he-goat, generally understood of one older than the "[^i^^ or young he-goat used in the our
and peace-offerings (Puerst, Knobel). It is often rendered Wd in the A. V. It is also rendered devil xvii. 7 ; 2 Chr. xi.
where the reference is to tlie idolatrous worship of the goat, (or goat-like deity) and twice aatt/r in Isa. (xiii. 21; xxxiv. i'
It is the kind of goat used in the sinMjffering generally. Bochart supposes it to mean a goat of a peculiar breed ; so m
22 Ver. 24. The Sam. puta the verb in the plnral ; so also in ver. 33.
2« Ver. 25. Tlie LXX. and 4 MSS. have all his blood, as in the other places. ^^
2< Ver. 27. There seems no occa,sion here to deviate from the literal translation which la retained so far as peopw
the land" is concerned, in xx. 2, 4; 2 Ki. xi. 18,19; xvi. 16. It was the common name of the whole people as distinguU"
from the priests (in this case probably from the high-priest) and the rulers.
25 Ver. 28. ni'JJtJ' is simply the feminine of the word discussed under ver. 23.
» Ver. 30. Two MSS., the Sam., and the Syr., unnevjssarlly add " of burnt-offering." The Sam. and the LXX. ""
the same adoition at tlie end of v* r. 34.
CHAP. IV. 1-35— V. 1-13.
31 bottom of the altar.'" And he shall take away all the fat thereof, as the fat is taken
away from off the sacrifice of peace offerings ; and the priest shall burn it upon the
altar for a sweet savour unto the Lord ; and the priest shall make an atonement for
him, and it shall be forgiven him.
32 And if he bring a lamb [a sheep"] f >r a sin offering, he shall bring it a female
33 without blemish. And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the sin-offering,
34 and slay it for a sin offering in the place where they kill the burnt offering. And
the priest shall take of the blood of the sin offering with his finger, and put li upon
the horns of the altar of burnt offering, and shall pour out all the [otlier] blood
35 thereof at the bottom of the altar : and he shall take away all the fat thereof, as
the fat of the lamb [sheep"] is taken away from the sacrifice of the peace offerings ;
and the priest shall bum them upon the altar, according to [upon'''] the offerings
made by fire unto the Loed : and the prisst shall make an atonement for his sin
that he hath committed, and it shall be forgiven him.
Chap. V. 1. And if a soul sin, and hear [in that he hear''] the voice of swearing
[adjuration'"], and is a witness, whether he hath seen or known ofit; if he do not
2 utter it, then he shall bear his iniquity. Or if" a soul touch any unclean thing,
whether it be a carcase of an unclean beast/" or a carcase of unclean cattle, or the
carcase of uncleau creeping things, and tjit be hidden from him; he also shall be
3 unclean, and guilty. Or if he touch the uncleanness of man, whatsoever uncleau-
ness it be that a man shall be defiled withal, and it be hid from him ; when he kno w-
4 eth ofit, then he shall be guilty. Or if a soul swear, pronouncing [speaking idly^^]
with his lips to do evil, or to do good, whatsoever it be that a man shall pronounce
[speak idly"'] with an oath, and it be hid from him ; when he knoweth of it, then
5 he shall be guilty in one of these. And it shall be, when he shall be guiltv^' in one
6 of these things, that he shall confess that he hath sinned in that thing: and he shall
bring his trespass offering [bring for his trespass^] unto the Lord, for his sin which
he hath sinned, a female from the flock, a lamb or a kid of the goats [a sheep" or
a she-goaf^], for a sin offering; and the priest shall make an atonement for him
concerning his sin.
7 And if he be not able'' to bring a lamb [sheep"], then he shall bring for his tres-
pass, which he hath committed, two turtledoves, or two young pigeons, unto the
8 Loed; one for a sin offering, and the other fir a burnt offering. And he shall
bring them unto the priest, who shall offer that which is for the sin offering first,
9 and wring [pinch] off his head from his neck, but shall not divide it asunder : and
he shall sprinkle of the blood of the sin offering upon the side of the altar ; and the
rest of the blood shall be wrung [pressed'*] out at the bottom of the altar : it is a
" Ver. 32. ty23 — a sheep, see Text, note 6 under iii. 7.
" Ter. 35. 'tJ^X' h))- The sense is here as in iii. 5 upon. These be'ng special offerings, tlie daily burnt-iiffering wouM
always have been upon the altar before them, and even if that wire already wholly consumed, the expression " upon " it
conld still be naturally used.
S" Chap. T. Ver 1 "Partioula 1 ante nVDE' hie usurpatur ainoKoyucm, estquevortenda pn'n, ei guid, utQen. xxyi.
T ■■ It
12 ; Deut. xvii. 16." KoBenmueller.
"> Ver. 1. n'^X- Commentators are generally agreed that this should be translated adjm-aUrm. The veib hi the Hiph.
is translated ailjitre in 1 Sam. xiv. 2t. See Exeg. Com. The Heb. has no word for adjuration as distinct from mmring. It
is expressed in the LXX. by ookhtjuoi). . j, -,.,(,*
" Ver. 2. Tiie full form would be IK'S '3; accordingly ihe Sam. and some MSS. prefix 'J) here and add "lu'K
in ver. 4. "' Ver. 2. See note i on xi. 2.
82 Ver. 4. Nt337, NI33', speoli idly, or ill-admsedly. Conip. jSaTToAoyeio, Malt. vi. 7.
" Ver. 5. For DtyX' the Sam. and 20 MSS. here substitute KtSTV-
" Ver. 6. DtyN, like JlXtSn, is us'd in the sense both of trespass and trespass-offering. The ancient versions have
the question between them open. The Vulg. has simply agat pmitentiam, LXX. oicrei irepl Siv eTAijfijieAijire Kupi'io, while
the Semitic versions leave the same doubt as the Hebrew. Modern commentators aie divided, but the weight of "P™'™
accords with the Exeg. Com. At the end of the verse the Sam.and t e LXX. have the fuller form, " and the prie,-t Bliall
make an atonement for him, for his sin which be hath sinn-id, and ic shiill be forgiven him."
"Ter. 7. IT J^'JO x'7~DNl lit. // his hand cannot acquire. The sense is well expressed by the A. V.
" Ver. 9. nis'^ the translation of the A. V. wrung i"ight answer here, but aa the same word must be translated iir«iis Ver. 13. OMation. Comp. ii. 1, Textual Note 2, and Exeg. at beginning of ch. ii.
EXEGETIOAL AND CRITICAL.
The formula by which this chapter is intro-
duced — And the LORD spake unto Moses
— answering to i. 1, 2; v. 14; vi. I; vi. 8, etc.,
marks this passage as a distinct portion of the
law. The offerings of chaps, i. — iii., when
brought by individuals, were all voluntary, and
are recognized as already familiar; but in chaps,
iv., V. sacrifices are appointed (no longer volun-
tary) for certain offences, and these sacrifices
now for the first time receive names from the
purposes for which they were commanded — Sin
and Trespass offerings. These specialized sacri-
fices were a creation of the Mosaic law, and are
therefore naturally placed after the more gene-
ral sacrifices of chaps, i. — iii. Lange says also:
"The former class of sacrifices refer to innate
sinfulness, and in so far forth to the general par-
ticipation in guilt of the offerer (on which ac-
count throughout a 133, a covering of the offerer,
takes place) ; but does not have reference to pe-
culiar persOLial transgressions to be atoned for by
the sin and trespass offerings." In the present
section we have to do only with the sin offering
(iv. 1 — V. 13) ; yet this and the trespass offering
are closely related, and are distinguished only
as the sin or the trespass comes into the fore-
ground, so that the line of separation is not al-
ways strongly marked, and in particular cases
might even be difficult to trace. "Sin is the
transgression of the law," and may involve no
further harm, and requires expiation only for its
own guilt; while trespass is wrong done to ano-
ther (whether God or man), and involves not
only sacrifice for its sin, but also amends for its
hurra. With neither were oblations or drink-
offerings allowed ; and when, in case of extreme
poverty, flour was permitted as a sin-offering, it
must be without oil or frankincense (v. 11).
Lange lakes a somewhat different view of the
relation of these two offerings, and consequently
of the proper analysis of (his whole passage, iv.
1 — vi. 7. The substance of his views may be ga-
thered from the headings of his several sub-
divisions as follows: The Sin offering and the
Trespass offering (iv.— vi. 7). (a) The Sin-of-
fering and the little Sin and Trespass offering
(,iv.— V. 13). 1. The Sin offering (iv. 1-21). 2.
The little Sin offering (iv. 22-35). (6) The
Trespass offering. 1. The little Sin and Tres-
pass offering, or the uucleannesa of the common
people (v. 1-13). 2. The great Trespass offer-
ing, or guilt offering (v. 14 — vi. 7). Accordingly
he says: "The following considerations may
serve somewhat to disentangle the question how
the sections of the sin offering and the trespass
offering are to be separated from one another,
and whether v. 1-13 treats of the sin offering or
of the trespass offering. There is, certainly, no
question that all sin is at the same time guilt, a
deed which has made itself into an actual stale
of things which must be atoned for, or has be-
come liable to punishment. And there is also no
question that guilt in general is also sin, although
as participation in guilt, it may be widely sepa-
rated from the centre of sinfulness, as far as the
disappearing minimum, even until it is said of
the guiltless Messiah in Isa. liii. that He would
give his life as a trespass offering — Asham; and
from this arises also the possibility that two
classes may be formed in which the one empha-
sizes sin as such, while the other emphasises
more the slate of guilt. The state of guilt may
be very trifling, as being accessory to a guilty
principal, or very evil as an original offence; in
all cases it requires a proportionate penance
(not expiation) or satisfaction. From the inde-
terminate character of the antithesis, it also
comes that there may be a transitional form be-
tween the sin and the trespass offerings — a form
of sin offerings which, at the same time, becomes
elevated as a trespass offering. There are forms
of the predominating participation in guilt, and
one Buoh we find in the section chap. v. 1-13.
On the other hand, in the strict trespass offer-
ings which follow further on, we shall take up
all cases in which the offence against the holy
places and rights of Jehovah, or in regard to the
property of a neighbor, amount to an offence
that is a violation of right, which must be atoned
for by restitution, punishment and sacrifioe.
"In chap. iv. 3 the sin of the High Priest
brings guilt on the people — that is, the guilt of
participation in guilt. Luther translates
Vi}}T\ n'DE^N"? that he scandalizes the people— AHim-
oeption not very different from our own— fi^''
that he brings upon them liability of penalty w^
punishment. So it is also with the congregatii'*
CHAP. IV. 1-35— V. 1-13.
41
of Israel : it becomes guilty through its sin
(ver. 13). So also with the noble (ver. 22). So
too, at last, with the oommoa Israelite (ver.
27). Ought now the section chap. v. 1-13 to be
(as Knobel) only an example to illustrate the
foregoing transaction in the case of the sin offer-
ing of the common Israelite? Ver. 6 says:
And he shall biing his trespass ofiering
unto the IiORD for his sin." [This is pro-
bably the key to the whole view of Lange. If,
however, DI^K be here considered as standing
not for trespass offering, but for trespass (see
Text, note 34 on verse 6), the view before given
seems preferable.] "It is true that both vers.
11 and 12 repeat the statement that his offering
is a sin offering. But according to the context,
the meaning of this is that this sacrifice must be
treated entirely after the analogy of the sin of-
fering. No incense nor oil are to be added to
this sacrifice. The same rule is applied to the
great trespass offerings that follow, chap. v.
14 sq. The first instance, chap. v. 1, has pecu-
liarly the character of participation in guilt.
The properly guilty person in this case is the
blasphemer ; the participation in guilt comes
from a soul hearing the curse and not cleansing
itself from defilement by giving information.
The view of the Heidelberg Catechism, that "by
silence and looking on one may become a parti-
cipant in such fearful sins," appears here. So
the touching a corpse is set with the unclean
states of men by its natural connection, and the
rash swearing, by traditional and common cus-
tom. That which is spoken of in the special
greater crimes, as they are raised into a class by
themselves by the introduction in ver. 14, is the
gross violation of the law. Here, then, rightly
appear the actions in which a man is guilty
against Jehovah, i. e., against His holy things or
His law. The fraud of which the sinner h^s at
last become conscious must be atoned for in
most cases by a restitution which was increased
by one-fifth of the whole amount. But legal
restitution alone was not enough ; it must be
preceded (without mentioning the trespass offer-
ing elsewhere prescribed) by a costly sacrifice
of a ram worth two shekels. As religious atone-
ment was of little value alone, when social resti-
tution was directed, so also restitution, as a sup-
plementary payment, was of little worth without
religious atonement.
"Now, on the one hand, we must not mistake
the fact that the section chap. v. 14 sq. draws a
distinction between those faults which at the
same time have become debts or relate to customs
(mostly legal transgressions of right, as viola-
tions of the rights of property), and the purely
religious faults in which throughout (with the
exception of the case in chap. v. 17-19) the sin-
ner has only to deal with God, and so far the
newer division must be considtre 1 right, as in
Knobel and Keil (and so also in Kurtz and
others). But, on the other hand, it must not be
overlooked that the subject has already been
about the offering of the Asham in the section v.
1 sq. [?], and this is in favor of the older opinion
which may be found in the headings of Stier's
translation. There is also no question thst to
reduce the whole guilt-idea to legal transgres-
18
sions will obscure very much the guilt-idea in
the present case, as when Knobel wishes to
leave out of consideration the passage Isa. liii.
10, when he says " Dt?X can be no actual tres-
pass offering." According to Knobel, the
Asham arises from the rights of neighbors. But
here evidently it arises from the rights of Jeho-
vah, which Keil also emphasizes, and Knobel
states indirectly. But we should rather say that
it arises from the absolute right which is consi-
dered to be under Jehovah's protection, in hea-
ven and earth, and which has been completely
confused with the guilt-idea itself in the theology
of the day, in which justice in its many forms is
travestied by "Good disposition" (the substan-
tive and the adjective are allowed to evaporate
into the adverb). It would have been better to
have found the key to the conception of guilt in
Isa. liii. For just as the guilt of a sinner can
extend over a community, so also the exculpation
wrought by the Redeemer. The W'A expresses
that man has become guilty, liable to punish-
ment, towards Jehovah or towards bis fellow-
man ; and the emphasis lies so strongly on the
liability to punishment that the same word de-
notes at the same time satisfaction; and con-
versely, the Hiphil means not merely to give sa-
tisfaction, but also to bring over others the b.an
of guilt as a penalty. As concerns the varying
distinction between the respective sections, we
must especially notice that one must proceed
from the difctinction between the universal guilt
idea and the conception of a legal fault, falling;;
into the theocratic judicial sphere. If this dif-
ference be held to, we can certainly establish,
the newer division ; for in the ritual of sa-
crifice the distinction between the sin and
trespass offerings is not to be mistaken. Kno-
bel has stated this difference accurately, p. 394
sq. It is properly made prominent that the
trespass-offering — as a religious offence makes
the forgiveness of God necessary — may also be
a sin-offering, so that it is frequently cited as a
sin-offering " The trespas.s-offering, it may
then be said, was always available only for the
single Israelite, and was the same for all; while
the sin-offering served also for the whole people,
and varied according to the standing of the sin-
ner in the Theocracy ; the trespass-offering con-
sisted always of sheep, while in the sin-offering
all sacrificial animals were allowed;, the tres-
pass-offering must be worth a definite price, and
was not modified, in the case of those who were
unable to offer it, to a pair of doves or a meat-
offering, as was the sin-offering ; in the trespass-
offering, as in the burnt-offering and thank-
offering, the blood was sprinkled on the side of
the aliar of burnt offering (vii. 2); in the sin-
offering, on the other hand, departing from the
custom in all other sacrifices, it was brought
before God (iv. 5); the flesh in the trespass-
offering always belonged to the priest (vii. 6),
while in the more especial sin-offerings it was
burned." Then the distinction of the occasions
may be expressed as follows: 1) Dishonesty
against the revenues of the priests, as against
the holy things of Jehovah. 2) Dishonesty in
the due fidelity towards a neighbor (in a trust,
in a deposit, in property found). 8) Dishonest
42
LEVITICUS.
use of auth rity over a maid betrothed to ano-
ther man (xix. iO). 4) Defeaudino in regard
to the preference of the daughters of Israel over
heathen women lEzra x. 19). Besides these,
the VIOLATION of the Ark of the Covenant by the
Philistines (1 Sam. vi. 3); imperillinq the con-
gregation by the contagious leprosy (xiv. 12) ;
DEFILEMENT of the Nazarite, as wealieuing the
inviolability of his vow (Num. vi. 12). "Ac-
cording to tliese examples the trespass-offering
is distinguished from the sin-offering in the fol-
lowing manner: it arises from the right of a
neighbor, and rests upon a violation of this
right." But Jehovah too claims satisfaction,
" since He has iixed the rights of those pertain-
ing to Him." Or also the right simply claims
satisfaction: a particular instance is the case
of a guilty person who has gone astray, through
oversight or heedlessness, in a way that is
known to no one but himself; who afterwards
has an uneasy conscience, and then feels him-
self burdened by his misdeed, and becomes con-
scious of his guilt (v. 17, 18). Otherwise in-
deed, he would be unable to atone, for instance,
for his false oath. With the former division
one could with propriety reverse the designa-
tions, and term the sin-offering the trespass-
offering, and the trespass-offering for the most
part the sin-offering, the offering for real and
ideal transgressions of right. In this confusion
of ideas the manifold differences are not too
prominent as tliey are cited in Knobel, p. 396,
Keil, p. (53) 310, Winer (Schuld und Siindop-
fer) and others. If we go back briefly to the
ideal distinctions: sin, as sin, is indeed guilt,
Kar' e^ox'/v, the particular evil deed ; guilt, as
such, on the contrary, is the entire effect of sin
in its cosmic sphere from the bad conscience
even to death, to Sheol, to Hell. Guilt, as such,
falls within the circle of evil, although the axiom
" guilt is the greatest of evils" refers to sin.
The sinfulness in guilt is the temptation to fur-
ther sinfulness: it has, however, also a natural
influence, aoi ording to which it reacts upon sin.
See the article ''Schuld" in Herzog's JSeal-
enrydopadie. Guilt rests in the legal effect, there
must be siiti?fiiction for it ; in the ethical effect,
evil eonscienc', false position towards God,
temptation to new ein ; in the social effect, it lies
as a burden upon the sphere of life that sur-
rounds the sinner, whether he be high or low ;
in the gewric effect, it is visited upon the chil-
dren of the father.?, and becomes a universal
might, a cosmic evil. Sin is solitary, guilt is
common ("forgive us our trespasses"). It is
obvious that ain in all cases is originally guilt;
but guilt in distinction from ein is, in many
cases, only participation in sin — aecessnriness.
Hveu in the section of the great trespass-offer-
ing, the force of participation in guilt may not
be entirely wanting, for the severity of the Le-
vitical relations, the temptations which adhered
to the church goods and lands, to property,
come into consideration. Under the law the
ignorant man is touched on all sides, and is thus
constituted in some measure a sinner, an acces-
sory through greater sinners who made the law
necessary. Sm is like a stone cast into a lake ;
guilt like the wave-circles which go out from it,
the circumference of that evil cen're. Sin, in
its consequences, is ideally an infinitum, enmity
against God; guilt, in itself considered, is a
self-consuming ^rettem, so far as it is not changeil
into a curse by its constant reciprocity with sin.
Sin can only be done away through the reconci-
liation of person to person ; it requires repent-
ance. Guilt is to be done away by means of
atonement (voluntary penance, not expiation),
personal or vicarious restitution ; for, on the
one hand, this of course is preliminary to the
completed reconciliation, and, on the other
hand, that breaks the way for expiation. See
the history of Jacob : the vision of the heavenly
ladder preceded the wrestling at the Jabbok.
Keil says somewhat differently: "As in the
sin-offering the idea of expiation or atonement
for sin, indicated in the sprinkling of blood,
comes forward, bo in the trespass-offering we
find the idea of satisfaction for the parpoue of
restoring the violated rightful order."
In what follows, the views previously pre-
sented will be followed, since the rendering of
DE'X by trespass rather than by trespass-offering
in V. 6 renders it unnecessary to enter upon
much of the nice distinctions here drawn by
Lange, and enables us clearly to separate the
sections of the sin and the trespass-offering.
Lange continues: "Ch. iv. 1. Sin, nNBri,
as missing, is in Leviticus more particularly
missing in regard to the holy fellowship with
the holy God through transgression of His com-
mand or violation of the reverence due Him.
It must, as debt, be paid for by punishment.
It makes the sinner unclean, so that he cannot
appear in God's fellowship, and hence unclean-
ness is a symbolic representation of sin, and the
unclean needs, when cleansed, a sin-offering for
a token and sign of his cleanness. It is under-
stood that the sin offering that was introduced
into the law by Moses preceded the given law;
and so it is easily to be supposed that voluntary
sin-offerings from compulsion of conscience
most probably must be as old as the saoriSce
in general, as certainly in the Passover the
force of the sin offering may be plainly recog-
nized." — [Lange must mean that the more gene-
ral sacrifices of old often included within them
ihe idea of the sin offering, as they did of every
other sacrifice ; but the specialized sin offering
itself, as already pointed out, is not menlioncd
before Ex. xxix. 14, nor is there any evidence
that it was used or known at an earlier date.]—
" On the extra-theocratic sin offering see Kuo-
hel, p. 386. But it is not correct to see with
Knobel in the death of the sacrificial animal an
actual satisfactio vicaria of the sinner, or to find
in the death of the animal the expression that
Ihe offerer had already deserved death. In
regard to the first point, the sacrificial animal
furnishes orily in the symbolical sense what the
offerer ought to furnish personally, but cannot.
And as to the second point, the death-punish-
ment, in the peace-offering, it is self-evident,
that the reference could not be to the punish-
ment of death, and also in the sin-offering the
difference between the Cherem" [Din— a curse,
a thing devoted to destruction] " and' the propi-
tiation through the sacrifice must be considered.
That the divine Justice should have punisheii
CHAP. IV. 1-35— V. 1-12.
43
an inadvertence, njJK'3, with death is an ovur-
TT : *
straining of the confession (with which the sao-
' rifioer appeared before God), that by this over-
sight or going astray he had entered the paths
of death,* as this idea indeed belongs to par-
donable sin. Otherwise an arbitrary distinction
would have to be drawn between sin with up-
lifted hand, and sin from inadvertence, under
which head must be understood not only sins of
ignorance and precipitation, but also natural
weakness and heedlessness. The turning point
of these sins lay in contrition. But the sacri-
ficer could in reality hardly satisfy the theocratic
order by his sacrifice; on the religious side his
sacrifice was thus a confession of his inability
to satisfy, an appeal for mercy ; and hence the
sacrifice became a typical prophetic movement
towards the future satisfaction "
The sins for which sin offerings were to be
presented were offences against the Divine law
much more in its moral than in its ceremonial
aspect. Great offences against civil society, such
as involuntary manslaughter (Num. xxxv. 10-15;
Deut. xix. 1-10), did not come within the scope
of these sacrifices ; and minor breaches of the
ceremonial law, such as uncleanness from contact
with the dead bodies of animals (Lev. xi. 24, 28)
or men (Num. xix. 11,19,20), were otherwise pro-
vided for. The sin offering had relation much
more to the individual conscience tlian to the
theocratic state or the peculiar Hebrew polity.
In Num. XV. 29 its privileges are expressly ex-
tended to the *' stranger." liut it was not allowed
to be offered in cases where no true penitence
could be supposed to exist, and it was therefore
not permitted in the case of presumptuous or
defiant sins (Num. xv. 30, 31).
The idea of vicarious satisfaction necessarily
appears more clearly in this specialized offering
for sin than in other sacrifices which were either
more general in their character, or specialized
for other purposes. (The word i^Xt3^ occurs
several times in Genesis in the sense of sin, but
never in the sense of ain offering, before Ex. xxix.
14). Hence, in view of the intrinsic insuificiency
of animal victims to atone for moral offences, this
sacrifice was emphatically typical of the true
Sacrifice for sin to come. The object of all the
divine dealings with man has been his restora-
tion to communion with God by the restoration
of his holiness; and the first step to this end
was necessarily the putting away of his sin.
Under the old dispensation, therefore, the typi-
cal sin offering was the culmination of its whole
syiitem, presented in the most emphatic form on
the great day of atonement (chap, xvi.) ; just as
under the new dispensation the culmination of
Christ's worlj for the redemption of His people
was His atoning sacrifice of Himself upon the
Cross of Calvary.
Unlike the preceding sacrifices, the victim in
the sin offering varied according to the offender's
rank in the theocracy. The ground of this is to
be sought in the conspicuousness of the offence,
not at all in its grossness. Here, as elsewhere,
„ .* " -^^ ^^ *^o a strainiag of the text to render the words :
in the day that thou eatest thereof, thou ehalt surely die,"
as meaning "thou shalt actually die the death." Religio-
naoral defith realizes itself gradually. Indeed, the principle
or death is the germ of death itself."
there was no correlation between the value of
the victim and the magnitude of the sin. Every
sin, great or small, of the same class of persons
was expiated by the same means; a victim of
higher value was only required in consequence
of official responsibility and position, and tbe
consequently greater strain which offences
brought upon the theocracy. There was no
such gradation in the Trespass offering, which
was related more to the harm done than to the
sin committed. Four grades are prescribed:
for the sin— (1) of the high-priest (3-12) ; (2)
of the whole congregation (13-21); (3) of a
prince (22-26) ; (4) of any of the people of the
land (27-35). After this follows an enumeration
of special sins for which confession should be
made and sin offerings offered (v. 1-6), with the
allowance of inferior offerings in case of poverty
(7-13).
Vers. 1, 2. The general condition of the sin
offering.
Ver. 2. Speak unto the children of Israel.
— It is always to be remembered that these laws
are given to a people already in covenant rela-
tion to God, and the essential point of that cove-
nant was the promise of the final victory over
sin in the person of "the seed of the woman."
The laws given until He should come are therefore
necessarily based upon His coming, and look
forward to Him.
Any of the commandments. — S^D in a
partitive sense. At the close of this verse must
be understood some such clause as he shall bring
nn offering for his sin. The actual apodosis of the
verse is the whole following chapter, and not
ver. 3, which relates only to the high-priest.
Vers. 3-12. The sin offering of the high-priest.
Lange here says: "It must be noticed that thi
high-priest could become the most guilty of all,
which the haughtiness of the hierarchy never
thought of enough ; that the whole congregation
was rated as one personality equal in rank to
him ; that the prince was only considered siightly
greater than the common man (the difference is
he goats, she goats, or an ewe) ; and that for the
poor, in the section v. 1-13, there were two more
peculiar modifications."
Ver. 3. The priest that is anointed. —
LXX.: apxi^psvc, ii2')_m\}3= high-priest, Tar-
gums. The high-priest is so called by reason
of the peculiar authority by which he alone was
consecrated to his office (Ex. xxix. 7; chap. viii.
12). The anointing of all the priests was indeed
expressly commanded (Ex. xxviii. 41; xl. 15),
and is recognized as having taken place vii. 36;
i. 7 ; Num. iii. 3 : yet in the account of the con-
secration, chap, viii., no other anointing of the
common priests is mentioned than that Moses
sprinkled both them and Aaron with " the an-
ointing oil" and the blood from the altar. Ac-
cording to the best Jewish authorities, however,
the pricits were anointed with the finger upon
the forehead. Ontram places the distinction in
the fact that each successive high-priest was per-
sonally anointed, while the others were only an-
ointed once for all in the persons of Aaron's im-
mediate sons. Whatever may be the truth in re-
gard to these things, the high-priest is evidently
regarded in a peculiar sense as anointed, and is
44
LEVITICUS.
generally designated in Lev. (iv. 5, 16; vi. 22;
XTi. 32) as the anointed priest. He is also
called the VnJH [rl3n=^rOT( priest (ixi. 10;
Num. XXXV. 25/28 bin; Josh. xx. 6), and in later
times the head or chief priest (2 Kings xxv. 18 ;
2 Chr. xix. 11), or simply the priest, /car' i^oxv"
(1 Kings ii. 35, etc.).
Do sin. — Origen (Horn. II. in Lev. §1) ob-
serves that inadvertence is not specified in the
case of the high-priest. It must, of course, be
supposed in view of the general principles on
which sacrifices were allowed at all; but it pro-
bably was not written in the law that the in-
firmity of the high-priest might not be made too
prominent. ,
To the guilt of the people, Di'ri nDEJiji^—
i. «., to bring upon the people the guilt of his own
transgression. It is an undue restriction of the
sense of these words to limit them to the sins
committed by the high-priest in his official capa-
city. Such sins, of course, did brin' guilt upon
the people (Lev. x. 17; Mai. ii. 7, 8) ; but over
and above this, nothing can be clearer in his-
tory, both under the old covenant and in the
world at large, than that God bad so constituted
men with a federal as well as individual relation,
that the sins of the head, whether of the nation,
the community, or the family, en'ail suffering
upon its members. The high-priest as the head
of the theocracy could not sin, but ihit the whole
body of Israel should feel its effects. The dis-
tinction may indeed be made between natural
and moral consequences, between earthly and
future punishments; still the two things are so
intimately connected, a debasing of the moral
sense of the community is so much the effect of
the unfaithfulness of its head that the spiritual
condition of the Israelites, following the general
law, was largely affected by that of their high-
priest, so that his sins did indeed "bring guilt
upon the people."
A young bullock -without blemish. —
The high-priest's sin offering was the same as
that of the whole congregation (ver. 14), not
merely because of the conspicuousness of his po-
sition and of the gravity of sin in one who should
be the leader to all holiness; but especially (see
ver. 3) because of his representative character
and his federal headship mentioned above. Ac-
cording to Jewish tradition, if the bullock of the
high-priest and the bullock of the congregation
stood together ready for sin offerings, the former
had the preference in every way. There was a
careful gradation of the victims for the sin offer-
ing : the high priest and the whole congregation
offered a male — a young bullock; the prince of-
fered also a male, but of the goats (ver. 23) ;
the people offered a female of either the goats
(ver. 28) or the sheep (ver. 32). There was also
a corresponding gradation, but with fewer
steps, in the ritual in regard to the blood, and
also in the disposition of the flesh. See below.
Ver. 4. The presentation, laying on of hands,
and slaughtering, were the same (vers. 4. 14.
15. 23, 24), as in the case of other sacrifices
(i. 3-5).
Vers. 5-7. And the priest that is anointed
shall take . — At the point of the treatment of the
blood the difference between the ritual of the sin
c Jerings and the other sacrifices begins, and thij
treatment differs somewhat in tlie several sin of-
ferings themselves. In this case, the high,
priest, who was himself the offerer, brought
some of the blood to the tabernacle of the con-
gregation; afterwards the person officiating is
designated simply the priest. From this it has
been argued that, as the high-priest was the one
whose sin was to be atoned for, the service was
here taken up on his behalf by another priest;
but there is precisely the same change at the
same point in the following offering for the
whole congregation (vers. IG, 17), and the high-
priest certainly officiated througboui on the great
day of atonement (chap, xvi.); moreover, the
fact of his offering the sin offering for himself as
well as for the people is established by Heb
V. 3.
Ver. 6. Sprinkle of the blood. — The wor'l
nin is different from pll used for sprinkle in
chaps, i, and iii. in view of the much smaller
quantity of blood used here. It is difficult to
express this in English translation, though fh'!
difference is observed in the LXX. and Vulg.
Seven times. — -The seven-fold sprinkling of
blood is frequently commanied (ver. 17: xvi. 17,
19; Num. xix. 4) always in connection with sin
offering, or (xiv. 7, 27) with ihe purification of
leprosy. In consecrations, too, there was a
seven-fold sprinkling of oil (viii. 11; xiv.l6),anJ
frequently the number seven is designated for
tho victims in sacrifice (xxiii. 18; Num. xxiii.
1,4,14.29; xxviii. II, 19, 27; xxix. 2, 8, 13,
3')). The same number also appears in many
other particulars connected with the divine ser-
vice, and has always been considered as symbo-
lical of completeness and perfection. The num-
ber is so frequent in the divine word, as well a<
in the ordering of nature, that it must be thought
to have its foundation in some unfathomable
heavenly relations. Its use in connection with
the sin offering is plainly to give emphasis to the
typical completeness of the propitiation.
Before the veil of the sanctuary.— There
is a variety of opinion as to precisely where the
blood was sprinkled. The LXX : /card rd mra-
Treraafia, and the Vulg.: contra velum, seem to
have supposed it was upon the veil itself. It
is more probable that the high-priest, dipping
his finger in the blood at the entrance of the
sanctuary, sprinkled it before him towards the
veil as he advanced to the altar of incense. The
object was plainly the presenting of the blood
before Jehovah, the manifestation of whose pre-
sence was on the ark just within the veil. "The
objective point was not the veil, but the ark 01
the covenant." Lange.
Ver. 7. Upon the horns of the altar of
sweet incense — the golden altar which stood
immediately before the veil. It was only in the
case of the sin-offerings for the high-priest and
for the whole people (ver. 18) that the blood was
brought to this altar — doubtless on account of
the especial gravity of the sins to be atoned for;
in case of the other sin offerings the blood wafl
put on the horns of the altar of burnt-offi'rin?i
(vers. 25, .30, 34) which stood in the court witn-
out. It was to be put in either case upon *
horns of the altar because in these the sigmn-
cauce of the altar culminated, and in the 8H
CHAP. IV. 1-35— V. 1-13.
45
offering, as has already appeared, and will still
more fully appear, the utmost emphasis was to
be given to every part of the ritual of propitia-
tion.
Shall pour all the blood. — But very little
of the blood had thus far been used ; the re-
mainder — all the blood — was to be poured out at
the foot of the altar of burnt-offering, the place
to which all blood of the sacrifices not otherwise
required was to be brought; it bad no sacrificial
significance. During the life in the wilderness
the blood of the comparatively smnll number of
sacrifices was here absorbed by the earth ; later,
in the temple conduits were arranged by whicii
it was carried off into the valley of the Kedron.
Vers. 8-10. The fat of the sin offering was
to be treated in the same way as that of the
peace offering, only that it is not said that it
siiall be burned " upon the burnt offering " since
when both were offered the sin offering came
first (xvi. 11, 15, 24) ; neither is the burning
of the fat described as " an offering made by
fire, of a sweet savor unto the Lord."
Vers. 11, 12. The disposition of the rest of
the victim, i. e., of the whole animal except
the blood and the fat, was the same in the
sin offering of the high-priest and of the whole
congregation (vers. 20, 21). The difference in
the treatment of the flesh of these from that of
other sin offerings is determined by the treat-
ment of the blood (vi. 30). When the blood had
been brought within the sanctuary, the flesh
must be wholly burned ; yet not burned as a sa-
crifice, the word 'l^tS' being never used in that
sense.
Without the camp. — No flesh of a sin-offer-
ing might be burned upon the altar, because the
nature of the offering was purely propitiatory,
and it did not admit of being so used as to be
called " the food of the offering made by fire
unto the Lord" (see on iii. 11). It is described
as " most holy" (vi. 25), and unlike the flesh of
any other sacrifice, affected everything with
which it came in contact (vi. '26-2S) ; whatever
it touched must either be destroyed or specially
purified. This was the law for all sin-offering-i,
and a further law comes into play in regard to
those sacrifices (that of the high-priest and that
of the whole congregation) whose blood was
brought within the sanctuary (vi. 30). Their
flesh was strictly forbidden to be eaten ; and it
remained that it must be destroyed in some other
way. Hence the command that it should be
"burned without the camp." Yet this was not
a mere convenience, resorted to because there
was nothing else to be done with it. The burn-
ing without the camp had a deep symbolical
teaching of sufiScient prominence to be referred
to in Heb. xiii. 11, 12, and applied to Christ.
The ground of the law seems to be that the flesh
of all sin offerings was in a peculiar sense " holy"
— devoted, under the ban — because they were
for the propitiation for sin; yet a gradation was
to be observed between them in this as in other
respects. Their blood had been offered before
the Lord, but when the blood had been offered
in a more peculiar and emphatic way by bring-
ing it within the sanctuary itself; a correspond-
ing emphasis must mark the treatment of the
flesh by carrying it forth to burn without the
camp. The red heifer, whose ashes were to be
used for purification, (Num. xix.) was to be
burned in the same way. The sinfulness of sin
and the importance and saereduess of everything
connected with its propitiation were thus set be-
fore the people in the strongest light.
Unto a clean place — not carelessly any-
where, lest it might happen to be to an "un-
clean place" (xiv. 40); but -where the ashes
are poured out, which was not merely "clean,"
but being used only in conneetiou with sacred
things, had itself acquired a certain sacred as-
sociation. The word *)"]!?, as already noted, in-
dicates that the burning itself was not sacrificial.
The same word is used for the burning of the
red heifer. Num. xix. 5. No especial sin offer-
ing is provided for the ordinary priest. It was
the spirit of the law to have as little as possible
of the caste relation about the priests, and in all
matters in which they were not necessarily se-
parated by their official functions, to treat them
as ordinary citizens. Their sin-offering was
doubtless the same with that of " any one of the
people of the land."
Vers. 13-21, The sin-offering of the whole
congregation.
If the -TO-hole congregation of Israel sin.
— Prominent among the ways in which a whole
congregation might sin are these : The civil
ruler might do that which involved the nation in
sin, and brought down punishment upon if, as
in Saul's slaughttr of the Gibeonites, or David's
numbering of the people ; a single individual by
an act which caused a breach of the divine com-
mands given to the whole people, might bring
sin upon them all, as in the case of Achan, Josh,
vii. 1 ; or the people generally might commit
some special sin, as in 1 Sam. xiv. 32, or f.all
into some habitual neglect of the divine com-
mands, as in regard to the Sabbatical year (2
Chr. xxxvi. 21), and the neglect of tithes and
offerings for which they are so frequently re-
proved hy the later prophets.
Through inadvertence. — There were two
kinds of such sin : first, inadvertence of conduct,
where the sinfulness of the act would be ac-
knowledged when attention was called to it ; and
secondly, inadvertence of the law, when the act
would not be known to be sinful until the law
had been explained. In either case there would
be no consciousness or intention of sin, and the
thing would be hid from the eyes of the
assembly.
And are guilty. — Every transgression of the
divine law brought guilt, whether through a
faulty heedlessness of conduct, or a criminal
ignorance of the law which had been given.
This principle is abundantly recognized in the
New Testament.
Vers. 14-21. The ritual of the sin offering for
the whole congregation is the same as that for
the high-priest. The victim prescribed here is
a bullock ; in Num. xv. 24 a kid in addition is
required for sins of inadvertence of the congre-
gation. Either the law was modified, which
seems unlikely, or else the two requirements
have reference to some distinction in the occa-
sion or character of the sin, such as in one case
46
LEVITICUS.
sins of omission, in the otlier of commission.
Tliere was also another and very peculiar sin-
offering for the congregation prescribed on the
especial occasion of the great day of atonement
(xvi. 5). The high-priest's sin offering isthere
unchanged; but that for the people is highly
altered in view of the especial purpose of the
day.
Vor. 1.5. The elders — since the congregation
could only perform the acts required of thd of-
ferer by means of their representative".
Ver. 20. And the priest shall make an
atonement for them, and it shall be for-
given them. — This naturally was not said in
regard to the high-priest's own sin offering, hut
is repeated in connection with those that, follow
(vers. 26, 31, 35; y. 6, 10, 13), and elsewhere in
the same connection (Num. xv. 2-3, 28); also in
connection with the trespass offering (v. 16, 18;
vi. 7; xix. 22). It is also used in connection
with the purificatory offerings, the change being
lu I'le from forgiveness to cleansing ns the result of
the atonement (xii. 7, 8; xiv. 20, 53; Num. viii.
21). The use of the simpler form " make atone-
ment for him" in connection with the burnt-
offering has already been noticed. The priest
in these oases unquestionably acted, and was un-
derstood by the people to act, in a mediatorial
capacity. "^33. as noticed under i. 4, means
literally, to cover, io put mil of sight, to hide. Wh,at
is promised here is of course not that God will
cause to he undone the wrong that has been
done ; but that He will so put it out of His sight
that the sinner may stand without fault in His
presence. See the various expressions to this
effect in the prophets, e. ff., Ps. Ixxxv. 2; ciii.
12; xxxviii. 17; xliii. 25; xliv. 22; Jer. xxxi.
34; Ezel£. xviii. 22; xxxiii. 16: Mio. vii. 18,19,
etc. This atonement was thus effectual in re-
moving the guilt of all transgression (other tlian
wilful) against the divine law. Hence the efB-
caey of the sin-offering could only have been de-
rived from its typical relation to Him who was
the Propitiation for the sins of the whole world.
(1 Jno. ii. 2).
Vers. 22-26. The sin offering for a Prince.
The ritual in this case differs from that in the
previous cases, first in the selection of the vic-
tim, which must now be a he-goat instead of a
bullock ; and secondly, in that the blood was not
presented within the sanctuary, which involved
consequently a difference in the disposition of
the flesh.
Ver. 24. In the place Twhere they kill the
burnt offering — i. e., the burnt offering "of
the flock." on the north side of the altar, i. 11.
Ver. 25. The horns of the altar of burnt
offering — In this and the following cases, as
the sin was less extensive in its effects, so the
ritual was far more simple. There was no
sprinkling of blood before the veil, and the great
altar in the court was substituted for the allar
of incense within the sanctuary. The fiit was
burned as before; on the disposition of the flesh,
see vi. 26-29.
Vers. 27-35. The sin offering for one of the
people.
In this case the victim is changed to a female,
but the ritual remains the same in all respects
as in the sin offering of the prince An option
was allowed as to the victim whether it should
be of the goats, which seems to have been pre-
ferred (vers. 28-31), or of the sheep (vs. 32-3.5).
Chap. V. 1-13 Certain specified sins and the
sin-offering for them.
There is a difference of opinion among com-
mentators as to whether this section should be
connected with the ein-offerings which preiieile,
or with the trespass offerings which follow. See
Lange's discussion under iv. 1. The chief ar-
gument for the latter is from the use of the
word 'IDE'S, ver. 6 (see below), which, however,
rightly understood, does not bear out the infer-
ence. On the other hand, these verses are dis-
tinctly a part of the same divine communication
begun iv. 1, while another begins at v. 14 ; tbe
word sin-offering is expressly used throughout
(vers. 6, 7, 9, 11) ; and the idea of compensation
for the harm done, prominent in the trespass
offering (especially ver. 16), only slightly ap-
pears (ver. 6) in these offerings. They are
reckoned with the sin offerings by Knobel and
Keil. They may perhaps be considered as some-
what intermediate between the ordinary sin
offering and the trespass offering, yet belonging
in the category of the former. The sins for
which they were to be offered were of a less
flagrant character than those of ch. iv.
Four partiouLir cases of inadvertent sins are
first mentioned, vers. 1-4 (for vers. 2 and 3 are
clearly to be distinguished); and then confession
(ver. 5) and an offering (vers. 6-13) is required
for each. The normal offering is prescribed in
ver. 6, a substitute allowed in case of poverty,
vers. 7-10, and a further substitute in case of
extreme poverty, vers. 11-18. Only in regard to
these substitutes is the ritual given, that for ihe
normal sin offering having been already de-
scribed in ch. iv.
Ver. 1. The case here specified is that of a
witness put upon oath who withholds testimony
as to that which is within his own certain know-
ledge — lj;_ Xini. It is the omissioh, according
to our phraseology, " to tell the whole truth."
It may cover also the case of neglect to testify
when a public demand for information has been
madu with an adjuration; St. Augustine (Quest.
in Lev. I.) aud Theodoret extend it also to the
case of hearing testimony, known to be false,
given under oath. The case of giving positive
false witness is quite a different one, and is
treated in Dent. xix. 16-19.
Adjuration. — In the forms of Jewish trial,
the witness did not himself utter the oath, or
express his assent to it, but was adjured by the
magistrate. Comp. Matt. xxvi. 63 ; 2 Chron.
xviii. 15.
Whether he hath seen or known.— This
covers both the cases of eye-witness and of
knowledge derived from any other source.
Bear his iniquity. — Until purged in the
way herein provided. The expression is a very
common one in the law (vii. 18; xvii. 16; xii.
8; XX. 17; xxiv. 15; Num. v. 31; ix- 13;
xiv. 33, 34, etc.), and means that he shall endure
tlie punishment of the sin, whether in its natural
consequences or in positive inflictions. It "
used both vvith reference to capital sins and also
CHAP. IV. 1-35— V. 1-13.
47
to those which might be expiated hy sacrifioc.
If the sacrifice were not offered, the sinner must
bear the consequences of his sin. In this case
confession (ver. 5) was a necessary condition of
the sin-offering ; therefore if he do not utter
it, for without this there could be no desire to
be again at one with God, and hence no place
for the offering of sacrifice.
Ver. 2. The second case is that of unoleanness
from touching the carcase of any unclean ani-
mal, and was a sin of a ceremonial character.
It be bidden from him. — For the unolean-
ness of this and the following verse simple and
speedy forms of purification were provided in
ease immediate action were taken (xi. 24, 25. 28,
89,40; XV. 5, 8, 21; Num. xix. 22); but if it
were neglected or unobserved, the defilement
still actually existed, and as the offender was in
danger of communicating his own uncleanness
to others, and also of constant violation of the
precepts of the law, it must be expiated by sac-
rifice. On the'oonnection between uncleannet'S
and sin, see preliminary note to ch. xi.
Ver. 3. Orifhe touch the uncleanness of
man. — A special case is made of this in order,
as everywhere in the law, to emphasize the dis-
tinction between man and the lower animals.
Thus while observed impurity from contact with
the carcase of an unclean animal was removed
at even after washing the clothes (xi. 24, etc.),
and neglected might be expiated by the sin-
offering, the impurity from contact with the
human dead body continued seven days, and
rpquired repeated purifications (Num. xix. 11-
16) ; and neglected, the offender defiled the
tabernacle, and must "be cut off from Israel."
The various kinds of uncleanness in man are
detailed in chs. xi.-xv.
When he knovreth of it. — This expression
is. to be taken in conneoiion with the " it be hid-
den from him" of ver. 2. Of course while the
defilement was "hidden" there could be no
consciousness of guilt, nor of moral sin ; yet the
transgression of the law was an existing fact,
and entailed its consequences. When it was
brought to the offender's knowledge, then he
was guilty in the further sense that he was
bound to remove the already existing guilt by
confession and sacrifice.
Ver. 4. The fourth and last case specified is
that of careless or forgotten oaths, not embra-
cing the breach of the third commandment ; but
the neglect or forgetfulness to perform an oath
(such as might be uttered in recklessness or
passion).— To do evil, or to do good. — That
is to do anything whatever. Comp. Num. xxiv.
13 ; Isa. xli. 23.
Ver. 5. And it shall be, when.— A form
to introduce the apodosis to each of the previous
verses.
He shall confess. — This applies to the par-
ticular sins mentioned in the foregoing verses,
not to the sin-offering in general. It is also
required in the case of the trespass offering.
Num. v. 6, 7. According to Jewish tradition a
prayer and confession accompanied the laying
on of the hand in all offerings. This is a dis-
tinct acknowledgment of the particular fault,
apparently before presenting the victim.
Ver. 6. Bring for his trespass. — The He-
brew being exactly the same as in the following
verse, it seems better to give the same transla-
tion. The A. V. has also the same translation in
vers. 15 and 25 (vi. 6). The phrase is thus parallel
to, and in apposition with, for his sin which
he hath sinned. The sacrifice for this is
expressly called a sin offering in this verse and
vers. 7, 11, 12. By this rendering the sin an I
the trespass offerings are kept distinct as they
were certainly intended to be.
A female from the flocis. — The victim and
the ritual are precisely the same as in the sin
offering for " one of the people of the land,"
and probably vers. 1-4 are intended to apply
only to sins committed by them.
Vers. 7-10. The alternative offering of the
poor.
As in the case of the voluntary burnt offering
(i. 14-17), so in this of the required sin offering,
the poor are allowed to bring pigeons or turtle-
doves.
One for a sin offering, and the other for
a burnt offering. — The two together evidently
constitute the full sin-offering; but they are
called by these names because the treatment of
the two birds was different, and each after the
analogy of the offering from which it is named.
The bird being too small to admit of its parts
being disposed of as a sin offering, two were
required, oneof which was undoubtedly (although
this is not expressed) to be eaten by tiie priest,
as is stated in the Mishna, after the fashion of
the flesh of the sin offering (vi. 26, 29 ; vii. 7) ;
4he other was to be burned on the altar like the
fat of that sacrifice.
Ver. 8. Finch off the head. — See under i.
15. In this case the head was not to be entirely
separated, but pinched off enough to allow the
blood to flow and to kill the bird.
Ver. 9. Sprinkle of the blood. — This was
not done in the case of the bird for the burnt-
cffering. It could easily be accomplished by
swinging the bleeding bird against the side of
the altar.
Pressed out at the bottom. — Where the
blood of the other sin offerings was poured. In
the burnt offering this blood (i. 15) was pressed
out against the side of the altar.
Ver. 10. The ritual of the second bird was to
be the same as when birds were offered for a
burnt offering (i. 15-17). The two birds toge-
ther constituted a complete sin offering. From
the fact, however, that two were required, it is
plain that the part of the offering not required
to be consumed upon the altar was still essential
to the sacrifice.
Vers. 11-13. The second alternative for the
extremely poor.
This was allowed, on account of the absolute
necessity of the sin offering, in order to put it
within the reach of all. Lange notes that the
sins specified in this section are, for the most
part, sins arising from the lowness and rudeness
of the inferior people : the law seeks to refine
them. Still it is to be remembered that this
alternative offering was not only for the sins
mentioned v. 1-13, but for all sins reached by
the sin offering. The fact that it was unbloody
is not opposed to the general significance of the
shedding of blood in connection with the remis-
48
LEVITICUS.
Bion of sin (Heb. ix. 22), since this alternative
■was altogether of an exceptional character and
allowed only in case of necessity- It was also
supplemented by the general sin offering on the
great day of atonement.
The tenth part of an Ephah. — The Ephah
according to Josephus was about 1 1-9 bushels ;
according to the Eabbins, rather less than half
that amount. The tenth of an Eph.ah (called an
Omer, Ex. xvi. 36) was therefore, according to
the lower and more probable estimate, Tery
nearly three pints and a half.
He shall put no oil upon it. — The tin-
ofFering of flour wns sharply distinguished from
the oblation of the sam'^ (ii. 5) by the absence
of the oil and frankincense, just as the other
sin offerings were marked by the absence of the
oblations. In both cases, the difference indi-
cates that the offerer stood in a different rela-
tion toward God, not that of one in communion
with Ilim, but of one seeking atonement for the
sin which separated from Him.
Ver. 12. On the "handful" and "memorial"
see on ii. 2.
Ver. 13. In one of these. — As in ver. 5,
one of the sins specified, vers. 1-4.
As an oblation, i. e. as most holy. Comp.
under ii. 3. The character of the sin offering
in its two parts is still preserved in this its
humblest form.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL.
I. One of the plainest teachings of the sin
offering is that everything opposed to the re-
vealed will of God is Bin, whether done with the
purpose of transgre.-ssing it or not. Butler has
shown that this is in perfect accordance with
the divine law in nature. St Paul considered
himself the chief of sinners, because he "perse-
cuted the Church of God;" yet as he obtained
mercy because he did it ignorantly in unbelief
(1 Tim. i. 13-16), so the sin-offering was pro-
vided for those who put themselves io opposition
to the divine will without intending to do so.
It was on this principle that Jesus could pray
for those who nailed Him to the cro»s : " Father,
forgive them for they know not what they do"
(Luke xxiii. 34) The great mass of human sin
is incurred not for the sake of sinning, but in
heedlessness, or through wrong judgment, or
under the impulse of passion. It comes under
the head of sins of inadvertence; but, as of old,
needs the intervention of the blood of the atone-
ment before the sinner can be restored to com-
munion with God.
II. In the law of the sin offering it appears
clearly that under the old dispensation as well
as the new the character of the sin was deter-
mined by the animus of the sinner. For high-
handed and defiant sin no sacrifice was allow-
able ; he who committed this put himself out of
the pale of reconciliation. But he who commit-
ted sins — which might in themselves be far worse
— " through inadvertence" might bring his of-
fering and have " an .ilonement made for him."
An excellent historical illustration may be found
in oomparing ihe stories of th'i lives of Saul and
of David; and the distinction between the two
kinds of sin is expressed in the psalm of David
(XIX. 12).
III. In the sin offering the offerer must have
already been in a state of mind which led him to
desire the forgiveness of his sin, as is shown by
his very act of bringing his victim to the priest;
he was also ready to confess his sin ; yet still
the offering was required. By this was taught
in outward symbol to the people of the old dis-
pensation what is BO clearly proclaimed in the
Gospel, that for the forgiveness of sin there must
be some propitiation outside and beyond the sin-
ner himself; mere penitence, though an essen-
tial prerequisite, cannot alone avail to restore
the disturbed relations to God of one who has
transgressed His law.
IV. The inherent ineflicacy of these sacrifices
to atone for sin has been already repeatedly no-
ticed ; moreover, this inefficacy was constantly
brought to the mind of the worshipper by the
repetition of the sin offerings, as is especially
noted in regard to the sacrifices of the day of
atonement in the Ep. to the Heb. (ix. 6-8);
still the sin offering is insisted upon in the law
with an emphasis greater than belongs to any
other sacrifice. Most clearly, therefore, does it
point to the " Lamb of God that taketh away the
sin of the world."
V. In the extension of the privileges of tho
sin-offering in Num. xv. 29 to "the stranger"
one of those many intimations is given, scattered
everywhere throughout the Old Test., which the
Israelites were so slow to understand, that tbe
blessings of forgiveness and of approach to God
were intended for all people, and that tbe nar-
rowness of restriction to the children of Abia-
ham after the flesh was on'y a temporary provi-
sion "because of transgressions" until the
promised Seed should come. But even while the
restriction continued the stranger in Is-rael might
present his sin offering, and Israel's priests must
make atonement for him.
VI. The sacramental va'ue of the sin offering
is happily expressed by Calvin in Lev. iv. 22.
"In truth they hold not the first rudiments of
the faith who do not reci'gnize that the legal ce-
remonies were sacraments. But in all sacra-
ments, at least those which are regular in the
church, there is a spiritual promise annextd. It
follows therefore that forgiveness was tru'y pro-
mised to the Fathers who reconciled themselves
to God by the victims offered ; not that the
slaughter of sheep could expiate sins, but be-
cause this was a symbol, certain and impossible
to deceive, in which pious souls might rest so
that they could dare to appear before God in
lalm confidence. In fine, as sins are now sacra-
mentally washed away by baptism, so under the
law also sacrifices were expiations, although in
a different fashion ; since baptism sets before us
Christ immediately, who was only obscurely sha-
dowed forth under the law. Improperly indeed
is that transferred to the signs which belongs to
Christ alone, in whom is set forth to us the truth
of all spiritual good and who finally did away
sin by His single and perpetual sacrifice. But
since the question is not what the sacrifices
availed in themselves, let it suffice that they testi-
fied of the grace of God of which they were
figures."
VII. The ritual of the sin offering was the
most solema of all the sacrifices, and the blood
CHAP. V. 14— VI. 7.
49
of this (except in case of tlie alternative doves)
was always to be placed at least ou the bonis of
the altar, while that of the greaest burnt or
peaoe-otfering was only sprinkled ou its sides;
thus the forgiveness of sin is shown to be the
most fundamental and necessary part of the
whole approach to God.
VIII. No sin offerings, although some of them
were "burned without the camp," were ever
wholly burned upon the altar, and the common
expression in regard to other sacrifices, " the
food of the Loi'd " is never applied to these.
Frankincense and oil were not allowed with the
vegetable, nor an oblation with the animal sin
ottering The whole ritual was stern and severe,
until by the sacrifice itself propitiation had been
made. By this symbolisTi is set forth the atti-
tude of the Infinite in holiness towai-ds sin ; and
thus is seen what must have been the conse-
quences to the sinner, except for the Propitiation
that is in Christ Jesus.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL.
The " exceeding sinfulness of sin " is shown
in every possible symbolical way by this offering
It has in it nothing of the oil of gladness, or the
fragrance of frankincense ; it has nothing of
festive joy, or of communion between the wor-
shipper and God. Yet dark as the shadow of
sin is hereby shown to be, it appears on all oc-
casions when man comes into the presence of
God. The sin offering was presented for "the peo-
ple, on all the great festivals and days of solemn
ooDVOcatiou, ou Passover, the Feast of Weeks,
and the Feast of Tabernacles, on the Day of 5Ie-
morial, on the first day of the seventh mouth,
and on the Day of Atonement " (Kalisoh) and on
many other public occasions. Besides all these,
it was offered continually by individuals as the
sins of their own lives were brought to their con-
sciousness. So must man's approach to God ever
be with the plea, "Have mercy upon me, a sin-
ner." Coming in this temper, propitiation is
provided for all. There was none so poor but
that a sin offering was within his reach. And
so the word of the great Propitiation is, "Him
that Cometh to me, I will in no wise cast out."
" Ho is able to save unto the uttermost them that
come unto God by Him."
Yet for high-handed and defiant sin, for sin that
sets itself in opposition to the Divine way of salva-
tion, there is no other way of forgiveness, " there
remains no more sacrifice." Comp. Heb. x. 26.
For the sin of the high-priest a higher victim
was commanded, and with a higher ritual, be-
cause he " sinned to the guilt of the people."
Only for the sin of the whole people collectively
the same offering was required. So it must ever
be with those in positions of influence and au-
thority ; when they sin, they drag others with
them into guiltiness. There is ever a federal,
as well as an individual relation between man
and God, and though the latter may delerm ne
his final condition, yet his individual rtlation
itself is largely affected by his federal.
Sins of omission are regarded as sins equally
with those of commission.
No one is so humble that the means of propi-
tiation is not provided for him. Under the law
this could only be symbolized by alternative of-
ferings of different degrees, showing forth the
freeness under the Gospel of the offer of the
waters of life to all that are athirst.
E.— TRESPASS OFFERINGS.
Chaps. V. 14— VI. 7.
Note.— In the division of chapters in the Hebrew Bible this section is rightly all included in Chap. V.
14, 15 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, If a soul commit a trespass [do a
wrong'], and sin through ignorance [inadvertence^] in [takinff from^] the holy things
of the Lord ; then he shall bring for his trespass unto the Lord a ram without
blemish out of the flocks, with [according to*] thy estimation by shekels of silver,
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL.
> Ter. 15. b;7rD hj/OPi- The wor i be.ng ditferent from the OWH bo frequently recurring in this chapt r in a tech-
nical Beuse, it is better to chango the translation. Otherwise cnmwit a trespass is a sufficiently good translation, as no Eng-
lish word embodies the idea of secrecy or stealth conveyed by the original.
^ Ver. 15. njJE'3 *= through inadvertence. See Note i on iv. 2.
' Ver. 16. «"" 'ttflpD a oonalructio pra^ffnans — takine, or diminishing from the holy things.
* Ver. 15. n31_J?3.' 'ihe preposition often hai the sense given in the A. V. with but according to (as in the next word
bnt one) seems here the better rendering. The evlden' sense is that the ram was tf> be of a certain value, an 1 this was to
he determined by an estimation. The restitution for the harm done, with its added fifth, is prescribed in tbn following ver.,
and doesnot come into view here. The Sara, text preserves the exact form of the Hebrew, bnt all the ancient versions,
while changing the form of expression, give the sense according to ; they also neglect to translate the T| = thy.
50
LEVITICUS.
16 after the shekel of the sanctuary, f jr a trespass offering ; and he shall make amends
for the harm that he hath done [sin that he hath committed*] in the holy thing,
and shall add the fifth part thereto, and give it unto the priest : and the priest shall
make an atonement for him with the ram of the trespass offering, and it shall be
forgiven him.
17 Aud if a soul sin, and commit any of these things which are forbidden to be done
by the commandments of the Lokd ; though he wist it not, yet is he guilty, and
18 shall bear his iniquity. And he shall bring a ram without blemish out of the
flock, with [according to*] thy estimation, fjr a trespass offering, unto the priest:
and the priest shall make an atonement for him concerning his ignorance [inadver-
19 tence'"] wherein he erred and wist it not, aud it shall be forgiven him. It is a tres-
pass offering : he hath certainly trespassed against the Lokd.
Chap. VI. 1, 2. And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, If a soul sin, and commit
a trespass [do a wrong'] against the Lord, and lie unto his neighbour, in that [and
deny to his neighbor that"] which was delivered him to keep, or in fellowship [or a
pledge'] or in [omit in] a thing taken away by violence, or hath deceived [op-
3 pressed"] his neighbour ; or have found that which was lost, and lieth concerning
it [denieth it^] and sweareth falsely ; in any of all these that a man doeth, sinning
4 therein : then it shall be, because he hath sinned, and is guilty, that he shall re-
store that which he took violently away, or the thing which he hath deceitfully
[oppressively'] gotten, or that which was delivered him to keep, or the lost thing
5 which he found, or all that about which he hath sworn falsely ; he shall even re-
store it in the principal, and shall add the fifth part more thereto, and give it unio
6 him to whom it appertaineth, in the day of his trespass offering.' And he shall
bring his trespass offering unto the Lord, a ram without blemish out of the flock,
7 with [according to*] thy estimation, for a trespass offering, unto the priest : and the
priest shall make an atonement for him before the Lord : and it shall be forgiven
him for anything of all that he hath done in trespassing therein.
s Ver. 16. This is the only place in Lev. in which KDH is rendered by any other word thau sin in theA. V. Tliifl
Bhonld be conformed to the usage.
fl Chap. VI. Ver. 2. ^n3 construed with a double 3 of the person and of the thing, = to deny a thing to a person.
The word means to lie (xix H, etc.), but the other rendering expresses more exactly the sense here, and is the more usual
^ Ver. 2. n^ nOl^r^j'lK = o. thing given in pled^e^ apaum^ different from the trust just before. The coustraction ia
T ..■ : .
with the same verb, and is sufficiently expressed without the special translation of ^, so that the in of the A, V. may be
t niittvd tbroughout.
8 Ver. 2. pU^J^ lit. to ^rfs.s, to squeeze, hence to oppress. A new verb being here introduced the construction with the
series of 3 enJs. The derived noun piy^, ver. 4, bears the same sense => that which has been oppressively obtained.
8 Vor. 5. The Heb. word meaning either trespass or trespass offering, the marg. of the A. V. is hardly accurate in writing
*' Heb. m the ilsiy of his trespass."
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL.
The general distinction of the trespass from
the sin offering lias already been pointed out: in
the trespass offering the idea of the harm done
was more prominent, in the sin offering that of
the sin commUt''d. Accordingly the trespass of-
fering was usually accompanied by *' amends for
the harm" — a fifth (a double tithe) being added
as penalty. In case the person against whom
the wrong was done was already dead without a
kinsman to receive the compensation, the amends
and penalty were to be paid to the priest (Num.
y. 8). The ritual differed in several respects
from that of the sin offering: the blood was
treated as in the burnt and peace offerings; the
only victim here allowed was a ram; there was
no gradation either in the victim or the ritual
according to the rank of the offender; nor were
any alternative offerings allowed in case of po-
verty. The reason for the last provision results
necessarily from the nature of the offering.
Elsewhere we find the same trespass offering
prescribed for unchastity with a slave (xix. 2ft-
;22), and in later times offered by those who, on
the return from the captivity, had taken strange
wives (Ezra X. 19); the same also (not «, "he-
lamb," as in the A. V. ) is commanded with a
Bomewhatdifferent ritual on occasion of declaring
the cleansing of a leper (xiv. 12, 21), and also
with a ram of a year old for the victim in case
of unintentional defilement by a dead body during
a Nazarite vow (Num. vi. 9-12).
Three cases are specified which demand a
trespass offering — the first two having reference
more directly to wrong done towards God (v.
15-19), aud the third, including several varieties
of offence, having reference to wrong done to men
(vi. 2-7).
CHAP. V. 14— VI. 7.
51
Ver. 14. And the LORD spake. — This for-
mula marks a fresh communication and distinctly
separates tlie trespass-offering from the sin offer-
ing which has occupied the whole of the previous
communication from iv. 1. The whole law of the
trespass offering is not, however, contained in
this communication, but only that part of it re-
lating to wrongs done toward God. Wrongs
done toward man are the subject of a separate
communication (vi. 1-7).
Vers. 16-17. The first ease of the trespass
offering.
Ver. IS. Through inadvertence, as in iv.
2, 13, 22.
In taking from the holy things. — See
Textual note 3. The holy things were the first-
fruits, tithes, or gifts of any kind connected with
the service of the sanctuary or the support of its
priests, by the withholding of which the Lord is
said to suffer loss. The restitution and penalty
are mentioned xxii. 14 without mention of this
offering, vsUich is presupposed.
A ram. — The invariable trespass offering
(except in the special cases xiv. 12 ; Num. vi. i2)
which does not at all appear in the list of victims
for the sin offering in iv. 1 — v. 13.
According to thy estimation. — See Text-
ual note 4. — The pronoun thy must be considered
as used impersonally ; or if it be taken person-
ally, then it is addressed to Moses, and of course
to any one to whom this duty should afterwards
belong in bis place.
Shekels. — The Vulg. and many commentators
understand the plural to stand for two, as the
A. V. has explained the plurnl in Ezek. xlvii. 13 ;
others, as Aben-Ezra, Abarbanel, etc., understand
it less definitely as meaning at least two shekels.
The notion of Oehler (p. 478) and Keil (in loc.)
that the value of the ram was purposely left in-
definite, that there might be room to vary it ac-
cording to the gravity of the trespass, although
advocated by Michaelis (Art. 244), is clearly
wrong It is opposed to the fundamental idea
of all sacrifice, which excludes such correlation ;
and is entirely unnecessary, since the compensa-
tion and forfeit (ver. 16) were separately re-
quired. Moreover, the variation in the value of
the ram would be very small in comparison with
the variation in trespasses. The text »as in-
tended to fix the lowest limit of the value of .1
ram that could be allowed, and the estimutiou
was for the purpose of determining whether he
came up to the standard. " The plural is plainly
to be uuderstood as meaning two shekels, or at
least two shekels." Knobel.
Shekel of the Sanctuary. — See Ex. xxx.
13 ; xxxviii. 24, etc.
Ver, 16. And he shall make amends. — He
shall give the first-fruits or tithes, or whatever
he had withheld or taken from sacred dues, or its
value. And shall add the fifth part thereto
as a penalty or forfeit. — Theodoret here refers to
the example of Zaccheus. The justice of such ad-
ditional payment is everywhere recognized in the
Hebrew and all other laws. It is in this, and not
iu the ram, that the penalty is proportioned to the
offence. This having been done, and reparation
made, then, with the ram, the priest shall
make an atonement.
On the ritual of this sacrifice see vii. 1-6.
Vers. 17-19. The second case of the trespass
offering.
This second ease probably differed from the
first as sins of commission differ from those of
omission. The formula by which the trespass is
expressed is substantially the same as in iv. 22
and 27 in regard to the sin to be expiated by the
sin offering. From its connection, and from its
being expiated by the trespass offering, it is sup-
posed to include all those transgressions against
the theocratic law which could be compensated
by money or other payment ; yet in this case
alone no mention is made of compensation, partly
because it was evident from the foregoing that
it was required when it could be given, and
partly because it included also eases in which
pecuniary compensation could not be given, but
punishment must be inflicted in some other way.
(See xix. 20.) Lange, however, urges that this
omission is a serious difficulty against the view
of the trespass offering which has here been
given. He considers that the trespass offering
relates to participation in guilt in contradistinc-
tion to an original offence, and thinks this is in.
dicated by the description of these sins as "sins
of ignorance." He says "these sins of ignorance
belong specifically to the category of participation
in guilt." It must be remembered, however, that
all sins for which any offering was allowed were
"sins of ignorance," or rather of inadvertence.
VI. 1-7. The third case of the trespass
offering.
From the formula of ver. 1 this appears as a
separate divine communication, on account of
the different character of the sins enumerated.
All sin is indeed against God, yet those which
follow belong to that class of offences against Him
which also work harm to men.
The first three verses contain an enumeration
of specific wrongs; vers. 4 and 6 provide for
amends for the harm done with the added pe-
nalty; and vers. 6 and 7 for atonement by means
of the trespass offering. This communication
bears the same relation to the foregoing which
V. 1-13 bears to chap. iv.
Ver. 2. If a man deny to his neighbor
that -which viras delivered him. — "]np3
is a deposit, a thing entrusted to be kept. The
sin in this case would consis.t either iu denying
the receiving it at all, or denying that it was re-
ceived in trust, or refusing to restore it.
A pledge. — This differs from the former iu
not being simply a trust, bnt a security, a pawn.
It is not separately mentioned in ver. 4.
Ver. 8. Svreareth falsely. — When he denies
that he has found a lost thing, and is put upon
his oath, he swears to his lie, IPBi-bj;. This
false swearing refers also to all the wrongs men-
tioned before, and the guilt of the false oath,
added to the wrong done, brings the offence into
the category of sins against the Lord.
Ver. 6. In the day of his trespass o&ering.
The amends for the wrong done was to be
made to the person wronged at the same time
that the offender sought the divine forgiveness.
The penalty for the wrong and the ritual of the
offering are the same as in chap. v.
In Ex. xxii. 1-9 a series of wrongs is enume-
rated much like those here mentioned with the
62
LEVITiuuHT
general law that the restitution should be dou-
ble (vers. 4, 9), while in particalar cases it rose
to four and five-fold. The distinction between
the penalty as given there and here appears to
lie in the fact that there the offender was only
brought to any restitution by a conviction "be-
fore the judges" (ver. 9): while here, although
it is not distinctly so declared yet. every thing
implies that the acknowledgment of the wrong
is voluntary. There is no mention of conviction,
and the whole connection is with sins of inad-
vertence or impulse which were afterwards ac-
knowledged, and for which forgiveness was
sought by the offender.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL.
I. From the law of the trespass offering it is
clear that guilt was not removed by the mere act
of compensation (with penalty added) for the
harm done; nor, on the other band, could an
atonement be offered for that cuilt until such
compensation had been made. Here are brought
out the two principles whioli everywhere, under
the oM and the new dispensation abke, are con-
cerned in the forgiveness of transgression.
There must be both the desire, as far as possible,
to make amends for the harm done; and tlieie
must be also the sacrifice divinely appointed for
"the covering" of the sin. Neither of these can
avail alone, because both are essential to that
stale of holiness, that conquest over the evil, by
which alone man can be at one with God. The
sacrifice of Christ is all-sufficient for the forgive-
ness of sin; but the sinner can only avail him-
self of its benefits when, Christ-like, he himself
seeks to conquer the evil.
II. Wrong done to man is itself sin against
God. It is impossible to separate the command
to love God from that of loving our neighbor also.
1 J no. iii. 20, 21.
III. In tho'e sins against others for which
atonement was provided in the trespass offering,
there was the additional sin of a false oath. This
was certainly a moral offence — a sin in the full
sense of the word. In view of this, it is impos-
sible to look upon the offences for which sacri-
fices were appointed as mere ceremonial or theo-
cratic offences. They everywhere appear as
true sins, moral transgressions, and this is most
cliarly shown by including the false oath among
them.
HOMILETrCAL AND PRACTICAL.
There is no true repentance for wrong done to
man which is not accompanied by restitution—
and none for having taken from the things of the
Lord, or for having failed to give all that should
have been given to Him, except in restoring it in
overflowing measure; yet while this may make
amends fir the harm done, forgiveness of the *m
must still be sought through propitiation.
In the trespass offering the ritual of the blood
was like that of the hurnt or the peace offering —
inferior to that of the sin offering. This s"hows
that while wrong must of necessity involve sin,
yet it does not, in itself considered, stand on tlie
same footing as sin; the moral element in trans-
gression is always the more important. One
cannot indeed really offend against man without
also offending against God ; yet the offence whicli
has God directly for its ohjective point must ne-
cessarily be more serious, since it involves a
deeper lort than that which is directed only
against man.
The tin offering was lessened by successive
stages for the poor, and the very poor, that it
might be brought within the reach of all; for all
must have propitiation for sin; but the trespass
offering is unvaried, the same for all; because
it one cannot make amends for the wrong he has
done, it mus; be let alone, — an inferior gift can-
not set things right.
Wrong, like sin, may be committed through
inadvertence. Still it must be atoned for. Good
intentions will not repair the wrong.
For sin done " with a high hand," presump-
tuously, nu sacrifice was provided, because the
offender deliberately set himself in opposition to
God ; but for offences against man, such as those
here enumer.itcd, some of which must have been
done deliberately, a sacrifice is allowed, because
even such intentional wrongs do not constitute
the same attitude of opposition to God. They
may be done, through passion or covetousuess,
without reflection upon their moral bearings.
Therefore, on repentance, restitution, and propi.
tiation, they may be forgiven.
Origen applies the law of trespass in abstract-
ing from sacred things to the faithfulness re-
quired of the Christian minister in regard to
gifts for holy uses committed to his trust; and
then further to the hearing of God's word as a
sacred gift, for the use of which men are re-
sponsible, and for the misuse of which they be-
come guilty.
CHAP. VI. 8— VII. 38. 53
SECOND SECTION.
Special Instructions chiefly for the Priests.
Chap. VI. 8— VII. 38.
"Standing Sacrificial Rites and Duties — especially of the Priests'' — Lange.
A.— FOR BURNT OFFERINGS.
Chap. VI. 8-13.
8, 9 And the Loed spake unto Moses, saying. Command' Aaron and his sons, say-
ing, This is the law of the burnt offering: It^ is the burnt offering, because of the
burning upon the altar [This, the burnt offering, shall be upon the hearth upon the
altar'] all night unto the morning, and the fire of the altar shall be burning in it.
10 And the priest shall put on his* linen garment, and his linen breeches shall he put*
upon his flesh, and take up the ashes which the fire hath consumed with the burnt
offering [ashes to which the fire hath consumed the burnt- offering'] on the altar,
11 and he shall put them beside the altar. And he shall put off his garments, and
put on other garments, and carry forth the ashes without the camp unto a clean
12 place.' And the fire upon the altar shall be burning in [on] it; it shall not be
put out : and the priest shall burn wood on it every morning, and lay the burnt
offering in order upon it : and he shall burn thereon the fat of the peace offerings.
13 The fire shall ever be burning upon the altar ; it shall never go out.
B.— FOR OBLATIONS (MEAT OFFERINGS). VI. 14-23.
14 And this is the 1 iw of the meat offering [oblation*] ; the sons of Aaron shall
15 offer" it before the Lord, before the altar. And he shall take of it his handful, of
the flour of the meat offering [oblation*], and of the oil thereof, and all the frank-
incense which is upon the meat offering [oblation*], and shall burn it upon the
16 altar /or a sweet savour, even the memorial of it, unto the Lord. And the remain-
der thereof shall Aaron and his sons eat : with [om. with] unleavened bread [om.
bread] shall it be eaten in the [a] holy place ; in the court of the tabernacle of the
17 [om. the] congregation they shall eat it. It'' shall not be baken with leaven. I
have given it unto them for their portion of my offerings made by fire ; it is most
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL.
' Ter. 9. li". ThsiSam. has 'IS, a form which occurs in MSS. with the pointing 'IV.
' Ver". 9, 17, 18, 22. XIH. The S.im, and many MSS. haye the later form NTI indicated by the Masoretic punctua-
tion. This frequent variation will not hi-reatter bo noticed. The conjectural emendation of Houbigani:, 'in iQ the impe-
rative, although expresBing the sense, is unnecessary. •
3 Ver. 9. The suggested translation is that given hy most critics ; of its general correctness there can be no doubt ; but
the sense of mplD (which occurs only hero) may be either that of liearth, or of bwming. The masculine form, TpJD
(which is found only Ps. cii. 4 (3), and Isa. xxxiii. 14), is translated in both ways in the A. V., but should have only the
later sense. The weight of autliority as well as the context make hmrlh, the prof'erable translation hero. Knohel woulj
make XIH the vtrb io«6e in tite impL-rative; but this is not sufficienfly supported.
* Ver. 10. no- Tor the suffix on a noun in the constr. Knobel refers to xxvi. 42; Ex. xxvi. 25; Jer. ix. 2 (viii. 23);
2Sam. xxii. 33, however, reads 'IJO.
^ Ver. 10. The Sam. for ^3*?' has Vn' as in xvi. 4, which scarcely affects the s«iae.
' Ver. 10. The proprietv of this correction is obvions. Bp. Horsley's emendation : take up the ashea of the firs which hath
consiimed— does violi-nce to the Heb.
' Ver, 11. The Vulg. has this curious addition: uaque adfaviWim consumi faciRt.
' Ver. li, etc. nrUD— oblation. See ch. ii. 1, Text, and Gram. Note (2). The Sam. has here "the law of the oblation
of the drink offerings," whence the Vulg. : lex sacrificii et libamentorum,
» Ver. 14. aipn, Infln. Abs. as in ii. 6j Ex. xiii. 3.
64 LEVITiuuis.
18 holy, as is the sin offering, and as the trespass offering. All the males among the
children of Aaron shall eat of it. It shall be a statute forever in your generations
concerning the offerings of the Loed made by fire : every one that [whatsoever*']
toucheth them shall be holy.
19, 20 And the Lord spake unro Moses, saying, This is the offering of Aaron and
of his sons, which they shall offer unto the Lord in the day when he" is anointed;
the tenth part of an ephah of fine flour for" a meat offering [an oblation*] perpetual,
21 half of it in the morning, and half thereof at night.'' In a pan it shall be made
with oil ; and when it is baken [fried'*], thou shalt bring it in : and the baken''
pieces'^ of the meat offering [oblation*] shalt thou offer for a sweet savour unto the
22 Lord. And the pritst of his sons that is anointed in his stead shall offer it : it w
23 a statute forever unto the Lord ; it shall be wholly burnt. For every meat-offer-
ing [oblation*] for the priest shall be wholly burnt : it shall not be eaten.
C— FOR SIN OFFERINGS. VI. 24-30.
24, 25 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto Aaron and to his sons,
saying, This is the law of ihe sin offering : In the place where the burnt offering is
26 killed shall the sin offering be killed before the Lord : it is most holy. The priest
that offereth it for sin shall eat it : in the [a] holy place shall it be eaten, in the
27 courtof the tabernacle of the [om. the] congregation. Whatsoever shall touch the flesh
thereof shall be holy: and when there is sprinkled of the blood thereof upon any
garment, thou'* shalt wash that whereon it was sprinkled in the [a] holy place.
28 But the earthen vessel wherein it is sodden shall be broken : and if it be sodden in
29 a brazen pot, it shall be both scoured, and rinsed in water. All the males among
30 the priests shall eat thereof: it is most holy. And [But] no sin offering, whe'eof
any of the blood is brought into the tabernacle of the [om. the] congregation to
reconcile [make atonement"] withal in the holy place, shall be eaten : it shall be
burnt in the fire.
D.— FOR TRESPASS OFFERINGS. Chap. VII. 1-6.
Chap. VII. 1 Likewise [And] this is the law of* the trespass-offering : it is most
2 holy. In the place where they kill the burnt offering shall they kill the trespass
offering : and the blood thereof shall he" sprinkle round about upon the altar.
3 And he shall ofier of it all the fat thereof; the rump [the fat tail'"], and the fat that
4 covereth the inwards, and the two kidneys, and the fat that is on them, which is
by the flanks, and the caul that is above the liver, with [on^'] the kidneys, it shall
5 he take away: and the priest shall burn them upon the altar for an offering made
6 by fire unto the Lord ; it is a trespass offering;. Every male among the priesti
shall eat thereof: it shall be eaten in the [a] holy place: it is most holy.
10 Ver. 18. HE^'X 73 might be undeiBtood either as every one that, as in the A. V., or as ei'ery thing that; but ss tUo
latter is the necessary translation of the exactly parallel clause in ver. 27 fas in the A. T.), it is better to keep it here also,
u Ver. 20. The Syr. here has the plural.
^ Yer. 20. The prep. 7, not in the Heb., is supplied by the Sam. and many MSS.
18 Ver. 20. The paraphrase of the Sam. D'^'lJ^n V2==between the evfnings, expresses the connection of this oblat'on
with the evening sacrifice.
1-1 Ver. 2l. ri33lp, a word of very doubtful meaning, but should certainly have the same translation as in Tii. 12,
where sf^e note.
16 Ver. 21. ''yBn, a word an-. Ae'y. to Which different significations are attached according to its supposed derivation.
FUrst, deriving it from ni;^, gives the sense of the A. V. Gesenius also, deriving from ni3X, gives the sense of cooked.
Othera derive it from an Arabic root, and give the meaning hroheti. So Targ. Onk. (which points '' Jl3^i^) and the Sam.
i» Ver. 27. D3DlT T^^lV■ The sudden change of f erson, and the feminine sufBx in reference to a mascnline noun,
— : T V T ,
are both avoided by the Sam. reading D33^ V7 V.
" Ver. 30. ^£307. There may be but little difference in the sense of the two renderings ; but it is better to retain
the same form always. Other instances of variation in the A. V. in Lev. are vi ii. 15 and xvi. 20 only.
18 YII. Ver. 1. The LXX. here has 6 vo/ios rov Kpiov, the ram being the only victim admissible for the trespass oifering.
" Ver. 2. The Sam. here uses the plural. It cannot mean that the offerer sprinkled the blood, but rather aflsimilatM
this verb to those going before on the supposition (as in i. 6, 12, etc.) that the priests also killed the victim.
» Ver. 3. rriXri. See Textual Note * on iii. 9.
21 Ver. 4. S^^on. See Textual Note ' on ili. i.
CHAP. VI. 8— VII. 38. 55
E.— FOR THE PRIESTS' PORTION OF THE ABOVE OFFERINGS. VII. 7-10.
7 As the sin-offering is, so is the trespass offering : there is one law for them : the
8 priest that maketh atonement therewith shall have it. And the priest that offer-
eth any man's birnt off ring, even the priest shall have to himself the skin of the
9 burnt-offering which he hath offered. And all the meat-offering [oblation*] that is
baken in the oven, an'l all that is dress d in the frying-pan [pot'^], and in the pan,
10 shall be the priest's th^t offereth it. And [But] every meat offering [oblation*]
mingled with oil, and dry, shall all the sons of Aaron have, one as nvuch as another.
F.— FOR PEACE OFFERINGS IN THEIR VARIETY. VII. 11-21.
11 And this is the law of the sacrifice of peace offerings, which Tib'' shall offer unto
12 the Lord. If he offer it for a thanksgiving, then he shall offer with the sacrifice
of thanksgiving unleavened cakes mingled with oil, and unleavened wafers anointed
13 with oil, and cakes mingled with oil, of fine flour, fried.^* Besides the cakes, he
shall offt-r for his offering leavened bread with the sacrifice of thanksgiving of his
14 peace offerings. And of it he shall offer one out of the whole oblation [out of ea' h
offering®] for an heave offering unto the Loed, and it shall be the priest's that
15 sprinkleth the blood of th^i p^ ace offerings. And the flesh of the sacrifice of his
peape offerings for thanksgiving shall be eaten the same day that it is offered ; he
16 shdl not leave any of it until the morning. But if the sacrifice of his offering be
a vow, or a voluntary offering, it shall be eaten the same day that he offere h his
17 sacrifice: and on the morrow also the remainder of it shall be eaten: but the re-
mainder of the flesh of the sacrifice on the third day shall be burnt with fire.
18 And if any of the flesh of the sacrifice of his peace offerings be eaten at all on the
third day, it shall not be accepted, neither shall it be imputed unto him that offer-
eth it: it shall be an abomination,^* and the soul that eateth of it shall bear his
19 iniquity. And the flesh that toucheth any unclean thing shall not be eaten ; it
shall be burnt with fire: and as for the flesh, all that be clean shall eat thereof.
20 But the soul that eateth of the flesh of the sacrifice of peace offerings that pertain
unto the Lord, having his uncleanness upon him, even that poul shall be cut off
21 from his people. Moreover the soul that shall touch any unclean thing, as the
uncleanness of man, or any unclean beast, or any abominable unclean ihing," and
eat of the flesh of the sacrifice of ppace offerings, which pertain unto the Lord, even
that soul shall be cut off from his people.
G.— FOR THE FAT AND THE BLOOD. VII. 22-27.
22, 23 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying. Speak unto the children of Israel,
24 saying, Ye shall eat no manner of fat, of ox, or of sheep, or of goat. And the fat
of the beast [carcase'*] that dieth of itself, and the fat of that whicii is torn with
25 beasts, may be used in any other use : but ye shall in no wise eat of it. For who-
soever eateth the fat of the beast, of which men offer an offering made by fire unto
•* Ver. 9. See Textual Note ' on H. 7.
" Ver. 11. The Sam., LXX. and Vulg. with two MSS. have the plural.
'* Ver. 12. n33^a. There is so much difference of opinion as to the meaning that it seems unsafe to attempt any
changB in the A. V. '' rbrst says : " smelMng dipped in, mingled (hy moisteninK) ;" Lanije denies that it ronveys the some
Of cooked; Keil trannlatps •'and roasted fine, flam- (see Ti. 14) mixed ax cakes with ml, i. e., cakes made of fine fluur roaste.l
with oil, and thoroughly kneaded with oil." Others give varying interpretations.
ffi Ver. 14. p-ip is to be uniformly translated ofertna. See ii. 1. The word ra&oie in the A. V. does not exp-ess the
idea that one must be taken out of each of the offerings mentioned in the two preceding verses.
» Ver. 18. Sua OCCUK only here and in xix. 7 ; Isa. Ixv. i ; Bzek. iv. 14, and is always applied to the sacrificial flesh.
It is from the root 7j3, and signifies something unclean and fetid, LXX. fiCacriia.
» Ver. 21. For Vntj(=are cibmmmhh animal fxi. 10, 12, 13, 20, 23, 41), the Sam., six MSS. of Kennicott and of de Bossi,
larg. of Onkelos (JSTC)) and the Syr. read ^lE^-repfifes, marms (v. xi. 20, 29, 41). This would make a more systematic
*flumeration of the sources of uncleanness, and is adopted by many.
i8 Ver. 24. rh^i- The margin of the A. V. is better than the text. The HS^B of ^e next claufle-tora k. of
T '* ! ^ '
Jiea-tB, is of course a wholly different word.
56
LEVITICUS.
26 the Lord, even the soul that eateth it shall be cut off from his people. Moreover
ye shall eat no manner of blood, whether it be of fowl or of beast, in any of your
27 dwellings. Whatsoever soul it he that eateth any manner of blood, even that soul
shall be cut off from his people.
H.— FOR THE PRIESTS' PORTION OF THE PEACE OFFERINGS. VII. 28-36.
28, 29 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel,
saying. He that offereth the sacrifice of his peace offerings unto the Lord shall
bring his oblation [offering^] unto the Lord of the sacrifice of his peace offerings.
30 His own hands shall bring the offerings of the Lord made by fire, the fat with the
breast, it shall he bring, that the breast may be waved for a wave offering before
31 the Lord. And the priest shall burn the fat upon the altar: but the breast shall
32 be Aaron's and his sons'. And the right shoulder [leg^] shall ye give unto the priest
33 for an heave offermg of the sacrifices of your peace offerings. He among the sons of
Aari n, that offereth the blood of the peace offerings, and the fat, shall have the right
34 shoulder [leg™] for his part. For the wave-breast and the heave shoulder [leg"] hav3
I taken of the children of Israel from off the sacrifices of their peace offerings, and
have given them unto Aaron the priest and unto his sons by a statute for ever from
35 among the children of Israel. Tnis is the portion of the anointing of Aaron, and
of the anointing of his sons [This is the portion" of Aaron and the portion" of his
sons], out of the offerings of the Lord made by fire, in the daj when he^ presented
36 them to minister unto the Lord in the priest's ofBce ; which the Lord commanded
to be given theaa of the children of Israel, in the day that he anointed them, by a
statute forever throughout their generations.
CONCLUS'ON OF THIS SECTION. VII. 37-38.
37 This is the law of the burnt offering, of the meat offering [oblation], and of the
sin offering, and of the trespass offering, and of the consecrations, and of the sacri-
38 fice of the peace offerings; which t'le Lord commanded Moses in Mount Sinai, in
the day that he commanded the children of Israel to offer their oblations [offerings"]
unto the Lord, in the wilderness of Sinai.
28 Yer. 29. The uniform translation of |3Tp must be retained here also, although giving an appearance of tautology
which is not in xhe ori'^ina], his peace offerings bting expresayd simply by VD7ty. The translation of the A. V. may hare
TT :
been influoncpd by the rondi^ring in the Vu'g. : ojferat simvX et sacrijicium, id est, libamenta ejus ; bnt for this there ia no
warrant, nor is it su itaiued by any other of the ancient vel3ioud.
30 Ver. 32. p\^ is uniformly rendered shftulder in the A. Y. wherever it is applied to sacrificial animals; in all other
places it ia uaeii of men (Deut. xxviii. 35; ProT. xxvi. 7 ; Cant. v. 15; Isa. xlvii. 2; also Dan. ii. 33, Chald.; Ps. cxlTii, W),
and is translated teg, or hip, r.r thigh. The A. V hiia hero followed the equally uniform practice of the LXX. and tlio VulK-
It would seem that the word should have the same sense in both eases; there is no place in which teg is inapplicable;, bvit
tlnj-e are several in whicli shmtlder is inadmiss ble. The testimony of Josephus (III. 9, § 2, ici^^^ij) is explicit in favor of
Ipg ; so also Jewish tradition and the lexicons. Whether the fort^ or the hind leg is meant is a matter of difference of- opi-
nion ; but the Heb. has a distinct word ^^')1'=arm for the shoulder or fore-leg (Num. vi. 19 ; Deut. xviii. 3), and that, too,
o[ the sacrificial animal:^.
SI Ver. 35. T]r\U^D- The word undoubtedly means anointing; but there is also good authority for the meaning jjordon
T ; • . .
which Kosenrailller considers undoubtedly the right tr,Tn8lation here, and which is so neceaeary to the sense that it is sop-
plied in the A. V., which has followed the translation of the LXX. and Vulg.
82 Ver. 35. The Vulg. haa die g«a obtulU eoa Moyses vi sactrdotio fungwentar.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL.
The remainder of ch. vi., with the whole of
oh. vii., form a distinct section occupied mainly
with the duties and privileges of the priests in
conneetioa with their sacrificial service. Al-
though there is unavoidably a little repetition in
thus speaking again of the same sacrifices from
a different point of view and for a different ob-
ject ; yet the gain in clearness and distinctness
in thus separating the priestly duties from those
of the laymen is obvious, both for the priests and
for the people. The section consists of five di-
vine oomraunications addressed through Moses
to Aaron and his sons, as the former commu-
nication had been to the children of Israel.
It has already been noticed that in the Hebrew
Bibles the chapter rightly begins with the begin-
ning of this section. Here also begins a new
Parashah, or Proper Lesson of the law, whiok
extends to viii. 36. The corresponding Lesson
from the prophets begins with Jer. vii. 21, in
which " God declares the vanity of saorifioe
without obedience."
A. Vera. 8-13. Instructions for the priests m
regard to the burnt-offeriiigs. This has refe-
rence to the daily burnt-offerings of a lamb »'
CHAP. VI. 8— VII. 88.
57
evening and al morning. There was no occa-
eion for directions in regard to the voluntary
burnt offerings as they involved no other priestly
duties than those already expressed in chap. i. ;
in that chapter nothing has been said of the re-
quired burnt sacrifice, provided at the public
ooBt, which is here treated of.
Ver. 9. All night unto the morning. — The
slow fire of the evening sacrifice was to be so
arranged as to last until the morning; that of
the morning sacrifice was ordinarily added to
by other offerings, or if not, could easily be made
to last through the much shorter interval until
the evening. The evening sacrifice is natu-
rally mentioned first because, in the Hebrew di-
vision of time, this was the beginning of the
day. It was offered "between the evenings,"
i. «., between three o'clock and the going down
of the sun. The general direction for the daily
burnt offerings has already been given in Ex.
xxix. 38, and is again repeated in Num. xxviii.
3. As this offering was theoretically the com-
prehensive type from which all other offerings
were specialized, so practically it was always
burning upon the altar, and all other sacrifices
were offered " upon it."
Ver. 10. His linen garment. — This was
" the long tight-robe of fine white linen, or bys-
SU8, without folds, covering the whole body, and
reaching down to the feet, with sleeves, woven
as one entire piece, and with forms of squares
intermixed, and hence called tesalated" (Ka-
lisoh). It is scarcely necessary to point out that
linen, from its cleanliness, and from the readi-
ness with which it could be washed, was selected
as the priestly dress not only among the Israel-
ites, but among many other nations also, espe-
cially the Egyptians, whose priests are therefore
often described by Roman poets as Unigeri. There
were four parts of the priestly linen dress, of
which two only are mentioned here, because all
had been prescribed in Ex. xxviii. 40-43, and the
girdle and the turban were of course to be un-
derstood. The priests might not minister, at the
altar in any other garments, nor might they wear
these outside the sacred precincts.
And take up the ashes. — As the priest must
be in his ofiScial dress at the altar, it was of ne-
cessity that he should temporarily deposit the
ashes near by, until he had finished the ordering
of the altar.
Ver. 11. And he shall put off bis gar-
ments. — The sacred dress was now to be laid
aside as the priest must pass out of the taber-
nacle and out of the camp. It has been ques-
tioned whether the carrying forth of the ashes
must necessarily be performed by the officiating
priest himself. According to Jewish tradition it
might be done by any of the priestly family who
were excluded from officiating at the altar by
reason of some bodily defect. The same tradi-
tion also tells us that it was onlyrequired each day
to carry forth a small quantity of the ashes — a
shovel-full— allowing the rest to remain until the
hollow of the altar below the grating was filled
up, when all must be emptied and carried away.
ITnto a clean place. — There was a fitness
loo evident to require further reason, that the
remains of what had been used for the holiest
purposes should be deposited in a clean place.
19
— Without the camp, is a phrase belonging
to the life of the wilderness, but easily modified
to the requirements of the settled life in Pales-
tine.
Ver. 12. Shall barn wood on it. — The fire
was to be maintained always whether the pre-
vious sacrifice remained burning sufficiently or
not, so that fresh supplies of wood were to be
added. Great care was taken in the selection
and preparation of this wood, and any sticks
worm-eaten were rejected. And lay the burnt-
oSering. — AU was to be arranged and the fire
brightly burning before the time of offering the
morning sacrifice. When this was laid upon the
wood, the sacrificial day was begun, and the fat
of the peace-oSerings and any other sacriSces
that might he presented were placed upon it.
Ver. 13. The fire shall be ever burning
upon the altar. — The fire upon the altar was
not. as is sometimes supposed, originally kindled
by the "fire from before the Lokd" (ix. 24),
since it had been burning several days before
that fire came forth; yet that fire so marked the
Divine approbation of the priestly order as they
entered upon their office, that a continual fire in
which that was always in a sense perpetuated,
was a constant symbol and pledge of the Divine
acceptance of the sacrifices offered upon it. So
also, in later times, with the fire from heaven at
the dedication of the temple (2 Chr. vii. 1). But
besides this, " It is evident that the fire burning
continually, which was kept up by the daily
burnt offering (Ex. xxix. 38), had a symbolical
meaning. As the daily burnt; sacrifice betokened
the daily renewed gift of God, in like manner
did this continually burning fire denote the un-
ceasing, uninterrupted character of the same.
Similar customs with the heathen had a different
signification. Among the Persians (and among
the Parsees in India at this day), fire was and is
the visible representative of the Godhead ; the
continual burning of it, the emblem of eternity.
The perpetual fire of Vesta (the " oldest god-
dess ") among the Greeks and Romans, was the
emblem of the inmost, purest warmth of life,
which unites family and people — the hearth, as
it were, the heart of a house or of a State. In
both is shown the essential difference which ex-
isted between these and the Divine covenant re-
ligion." Von Gerlach. Perpetual sacrificial fires
were common among many ancient nations.
It is obvious that during the marches of the
life in the wilderness some special means must
have been used for the preservation of this fire.
On such occasions the altar was to be carefully
cleaned and covered with a purple cloth and then
with "badgers' skins." (Num. iv. 18, 14). Pro-
bably the fire was carried on the march in a ves-
sel prepared for the purpose.
B. Instructions for the priests concerning ob-
lations. This division consists of two portions,
the former of which (vers. 14-18) is a part of the
same divine communication as the preceding di-
vision, and relates to the priestly duties con-
nected with the oblations of the people, whether
voluntary or required ; while the latter, (vers.
19-23), forms a separate divine communication,
and relates to the special oblation of the high-
priests themselves in connection with their con-
secration.
58
LEVITICUS.
The law of the oblation ia a repetition in part
of that in ch. ii., because it was there applied
only to voluntary oblations, while here it in-
cludes all ; but there are also (in vers. 16-18)
additional particulars not given before.
Ver. 14. The sons of Aaron shall offer it.
This presentation of the whole oblation by the
priests, which seems to have been an essenti.al
part of the sacrifice, has been already mentioned
in oh. ii. 8, while ver. 15 merely repeats and ap-
plies to all oblations the directions in ii. 2 for
the private and voluntary oblation.
Ver. 16. The following directions, which con-
cern the duties of the priests, have not before
been given. By their consuming the remainder
of the oblation it became, like the sin-offering, a
sacrifice wholly devoted to the Lord. See note
on ii. 3. Only those of Aaron's sons might eat
of it who were ceremonially clean. This is ex-
pressed emphatically in regard to the peace
offerings in vii. 21. The addition of the words
with and bread in the A. V. singularly obscures
the sense ; it should be read unleavened shall
it be eaten in a holy place.
Ver. 17. I have given it.— Not merely by
appointment, as God is the giver of all that man
enjoys ; but of my offerings, as of that which
peculiarly belonged to God. — Most holy. See
on ii. 3.
Ver. 18. All the males. — Because they, and
they only, were in the priestly succession. It
includes both those who were actual priests, and
their sons yet too young to officiate, but who at
the proper age would become priests; and still
further, those who were of priestly family, but
were hindered by bodily defect or infirmity from
ministering at the altar. Whatsoever touch-
eth them shall be holy. — Two senses are pos-
sible: (a) nothing shall be allowed to touch
them which is not holy ; (b) whatever does
touch them shall thereby become holy. The
latter must be considered the true sense in ac-
cordance with the analogy of vers. 27, 28, and
Ex. xxix. 37, (comp. Hag. ii. 12, 13), and with
this sense the command, understood of inanimate
objects, as Calmet suggests, presents no diffi-
culty. The LXX. and Vulg., however, (not the
Semitic versions which of course present the
same ambiguity as the Heb.), like the A. V., un-
derstood it of persons, and so understood, it has
occasioned much difficulty to commentators.
Lange, following Theodoret, says " Whoever
should touch this most holy flesh offering (and
more especially the meat offering) should be
holy, should henceforward be considered to be-
long to the Sanctuary." He then gives various
differing interpretations. It is belter to avoid
the difficulty altogether as above.
Ver. 20. In the day when he Is anointed.
— The new communication in relation to the high-
priest's oblation begins with ver. 19. Most com-
mentators understand the time when this obla-
tion was to be offered as at the end of the seven
days of consecration, as the high-pripst was only
then qualified to officiate. The word da;/ would
then be understood as in Gen. ii. 4. Langp, how-
ever, says "on each of the seven days, not only
on the eighth day, when the consecration was
ftnished (oh. viii. 34) this was to be offered."
An oblation perpetual. — A few interpreters
(as Kalish and Knobel) understand this of an
observance to be always repeated at the conse-
cration of each successive high-priest, and then
only. More generally it is interpreted as refer-
ring to a daily oblation always to be offered
luorning and evening by the high-priest. Such
is the uniform Jewish interpretation. It is pro-
hably this offering that is referred to in Ecclu!>.
xlv. 14; see also Philo, de Vict. Jos. Ant. iii. oh.
10 J 7. Several eminent Jewish authorities, as
.Maimonides and Abarbanel, have supposed that
the same offering was also required of every
priest at his entrance upon his office; but this
opinion, as it has not been widely adopted, so it
seems to have no foundation in the law. The
high-priest alone is distinctly designated in
ver. 22.
The tenth part of an Ephah. — The same
n mount which was required for the sin offering
of the poorest of the people in v. 11. This
amount was to be presented by the high-priest -
as a single offering which was to be afterwards
divided and offered half in the morning and half
at night.
Ver. 23. It shall not be eaten. — In other ob-
lations all was given to God, but in part through "
the priest ; in the priestly oblation, he could not
offer it to God through himself, and therefore it
must of necessity be vyholly burnt.
C. Instructions for the priests concerning sin
offerings.
Lange adheres to the view he has given in ch.
iv., and makes this division include both the sin
and the trespass offerings. For his reasons see
oh. iv. He, however, calls the next division
" The ritual of the trespass offering."
We have here the third of the five divine com-
munications contained in this section. The first
includes the burnt offerings and oblations, wbile
Ibe second, as an appendix to this, is occupieil
with the special oblations of the high-priest; the
present communication extends to vii. 21, anil
embraces the directions to the priests concerning
the various other kinds of sacrifice. In the or-
der in which they are mentioned in chs. iii. — v.
the peace offerings came before the sin and tres-
pass offerings, while here they are placed after
them ; the reason for this change is well ex-
plained by Murphy, as resulting from the differ-
ent principle of arrangement appropriate in llie
two oases. In the instructions for the people
the order of the sacrifices is that of their com-
parative frequency, the burnt offering and obla-
tion being constant (although not so as voluntary
offerings), the peace offerings habitual, the ain
and trespass offerings, from their nature, occa-
sional ; here the principle of arrangement is in
the treatment of the flesh, — the burnt offering,
(with which the oblation is associated) was
wholly consumed on the altar, the sin and tres-
pass offerings were partly eaten by the priests,
the peace-offerings both by the priests and the
people.
Ver. 25. In the place where the burnt
offering. — It is evident from ver. 30 that thi»
whole direction refers to the sin offerings of the
people, not of the high-priest or of the whole
congregation. These were to be killed in tbe
usual place of killing the smaller sacrificial W'
mals, on the north side of the altar. See not*
CHAP. VI. 8— VII. 38.
59
on i. 11. The sin offering for the high-priest
and for the congregation, consisting of a buUook,
was to be killed (i. 8) where the bullock for
burnt offering was killed " before the door of
the tabernacle." See note on i. 8.
It is most h'oly. — See on ii. 3.
Ver. 25. The priest that oSereth it. — For
the exceptions see ver. 80. The flesh of the or-
dinary sin-offering belonged, not to the priests
as a body, but to the particular priest that of-
fired it. It was, however, much more than he
could consume alone, and therefore in ver. 29
all miles of the priestly family were allowed to
eat of it, doubtless on the invitation of the offi-
ciating priest, or by some established arrange-
ment.
Ver. 27. Shall be holy.— As in ver. 18. In
regard to the peculiarly sacred character of the
sin offering Lange says, " the complete surren-
der to Jehovah is expressed in three ways : 1 )
Forbidding the flesh to the unclean ;" [But this,
although to be supposed, ia not mentioned here,
whereas it is very emphatically commanded in
connection with the peace offerings, vii. 20, 21].
" 2) Washing the garments sprinkled with blood
in a holy place, or in the court. Here the re-
gard ia not for the cleansing of the garment, but
for the blood, — it must not be carried on the
garment out of the sanctuary ; 3) If the vessel in
which the flesh was cooked was earthen, it had
to be broken, if of copper, it had to be scoured
and rinsed, so that nothing of the substance of
the flesh should remain sticking to it." On the
reason for the peculiar sacredness with which
the flesh of the sin offering was regarded vari-
ous opinions have been held. It seems unnecea-
aary, however, to look for this reason in the sup-
position that the victim was regarded as bearing
either the sins of the offerer, or the punishment
due to those sins. The simple fact that God had
appointed the sin-offering as a means whereby
ainfulness might "be covered," and sinful man
might approach Him in His perfect holiness, is
enough to invest that means, like the altar upon
which it was offered, with a sacredness which
needs no aualyaia for its explanation. The very
important paaaage, ch. x. 17, usually referred to
in ttiis connection, will be treated of in its place.
Thou Shalt ^rash. — The second person is
used beoauae the command is addressed to the
priest. The garment referred to is probably
that of the offerer ; it might easily happen that
this would sometimes be stained by the spurting
of the blood of the victim, but he was not to wash
it himself ; no particle of the blood might be car-
ried out of the sanctuary, and none might med-
dle with it but the divinely appointed priest.
Ver. 28. Bat the earthen vessel. — Vn-
glazed earthenware would absorb the juices of
tlie flesh so that they could not be removed ;
hence such vessels must be broken that the flesh
of the sin offering might not be profaned. The
brazen pot probably stands for any metallic
vessel, and these being less porous, might be
perfectly freed from the fleah by scouring and
rinsing. For the same reason the earthen vessel
into which any of the small unclean animals
when dead had fallen (xi. 33, 35), must be
broken ; from its absorptive qualities it took the
character of that which had been within it, and
was unfit for other use. No direction is given
for the disposition of the broken fragments. It
is more likely that they were disposed of with
the ashes from the altar, than that, as Jewish
tradition affirms, the earth opened to swallow
them up. No mention is made of any other me-
thod of cooking the flesh of the sacrifice than by
boiling. From 1 Sam. ii. 13-15, and from the
allusion in Zeoh. xiv. 21, it would appear that
the same meihod was observed also in later ages.
Ver. 29. All the males. — Comp. Note on
ver. 18.
Ver. 30. But no sin offering whereof any
of the blood is brought in the tabernacle.
—Comp. iv. 5-7, 11, 12. 16-18, 21 ; xvi.27. This
shows that from the foregoing directions the
sin offerings for the high-priest and for the whole
congregation are to be excepted ; for these no
directions are here given, since the priest had
nothing more to do with them than has already
been provided for in ch. iv.
D. Instructions for the -priests concerning
trespass offerings, vii. 1-6^,.
In the LXX. this and the next division (vii. 7-
10) form a part of ch. vi. This is certainly the
better division ; but the A. V. has here followed
the Hebrew, as in the division between ohapa.
V. and vi., it followed the LXX. — in both cases
for the worse.
In the former directions for the trespass offer-
ing (v. 14 — vi. 7) designed for the people, no-
thing is said of what parts are to be burned on
the altar, nor of the disposal of the remainder.
The directions on these points are now given to
the priests. The ritual is precisely the same as
for the ordinary ain-offering except in the treat-
ment of the blood. This was to be treated as
that of the burnt and of the peace offerings, viz.
to be sprinkled on the aides of the altar, instead
of being placed on its horns as in the sin
offering. See iii. 2, 8, 13 ; iv. 6, 30, 34.
The Codex Middoth (iii. 1) is quoted for the
tradition of the Jews that there was a scarlet
thread or line around the altar just at the middle
of its height; an^l that the blood of the burnt
offering was sprinkled above, and that of the
trespass offering below this line. No mention
is made of laying on of hands in the trespass
offering, either here or in v. 14 — vi. 7 (where it
would more naturally occur). Knobelargues from
this omission that it waa omitted in this offering ;
it is more likely that there is no mention of it
because it was a universal law in the case of all
viftims and therefore did not require to be spe-
cified.
Ver. 3. The fat tail is specified because the
victim in the trespass offering must always be a
ram. For other pointa aee ch. iii.
E. Instructions concerning the priests' por-
tion of the above, vii. 7-10.
Before proceeding to those sacrifices, of which
a part was returned to be consumed by the of-
ferer, summary directions are now given in re-
gard to all the preceding offerings, which were
wholly devoted to the Lord, whether by being
wholly conaumed upon the altar, or partly eaten
by the priests.
Ver. 7. One lavT- for them — i. e., in respect
to the matter here treated of, the disposil of their
flesh. The priest that maketh atonement.
60
LEVITICUa.
— The flesh of these victims did not become the
common property of the priestly body, but was
the peculiar perquisite of the officiating priest.
He might, of course, ask others, and especially
those who were hindered by bodily infirmity
from officiating, to share it with him.
Ver. 8. Shall have to himself the skin. —
Since this was unsuitable for burning upon the
altar, and yet the victim was wholly devoted.
No directions are any where given in regard to
the skins of the other offerings, except those
which were to be burned with the flesh without
the camp. The Mishna (Sebaoh 12, 3) says that
the skins of all victims designated as "most holy ' '
were given to the priests, while those of other
victims (i. c, the peace offerings in their variety)
belonged to the offerer. This distinction, being
in accordance with the character of the sacrifice,
is probably true. Among the heathen, the skin
of the sacrificial animals usually belonged to the
priest, and was by them often perverted to super-
stitious uses. See Patrick, Kalisch, and others.
Some commentators trace the origin of the cus-
tom in regard to the burnt offering back to
Adam; it rather lies still further back in the
nature of the sacrifice.
Ver. 9. And all the oblation. — Except, of
course, the "memorial," which was burned
upon the altar, and which having been carefully
provided for in chap, ii., did not require to be
specified in this brief summary. In this verse
all cooked oblations are assigned to the officiating
priest; while in the next all that are uncooked
are given to the priestly body equally. The
former included all the oblations of ii. 4-10, and
it is generally supposed that even these required
to be consumed without delay ; the latter include
the oblations of ii. 1, and probably that of ii. 15;
also the alternative sin offering of v. 11, and the
jealousy offering of Num. v. 15. Only the two
latter come under the class of dry, the others
being mingled ■with oil. Thus all oblations,
except that of the thank offering (vii. 14) and
the "memorial" in all cases, was in one way or
the other consumed by the priests. A secondary
object in the assignment of these sacrifices was
the support of the priests. See Ezek. xliv. 29.
F. Instructions for the priests in regard to
the peace offerings in their variety, vii. 11-21.
For the reason why the peace offerings are
here placed last, see note on vi. 24.
We here enter upon an entirely different kind
of sacrifice from those which have gone before,
and therefore there is a different ritual. The
former had reference to the means of approach
to God through the forgiveness of sin ; these are
more closely connected with the idea of con-
tinued communion with God, and hence, so far
as their object is concerned, seem to belong more
properly to the second part of the book. Never-
theless, for the purpose of law, the stronger con-
nefction is, as sacrifices, with the general laws
of sacrifice, and hence they must necessarily be
placed here. Moreover, they are not to be con-
sidered altogether by themselves, but, as Outram
has noted, as generally following piacular sacri-
fices, and therefore as together with them form-
ing the complete act of worship.
The peace offerings might be of any animal
allowed for sacrifice (except birds which were
too small for the accompanying feast) as is pro-
vided in chap. iii. They might be of either tlie
herd or the flock, and either male or female. No
limitation of age is given in the law, although
Jewish tradition limits the age of those offered
from the herd to from one to three years, and
of those from the flock to from one to two years
complete. On the place for the killing of the
victims, see note on i. 11. Historical examples
of these offerings are very frequent in the later
books, e.g., 1 Sam. i. 4; ix. 13, 24; xi. 15; xvi.
3, 6 ; 1 Kings viii. 65 ; 1 CKron. xvi. 3, etc. Si-
milar sacrificial feasts among the heathen are fa-
miliar to all readers of Homer.
Three varieties of the peace offering are dis-
tinguished, or rather two principal kinds, the
second of which is again subdivided — (a) Tlio
thank offering, vers. 12-15, which included all
the public and prescribed peace offerings; (b)
the (1) vow, or (2) voluntary offering, vers. IB-
IS, both of which were sacrifices of individuals.
The two kinds were broadly separated from one
another by the length of time during which it
was lawful to eat the flesh, while the sub-varie-
ties of the second kind are only distinguished in
the purpose of the offerer. " There are three
possible forms in which man can offer with re-
ference to his prosperity or safety : praise and
thanksgiving for experiences in the past; promi-
sing in regard to a desire in the fut ure ; expressioa
of thankful prosperity in the present." Lange.
Vers. 12-15. The thank offering.
Ver. 12. The thank offering was aocompanieil
by an oblation of three kinds, to which a fourth
was added (ver. 13) of leavened bread, which
last is perhaps to be considered as an accompani-
ment rather than a part of the offering, as it is
doubtful whether it is included in the "heave
offering" of ver. 14. Still, as none of this ob-
lation was placed upon the altar, the leavened
bread would not come under the prohibition of
ii. 11 and of Ex. xxiii. 18; xxxiv. 25. The
drink offerings prescribed with this and other
sacrifices in Num. xv. (and alluded to in
Lev. xxiii. 18, 37) ns to be offered "when ye
be come into the land of your habitation," are
not mentioned here, probably because they were
not easily obtained during the life in the wilder-
ness. The abundance of bread of various kinds
here required was in view of the sacrificial meal
to follow. Jewish tradition affirms that with
certain peace offerings of festivals [Bagigah and
Sheincah) no bread was offered.
Ver. 14. One out of each offering — i-f-,
one cake out of the number of each kind pre-
sented, and perhaps one from the loaves of
leavened bread. An heave offering. — Herein
this oblation is strongly distinguished from tbe
oblations accompanying the burnt offering. No
part of them was placed upon the altar. Comp.
the heave offerings of the Levites, Num. xviii.
26-30. It must be inadvertently that Lange says
"one of the unleavened cakes was offered to Je-
hovah on His altar as a heave offering ; all tbe
rest of the meal offering fell to the share of the
priest who sacrificed ;" for it is plain from the
text that the one offered as a heave offering was
not consumed, but belonged to the officiating
priest, while the rest were returned to the of-
ferer. The heave offering was waved in the
CHAP. VI. 8— Vir. 38.
Gl
hands up and down before the altar, but not
placed upon it.
Ver. 16. Shall be eaten the same day. —
Gomp. the similar provisioa in regard to the
Paschal lamb, Ex. xii. 10, and also in regard to
the manna, £x. svi. 19. The same command is
repeated in regard to the thank offering in xxU.
29, 30; while the greater liberty allowed in the
yow and voluntary offerings (ver. 16) is also re-
peated xix. 6-8. In both cases Jewish traditiou
affirms that the rule applied also to the accom-
panying oblations. The difference of time al-
lowed in which the flesh of these two kinds of
peace offerings might be eaten evidently marks
the one as of a superior sacredness to the other.
Yet it is not easy to say wherein precisely the
difference consisted. The general observation is
that the thank offerings were purely unselfish,
offered in gratitude for blessings already re-
ceived; while the vow and voluntary offerings
had respect to something yet hoped for, and
therefore involved a selfish element. But it is
not altogether clear that this was the case with
the voluntary offering. Outram (p. 131 , Eng.
tr.), on the authority of Maimonides and Abar-
banel, makes the distinction to consist in the vow
offering being general — a promise to present a
certain kind of victim or its value, and this re
mained in all cases binding ; while the voluntary
offering was particular — a promise to present a
particular animal, which became void in case of
the animal's death. Under this interpretation
both have respect to the future. If there were
any accidental remainder of the thank offering
after the first day, it was doubtless consumed
(but not on the altar), as in the case of the Pas-
chal lamb (Ex. xii. 10) and of the other peace
offerings (ver. 17), and the consecration offerings
(Ex. zxix. 34). Several reasons have been as-
signed for the limitation of the time for eating.
Outram says, "The short space of time within
which the victims might be eaten, seems to have
been designed to prevent any corruption of the
sacrifices, and to guard against covetousness, "
and he quotes Philo at length in support of this
double reason. The incentive hereby added to
the command to share these feasts with the
poor, and especially the poor Levites, though en-
tirely rejected by Keil, is made more or less pro-
minent by Theodoret (who gives this reason
only), Corn. 4 Lapide, Ealisch, Kosenmiiller, and
others. "The recollection tliat in warm lands
meat soon spoils, may give us the idea that the
feaster was compelled in consequence to invite
in the poor." Lange. It must be remembered also
that the feast would rapidly lose its sacrificial as-
sociations as the interval was prolonged between
it and the offering of the sacrifice.
Vers. 16-18. The vow and voluntary offerings.
The distinction between these has already been
pointed out. Both were clearly inferior to the
thank offering. It is to be remembered that
these did not belong to the class of expiatory of-
ferings, and hence the vow offering of St. Paul
(Acts xviii. 18 ; xxi. 23-26) had in it nothing in-
consistent with his faith in the one Sacrifice for
sins offered on Calvary. These offerings might
be eaten on the two days following the sacrifice,
but the remainder on the third day shall be
burnt with fire.
Ver. 18. The penalty for the transgression of
this command was not only that the offering
went for nothing — it shall not be accepted ;
but further, it shall be an abomination, and
the soul that eateth of it shall bear his ini-
quity. The sense is not, as many suppose, that
the offering being made void, the offerer re-
mained with his former iniquity unoleansecj; for
these offerings were not at all appointed for the
purpose of atonement, or the forgiveness of sin;
but that the offerer, having transgressed a plain
and very positive command, must bear the conse-
quences of such transgression.
The distinctions in regard to these offerings
(as in the case of those which have gone before)
embrace only the common sacrifices of their
kind. There were other special peace-offerings
(xxiii. 19, 20) which were otherwise dealt with.
In later times, the place where the peace-
offerings might be eaten was restricted to the
holy city (Dent. xii. 6, 7, 11, 12) ; at present,
there was no occasion for such a command,
while all were together in the camp in the wil-
derness. But all sacrificial animals slain for food
must be offered as sacrifice to the Lord (xvii. 3, 4).
Kalisch (p. 144 ss.) says: "The character of
these feasts cannot be mistaken. It was that of
joyfuluess tempered by solemnity, of solemnity
tempered by joyfulness: the worshipper had
submitted to God an offering from his property;
he now received back from Him a, part of the
dedicated gift, and thus experienced anew the
same gracious beneficence which had enabled
him to appear with his wealth before the altar;
he therefore consumed that portion with feelings
of humility and thankfulness ; but he was bid-
den at once to manifest those blissful sentiments
by sharing the meat not only with his house-
hold, which thereby was reminded of the divine
protection and mercy, but also with his needy
fellow-beings, whether laymen or servants of
the temple. Thus these beautiful repasts were
stamped both with religious emotion and human
virtue. The relation of friendship between God
and the offerer which the sacrifice exhibited
was expressed and sealed by the feast which
intensified that relation into one of an actual
covenant; the momentary harmony was extended
to a permanent union ; and these notions could
not be expressed more intelligibly, at least to
an Eastern people, than by a common meal,
which to them is the familiar image of friend-
ship and communion, of cheerfulness and joy.
.... Some critics have expressed an opposite
view, contending that the offerer was not consi-
dered as the guest of God, but, on the contrary,
God as the guest of the offerer ; but this is
against the clear expressions of the law ; the
sacrificer surrendered the whole victim to the
Deity (iii. 1, 6, 7, 12), and confirmed his inten-
tion by burning on the altar the fat parts, which
represented the entire animal. . . . The Apos-
tle Paul says distinctly : 'Are not they who eat
of the sacrifices partakers of the altar' or 'of
the Lord's table?' "
Vers. 19-21. The sanctity of even this inferior
sacrifice is strongly guarded. Peace-offerings
being representative especially of communion
with the Most Holy, all uncleanness or contact
with uncleanness is rigorously forbidden.
62
LEVITICUS.
Yer. 19. And as for tbe flesh, all that be
clean shall eat thereof, — meaning, of course,
the flesh in general — that which has not touched
any unclean thing. The sense might easily be
made more clear ; but there is no ground for
altering the translation.
Yer. 20. Shall be cut oB from his people,
i. e. be excommunicated, cast out from the com-
monwealth of Israel. This might sometimes, as
in Ex. xxxi. 14, involve also the punishment of
death, but only when the offence was also a
civil one. Capital punishment is not intended
by the expression itself. — That pertain unto
the Lord. — This shows plainly enough that the
Tictim, once offered, was considered as belong-
ing to God, and hence that they who feasted
upon it were the guests of the Lord.
Yer. 21. Unclean beast, etc. This is to be
understood of the dead bodies of these animals.
Unoleanness was not communicated by their
touch while living; but, on the other hand, it
was communicated by the touch of the body,
even of clean animals which had died a natural
death, or as we should say, of carrion.
Nothing is here said of the portion of the
priests, that being the subject of a distinct di-
vine communication (vera. 28-36).
G. Instructions in regard to the Fat and the
Blood. Yers. 22-27. From its importance, this
group of commands forms the exclusive subject
of another communication, and is addressed to
ihei people^ because, while these portions were in
the especial charge of the priests, it was neces-
sary to warn the people very carefully against
making use of them themselves. It comes ap-
propriately in connection with the peace offer-
ings, because it was only of these that tbe peo-
ple eat at all, and hence here there was especial
liability to transgress this command.
Yer. 22. No manner of fat, of 03t, or of
sheep, or of goat.— The prohibition of the
eating of fat extends only to the sacrificial ani-
mals, and is to be so understood in ch. iii. 17.
The reason of this prohibition appears in ver.
25 : this fat was appropriated to burning upon
the altar, and hence any other use of it was a
profanation. While the Israelites were in the
wilderness, all animals slain for food, which
were allowed in sacrifice, were presented as
victims, and their fat was burned on the altar.
Afterwards, in view of the settlement in the
promised land, this restriction was removed,
Deut. lii. 15, 21. With that permission the
prohibition of blood is emphatically repeated ;
but nothing is said of the fat. Hence Keil ar-
gues that in such case the eating of the fat was
allowable, and this opinion is strongly confirmed
by Deut. xxxii. 14, enumerating among the good
things to be enjoyed the "fat of lambs, and
rams of the breed of Bashan." Nevertheless,
the language of universal prohibition is distinct
in ch. iii. 17, unless that is to be understood
only of animals offered in sacrifice. The gene-
rality of commentators understand, in accord-
ance with Jewish tradition, that the fat of the
sacrificial animals was perpetually forbidden.
In any case the prohibited fat was of course
that which was burned on the altar, the separa-
ble fat, not that which was intermingled with
the flesh.
Yer. 24. That which died of itself, its hlooj
not having been poured out, and that which wag
torn of beasts, was prohibited as food (xxii. 8),
and if any partook of it, he must undergo puri-
fication, and "be unclean until the even" (xfii
15). The fat of such animals therefore could
no more be eaten than their flesh ; but since it
was also unfit for the altar, it might be us«d
in any other use. Nothing is said of the fai
of fowls as no special use was made of this ou
the altar.
Yers. 26, 27. The prohibition of blood is ab-
solute and perpetual, and this for the reasons
given in xvii. 11. It has been urged that as
nothing is anywhere said of the blood of fish,
that id not included in the prohibition. More
probably this was of too little importance to ob-
tain particular mention, and the general princi-
ple on which blood is absolutely forbidden must
be considered as applying here also, notwitli-
standing any tradition to the contrary.
H. Instructions for the priests' portion of the
peace offerings. Yers. 28-36.
This, the final communication of this part of
the book, is also addressed to the people, be-
cause the priests' pordon was taken from that
which would otherwise have been returned to
them, and it therefore concerned them to under-
stand the law. It stands here quite in its right
place : " When the priest's rights in all the
other sacrifices were enumerated, this was omit-
ted, because the people here took the place of
the priest in respect of the flesh. When tbe
special nature of this offering in this respect
has been made prominent, a new communicatioQ
is made, addressed to the sons of Israel, and
directing them, among other things, to assign
certain portions of the victim to the priest."
Murphy.
Yer. 29. Shall bring his offering unto
the Iiord. — Tbe object of this provision seems
10 be to secure an actual, instead of a merely
constructive offering. As moat of the flesh Vfas
to be consumed by the offerer, it might possibly
have been supposed sufiScient merely to send
in the consecrated parts ; but the law regards
the whole as offered to the Lord, and therefore
requires that it shall be distinctly presented
before Him.
Yer. 30. His own hands shall bring.—
Still further to guard the sacrificial character
of this offering, which was more in danger of
being secularized than any other, it is required
that the parts especially destined for the Lords
use might not be sent in by any servant or other ■
messenger, but must be presented by the offer-
er's own hands. Comp. viii. 27; Ex. xxix.
24-26; Num. vi. 19, 20.— The fat with the
breast. — The construction of iy_ is as in Ex.
xii. 8, 9. Breast ia that part between the shoul-
ders in front which we call the brisket, and which
included the cartilaginous breast-bone.
A wave-offering. — The breast is to be a
wave-offering, the right leg (ver. 31) a heave-
offering.- These two kinds of offering are
clearly distinguished in the law. Both are
mentioned together in ver. 34. and frequently
(X. 14, 15; Ex. xxix. 24-27 ; Num. vi. 20; xviii.
11, 18, 19, etc.) as distinct offerings; the heave-
CHAP. VI. 8— VII. 38.
63
offering is mentioned alone (xxii. 12 ; Ex. xxv.
2, 3; XXX. 13-16; xxxv. 6; xxxvi. 3, 6; Nuu).
XV. 19-21; xviii. 24; xxxi.29, 41, 52, etc.), and so
is the wave offering (xiv. 12, 21, 24; xxiii. 15,
17, 20; Ex. xxxviii. 24, 29; Num. yiii. 11. 13,
etc.); although both apparently are sometimes
used simply in the sense of offering and coupled
together without distinction of meaning (Ex.
xxxv. 21-24); both are here applied to the offer-
ings of metal for the tabernacle, though the
other offerings are only spoken of as heave
offerings. The distinction is much obscured in
the A. V. by the frequent translalion of both by
the simple word offering, and sometimes without
any note of this in the margin. In regard to
the parts of the sacrifices designated by the two
terms, the distinction is clearly marked ; the
heave-leg belonged exclusively to the officiating
priest, while the wave-breast was the common
property of the priestly order. The distinotiou
in the ceremonial between them it is less easy to
make. That of the wave offering appears to
have been the more solemn and emphatic, con-
sisting in the priest placing his hands under
those of the offerer (which held the offering to
be waved), and moving them to and fro — some
of the Rabbins say, towards each of the four
quarters, and also up and down. The heaving,
on the other hand, appears to have been a sim-
ple lifting up of the offering, (dee authorities
in Outram I. 15, J V.) In all cases of the wave
offering of parts of animals, only the fat was
burned, except in the peculiar cuse of the con-
secration of the priests commanded in Ex. xxix.
22-26, and fulfilled in viii. 25-29, when the leg
was also burned. In the case of the " waving "
of the Levites (Num. viii. 11-19), they were
wholly given up to God as the ministrants of the
priests. Lange says : " The breast may repre-
sent the bold readiness, the leg the energetic
progress, which in the priest are always desi-
rable."
During the sojourn in the wilderness, where
all sacrificial animals that were to be eaten were
offered in saorifioe, the priests' portion was only
the breast and the right leg ; afterwards, when
permission was given to kill these animals for
food in the scattered habitations of the people,
and thereby the perquisites of the priests were
greatly reduced, there was added (Deut. xviii.
8) "the shoulder (J?'1t) and the two cheeks and
the maw.''
Ver. 34. A statute forever. — As long as the
sacrificial system and the Aaronic priesthood
should endure.
Ver. 35. In the day when he presented
them. — At the time when God, by the hand of
Moses, brought them near to minister. The verb
is without an expressed nominative in the He-
brew as in the English.
The conclusion of this part of the book. Vers.
37, 38.
Ver. 37. The enumeration in this verse is to
be understood not merely of the immediately pre-
ceding section ; but of the whole law of sacrifice
as given in all the preceding chapters.
Of the consecrations. — Lit., "of the fill-
ings" sc. of the hands. Comp. Ex. xxix. 19-28.
The ordinance for the consecration of the priests
has been given in full there; but still something
of it has been directed here (vi. 19-23) so that ii
must necessarily appear in this recapitulation.
Ver. 38. In Mount Sinai. — That this ex-
■pression is used broadly for the region of Mt.
Sinai, not distinctively for the mountain itself,
is apparent from the concluding clause of the
verse.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL.
I. In the stress laid upon the necessity of
maintaining perpetually the fire divinely kindled
on the altar, is taught the necessity of the divine
approval of the means by which man seeks to
approach God. The only Mediator under the
old Covenant as under the new, is Christ ; but
as the divine appointment was of old necessary
to constitute the types which prefigured Him,
and by means of which the worshipper availed
himself of His sacritice, — so now, man may claim
the benefits of Christ's work for his redemption
only in those ways which God has approved.
IL The priests, and the high-priest, like the
people, must offer oblations and sacrifices. They
were separated from the people only in so far as
the functions of their olfioe required ; in the in-
dividual relation of their souls to God, they
formed no caste, and stood before Him on no dif-
ferent footing from others. This is a funda-
mental principle in all the divine dealings with
man ; " there is no respect of persona with God,"
(Rom. ii. II, etc.).
III. In the assimilation of the trespass to the
sin offering is shown how wmng done to man is
also sin against God ; while in the peculiar or-
dinances belonging to the sin offering alone, we
see the peculiar sinfulness of that sin which is
committed directly against God.
IV. The provision for a portion for the priests
from the various offerings, and from the oblation
accompanying the whole burnt offering sets forth
in act the general principle declared in wordi in
the New Testament, " that they which minister
about holy things live of the things of the tem-
ple." (1 Cor. ix. 13).
V. The peace offerings are called in the LXX.
frequently "sacrifices of praise" (ffvaiai rijg al-
veaeuf) ; by the use of the same phraseology in
the Ep. to the Heb. (xiii. 15) applied to Christ,
He is pointed out as the Antitype of this sacri-
fice : " By Him, therefore, let us offer the sacri-
fice of praise [Svalav alviaeoic) to God continu-
ally;" and again (ver. 10) " We have an altar
whereof they have no right to eat which serve
the tabernacle."
VI. In the oblation accompanying the peace
offering leavened bread was required. This
could not be admitted for burning upon the altar
for reasons already given ; nevertheless it must
be presented to the Lord for a heave offering.
Many things in man's daily life cannot, from
thefr nature, be directly appropriated to the ser-
vice of God ; yet all must be sanctified by being
presented before Him.
VII. In the strict prohibition to the people of
the fat which was appropriated as the Lord's
portion was taught, in a w .y suited to the ap-
prehension of the Israelites, the general princi-
ple that whatever has been appropriated to God
may not rightly be diverted to any other use.
64
LEVITICDS.
VIII. The various kinds of sacrifice here re-
cognized as means of approach to God, and the
provisions for their constant repetition, alike
indicate their intrinsic insufEcienoy and tempo-
rary character. Otherwise " would they not
have ceased to be offered, because that the wor-
shippers once purged should have had no more
conscience of sins ?" (Heb. x. 2).
IX. The same temporary and insufficient cha-
racter attached to the peace offerings, which ex-
pressed communion with God. As Keil has
pointed out, they still left the people in the outer
court, while God was enthroned behind the vail
in the holy of holies, and this vail could only be
removed by the sacrifice on Calvary. And in
general, as the office of the old Covenant was to
give the knowledge of sin rather than, by any-
thing within itself, completely to do it away ; so
was it designed to awaken rather than to satisfy
the desire for reconciliation and communion
with Qod. In so far as it actually accomplished
cither purpose, it was by its helping the faith
of the worshippers to lean, through its types,
upon the one true Sacrifice in the future.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL.
VI. Vers. 9-13. The ever-burning fire ; kin-
dled by God, but kept alive by man ; the accept-
ance of our efforts to approach God is from Him,
but He gives or withholds it according to our
desire and exertion. " Quench not the Spirit."
(1 Thess. V. 19). The Spirit ^aoKom, but it is
for us nva^anvpelv (2 Tim. i. 6) Wordsworth. Put
on his linen garment ; the inward purity re-
quired in those who are serving immediately at
the altar is fitly symbolized by outward signs.
Even that which is becoming in service of other
kinds, as the carrying forth of the ashes, may
well be replaced in duties which are more nearly
related to the divine Presence.
Vers. 14-18. The oblation. That is truly of-
fered to God which is consumed in His service,
though but the '■ memorial " of it and the frank-
incense, typifying prayer and praise, can be ac-
tually given directly to Him. Whatsoever
toucheth them shall be holy. — As there is
a contaminating effect in contact with evil, so
is thero a sanctifying effect from close contact
with that which is holy. The woman in the
Gospel by faith touched the holy One, and virtue
went forth to heal her from her uncleanness.
Origen (Horn. 4 in Lev.).
Vers. 19-23. The high-priest must offer an ob-
lation for himself as well as for the people. Man
never reaches on earth a stage of holiness so
high that he needs not means of approach to
God; He alone who " was without sin" offered
Himself for us.
Vers. 24-80. Everything connected with the
sin-offering is to be scrupulously guarded from
defilement, and everything which it touches, re-
ceives from it somewhat of its own character ; a
fit emblem and type of the true Sacrifice for sins,
Himself without sin. Whoever seeks the benefit
of this Sacrifice, must " die unto sin," and who-
ever is sprinkled by His all-availing blood be-
comes thereby " purged from sin." Yet even
so, the virtue of that blood may not be carried
out of the sanctuary of God's presence ; they
who, having been touched by the blood shed on
Calvary, would depart from communion with God,
must leave behind them all the efficacy of that
atonement.
VII. Vers. 1-6. Though the sin whose promi-
nent feature is harm done, be less than that in
which the offence is more directly against Qod,
yet for the forgiveness of one there is essentially
the same law as for the other. Both are viola-
tions of the law of love, and love toward God and
man are so bound together that neither can truly
exist without the other (1 Jno. iv. 20), and there
can be no breach of the one without the other.
Vers. 11-21. The peace offering was at once
communion of the offerer with God and also the
opportunity for extending his bounty to his fel-
low-men. So always there is the same connec-
tion. It was said to Cornelius, " Thy prayers
and thine alms are come up for a, memorial."
"To do good and to communicate forget not;
for with such sacrifices God is well pleased"
(Heb. xiii. 16). The thank offering has a higher,
place than the vow or the voluntary offering:
that is a nearer communion with God in which
the grateful heart simply pours out its thanks-
givings, than that in which, with some touch of
selfishness, it still seeks some further blessing.
Yet both are holy. But uncleanness allowed to
continue, debarred from such communion; and
sin. unrepented, in its very nature now forbids it.
Vers. 37, 38. A summary of the law of sacri-
fice in its variety. All these sacrifices were (as
elsewhere shown) types of Christ; for it was
impossible that the fulness of His gracious offices,
could be set forth by any single type. He is at
once the whole burnt offering of complete conse-
cration of Himself, through whom also we "pre-
sent our bodies a living sacrifice, holy, accept-
able unto God ;" and He is, too, the oblation, as
that which man must present to God with his
other sacrifices, as it is in and through Christ
alone that our sacrifices can be acceptable; He
is the sin offering, as it is through Him alone
that our sins can be "covered" and effectual
atonement be made for us ; as trespass offering
also, it is through His love shed abroad from
Calvary, that we learn that love towards ourfel-
low-men in the exercise of which only can our
transgressions against Him be forgiven ; and so
too is He the peace offering, for His very name
is " Peace." His coming was " peace on earth,"
and by Him have we peace and communion with
God. No one of these alone can fully typify
Christ ; beforehand each of His great offices in
our behalf must be set forth by a separate sym-
bolical teaching ; but when He has come, all
these separate threads are gathered into 0IW|
and He is become our "all in all."
PRELIMINART NOTE ON THE LEVITICAL PRIESTHOOD.
66
PART SECOND. HISTORICAL.
Chapters VIII.— X.
"7%e Sacrificing^ Priesthood: Its Consecration and its Typical Discipline shown by the Death of
Nadab and Abihu,^^ — Lange.
The law of sacrifices having now been given, and the duties of the priests in regard to them appointed, all necessary
preparation has been made for carrjing out the consecration of the priests aa commanded in Ex. xxix. This histcrical sec-
tion follows, therefore, in its natural order, and takes up the thread of events at the close of the book of Exodus, where it
was broken off that the necessary laws might be announced. There is, first, the consecration of the priests (chap, viii.), oc-
cupying seven days; then the record of the actual entrance of Aaron and his sons upon the discharge of their functions
(chap, ix.); closing with the account of the transgression of two of those sons in their first official act, and their consequent
punishment, together with certain instructions for the priests occasioned by this event (chap. x,). To euter understandingly
upon the consideration of these chapters, it is necessary to have in mind the origin, nature, and functions of the priest-
hood. These will be briefly discussed in the following
PKELIMINAKY NOTE ON THE LEVITICAL PRIESTHOOD.
In the early days of the human race such
priestly functions as were exercised at all were
naturally undertaken by the head of the family,
and hence arose what is called the patriarchal
priesthood, of which the Scripture patriarchs are
standing illustrations. When, however, families
were multiplied and formed into communities or
nations, the former provision was manifestly in-
sufficient, and we meet with instances of priests
for a larger number, as Jethro, " the priest of
Midian" {for pruat seems here to be the proper
rendering of [Hi). The chief priestly office was
sometimes, and perhaps generally, associated
with the chief civil authority, as In the case of
"Melchisedec, king of Salem the priest
of the Most High God" (Gen. xiv. 18), and
among the heathen, Balak, who offered his sacri-
fices himself (Num. xxiii.); a trace of this custom
may perhaps be preserved in the occasional use
of ins for prince (Job xii. 19 ; 2 Sam. viii. 18 ;
xz. 26?), But in large nations the actual func-
tions of the priestly office must necessarily have
devolved chiefly upon inferior priests. In Egypt
the Israelites had been accustomed to a numerous,
wealthy, and powerful body of priests, at the
head of which stood the monarch. It is unneces-
sary to speak of these further than to note a few
points in which they were strongly contrasted
with the priests of Israel. In the first place, al-
though the monarch was at the head of the whole
priestly caste, yet as the popular religion of
Egypt was polytheistic, each principal Divinity
had his especial body of priests with a high-
priest at their head. In contrast with this, mo-
notheism was distinctly set forth in the Levitioal
legislation, by the one body of priests, with its
single high-priest at its head. The Egyptian
priests maintained an esoteric theology, not com-
municated to the people, in which it would ap-
pear that the unity of the Self-existent God and
many other important truths were taught; in
Israel the priests were indeed the keepers and
guardians of the law (Deut. xxxi. 9, He.'), but
they were diligently to teach it all to the people
(Lev. X. 11), to read the whole of it every seventh
year to all the assembled people (Deut. xxxi.
10-13), to supply the king with a copy for him-
self to write out in full (Deut. xvii. 18, 19), and
in general to teach God's judgments to Jacob and
His law to Israel (Deut. xxxiii. 10). While,
therefore, from the nature of their occupation,
they might be expected to have a more perfect
knowledge of the law than the generality of the
people, this knowledge was only more perfect as
the result of more continued study, and might be
equalled by any one who chose, and was actually
shared by every one as far as he chose. The
Egyptian priests were, moreover, great landed
proprietors (besides being fed from the royal
revenues. Gen. xlvii. 22), and actually possessed
one-third of the whole territory of Egypt; the
priests of Israel, on the contrary, were expressly
excluded from the common inheritance of the
tribes, and had assigned to them only the cities
with their immediate suburbs actually required
for their residence. The priesthood of Egypt
culminated in the absolute monarch who was at
their head, and in whose authority they in some
degree shared ; in Israel, on the other hand, the
line between the civil and the priestly authority
and functions was most sharply drawn, primarily
in the case of Moses and Aaron, Joshua and
Eleazar, generally in the time of the judges (al-
though in that troubled period this, like all other
parts of the Mosaic system, was sometimes eon-
fused), and finally under the monarchy. It is
indeed sometimes asserted that the kings, by
virtue of their prerogative, were entitled to exer
cise priestly functions; but for this there is no
real ground. The instances relied on are either
C6
LEVITICUS.
manifest oaaea of sacrifice offered at the command
of the monarch (1 Kings iii. 15; viii. 62-64.) ; or
of the simple wearing of an ephod (2 Sam. vi.
14), which by no means carried with it the
priestly ofiBoe; or else are misinterpretations of
a particular word (1 Kings iv. 2, 5 — see the
Textual notes there; 2 Sam. viii. 18— the only
case of real difficulty— comp. 1 Chr. xviii. 17).
There are but two definite instances of the as-
sumption of priestly functions by kings, and
both of them were most sternly punished (1
Sam. xiii. 10-14; 2 Chron. xxvi. 16-21). There
was also the intrusion of Korah and his compa-
nions on the priestly office and their exemplary
punishment (Num. xvi.). In the later abnormal
state under the Maccabees, it was not the kings
who assumed priestly functions, but the priests
who absorbed the royal prerogative. With these
contrasts, it is plain that there was little in com-
mon between the Egyptian and Levitical priest-
hood, except what is necessarily implied in the
idea of a priesthood at all, and is found in that
of the nations of antiquity generally. They
were, however, both hereditary (as was also the
Brahminical priesthood) ; both were under a law
of the strictest personal cleanliness, and there
was a resemblance between them in several mat-
ters of detail, as linen dress, and other non-es-
sential matters.
When the Israelites came out of Egypt, they
were a people chosen — on condition of faithful-
ness and obedience— »to be " a kingdom of priests
and an holy nation" (Ex. xix. 6), and in accord-
ance with this the paschal lamb was sacrificed
by each head of a household, and eaten by him-
self and his family (Ex. xii. 6), and the same
idea was retained in this sacrifice always. Never-
theless, the people were unprepared for so high a
vocation, and soon after we find the existence of
certain persons among the people recognized as
priests "which oome near to the Lord" (Ex.
xix. 22, 24), although they did not receive the
Divine sancliou necessary to the continuance of
their oflice. We have no knowledge of the na-
ture of their functions, nor of their appointment.
However this may have been, the people cer-
tainly shrank from that nearness of approach to
God implied in the office of priest (Ex. xx. 19,
21; Deut. v. 23—27), and sacrifices were offered
by "young men" appointed by Moses, he re-
serving to himself the strictly priestly function
of sprinkling the blood (Ex. xxiv. 5—8). Such
was the state of things at the time of the ap-
pointment of the Aaronic order; there was no
divinely authorized priesthood, and the need of
one was felt.
Meantime, in the solitude of Sinai, God di-
rected Moses to take Aaron and his sons for an
hereditary priesthood (Ex. xxviii. 1), and gave
minute directions for their official dress, for
their consecration and their duties (Ex. xxviii.,
xxix.). Emphasis is everywhere placed upon
the fact that they were appointed of God (comp.
Heb. V. 4). They were in no sense appointed by
the people ; had they been so, they could not
have been mediators. It has been seen that the
Levitical system makes prominent the fact that
the sacrifices had no efficacy in themselves, but
derived their whole value from the Divine ap-
pointment ; so also in regard to the priesthood.
The priests appear as themselves needing atone-
ment, and obliged to offer for their own sins;
yet by the commanded unction and dress they
are constituted acceptable intercessors and me-
diators for the people. All was from God ; and
while this gave assurance to the people in their
daily worship, at the same time the priests' own
imperfection showed that the true reconciliation
with God by the restoration of holiness to man
had not yet been manifested. The Levitical
priest could be but a type of that Seed of the
woman who should bruise the serpent's head.
Before the directions concerning the priests
hood, given to Moses alone in the Mount, could
be announced, occurred the terrible apostasy of
the golden calf, when, at the summons of Moses
" who is on the Lord's side?" the whole tribe
of Levi consecrated themselves by their zeal on
God's behalf (Ex. xxxii. 25-29). Subsequently
(Num. iii. 5-10, 40-51), the Levites were taken
as a substitute for all the first-born Israelites
(who, under the patriarchal system, would have
been their priests, and who had been spared in
the slaughter of the Egyptian first-born) to mi-
nister to the chosen priestly family. Of these
nothing is said in this book, except the modifica-
tion in their favor of the law concerning the sale
of houses in xxv. 32-34) (see Com.). They may
therefore be here wholly passed by with the
simple mention that they never had sacerdotal
functions, and were not therefore a part of the
sacerdotal class. It is, perhaps, for the purpose
of making this distinction emphatically that no
mention is made of them in this book where it
might otherwise have been expected. As, how-
ever, they constituted the tribe from which the
priests were taken, the latter are often called by
their name, and thus we frequently meet with
the expression in the later books, "the priests,
the Levites," or even with "Levites" alone,
meaning Levites, /car' i^oxv", or priests.
But while there was an evident necessity thai
a much smaller body than the whole tribe of Levi
should be taken for priests; and while Aaron,
the elder brother, and appointed as the "pro-
phet" of Moses (Ex. iv. 14-17), and associated
with him in the whole deliverance of the people
from Egypt, was evidently a most suitable per-
son for the office, the law that (he office should
be hereditary must rest on other grounds. If
we seek for these in any thing beyond the sim-
ple Divine good-pleasure, we should readily find
them in the general fact of the whole Mosaic
system being founded upon the principle of heir-
ship leading on to the fulfilment of the Messianic
promise : and in the more special one that it was
by this means the priesthood was in the main
kept true to God during long periods of Israel's
apostasy and sin.
It is to be carefully observed that this heredi-
tary office did not make of the priests a caste; in
all things not immediately connected with the
discharge of their functions, they were fellow-
citizens with the other Israelites, subject to the
same laws, bound by the same duties, and ame-
nable to the same penalties. When not engaged
in official duty, they wore the same dress, and
might follow the same vocations as their fellow-
citizens. They were only exempt from the pay-
ment of tithes because themselves supported bj
PEEHMINARY NOTE ON THE LEVITICAL PRIESTHOOD.
C7
them. In all this is manifest a striking con-
tvast, not only with heathen priesthoods of an-
tiquity, but also with the hierarchy of the Me-
dieeval Christian Church.
The especial function of the priesthood was
to come near to Ood (vii. 3-5 ; x. 3 ; xxi. 17 ;
Num. xvi. 6, etc.). They were to stand in the
vast gap between a sinful people and a holy
God, themselves of the former, yet especially
sanctified to approach the latter. " Hence their
chief characteristic must be holiness, since they
were elected to be perpetually near the Holy
One and to serve Him (Num. xvi. 6) ; they were
singled out from the rest of their brethren ' to
be sanctified ad most holy.' To hallow and to
install as priests are used as correlative terms
(Ex. xxix. 33; co np. vers. 1, 44; xxviii. 41;
xl. 13). By neglecting what cuntributes to their
sanctity they pr )f'an'? the holiness of God (Lev.
xxi. 6-8) ; and the high-priest is himself the
'Holy One of the Lord' (Ps. cvi. 16)." Kalisoh.
They sustained a distinct mediatorial character
between God and His people. This appears in
every part of the law concerning them. The
golden plate inscribed "holiness to the Lord,"
which the high-priest wore upon his brow, ex-
pressly meant that he should " bear the iniquity
of the holy things which the children of Israel
shall hallow" (Ex. xxviii. 38) ; and the flesh of
the sin offerings was given to the priests "to
bear the iniquity of the congregation, to make
atonement for them before the Lord" (Lev. x.
17). Of course this could be done by human
priests only symbolically, as they were types of
the great High Priest to come ; and His all-
sufficient sacrifice having once been offered,
there could be thereafter no other priesthood in
this relation to the people, or discharging this
mediatorial function. The Christian ministry
finds its analogy, not in the priests, but in the
prophets of the old dispensation, although even
here the likeness is very imperfect. Still, while
the priests were required to preserve and teach
the written law, it was left to the prophets to
unfold its spiritual meaning, and to urge regard
to it by argument and exhortation. It is a
striking fact that the Greek word for priest,
Upeiig, and its derivatives in the New Testament,
while frequently applied to the priests of the
old covenant and to Christ Himself, their Anti-
type, are never used for any office in the Chris-
tian Church, except for the general priesthood
of the whole body of believers ; jrpo0;^r»)f=r/>ro-
phet, however, and its cognates are thus used
with great frequency. It is to be borne in mind
that priest, in the Levitical sense of the word,
and sacrifice are correlative terms; sacrifice
pre-supposes a priest to offer it, and a priest
must needs have "somewhat also to offer"
(Keb. viii. 3). From these points flow all the
duties of the priests, and in view of these their
qualifications, and the other laws concerning
them are fixed.
The first and chiefest of all their duties was
the offering of sacrifice, as this was the especial
instrumentality by which men sought to draw
near; to God. No sacrifice could be offered with-
out the intervention of the appointed priest ;
for the sacrifices having no virtue in themselves,
and deriving their value from the Divine ap-
pointment, must necessarily be presented in the
way and by the persons whom God had author-
ized. Hence it is that in the ritual of the sacri-
fices an emphasis is always placed upon the
declaration that the priests "shall make atone-
ment." The apparent exceptions to this, in the
case of Samuel and Elijah, are really but illus-
trations of the principle, they being prophets
directly charged from on high to do this very
thing. In this, including the burning of in-
cense, the priests were undoubtedly typical of
the one true High Priest and Mediator. They
stood, as far as was possible for man, between
God and the people, and by their acts were the
people made — at least symbolically — holy, and
brought near to God. The acts of sacrifice
which were essential and which therefore could
only be performed by the priests, were the
sprinkling or other treatment of the blood, and
the burning of such parts as were to be con-
sumed upon the altar. In the sin and trespass
offerings, as well as in the oblations, which must
be wholly consecrated to God. they were to con-
sume the parts which were not burned.
From this essential duty naturally were de-
rived a variety of others. To the priests be-
longed the care of the sanctuary and its sacred
utensils, the preservation of the fire on the
brazen altar, the burning of incense on the
golden altar, the dressing and lighting of the
lamps of the golden candlestick, the charge of
the shew-bread, and other like duties. They
were necessarily concerned in all those multitu-
dinous acts of the Israelites which were con-
nected with sacrifices, such as the accomplish-
ment of the Nazarite vow, the ordeal of jealousy,
the expiation of an unknown murder, the deter-
mination of the unclean and of the cleansed lep-
rous persons, garments and houses ; the regula-
tion of the calendar; the valuation of devoted
property which was lio be redeemed ; these and
a multitude of other duties followed naturally
from their priestly office. They were also to
blow the silver trumpets on the various occa-
sions of their use, and in connection with this
to exhort the soldiers about to engage in battle
to boldness, because they went to fight under
the Lord. They were also, from their own
familiarity with the law, appropriately appointed
as the religious teachers of the people. From
their priestly office they were charged to bless
the people in the name of God; and from their
privilege of consulting God especially through
the Drim and Thummim, they were made arbi-
ters in disputes of importance : " by their word
shall every controversy and every violence be
tried " (Deut. xxi. 5). All these secondary du-
ties flowed from their primary one in connection
with the sacrifices. Hence the influence and
importance of the priests in the Hebrew com-
monwealth varied greatly with the religions
earnestness and activity of the nation. Nega-
tively, it is important, to note that the priests
did not, in any considerable degree, discharge
towards the people the office of the Christian
pastor, the spiritual guide, comforter and assist-
ant of his flock. It is possible that if the people
and the priests themselves had been prepared
for it, something more of this relation might
have resulted from the provisions of the law*
68
LEVITICUS.
Still, they were not individually the priests of
particular communities ; but rather, aa a body,
the priests of the whole nation. From this it
resulted that their connection with the people
was little more than simply official and ministe-
rial. In so far as the need of the pastor was
met at all under the old dispensation, as already
said, it was by the prophet rather than by the
priests.
The same thing is also true of their revenue.
This was chiefly derived from the "second
tithe," or the tenth paid to them by the Levites
from the tithes received by them from the peo-
ple. Tithes were stringently commanded ; but
no power was lodged with any one for their
compulsory collection. Their payment was left
absolutely to the conscientious obedience of the
people. The priests' support was supplemented
by their share of the sacrifices, first-fruits, and
other offerings of the people. Very ample pro-
vision appears to be made for them in the law ;
the Levites, who were much less than a tenth of
the people, were to receive the tenth of all their
increase ; and the priests, who appear to have
numbered still much less than the tenth of the
Levites, were to receive the tenth of the income
paid to them. Practically, during the far greater
part of the Hebrew history, their support ap-
pears to have been precarious and insufficient,
and we know that large numbers of them de-
clined to return from the captivity of Babylon,
and many of the descendants of those who did
return did not exercise their priestly office or
claim their priestly privileges.
The qualifications for the priesthood were
first, Aaronio descent ; to spoure this genealogi-
cal registers were kept with great care (2 Chron.
zxxi. 16, 17, etc.), and any one who could not
find his descent upon, them was not allowed to
minister in the priest's office or to receive its
emoluments (Ezra ii. 62 ; Neh. vii. 64). Secondly,
they must be perfect physically, free from any
bodily defect or injury; otherwise, they might
eat of the priests' portion, and receive his tithe,
but they were forbidden to approach the altar,
or enter the sanctuary (Lev. xxi. 17-23). Fur-
ther, during the time of their ministrations,
they must be entirely fre-i from any form of
legal uncleanness (xxii. 1-7), and must practice
frequent ablutions, espeeinlly on entering the
sacred precincts (viii. 6; Ex. xl. 30-32), and
they must carefully abstain from wine and strong
drink (ch. x. 8-10); at all times they must
maintain an especial symbolic purity, and particu-
larly must never be defiled by the contact of a
dead body, except in the case of the very near-
est relatives (xxi. 2-4), even this exception
being denied to the high-priest {ib. 10-12). No
limit of age either for the beginning or the end
of their service is fixed in the law ; but in the
absence of such limitation, the age appointed
for the Levites would probably have been gene-
rally regarded as fitting. In later times there
was great laxity in this respect, and Aristohulus
was appointed high-priest by Herod the Great
when only seventeen. In addition to these out-
ward qualifications, exemplary holiness of life
is everywhere required of the priests, and even
in their families, violations of virtue were visited
with more severity than among others (xxi. 9).
In marriage the priests generally were only
restricted in their choice to virgins or widows
of any of the tribes of their nation (xxi. 7);
later, marriage within the Aaronio family seems
to have been preferred, and by the prophet
Ezekiel (xliv. 22) the marriage with widovfs
(except of priesis) was forbidden them.
They were originally inducted into their office
by a solemn consecration, and were sprinkled
with the sacrificial blood and the holy anointing
oil (ch. ix.); but, except for the high.priest,
this one consecration sufficed for all their de-
scendants, and was not repeated.
While on duty in the sanctuary they were
arrayed in robes of linen which might never
pass beyond the sacred precincts ; and they
must minister at the altar unshod.
In the small number of priests at first, it was
probably necessary that all of them should be
constantly on duty; but when in later times
they had greatly multiplied, they were divided
by David luto twenty-four courses, each with a
chief at its head, who should minister in turn
(1 Chron. xxiv. 3, 4). This arrangement was
maintained ever after, although on the return
from the captivity, some of the courses were
wanting from the returning exiles (Neh. xii. 1-
7; 12-21).
The whole order of the priests was concen-
trated, so to speak, in the high-priest. His office
was also hereditary, but not with the same
strictness. We find in the time of Eli that the
high priesthood had passed to the house of
Ithamar (Aaron's younger son), and from his
descendants it was again by divine direction
transferred back to the elder branch. The du-
ties and responsibilities of the high-priest were
far more solemn than that of the ordinary priests.
" Pity and sympathy also, according to the Ep.
to the Hebr., enter into the idea of the high-
priest." Lange. There could be only one high-
priest at a time, although a second, in some de-
gree at least, seems to have been permitted
during that abnormal period during the reign
of David when the ark and the tabernacle were
separated. The high-priest was restricted in
marriage to a Hebrew virgin; bis official robes
were of the utmost splendor, and on his breast
he wore the precious stones on which were en-
graved the names of the twelve tribes of Israel,
while on the golden plate on his forehead was
inscribed "holiness unto the Lord;" he was
originally consecrated hy a more ample anoint-
ing than his brethren, and this was repeated for
each of his successors, so that he is described
as having " the crown of the anointing oil of his
God upon him" (xxi. 12), and, as we have seen,
is often designated simply as " the anointed
priest;" he must have succeeded to his office at
whatever age his predecessor died or became
incapacitated, and continued in it to the end of
his own life, which formed a civil epoch (Num.
XXXV, 28, 32) ; no especial provision is made in
the law for his support, and history shows tbat
it was unnecessary to do so, as he was always
amply provided for; the high-priest was forbid-
den the contact with the dead and the customary
marks of sorrow even in those few cases which
were permitted to other priests (xxi. 10-12), anii
that on the express ground of the peculiar oom-
CHAP. VIII. 1-36.
GO
pleteness of his coasecration. But his chief
diBtiaotion lay in his being the embodiment, as
it were, of the whole theocracy, and the media-
tor between God and the whole people. This
was signified by manifold symbols on his robes ;
' it was shown by his duty of offering the sin
offering for himself and for the whole people
(the same victim being required for each) ; and
especially by his most solemn duties on the
great day of Atonement (oh. xvi.). From his
position and religious duties necessarily flowed
many others, as in the case of the ordinary
priests, only that in the one case as in the other
those of the high-priest were far higher and
more important. In the Epistle to the Hebrews
he is singled out not only as the representative
of the whole priestly system, but as peculiarly
the type of Christ, the one great High-Priest,
Who alone could make effectual atonement, once
for all, for the sins of all people. A " second
priest," or vice high-priest, is mentioned Jer.
lii. 24, and such an office is recognized by the
later Jews. Literature : Kaiisoh, Preliminaiy
Essay on Lev. VIII., and many of the worka
already mentioned under Sacrifices. Kuepeb,
Das Priesterthum des Alien Bundes, Berlin, 1865.
FIRST SECTION.
The Consecration of the Priests.
Chap. VIII. 1-36.
1,2 And the Lord spake uuto Moses, saying. Take Aaron and his sons with him,
and the garments, and the anointing oil, and a [the^] bullock for the sin-offering,
3 and [the'] two rams, and a [the'] basket of unleavened bread : and gather thou all
the congregation together unto the door of the tabernacle of the [pmit the] congre-
4 gatlon. And Moses did as the Loed commanded him ; and the assembly [con-
gregation''] was gathered together unto the door of the tabernacle of the [pmit the]
5 congregation. And Moses said unto the congregation, This is the thing which the
Lord commanded to be done.
6 And Moses brought Aaron and his sons, and washed [bathed'] them with water.
7 And he put upon him the coat, and girded him with the girdle, and clothed him
with the robe, and put the ephod upon him, and he girded him with the curious
8 [ewnoiM*] girdle of the ephod, and bound it unto him therewith. And he put the
breastplate upon him : also he put in the breastplate the Urim and the Thummim.
9 And he put the mitre upon his head ; also upon the mitre, even upon his forefront,
did he put [and upon the mitre upon his forehead did he put"] the golden plate,
10 the holy crown ; as the Lord commanded Moses. And Moses took the anointing
oil, and anointed the tabernacle [dwelling-place'] and all that was therein, and
11 sanctified them.' And he sprinkled thereof upon the altar seven times, and an-
ointed the altar and all his vessels, both the laver and his foot, to sanctify them.
12 And he poured of the anointing oil upon Aaron's head, and anointed him, tosanc-
13 tify him. And Moses brought Aaron's sons, and put coats upon them, and girded
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL.
1 Ver. 2. The Heb. has the article in all these cases, and it shonld be retained as referring to the commands given in
Ex. xxix.
« Ver. 4. muri- The word being precisely the same as in ver. 3, should certainly have the same translation. The
Vulg. and Syr. prefix da, as in ver. 3.
' Ver. 6. ym»l. See Textual Note » on xiv. 8.
* Ver. 7. 3E?n means simply girdle, and there is nothing in the Heb. answering to curtoiM, yet as this word is used
only of the girdle of the Ephod, while there are several other words for the ordinary girdle, and as the A. V. has uniformly
rendered it mirimt girdle, it may be well to retain the aAJeotive as the readiest way of marking in English the pecnlian.y
of the girdle. It should, however, be iu italics.
' Ver. 9. The A. V. is unnecessarily complicated. For the second Dtfl, the Sam. reads jTI'V
' Ver. 10. \3m. See Textual Note » on xv. 31.
' Ver. 10. Throe MSS., followed by the LXX., read it in the singular.
• Ver. 12. One MS., followed by the Vul?., omits the partitive Q.
LEVITICUS.
them with girdles [a girdle'], and put [bound] bonnets upon them ; as the Lord
commanded Moses.
14 And he brought the bullock for the sin offering : and Aaron and his sons laid"
15 their hands upon the head of the bullock for the sin offering. And he slew U;
and Moses took the blood, and put it upon the horns of the altar round about with
his finger, and purified the altar, and poured the blood at the bottom of the altar,
16 and sanctified it, to make reconciliation upon it [to atone for it"]. And he took
all the fat that was upon the inwards, and the caul above the liver, and the two
17 kidneys, and their fat, and Moses burnt it^' upon the altar. But the bullock, and
his hide, his flesh, and his dung, he burnt with fire without the camp ; as the Lord
18 commanded Moses. And he brought" the ram for the burnt offering : and Aaron
19 and his sons laid their hands upon the head of the ram. And he killed it; and
20 Moses sprinkled the blood upon the altar round about. And he cut the ram into
21 pieces ; and Moses burnt the head, and the pieces, and the fat. And he washed
the inwards and the legs ia water ; and Moses burnt the whole ram upon the altar:
it" was a burnt sacrifice for a sweet savour, and [omit atid] an offering made by fire
22 unto the Loed ; as the Loed commanded Moses. And he brought the other ram,
the ram of consecration : and Aaron and his sons laid their hands upon the head
23 of the ram. And he slew it; and Moses took of the blood of it, and put U upon
the tip of Aaron's right ear, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the
24 great toe of his right foot. And he" brought Aaron's sons, and Moses put of the
blood upon the tip of their right ear, and upon the thumbs [thumb^*] of their right
hands, and upon the great toes [toe"] of their right feet : and Moses sprinkled the
25 blood upon the altar round about. And he took the fat, and the rump [the fit
tail"] and all the fat that was upon the inwards, and the caul above the liver, and
26 the two kidneys, and their fat, and the right shoulder [leg"] : and out of the basket
of unleavened bread," that was before the Loed, he took one unleavened cake, and
a cake of oiled bread, and one wafer, and put them on the fat, and upon the right
27 shoulder [leg"] : and he put all upon Aaron's hands, and upon his sons' hands,
28 and waved them for a wave offering before the Loed. And Moses took them fi:om
off their hands, and burnt them^ on the altar upon the burnt offering : they were
consecrations for a sweet savour : it^' is an offering made by fire unto the Loed.
29 And Moses took the breast, and waved it for a wave offering before the Lord: far
of the ram of consecration it was Moses' part ; as the Loed commanded Moses.
30 And Moses took of the anointing oil, and of the blood which was upon the altar,
and sprinkled it upon Aaron, and upon his garments, and upon his sons, and upon
his sons' garments with him ; and sanctified Aaron, and his garments, and his sons,
and his sons' garments with him.
31 And Moses said unto Aaron and to his sons. Boil the flesh at the door of the
tabernacle of the [omit the] congregation^' : and there eat with the bread that is in
the basket of consecrations, as I [am^'] commanded, saying, Aaron and his sons
32 shall eat it. And that which remaineth of the flesh and of the bread shall ye bum
<* Ver. 13. I0J3X In the sing. (The ancient versions, howeTer, have the plnral). An entirely different word from
3t!/n of ver. 7.
10 Ver. 14. The Heb. verb ^OD^I is in the sing. In the corresponding clause in ver. 18 it is plural, and ao it is mada
here als ) by the Sam. and Syr.
11 Ver. 15. vSy ISoS It is better here, as in vi. 30 (23), and xvi. 20, to retain the almost universal renderiDg of
"133 in the A. V. These three places are the only exceptions in Ex., Lpv., or Num. The sense is clearly ^ Ui rataW
than upon it, and it is so rendered in the corresponding passage. Ex. xxix. 36, comp. 37.
12 Ver. 16. The missing pronoun is supplied in one MS. and the Arab.
18 Yer. 18. For ^Ip^l the Sam. reads Wi')- '<
1* Ver. 21. Five MSS., the Svr. and Vulg., omit the pronotm.
16 Ver. 24. TheLXX, says, Illoses brought.
M Ver. 24, The singular, which is the Heb. form, is quite as accurate and expressive.
1' Ver. 25. See Text. Note ' on iii. 9.
1» Ver. 25. See Text. Note »> on vii. .S2.
1* Ver. 26. The LXX. here reads dwo toO Kavov t^s reXetbttrftoi.
K> Ver. 28. The pronoun is supplied by one MS., the LXX., and the Syr.
>i Ver. 28. This pronoun is wanting in two MSS., the Vulg. and Arab.
M Ver. 31. The Sam. and LXX. add Iv riiiru oyitu.
» Ver. 31. The A. V. follows the Mosoretio punotnation Ti'lS; but the LXX., Vulg. and Syr., that of ver. 35 'H'^lf-
CHAP. VIII. 1-36.
33 with fire. And ye shall not go out of the door of the tabernacle of the [omif the]
congregation in seven days, until the days of your con-secration be at an end : for
34 seven days shall he consecrate you. As he hath done this day, so the Loed hath
35 commanded to do, to make an atonement for you. Therefore shall ye abide at the
door of the tabernacle of the lomit the] congregation day and night seven days,
36 and keep the charge of the Lord, that ye die not : for so I am commanded. So
Aaron and his sons did all things which the Lord commanded by the hand of
day of atonement (ch. xvi. 4). This washing
was obyiously Bymbolioal of the purity required
in those wU,o draw near to God, and ia applied
spiritually to the whole body of Christians,
" made priests unto God " in Heb. x. 22. With
this comp. Christ's receiving of baptism (Malt.
iii. 13-16) before entering upon His public min-
istry.
Vers. 7-9. The robing of Aaron comes first,
then the sanctiiication of the tabernacle and all
it contained, especially of the altar, then the
anointing of Aaron, and finally the robing of his
sons. Neither here nor in Ex. xxix. 5 is there
any mention of the " linen breeches " of Ex.
xxviii. 42; xxxix. 28 probably because these were
simply " to c iver their nakedness," and were
not considered a part of the o£&cial costume.
As Kalisch suggests, Aaron and his sons proba-
bly put them on themselves immediately after
their ablution. On the remaining articles of
apparel see Ex. xxviii. Briefly, the coat was
the long tunic of fine linen worn next the skin.
According to Josephus {Ant. III. 7, ^ 2), it
reached to the feet, and was fastened closely to
the arms. It was to be " embroidered " (Ex.
xxviii. 39), i. e., woven, all of the same material
and color, in diaper work. From Ex. xxviii. 40,
41 ; xxxix. 27, this garment appears to have
been the same for the high-priest and the com-
mon priests. The girdle next mentioned is not
the "CMnoMs girdle" of the Ephod (3Kfn), but
the !333X described by Josephus {loe. cit.) as a
long sash of very loosely woven linen, embroi-
dered with flowfrs of scarlet, and purple, and
blue, which was wound several times around the
body and tied, the ends hanging down to the
ankles ordinarily, but thrown over the shoulder
when the priest was engaged in active duty. —
The robe (Ex. xxviii. 31-35), wholly of blue,
was woven without seam, apparently without
sleeves, with a hole whereby it was put over ih-e
head. It is supposed to have reached a little
below the knees, and to have been visible below,
and also a little above, the Ephod. The hem at
the bottom was ornamented with " pomegranates,
blue, and purple, and scarlet," with golden bells
between them, which should sound as the high-
priest went in and out of the holy place. Over
this was the Ephod (Ex. xxviii. 6, 7; xxxix.
2-4), a vestment whose construction is imper-
fectly understood. The word etymologically,
means simply a "vestment." and a simple "lin-
en Ephod" was worn by the common priests (1
Sam. xxii. 18), as well as by others engaged in
religious services (1 Sam. ii. 18; 2 Sam. vi. 14;
1 Chr. XV. 27). The "vestment" or Ephod of
the high-priest here spoken of, however, was a
very difi'erent and much more gorgeous affair.
Its material was W =fine linen (of which also
EXEQETICAL AND CRITICAL.
In the chapters of this section we have the
only prolonged narrative in Leviticus, in fact
the only historical matter at all except the pun-
ishment of the blasphemer in xxiv. 10-23.
Ver. 1. The IiORD spake. — A special com-
mand to carry out now the command already
given minutely in Ex. xxviii., xxix., and xl.
Vers. 2-6 contain the preliminary arrange-
ments. Moses takes Aaron and his sons, and
the various things previously provided for their
consecration, and brings tdem into the court of
the tabernacle. The four sons of Aaron were
brought, and the language would also include
his grandsons, if there were any at this time of
suitable age. The fact, however, that Eleazar
entered the promised land, would make him less
than twenty-one at this time, and therefore too
young to have sons of suf&cient age, and no sons
of Nadab and Abihu are ever anywhere men-
tioned. The people were also gathered about
the wide opening of the court, probably repre-
sented by their elders in the nearest places, and
the mass of the men generally standing upon the
surrounding heights whica overlooked the taber-
nacle. Lange : " This is the ordinance : first,
the persons; then the garments as symbols of
the office ; the anointing oil, the symbol of the
Spirit ; the bullock for the sin oflfering, the sym-
bol of the priest favored with the entrusted
atonement, and yet needing favor ; the ram for
the burnt offering, the symbol of the sacrificial
employment ; the ram for the sacrifice of conse-
cration, the symbol of the priestly emoluments
in true sacrifices of consecration ; and the basket
of unleavened bread, the symbol of life's enjoy-
ments ef the priests, sanctified in every form by
the oil of the Spirit."
Ver. 2. The basket, according to Ex. xxix. 2,
3, 23, contained three kinds of bread all un-
leavened, the loaf, the oil bread, and the wafer
anointed with oil.
Vers. 3, 4. The consecration was thus public,
not only that Aaron might not seem "to take
this honor unto himself;" but also that by their
presence, the people might be assenting to the
consecration of him who was to minister among
them and for them.
Vers. 6-13. The washing, anointing, and in-
vestiture.
Ver. 6. And bathed them •with v^ater. —
Not merely their hands and their feet, which
Moses must have already done for himsfflf, and
which was always done by every priest who en-
tered the tabernacle, or who approached the
altar (Ex. xl. 31, .S2) ; but doubtless an ablu-
tion of the whole body as seems to be intended
in Ex. xxix. 4, and as was practised on the great
72
LKVITICUS.
the tunic mentioned above was made), while that
of the other Bphods was 13 or common linen of
which the " linen breeches " were made. (The
latter word, however, as the more general, is
sometimes used for both, Lev. vi. 10 (3) ; xvi.
4, 23, 32). The Ephod of the high-priest ap-
pears to have been made in two parts, one for
the back and one for the breast, joined at the
shoulders by two onyx stones set in gold, upon
which were engraved the names of the tribes of
Israel. To these stones were attached chains of
pure wreathen gold for the support of the breast-
plate. According to Josephus (_loc. cit., ^ 5), it
had sleeves and a place left open upon the breast
to be covered by the breast-plate. It was woven
with gold thread and colors " with cunning
work," and with its attachments was one of the
chief parts of the high-priest's attire. Upon it,
wrought of the same costly and gorgeous mate-
rials, was the curious girdle of the Ephod,
woven on to one of the parts, and passing round
the body, holding them both together. On this
was put the breast-plate (Ex. xxviii. 15-30), a
separate piece of cloth woven of the same mate-
rials, so that when folded it was " a span "
square. By gold rings it was attached to the
chains from the onyx stones on the shoulder,
and by other gold rings it was tied with bands
of blue lace to corresponding rings on the Ephod.
To this breast-plate were attached by settings of
gold, twelve precious stones, on each of which
was engraved the name of one of the tribes of
Israel. — Also he put in the breast-plate
the Urim and the Thummim. — On these
words many volumes have been written, and we
can only here refer to the note on Ex. xxviii. 30.
From the way in which they are spoken of both
there (comp. vers. 15-21) and here, they appear
to have been something different from the pre-
cious stones before spoken of, and to have been
placed, not on, but in the breastplate, i. n , in
the receptacle formed by its fold, although a
great variety of authorities might be cited for
the opposite view. There is nowhere any direc-
tion given for their preparation, and from the use
of the definite article with each of them, it is
likely that they were things already known.
They were used as a means of ascertaining the
will of God (Num. xxvii. 21; 1 Sam. xxviii. 6,
etc.) ; but by precisely what process is not
known, and there are now no means of ascer-
taining. The many conjectures concerning them
are conveniently arranged by Clark (Speaker's
Com.) under three heads: (1) that the Divine
will was manifested by some physical eflFect ad-
dressed to the eye or ear ; (2) that they were a
means of calling into action a prophetic gift in
the high-priest; (3) that they were some contri-
vance for casting lots. The Urim and Thum-
mim were here formally delivered to Aaron, and
passed on to his successors ; but the last re-
corded instance of their use is in the time of Ba-
vid, and they seem to have passed into disuse as
revelations and teachings by prophets became
more frequent. It is certain that they had dis-
appeared, or their use had been lost, after the
return from the captivity (Ezra ii. 63; Neh.
vii. 65).
And he put the mitre upon his head.—
(Ex. xxviii. 37-39). The word mitre is here used
in its etymological sense, of a twisted band of
fine linen around the head, which might now be
described as a turban. The golden plate, the
holy oro^i7n, — a plate of pure gold having en-
graved on it HOLINESS TO THE LoBD. This was
attached to a " blue lace," whereby it was fast-
ened to the mitre. It was the crowning glory
of the high-priest's official dress, and its sym-
bolism is fully expressed in the command for its
preparation (Ex. xxviii. 38), "that Aaron may
bear the iniquity of the holy things, which the
children of Israel shall hallow in all their holy
gifts ; and it shall be always upon his forehead,
that they may be accepted before the Loed."
This completed the investiture of Aaron, and it
is added as the LORD commanded Moses,
both to show that the command had been ful-
filled, and also that only that which was com-
manded had been done. In this matter nothing
was left to human device ; every particular was
expressly arranged by minute Divine directions;
for everything was symbolic and intended gra-
dually to teach Israel spiritual truths, which as
yet they were only prepared to learn by thesD
sensible images.
Vers. 10-12. The anointing of the sacred
things and of Aapon.
The composition of the anointing oil, and the
careful restriction of its use had been minutely
commanded (Ex. xxx. 22-33). The Rabbis say
that the art of compounding it was lost after the
captivity, and hence from that time its use was
necessarily discontinued. The things to be an-
ointed had all been made " after the pattern
shown in the Mount" (Ex. xxv. 40; Heb. ix. 23)
and expressly for their sacred uses ; yet there
was a fitness, such as has always been recog-
nized by the sense of mankind, that they should
first be especially set apart by a solemn cereiro-
nial for their holy purpose. The tabernacle
and all that ■was therein. — In Ex. xxx. 26-
28, many of the things are specially mentioned,
showing that Moses with the anointing oil must
have passed not only into the holy place butinto
thj holy of holies itself.
Yer. 11. He sprinkled thereof upon the
altar seven times. — This refers to the brazen
altar in the court, as is shown by the things enu-
merated with it. On the seven-fold sprinkling
see on iv, 6. And anointed the altar.— As
this is a different act from the sprinkling, so
does this special sanctifying of the altar seem
appropriate to its use in the sacrifices.
Ver. 12. He poured of the anointing oil
upon Aaron's head. — Comp. Vs. cxxxiil. 2.
"The anointing with oil was a symbol of en-
dowment with the Spirit of God (1 Sam. x. 1,6;
xvi. 13, 14; Isa. Ixi. 1) for the duties of the
office to which a person was consecrated," Keil.
The A. V. is quite accurate in marking the more
abundant anointing of Aaron by the word
poured. The symbolism of anointing is abun-
dantly recognized in the New Test, as applied to
Christ (Luke iv. 18; Acts x. 38, c(^:). There
has been much question whether the sons of
Aaron were also here anointed. On the one
hand, it had been commanded that they should
be anointed (Ex. xxviii. 41; xl. 15) "IhoushaU
anoint them as thou didst anoint their father."
and they are always recognized as having been
CHAP. VIII. 1-36.
73
anointed (vii. 36 ; x. 7) ; and on the other hand,
there is no mention here of this having been
done (which could hardly have been omitted had
It taken place) ; and as Aaron was first robed,
and then anointed, while his sons were not yet
Tobed, it seems necessary to consider their unc-
tion as having been confined to the sprinkling
with mingled oil and blood of ver. 30. This
would be quite in accordance with the recogni-
tion of the high-priest alone as the anointed
priest and with all those passages in which his
anointing is spoken of as something peculiar.
(The word as in Ex. xl. 16 cannot, of course, be
pressed — as Kalisch insists — to mean an exactly
similar form of anointing).
Ver. 13. Next comes the robing of Aaron's
sons, all in accordance with the commands so
often referred to. The bonnets were also a
sort of turban, but it may be inferred from the
difference in the Heb. word that they were pro-
bably diiferently fashioned from that of the high-
priest.
Vers. 14-30. The sacrifices and accompanying
ceremonies.
In the order of the sacrifices the sin ofi^ering
comes first, then the burnt offering, lastly the
peace offering; this, the normal order, is al-
ways observed (unless in certain exceptional
cases) where the several kinds of sacrifice come
together, as was evidently fitting in view of the
special object of each.
The victim and the ritual of the sin offering
are the same as that appointed for the sin offer-
ing of the high-priest in oli. iv. 3-12, except that
the blood was not brought into the sanctuary
nor sprinkled " before the vail." The reason
commonly assigned for this is that the offering
was not for any particular sin, but only for a
general state of sinfulness. So Lange. But it
is to be borne in mind that this sacrifice was not
for Aaron alone, but for him and his sons toge-
ther; also it was not for an already consecrated
high-priest, but for one who was in the very act
of being consecrated and not yet entitled to dis-
charge the functions of the high-priest. In view
of what he was to be, the victim might well be
the same as that appointed for the ordinary sin
offering of the high-priest ; in view of what be
actually was, it was fitting that there should be
a difference in the ritual as regards the blood.
Moses took the blood and put it upon the
horns of the altar round about with his
finger, as was done in all sin offerings, only
here the object of the act seems to have been, in
part at least, the altar itself. This had been
already sprinkled and anointed ; now by the
blood it is still further purified, and also sanc-
tified, and atonement made for it. On the ne-
cepsity of the blood in addition to the oil, see
Heb. ix. 21, 22. The application of this to the
altar was for the same general reasons as in case
of the tabernacle and its contents, only that there
was especial emphasis in regard to the altar on
account of its peculiar use. As all things in
heaven and earth are reconciled unto God by
the blood of the cross (Col. i. 20), so must these
typical things be reconciled by the blood of the
typical sacrifice.
In all this service Moses, by a special Divine
commission, acts as the priest. Hence he is
20
spoken of in Ps. xcix. 6 as " among His priests,"
and Philo calls him a high-priest. He did not,
however, wear the priestly garments, and strictly
he was not a priest at all. He had hitherto acted
as priest (Ex. xl. 23), although he had not be-
fore offered a sin offering ; but now he was both
less and more than a priest. Less, in that with
this consecration his priestly functions abso-
lutely ceased ; more, in that he now acts on God's
behalf as the Mediator of the Old Covenant (Gal.
iii. 19). The Aaronic priesthood was continued
with its powers by hereditary succession ; but
all chains must have a beginning, and all au-
thority must have a giver. Here the first link
of the chain, the beginning of all priestly autho-
rity, is given by Moses acting under an express
commission for this purpose, from the Almighty.
Ii is to be remembered that all these sacrifices
were consumed by fire kindled in the ordinary
way, the fire "from before the Lord' (ix. 24)
not having yet come forth.
Vers. 18-21. The burnt offering differed in
nothing from the ordinary burnt offering, al-
though the victim was of a kind less commonly
selected.
Vers. 22-30. The peace offering, or ram of
consecration. Any sacrificial animal might be
offered in the ordinary peace offerings ; but a
ram, as here, was required along with a bullock
for the priestly peace offering immediately after
their consecration (ix. 4-8), and a rnm alone at
tlie fulfilment of the Nazarite vow (Num. vi. 14,
17), and this also formed a part of the varied
peace offerings of the princes after the dedica-
tion of the altar and tabernacle (Num. vii. 17,
23. etc.).
Ver. 22. The ram of consecration, lit.
"the ram of the fillings," i. e. with which the
hands of Aaron and his sons were to be filled
for the wave-offering, ver. 27, and by this phra-
seology is the idea of consecration usually ex-
pressed according to the Hebrew idiom (comp.
the verb in Judg. xvii. 5, 12; 1 Kings xiii. 33;
Ezek. xliii. 26, etc.). The LXX. renders it
Kptbv Telec Vers. H, 15. Leg. See Text. Note ^ on vii. 32.
" Ter. 15. The Sam. and LXX. add and thy daughters', as in ver. 14.
^ Ter. 17. The Syr. reads in the 1st person, J have given.
^ Ter. 17. Thirteen MSS. read /or yoa in the 2d person.
" Tor. 18. The Masoretio punctuation of WlbS tere indicates the article ; it would seem proper, however, to omit it
Wording to invariable usage. All the versions make a distinction between the sanctuary, into which the blood bad not
been carried, and the court where the flesh should have been eaten. We can only express this by a change oJtbe article.
IS Ver. 18. Most of the versions have the passive, as I was commanded, and the LXX, ov rpoTiov fioi D"l3 JJDty P^DK'1. The idea is that of not merely partially (like the camel), but completely dividing
the hoof. The Sam., LXX., Syr. and nine MSS. make this still more indefinite by inserting 'j^tS— '""> before the lust
word.
8 Ver. 5. ti]tj?n. The animal is indicated here as one that chews the cud (or appears to do so), in Ps. civ. 18; Prov.
XXX. 20, as living in the rocks, and in the latter as being very weak. It ocurs elsewhere only in the parallel place, Deat
xiv. 7. Ilere the LXX. renders it SairuTrous, Aq. Xa-yuds; in Dent. xiv. 7, the LXX. has x°*-P°yP^^^"^''=^^^^H avimd^
which is adopted by the Vulg. in both places. The Sam. translates it Vabr, the Htjrax Syriacus, whicli is said to be still
called t£o/un in Southern Arabia. FUrsteays; " The Targ. points to the same animal when it triuislates KTIDi KD£)Qi
t: - _ T : "
NTDtD (leaper) since the Vabr goes by leaps." The Duke of Argyle (Beign of Law, p. 264) speaks of a specimen of it in the
Zoological Gardens, and states that in the structure of the teeth and the foot it is assimilated to the rhinoceros. Cnvler
classc'l it with the pachyderms. The Eabbins understood it to be a rabbit, and were followed by Luther and the A. V. in
the old word Coniy. Bochart (Hieroz. Lib. III., c. 33) understands it of the Jerboa or bear^moiMe, and BO Gesenius, Geddes
and Others, Although the word in the A. V. is certainly wrong, yet as it is obsolete, it seems unnecessary to makeachange
whiclj could only be either to the Heb. word, or to the scientific name.
* Ver. 7. The construction is the same as in ver. 3. See note 2.
5 Ver. 9. The Sam., one MS., the LXX. and Syr. prefix the conjunction 1.
* Ver. 12. The same, with fourteen MSS., here prefix the conjunction.
' Ver. 13. Ti^J is uniformly translated eagh in the A. V., derd! in the LXX., and aqwUa in the Vulg. Kalisoh saj»
this "is beyond a doubt." The same meaning is given by Fiirst and Gesenius, although both would include also the Bense
of vutture. Clark's proposed emendation, the great vulture^ seems therefore unnecessary.
8 Ver. 13. D13 H^JT^J^. Both, by preponderance of authority, species of eagles, and the former sufficiently well
described by oasifrage ; the latter species is not certainly identified, the word occurring only here and in the paraUel, Dent
xiv. 12. The LXX. renders a\iaicTos=8ca eagle. FUrst prefers Taleria^ the black eagle. Kalisch prefers the sense wHtort.
Gesen. (ThcHaur,), blaclt eagle.
CHAP. XI. 1-47. 89
14, 15 ospray,' and the vulture,' and the kite"" after his kind ; "every raven after his
16 kind ; and the owl [ostrich"], and the night hawk [owP^], and the cuckow [gull'*],
17 and the hawk after his kind, and the little owl,'^ and the cormorant, and the great
18, 19 owl,'* aud the swan," and the pelican, and the gier eagle [vulture'*], and the
stork," the'^ heron"" after her kind, and the lapwing [hoopoe''''], and the bat.
20 All"' fowls that creep [all winged creeping things'*^], going upon all four, shall he
21 an abomination unto you. Yet these may ye eat of every flying creeping thing
that goeth upon all four, which have'^ legs above their feet, to leap withaP* upon
22 the earth ; even these of them ye may eat ; the locust after his kind, and the bald
locust''' after his kind, and the beetle''' after his kind, and the grasshopper after his
23 kind. But all other flying creeping things, which have four feet, shall he an abo-
• Ter. 14. HX^, » word, air. My. In the parallel passage, Dent. xiT. 13, it is DNI- Ito etymology indicates a rave-
T T TT
nons biri of swift flight. LXX. yv^=^itv.ltare^ Vulg. miluua=kit''. Bodiart considers it a species of hawk or falcon. So
Ealiscli. In Deut. xiv. 13 there is mentioned also H^^, making twenty-one Tarieties of birds ; but that word in Dent, is
T •
omitted by the Sara, and four MSS.
W Ver. 14. n'^N is only to be Identified by the fact that it here stands for the name of a class — after his land, and that
in Jobxxviii. 7 it is spoken of for its great keenness of sight. The LXX. renders here Jnf£, in Deut and Job vulture. Clark
makes it milvus regalis.
11 Yer. 16 and vor. 20. The Sam., manv MSS. and versions prefix the conjunction.
IS Vor. 16. 713 J?'n nS. LXX. o-Tpoi/eds. The word is uniformly rendered oml in the text of the A. V. ; but in the
marg. of Job xxx. 29; laa. xill. 21; xxxlv. 13; xliii. 20, it is rendered oatrich in accordance with the Targ., LXX., Yulg.
and Syr., and there can be no doubt that this is the true sense. The fern, stands for the bird coUec tivelv , of both sexes.
Bosen.: "Vox, j^S, apposlta est ex more quodam Orientalium, qui nomina jjaier, mater, JlUwt, JUia, animalium quorundam
nominibns prsefigrere Solent sine respectu setatis et sexus." Bochart, however, thinks it means distinctively the female.
IS Yer. 16. DDnB (from DDD. to do violmce), interpreted by Uocbart, and others on his authority, of the male
ostrich; but this is now generally rejected. The Targ. Onk. has XY'V, and Targ. Jerus. t{JT'3[3n=™ Ter. 17. 0)3. There seems no sufficient reason to question the accuracy of the A. Y., which is substantially that
ofthe ancient versions. Tristram identifies it with the Athene mmdionahs common in Syria. Bochart, however, would
render Pelican, and Biggs Aight-hawJc.
1« Yer. 17. The A. V. is probalily right. The LXX., Yulg. and Targ. Onk. have Ibis, which seems to have arisen trom
a misplacement of the words of the tex^ rather than &om a different translation of '^Wi"^ They are followed by Bigga
and others. .^ - . . . j .:,■+.
1' Yer. 18. riDtffJjI. The same word is used, ver. 30, for mole (probably chameleon) : here it refers to a bird, ana it is
likely that this is the word for which Ibie stands in the LXX. and Yulg. But it is not probable that the Israelites would
have come much in contact with the Ibis. The preponderance of authority (see Mrst) is for some variety of owl, accord-
ing to the Ohald., Syr. and Sam. ; but there does not appear to be sufflcient certainty to warrant a change in the text of
the A Y
18 Yer. 18. DITI LXX. rendering doubtful. The best authorities agree that some species of vulture is meant. Ge-
senius (thesaur.) w^onld make it a very small spedes. of the size of a crow. Others consider it moat probably the large
Egyptian vulture, Neophron perenapUrus. Perhaps something of this kind was meant by gier eagle. Kalisoh, governed
only bv the order of the birds, would translate neZican. ,,
"Yer. 19. nTDH, LXX., Aq., Symm., Tfieod., heron, but LXX. in Job xxxix. 13 ttorlt. Either bird answers well
enonirh to the etymology and to the passages vfhen it occurs, and sinrlis as likely to be right as fteron. .
20 Yer. 19. The Sam. and sixteen MSS. prefix the conjunction which is found in the parallel place m Deut. J! or the
want of it Knobel would connect the word with the preceding as an adjective ; but it seems better to consider it as an acci-
dental omission. „ . . .1. TT I. ^ T-VV
a Yer. 19. nSJN. Tbo meaning of the rendering in Targ. Onk. is unknown, Syr. retains the Heb. word, LXX. xop"-
SpuSt, a bird chieflyVemarkable for its greediness. The Heb. etymology is uncertain. Clark identifies it witti the great
plover (Ohmadrius aedimemm). FUlst defines it Parrot, and so Gesen. Bochart, following the etymology of the Babb us
defines it the angry Urd, and considers it some species of eagle. It seems probable that the A. Y. is wrong, but difBouIt to
determine upon a substitute. . , , ^, x,. .» *• *i. tw - ..^^
" Yer. 19. nS'DII. The bird intended has not been certainly identified; but the authonty of the LXX., eiroira, ana
Ynlg.,tij!«iia,is here' followed. The Arab, adopts it, and it is followed by Biggs. Bochart would render mountoin cocTs
after the Chald.
« Ter. 20. eiiun Vltt* Si. The idea of fmels that creep is not less strange and grotesque in Heb. than in English.
The word V-W by its el^imology means those creatures that muldply abundantly, swarm, whence it came to be applied
to very much the same creatures as we mean by vei-min. It can hardly be better ^^f^^.^^^X^lZtTZV^^Z
Going upon aU four does not necessarily mean having just lour feet, but going with the body in a horizontal posi-
""a Ter. 21. For the ^ ofthe text the h'ri has 1 7, and so the Sam. and many MSS. So it must necessarily be under-
Btood, as it is in the versions.
* Yer. 21. For |ri3 the Sam. and thirty-seven MSS. have Drij-
» Ter. 22. Beetle'iJ certainly wrong ; for this, like the rest, muJt have been one of the leaping insects. There are no
means of identifying these four varieties. Each of them stands for a class "after his kind." Two of them, the U^JIQ and
"18 Sj'in, do not occur elsewhere. The others are of frequeot occurrence, and are uniformly translated in the A. V. the
first (ocirf. the last arasrhopper. It would probably be better in the other cases to follow the example of the older English
»nd most modern versions in giviug simply the Hebrew names without attempting translation.
21
90 LEVITICUS.
24 mination unto you. And for these ye shall be unclean : whosoever toucheth the
25 carcase of them shall be unclean until the even. And whosoever beareth ougM of
the carcase of them shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until the even.
26 The carcases of every beast which divideth the hoof, and is not cloven footed,
nor cheweth the cud, are unclean unto you : every one that toucheth them" shall be
27 unclean. And whatsoever goeth upon his paws, among all manner of beasts"' that
go on all four, those are unclean unto you : whoso toucheth their carcase shall be
28 unclean until the even. And he that beareth the carcase of them shall wash his
clothes, and be unclean until the even : they are unclean unto you.
29 These also shall he unclean unto you among the creeping things that creep upon
the earth ; the weasel,'* and the mouse, and the tortoise [the great lizard'"] after
30 his kind, and the ferret [gecko'"], and the chameleon [strong lizard'^], and the
lizard [climbing lizard'^], and the snail [lizard^], and the mole [chameleon^],
31 These are unclean to you among all that creep : whosoever doth touch them, when
32 they be dead, shall be unclean until the even. And upon whatsoever any of them,
when they are dead, doth fall, it shall be unclean ; whether it he any vessel [thing"]
of wood, or raiment, or skin, or sack, whatsoever vessel [thing"*] it he, wherein
[wherewith'*] any work is done, it must be put into water, and it shall be unclean
33 untU the even ; so it shall be cleansed. And every earthen vessel, whereinto any
34 of them falleth, whatsoever is in it shall be unclean ; and ye shall break it. Of
all meat [food'°] which may be eaten, that on which such [om. such''''\ water cometh
shall be unclean : and all drink that may be drunk in every such vessel shall be
35 unclean. And every thing whereupon any part of their carcase falleth shall be
unclean ; whether it he oven, or ranges'* for pots, they shall be broken down : jar
36 they are unclean, and shall be unclean unto you. Nevertheless a fountain" or pit,
wherein there is plenty of water, shall be clean : but that which" toucheth their
" Ver. 26. Six MSS. and the LXX. specify, what is Bufficientl.v plain, iheir carcases. »» Ver. 27. See note' on yer. 2.
28 Ver. 29. 'Vjx^ occurs nowhere else. The A. V. aeems justified in following the LXX. and Targ., although Bochart
would render mole, which is still called Chuld bv the Arabs.
29 Ver. 29. J]f, a word in this sense, dn-. Xe-y. There seems no doubt that this and all the names following in ver. 30
indicate vari 'US species of lizard. So Kiggs. This particular one is called by the LXX. 6 KpofcdSvAo; 6 xepo"a'os='flnd
crocndil'', nnd so St. Jerome. Bochart considers it a kind of large lizard abounding in Syria, often two feet long. Tristam
iflcntifics it with the uromastix apinijies. The translation proposed by Clark, the great lizard^ is probably as good as can
bo ha-i.
80 Ver. 30. HpJX in this sense only here. LXX. fivya\-ri^=shrew mouse; Onk. ''7''=Afi(^e Iwg; the other oriental Ter-
sions by Ta^ious names of lizard. Almost all the authorities concur in making: it some variety of lizard. Enobel is ce^
tait.ly wrong in iflcniifving it with the Lacerla Nilotica, an animal lour feet long. FUrst only so far defines it as "a reptile
with a long narrow neck." The translation of Eosenmilller, lacerta gecht, seems as probable as any.
'1 Ver. 30. nil, a word ot frequent occurrence for strength, power, but as a name of an animal occuiring only here.
The etymology seems to indicate a characteristic of strength (although Furst makes it the alimy), and the connection,
s.ime variety of lizard. The translation chameleon is derived from the LXX., and is probably wrong. Keil shows that Kao-
bel (followed by Clark) is in error in translating by frog. The uncertainly is too great tci substitute another »ord lor tbat
of the A. v., which yet must be changed, because the last name belongs to the ch>Lmeleon. The etymology simply is there-
fore indicated. ,
8a Ver. 30. DXtDl, another word, air. Ae-y. LXX. icaAa/3iiT,js, Vulg. stellio. Knobel makes it a crawling, and Fneut a
climbing lizard. The latter is adopted as a probable sense In order to avoid confusion in the text.
S3 Ver. 30. Don, also air. Key. LXX. (raifa, Vulg. lacerta, and so also the Syr. The A. V. comes from the Targ.
Je»ns. and Eabbinical authorities. Otherwise there is a general agreement with Bochart that it should be rendered
lizard.
8* Ver. 30. n^E/jH bas already occurred, ver. 18, as the name of a bird. Here it is some variety of lizard, and from
its etymology — Q^^j, to breathe, to draw in air — there is a good degree of unanimity in understanding it of the chameleon,
either as inflating itself, or as popularly supposed to Hvo on air.
» Ver. 32. i'73 is evidently here used, as in Ex. xxii. 6 (7), in its most comprehensive sense. It is only limited by
the clause wbereirltb any work is done. This change of course makes it necessary to translate DDSi '»''«'''"
wi(&, instead of wfterein.
*> Ver. 34. l2\A means any kind of food, especially cereal. The English meat is now so altered in sense that it is bat-
ter to change it,
w Ver. 34. The word mcTi is unfortunately inserted in the A. V. The idea is (comp. ver. 38) that all meat prepared
with water should be rendered unclean by the falling of any of these animals upon it.
^ Ver. 35. D^'1^3 occurs only here, and there is much question as to its meaning. According to Keil it "can only
signify, when used in the dual, a vessel consisting of two parts, i. «. a pan or pot with a lid." So Enobel and the Targumsi
others a support for the pot like a pair of bricks, LXX. xuproirovs; others, as FUrst, " a cooking furnace, ptxjbably consisling
of two ranges of stones which met together in a sharp angle."
8» Ver. 35. The Sam. and LXX. add of waters.
*^ Ver. 36. Roseumiiller, Ke'l, and others understand this in the masculine, fte who, viz. in removing the carcase. The
moaning, however, S' ems to bo more genoial : the person or the thing touching tho carcase, in removing it or otherwiaa
CHAP. XI. 1-47.
91
37 carcase stall be unclean. And if any part of their carcase fall upon any** sowing
38 seed which is to be sown, it shaU he clean. But if any water be put upon the seed,
and any part of their carcase fall thereon, it shall be unclean unto you.
39 And if any beast, of which ye may eat, die ; he that toucheth the carcase there-
40 of shall be unclean until the even. And he that eateth of the carcase of it*^ shall
wash his clothes, and be unclean until the even : he also that beareth the carcase
of it" shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until the even.
41 And every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth shall he an abomination ;
42 it shall not be eaten. Whatsoever goeth upon the belly,*' and whatsoever goeth
upon all four, or whatsoever hath more feet among all creeping things that creep
43 upon the earth, them ye shall not eat ; for they are an abomination. Ye shall not
make yourselves abominable with any creeping thing that creepeth, neither shall
44 ye make yourselves unclean with them, that ye should be defiled thereby. For I
am the Loed your God : ye shall therefore sanctify yourselves, and ye shall be
holy ; for I am holy : neither shall ye defile yourselves with any manner of creep-
45 ing thing that creepeth upon the earth. For I am the Lord** that bringeth you
up out of the land of Egypt, to be your God ; ye shall therefore be. holy, for I am
holy.
46 This is the law of the beasts, and of the fowl, and of every^ living creature
that moveth in the waters, and of every creature that creepeth. upon the earth :
47 to make a difference between the unclean and the clean, and between the beast**
that may be eaten and the beast** that may not be eaten.
^ Ver. 37. The Sam., two MSS., and Vulg. omit amy ; but two MSS. and the LXX. insert it before tetd in the follow-
ing verde,
« Vers. 39 and 40. Several MSS. and the LXX. have the plural in these places.
^ Yer. 42. The letter 1 in \)y\ir^eUy is printed in larger type in the Heb. Bibles to indicate that it is the middle let-
ter of the Pentateuch.
** Ver. 45. The Sam., two MSS. and the Syr. add, as in ver. 44, your God.
* Ver, 47. See note on ver. 2.
EXEGETICAL AND CEITICAL.
The whole of Lange's "Exegetical" is here
given in full, the remarks of the translator being
added in square brackets.
"Cleanness as a condition of the sacrifices —
the cleanness of the sacrificial animals, and the
cleanness to be regained through the purification
of men and of human conditions. Chap, xi.-xv.
'These are regarded in the law as defiling: the
use of certain animals, and the touching a oar-
case (chap, xi.); the confinement of a woman
(chap, xii.) ; the leprosy (chap, xiii., xiv.) ; the
issue of seed of a man (ch. xv. 1-15) ; the invo-
luntary emission of semen (ib. 15, 16) ; the car-
nal conjunction of the sexes (ib. 18) ; the menses
of a woman (ib. 19-24) ; and the lasting issue
of blood of the same (ib. 25-30) ; to which Num.
xix. 11-22 adds the touching the dead ; but the
things mentioned do not all give the same un-
cleannesB,' etc. Knobel, p. 432. The priests
were to administer the laws of cleanness and of
purification, so to speak, as the religious district
physicians of the theocracy. On the laws of the
Gentiles about cleanness, see Knobel, pp 436-
40; on the animals, pp. 443 ss. (the detailed pre-
sentation)."
"Chap. xi. The cleanness of the sacrifice, or
the contrast of the clean and unclean animals.
The clean sacrificial animal is marked out from
the four-footed beasts by two characteristics:
cleaving the hoof and chewing the cud. The
cloven hoof distinguishes the slow-moving, tame
animal, naturally adapted to domestication, from
the single-hoofed animal, naturally wild, although
sometimes capable of being tamed. The rumi-
nation characterizes quiet, dispassionate, grami-
nivorous animals, as opposed to the carnivorous
beasts of prey, and the unclean omnivorous
beasts."
" Thus especially are the one-hoofed excluded,
although they chew the cud ; the camel, and (as
stated) the rock badger, the hare. And so with
those that cleave the hoof and do not chew the
cud — the swine. And, of course, the four-footed
creatures which lack both characteristics."
" In regard to all unclean animals, the use of
their meat and the touching of their carcase is
forbidden. That they certainly might not
be offered in sacrifice is therewith presupposed.
Vers. 1-8."
[From this general view of the chapter, and
from several of the particulars, a dissent must be
expressed. Although, as has been shown in the
preliminary note, the original distinction between
clean and unclean animals was in regard to their
fitness or unfitness for sacrifice ; yet here there
is no immediate reference to sacrifice at all, and
the animals are classified solely in relation to
their being allowed or forbidden for food. Again,
in the detail, while among the animals reared by
man it may be true that "the cloven hoof dis-
tinguishes the slow-moving tame animal;" yet
this certainly could not apply to the gazelle and
other kinds of deer, which are equally included
among the clean animals. Probably Lange's re-
mark was made because his mind was already
fixed upon the classification of animals for sacri-
fice, although even then it would but imperfectly
92
LEVITICUS.
apply to the goat. Also, on the other side, "the
Bingle-hoofed animal, naturally wild, but some,
times capable of being tamed," is quite insuffi-
cient in its description, for the single-hoofed
horse is quite as much a domestic animal as the
bull or the goat, and it fails altogether to include
the many-toed domestic cat and dog, which were
eminently unclean.
[The first and larger half of this book is con-
cerned with the means of approach to God.
First of all came the laws of sacrifice, chaps, i. —
vii.; then followed the consecration of the priests
by whom the sacrifices were to be offered, with
an account of their entrance upon their office,
and the connected events, chaps, viii. — x.; now
follow the laws of purity, chaps, xi. — xv., and
of these first, the laws of clean and unclean food,
contained in the present chapter. In this con-
nection also the uncleanness produced by contact
with the dead bodies of animals unclean for food
is emphatically set forth, and thus this chapter
is intimately connected with the laws of purifi-
cation in the following chapters. "In all the
nations and all the religions of antiquity we find
the contrast between clean and unclean, which
was developed in a dualistio form, it is true, in
many of the religious systems, but had its pri-
mary root in the corruption that had entered the
world through sin. This contrast was limited in
the Mosaic law to the animal food of the Israel-
ites, to contact with dead animals and human
corpses, and to certain bodily conditions and
diseases that are associated with decomposition."
Eell.
[Vers. 1-8 are concerned with the larger
quadrupeds. The distinction is so made among
these that the Israelites might be in no mistake
about them. To an anatomist it might have been
enough to say either parteth the hoof, or
Chevreth the cud; but since several animals
apparently had one of these characteristics with-
out the other, or were popularly supposed to
have them, for the sake of clearness both are
given, and also some animals are excluded, as
the camel, which apparently lacked one of them,
although anatomically it might be considered as
possessing both.
[Ver. 1. Both Moses, as the lawgiver, and
Aaron, as the now fully consecrated high-priest,
to whom would especially pertain the enforce-
ment of the laws of purity, are now addressed
together.
[Ver. 3. No enumeration is here made of the
animals possessing these qualifications ; but there
is such an enumeration in the parallel passage.
Dent. xiv. 4, 5.
[Ver. 4. The camel has a ball behind the cleft
of the foot on which it treads. It comes, there-
fore, under the class of those with hoofs not
completely cloven. So also the swine in ver. 7
is spoken of as dividing the hoof, because he
does so in all common acceptation, and is so
spoken of at this day, although anatomically he
has four toes. Correspondingly in vers. 5, 6
animals are spoken of which appear to the eye
to cheiw the cud, although they do not really;
because otherwise the people, guided by the ap-
pearance, would be led into transgression. All
these animals, it is needless to say, were eaten
among siirrounding people, some by one nation,
some by another. — F. G.]
Vers. 9-12. "The clean aquatic animals are
distinguished likewise by two characteristics —
they must have fins and scales. All aquatic ani-
mals, on the other hand, which have not these
characteristics, should be not only unclean to
them, but an abomination. The fish nature must
thus appear distinctly marked. Of fitness for
sacrifice, nevertheless, nothing is said here"
[obviously because fish were not. included among
sacrificial animals at all] ; " as food for fast days,
fish could not possibly have been used by the Jews."
[In this, as in the preceding law, the marks of
distinction are to be understood of obvious ones:
fins and scales that were apparent to the eye.
As the law covers all that are in the waters,
the Crustacea, lobsters, crabs, etc., and the mol-
lusks, oysters, etc., are wholly forbidden. — E.G.]
Vers. 13-19. "With reference to birds, the
unclean varieties are named at length : eagles,
hawks, fish-hawks, vultures, kites, and every
thing of that kind, all kinds of ravens, the
ostrich, the night-owl, the cuckoo, the kinds of
sparrow-hawk, the eared owl, the swan, the
horned owl, the bat, the bittern, stork, heron,
jay, hoopoe, swallow. The clean kinds are not
named; they are limited to a few examples.
Pigeons and turtle-doves, however, were more
especially made use of for sacrifice." ["Pigeons
and turtle-doves" were the only birds used for
sacrifice, but they are not mentioned here, be-
cause this chapter is not concerned with sacri-
fice. For the birds intended by this list of
twenty Hebrew names, see the Textual notes.
All the birds mentioned, so far as they can be
identified, feed more or less exclusively upon
animal food ; but no general characteristic is
given. The list is probably only meant to in-
clude those prohibited birds with which the
Israelites were likely to come in contact. All
not included in it, however, would have been
lawful under a strict construction of the law.
The bat is included in the prohibited list on the
general principle of this whole nomenclature; it
was popularly regarded as a bird. — F. G.]
Vers. 20-25. "A remarkable exception is made
by the varieties of locusts appended to the birds
(locusts, crickets, grasshoppers, green grasshop-
pers). It is as if these animals were to be an
important object of game for the theocracy."
[It is evident that they did, as in the case of John
the Baptist, become an important item of food
for the poorer classes, and as they are still in the
desert regions adjoining Palestine. — F. G.]
"But besides these, all winged (four-footed) in-
sects are described as things to be avoided (not
abominable)." [This is a general prohibition
of all small flying creatures, having more than
two feet. Creeping things in the original
means also "things that swarm" ormultiplyin
great numbers. Going upon all four seems in-
tended, in contrast to birds which have only two
feet, to include all that have more than two feet,
and consequently creep in a horizontal position.
It is so understood by Jewish writers. From
this general prohibition the sallatoria are ex-
cepted, which are still, as they have always
been, used as an article of food by the poorer
classes in the East. T..ese have, like the common
CHAP, XI. 1-47.
93
grasshopper, very long hind legs for leaping.
With this exception, this whole class of creatures
is described in vers. 23-25 as abominable. Yet
the living animal communicated no uncleanness
by contact — only its dead body. This is a decla-
ration immediately afterwards (vers. 27, 28) ex-
tended also to the bodies of unclean quadrupeds,
and also (vers. 39, 40) to the bodies of even clean
animals that have died of themselves. Washing
of the clothes (vers. 25, 28) required of those
who bore their carcases was evidently because
contact with the clothes could hardly be avoided
in doing this. — F. G.]
Vers. 26-28. "Once more the oharacteristica
are enjoined — to which, however, the definition
is added that also all beasts which go on paws
(the stealthy-going beasts of prey) are to be con-
sidered unclean."
Vers. 29-38. " Moreover there is still a crowd
of little animals named in which there is no at-
tempt at a natural history classification, as a re-
semblance has already appeared in the four-
footed flying creatures. Mammalia: mole and
mouse ; amphibia : the lizard, the Egyptian li-
zard, the frog, the tortoise, the snail, the chame-
leon. This division of various animals is more
especially prominent because the individuals that
compose it could easily make clean objects un-
clean. First, the dead body of all these crea-
tures is, and makes, unclean ; secondly, the wa-
ter with which one has purified either himself or
any object from them ; thirdly, utensils, meats
and drinks which these creatures" [i.e., their
dead bodies] "have touched, vers. 29-35. On
the other hand, these animals cannot defile the
spring, the cistern, or the seeds intended for
sowing. The case is different with seed intended
for food when wet with water, vers. 36-38."
[The names of these creatures have already been
treated in the Textual notes. It appears that,
except the first mentioned weasel (or mole) and
the mouse, they are all of the lizard family. But
in vers. 32-38 the uncleanness produced by con-
tact with their dead bodies is carried much fur-
ther than in regard to the animals previously
named, doubtless for the reason suggested by
Lange that there was more likelihood of contact
from them. Any thing of which use was made
in doing work (ver. 32) must be soaked in water.
Skin included in the list refers to the skins used
for churning, for holding wine and other liquids,
and for a variety of purposes. The earthen ves-
sel (ver. 33) into which any of their bodies fell
must be broken on the same principle, but with
an opposite application, as in vi. 28. The ground
in both cases is the absorbent character of
unglazed earthenware; there it must be broken
lest what it had absorbed of the "most holy offer-
ing " should be defiled ; here lest the defilement
it had itself absorbed should be communicated.
In vera. 34 and 38 it is provided that if their
carcase fell upon any food or seed in a dry
state, it should not communicate defilement ; but
if these were wet, they should be defiled. The
reason of the distinction is evident — the moisture
would act as a conveyor of the defilement. In
ver. 35 the strong contamination of these dead
bodies is still further expressed ; but in ver. 36
an exception is made in favor of any large col-
lection of water in fountains or cisterns, on the
general principle that God " will have mercy ra-
ther than sacrifice." — F. Q.]
Vers. 89, 40. "Finally comes into considera-
tion the carcase of the clean animal that has died
a natural death. This also makes unclean (a)
by contact, (6) by unconscious using thereof, (c)
through carrying and throwing it away. The
one defiled must wash his clothes and hold him-
self unclean until evening." [Yet from vii. 24 it
is evident that this precept applied to the dead
body as a whole, not to the fat, or probably to
the skin, when it had been separated. The rea-
son for the uncleanness of the carcase was evi-
dently that its blood had not been poured out,
but was still in the veins and arteries;, and spread
about in the flesh. This would not apply to the
separate fat, nor to the skin, when properly
cleaned. The provision for puiifioation of one
who had eaten of the flesh may apply not only to
unconscious eating (Lange), but also to eating in
cases of necessity. It did not constitute a sin,
but only a ceremonial defilement, for which
purification was provided. — F. G.]
Vers. 41, 42. "At last the true vermin are
spoken of. Every thing that crawls, that goes
on the belly (in addition to the division already
given), four-footed vermin, and those having
more than four feet (beetles)." [It was a curi-
ous conceit, adopted from Miinster by some of
the older writers, that flies and worms living
upon fruit and vegetables are not here prohibited
because they do not •' creep upon the earth."
The text evidently intends to forbid all creep-
ing things, and is especially comprehensive in
ver. 43. Tiie Talmudists also exclude from the
operation of the law all the minute creatures
supposed by them to be spontaneously generated
in vegetables, fruits, cheese, etc., and all the mi-
nute parasitic animals. It is plain enough, how-
ever, that the law, making its distinctions by ob-
vious and popularly recognized marks, does not
enter at all into minuiise of this sort.]
Vers. 43-45. [Ye shall not make your-
selves abominable. — Lit.] "Ye shall not
make your souls an abomination — a strong ex-
pression, but the key to this legislation. From
tlie educational standpoint of the law for this
morally infant people, purification must be made
from all beastly conditions by a strong exclusion
of all the lower animal forms, and the people
thus be elevated to a consciousness of personal
dignify. Therefore it is also further said that
this is in conformity with the character of Jeho-
vah your God. Ye shall therefore sanctify
yourselves, and ye shall be holy — i. e., be-
come sanctified personalities ; for I am holy —
i.e., the absolute sanctified Personality. They
could thus, by the defilement of their body, de-
file also their souls. This also is made promi.
nent: that Jehovah bringeth you up out of
the land of Egypt, the country defiled by ani-
mal worship."
Vers. 46, 47. "This is the lav7. — Although
it is not specifically extended over the whole ani-
mal kingdom, it is still a general regulating prin-
ciple according to which the distinctions are to be
made. In principle, with this, the distinction is
also introduced in regard to the vegetable king-
dom, the contrast of edible and inedible plants.
94
LEVITICUS.
Yet the application of this to the manner of
living, to the usages, is left untold."
" In regard to the law of clean animals, we
have to distinguish different classes : the speci-
fically clean, or cleanest animals, are those used
in sacrifice — old and young cattle, sheep and
goats, turtle-doves, and (young) pigeons. These
animals form the common food of Jehovah and
His people ; the symbolical food of Jehovah, and
the actual food of the Israelites — a mark of the
divine dignity of man, and of his designation e,a
the image of God Of the vegetables : with this
animal centre correspond the cereals, especially
barley and wheat, incense, wine, and oil ; of the
mineral kingdom, salt. The second class is
made up of the clean animals which men were
allowed to eat, but which were not fitted
for sacrifice. The third class is made up of
the unclean animals, the touch of which, —
so long as Ihey are living, — does not make
men unclean, but of which they are not al-
lowed to eat, and whose carcase defiles them,
(not the fat of the slain imiraals). In the fourth
class, finally, are the repulsive animals, which
even while living are repulsive at least to men,
the creeping and crawl ng animals. That this
classificatiou w.iis to -be symbolic of spiritual
conditions is shown to us very clearly in the vi-
sion of Peter in Acts x. ; but that the ordinary
symbolism is limited by exiraordinary symboli-
cal requirements is shown to us by the appear-
ance of the eagle in the forms of the Cherubim.
With the New Testament this symbolism gene-
rally has reached its end, that is, face to face
with Christian knowledge. But yet, condition-
ally, it remains in the New Testament era pro-
portionately through the Christian national cus-
toms, as this can be deduced from the prohibition
of the eating of blood, and of things strangled
(Acts XV.). The condition of natural abhor-
rence towards all repulsive objects certainly re-
mains more or less -ineradicable, although even
in this respect, necessity can break iron."
" We should distinguish here most carefully
between the theocratic teleological rules, which
have a divine and ideal force, and their exem-
plification, which belongs to the Jewish senaus
communis, and its product, popular usage ; as is
shown here, particularly by the example of the
unruminating animals, the badger and hare
(which seemed to the people to ruminate to some
extent). Obstinacy in valuing the literal inspi-
ration would certainly make here an irrecon-
cilable conflict between theology, or even nomi-
nal belief, and natural science, and the hare
would become the favorite wild game of negation
as Balaam's ass is its favorite charger."
" In regard to the animals mentioned here, we
must refer to the detailed treatment of Knobel
and Keil, the quoted literature of the latter, and
the natural history of Calwer and others."
[It is to be observed that there is no defile-
ment whatever produced by the contact with any
living animal. The distinction between animals
which are attractive and those which are repul-
sive to man is not at all recognized ; nor Indeed,
judging from the habits of different nations,
would it be easy to draw any line of distinction
on this ground. The law simply prescribes what
animals shall be, and what shall not be used /or
food — between the beast that may be
eaten and the beast that may not be eaten,
ver. 47. The distinction is nevertheless symbo-
lical, as the line of separation is plainly so taken
as to exclude from the list of the clean all carni-
vara, except in the case of fish whose habits are
to a great extent hidden under the waves from
common observation. But while no living ani-
mal defiled, the bodies of all dead animals, not
properly slaughtered, did defile. The peculiar
care with which defilement is guarded against
in the case of the carcasses of certain of the
smaller animals (vers. 29-38), seems to be due
to the greater liability to contact with them. The
degree of uncleanness occasioned by contact with
the dead body of any animal which died of itself,
was the same in all cases, vers. 2-5, 28, 31, 40, even
in that of animals otherwise fit for food. The only
exception is in case of sacrificial or food ani-
mals when properly slaughtered, an exception
obviously necessary unless sacrifices and animal
food were to be prohibited. The Apostle has
expressly taught " that there is nothing unclean
of itself" (Rom. xiv. 14); and we must look
therefore for the ground of the distinctions made
in this chapter, not directly to anything in the
nature of the various animals themselves, but to
the educational object of the law. That educa-
tional object, however, was of course best sub-
served by having regard to such characteristics
of the animals as should make the lessons to be
taught most impressive and most easily appre-
hended.— F. G.].
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL.
I. The doctrinal significance of the distinction
between animals clean and unclean for food, must
be considered in view of two facts: first, that as
far as food is concerned, this is distinctly a part
of that law which was "added because of trans-
gressions." It limited an earlier freedom, and
it passed away when the law was superseded by
a higher revelation. Secondly, that for the time
while the law was in force — the whole period of
Israel's national existence — these precepts vpere
elevated into distinctly religious duties, resting
upon the holiness which should characterize the
people of a holy God (vers. 44, 45). These two
facts can only be brought into harmony in view
of the educational purpose of the law. The peo-
ple, in their spiritual infancy, could only be
taught purity by sensible symbols, and among
these there was nothing which entered more tho-
roughly into all the arrangements of daily life
than the selection of food. By this, therefore,
they were taught to keep themselves pure from
all defilement which God had forbidden.
II. The evil consequences attending a neglect
of the precepts in this chapter are represented
in a twofold aspect: First, there was sin in dis-
obedience to these as to any other divine com-
mands, and this is described as making your-
selves abominable, (ver. 43). This phrase
precisely is applied only to the eating of creep-
ing things, but is implied in regard to the
others (vers. 11, 13, 23). It carries with it the
idea that he who offended in these matters put
himself in that relation towards God in whioli
CHAP. XI. 1-47.
these things intended to stand towards man: —
he had sinned by transgression, and thus made
himself an abomination. The other aspect is
that of the violation of the theocratic older, and
here the penalty is very light. The kind of uii
cleanness contracted in any of these instances
found a sufficient purification in any case by the
washing of the clothes and remaining unclean until,
the evening. In cases of a secondary defilement
of other things, they also must be similarly pu-
rified, or be destroyed. Even the eating of a
clean animal which had died a natural death re-
quired no deeper purification. Here, then, the
line is very distinctly drawn between ceiemouial
defilement and moral sin, even when both were
incurred by the same act.
III. All commands to holiness, whether ex-
pressed by symbolical act, or to be wrought out
in the efforts of the spirit, rest upon the same
ground. For I am the Lord your G-od
I am holy. — This is the teaching alike of the
Old and the New Testaments, and again brings
out in a striking way the impossibility of any
true communion between God and man except on
the basis of man's restoration to holiness. This
teaching has been already seen to be the object
of the Levitical law in regard to sacrifices, and
it is here none the less so when the law enters
into the details of man's daily life.
IV. While the unoleannesses here enumerated
were purged simply and speedily if attended to
at once, if neglected, they required (v. 2) the
more serious expiation of the sin offering. Such
is the nature of sin; like leaven, it is ever prone
to spread and intensify its effects.
v. " The cleanness of the animals for sacrifice
and the purification of the saorifioer. Chaps,
xi. — xvi."
" Through sacrifice Isra 1 is made holy, i. e.,
they become in the fellowship of a personal God,
a people of personal dignity belonging to God.
The preliminary condition of sanctification by
fire is the purification especially produced by
water and blood. Only clean, or rather, purified
men can serve as sacrificers in the presentation
of clean animals."
"Clean men must be circumcised, sanctified
by the symbol of circumcision to the new birth
under the power of Jehovah, and thus especially
taken out from the confusion of the unclean
world ; and so, too, the clean animals, as animals
of civilization, form a contrast to the unclean
creation, as the elite of domestic animals, some
of which are too human, too sympathetic (horse,
ass, and dog), while swine are too brutally un-
clean to become domestic animals for the Is-
raelites."
" Cleanness is the negative side of holiness, and
so purification is the negative side of sanctifica-
tion." Lange, Dogmatik zum Lev.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL.
The homiletical teaching of this chapter may
be briefly summed up in the weighty words of
the Apostolic proverb (1 Cor. xv. 33) " Evil onra-
munications corrupt good manners." It is easy
to deceive ourselves here. It is easy to work
out plausible reasons why, particular divine com-
mands may not be founded in the nature of
things, and hence may not bo of binding force
upon us. But all God's commands are binding,
and he who chooses to violate them, however
unimportant they may seem to him to be, incurs
the risk of making himself an abomination.
Sins in matters of little importance, intrinsi-
cally and inadvertently committed, may, through
the means which God has provided, be readily
put away on repentance, and a true seeking of
restored communion ; but if neglected, or passed
over because they seem of little moment, they
lead to a heavier guiltiness.
The defiling effect of personal contact with
that which is unclean is set forth in this chapter.
Origen, in treating of it, calls attention to the
corresponding effect of contact with that which
is holy as illustrated by the restoration to life
of the body of the man which touched the bones
of Elisha (2 Kings xiii. 21), and of the womnn
whose issue of blood was staunched when she
had touched the hem of the Saviour's garment
(Matt. ix. 20). Both serve to show the influence
exerted upon us by our associations; the spiiic
as surely as the body is defiled by contact with
the unclean, and elevated by association with the
pure.
Certain moral qualities of men are commonly
described by reference to the animal creation.
As this is frequently done in the New Testament
(Matt. vii. 15; x. 16; xxiii. 33; Luke xiii. 82;
l?hil. iii. 2 ; 2 Pet. ii. 22, etc.), so it appears al-
ways to have been common among mankind.
Therefore, in the classification as clean, of those
animals associated with excellent qualities, and
as unclean of those associated with evil qualities,
a praise of virtue and a condemnation of evil wag
introduced into the domestic associations of the
daily life. The neopssity of such teaching has
passed away with the coming of the clearer light
of the Gospel.
Parting the hoof and chewing the cud are two
marks of the clean animal which go together,
and must both be found; though one maybe
apparently possessed, yet if the other is wanting,
the animal is unclean. This Origen applies to
one who meditates upon and understands the
Scriptures, but does not order his life in accord-
ance with their teaching. So it may be applied
to faith and works ; neither can truly exist with-
out the other, and the semblance of either alone
is unavailing.
Positive Divine laws, simply as laws, and even
without regard to their immediate object, have
a high moral value from their educationary
power. From the garden of Eden down, man
has been always subjected to such laws. As
disobedience to them has resulted in harm, and
placed the transgressor in an attitude of opposi-
tion to God; so has thefai'hful effort to obey
them resulted in blessing, and brought those
who have undertaken it into nearer relations
to God. Whether the ground of the com-
mand could be understood, or whether the
act enjoined or forbidden might seem to man
morally colorless, yet the simple habit of obe-
dience has always had a most salutary effect.
"A law, the fitness and utility of which we
cannot discover by our natural reason, is more
a test of the spirit of obedience than a moral rp-
quirement that commends itself to our judgment
96
LEVITICUS.
as good and proper ; because our compliance
with the latter may be but a eompUment to our
own iutelligence, and not at all an act of defer-
ence to the divine authority." Hallam. The
multitude of daily demands made upon the
obedience of the Israelites offered to them a
great opportunity of blessing, and is repeatedly
declared to have been a test whether they had a
heart to do God's will or no. Under the higher
dispensation of the Gospel we are allowed to see
moie clearly the grounds of the Divine com.
uiundu; nevertheless, the opportunities of ren-
diii'iag obedience, simply as obedience, without
ueeiug the grounds upon which the command
rests, is by no means entirely withdrawn from
the Christian. Such opportunities improved are
means of blessing, and become to us one of the
many ways in which we " walk by faith and not
by sight."
SECOND SECTION.
" The purification and cleanness of the human conditions of the offerers. The lying-in women. The
leprosy in men^ in garments^ in houses. Sexual impurities andpurifica-
tions. Chaps. XII. — XV" — Lange.
Laws of Purification after Childbirth.
Chapter XII.
1, 2 And the Loeb spake unto Moses, saying. Speak unto the children of Israel,
saying, If a woman have conceived' seed, and born a man child, then she shall be
unclean seven days ; according to [as'] the days of the separation for her infirmity
3 shall she be unclean. And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be cir-
4 cumcised. And she shall then continue in' the blood of her purifying three and
thirty days ; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until
5 the days of her purifying be fulfilled. But if she bear a maid child, then she shall
be unclean two weeks, as in her separation : and she shall continue in the blood of
6 her purifying threescore and six days. And when the days of her purifying are
fulfilled, for a son, or for a daughter, she shall bring a lamb [sheep*] of the first
year for a burnt ofiering, and a young pigeon, or a turtledove, for a sin ofiering,
7 unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, unto the priest : who shall ofier
it before the Loed, and 'make an atonement for her ; and she shall be cleansed
from the issue of her blood. This is the law for her that hath born a male or a
8 female. And if she be not able to bring a lamb [one of the flock'], then she shall
bring two turtles, or two young pigeons ; the one for the burnt oflTering, and the
other for a sin offering : and the priest shall make an atonement for her, and she
shall be clean.
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL.
> Ver. 2. ^■'IIP. ThB Sam. here has the Niphal. Comp. Gen. i. 11 for similar use of Hiphil.
3 Yer. 2. ^D'*3- The text InBtitutea a comparison, saying that the one is the same as the other, rather than makes one
the law for the other.
8 Ver. 4. 7J?. There is no distinction in the A. V. between this and the preposition of the preceding verse. Two MS3.
read here also ^0^^ as in ver. 4.
« Ver. 6. bail. See Textual Note » on iii. 7.
* Ver. 7. One MS., the Sam., LXX., and Syr., here supply the word priest, which is nereasarily understood from the
connection.
* Ver. 8. nty a di£ferent word from that in ver. 6, and used either of sheep or goats, but uccordmg to FUrt-t, only of the
young of either.
The previous chapter was addressed to Moses
and Aaron conjointly, and so is the following,
the latter part of ch. xiv. (beginning at ver. 88),
and ch. xv. ; the present chapter and the earlier
part of ch. xiv. are addressed to Moses alone.
The reason of this difference seems to lie in the
fact that the parts addressed to Moses alone are
simple commands given to him as the legislator.
EXEGETIOAL AND CRITICAL.
Here begins a new parashah of the law extend-
ing to xiii. 59; the parallel section of the pro-
phets is 2 Kings iv. 42 — v. 19, a prominent sub-
ject of which is the cleansing of Naaman from
his leprosy.
CHAP. XII. 1-8.
97
requiring no exercise of judgment in their appli-
cation ; while those addressed to both called for
more or less of a discrimination which was
entrusted by the law to the priests.
The previous chapter treated of unoleanness
of men arising from the lower animals which,
if attended to promptly, in no case required
more for its purification than ablutions, and
continued only until evening. This and the
three following chapters treat of uncleanness
arising from the human body, in most cases
requiring expiatory sacrifices with various, and
often prolonged, periods before the purification
became complete. The various sources of this
defilement are: child-bearing (xii.); leprosy
(liii., xiv.) ; and certain secretions (xv.) ; to
these is added in Num. xix. 11-16 the most in-
tense of all defilements, that arising from con-
tact with a human corpse. The omission of a
vast mass of other sources of impurity, and
restriction of rites of purification to these few,
certainly indicates (as Keil has shown) that
these are not simply regulations for the promo-
tion of cleanliness, or of good morals and de-
cency, but had a higher symbolical and educa-
tional meaning. The defilement of child-bearing,
which occupies the present chapter, is placed
first not only because birth is the natural start-
ing point for the treatment of all that concerns
the human body, but also plainly to prevent any
possible confusion between this defilement and
those mentioned in ch. xv. 19-80. There is in-
deed a certain degree of connection between the
two, and this made it all the more necessary
that this should be treated by itself, as being a
different thing and resting upon different
grounds.
In regard to purifications in general, Ealisch
says: "Next to sacrifices, purifications were
the most important part of Hebrew rituals.
Whenever both were prescribed together, the
latter appeared indeed as merely preparatory to
the former, since sacrifices were deemed the
main agency of restored peace or holiness ; but
purifications, like offerings, were frequently
ordained as separate and independent acts of
worship : closely entwined with the thoughts
and habits of the Hebrews, they formed an
essential part of their religious system
The Hebrews ' purified,' or, as they understood
the term, sanctified themselves, whenever they
desired to rise to the Deity, that is, before
solemn ceremonies and seasons, as sacrifices and
festivals (Gen. xxxv. 2-4 ; 1 Sam. xvi. 6 ; oomp.
2 Chron. XXX. 17) ; or whenever they expected
the Deity to descend to them by some superna-
tural manifestation, as a disclosure of heavenly
wisdom, or a deed of miraculous power and help
(Ex. xix. 10, 14, 15; Josh. iii. 5; vii. 13).
Therefore, when in a state of impurity, they
were forbidden to enter the sanctuary, to keep
the Passover, and to partake of holy food, whe-
ther of sacrificial meat, of sacred offerings and
gifts, or of shew bread, because the clean only
were fit to approach the holy God and all that
appertains to Him (Lev. vii. 19-21 ; xxii. 3 ss. ;
Num. ix. 6es. ; xviii. 11, 13; 1 Sam. xxi. 5)."
Later he adds : " If compared with the purifica-
tory laws of other nations, those of the Penta-
teuch appear in a favorable light They
exhibit no vestige of a dualism ; in every detail
they are stamped by the monotheistic creed;
God alone, the merciful, wise and omnipotent
Buler, sends trials and diseases ; and no evil
genius has the power of causing uncleanness.
They are singular in the noble principles on
which they are framed — the perfection and holi-
ness of God ; and they are thereby raised above
frivolity and unmeaning formalism. Moreover,
it would be unjust to deny that they were un-
derstood as symbols, or as means of sanctifica-
tion ; to defile oneself and to sin, and also to
cleanse and to hallow, are frequently used as
equivalents. They must be pronounced simple
if considered side by side with those of the Par-
sees, the Hindoos, the Egyptians, or the Tal-
mud."
The connection here hinted at between un-
cleanness and sin, between purity and holiness,
is a very important one. It rests partly on a
symbolism which finds place in all languages,
and is abundantly recognized in the diction of
the New Testament ; and partly upon that actual
connection existing between the soul and the
body (spoken of in the last chapter), whereby
the one is deeply affected by the state and con-
dition of the other. In both respects the edu-
cational value of the Levitical laws of purity to
a people in their spiritual infancy were of the
utmost value. The importance of the symbolism
was further enhanced by the broad distinction
made between defilements arising from human
and those from other sources, and connecting
the sin offering only with the former.
This chapter consists of two parts : vers. 1-5
relate to the time of seclusion, vers. 6-8 to the
means of purification. The following are Lange's
Exegetical Notes on the chapter in full :
" The origin of life makes man unclean in
regard to his theocratic right of communion;
just as death, or the touch of the dead, and no
less that which impairs life — sickness, especially
as it is represented by the leprosy, and so also
every disturbance of the springs of life. But
this surely does not mean that finite life itself
was thought of as unclean, and that it must
therefore be reconciled to the universal life
(Bsehr II., p. 461, opposed to which Sommer
and Keil) ; and it also does not mean that ori-
ginal sin alone has produced all this darkening
of life, although the natural condition appears
here throughout laden with sinfulness; since
we find directions for the purification of lying-
in women among the most different nations (see
Knobel, p. 466)." [The following brief sum-
mary of some of these is given by Clark: " The
Hindoo law pronounced the mother of a new-
born child to be impure for forty days, required
the father to bathe as soon as the birth had
taken place, and debarred the whole family for
a period from religious rites, while they were
to 'confine themselves to an inward remem-
brance of the Deity :' in a Brahmin family this
rule extended to all relations within the fourth
degree, for ten days, at the end of which they
had to bathe. According to the Parsee law, the
mother' and child were bathed, and the mother
had to live in seclusion for forty days, after
which she had to undergo other purifying rites.
The Arabs are said by Burckhardt to regard
98
LEVITICUS.
the mother as unclean for forty days. The
ancient Greeks suffered neither child-birth nor
death to take place within consecrated places :
both mother and child were bathed, and the
mother was not allowed to approach an altar
for forty days. The term of forty days, it is
evident, was generally regarded as a critical
one for both the mother and the child. — The day
on which the Romans gave the name to the
child, the eighth day for a girl, and the ninth
for a boy, was called lustricus diet, ' the day of
purification,' because certain lustral rites in
behalf of the child were performed on the occa-
sion, and some sort of offering was made. The
Amphidromia of the Greeks was a similar lustra-
tion for the child, when the name was given,
probably between the seventh and tenth days
(Menu V. 62; Ayeen Akbery, Vol. II., p. 556;
ZeudAvesta, ap. Bahr; Thucid. III. 104; Eurip.
Iph. Taur. 382 ; Callim. Hym. ad Jov. 16, Hym.
ad Del. 123 ; Censorin. De Die N'at. c. xi., p. 51 ;
Celsus, II. 1 ; Festus, s. Lustrici Dies with the
note in Lindemann, II. 480; Smith, Diet, of
Aniiq. s. Amphidromia)." — F. G.]- — ^"But, in
general, by this establishment of the unolean-
ness of the natural processes of birth and death,
the truth was expressed, that the ideal life of
man was already a kind of immortal life, which
had to raise itself above the natural conditions
of human life — the natural side of his being —
and set itself in opposition thereto."
"If now any one says that all these regula-
tions are not to be considered under the aspect
of sanitary or dietetic, but only of typical or
religious precepts, we must hold this antithesis
to be thoroughly false; there are plain indica-
tions that always, from the tree of knowledge
down, especially from the circumcision, the one
particular was joined with the other."
" Ver. 2 ss. In regard to the uncleanness of
lying-in women, in the first place there are two
conditions to be distinguished: first, the time
of their especial sickness; secondly, the time
of their recovery through the blood (the issue
of blood) of their purification. These times dif-
fer according as she has borne a son or a daugh-
ter. If the child be a boy, the time of her espe-
cial sickness is fixed at seven days, exactly like
the regulation in regard to the monthly courses.
Then on the eighth day the circumcision of the
boy was to follow, and from that time for thirty-
three days — i-he eighth day reckoned in — she
was to remain at home with the boy, engaged
in a constant process of recovery and purifica-
tion. But why are the seven days of her espe-
cial uncleanness doubled to two weeks by the
birth of a, girl t It is said that this has its
foundation in the belief of antiquity that "the
bloody and watery issues last longer after the
birlh of a female than of a male " (see the cita-
tions from Hippocrates [op. ed. Kiihn. i. p.
893], Aristotle [Hist. anim. vi. 22; vii. 3], and
Biirdach [Physiologie III., p. 34] in Keil).
Whether this view formed a natural reason for
the above regulation or not, there was certainly
alsoatheocraticreaeonofimportanoe: theboy was
circumcised— the girl was not; for thip ihe twice
seven days might form an equivalent. The girl was
BO far a Jewess, but not yet an Israelitess " \i. e.
a descendant of Abraham after the flesh, but not
yet incorporated with the chosen people. — F. 6.].
" It was now moreover the proper consequencs
that the thirty-three days of recovery were
doubled to sixty-six days, wherein, indeed, the
law of circumcision is still more strongly re-
flected. The totality of the forty days of purifi.
cation at the birth of a boy corresponds to the
former explanation of the forty days in the life
of Moses and Elijah : it is the symbolical time
of purification, of exclusion from the world, as
it was extended for the whole people to forty
years. And the doubling of the forty days in
the case of the new-boru girl explains itself, if
forty days are reckoned for the girl and forty
for the mother ; a doubling which could not be
applied to the circumcised boy. Moreover, the
cooperation of the physical view, already noticed,
may be also taken into consideration." [It is
particularly to be noticed that the uncleanness
continued only seven or fourteen days. During
this time it appears from the analogy of xv. 19-
24, the woman was unclean in the sense that
every person and thing touched by her became
itself unclean and capable of communicating de-
filement. After this period, the woman was no
longer unclean, but might perform at home all
the ordinary duties of domestic life ; only she
was forbidden to approach the sanctuary (t. e.,
the court of the tabernacle) until the time of her
purification. The suggestion of Lange (which
was also the opinion of Calvin) that the differ-
ence in the length of time for the uncleanness
and the purification at the birth of a boy or a
girl was due to the fact of the boy's being for-
mally received into the visible Church of God
by circumcision, is a complete and satisfactory
solution of a long-vexed question; but this so-
lution necessarily carries with it the determina-
tion that the law had respect to the child as well
as to the mother. To this two objections are pro-
posed : first, the case of still-born children; but
tills was so exceptional that there was no occa-
sion to provide for it in the law. When it did
occur — if the principle above given is correct —
there being no child for whom purification was
required, the time would probably have been re-
duced to that which was considered necessary
for the mother alone. The other objection arises
from the necessity of including the infant Jesus
in the purification of the Virgin Mary, Lukeii.
22 (where it is very observable that the Evange-
list does not hesitate to say tow KaOapia/iov ai-
rav*), but this is easily disposed of on the prin-
ciple announced by Himself in regard to His
baptism that " thus it becometh us to fulfil all
righteousness" (Matt. jii. 15). This is the view
taken by S. Augustine (Quaest. in Hept. L. III.
40).— F. G.].
" Ver. 6. The equalization of girls with boys
appears again in the appointed completing sacri-
fice." [That is, in the time at which it was of-
fered ; there was no distinction in the sacrifice
itself —F. G.]. "And in this there is not first
a sin offering brought, and then a burnt offering,
as in the trespass offerings ; but first a costly
burnt offering, as the expression of the conse-
cration of the new life ; — namely, a year old
lamb, and then a sin offering small in propor-
* lo note on Luke ii, 22 the view taken by Ooateraee il
that the plural refers to Mary aaJ Joseph.
CHAP. XII. 1-8.
99
tion, a young pigeon, or a turtle-dore." [This
order of the offerings is a remarkable deviation
from the general principle that when the two of-
ferings came together, the sin offering always
preceded. The reason of this exception appears
to lie in the fact that at the birth of a child feel-
ings of joy and gratitude are naturally upper-
most ; the thought of the child's heritage of Bin-
fulness comes afterward. — F. G.]. "Only in
case of necessity was the burnt offering reduced
and made the same as in the sin offering." [This
necessity seems to have be»n liberally interpre-
ted by custom, and the smaller offering to have
been allowed generally to the humbler classes
of society. Comp. Luke ii. 22-24. The time of
the offering also could not be before the fortieth
or the eightieth day, but only a very strict con-
struction of the law could forbid its being defer-
red to a later period for those living at a distance
from the sanctuary, as appears to have been
done at the birth of Samuel, 1 Sam. i. 22-25. —
F. G.]. "That bearing and being born, as well
as being unclean through sickness and touching
the dead, could not be thought of without human
complicity in sin, or at least in guilt, was set
forth by this law ; but how gently was this judg-
ment expressed ! If it is now said of this saori-
iioe from one point of view: for a son, for a
daughter [ver. 6], and then again so she shall
be clean [ver. 8], so again is the time, just as
much as the sacrifice of purification, desiguated
as common for mother and child. Keil is thus
incorrect when he supposes that the woman did
not require purification for the child, but only
for herself. According to the fundamental prin-
ciples of the Levitical law, it could not be con-
ceived that a clean child lay on the breast of an
unclean mother. In this very community of the
Levitical uncleanness, this inner fellowship be-
tween mother and child is raised above the sup-
posed separation in their condition. It is evi-
dent that the thing here treated of is indefinite
sinfulness, but not " sins becoming known indi-
rectly in the corporeal manifestation of them."
" IJpon the laws of purity among other nations
in regard to women in childbed, see Knobel, p.
466, and so too on the circumcision, p. 467."
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL.
I. " The theocratic law is joined throughout
with the sanitary law, without giving up its pre-
dominating and symbolical Levitical signification.
In the law of lying-in women there comes espe-
cially into notice the connection or unity between
mother and child, and the difference between
the man-child and the woman-child. See the
Exegetical." Lange.
II. " The doctrine, echoed in a hundred
creeds, that 'Purity is, next to life, the highest
boon of man,' was among them also [the Isra-
elites] a truth and a reality." Kalisch.
III. " The fall oasts a shade of impenetrable
darkness over the birth of a child of man. All
that reason can say is, that this is another child
of sin and heir of death. . . . The mother in Is-
rael ia here taught that while there is impurity
and guilt connected with the bearer and the born
of the fallen race, yet there is a propitiation on
which she may rely for herself and for her off-
spring, and a purification which she has for her-
self, and may confidently expect for her child,
while she trains him up in the way he should
go." Murphy.
IV. This chapter shows clearly in the differ-
ence between the times of uncleanness and of
purification at the birth of a boy and of a girl,
the difference in relation to the ancient church
brought about by circumcision. The Christian
church has taken the place of the Jewish, and
baptism has taken the place of circumcision ; the
same relation therefore may be expected to hold
between these.
V. Inasmuch as a sin offering was to be pre-
sented conjointly for the mother and the new-
born child, the doctrine of original sin is plainly
taught in this law. Origen (Hom. viii. in Lev.,
^3) draws the same conclusion from the fact
that baptism is appointed " for the remission of
sins," and yet is administered to infanta.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL.
As the primeval curse on sin fell, for the wo-
man, on child-bearing, so in child-bearing she
becomes by the law unclean, and must present
for her purification a sin offering. That curse
remaina and atill clinga to every child of sin
coming into the world ; for purification resort
must be had to that true Propitiation for sin
of which the sin offering was a type.
" As the mother and her child emerge out of
the impurity, ahe learns to hope for the day when
both will emerge out of the bondage and corrup-
tion of sin ; as the child is circumcised on the
eighth day, the confiding parents pray and wait
and watch and work for the circumcision of the
heart, which is hopefully foreshadowed by the
outward rite ; as the mother offers her burnt
sacrifice and sin sacrifice she rejoices in the
knowledge that there is a propitiation that ia
sufficient for her, and for her children, and for
her children's children to all generations."
Murphy.
" The priestly people of God have always a war
to wage with the defilements of the natural life.
Even the uncleanness which belongs to the na-
tural vigor of a lying-in woman, and to a new-
born child, must be taken away and atoned for."
Lange.
In accordance with this law, " on the fortieth
day after His birth from the Blessed Virgin's
womb, Christ, the second Adam, our Emmanuel,
was presented in the substance of our flesh ; and
on the fortieth day after His resurrection, or
birth from the grave (Col. i. 18 ; Rev. i. 5), He
was presented in our flesh in the heavenly sanc-
tuary, and we were presented in Him in the
dress of a cleansed and glorified humanity,"
Wordsworth.
100
LEVITIcuisr
THIRD SECTION.
Laws Concerning Iieprosy
Chaps. XIII., XIV.
PRELIMINARY NOTE.
The disease of leprosy has happily become so
rare in modern times in the better known parts
of the world that much obscurity rests upon its
pathology. The attempt will only bo made here
to point out those matters which may be consi-
dered as fixed by common consent, but which
will be found sufficient for the illustration of the
more important poinis in the following chapters.
In the first place, then, it appears indisputable
that leprosy is a broad name covering several va-
rieties of disease more or less related to one
another. These are separable into two main
classes, one covering the different forms of Ele-
phantiam (tuberculated and anaesthetic) ; the
other, (he Lepra vulgaris. Psoriasis, Syphilis, etc.
It is the former class alone with which Leviticus
has to do as a disease. At the present time the
tuberculated variety is said to be the more com-
mon in those countries in which leprosy still ex-
ists to any considerable extent, while the anaas-
thetic was probably more prevalent in the time
of Moses. The latter is described by Celsus un-
der the name of Tiehnj], and Keil maintains that
the laws of Moses in regard to leprosy in man
relate exclusively to this. Clark, however, has
shown " that the two in a great number of oases
work together, and as it did in the days of
Moses, the disease appears occasionally in an
ambiguous form." Wilson has recorded a num-
ber of cases in detail, showing the interchange
of the two forms in the same patient. The symp-
toms of the dise ise intended by Moses sufficiently
appear in the text itself, and if these symptoms
cover what would now appear in medical no-
menclature as different diseases, then all those
diseases, classified under the general name of
leprosy were intended to be included in the Le-
vitioal legislation.
Nothing whatever is said in the law either of
the origin, the contagiousness, or the cure of
the disease. In modern experience it seems to
have been sufficiently proved that it is heredi-
tary, but only to the extent of three or four gen-
erations, when it gradually disappears; neither
is it in all oases hereditary, the children of le-
pers being sometimes entirely unaflFected by
leprosy, and on the other hand the disease often
appearing without any hereditary taint. In its
first appearance it is now often marked only by
some slight "spot" upon the skin, giving no
pain or other inconvenience, but obstinately re-
sisting all efi'orts at removal, and slowly but ir-
resistibly spreading. Sometimes months, some-
times years, even to the extent of twenty or
thirty years, intervene between the first appear-
ance of the " spots " and their development. It
is not improbable that in the course of many
centuries a considerable modification in the ra-
pidity of its progress may have taken place in a
disease which is found gradually to die out by
hereditary transmission. The question of its
contagiousness is still much mooted among the
medical faculty. The better opinion seems to be
that it is not immediately contagious, but is pro-
pagated by prolonged and intimate intercourse
in the case of susceptible persons. A( least it
is certain that in all known instances of the pre-
valence of the disease one of the most important
of the means of control has been the segregation
of the lepers, and where this precaution has
been neglected, the disease has continued to pre-
vail. After the leprosy has once acquired a cer-
tain degree of development, there is no known
means of cure. Everything hitherto attempted
has been found to rather aggravate than miti-
gate the disorder. It is asserted that it yields
to medical treatment in its earliest stages when
the "spots" first appear, and a number of dis-
tinct cases of cure are recorded; but the doubt
will always remain whether the disease which
yields is really leprosy, or whether something
else has not been confounded with an undevel-
oped stage of the true disease. However this
may be, it is certain that after it has once be-
come developed to any considerable extent it is
incurable by any remedies at present known,
although spontaneous cures do sometimes occur.
The reliance for its control is more upon diet,
cleanliness, and general regimen, than upon spe-
cific antidotes.
Medical observations upon the disease in mo-
dern times have been made in the island of Gua-
daloupe, where it broke out about the middle of
the last century, and was very carefully investi-
gated by M. Peyssonel, a physician sent out by
the French government for the purpose. An ac-
count of the result of his examination, as well as
of other investigations of English, French, and
German physicians in other islands of the West
Indies whither it had been imported from Africa,
and in other parts of the world is given by Mi-
ohaelis (Laws of Moses, Art 208, 210). Also of
especial importance is a " Report on the leprosy
in Norway by Dr. Danielssen, chief physician of
the leper hospital at Bergen, and Prof. Boeok'
(Paris, 1848). The subject of late years has
considerably interested physicians, and the Lon-
don " College of physicians " have published a
report upon it, based upon a series of questions
addressed to nearly all parts of the world where
the disease now prevails. Many other authori-
ties are cited by Clark in his preliminary not*
PRELIMINARY NOTE ON LAWS CONCERNING LEPROSr.
101
,0 these chapters. A particularly valuable dis-
mssion of the disease may be found in Wilson,
Diseaiea of the akin, ch. xiii. (5th Am. Ed., pp.
iOO-314 and 333-381). The disease appears to
lave been more or less common in Western Eu-
rope from the eighth century down, but received
1 great extension at the time of the crusades.
It one time a partial enumeration by Dugdale
mentions eighty-five leper bouses in England
ilone, six of which were in London, and it con-
iinued to linger in Scotland until the middle of
Lhe last century. It still exists to a considerable
sxtent in Iceland and Norway, and in all the
iountries bordering the Eastern shores of the
Mediterranean, especially Syria and Egypt,
irhere it has found a home in all ages, in some
parts of Africa, Arabia, and India.
The characteristics of the disease are the ex-
seedingly slight symptoms at its first appear-
inoe ; its insidious, and usually very slow pro-
cess, the horribly repulsive features of its later
stages when the face becomes shockingly disfi-
gured, and often the separate joints of the body
become mortified and drop off one by one ; and
its usually sudden and unexpected termination
it the last, when the leprosy reaches some vital
organ, and gives rise to secondary disease, often
lysentery, by which life is ended. Meanwhile,
during the earlier stages, generally very pro-
longed, there is no suffering, and the ordinary
enjoyments of life are uninterrupted.
Leprosy, with these characteristics, especially
its hidden origin, and its insidious and resistless
progress, has always seemed a mysterious dis-
ease, and among the heathen as well as among
the Jews, has been looked upon as an infliction
especially coming from God. In fact in Hebrew
history it was so often employed in Divine judg-
ments, as in the case of Miriam, of Gehazi, and
of Dzziah, and was also so often healed by mi-
raculous interposition, as in the case of Miriam
iIbo, and of Naaman, as to give some reason for
;his belief; while the peculiar treatment it re-
seived in the law tended still further to place
eprosy in a position of alienation from the theo-
;ratio state, and actually included the leper in
hat " uncleanness " which was utterly excluded
'rom approach to the sanctuary. The disease
hus became a vivid symbolism of sin, and of the
ipposition in which this stands to the holiness
if Ood ; while at the same time its revolting as-
)ect in its later stages made it such an image,
md indeed a beginning, of death itself that it is
iften most appropriately described by Jewish as
cell as other writers as " a living death." Much
if the association with death and the body in
he corruption of death, thus attached to leprosy
md the corruption at work in leprosy. It is not
lecessary here to speak of the prevailing He-
irew notion that all suffering was the conse-
[uence of individual sin, and was proportioned
n severity to the degree of that sin ; for how-
ver deeply seated such ideas may have been in
he minds of many of the Israelites, and however
Mch they may have increased the popular dread
nd abhorrence of leprosy, they find no shadow
f encouragement whatever in the law.
In regard to what is called "leprosy" in
onses, in textile fabrics, and in leather, it is
ot necessary to suppose that the name is in-
tended to convey the idea of an organic disease
in these inanimate things. Tbe law will still be
BuflSciently clear if we look upon the name as
merely applied in these oases to express a kind
of disintegration or corruption, such as could ba
most readily and popularly described, from cer-
tain similarities in appearance, by the figurative
use of the word. In the same way the terms out
of joint, sick, and others have come among our-
selves to be popularly used of inanimate things,
and such words as blistered, bald, and rotten, have
a technical figurative sense almost more common
than their original literal one. These modes of
disintegration have been often investigated with
great learning and labor; but it is not surprising
that at this distance of time, and after such pro-
found changes in the arts and the habits of men,
the result of all such investigations should re-
main somewhat unsatisfactory. Just enough
has been ascertained to show that inanimate
things, of the classes here described, are sub-
ject to processes of decay which might be aptly
described by the word leprosy ; but precisely
what the processes were to which the Levitical
law had reference it is probably impossible now
to ascertain definitely. The most satisfactory
treatment of the subject from this point of view
is to be found in Miohaelis {ubi supra. Art.
211). He instances in regard to houses, the
formation of saltpetre or other nitrous salts
upon the walls to such an extent in some parts
of Germany as to become an article of com-
mercial importance, and to be periodically
scraped off for the market. By others the exist-
ence of iron pyrites in the dolomitic limestone
used for building in Palestine has been suggested
as leading in its decomposition to precisely the
appearances described in the law — hollow streaks
of the green ferrous sulphate and the red of fer-
ric sulphate — upon the walls of the houses af-
fected ; but proof is wanting of the existence in
that stone of pyrites in sufficient abundance to
produce the effects contemplated in the law.
Both these explanations, however, are suggestive
of methods of disintegration which might have
occurred, but for the determination of which we
have not sufficient data. It is the same with the
explanation of Michaelis in regard to woolen
fabrics, — that the wool itself is affected by dis-
eases of the sheep upon which it has grown.
The fact itself does not seem sufficiently well au-
thenticated ; nor if it were, would it be applica-
ble to garments of linen. Nevertheless, this is
suggestive of defects in the materials, — which
were in all cases of organic production — arising
either from diseased growth, or from unskilful-
ness in the art of their preparation, which would
after a time manifest themselves in the product,
much in the same way as old books now some-
times become spotted over with a "leprosy"
arising from an insufScient removal of the chemi-
cals employed in the preparation of the paper
But whatever the nature and origin of this sort
of "leprosy," it is plainly regarded in the Levi-
tical law as is no sense contagious, or in any way
calculated to produce directly injurious effects
upon man. It is provided for in the law, it
would appear, partly on the general ground of
the inculcation of cleanliness, and partly from
102
LEVITICUS.
association with the human disease to which it
bore an external resemblance, and to which the
utmost repugnance was to be encouraged. Even
the likeness and suggestion of leprosy was to be
held unclean in the homes of Israel.
No mention has thus far been made of a theory
of this disease adopted by many physicians, and
which, if established, might really assimilate the
leprosy in houses and garments and skins to that
in the human body, and explain the origin of all
alike by the same cause. According to this
theory, the disease is occasioned by vegetable
spores, which find a suitable nidus for their de-
velopment either in the human skin or in the
other substances mentioned. If this theory
should be accepted, the origin and effects of the
disintegrating agencies would be the same in all
cases. The late eminent physician, Dr. J. K.
Mitchell, in hin work upon the origin of mala-
rious and epidemic fevers {Mve Essays, p^ 94),
after quoting the law in relation to leprosy,
says : " There is here described a disease whose
cause must have been of organic growth, capable
of living in the human being, and of creating
there a foul and painful disease of contagious
character, while it could also live and reproduce
itself in garments of wool, linen, or skin ; nay
more, it could attach itself to the walls of a
house, and there also effect its own reproduction.
Animalcules, always capable of choice, would
scarcely be found so transferable ; and we are
therefore justified in supposing that green or red
fungi so often seen in epidemic periods, were the
protean disease of man, and his garment, and
his house." He further quotes from Heoker
statements corroboratory of his views in regard
to the plagues of 786 and 959. This theory, how-
ever, has not here been urged, partly because it
yet needs further proof, partly because no theory
at all is necessary to account for the Levitical
legislation in view of the facts presented in the
law.
For the literature of the subject, besides the
reference above given, see the art. by Hayman,
Leper, Leprosy, in Smith's Bibl. Diet., and the
Preliminary note on these chapters in Clark's
Com. on Lev., together with the appended notes
to the same.
At the opening of his "Exegetical" Lange
has the following, which may be appropriately
placed here : " First of all, it must be made pro-
minent that the leprosy, under the point of view
taken, and the sentence of uncleanness, is placed
as a companion to the uncleanness of birth, as
the representative of all ways of death, of all
sicknesses. It is unclean first in itseK, as a death
element in the stream of life — in the blood — even
as the source of life appears disturbed in the re-
lations of birth ; but still more it is unclean as
a sickness spreading by transmission and con-
tagion.
"Hence it appears also as a polluting element
of physical corruption, not only in men, but also
through the analogy of an evil diffusing iteelf, in
human garments and dwellings. The analogous
evils of these were, on this accotint, called lep-
rosy.
" In this extension over man and his whole
sphere it is, in its characteristics, a speaking
picture of sin and of evil the punishment of sin ;
it is, Bo to speak, the plastic manifestation, the
medical phantom or representation of all the
misery of sin.
" Accordingly the leprosy, and the contact
with it, is the specific uncleanness which ex-
cluded the bearer of it from the theocratic com-
munity, BO that he, as the typically excommuni-
cated person, must dwell without the camp.
" Nothing is here said of the application of
human means of healing in reference to this evil.
The leper was left with his sickness to the mercy
of God and to the wonderfully deep antithesis of
recovery and death ; the more so, since leprosy
in a peculiar sense is a chronic crisis, a progres-
sive disease, continually secreting matter, whe-
ther for life or for death. Mention is made of
external count eraction only in regard to leprosy
in garments and houses. Hence, from its na-
ture, it is altogether placed under the supervi-
sion of the priest. The priest knew the charac-
teristics of the leprosy, and the course of its
crises; he had accordingly to decide upon the
exclusion and upon the restoration of the sick,
and to express the latter by the performance of
the sacrifice of purification brought for this pur-
pose by the convalescent.
"Thus in conformity to the spirit of Oriental
antiquity, the priest here appears as the physi-
cian also for bodily sicknesses, as a watchman
over the public health. But for the cosmic evils
he was still less a match than for those of the
body ; against such the prophet must reveal mi-
raculous helps, e. g., against the bitterness of
the water, and against the bite of the fiery ser-
pents.
" The great contrast between the Old and the
New Testaments is made prominent in the fact,
that in the Old Testament the touch of the leper
made unclean, — apparently even leprous; — while
Christ by His touch of the lepers cleansed them
from their leprosy. But it continued to be left
to the priest, as the representative of the old co-
venant, to pronounce the fact. See Comm. 8.
Matt., p. 150."
" The name Leprosy, n^]}X is derived from
Jfyi to strike down, to strike to the ground; the
leprosy is the stroke of God. Gesenius distin-
guishes the leprosy in men, the leprosy in houses
(probably the injury done by saltpetre), and the
leprosy in garments (mould, mildew). On this
chronic form of sickness, fully equal to the acute
form of the plague, comp. the article Leprosy
(Aussatz) in the dictionaries, especially in Her-
zog's Real-encyclopddie, and in Winer. Four
principal forms are distinguished, of which three
are particularly described by Winer: 1) The
white leprosy, Barras, levKi/. " This prevailed
among the Hebrews (2 Kings v. 27, etc.) and has
hence been called by physicians lepra Hfosaica.
See the description in Winer, I. p. 114. 2) The
Elephantiasis, lepra nodosa, or tuberculosa, tuber-
cular leprosy, Egyptian boil, thus endemic in
Egypt. " The sickness of Job was commonly
considered in antiquity to have been this kind
of leprosy." 3) The black leprosy or the dark
Barras. Later medical researches (to which the
articles in Bertheau's Conversations-lexicon, and
Schenkel's Bibel-lexieon refer) show the differ-
ences between the various kinds as less defined;
CHAP. XIII. 1— XIV. 57. 108
the contagious character is called in question by
Furrer (in Schenkel). In this matter indeed, it
is a question whether the rigid isolation of the
leprous has not hindered, in a great degree, the
examples of contagion." For a catalogue of
the literature, see Knobel, p. 469 and beyond.
A.— EXAMINATION AND ITS RESULT.
Chapter XIII. 1-46.
1, 2 And the Lord spake unto Moses and Aaron, saying, When a man shall have
in the skin of his flesh a rising, a scab, or bright spot, and it be in the skin of the
flesh like the plague [a spot^] of leprosy ; then he shall be brought unto Aaron the
3 priest, or unto one of his sons the priests : and the priest shall look on the plague
[spot^] in the skin of the flesh : and when the hair in the plague [spot'] is turned'
white, and the plague [spot'] in sight be deeper than the skin^ of his flesh, it is a
plague [spot'] of leprosy : and the priest shall look on him, and pronounce him
4 unclean. If the bright spot be white in the skin of his flesh, and in sight be not
deeper than the skin, and the hair thereof be not turned' white ; then the priest
5 shall shut up Mm thai hath the plague [shall bind up the spot*] seven days : and
the priest shall look on him the seventh day : and, behold, if the plague [spot'] in
his sight be at a stay, and the plague [spot'] spread not in the skin ; then the
6 priest shall shut him up [shall bind it up*] seven days more : and the priest shall
look on him again the seventh day : and, behold, if the plague be somewhat dark
[spot' be somewhat faint^], and? the plague [spot'] spread not in the skin, the priest
shall pronounce him clean : it is but a scab : and he shall wash his clothes, and be
7 clean. But if the scab spread much abroad in the skin, after that he hath been
8 seen of the priest for his cleansing, he shall be seen of the priest again : and if the
priest see that, behold, the scab spreadeth in the skin, then the priest shall pro-
nounce him unclean : it is a leprosy.
9 When' the plague [spot'] of leprosy is in a man, then he shall be brought unto
10 the priest ; and the priest shall see him : and, behold, if the rising be white in the
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL.
Note. — K free tratislation of this chapter in terms of modern m edical science may be fourd in Wilson, p. 377.
^ Ver. 2. yjj, a word of very frequent occnrrence in these two chapters where it is uniformly 'translated ia the A. V.
(pxc^'pt xiii. 42, 43, sore) plague, as it is al^o in Gen. xii. 17 ; Ex. xi. 1 ; Deut. xxiv. 8 (in reference also to leprosy) ; 1 Kings
viii. 37, 38 ; Ps. xci. 10. Elsewhere the renderings of the A. "V. are very various : sore, atrohe., stripe, wmmd. By far th >
moBt comraon rendering in the LXX. i-t oLfi>7i=tactua, ictus. The idea of the word is a strohe or blow, and then the effect of
this in a Motwid or ifpnt. CUrk t'lerefure would translate here stroke, which meets well enough the meaning of the word
itself, but does not in all cases convey the sense in English. It is perhaps impoBtjible to find one word in English which
(an be used in all cas^-s; but that which seems best adapted to Leviticu'i is thw one given by Horsley and Lee, and adopted
here: spot. So Ke'l, Wilson and others. There is no a'-tic!e in the Ileb.
3 Ver. 3. The senae is here undoubtedly the scarf shin (Clark), IM cut.icJe, in contradistinction to the cutis, the true skin
below. So Wilson, who says: "This distinction in reality constirut s one of the most important points of diagnosis between
real leprosy and affections of the skin otherwise resemlding l-^prosy." But as we have in Heb. only the one word ^ij; for
both (except the ajr. Key. 'wi. Job xvi. 15), there does not seem to be warrant for changing the translation, especially aa
in Baplish slein answers to either with the same indefiniteness.
8 Ver. 4. The co struction in vers. 3, 4 and 10 is without a preposition ; in veiB. 16 and 17 it is with the preposition
7, aa is expressed in the A. V,
' Vers. 4, 6, etc. According to RosenmUller and Oesenins, ^J] is used by metonymy for the person upon whom it is.
This view is adopted by Lange. It apnears in the Targ. of Onk. and in the Vulg., and has been followed by the A. V. Far
batter ia the rendering of the Sam., LXX. and Syr. : the priest shall bind wp the spot, or sore. This is the exact translation of
the Heb., and is advocated bv Horsley, Boothroyd, and many others. Fuerst does not recognize the sense by metonymy.
Thi same change should perhaps also be made in v-r. 12. See Exegesis. In the case of shutting up the leprous house
(xiv. 38) the word hotise is distinctly expressed in the Heb.
' Ver. 6. 'nr\3=dim, pale, faint, weak, dying. The idea ia that of s.mething in the process of fading away, disappear-
ing. LXX. afiavpd., Vulg. ohscurior.
* Ter. 6. It does not appear why the coniunction in the A. V. should be printed in italics; it is, however wanting in
18 MSS., the Sam., and LXX.
' Ver. 9. The conjunction is wanting in the Heb., but is supplied in the Sam. and versions.
^ Vers. 10 and 24. n^HO, ac-ordingto Roa^'Hrnuell-'r and Fuerst are indic/Yion, and this is the sense given in Targ.,
Onk, and the Syr., and apparently also in the Vulg. The LXX. renders airo toO u-yioOs t^s crapKos t^s ^uotj? ev ry ovKy,
104 LEVITIv^uo.
skin, and it have turned' the hair white, and there be quick [a mark oP] raw flesh
11 in the rising ; it is an old leprosy in the skin of his flesh, and the priest shall pro-
nounce him unclean, and shall not shut him up [bind it up*] : for he is unclean.
12 And if a leprosy break out abroad in the skin, and the leprosy cover all the
skin of him that hath the plague [spot^] from his head even to his foot, wheresoever
13 the priest looketh ; then the priest shall consider : and, behold, if the leprosy have
covered all his flesh, he shall pronounce him clean that hath the plague [pronounce
14 the spot' clean*] : it [he'] is all turned white : he is clean. But when raw flesh
15 appeareth in him, he shall be unclean. And the priest shall see the raw flesh, and
16 pronounce him to be unclean : for the raw flesh is unclean : it is a leprosy. Or if
the raw flesh turn [change'"] again, and be changed [be turned'"] unto white, he
17 shall come unto the priest; and the priest shall see him: and, behold, i/" the plague
[spot'] be turned into [unto"] white ; then the priest shall pronounce him clean
that hath the plague [prononnce the spot' clean*] : he is clean.
18 The flesh ^so, in which," even in the skin thereof, was a boil," and is healed,
19 and in the place of the boil'* there be a white rising, or a bright spot, white, and
20 somewhat reddish [and glistening'^], and it be shewed to the priest ; and if, when
the priest seeth it, behold, it be in sight lower than the skin, and the hair thereof
be turned white ; the priest shall pronounce him unclean : it is a plague [spot'] of
21 leprosy broken out of the boil.'* But if the priest look on it, and, behold, there be
no white hairs therein, and if it be not lower than the skin, but be somewhat dark
22 [faint'] ; then the priest shall shut him up [shall bind it up*] seven days : and if
it spread much abroad in the skin, then the priest shall pronounce him unclean :
23 it is a plague [spot']. But if the bright spot stay in his place, and spread not, it
is a burning boil [a scar of the boil'"] ; and the priest shall pronounce him clean.
24 Or if there be any flesh, in the skin whereof there is a hot burning [a bum by
fire'"], and the qaick flesh that bumeth [the mark of the burn'] have a white bright
25 spot, somewhat reddish [glistening"], or white : then the priest shall look upon it :
and, behold, if the hair in the bright spot be turned white, and it he in sight deeper
than the skin ; it is a leprosy broken out of the burning : wherefore the priest shall
26 pronounce him unclean : it is the plague [spot'] of leprosy. But if the priest look
on it, and, behold, there be no white hair in the bright spot, and it be no lower than
the other [omit other] skin, but be somewhat dark [faint'] ; then the priest shall
27 shut him up [shall bind it up*] seven days : and the priest shall look upon him
the seventh day ; and if it be spread much abroad in the skin, then the priest shall
28 pronounce him unclean : it is the plague [spot'] of leprosy. And if the bright spot
stay in his place, and spread not in the skin, but it be somewhat dark [faint^] : it
is a rising of the burning, and the priest shall pronounce him clean : for it is an
inflammation [a scar"] of the burning.
taking the TD as a prepositioD, and nnderatanding it, ob the Babbins, of a spot of prond flesh in the midst of the cicatrice.
The margin of the A. Y. is the guiokenijj^ of living JUish; scar would express the sense, but this is appropriated to nD'IX,
V VT
vera. 23, 28, and vtarh gives the exact rendering of the Hebrew, and meets the requirements of the context.
• Ver. 13. The prononn should obviously refer to the man rather than the spot,
10 Ver. 16. IjSnj. This being the same verb as is used in vers. 3, 4, 17, in the same sense, the rendering shonld cer-
tainly be the same. The alteration in the A. V. was evidently on account of the previous translation of ^VO^ by hiro.
T
It is better to put the new word there.
11 Ver. 17. The preposition is the same as In the previous ver.s6, and the change in the A. V. may have been simply
accidental.
1* Ver. 18. The word 1^ seems redundant, and is wanting in 4 MSS. and the Sam.
» Ver. 19. nO^DlN. The reduplication of the letters in Heb. always intensifies the meaning (see Bochart, BSerm. Pt.
n., lib. v., c. vi., Ed. Rosen, m., p. 612 88.); if therefbre this be translated red at all, it must be very red, which would be
inconsistent with tV'e previous white. This obvious inconsistency has led the ancient versions into translations represented
by tho somewhat reddiah of the A. V., and frequently to rendering the previous conjunction or. But ae there is no conjunc-
tion at all in the Heb., it seems better to follow the suggestion of Pool, Patrick and others, and understand the word as
meaning very bright, shining, glistening. Comp. the description of leprosy, Ex. iv. 6 ; Num. xii. 10 ; 2 Kings v. 27.
w Vers. 18 (fcis), 20, 23. rHK/, burning ulcer, would perhaps be a better, because a more general word; but boU was
probably understood with sufiQcient latitude.
^ Vers, 23 and 28. [TIK'n fl^lS, niDBil 'S, Kosenmneller, cicatrix ukerie. So all tho ancient versions, and so
Gesenius. So also Ooverdale and Oranmer, and so Kigjrs. Fuerst, however, injlammation.
1' Ver. 24. The margin of the A. V. is better than the text. This paragraph (vers. 24-28) is plainly in relation to lep-
rosy developing from a burn on the skin. So Qesen, Fuerst, Pool, Patrick, etc. So the LXX. and Vulg.
CHAP. XIII. 1— XIV. 57. 108
29, 30 If a man or woman have a plague [spot'] upon the head or the beard ; then
the priest shall see the plague [spot'] : and, behold, if it he in sight deeper than the
skin ; and there be in it a [omit a] yellow thin hair ; then the priest shall pronounce
31 him unclean : it is a dry scall, even a leprosy upon the head or beard. And if the
priest look on the plague [spot'] of the scall, and, behold, it ie not in sight deeper
than the skin, and that there is no black" hair in it ; then the priest shall shut up
him that hath the plague of the scall [shall bind up* the spot' of the scall] seven
32 days : and in the seventh day the priest shall look on the plague"* [spot] ; and, be-
hold, if the scall spread not, and there be iu it no yellow hair, and the scall be not in
33 sight deeper than the skin ; he shall be shaven, but the scall shall he not shave ;
and the priest shall shut up him that hath the scall [shall bind up the scall*] seven
34 days more : and in the seventh day the priest shall look on the scall : and, behold,
if the scall be not spread in the skin, nor be in sight deeper than the skin ; then
the priest shall pronounce him clean : and he shall wash his clothes, and be clean.
35, 36 But if the scall spread much in the skin after his cleansing ; then the priest
shall look on him : and, behold, if the scall be spread in the skin, the priest shall
37 not seek for yellow hair ; he is unclean. But if the scall be in his sight at a stay
and that there is black hair grown up therein ; the scall is healed, he is clean : and
the priest shall pronounce him clean.
38 If a man also or a woman have in the skin of their flesh bright spots, even white
39 bright spots ; then the priest shall look : and, behold, if the bright spots in the
skin of their flesh be darkish [faint^] white ; it zs a freckled spot" that groweth iu
the skin ; he is clean.
40 And the man whose hair is fallen ofl" his head, he is bald f yet is he clean.
41 And he that hath his hair fallen off from the part of his head toward his face, he
42 is forehead bald : yet is he clean. And if there be in the bald head, or bald fore-
head, a white reddish sore [glistening" spot'] ; it is a leprosy sprung up in his bald
43 head, or his bald forehead. Then the priest shall look upon it : and, behold, if
the rising of the sore [spot'] be white reddish [glistening"] in his bald head, or in
44 his bald forehead, as the leprosy appeareth in the skin of the flesh ; he is a leprous
man, he is unclean : the priest shall pronounce him utterly unclean ; his plague
[spot'] is Lq his head.
45 And the leper in whom the plague [spot'] is, his clothes shall be rent, and his
head bare," and he shall put a covering upon his upper lip [his mouthy, and shall
46 cry. Unclean, unclean. All the days wherein the plague [spot'] shall be in him he
shall be defiled : he is unclean : he shall dwell alone [apart'^] ; without the camp
shaU his habitation be.
B.— LEPROSY IN CLOTHING AND LEATHER.
Chaptee XIII. 47-59.
47 The garment also that the plague [spot'] of leprosy is in, whether it be a woollen
48 garment, or a linen garment; whether it be in the warp, or woof; of linen, or of
" Ver. 81. The meaning of iflE'— WacJ iB established. The LXX., yeVmi!, can therefore only be considered as an
emendation of the text, substituting^ahS, and this is followed by Luther, Knobel, Keil, Murphy and others; it is, how-
ever, sustained by no other ancient version nor by any MS., and the change in the LXX. must be considered as simply an
effort to avoid a difBoulty. Keil and Clark propose, as a less desirable alternative, the omission of the negative particle.
There is, however, no real difficulty in the text as it stands. See Ilxegesis.
« Ver. 32. The Sam. here substitutes pjlj, scall, for j;j3, spofc
« Ver. 39. pna, a word oir. \4y. according to Gesen. a harmless eruption of a whitish color which appears on ths
dark skin of the Arabs, and is still called by the same name.
» Ver. 40. nip, used here apparently for the back of the head in contradistinction to n3J> the frm', which occurs
only here (but its derivative, nn3il. is found Ters. 42 Wt, 43 and 55). niB, however, is elsewhere baldness in general.
Comp. Deut. xiv. 1.
" Ver. 45. Comp. Textual Note 6 on x. 6.
^ Ver. 45. Dijfc^. There is some doubt as to the true meaning. It is translated leard in the A. V., 2 Sam. xix. 24
(25), and so Fuerst^and Gesenius would render it hero, guided by the etymology. All the ancient versions, however, trans-
late it either mmA or lipe, and a word etymologlcally signifying Imri (or rather the tprcmting place of haw) wouia easuy
come to have this sense in use. It is a different word from the |pT=6mrd of ver. 29.
« Ver. 46. nn3. The aUme of the A. V. would ordinarily be a good enough translation, but is liable to be misundep
rtood. The leper was simply to dwell apart from the clean Israelites, but might and did live with other lepers.
22
106 LEVITICUS.
49 woollen ; whether in a skin, or in anything made of skin ; and if the plague [spot']
be greenish or reddish [very green or very red"*] in the garment, or in the skin,
either in the warp, or in the woof, or in anything of skin ; it ts a plague [spot'] of
50 leprosy, and shall be shewed unto the priest : and the priest shall look upon the
plague, and shut up it that hath the plague [spot,' and bind up* the spot'] seven
51 days : and he shall look on the plague [spot'] on the seventh day : if the plague
[spot'] be spread in the garment, either in the warp, or in the woof, or in a skm,
or in any work that is made of skin ; the plague [spot'] is a fretting leprosy ; it is
52 unclean. He shall therefore burn that garment, whether warp or woof^ in woollen
or in linen, or anything of skin, wherein the plague [spot'] is : for it is a fretting
53 leprosy ; it shall be burnt in the fire. And if the priest shall look, and, behold,
the plague [spot'] be not spread in the garment, either in the warp, or in the woof,
54 or in anything of skin ; then the priest shall command that they wash the thing
55 wherein the plague [spot'] is, and he shall shut [bind*] it up seven days more: and
the priest shall look on the plague [spot'], after that it is washed : and, behold, if
the plague [spot'] have not changed his color, and the plague [spot'] be not spread;
it is unclean ; thou shalt burn it in the fire ; it is fret inward, whether it be bare
56 within or without.'® And if the priest look, and, behold, the plague be somewhat
dark [the spot' be somewhat faint'] after the washing of it; then he shall rend it
57 out of the garment, or out of the skin, or out of the warp, or out of the woof: and
if it appear still in the garment, either in the warp, or in the woof, or in anything
of skin ; it is a spreading /iZaf^we [omit a and plaguel ; thou shalt bum that wherein
58 the plague [spot'] is, with fire. And the garment, either warp, or woof, or what-
soever thing of skin it he, which thou shalt wash, if the plague [spot'] be departed
from them, then it shall be washed the second time, and shall be clean.
59 This is the law of the plague [spot'] of leprosy in a garment of woollen or linen,
either in the warp, or woof, or anything of skins, to pronounce it clean, or to pro-
nounce it unclean.
C— CLEANSING AND EESTOEATION OF A LEPER.
Chapter XIV. 1-32.
1, 2 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, This shall be the law of the
3 leper in the day of his cleansing: He shall be brought unto the priest: and
the priest shall go forth out of the camp; and the priest shall look, and, behold, if
4 the plague [spot'] of leprosy be healed in the leper ; then shall the priest command
to take™ for him that is to be cleansed two birds'" alive and clean, and cedar wood
5 and scarlet, and hyssop : and the priest shall command that on« of the birds be
6 killed in an earthen vessel over running [living^] water : as for'' the living bird,
he shall take it, and the cedar wood, and the scarlet, and the hyssop, and shall dip
them and the living bird in the blood of the bird thai was killed over the running
7 [living^] water : and he shall sprinkle upon him that is to be cleansed from the
leprosy seven times, and shall pronounce him clean, and shall let the living bird
8 loose into the open fields. And he that is to be cleansed shall wash his clothes,
and shave off all his hair, and wash [bathe™] himself in water, that he may be
M Ver. 49. piniV The reduplication of the letters intensifies the meaning. Comp. note « on ver. 19. nOTmN,
too, as noted above, may here mean either very red, or, as before, glistening. There is so little knowledge abont the fact
that neither of them can be certainly decided upon; but as in this case we have the di^unctive (as also in xiv. 37), it seeiM
more probable that two distinct colors were intended.
25 Ver 66. The margin of the A. T. gives the literal rendering of the Heb. baU in the head thereof, or tn the forelmd
thereof, andHthere can be no donbt that these are terms figuratively applied to the cloth or skin for the right and wrong
side, as in the text.
2» Chap. XIV. Ver. 4. The Sam,, LXX. and Syr. here read the verb in the plnral, expressing the Miillment of tkB
command.
w Ver. 4. The margin of the A. V. reads sparrima, for which there seems to be no other authority than the Tulg. The
Heb. does not define the kind of bird at all.
28 Ver. 6. Better, living water, which is the exact rendering of the Heb. Ordinarily living water is a figure for running
water; but here the water is contained in a vessel, and had therefore simply been filled from a spring or running stream.
29 Ver. 6. nS. The conjunction which seems to be needed at the beginning of this verse is supplied in the Sam. and
* ^^' ''"'"' '° """■'"I! '" Heb. answering to the aefor of the A. V.
«> Ver. 8. I'nT is applied only to the washing of the surface of objects which water will not penetrate. Comp.l.9|
13 ; ix. 14, etc. It is a different word from 033 of the previous clause, which is used of a more thorough washing or fi^
CHAP. XIII. 1— XIV. 57. 107
clean : and after that he shall come into the camp, and shall tarry abroad out of
his tent seven days.
9 But it shall be on the seventh day, that he shall shave all his hair oif his head
• and his beard and his eyebrows, even all his hair he shall shave off: and he shall
■wash his clothes, also he shall wash [bathe™] his flesh in water, and he shall be
clean.
10 And on the eighth day he shall take two he lambs [two young rams'^] without
blemish, and one ewe lamb of the first year without blemish, and three tenth deals
of fine flour /or a meat offering [an oblation'^], mingled with oil, and one log of oil.
11 And the priest that maketh him clean shall present the man that is to be made
clean, and those things, before the Lord, at the door of the tabernacle of the con-
12 gregation : and the priest shall take one he lamb [ram"], and offer him for a tres-
pass offering, and the log of oil, and wave them /or a wave offering before the Loed :
13 and he'' shall slay the lamb [ram"] in the place where he'' shall kill the. sin offer-
ing and the burnt offering, in the holy place: for as the sin offering is. the priest's,
11 so is"* the trespass offering: it is most holy: and the priest shall take smne of the
blood of the trespass offering, and the priest shall put it upon the tip of the right
ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon
15 the great toe of his right foot : and the priest shall take some of the log of oil, and
16 pour it into the palm of his own left hand : and the priest shall dip his right finger
in the oil that is Ln his left hand, and shall sprinkle of the oil with his finger seven
17 times before the Loed : and of the rest of the oil that is in his hand shall the priest
put upon the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the thumb
of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot, upon the blood'' of the
18 trespass offering: and the remnant of" the oil that is in the priest's hand he shall
pour [put"] upon the head of him that is to be cleansed : and the priest shall make
19 an atonement for him before the Lord. And the priest shall offer the sin offering,
and make an atonement for him that is to be cleansed from his uncleauness ; and
20 afterward he shall kill the burnt offering : and the priest shall offer the burnt
offering and the meat offering [oblation'^] upon the altar :" and the priest shall
make an atonement for him, and he shall be clean.
21 And if he he poor, and cannot get so much : then he shall take one lamb [ram"]
jar a trespass offering to be waved, to make an atonement for him, and one tenth
22 deal of fine flour mingled with oil for a meat offering, and a log of oil ; and two
turtle doves, or two young pigeons, such as he is able to get ; and the one shall be
23 a sin offering, and the other a burnt offering. And he shall bring them on the
eighth day for [of] his cleansing unto the priest, unto the door of the tabernacle
24 of the congregation, before the Lord. And the priest shall take the lamb [ram"]
of the trespass offering, and the log of oil, and the priest shall wave them for a
25 wave offering before the Lord : and he shall kill the lamb [ram"] of the trespass
offering, and the priest shall take some of the blood of the trespass offering, and
put it upon the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the
ing. The English is unable in all cases to preserve the distinction ; but it should be done as &.r as possible, and yXV^ is
frequently translated bathr. in the following chapter (xv. S, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 18, 21, 22, 27) and elsewhere.
31 Ver. 10. D^ty33~''Jty. See Textual Note 6 on ill. 7. The age is not exactly specified in the Heb.; but the Sam.
and LXX. add ofihefirfit year, as in the following clause.
» Ver. 10. See Textual Note ' on il. 1.
" Ver. 12. The Sam. and LXX. have the plural. Probably the sing, of the Heb. is not intended to have the priest for
its DominatiTe, but to be impersonal.
" Ver. 13. One MS., the Sam , LXX. and Vulg. supply the particle of comparison, 3.
" Ver. 17. Two MSS., the LXX. and Vulg. here resid, as the Heb. in ver. 28, upon the plaee of the blood.
" Ver 18. For }DE?3 three MSS. and the Syr. read jaEJrTJO, as in ver. 16. On this use of 2, however, see Puerst,
Lex. -3, 3, 6. y. Qe'se'n. Lex. A. 2.
" Ver. 18. [fl' is better translated put, both as more agreeable to the meaning of the word itself; and because the oil
remaining in the left hand could hardly eulHce for pouring.
" Ver. 20. The Sam. and LXX. add 6c/ore the Lord.
" Ter. 23. The preposition is here so liable to be misunderstood that it is better to change it. It has roference to the
eighth day appointed for his cleansing (as the Vulg.), not to the sacrifices for his cleansing (as the LXX). So Geddes and
Boothroyd. In ver. 10 the diflBculty does not occur.
108 LEVITICUS.
■26 thuinb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot: and the priest
27 shall pour of the oil into the palm of his own*" left hand : and the priest shall
sprinkle with his right finger some of the oil that ,is in his left hand seven times
28 before the Loed: and the priest shall put of the oil that m in his hand upon the
tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the thumb of his right
hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot, upon the place of the blood of the
29 trespass offering : and the rest of" the oil that is in the priest's hand he shall put
upon the head of him that is to be cleansed, to make an atonement for him before
30 the Lord. And he shall offer the one of the turtle doves, or of the young pigeons,
51 such as he can get ; even such as he is able to get, the one for a sin offering, and
the other Jar a burnt offering, with the meat offering : and the priest shaU make
an atonement for him that is to be cleansed before the Lokd
32 This is the law of him in whom is the plague [spot'] of leprosy, whose hand is
not able to get that which pertaineth to his cleansing.
D.— LEPROSY IN A HOUSE.
Chapter XIV. 33-53.
33, 34 And the Loed spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying. When ye be come
into the land of Canaan, which I give to you for a possession, and I put the plague
35 fspof] of leprosy in a house of the land of your possession ; and he that owneth
the house shall come and tell the priest, saying. It seemeth to me there is as it were
36 a plague [spot'] in the house : then the priest shall command that they empty the
house, before the priest go into it to see the plague [spot'], that all that is in the
house be not made unclean : and afterward the priest shall go in to see the house :
37 and he shall look on the plague [spot'], and, behold, if the plague [spot'] be in the
walls of the house with hollow strakes,^^ greenish or reddish [very green or very
38 red**], which in sight are lower than the wall ; then the priest shall go out of the
39 house to the door of the house, and shut up the house seven days : and the priest
shall come again the seventh day, and shall look : and, behold, if the plague [spot']
40 be spread in the walls of the house ; then the priest shall command that they take
away the stones in which the plague [spot'] is, and they shall cast them into an
41 unclean place without the city : and he" shall cause the house to be scraped within
round about, and they shall pour out the dust that they scrape off without the city
42 into an unclean place : and they shall take other stones, and put them in the place
of those stones ; and he^ shall take other mortar, and shall plaister the house.
43 And if the plague [spot'] come again, and break out in the house, after that he**
hath taken away the stones, and after he hath scraped the house, and after it is
44 plaistered ; then the priest shall come and look, and, behold, if the plague [spot']
45 be spread in the house, it is a fretting leprosy in the house : it is unclean. And
he" shall break down the house, the stones of it, and the timber thereof, and all
the mortar of the house ; and he" shall carry them forth out of the city into an
46 unclean place. Moreover he that goeth into the house all the while that it is shut
47 up shall be unclean until the even. And he that lieth in the house shall wash his
clothes ; and he that eateth in the house shall wash his clothes.''*
48 And if the priest shall come in, and look upon it, and, behold, the plague [spot']
hath not spread in the house, after the house was plaistered : then the priest shall
49 pronounce the house clean, because the plague [spot'] is healed. And he shall take
60 to cleanse the house two birds, and cedar wood, and scarlet, and hyssop : and he
*> Ver. 26. |n2n ^3~7i^. an expression understood by Houbigant to mean tbat one priest Bhonld pour into the
hand of another; the sense given in the A. V. following the Vulg. is, however, doubtless correct.
« Ver. 29. The Sam. here reverses its change of reading in ver. 18, and has 3 for TO-
•2 Ver. 36. n'in|>ptjf, a word iir. k^y., but its meaning sufBoientlywell ascertained. The A. T. follows the IXX,
Chald. and Vulg., and the same sense is given by Rosenm., Fuerst and Qesen, though by each with a different etymology.
ffl Ver. 3T. See Notes is on xiii. 19, and !» on ver. 49.
« Ver. 41. All the ancient versions except the Yulg. chanee the causative form of the verb to the plural, as the fbllow-
Ing verb is plural. Also in vers. 42, 43, 45, 49, thoy have the plural.
^ Ver. 47. The LXX. here adds, what is of course implied, and be unclean until the even.
CHAP. XIII. 1— XIV. 57.
lOft
51 shall kill the one of the birds in an earthen vessel over running water : and he shall
take the cedar wood, and the hyssop, and the scarlet, and the living bird, and dip
them in the blood of the slain bird, and*' in the running [living'*] water, and sprin-
52 kle the house seven times : and he shall cleanse the house with the blood of the bird„
and with the running [living"] water, and with the living bird, and with the cedar
53 wood, and with the hyssop, and with the scarlet: but he shall let go the living bird
out of the city into the open fields, and make an atonement for tha house: and it,
shall be clean.
E. — CONCLUSION.
Chap. XIV. 54-57.
54, 55 This is the law for all manner of plague [spot^] of leprosy, and scall, and for
56 the leprosy of a garment, and of a house, and for a rising, and for a scab, and for a.
57 bright spot : to teach when it is unclean, and when it is clean : this i& the law of
leprosy.
^ Ter. 51. The LXX. has dip (hem in the blood of the bird that has been MUed over the living waiep'^ and tbds^ ia- doubtless;
the semie of the text.
EXEQETICAL AND CRITICAL.
A. The Examination and its result.
The indications of the disease. Vers. 1-8.
Ver. 1. This commuuieatiou is addressed to
Moses and Aaron conjointly because it requires
examinations and determinations entrusted to the
priests.
Vers. 2-8. The first case, of symptoms like lep-
rosy. Ver. 2. Man is of course used generically
for a person of either sex. No stress is to be
laid upon the fact that the expression skin of
his flesh is found only in this chapter ; for the
word skin occurs here nearly as often as in all
the rest of the Scripture put together, and very
similar expressions do occur elsewhere, e. g. Ex.
xxxiv. 29, 30, 35, " the skin of his face," and
the skin is often spoken of as covering the flesh,
t. g. Ezek. xxxvii. 6, 8, etc. — A rising, a scab,
or a bright spot, are different indications of
incipient leprosy; the disease itself was more
deeply seated, but it betrayed itself, as it does
still, by these marks. The last two terms are
only used in connection with this disease, and
the first is only elsewhere used figuratively of
dignity or excellency. " The name leprosy
^IJJ^X is derived from i'^S = to strike down, to
itrike to the ground: the leper is he who has been
smitten by God." Lange. For the examination
of the leper one of the ordinary priests was suf-
ficient as well as the high-priest ; the Talmudists
assert that priests debarred by physical imper-
fection from ministering at the altar were com-
petent to the examination of lepers. The priests
were expected, if occasion required, to consult
with experts, but the formal sentence rested with
them alone.
Ver. 3. These marks, however, might exist
without having been caused by leprosy. Two
distinguishing characteristics are now men-
tioned, and if both these concurred, there could
be no doubt about the case — the priest was at
once to pronounce him unclean ; (a) if the
hair growing upon the spot had turned white.
The hair of the Israelites was normally black ;
if it had turned -white upon the spot it be-
trayed a cause at work beneath the surface of
the skin, (b) If the spot was in appearance'
deeper than the skin. " These signs are re-
cognized by modern observers (e. g: Hensler) j
and among the Arabs leprosy is regarded as cu-
rable if the hair remains black upon the whita
spots, but incurable if it becomes whitish in co-
lor." Keil. Judgment was of course required in
the application of the second test ; but if the in-
dications were clear, the case was decided, and.
the duty of the priest was to declare the exist-
ing fact.
Vers. 4r-8. The determination of cases in which
the indications are not decisive. First, vers. 4-
6, the case in which the suspicion of leprosy
should prove unfounded. If there were suspi-
cious looking spots, but yet they appeared on,
examination to be merely superficial, and thera
was no change in the color of the hair growing
in them, either of two things might be possible :
the spots might be the effect of true leprosy not
yet sufficiently developed to give decisive indi-
cations : or they might be a mere eruption upon
the skin, of no importance. To ascertain which
of these was the fact, the priest was to bind up
the spot seven days. — At the end of that time
a second examination was to be made ; if then
the indications were favorable, the same process
was to be repeated. If at the end of this time
the indications were still favorable, and espe-
cially if the suspicious spot had become faint,
tending to disappear, the priest was to pro-
nounce the man clean. Yet still the very suspi-
cion, unfounded as it proved to be, had brought
some semblance of a taint upon the man, and he
must wash his clothes. These two periods
of seven days each are usually looked upon as
periods of a sort of quarantine, during which the
man himself was to be secluded, and this view
has been incorporated into the A. V. here and
throughout these chapters. It is not, however,
required by the Hebrew, and in view of the great
hardship it would impose upon those who were
in reality entirely free from the disease, it seems
more likely that the simple rendering of the He-
brew gives the true sense. The extreme slow-
ness with which leprosy is oftentimes developed
has been considered a difficulty in the way of a
determination in reality, in so short a time ;
110
liEVITICUS.
howeyer, the two things are not at all incompa-
tible. A fortnight was quite long enough to de-
termine the character of any ordinary eruption ;
if it was none of these, and yet possessed the
characteristics of leprosy, then it must be de-
cided to be leprosy, although months or years
might pass before the disease showed much fur-
ther progress. Vers. 7, 8, however, show that
even the leprous spots themselves did not re-
main quite unchanged during this time. On the
second exairinatioa the priest could ascertain if
the spots had begun to spread. If not, the dis-
ease, although it might possibly already exist,
was not pronounced ; but if they had spread, all
doubt iwas at an end; the priest shall pro-
nouHce him unclean. Anoiher view is taken
of ver. 7. Rosenmiiller says that in the word
imnt37 the 7 is to be taken for poaiguam as in
tt:t: :
Ex. xix. 1 ; Num. i. 1 ; 1 Kings iii. 18 ; this
sense is followed in the Vulg. and Luther, and
adopted by Vatablus, Patrick, and other com-
mentators. According to this the law would re-
late to the breaking out of the leprosy afresh at
some time after he had been pronounced clean
by the priest. The translation of the A. V.,
however, which is here followed, seems more ex-
actly the sense of the Hebrew.
Vers. 9-11. The second case is one in which
ulceration has already begun. Either it is a
long-standing case in which the command for
inspection has been neglected, or else one in
which sentence of cleanness has been pronounced
on insufficient grounds. With the appearance
of a mark of raw flesh in the rising, in com-
bination with the other indications, all doubt
was removed ; it must be an old leprosy, and
the priest shall at once pronounce him un-
clean.
Vers. 12-17. The third case is looked upon ac-
cording to differing medical views, either as a
different disease, the lepra vulgaris, which
"scarcely affects the general health, and for the
most part disappears of itself, though it often
lasts foryears " (Clark) ; or as a case of the true
leprosy in which " the breaking out of the lep-
rous matter in this complete and rapid way upon
the surface of the whole body was the crisis of
the disease ; the diseased matter turned into a
scurf, which died away and then fell off" (Keil).
Patrick compares it to the eruptions in measles
and small pox, when there is safety in their full
development. The suspected person thus either
had a harmless disease, or he had had the leprosy
and was cured. In either case sentence of clean-
ness was to be pronounced. But (vers. 14, 15)
if ulceration appeared (it would seem either at
the moment or afterwards) he was at once to be
declared unclean. This ulceration, however,
might proceed from some other cause ; therefore,
although the man must be declared unclean in
view of so suspicious an indication, yet if it af-
terwards passed away, the sentence might be
reversed, and the man pronounced clean without
further investigation.
Vers. 18-23. The fourth case is that of a sus-
pected leprosy arising from an abscess or boil
which had been healed. Such disturbed condi-
tions of the surface were peculiarly apt to be-
come the seat of disease. The indications are
much the same as in the other cases, the tertnrj
first mentioned here being equally applicable to
the others. Reliance is again placed (ver. 20)
upon the depth of the spot and the change in tlie
color of the hair. If these indications were clear,
as in ver. 8, the priest should at once pronounce
the man unclean ; if they were doubtful, he was
to proceed as in ver. 4, and be guided by the re-
sult of a second examination at the end of seven
days. In such a case a single interval of a week
appears to have been sufficient, and no further
examination is provided for. After one week it
could be certainly determined whether it was
merely the soar of the ulcer, or whether leprosy
had really broken out in it.
Vers. 24-28. The fifth case is that of suspected
leprosy developing from a burn, another of those
injuries favorable for the development of the
disease. The indications and the procedure are
precisely the same as before. In ver. 26 the A.
V. has inserted the word other unfortunately.
Vers. 29-37. The case of leprosy suspected in
an eruption upon the hairy part of the head, or
upon the beard. Although this is spoken ex-
pressly in regard to both men and women, yet
the indications are so dependent upon hair th.it
it is not proper to substitute here chin for beard,
as is done by Keil. The word used [pi is a dif-
ferent one from the OSW of ver. 45, which is
T T
often translated beard; the Ancient Versions,
however, give beardhere, and either mouth or Upi
there. Pliny (JVat. Hist. lib. xxvi. 1) speaks of
such a disease imported into Italy from Asia in
the reign of Tiberius, neither painful nor fatal,
" yet any death preferable to it." In ver. 30
the A. V. has unnecessarily modified the symp-
toms by inserting the indefinite article before
yellOTW thin hair. The word 1J>^ is collec-
tive, as in ver. 3, and freq. In this form of the
disease the natural hair seems to have been sup-
planted by thin, yellcw (in^ ^golden, shining)
hair. This is declared to be pHJ, translated in
the A. V. dry scall, and immediately explained
as a leprosy upon the head or beard. The
word occurs only in these chapters. The indi-
cations given in vers. 29, 30, were not absolutely
decisive. It would seem from ver. 31, that in
the coming on, of true leprosy the effect upon the
hair was only gradually produced, part of the
hair remaining for a time of its natural color ;
while in the case of other harmless cutaneous
eruptions, of more rapid progress, all the hair
on the affected spot was speedily changed. Hence
the entire absence of black hair at the first was
a favorable symptom. In this view the text is
consistent enough with itself as it stands, and
Keil is wrong in saying " there is certainly an
error in the text." In case of this favorable
symptom the priest should bind up the spot for
two periods of a week, making a further exami-
nation at the end of each of them. The favo-
rable indications were that the spot did not
spread, did not appear to be deep-seated, and the
yellow hair disappeared. If this was the case
at the eud of the first period, the person was to
be shaven with the exception of the spot, and at
the end of the second pronounced clean, and to
wash his clothes.— If, however, (vers. 36, 36)
CHAP. Xlir. 1— XIV. 57.
Ill
the trouble afterwards spread, the person was to
be again examined by the priest, and being sa-
tisfied of this single fact, the priest must pro-
nounoe him unclean. Tet if this spreading was
only temporary, he might finally be pronounced
clean (ver. 37) provided the natural hair grew
again in the spot.
Vers. 38, 39. This is the case of a harmless
eruption in the skin termed pri3, LXX. d^^df.
It is still known among the Arabs and called by
the same name, bohak. " It is an eruption upon
the skin, appearing in somewhat elevated spots
or rings of unequal sizes and a pale white color,
which do not change the hair; it causes no in-
convenience, and lasts from two months to two
years." Keil. It is placed here, because it
might be, without proper examination, mistaken
for leprosy, and its appearance was probably
most nearly assimilated to the symptoms last
mentioned. The sufi'erer by it was at once dis-
charged as clean, without further ceremony.
Vers. 40-44. The baldness of the head, whether
on the front or back, constitutes no uncleanness ;
yet leprosy might be developed in the bald parts,
and then was to be dealt with as in other cases.
The reason for speaking of baldness at all in this
eonneotiou is probably that the color of the hair
has been made of so much importance in deter-
mining the symptoms of leprosy, that the legis-
lator would cut off all opportunity for cavil in
suspected cases.
Vers. 45, 46. The law for the pronounced
leper. The leper was in the first place to put on
the signs of mourning (comp. Ezek. xxiv. 17, 22),
some say "for himself as one over whom death
had already gained the victory " (Clark) ; but it
may have been merely as a mark of great afflic-
tion, and some of the signs were also signs of
shame (comp. Mic. iii. 7). And shall cry.
Unclean, unclean, as a warning to any passers
by. This command is not, as sometimes asserted,
to guard against the danger of communicating
the disease ; but rather to avoid making others
ceremonially unclean by contact with a leper.
The Kabbins carried this sort of defilement so
far as to assert that " by merely entering a
house, a leper polluted everything without it."
(Mkhna, Kelim i. 4; Negaim xiii. 11, as cited by
Keil). All the days. — The law constantly
keeps in view the possibility of the recovery of
the leper; but it is uncertain whether this indi-
cates that the true leprosy was then less incura-
ble than now, or whether it has regard to the
possibility of error in the determination of the
disease. In either case, while the symptoms
continued for which he had been pronounced
uncleao, and until by the same authority he was
again formally declared clean (xiv. 1-32), he
was to dwell apart ; without the camp.
Comp. Num. v. 2-4; xii. 14, 15; 2 Ki. xv. 5;
Lk. xvii. 12. The Jews say that there were three
camps from all of which the leper was excluded :
that of God (the tabernacle), that of the Levites,
and that of Israel. After the settlement in the
Holy Laud the camp was considered in this, as
in other commands, to be represented by the
walled city. Yet after the erection of syna-
gogues lepers were allowed to enter a particular
part of them set apart for their use, (Mishna
itbi tupra).
B. Leprosy in clothing and Leather, xiii.
47-69.
Only three materials for clothing are here
mentioned: wool, linen, and skins. The two
former were the usual materials among the an-
cient Egyptians and Greeks, and only these are
mentioned Deut. xxii. 11; Prov. xxxi. 13; Hos.
ii. 9. It is a dispute among the Talmudisis
whether garments of camel's hair are included
or not. Woolen and linen were forbidden by the
law (xix. 19) to be mixed in the same garment.
On the nature of the leprosy here described,
see the preliminary note to this chapter.
Ver. 48. Whether it be in the warp or
woof has occasioned much unnecessary per-
plexity on account of the supposed difficulty in
one of these remaining unaffected in the cloth
by any disintegration occurring in the other;
and Keil would translate " the flax and the wool ;"
Clark, De Wette, Knobel and others, (with whom
Keil also seems to concur) explain it of i/arn
prepared for warp and j/arn prepared for woof.
There is really however, no difficulty in the mat-
ter, if the trouble is supposed to arise from some
original fault in the material or in the processes
of its preparation. Whichever was made of such
material would first show the defect, and it could
be seen in the cloth that the trouble arose from
either the warp or the woof, a,i the case might
be. The same sort of thing is sometimes ob-
served in cloth now when the proper proportion
has not been observed between the strength of
the two kinds of thread, so that the cloth will
tear with undue ease in one direction but not in
the other ; or when, in cloth woven of different
colors, one set of threads has been injured in the
dyeing. A distinction is made between a skin
and any thing made of skin. The former
were whole skins, as sheep skins dressed with
the wool on for a sort of cloak for the poor, or
for mats, etc., and also made into leather for
bottles and other uses; the latter the endless
variety of smaller articles made of leather. Ver.
49. A strong green or red spot was prima facie
evidence of leprosy, and subjected that in which
it appeared to priestly examination. According
to Maimonides (cited by Patrick) the spot must
be " as broad as a bean," and if smaller than
this was of no consequence. Ver. 50. Bind up
the spot. — Here as in ver. 4, etc., the usual in-
terpretation is that of the A. V., shut up it that
hath the spot; but the Hebrew in all these places
only means necessarily the binding up of the
spot itself, not a sort of quarantine upon the
person or thing on which it is. See Textual note
4. In this case there is not the same hardship
involved in the other rendering as in the case
of the human subject; but still the rendering is
objectionable as implying much more strongly
than the law itself the idea of contagiousness.
Vers. 51-58 describe the appearances by which
the priest must determine whether the suspicious
spots were really leprosy or not. These turn
upon whether the spot increased. If it did, then
he was at once to burn that garment. The
expresssion in vers. 52, and 58, whether vyarp
or woof, ami in ver. 56 out of the warp or
out of the Tvoof is to be understood of the:
cloth in whichtbe disease has appeared in either-
the warp or the woof. Fretting, vers. 53, 5i
112
LEVITICUS.
(Bochart, lepra exasperata), is equivalent to cor-
roding. If however, the spot had not increased
at the examination made at the end of a week,
the suspected article was to be washed and the
process repeated. If at the end of another week
after the washing there was no change in the
color of the spot, the thing was to be condemned
and burned, although there was no apparent
spreading. In such case it is fret in^ward,
i. e., the material itself was faulty and unfit for
use. Whether it be bare within or -with-
out; lit. bald in the head thereof, or in the
forehead thereof, (Margin A. V. See Texual
note 20). As the disease itself is figuratively
named from its resemblance to the human lep-
rosy, so these terms are used in the same way,
and are generally considered to mean the right
or the wrong side of the cloth or skin. On the
other hand, if at the end of the week after the
washing the spot had become less distinct (ver.
56), it was to be torn out of the garment or skin.
If it reappeared (ver. 57) the thing was to be
burned ; but otherwise (ver. 58) to be washed a
second time and then pronounced clean. Ver.
59 is simply the usual conclusion, stating that
the forpgoing is the law for the cases specified.
C. Cleansing and restoration of the leper,
xiv. 1-32.
This communication was addressed to Moses
alone, because there were no questions to be
determined by priestly examination ; it simply
directs what is to be dene in the case of a per-
son already pronounced clean by the priest.
Vers. 1-20 prescribe the normal course, vers.
21-31 allow certain modifications for the poor,
and ver. 82 is the conclusion.
A new Proper Lesson of the law begins here,
and extends to the close of the following chap-
ter; the parallel lesson from the prophets is
2 Ki. vii. 3-20, containing the account brought
into Samaria by the four lepers of the flight of
the besieging army of the Syrians.
Lange : " o. The theooratico-political atone-
ment, or the taking again of the person pro-
nounced clean into the camp, i. e., into the con-
gregation of the people. Hence this first act
of atonement took place without the camp (later,
before the gate of the city). The leper was to
be represented by two birds, living and clean.
They must be wild birds, since the tame turtle
doves or the young pigeons would not have flown
away when released. Since these birds repre-
sent the maximum of free motion, we may cer-
tainly find this thought indicated : want of free
motion was a chief cause of the leprosy." [This
inference, however, it is to be remembered, is
only an inference, not a, part of the law which
carefully abstains from any mention of the
causes]. "One of these birds was slain over a
vessel in which there was already some fresh
spring or river water. It is not to be understood
that in this the purification by water was indi-
cated together with the atoning blood, since the
washing follows farther on ; on the contrary, in
the fresh water the thought of living motion is
again brought out. The blood of the slain bird
dropped into this water ; the few drops of blood,
in and of themselves, would not suffice for the
sprinkling. Nevertheless also, the blood of the
slain bird considered as typically sick, through
death became fresh again in its signification.
The living bird, which was to remain alive, was
dipped in the augmented blood of the dead bird.
But very note-worthy are the allegorical accom-
paniments which jointly serve to illustrate the
living bird, and were therefore dipped with it in
the blood ; a piece of cedar wood, as a symbol
of the endurance of life ; a piece of scarlet, as a
symbol of the frrshness of life; some hyssop, as a
symbol of the purity of life through constant puri-
fications of life." (See Keil, p. 106, [trans., p.
385 ».]). After the living bird with these accom-
paniments had been dipped in the blood, the
person to be cleansed was sprinkled seven times
with this blood. No further mention is made of
the dead bird, since its flesh was not a sacrifice;
but the living bird, hallowed by the blood of the
dead, is set free. We may rightly see in the
two birds the double position of the leper in his
leprosy; in the slain bird he appears as he had
fallen into death ; in the one that is set free,
on the contrary, he appears as by God's mercy
he is recovered to unrestrained motion. But we
might also in this contrast find the thought, that
the leprosy, as it falls upon one part of the com-
munity, keeps the other part all the more free ;
or, that health and disease are separated as
opposite poles in regard to the comoQon national
life. In any case, it is a fact that, in regions
where Cretinism prevails, which is analogous to
leprosy, the freshest and strongest forms occur
near the sick. Meanwhile, the person sprinkled
with the blood must complete this purification in
several ways: first, by washing his clothes;
secondly, by cutting oflF all his hair from his
whole body, (whether also his eyebrows and
eyelashes ?) ; thirdly, by bathing himself. Then
he might go into the camp, but must yet add
seven days more on the outside of his tent.
Why ? Keil answers with the Ohaldee et tion
accedat ad latus uxorvs suse. But the law would
not have been too modest to say so. With this
is to be noticed that this same direction is
applied to several analogous cases. He who is
healed of a running issue, must wait seven days
after the recognition of his healing before he can
bring his sacrifice (xv. 13). The same applies
to the woman with an issue of blood (i6. 28). So
too, for the Nazarite in whose presence a man
had died (Num. vi. 10). Particularly weighty
is the direction of the seven days' waiting
which, according to viii. 36, must introduce the
final consecration of the priests. We cannot say
that during these seven days the priest was yet
unclean; but he had not indeed become fully
clean for the service of the priesthood. When
we look back at the ordinance of the second
seven days in reference to one who has been
recognijed as clean — the leprous man, or gar-
ment, or house, — there appears a distinction of
cleanness of a first and second grade, a negative
and a positive cleanness, which latter was a kind
of priestly consecration. Every Israelite, in his
degree should have this priestly consecration ;
but espeeially near to it stood the Nazarite, and
next to him we place the cleansed leper. In tUo
new covenant, the highly favored sinner sti-nd-s
higher than the Christian of less experience of
salvation ; the son, who was lost and found,
higher than tlie elder brother ; Mary Magdalene
CHAP. XIII. 1— XIV. 57.
118
Higher than a, oommon maiden." [It must be
always borne in mind, however, that this supe-
riority does not rest upon any advantage in
having sinned, but upon the earnestness of love
on the part of him who has been forgiven. See
Lk. vii. 47. F. G.]. "This fact appears to have
been typically represented in the Old Testament
by the restoration of the cleansed leper to the
worship of the congregation." [It was repre-
sented, that is to say, in the very full ceremonies
and sacrifices accompanying the restoration, but
not in any higher position of the cleansed leper
after his restoration was accomplished. — F. 6.].
" 4. The theooratico-religious atonement. The
offering obligatory upon the leper was very ex-
tensive ; two he-lambs, one ewe-lamb, three tenth
parts of wheaten flour mingled with oil, and a
log of oil. The trespass offering formed the be-
ginning of the offering, for the leper has by the
connection with his people come into its guilt."
[Nevertheless, it is hard to see how this could
nave been the reason, when the leper had been
absolutely separated from his people, and was
now to be restored to his connection with them.
But see under ver. 12.— F. G.]. " The blood of
this trespass offering was first treated like the
blood of the trespass offering of the priest; it
was put on the tip of the right ear, on the thumb
of the right hand, and on the thumb or great toe
of the right foot, all with the same meaning as
in the consecration of the priests. In addition
to this, the oil comes into use, which indeed, as
being common oil, is different from the anointing
oil of the priests, but is still a symbol of the
Spiritual life. With this oil in minute measure,
the priest, with a finger of his right hand dipped
in the oil which had been poured into the hollow
of the left, executed a seven-fold sprinkling be-
fore the Lord, i. e., towards the sanctuary. Then,
with the rest of the oil, the three parts of the
body were anointed which had been smeared
with the blood of the trespass offering. The
blood baptism preceded, as the negative conse-
cration ; the oil baptism must follow, as the po-
sitive atonement. The head of the leper was
also anointed with the oil. He was thus to be
made a man of the Spirit in each way, by his
tribulation, and his deliverance. Then followed
the sin offering, for which, in accordance with
iv. 28, 32, the ewe-lamb was to be used. In this
place the addition is made : he shall make an
atonement for him that is to be cleansed
[xiv. 31]. Plainly his sin is assumed in this to
be individual guilt, in contradistinction from his
share in the common guilt. It is rightly pre-
supposed that the leprosy in each one stands in
connection with his individual sinfulness; how-
ever light, it has for its result, sins of ill-will,
of bitterness, of impatience, of self-forgetfulness,
of prejudice toward the community. Now first can
the presentation of the burnt offering follow, with
the other he-lamb, and with the meat offering."
" The ordinance may be modified in case the
person to be purified is poor. The direction for
the sacrifice itself is indeed almost analogous to
the direction in the case of the poor woman in
child-birth; only here the lamb for the trespass
offering, the tenth deal of wheaten flour sprin-
kled with oil for a meat offering, and the log of
oil for anointing, could not be dispensed with by
the bringing of two doves or young pigeons.
Moreover, the trespass offering, as well as the
oil, is directed to be made a wave-offering before
Jehovah. It is the same ritual as the wave or
the consecration offering at the consecration of
the priests (viii. 22, 27). Thus this waving here
also can only signify a peculiar consecration of
the leper, which is more strongly expressed in
the case of the poor leper who must be shaken
free with his gift, must be brought to a swinging
up, or heave offering (Aufsohwung)."
Some points in the above will be found differ-
ently treated below.
Vers. 1-3. The starting point for the following
directions is the priestly inspection of the leper
supposed to be healed. This must take place
without the camp, and if it resulted favorably,
then the following directions were to be observed.
(The expression |D i on xiT. 8. Tne Sam. and LX.'^. luserL the word aU before hiefleth.
^ Ver. 5. ■'"I^j)^/, see Textual Note 21 on iv. 23. The same word is used also vers. 7, 8, etc.; hut it seems unnecesaBiy
to alter the translation tbroughont, ns this is the only place in which the sense is aff cted.
^ Vers. 8, 10 (bis), 26. 7lXTi?. The word occurs only heie, and in the wide difference of opinion existing as to its
meaning, it seems far better to rrtain the Heb. word unchanged, as is done in many modem critical translations. It
occurs in ail cases without the ar icie. For the meaning, see exegt-sis.
^ Ver. 12. It is better to retain the definite article, as expressed in the Heb.
8 Vers. 14, 16. For j^=upon, the Sam. reads ^i^^^before, towards.
^ Ver. 14. 'nty^p^loward the east is to be connected with the mercy seal, and not with sprinMe. The high priest
looking west, faced the mercy seat, and sprinkled it on the side next to him, t'. e. the aide toward the east. This caniol
be clearly expressed in English without a slight modification of the phrase,
w Ver. 20. 1330. See Textual Note " on vi. 30 (23).
CHAP. XVI. 1-31.
123
21 shall bring [offer"] the live goat : and Aaron shall lay both his hands" upon the
head of the live goat, and confess over him aU the iniquities of the children of
Israel, and all their trangressions in [according to"] all their sins, putting them
upon the head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of a fit'* man into
22 the wilderness : and the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land
not inhabited \^ and he shall let go the goat in the wilderness.
23 And Aaron shall come into the tabernacle of the [omit the] congregation, and
shall put off the linen garments, which he put on when he went into the holy place,
24 and shall leave them there : and he shall wash [bathe*] his flesh with water in the
holy place, and put on his garments, and come forth and offer his burnt offering,
and the burnt offering of the pe )ple, and make an atonement for himself, and for
25 the people. And the fat of the sin offering shall he burn upon the altar.
26 And he that let go the goat for the scapegoat [for AzazeP] shall wash his clothes
27 and bathe his flesh in water, and afterward come into the camp. And the bullock
for the sin offering, and the gnat for the sin offering, whose blood was brought in
to make atonement in the holy place, shall one carry forth without the camp ; and
28 they shall burn in the fire their skins, and their flesh, and their dung. And he
that burneth them shall wash his clothes and bathe his flesh in water, and after-
ward he shall come into the camp.
29 And this shall be a statute for ever unto you : that in the seventh month, on the
tenth day of the month, ye shall afilict your souls, and do no work at all, whether
30 it he one of your own country, or a stranger that sojourneth among you : for on
that day shall the priest make an atonement for you, to cleanse you, that ye may
31 be clean from all your sins before the Lord. It shall he a sabbath of rest unto
32 you, and ye shall afilict your souls, by a statute for ever. And the priest, whom
he [one'*] shall anoint, and whom he [one^*] shall consecrate to minister in the
priest's office in his father's stead, shall make the atonement, and shall put on the
33 linen clothes, eum the holy garments : and he shall make an atonement for the
holy sanctuary, and he shall make an atonement for the tabernacle of the \omit
the] congregation, and for the altar, and he shall make an atonement for the priests,
34 and for all the people of the congregation. And this shall be an everlasting sta-
tute unto you, to make an atonement for the children of Israel for all their sins
once a year.
And he did as the Lord commanded Moses.
u Ver. 20. 3''^p^, the same word as is nsed of the other goat in ver. 9, and the common word for aacriflciai
offering.
IS Ter. 21. For the IT' of the text, 35 MSS. read VT, as in the k'ri.
« Ter. 21. Acmrdingto is both a bett»r translation of the prep, b and gives a better sense.
I* Ter. 21. ^Pin, in-. \iy., according to Fnerst exiiHng or appointed at a convmient time. LXX. Stoijios, Vulg. paraim.
The sense oS appdirUed would probably bettter express the Heb. than fit So Targ. Jon., and bo Eosenmueller) ; but there is
neither sufficient certainty nor suiHcient difference to make the change.
15 Ter. 22. HIU- LXX a^arov, Vulg. mlitarUan, Onk. uninluibitaile, Jon. desoUUe, Syr. tmcuUivated. Lit. a land cut
of. The A. T. sufficiently expresses the sense.
M Ter. 32. Th -so verbs must either be rendered imperMnally, or else taken in the pasrive, as the Heb. idiom very
well allows.
tering into the heavenly Holy of Holies, and
reconoiling the world to God by His own blood
(Heb. ix. 7-12, 24-28)."
This chapter forms the culmination of all that
has gone before, of the laws both of sacrifices
and of purity, and therefore forms the fitting
conclusion of the whole portion of Leviticus
concerned with the means of approach to God.
The significance of its symbolical ritual is dwelt
upon in the 9th oh, of the Ep. to the Heb. The
Holy of Holies was entered only on the day and
with the sacrifices here prescribed, and this day
was the only day of fasting appointed in the
Mosaic law. The ritual of its sacrifices was
peculiar and impressive, and the goat for Azazel
EXEQETICAL AND CRITICAL.
Here a new Paraahah of the law begins, ex-
tending through ch. xviii. Amos ix. 7-15 forms
the parallel Proper Lesson from the prophets.
That prophecy is cited by St. James at the
Council of Jerusalem (Acts xv. 16, 17), and ap-
plied to the building up of the Gentiles into the
Church of Christ. Wordsworth suggests that
he may have selected that particular prophecy
because it was associated in his mind, through
the public readings in the synagogues, with the
passage before us "which displays, in a figure,
the work of Christ, our great High Priest, en-
124
LEVITICUS.
is something so unlike any thing else in the Levi-
tioal system as to have oecasioned the utmost per-
plexity to expositors. In xxiii. 27 (Heb.) the day
is called "the day of atonements (in the plural),
as if this included in itself all other atonements,
or at least was the most exalted and important
of them all. In ver. 31 THeb.) it is spoken of as a
"Sabbath of Sabbaths, and by the later Jews
it was commonly called simply "Joma,"=day.
as the day of all days. It is probably intended
by St. Luke in the expression " the fast," Acts
xxvii. 9. See Com. there. The high-priest
alone could officiate, and this he must do in a
peculiar dress worn only on this day. By the
ritual of this day, the imperfection and insuffi-
ciency of all other sacrifices was brought pro-
minently into view, while yet its own imperfec-
tion was necessarily involved in its yearly repe-
tition.
The chapter consists of two portions, of which
the first (vers. 2-28) contains directions for this
great annual expiation; and the second (vers.
29-34), the command for its yearly celebration.
The whole of Lange's Exegetical Notes are here
given.
"1. It is first of all to be noticed that the
yearly feast of atonement is mentioned twice in
the Levitical law of worship, viz. once here as
(he culminating point of the laws and expiations
of purifications; and again in ch. xxiii. in the
midst of the feasts of the Lord for the positive
sanctification of the land and the people, as a
solemn prelude to the most festal and joyous of
all the feasts, the feast of tabernacles. The
point of unity of both lines is the thought: tha',
Israel can then only attain to the full joys of the
feast of tabernacles, when, on the great Sabbath
of the seventh month — the single exclusive day
of expiation and regular fast diiy of the year —
it has humbled and purified itself before Jehovah
with the confession, that all its legal atonements
had not brought full purification ; that the in-
struments of atonement, priests and altar, must
themselves be atoned for ; that not even by these
comprehensive general supplications and general
atonements could complete atonement be made ;
that a guilt remaining in secret must be sent
home to Azazel as inexpiable under the iripeaiQ
of Jehovah (Rom. iii. 25) — an act with which
the Levitical atonement sweeps out beyond itself
to a future and real atonement.
"2. Corresponding to the thoughts that have
been mentioned, we have :
" a. The prevailing unapproachableness of
the holy God, only momentarily suspended
through a hypothetical, typically accomplished
power of approach, as the idea of a future
perfect atonement. This law was enforced
by the fact that the two eldest sons of
Aaron had died through approaching pro-
fanely, and by the threat that he too should
die if he went behind the curtain of the Holy of
holies, where Jehovah was manifested in a cloud
over the mercy-seat (Jer. xxx. 21), otherwise
than according to the stated conditions, once a
year. (Heb. ix. 7). Vers. 1, 2." [The historical
connection of this chapter with the death of Na-
dab and Abihu does not exclude the logical con-
nection with the legislation of the rest of the
book. The provision for the day of atonement
was necessary in any case to the completeness
of the Levitical system, but the command for its
observance was immediately occasioned by their
unauthorized act. There are no data to show the
length of the interval between their death and
the Divine communication contained in this
cliapter; but it was probably short. Ver. 2.
■Within the vail — which separated the holy
place, the outer part of the sanctuary where the
priests daily ministered at the altar of incense,
from the holy of holies which was never to be
entered by man except as provided for in this
chapter. On the significance of this arrange-
ment see Doctrinal remarks below. The custom
of having peculiarly sacred parts in the heathen
temples is well known. The mercy-seat. —
n^33 LXX. Vianr^ptov, Ynlg., propitiatorium, SMi
so the other ancient versions. The LXX. word
is twice used in the N. T., being translated mercg-
seat in Heb. ix. 5, hut propitiation in Rom. iii. 25.
The word occurs only in Ex., in this chapter,
and in Num. vii. 89, and 1 Chr. xxviii. 11. It
is evident from Ex. xxv. 22; xxx. 6; and Num.
vii. 89, that it was the place appointed for the
peculiar manifestation of the presence of God ;
and from this chapter, that it was the objeciive
point of the highest propitiatory rites known to
(he law. The English word only partially con-
veys the sense. I vrill appear in the cloud.
— There has been much question whether this
means the light-giving cloud which overshadowed
and at certain times filled the tabernacle, and
which according to the Jewish authorities, was
afterwards represented by the Shechinah above
the ark ; or whether it refers simply to the cloud
of incense arising from the censer of the high-
priest as he passed within (he vail. The subject
is ably and fully discussed by Biihr (Symb. I. o.
V. § 2, IV. 2d aufl., pp. 471-481) who concludes
in favor of the latter. See the authorities there
cited. The determination in reality involves
two separate questions : first, whether the pro-
mise of the text is personal to Aaron, or whether
it is given in perpetuity to him and his success-
ors in the high-priesthood; and second, whe-
ther, after the cessation of the wanderings in the
wilderness, there ever was such a Shechinah.
In regard to the latter question, later Jewish
tradition, from the time of the Targums down,
is certainly sufficiently emphatic in the affirma-
tive ; but for so remarkable and perpetual a mi-
racle, higher authority is required. Babr has
shown that Philo and Josephus, as well as the
Christian Fathers to the time of S. Jerome, knew
nothing of it, and it is never mentioned in tbo
Scriptures, or in the Jewish Apocryphal books.
Nevertheless, the incense is not spoken of until
ver. 12, and it seems unlikely that the cloud
from it should be intended here. God had
hitherto manifested His presence to Moses and
to the people in the cloud which covered the
tabernacle, and that in various localities; it
would not be strange that He should now
promise a similar manifes(*tion to Aaron by (he
same instrumentality. That (his should take
place upon the mercy-seat was a consequcnos
of Aaron's coming before it in this highest act
of propitiation. Of course this would give no
ground to suppose that such a manifestation
CHAP. XVI. 1-34.
125
oontinued there perpetually, 6r at any other
time than that on which it is here especially
promised. Rosenmiiller, Eeil, and most other
commentators, however, accept the Jewish tra-
dition of the Shechinah. — F. G.].
" b. He must next protect himself with a great
sacrifice ; for he is directed to take a young
bullock for a sin offering, and a ram for a
burnt offering. By these the great faults of
the priesthood on the one side, and the great
duties on the other side are signified," ver. 3.
[Come into the holy is sometimes understood
in relation to Aaron's entrance into the taberna-
cle merely, because these offerings were offered
befors he passed beyond the court at all; but as
the point of the whole ritual is the entrance into
the holy of holies, the words are more fitly in-
terpreted in relation to this. Full account is
given of the ritual of the sin offering in vers.
11-14 and 27, 28; the sacrifice of the priestly
burnt ofl'ering was at the same time with that
of the people at the conclusion of the other
sacrifices (ver. 24]. — F. G.].
" c. After this, he is to make himself the
atoner for the collective priesthood. All the
high-priestly ornaments were laid aside, and he
was clothed with a linen coat over linen drawers,
and girt with a linen girdle. The linen cap
completed the attire. Even this enrobing must
he preceded by a religious lustration" (ver. 4)."
[This clothing is called the holy garments,
vers. 4 and 32 ; and it is separated from that of
the common priests by a white linen girdle in
place of the ordinary priestly girdle wrought in
needle-work with "blue and purple and scarlet"
(Ex. xxxix. 29). The high-priest is thus to lay
aside his "golden garments" of authority, and
to be clad in pure white as symbolical of holi-
ness. This symbolism was increased by his
bathing himself before putting on these gar-
ments, and again when he exchanged them
(ver. 24) for his official robes. These bathings
were not the mere ordinary bathings of the
hands and feet, but of the whole body.— F.Q.].
" d. Only in such guise can he receive the
means of atonement for the congregation in-
volved with him in guilt, the two he-goats,
which in the more general sense, are appointed
for a sin offering. In the presentation of the
burnt offering, however, the congregation was
equalized with the high-priest himself. But how
inconsiderable is the he-goat in comparison with
the young bullock, ver. 5." [He shall take
of the congregation. — Inasmuch as these
sacrifices were for the people, the victims were
supplied by them, as the former ones had been
by Aaron. The fact that the two goats together
constitute the sin offering is to be particularly
noted. The high-priest's sin offering was a
bullock, as provided in iv. 3, and the ordinary
Sin offering for the whole congregation was the
same (ib. 14) ; here it is changed to two goats to
meet the particular ritual provided, but they
together constitute a single sin offering. In the
same way two birds were required for the puri-
fication of the leper (xiv. 4), or to " make atone-
ment for the leprous house {ib. 53) one of which
was set free ; and so also in the sin offering of
the poor (v. 7), two doves were required which
were differently treated, but together made up a
single sacrifice. The burnt offering, both for
the high-priest and for the congregation, was
not a bullock, but an inferior victim was pre-
scribed, probably to avoid withdrawing the at-
tention from the other sacrifices, and thus to
bring out with greater force the significance of
the whole work of the day as an atonement for
sin.— F. G.].
"e. Now follows the ordinance for the atone-
ment in a shorter statement. The sin offerings
were placed together before the sanctuary, pre-
sented before the Lord ; the bullock and the
two he-goats ; since the guilt is indeed different,
but yet also common." [The text, however, dis-
tinctly separates the presentation of Aaron's
bullock (ver. 6) from that of the he-goats for the
people (ver. 7) ; and this is in accordance with
the order of the actual sacrifice which follows. It
seems also necessary to the idea that Aaron must
first make an atonement for himself and for
his house before proceeding to offer for the
people. — F. G.]. "But now the mysterious act
was performed : the lot was cast over the two
he-goats, while the lot of the one was called for
Jehovah, that of the other for Azazel, Ou
the various significations of this, see below.
Meantime, only the directions which belong to
both are spoken of. Vers. 9 and 10." [6-10.
The n?!? used in vers. 9, 10 of the lots refers to
T T
the coming up of the lot out of the urn. Keil.
Aaron's bullock is now offered, not sacrificed, for
this comes afterwards, ver. 11 ; the same is true
also of the other sin offerings. According to
Jewish tradition, this offering was accompanied
by the high-priest's making a solemn confession
of sin, the form of which is given in Massechet
Joma c. 3, g 8 (Patrick). His house is not his
immediate, personal family, but the whole order
of priests, and perhaps it also included the Le-
vites after they were separated from the congre-
gation. — The t'wo goats of ver. 7 were to be,
according to Jewish tradition, of the same size,
color, and value, and as nearly alike in every
way as possible. Both of them alike Aaron was
directed to present before the Lord, but the
word used for this act C'DyH) is a different one
from that used of Aaron's offering of the bullock
(Tlpn), and does not appear to be used in a sa-
crificial sense. The lots were then cast, and only
the one upon 'which the LORD'S lot fell
was Aaron at present to offer (^'^pH) ^°^ * ^i"
offering (ver. 8) as he had already done with
his own bullock ; the other, on which the lot
fell for Azazel was to be presented alivo
Cn-npil') before the Lord (ver. 10). This dif-
ference in the treatment of the two goats from
the outset is too important to be overlooked ; but
subsequently the other was also o^ered( ver. 20),
and it is expressly said that Aaron should make
an atonement with him.— Thus it is clear
that the goat for Azazel, while forming part of
the one sin offering and used for the purpose of
atonement, was yet offered to the Lord, in the
sacrificial sense, separately from the other. —
F. G.J.
"/. The sacrificial acts follow these prepara-
tions. Aaron must slay the sin offering of the
priesthood in the court. Then he first brings a
126
LEVITICUS.
large offering of incense (both hands full of
s^7eet incense) into the holy of holies, a cloud
of the fulness of prayer, which covers the whole
mercy-seat, as this covers the law, the evidence i
of the guilt of sin. With this preparatory en-
trance only is made possible the principal en-
trance for fulfilling the priestly atonement, with- j
out Aaron's dying in that eutranoe- Then he i
comes back, brings the vessel of blood, and first j
sprinkles with his finger blood upon the mercy- '
seat on its front side, as if to express the thought I
that there is an atouement in the blood ; then he
sprinkles before the Kaporetb " [mercy-seat] j
'■ with his fingers (plural) seven times, as if to
express the whole historical work of the blood
of martyrdom which the blood-sprinkling of the
Kaporeth" [mercy-seat] "crowned." [Vers.
11-14. It is important to the understanding of
this day to keep the order of its rites distinctly
in view. They have been clearly stated above:
(1) the high priest slew the bullock for the
priestly siu offering; (2) then he entered the
holy of holies with the golden censer (comp. Heb.
ix. 4) full of burning incense ; (3) taking the
blood of his own sin offering, he again entered
the holy of holies and sprinkled the blood, first
upon the front side of the merey-seat, and then
seven times before it ; (4) he again came out to
slay the goat for the sin offering of the people
(ver. 15). — F. G.]. "Now first follows the atone-
ment for the people. Aaron takes the vessel of
blood of the people's atonement, and performs
the two sprinklings in the holy of holies as be-
fore. Here also the distinction is madeupon the
mercy-seat and before the mercy-seat. But
as Aaron does not make atonement for his private
guilt, of which mention was made in chap, iv.,
but for the faults in his sacrificial service itself,
80 is it also with the atonement for the people.
For their private sins they have brought their
sacrifices during the course of the year; now
they have, in connection with the priesthood, to
atone generally for the subtle sins in all their
atonements and offerings." [Yet it would give
an imperfect view of the purpose of the great day
of atonement to suppose it restricted simply to
atoning for defects in the various sacrifices of the
past year, nor probably does Lange mean to be
so understood. It was rather an expression of
the inherent insufficiency of those sacrifices; an
acknowledgment that, notwithstanding all those
propitiations, there still remained an alienation
between a sinful people and a perfectly holy God.
It was the design of this day to acknowledge
this, and by the most solemn and expressive
types, symbolically to remove it; yet in the pro-
vision for its annual repetition, its own insuffi-
ciency to this end stands confessed, and with
especial clearness it points forward to the only
true remedy in Him who should really obtain
the victory over the power of evil. — F. G.] "So
first atonement was made for the sanctuary of
the Temple" [or Tabernacle] "in the holy of
holies (which indeed had itself remained unap-
proachable for siu as well as the sinner), and
then from the holy of holies outward, for the
tabernacle of congregation, which had
been particularly exposed to defilement in the
midst of the impurities of the people. That by
the tabernacle of congregation is meant the
court, is shown by the command that no one
should enter it while he accomplishes the atone-
ment." [On the other hand, Keil understands
"the holy place of the tabernacle" in contra-
distinction to the " holy of holies," which is
called throughout this chapter simply "the
holy." So also Bosenmiiller and others. And
there shall be no man in the tabernacle
of congregation — The object of this was not
to guard the privacy of the ceremony, but sim-
ply because all were regarded as defiled aud to
be atoned for, and every thing defiled must be
excluded during the process of atonement. — F.G.]
" The whole religion of the people appears as in
abeyance while the high-priest was consum-
mating the atonement. And fitly were these
atoning acts so named. After the high-priest
had completed the atonement in the holy of ho-
lies, he went back into the sanctuary, and there
sprinkled the altar of incense. In a manner
entirely analogous to the sprinkling upon the
mercy-seat, he first sprinkled the horns of the
altar of incense, and then the altar itself seven
times." [The analogy is still more completely
carried out by the change of words in the Heb.
put it (JJIJ) upon the horns of the altar
he shall sprinkle (ilTH) of the blood upon
it. — F. G.] "Only in this sprinkling, the blood
of the bullock is joined with the blood of the he-
goat, as indeed the prayers of both priest and
people rise together to God, and in like manner
also their faults in prayer. It is remarkable
that the act of sprinkling in the court (at the
altar of burnt offering) seems to follow the act
of sprinkling in the holy of holies, and not till
then the sprinkling of the altar of incense in the
temple" [tabernacle], "which is here called
par excellence the altar. In this connection the
passage Ex. xxx. 10 is worthy of note. Accord-
ingly the atonement for this altar was the last
act of sacrifice, and thereby the atonement for
the theocratic prayer became the last point in the
atonement, as indeed it had certainly been the
basis for the first." [The ceremonies of propi-
tiation began by carrying the burning incense,
symbolizing prayer, within the vail ; then the
blood was sprinkled upon the instruments of pro-
pitiation, the mercy-seat and the brazen altar,
and finally upon the altar of incense itself which
was connected with the symbolism of prayer.—.
F. G.] " This ordinance seems to be connected
with the thought tnat the altar of incense in its
relation to Jehovah (the altar that is before
the LORD) was reckoned as belonging to the
holy of holies, as also the Epistle to the Hebrews
seems to understand. After all this comes the
treatment of the living he-goat, designated
for Azazel. This goat was brought into the
court. Here the high-priest must lay both Aw
hands (his hand in the singular was said of the
offerer i. 4 ; iii. 2 ; iv. 4 ; iv. 24) upon the head
of the goat aud confess upon it all the mis-
deeds (rt'lj^) of the children of Israel, and all
their breaches of allegiance (deadly sins, crimes)
(Dri'.j;tf'n), which belong to all their sins, which
are not included either in the sins to be atoned
for, or which have already been atoned for
(□nK'On-'rs'?), and shall lay these upon the head
CHAP. XVI. 1-34.
127
of the goat, and shall send it away (hunt it
away) into the wilderness by means of a man
who stood ready for that purpose (therefore in-
stantly). The object, however, is that the he-
goat shall bear away all the sins, as if they had
been laid upon him, into a desolate place. So
shall he send him away into the wilderness, pro-
perly speaking, into a complete solitude, into a
bare place in the midst of the wilderness, to the
most desolate spot. So fearful indeed is the
burden of guilt of this beast, that the man who
has driven away the goat must first, outside the
camp, wash hia clothes and bathe himself before
he may come hack again into the camp. This is
the contagious power of the deadly sins. It is
to be considered that sins done with uplifted hand
could not be removed by Levitical sacrifice."
"But further, they could not all be discovered
and blotted out by the penalty of death, ike Che-
rem. Thus there remained, after all the atone-
ments and penalties, an unatoned and unpar-
donable residue, the hidden guilt of Israel, which
crept on in darkness through its history until
the crucifixion of Christ (Rom. iii. 25). From
this the congregation of Israel could only be
freed by a symbolical act, in which they hunted
away this burden of guilt with the sin-goat of
double power, to him to whom this guilt be-
longed, to the Azazel in the wilderness. That
the solitude inside the pasturage of the wilder-
ness was considered as a region of evil spirits is
plain from passages of the Old and New Testa-
ments (Isa. xiii. 21 ; xxxiv. 14 ; Matt. xii. 43 ss.) ;
that further, the dismissing of the unpardonable
sins could be considered as a giving over of the
sinner, with his sin, to its author, is shown by
the act of excommunication of Paul (1 Cor. v. 5),
and that the idea or conception of a diabolical
opposing spirit was handed down from patriar-
chal times, is plain, backwards, from Gen. iii.,
and forwards, from the position of Satan in Job,
and other places. The name Azazel corresponds
throughout to this conception. Whether the
'.'.'"H he derived from 7jJ?, it means (from the
verb in Pihel) the one that is always hiding, se-
parating himself; or from btS, the one that
is always removing himself, the escaping
one, the old one every where and nowhere ;
and one can only say simply that the va-
rious explanations which are most divergent
from this conception are only to be accounted for
from the want of understanding the undoubtedly
very obscure and solemn idea of the text. Thus
Knobel finds himself authorized by the text and
the grammar to explain "our author considered
Azazel as an evil being in the wilderness." To
be sure, it is his purpose to assert in this con-
nection that the devil does not appear in the old
Hebrew books, and was not a dweller in the
wilderness. [Similarly Kalisch argues, upon
the same grounds, that this book must be later
than the time of Zechariah !"— P. G.] That the
teaching concerning the devil has only been
gradually developed from the obscurest forms ;
that the devil appears in Scripture in connection
with subordinate demons ; that further, he is
described in the New Testament as a dweller in
the wilderness ;* that finally, the conception of
natural or spectral "Desert fiends" would be a
dualisdc one, contravening the spirit of the Old
Testament — all this is overlooked in his skilfully
prepared antithesis. But when Merx, in oppo-
sition to the interpretation of the passage of Sa-
tan, declares that the Old Testament conscious-
ness is never dualistic, he has not learned to
distinguish dualism from the biblical teaching in
regard to Satan ; and, as regards the further ex-
position, that the idea of Satan was foreign to
the Old Testament, it is a pure assumption, with
which he sets himself in opposition to the best
recognized passages. The lately advanced pro-
position, " this thought does not appear any
where else in Scripture," denies the conception
of aTTof Xeydfieva, and can only be described as
bad Hermeneutics, without mentioning that we
have here nothing to do with a diraf leyS/isvov.
Into what adventurousness Exegesis was brought
when it passed to the thought, that the abso-
lutely or relatively (for the Old Testament eco-
nomy) inexpiable sins were given over to the
kingdom of darkness for earlier or later judg-
ment, is shown by the interpretations that are
given : — Azazel signifies a locality in the wilder-
ness ; a desolate place ; a mountain (while it is
forgotten that the people journeyed from station
to station) ; or the buck goat itself (from \}!_ and
'ly, caper emissarius, "the scapegoat" (der ledige
Bock\) according to Luther) ; or Azazel is a de-
mon, to whom this goat is brought as a sncrifice ;
or the word is an abstraction, and signifies the
whole sending away, like the characteristic hesi-
tation of the LXX. between a^onofiTrri and airo-
Ko/iiralog, in which two different expositions are
brought out." [In regard to the meaning of
Azazel: in the great variety of etymologies given
for the word by scholars of the highest standing,
it may be assumed as certain that nothing can
be positively determined by the etymology. See
the Lexicons and Bochart, Sieroz. I., lib. II. c.
54 (Tom. I., p. 745 seq. ed. Rosen.) ; Spencer, de
leg. L. III. Diss. 8, Sect. 2 (p. 1041 s. ed. Tu-
bing.). Not only the roots themselves are va-
ried, but their signification also, and still further
the signification of the compound. Little light
can be had from the Ancient Versions. The
Sam., and the Targs. of Onk., Jon., and Jerus.,
retain the word unchanged ; so also does the
Syriao, but in Walton's Polyglott this is paren-
thetically translated Deus fortissimus, for which,
however, there seems to be no more authority
than in the Hebrew ; the Vulg. has caprus emis-
sarius ; the LXX. renders in ver. 8, Ttj awoirofi-
7Tai. Diet. art. Atonement, Day of, and
in Winer, art. Versohnungstag . — F. G.]
[Ver. 29. In the seventh month of the
ecclesiastical year, which according to Josephus
(I. 3, § 3), was the first of the civil year. The
old Hebrew name for this month was Ethanim,
the post-captivity name Tiari. On the first day
of this month was appointed the Feast of Trum-
pets (xxiii. 24), celebrated as a Sabbath and by
"an holy convocation;" on the tenth was the
great Day of Atonement, provided for in this
chapter, and again mentioned xxiii. 26-32 ; and
on the fifteenth day began the feast of taberna-
cles, lasting for a week (xxiii. 33-4.S). Tho
deportment required of the people on the Day
of Atonement is more fully expressed in ch.
xxiii. Here it is simply described as a day in
which ye shall afilict your souls, i. e. devote
yourselves to penitence and humiliation. This
would of course include fasting; but the dis-
tinctive word for fasting, D1V or DIX, so com-
mon afterwards, does not occur in the Penta-
teuch or Joshua. It was further provided that
the people should do no work at all, not
merely no servile work, as was provided for on
various other occasions, but absolutely no work.
And this ordinance was extended to the stran-
ger that sojourneth among you. Various
laws were made obligatory upon the stranger,
as the observance of the fourth commandment,
Ex. XX. 10; the abstinence from blood. Lev.
xvii. 10 ; certain laws of sexual purity, xviii. 26 ;
the law against giving of one's seed to Molech,
XX. 2; and against blasphemy, xxiv. 16. These
were all laws so essential to the Hebrew theoc-
racy that every one who came within the sphere
of their exercise was bound to respect them.
They apply to every one staying for however
long or short a time within the bounds of Israel,
and it is a mistake to restrict them (Clark) to
those of other races permanently domiciled
among the Israelites, as will at once appear
from a consideration of the character of several
of these laws. Ver. 34. He did as the IiORD
commanded Moses, i. e. in announcing the
law. Perhaps also the expression may include
the observance of the day when the time came
round which could only have been several
months later, the Israelites having departed
from Mount Sinai on the twentieth day of the
second month (Num. x. 11), while all the legis-
lation in Leviticus was given during their so-
journ there (ch. xxvi. 46; xxvii. 34). — F. Q.]
DOCTKINAL AND ETHICAL.
I. The vail shutting out the Holy of Holies
set forth, in speaking symbol, the unapproaoha-
bleness and unknowableness of God. Even the
high priest, entering once in the year, must
obscure his view in the veiy cloud of incense
with which he approached. The same truth
130
LEVITICUS.
was more feebly taught iu the arrangements of
the heathen temples, and was set forth in the
speculations of heathen philosophy. In the
Jewish Scriptures it is declared with the utmost
emphasis and clearness. In the New Tes:ament
too, we are taught that He can be revealed to
man only by Him who is both God and miin.
Thus the latest conclusion of modern philosophy,
that behind all that can be discovered of nature
there is an " Unknowable," a "power inscruta-
ble to the human intellect" is taught iu Scrip-
ture from beginning to end. Even when the
vail was rent asunder at the crucifixion of Christ,
and a new and living way was consecrated for
us into the holy of holies, it became a, way to
the knowledge and apprehension of God rather
practically and spiritually than intellectually.
The finite and the Infinite can meet only iu Him
who is both.
II. The high-priest was warned to enter within
the vail only in the way and at the time pre-
scribed, lest he die. His official and symbolic
holiness did not make him personally holy, so
that he could bear to enter as he pleased the
presence of the holy God, but only covered his
officiiil service. This was not prevented or ren-
dered unavailing by his own personal unworthi-
ness. So here is taught the great principle that
" the unworthiness of ministers hinders not the
effect of the sacraments;" that the grace of
God accompanips the acts of those whom He has
appointed in that which He has given them to
do, all liough this treasure be placed " in earthen
vessels."
III. The dress of Aaron when he passed within
the vail was evidently significant. Ordinarily,
when he ministered as high-priest and in the
presence of the people, his robes were of the
utmost splendor, symbolizing his high office as
the typical mediator between God and the con-
gregation; but now in the highest act of that
mediation, when alone before God, these are to
be laid aside, and the whole purpose of the dress
is to symbolize that perfect purity with which
only he may enter tbe presence of the imme-
diate dwelling-place of God.
IV. In Aaron's first offering of a sin offering
for himself is very strongly set forth the imper-
fection of the Levitical law. The one on whose
mediation the people must depend for forgive-
ness must yet first make propitiation for him-
self. And in the provision for the annual repe-
tioQ of this day, its insufficiency is apparent,
see Heb. x. 1-3. Here then again, as so con-
stantly iu every part of its provisions, the law
of sacrifice proclaims itself as but a temporary
institution until that which is perfect should
come.
V. By the goat for Azazel again, the same
thing is taught. " It is not poisible that the
blood of bulls and of goats should take away
sins " (Heb. x. 4) ; therefore after all symbolism
bad been exhausted in the sacrifice of bulls and
of goats, the sins were yet laid upon the head
of tbe goat for Azazel, and sent away into the
wilderness. The sins thus sent away are not to
be looked upon as different sins from those for
which propitiation was offered, nor as a residue
of these unatoned for; but as the same sins, as
all the sins of the children of Israel (ver. 21J.
Atonements had bsen made for these through-
out the y^-ar ; u. further and higher atonement
had at this moment been made ; but that all
these were inherently ineflfectual was now shown
by the goat for Azazel.
VI. Tue Christian Fathers, with that instinct
which often seizes upon a truth without recog-
nizing accurately the process by which it is
reached, generally considered the goat for Aza-
zel as a type of Christ, some of them in one
way, some in another. Cyril thought him a
type of the risen Christ, and the wilderness to
which he was sent, a type of heaven. Theodoret
makes him a type of the Divine nature of Christ,
which was neoes'iary to the perfection of His
atonement, and yet incapable of suffering. The
type seems really to consist in this: that the
sins for whicli all the Levitical sacrifices were
unable really to atone, were symbolically borne
away by the goat; even as our iniquities are
truly laid upon Christ, and He has borne them
away. Isa. liii. 4-6.
Vn. The incense formed a prominent and
essential part of the ritual of the day of atone-
ment. This is not to be forgotten in its relation
to the antitype. It is not on Christ's sacrifice
alone that we depend for the forgiveness of our
sins, but upon His intercession also.
VIII. On the day of atonement no work what-
ever was to be done: the propitiation for sia
was not only the paramount duty, faking the
place of everything that interfered with it; but
it was to be all-absorbing. The people had no
duties to perform directly in connection with
the service of atonement ; but still they must do
no work. The propitiation for sin must be the
one thing on that day done in all the oamp of
Israel; and meanwhile the whole congregation
were to " afflict their souls.'' Though the pro-
pitiation of sins be wrought for us, and not by
us, yet must it bring to us the lowliness and
humiliation of repentance.
IX. Aaron was to make an atonement (ver. 20)
for the holy of holies, for the tabernacle, and for
the altar; but these had already been sanctified
at 'their first consecration, and the alooement
now made must be perpetually repeated year
by year. It is plain from this that there was no
effective remedy for the inherent weakness and
sinfulness of man, which contaminated even his
moat holy things, until the coming of that Son
of man who should be without sin. The high-
priest entered the holy of holies, and thus ap-
proached the symbolic dwelling-place of God;
but he did not thereby open the way to others,
or even to himself except for this same typical
entrance, "the Holy Ghost this signifying, that
the way into the Holiest of all was not yet made
manifest" (Heb. ix. 8); the only atonement
which could really open the way for man to
heaven itself must be offered before the throne
of Jehovah by Him who alone could offer an all-
suffioent sacrifice for the sin of the world.
X. " The rites were not in any proper sense
supplemental, but were a solemn gathering up,
as it were, of all other rites of atonement, so as
to make them point more expressively to the reve-
lation to come of God's gracious purpose to man,
in sending His Son to be delivered for our
offences, and to rise again for our justification
CHAP. XVI. 1-34.
131
to be our great High Priest for ever after the
order of Melohisedec, and to enter for us within
the vail (Horn. iv. 25 ; Heb. vi. 20). The day
of atonement expanded the meaning of every sin
offering, in the same way as the services for Good
Friday and Ash Wednesday expand the meaning
of our Litany days throughout the year, and
Easter Day, that of our Sundays." Clark.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL.
The day of atonement "forms a contrast to
the defilement of the sanctuary by the sons of
Aaron, their rash intrusion, their strange fire,
their moral death and fearful destruction. (Ch.
xvi. 1). It depends — as far as concerns the un-
derstanding — upon a great dread, a great world-
historic preparation, and earnest religious pray-
ers and actions. It is performed for the whole
people, and this means for all humanity. But it
points also, by its several particulars out from
the Old Testament and into the New. The high-
priest is not yet clean, not yet the righteous ; he
must first offer for himself (see the Ep. to the
Heb.). He is not one with his sacritice and sa-
crificial blood, although he must represent the
approximation to this unity in the disrobing
himself of his high-priestly majesty. But even
the sin offering availed only for sins of weakness
(xxiv. 16 ; Num. xv. 30), and not for sins of ma-
lice, of rebellion, of outrage with a high hand.
These were everywhere, when they were disco-
vered, punished with death. But since all were
not discovered, a deadly sin steals through the
life of Israel, and accumulates — as a token of
wliioh the goat of the sin offering is sent, through
the goat of the Azazel, into the wilderness as a
curse offering to the author of the demon-like
sin." [The same application may be made of
the different views given of the sins borne away
by the goat, and of Azazel in the Exegetioal. —
F. 6.]. " Thus the law lightens the darkest
night-side of Israel and of the human race. But
Christ has shown the chain and tradition of
these secret faults in His denunciation. Matt,
xxiii. 30 S3., and Paul has shown (Rom. iii.) how
Christ, before the tribunal of God. has also
atoned for these hitherto inexpiable sins (on the
distinction between wdpsai^ and a - T -T
ver. 3, a distinction carefully observed in the
killeth of the A. V. From S. Augustine and
Theodoret down, however, there has always been
a difference of opinion upon this point among
interpreters; most modern commentators, how-
ever (as Kosenmiiller, Knobel, Keil, Kalisch,
Clark, etc.) agree that the law must relate to all
killing of animals for food. Not much animal
food was used in the wilderness, as is evidenced
by the various murmurings of the people, the
manna forming their chief support. It is to he
remembered that this part of the law, as far as
ver. 7, is made obligatory only upon the Israel-
ites, and even for them was in force only du-
ring the life in the wilderness; while the rest
of the chapter includes also "the stranger"
in its requirements. — F. G.]. " The offering,
indeed, consisted in this, that the animal was
brought to the Tabernacle of congregation, and
placed before the priest, and that the priest
sprinkled the blood of the same on the altar,
and burned the fat for a sweet savour.
The same rule was obligatory for the strangers
not of Israel, if they wished not only to slay,
but with their slaying to bring also a burnt or
peace offering — they might offer only before the
door of the tabernacle of congregation; for the
public worship of false gods was forbidden in
Israel (Ex. xxiii. 32, 33)." [This law, in regard
to sacrificing, is made obligatory upon the
strangers, as well as upon the house of
Israel in vers. 8, 9 ; but the previous part of
the law (vers. 1-7) applies only to the Israelites.
Both were restrained from offering sacrifices
elsewhere ; but only the latter were obliged to
make offerings of all animals slain for food. —
P. G.] "The opposite, which was at the same
time to be avoided by the Israelites, reads thus:
they shall no more sacrifice their sacri-
fices to the he-goats (Luther: the field-
devils), as to those which they who are in the
snare whore after. Thus we understand the
expression in reference to this, not as a reproach :
which they whore after hitherto, or are inclined
to whore after." [The Heb. is D'3T DH ItyS
Dn^'inN, which seems sufficiently well expressed
in the A. Y., and this is sustained (either in the
CHAP. XVII. 1-16.
135
present or the past tense) by all the ancient
versions. — F. G.] "Rightly the Egyptian wor-
ship of the he-goat was remembered, which was
a deification of the generative desire, and con-
sequently of sensuality, and the biblical expres-
sion to whore after applies in this connection
with double force. It can thus be perceived
that the offering of the slain flesh, besides the
religious idea, had also the moral purpose of
hindering unrestrained luxury. But with the
sacrifice of the slain animal, the fact was at the
same time declared, that in truth every animal
enjoyed in the fear of God was offered to the
Lord; that the man who must offer himself to
Jehovah must also place his slaying of an ani-
mal under the aspect of giving it up to Jehovah,
if he wished to keep it holy. Therefore also the
transgression ia treated as a blood-guiltiness,
and would be visited upon them by Jehovah as
a murder. Since man has the right to shed the
blood of an animal only from Jehovah, and in
relation to Jehovah (to whom everything, with
this, must revert as a sacrifice), a reckless slay-
ing of an animal appears in the text as the be-
ginning of a criminal blood-shedding, which on
a descending path, may end in the murder of
man." [Vers. 1-7. Ver. 4. Blood shall be
imputed unto that man ; he hath shed
blood. This does not mean that murder is to
be imputed to the offender, but that the blood
of the animal which he has actually shed is to
be reckoned to his charge. The reason of both
this precept and that against the eating of blood
is given in ver. 11 : Blood had been divinely
appointed as a means of atonement. If now the
animal slain was one allowable for sacrifice, and
its blood was not used for atonement, the offen-
der was guilty of a misuse of that which God
had appointed for this purpose, and he must be
held responsible for the wasted blood. By ana-
logy, the blood of animals that were not sacrifi-
cial (vers. 13, 14) must also be treated with
respect. It is important to note this meaning
of the passage, for nowhere in Scripture is any-
thing ever said to be imputed to a man by God
which does not really belong to him. — That
man shall be cut oS from among bis peo-
ple. — The slighting of the Divinely appointed
means of atonement was a sin which struck so
deeply at the root of the theocratic and typical
■law that it was inconsistent with membership
among the holy people. The offender must be
excommunicated. Ver. 6. A further reason is
here given for the law of ver. 4. It is only
applied to peace offerings, for this was the only
kind of sacrifice that could be used by the peo-
ple for food, the subject of this paragraph.
This reason is further developed in ver. 7. It
would seem thai the Israelites, very lately come
out of Egypt, were more or less in the habit, so
common among all nations of antiquity (comp.
1 Cor. viii. ; x. 25-28), of consecrating all ani-
mal food by first offering the animal to the
Deity; and this custom, if allowed to be carried
out by the people at the-r own pleasure, would
become, and indeed had already become (ver.
7) a fruitful source of idolatry. Entirely to out
off this, it is provided that all such offerings must
be brought first unto the door of the taber-
nacle, the place of the sole worship of Jehovah;
and second, unto the priest, as His represent-
ative, and the mediator between Him and the
people. The custom of sacrificing in the open
field also prevailed among the nations of classic
antiquity, and was so inveterate among the
Israelites as to be spoken of by both Hosea
(xii. 11) and Jeremiah (xiii. 27). Ver. 7.
Unto demons. — The Hebrew word, as noted
under Textual, is the same as that for he-goats,
Q'Ti^E', Onkeloa has TTE?, the same word as
is used in Deut. xxxii. 17, meaning demons.
It is doubtful whether the word is used of an
actual worship of a false god under the form of
a goat, or only figuratively. Certainly at a
later date there was in Thmuis, the capital of
the Mendesian nome in lower Egypt, and there-
fore near the residence of the Israelites, a hor-
rible and licentious worship of the fertilizing
principle in nature, represented by a he-goat
(Joseph, c. Ap. ii. 7; Herod, ii. 42, 46; Diod.
Sic. i. 18; Strabo, lib. xvii. c. 19, 802; c. 40,
813) ; it may be doubted whether this, in its full
development, existed as early as the time of
Moses ; but very likely it may have already
been known in its germ, and have been commu-
nicated to the Israelites (comp. Hengstenberg
Eg. and the Books of Moses, Am. Ed., p. 216).
The strong tendency of the Israelites to adopt
idolatrous forms of worship boTOwed from
Egypt had already been shown in the instance
of the golden calf; and we find again (2 Chron.
xi. 15) this very worship of the he-goat (A. V.
devils) mentioned along with the calves of Jero-
boam, who had sojourned so long in Egypt be-
fore ascending his throne. — This shall be a
statute forever does not refer to the sacri-
ficing of animals designed for food, which was
revoked with the termination of the life in the
wilderness; but to the worship of demots,
which is the immediate subject. — F. G.]
" Knobel thinks this statute forever was
abolished later, when the animals were no longer
brought to the Tabernacle or to the Temple;
but the principal thought is the consecration to
Jehovah, the religious slaying, and in this the
statute (the husk of an idea) remains among the
Jews continually, even to this day. But the
idea itself remains continually in the Christian
community. From this type it follows also that
that use of animal food was sacrilegious in which
the distinction between the nature of man and
of animals was obliterated."
" 4. Most solemnly is the use of blood forbid-
den. There follows immediately the menace of
punishment in the strongest terms for the
stranger as well as for the Israelite: I virill
even set my face against that soul that
eateth blood, and vsrill cut him off from
among his people [ver. 10]. The reason is
this: the soul or life of the flesh, its soul-like
life-principle, is in the blood. But the blood
belongs, as does all life, to Jehovah, and He baj
given it to the Israelites only for a definite pur-
pose, that they may with it atone for, or cover,
their souls. The blood is the atonement for the
life, since in the blood the life is given over to
the judgment of Jehovah for deliverance and for
pardon. Therefore the prohibition is here re-
peated, as it has also been already expressed.
136
LEVITICUS.
Bven to the blood of beasts that man slays in
the chase, to the very birds, this prohibition
applies, although this blood was not offered ; it
was to be poured out and covered with earth —
it was to be buried. The burial is generally
analogous to the sprinkling of the blood upon
the altar, as the earth is an altar in the widest
sense — it is a symbol of the atonement of the
life, which lies in the resignation of the life.
As physiology confirms the proposition that the
blood is the especial source of life in living
creatures, so do justice and the philosophy of
religion confirm the proposition that death atones
for the guilt of life — so far as it is on this side
of death (Rom. vi. 7). And the use of blood
must appear wicked as long as blood was the
means of atonement. Bat the analogue for this
guilt, for all times, is the making common or
life, of death, of blood, the self-willed invasion
of the destiny of man." [Vers. 10-14. Lange
has not here called attention especially to vers.
8, 9, which show that the stranger was allowed
to offer both the burnt offering and the sac-
rifice (i. c. the peace offering) ; only in so doing
he must conform to the law in offering it at the
door of the tabernacle. This command is given
here because the previous statute being only
applicable to the Israelite, and the stranger not
being required to offer as sacrifices the animals
he might kill for food, he might have claimed
the liberty also of offering sacrifices at his own
pleasure. The penalty of ver. 9, since it applies
equally to the stranger, cannot be restricted to
excommunication, but must be understood either
of banishment from the land or else of the pun-
ishment of death. The object, as already no-
ticed, and as is evident from the amplification
of the law in Deut. xii., was at once to prevent
idolatrous sacrifices, and also to keep up the
idea of the sacrifice as having only a typical '
and not an intrinsic efficacy, since it could only
be allowed at all when its blood was sprinkled
on the altar by the appointed priest. The other
injunctions that follow in this chapter, equally
with the present one, are applicable to strangers
as well as Israelites. In ver. 10 the expression
set my face against means that Ood will take
the punishment of the offence into His own
hands ; He will oppose and reject the offender.
In ver. 1 1 the vicarious character of the atone-
ment effected by means of the sacrifices is very
clearly brought out ; the soul, the V^OTi the prin-
ciple of animal life, is in the blood, and for that
reason the " soul " of animals was given to man to
make an atonement for his own "soul;" by the
giving up of the life of the animal the life of man
was spared. Nothing is said here of the higher
spiritual principle in roan, because — even if the
people could have understood such a distinction —
there was nothing answering to this in the brute.
Nothing in the victim could be a vicarious sub-
stitute for this J that want could be met only by
the sacrifice of Calvary. Meantime, however,
this was symbolized and set forth, as far as the
nature of the case allowed, by the substitution
of the animal life of the victim for the animal
life of man. The blood, therefore, maketh an
atonement by means of the soul which is
in it. See Textual note 8. The statement is not
here, that the blood makes atonement for the
soul, as in the A. V.; this idea has already been
expressed in the previous clause, and now is
added the statement of how this is effected, lest
there should seem to be a virtue in the mere
blood itself as such. With this exposition of the
meaning of the passage itself must be connected
the whole typical significance of sacrifice ; and
in view of this there is truth in the explanation
of Theodoret, of the Jewish expositors, and of
the great mass of commentators, that the animal
life of the victims was accepted in place of the
rational soul of man; the former died that the
latter might live. But that this sense can only
be held in view of the connection of the type
with the Antitype was long ago seen by St. Au-
gustine (Quaest. 57 in Hept.). In ver. 13 the
particular is put for the general ; as during the
life of* the wilderness most animals used lor food
which were not sacrificial were taken in the
chase, this stands for all such animals. But af-
terward (Deut. xii. 15, 16, 22-24) the same di-
rection of pouring out the blood upon the earth
is applied to all animals slain for food. The ob-
ject of the command to cover the blood was pro-
bably double ; first, simply to prevent the dese-
cration of the blood as the vehicle of the animal
soul ; second, to avoid any abuse of it to super-
stitious and idolatrous uses. Ver. 14 once more
repeats with emphasis the prohibition of the
eating of the blood, and for the same reason —
because the blood is the soul, t. e., the vehicle of
the animal life. — F. G.]
5. " The use of unclean flesh (ver. 15) could not
be placed on an equality with the foregoing sins,
since it might take place through many formi
of thoughtlessness ; but nevertheless it was pre-
vented through the natural loathing. Hence the
offender, in the first instance, fell only into the
first grade of the law of purification ; but if he
neglected this, he had to make expiation for his
misdeed.
" Keil (following Baumgarten) entitles the
section chap. xvii. — xx. the holiness of the daily
life of the Israelites, and chap. xvii. particularly
the holiness of food. Certainly the sanctification
of the eating of flesh leads to the sanctification
of food generally. On ' the oneness of soul and
blood,' see Keil, p. 126." [Trans, pp. 409-10.
See also Clark's note II. at the end of this chap-
ter. The prohibition of flesh that had not been
properly slaughtered evidently rests on the fact
that its blood had not been poured out. Still, as
even in this case most of the blood would be col-
lected in the larger vessels of the body, and
would not appear as blood in the flesh that was
eaten, there is less stringency in the prohibition.
The defilement, however, was still considerable,
and involved alike for the Israelite and the
stranger, the washing of the clothes and the
bathing of the person, and remaining unclean
until the evening (ver. 15). That^vhich died
of itself, or that 'which 'was torn, are here
classed together, as also in chap. xxii. 8. In
Ex. xxii. 31 the latter is commanded to be given
to the dogs, and in Deut. xiv. 21 the former is
allowed to be given to the stranger, or sold to an
alien. There appears to have been a certain
degree of distinction between the two, although
both are forbidden to the Israelite. That whiok
died of itself was also forbidden to the stranger
CHAP. XVII. 1-16.
187
during the intimate aasooiation of Israelite and
stranger in tiie camp life of the wilderness, but
this law was relaxed in Deuteronomy in view of
the better separated life in the land of Canaan.
Such food, however, was always considered
polluting to the Israelite (Ez. iv. 14; xliv. 31),
and its touch, as has already been seen (xi. 39)
oommunioated defilement. At the council of Je-
rusalem (Acts XV. 29) the prohibition of "things
strangled " is still continued in counection with
the prohibition of blood. — F. G.]
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL.
I. The command that all sacrifices should be
offered in one place was plainly a part of that
educational law which had been added because
of transgressions. There had been no such re-
striction laid upon the patriarchs ; and under
the law ifself, it was often dispensed with by
Divine command, or with the Divine approval, as
in the case of Samuel, of David, of Solomon, and
of Elijah. Its purpose was to teach symbolically
the Divine unity, and to prevent the worship of
false gods. When this lesson had been suffi-
ciently taught came the hour " when neither in
this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem," men should
"worship the Father" (Jno. iv. 21).
II. When the Israelites sacrificed otherwise
than at the tabernacle, though the idols to which
they professed to offer might be nothing, yet
really they sacrificed to demons. So St. Paul
teaches it was with the sacrifices of the heathen
in his time (1 Cor. x. 19, 20), and he warns
Christians that by partaking of those sacrifices
they came into fellowship with demons, and this
was incompatible with partaking of "the cup
of the Lord." The same consequences must in
all ages attend the offering of the homage of the
heart elsewhere than to God.
III. This unfaithfulness to God is represented
here, as so constantly in the later Scriptures,
by conjugal infidelity. As husband and wife
are no longer twain, but one flesh, so are the
faithful united to their Head in one body, and
any giving of superior allegiance to another is as
the sin of marriage unfaithfulness.
IV. The blood and the soul, or animal life
(1!'3|1), are here connected together, and the same
word is used of the sacrifice of Christ, Isa. liii.
10, and the corresponding Greek word {''jnixv)
repeatedly by our Lord Himself (Matt. xx. 28 ;
Jno. X. 11, etc.). He gave His life {fux^) for us.
In view of the connection established in this
chapter between this and the blood, a fresh sig-
nificance attaches to His words of institution of
the Lord's Supper (Matt. xxvi. 27, 28). The
drinking of the cup which He gave, is the com-
munion in His sacrifice for the remission of sins.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL.
Lange : "That animal food as used by man,
was to be kept holy by a religious consecration
and slaying, excludes the use of flesh that is un-
hallowed or has been offered to demons. Man
was to have a feeling for the suffering of the ani-
mal, for the sacrificial particular of the act of
slaying, for the religio-moral duty of thankful
and moderate use of flesh. Hence there is an
24
element of truth also in the dogma of the vege-
tarians. But all blood must be reserved as an
offering to Jehovah ; for Jehovah alone is the
Author of life, the God of all souls, and it is a
crime to encroach greedily upon His domain.
But how does the eating of blood in Christendom
agree with this, as the council of the Apostles
(Acts XV.) have forbidden it, and as it is still
forbidden in the Oriental Church ! The New
Testament thought is the holiness and inviola-
bility of everything living in itself, since a cre-
ative breath of life dwells in it. If man, without
an object, sheds blood or destroys life, he de-
stroys the sanctuary of Divine goodness. The
outline of the legal prescription disappears be-
hind these thoughts. Men may be very careful,
as in Byzantium and in Russia, to avoid the eat-
ing of blood, and still be in many ways crimi-
nally careless with life, even with the life of
man. Connected with the eating of flesh, the
eating of the flesh of an animal that has died of
itself, or been torn by wild beasts, is also forbid-
den, even if in a slighter degree. In the fact
that such a use of flesh has in itself something
savage, and is a source of many sicknesses, lies
the permanent thought of this legal command."
Calvin notes that the command to sacrifice in
one place was to avoid corruption of the sacri-
fices, and the direction to bring the offering to
the priest was to direct the people to the One
Mediator to come. Thus everywhere the law is
our school-master to point us to Christ. No of-
fering acceptable to God can be offered except
through Him, and all enjoyment of daily life must
be made holy through His mediation.
God does not impute to man the fault which is
not his ; but the fault which is really his may
be far more serious than he supposes. The kill-
ing of an animal otherwise than God allowed,
was the shedding of blood — of blood which had
been given for man's atonement ; and so now,
many sins which seem upon the surface mere
sins of frivolity and thoughtlessness, will prove
on closer examination to be deep offences against
the love of Him who shed His blood for us on
the cross.
Any offering of sacrifice otherwise than in the
way of God's appointment, became to the Isra-
elites a sacrificing to demons; so any giving to
other objects of the supreme affection He re-
quires for Himself,beoomes to us idolatry. Comp.
Eph. T. 5 ; Col. iii. 5.
Strangers must in many respects come under
the laws given to the people of God. Men do
not escape the responsibility of obedience by re-
fusing to acknowledge allegiance, and to be num-
bered with His people.
In the treatment of the blood of the wild ani-
mal is taught the general principle of congruity
in matters which are not the subject of direct
precepts. Man should order all his ways in har-
mony with the conduct which in certain things
is directly commanded. Especially under the
Christian dispensation is this principle of wide
application. Here principles are given rather
than detailed precepts, to guide our conduct, and
we must largely be governed by the congruity
and fitness of things, and their harmony with
that which is commanded.
138
LEVITIv^vK.
SECOND SECTION
Holiness of the Marriage Relation.
Chapter XVIII.
" The keeping holy of marriage, nj all sexual relations, and of all the relations of life in general"
Chapteks XVIII.— XX.
A— "THE KEEPING HOLY OF MARRIAGE AND OF ALL SEXUAL RELATIONS UNDER
THE PENALTY OF THE CHEEEM."— Lahgb.
Chapter XVIII.
PRELIMINARY NOTE.
On the " Prohibited Degrees " and on the Marriage Laws of the Heathen.
The law declaring under what conditions sex-
ual intercourse is forbidden is given in the pre-
sent chapter ; the punishment of disobedience in
the several cases is declared in xx. 10-21. The
latter is naturally less full, leaving the punish-
ment in some instances to be inferred from ana-
logy ; and in one case it is considered by some
commentators that there is a slight extension of
the law here given. See on xx. 20. The law
covers all sexual intercourse whether by formal
marriage or by simple concubinage; and when
the wives of various persons are mentioned, the
term includes their wives when living, and their
widows when they were themselves dead. It is
remarkable that it makes no exception in favor
of such marriages as had occurred among the
ancestors of the Israelites, as in the case of Ja-
cob, from which they were themselves descended.
(The marriage of Abraham with Sarah was pro-
bably with his niece, the word mter allowing of
this latitude).
The whole law is expressed in reference to the
man, since the inception of such relations rests
with him ; but it would be a mistake to suppose
that a precisely parallel list might be drawn up
also for the woman. Differences are introduced
by the law of the Levirate marriage (an institu-
tion much more ancient than the time of Moses,
see Gen. xxxviii.), and by the general relation
of protector and protected ; the law therefore
applies to the woman only in the case of those
relationships in whioh the man is forbidden to
have intercourse with her. Some of the degrees
which are prohibited implicitly are not expressly
mentioned : thus connection with a daughter is
not mentioned by itself, although necessarily in-
volved in the prohibition of intercourse with a
woman and her daughter in ver. 17 ; that with
a step-mother is included in ver. 8, and is espe-
cially mentioned as the subject of one of the
curses in Deut. xxvii. 23 ; that with a
mother is not mentioned at all, either because it
was considered unnecessary to do so, or else be-
cause it was sufficiently implied by the other pro-
hibitions. The whole law is expressly grounded
(vers. 2, 3, 24-27) upon the duty of avoiding the
abominable customs of the Egyptians and the
Canaanites, so that there was the less necessity
for express mention of anything which was not
practised by them.
The principle on which the prohibitions rest
(ver. 6) is expressly declared to be nearness of
relationship ; and although the Hebrew expres-
sion employed for this (lit. flesh of bis flesh)
might in itself apply only to blood relations, yet
it is distinctly extended in the law to relations
by affinity also, though not always to the same
degree. In the remoter degrees the relationship
is afi'ected by other considerations, so that ia
parallel cases, sometimes one connection is for-
bidden while the other is not mentioned. Gene-
rally, the whole list might be incluiled in the
single prohibition that no man might be connec-
ted with a woman who stood, or who might come
to stand to him in the position of a ward ; no one
who could be included in the family of whioh he
was head. In this connection the LXX. trans-
lation in ver. 6 is to be noted : ovflpoirof trpof
Trdvra o'tKsla aapub^ avrnv oil 7i-po(!£7i.£vasraL. Such
a description, however, would not be quite ac-
curate, since the niece is not included in the list
of prohibited degrees ; and there are two pro-
hibited cases which would not come under the
description. These are the maternal aunt, who
would form a part of the wife's father's or bro-
ther's family; and the wife's sister, forbidden
only during the life-time of the wife.
The prohibited degrees may be conveniently
arranged under the three following heads :
PKELIMINART NOTE ON THE PROHIBITED DEGKBES OF THE HEATHEN.
139
1. Mother, ver. 7,
4. Daughter, ver, 17.
6. Motber-In-lftw, rer. 17.
9. Step-graud-daughter, Ter. 17.
a. Relations by Blood.
2. Aunt on either side, vers. 12, 13.
6. Grand-daughter, vers. 10.
b. Direct Relations by Affinity.
3. Siater aod half sister, vers. 9, IL
7. Step-mother, ver, 8.
8. Step-daughter, ver. 17-
o. Indirect Relations by Affinity.
10. Father's brother's wife, ver. 14. 11, Brother's wife, ver. 16. 12. BE^aghtef-in-law, ver. 16,
In addition to these there is a temporary pro-
hibition of the wife's sister daring the wife's
own life.
Among the heathen these relationships were
very differently regarded. Marriage with a sis-
ter was permitted among the Egyptians by ex-
press law in consequence of the legend in their
mythology of the marriage of Osiris with his
sister Isia (Diod. Sic. i. 27; Philo de Sp. Legg.
near beginning), and this custom continued, at
least in the royal family, quite down to the time
of their conquest by the Eomans (Dio. Cass. xlii.
p. 205, E. ed., Hanover, 1606). With regard to
lufirriage with a mother, direct evidence is want-
ing ia regard to the Canaanites, but among the
Medes and the Persians it was practised from
the earliest times, as also among the Indians and
the Ethiopians. (See the authorities in Enobel),
and all these nations appear to have permitted
also marriage with a daughter. Marriage with
a sister, however, was unknown among the Per-
sians until the time of Cambyses, (Herod, iii.
31). Marriage with a step-mother seems to have
been universal among Oriental monarchs, and
the inheritance of the father's seraglio one of
the marks of succession to his throne. Hence
Solomon's treatment of Adonijah is to be ex-
plained when he sought to have Abishag given
to him (1 Kings ii. 13-25). Marriage with a
wife's step-mother, however, is not forbidden,
and a notable instance of it is in David's inhe-
riting the wives of his father-in-law Saul, spoken
of as a mark of the Divine favor, 2 Sam. xii. 8.
The marriages here forbidden are spoken of
as crimes in the Canaanites for which they were
about to be punished. While it is not necessary
to extend this to each particular, still it must be
recognized that the prohibited degrees generally
were such as could be understood by the light
of nature or such dim tradition of the Divine
will as might have been accessible to the Ca-
naanites. Accordingly, it is well known that the
prohibited degrees among the Greeks and Ro-
mans were for the most part the same as in the
laws of Moses. Solon indeed permitted mar-
riage with a half-sister by the father only, and
Lyourgus with a half-sister by the mother only
(Philo de Sp. Legg., pp. 601, F. Ed., Geneva,
1618) ; but the early Roman law went even far-
ther than the Levitical in forbidding marriages
between uncles and nieces, and between cousins
german, which was only relaxed in the 2d cent,
before our era (Liv. xlii. 34 ; Cic. pro Gluent. V.
quoted by Clark). Similar laws, too, might be
quoted from other nations, showing that those
of the Egyptians and Canaanites were simply a
license to passion, contrary to what they might
have known to be right.
Marriage with a deceased, wife's sister is
clearly allowed under the I^Bvitioal law, not
merely by not being prohibited ;. but being pro-
hibited during the lifetime of the sister first taken
to wife, it becomes doubly certain that it was
permitted afterwards. It is even made still mor?
clear by the reason assigned.^: the relations of
two wives of the same man are not apt to be
friendly, and Moses would not allow either that
the natural affection of sisters should be sub-
jected to this strain, or that the inevitable ani-
mosities of the harem should be increased b;/
the previous familiar relation of sisters. On the
other hand, the marriage with a brother's widow
was forbidden, evidently because she became
the ward of the surviving brother ; and because
also if the brother had died childless while she
remained his wife, the survivor was bound to
take her by a Levirate marriage. In either case
her children were to be reckoned to the deceased
brother, and hence the penalty for violating this
precept in xx. 21 is that they shall be childless,
i. 6., that any children born to such a union
should be reckoned in the genealogies, not to
them, but to the deceased brother. The law
therefore in this case must be considered as based
upon questions of civil polity and not upon afS-
nity. Hence it does not apply to the parallel
case of the decased wife's sister; for she could
never have formed a part of her brother-in-law's
household under the family system of the He-
brews. In the punishments denounced in ch.
XX. against the sins here prohibited, it will be
found that a distinction is made in the degree
of guilt. One, and the larger class, is to be ca-
pitally punished (in one case even the bodies of
both parties are to be burnt), while in the other
class the penalty is simply that "they shall be
childless." It cannot be supposed that a per-
petual miracle was to be maintained through all
the ages of Israel's hisl^ory ; but the meaning
evidently is that the children of such marriages
should be reckoned not to their actual father,
but to the former husband of the woman. In the
strong feeling of the Israelites in regard to pos-
terity, this penalty seems to have been suficient.
(An instance of this use of the word childless is
to be found in Jer. xxli. 30 compared with 1
Chr. iii. 17, 18). It is not to be supposed that
the more remote of the prohibited degrees were
among the abominations for which the Canaan-
ites were to be cut off; but on the other hand
adultery and the other horrible sins mentioned
in vera. 20-28 were undoubtedly among their
custom*.
140 LEVITICUS.
Literature. — Miohaelis, Laws of Motes; Ab-
\andlung ilber die Ehegeaetze Mosis; Saalschutz,
Mos. Eecht; Seldeu, uxor ebr. See also the
numerous references in Calmet on this chapter.
Also, John Fry, The cases of marriage between
near kindred, etc. Loudon, 1766.
Chaptek XVIII. 1-30.
1, 2. And the Loed spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel,
3 and say unto them, I am the Lokd your God. After the doings of the land of
Egypt, wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not do : and after the doings of the land of
Canaan, whither I bring' you, shall ye not do : neither shall ye walk in their ordi-
4 nances [statutes']. Ye shall do my judgments, and keep mine ordinances [statutes*],
5 to walk therein : I am the Lord your God. Ye shall therefore keep 'my statutes,
and 'my judgments : which if a man do, he shall live in them : I am the Lord.
6 None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin* to him, to uncover thdr
7 nakedness : I am the Lord. The nakedness of thy father, or [even°] the naked-
ness of thy mother, shalt thou not uucover : she is thy mother ; thou shalt not
8 uncover her nakedness. The nakedness of thy father's wife shalt thou not uncover :
9 it is thy father's nakedness. The nakedness of thy sister, the daughter of thy
father, or daughter of thy mother, whether she he born* at home, or bom abroad,
10 even their' nakedness thou shalt not uncover. The nakedness of thy son's daugh-
ter, or of 'thy daughter's daughter, even their nakedness thou shalt not uncover:
11 for their's m thine own nakedness. The nakedness of thy father's wife's daughter,
begotten of thy father, she is thy sister, thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.
12 Thou shall not uncover the nakedness of thy father's sister:' she is thy father's
13 near kinswoman.* Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy mother's sister:
14 for she is thy mother's near kinswoman.* Thou shalt not uncover the nakednass
of thy father's brother,' thou shalt not approach to his wife : she is thine aunt.
15 Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy daughter in law : she is thy son's
16 wife; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness. Thou shalt not uncover the naked-
17 ness of thy brother's wife ; it is thy brother's nakedness. Thou shalt not uncover
the nakedness of a woman and her daughter, neither shalt thou take her son's
daughter, or her daughter's daughter, to uncover her nakedness ; for they are her
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL.
1 Ver. S. " N^3D- Introducturus sum. Present for the future." EosenmtlUer.
' Ver. 3, Dn^npn^l- npn is variously and apparently arbitrarily rendered in the A. V. ordinance and ifnhite,
beside the occaBional re'uderingB, cusfmn, manner and rite. There is no reason why the translation should not be uniform,
and as statute is the more cooimon. and hitherto in Lev. the uniform, rendering, this is adopted.
s Ter. 5. One MS. and the LXX. insert twice the word aU. At the end of the verse the LXX. adds your God.
• Ver. 6. 11i£73 •1!
Molech"], neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the Lord. Thoii
shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind : it is abomination. Neither shalt
thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith : neither shall any woman stand
before a beast to lie down thereto : it is confusion.
Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things : for in all these the nations are
defiled which I cast out" before you : and the land is defiled : therefore I do visit
26 the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth" out her inhabitants. Ye
shall therefore keep" mj statutes and my judgments, and shall not commit any. of
these abominations ; neither any of your own nation, nor any stranger that sojourn-
27 eth among you: (for all these abominations have the men of the land done, which
28 were before you, and the land is defiled ;) that the land spue not you out also,, when
29 ye defile it, as it spued" out the nations that were before you. For whosoever shall
commit any of these abominations, even the souls that commit them shall be cut off
30 from among their people. Therefore shall ye keep mine ordinance, that ye commit
not any one of these abominable customs [statutes^], which were committed before
you, and that ye defile not yourselves therein : I am the Loed your God.
22
23
24
25
w Ter, 18. There can be here no question of the exact literalnesa of the rendering of the text of the A. Y; ; that of the
margin is not a translation, but a more than doubtful iiUerpretation. It would be an absolute prohibition of polygamy
which is here out of the question, unless stress were laid, as Poole has done, upon the purpose of such marriage, to vex ;
but the word Ti]f7=to press, to bind together^ will not justify Ihia.
" Yer. 21. For T3j7n7, Sam. and LXX. read T'^^jTl—lo reduce to servitmie. A similar idea, to didieate, may be
given to the Heb. word as it stands. Vulg. ut conaecretwr, and similarly all the ancient versions. So the word is used, Ex.
xiii. 12. As this is the first mention of Molech, and there is no word for fire, it is better to keep' strictly to the original
and translate dedicate. BosenmuUer, traducas. The corresponding expressions in xx. 2, 3, 4, have simply Tnj=to giva^
without the following verb. According to the Maaoretic punctuation Molech is always (except 1 Kings xi. 7) written with
the article II^Qrit ^^^ ^^ rendered here and xx. 2, 3, 4, 5, by the LXX. apxav, but Jer. xxxii. (Gr. xxxix.) 35, o MoXbx
^a(^lAev5, 1 Kings xi. 7 (Or. 6), simply 6 ^ao-iAeus, and 2 Kings xxiii. 10, o MoAd;^.
^ Yer. 26. The Heb. has here the pronoun Di^K in addition to the verbal suffix. It is omitted in the Sam. and in 3
MSS. ,
13 Yers. 24, 25, 28. In ver. 24 TvJJ^O is t^i© Hiphil Part.=Iam casting oul^ and in accordance with this the preteritea
Kpni (which has the 1 conversive) of ver. 25 and TItip "VffKS of ver. 28 are to be understood.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL.
This chapter coosists of an introductory ex-
hortation, vers. 2-5 ; the laws against incest,
Yers. 6-18; the prohibition of other kind of
unchastity and unnatural crimes, vers. 19-23 ;
and a concluding exhortation, vers. 24-80.
" The whole marriage law, as a holy limitation,
marks two mutually opposite extremes or forms
of excess : first, sins against the blood relation-
ship, or against the fear of desecrating the com-
mon source of life, the community of blood,
vers. 1-18 ; secondly, sins of the dissolutedispo-
sition, the horrible passing over the life-line of
pure marriage, or the new relationship, into the
Tarious forms contrary to nature, vers. 19-30."
I/ange.
Vers. 2-5. This exhortation opens with re-
minding the people I aia the LORD your
Grod, and closes with the abbreviation of the
same formula : I am the LORD. The same
expression occurs again in the midst of it (ver.
4), and also at the opening of the law itself
(ver. 6), in the midst of the third diyision of the
chapter (ver. 21), and again at the close of the
whole. It is designed to impress most strongly
upon the minds of the Israelites that the obser-
vance of this law is a matter of covenant obliga-
tion. And this is enforced by the contrast (ver.
3) with the doings of the laad of Egypt
from which they had been delivered, and the
doings of the land of Canaan whose nations
were about to be cast out to make room for them«
It closes with the promise that if a man do the
Divine statutes and judgments, he shall live
in them. Xot merely, he shall not be cut off
by the punishments denounced against the trans-
gression of these laws in ch. xx. ; bat he shall
gain that true life of communion with God which
accompanies the obedience to His commands.
Comp. Ezek. xx. 11, 13, 21 ; Luke x. 28. "This
whole legislation bears on its front the name of
Jehovah, the God of Israel, ver. 2, in the more
definite signification that the Israelites should
keep themselves holy in their personality, i. e.
true to themselves, suitably to their personality,
as Jehovah is holy (xix. 2). But the legislation
took its occasion in this : that Israel, as the
people hallowed by Qod, should form an instruo-
142
LEVITICUS.
tiTe and rebuking contrast to the shameful sexual
life of the land of Egypt, whence they had just
come out, and that still more shameful of the
land of Canaan, whither they were going under
the leadership of Jehovah. . . . That this legis-
lation was not able in later days to prevent
transgressions, e. g. in the family of David itself,
is explained even from the essential nature of
law. From this a careful critic would decide
for the high Mosaic age of the law rather than
for the contrary.
"That a most highly living intelligence per-
vades the section results from the various signi-
ficant expressions : the judgments and sta-
tutes of Jehovah (ver. 4) become for the people
the statutes and judgments (first law, and
only afterwards the idea (ver. 5)." [Patrick
says: "The Gemara Babylonica, mentioning
these words, saith, it is a tradition of their doc-
tors that by D'Q3t!'p are to be understood such
natural laws as all mankind are bound to ob-
serve, though there were no written commands
for them, such as those against idolatry, and
those about uncovering the nakedness of such
near relations as are here mentioned, and mur-
der, etc. And by iTlpn such laws are meant
as depended only on the pleasure of God, and
obliged none but those to whom they were given,
such as those about meats and garments and
leprosy, etc." F. G.] "That which is contrary
to nature in the marriage of relations consists
in this : that the man by his family life, which
should be the foundation of new bonds of love
and new families, mingles again egotistioalUy
with his own flesh ('nb?3 nXB'-Vs '7N) ; and
that by profane conduct he exposed the obscure
and hallowed origin of his own life (uncovered
the shame), and thus repeated the sin of Ham (for
the shame of the wife of near kin is also the shame
of the father, xx. 11). Therefore also it is neces-
sary to explain the saying 'V7hich if a man do,
he shall live in them in its particular connec-
tion : all these directions tend to the furtherance
of life, especially of the higher life, while the con-
trasted sexual relations produce death.
"The case of adultery is not considered,
since the reference is to widows when connec-
tions with those who have been married before are
considered The deterinining principle is
that of community of blood ("'KE'). But this is
itself determined by the fundamental idea that
man and wife are one. Hence it follows that
the shame of the father's wife is also the shame
of the father himself (vers. 7, 8). The shame
of a grand-daughter was looked upon, since she
was a descendant, as the shame of the grand-
father himself (ver. 10). The shame of the sis-
te>-in-law was thus also looked upon as the
shame of the brother.
" As to the guilt and punishment, the death-
penalty stands according to xx. 11 sqq. for the
carnal intercourse (not. merely the marrying)
with a father's wife, with a daughter-in-law, witli
a, half-sister " [and hence of course with a full
sister] ; " the punishment was, indeed, death by
fire when one took a woman and her daughter
together (that is DBt)." [This necessarily in-
cludes the case of a daughter, and of a wife'°
mother. Michaelis (Laws, Art. 102) considers
ni3I as a foreusio term used to express those
forms of incest in which the woman is under the
guardianship of the man, and derives the word
from the Arabic in which " Zimm means mar-
riage, and Zimma the state of guardianship ( Cli-
entela), from the word Zamm, to connect." This
sense is indeed appropriate for the very few
places in which it occurs in the law (Lev. xviii.
17 ; xii. 29 ; xx. 14 bis), but elsewhere it is used
for any abominable wickedness (as Job xxxi. 11)
especially lewdness (Judg. xx. 6). See Gesen.
Thea. — P. G.]. "It is said indefinitely of the
intercourse with a sister of the father or of the
mother, they shall bear their iniquity (|1j[)."
[xx. 19. Michaelis (Art. 112, 2) observes in re-
gard to these and the following kinds of pro-
hibited marriages, that Moses tolerated " their
continuance, if once consummated. At least he
nowhere enjoins a separation of the parties." It
might be argued, indeed, that a forbidden mar-
riage was utterly void, and therefore that its sin
was constantly renewed as long as the parties
continued to sustain towards each other the mar-
riage relation ; but certainly the penalty in the
two following classes presupposes that they con-
tinued to live together. — F. G.]. " In contrast
with this, it is said of him who slept with his
father's brother's wife, they shall bear their
sin (DNOn); they shall die childless" [xx.
20]. " So also of the case when any one takes
his brother's wife, thatisiTIJ ( Levitical unolean-
ness), they shall be childless" [xx. 21],
" Thus the social punishment is not wholly ab-
sent here also, but the principal thing was the
threat of the Divine punishment of these con-
nections with childlessness." [On the meaning
of this punishment, see the preliminary note.—
F. G.]. " Since in all these cases the willingness
on the woman's side is assumed, the threat of the
penalty is for both sides alike. It is worth while
to notice also the circumstance that the penal
statutes which refer to the marriage of relations
are mingled with other penal statutes (xx. 13,
16, 16), a proof that here in chap. xx. another
point orview is brought forward. But if in re-
gard to the prohibition of the marriage with a
brother's widow childlessness was threatened,
while later the prohibition could be changed re-
latively into a command in the ordinance of the
Levirate marriage " [the Levirate marriage took
place only in case the brother died childless —
F. G.]; " still there is made definitely prominent
a principal end of the legislation in the manifold
threat of childlessness, which evidently extended
also over the greater transgressions or reached
the Cherem : marriage was to be protected, ob-
served, and kept holy as the nursery for the
raising of children, for new families, and truly
for pure and hallowed families (comp. Com. on
Jno., p. 47 " [Am. Ed., p. 111]).
" It is well known that in the treatment of
these prohibited degrees of marriage various
motives have been given, among others the fol-
lowing: the diminution and prevention of fami-
lies in the marriage of relations. This motive
comes out strongly here. Also in the expyession
in ver. 6, he shall live by them." [A broader
meaning may be given, as above, to ver. 5, and
CHAP. XVIII. 1-30.
143
the threat of childlessness has already been ex-
plained (prel. note) as referring to the legal reck-
oning of the children. If childlessness could be
proved to be a natural penalty of the inter-mar-
riage of near blood relations, it would yet wholly
fail to apply to cases of simple affinity, to which
alone the penalty is attached in the law. Very
striking is its inapplicability to the marriage with
a brother's wife, for if such a natural law existed,
the Levirate marriage would have been wholly
useless. — P. G.]. "But no less is there another
motive here implied : the respect of kinship,
{reapectus parentelse), and even the forcible ex-
pression uncover the nakedness only brings
out strongly the impiety which, in such case.s,
uncovers the fountains of its own life, which have
been hitherto concealed by natural respect."
[See this point discussed at length in Michaelis
(Art. 107) who decides that it had no influence
in the Mosaic legislation. — P. G.]. "And it is
plain, that with this unnatural going back of
men to the roots of their own existence in this
perversion of marriage, which is the specific
school of the future, into a retrogressive move-
niient, it must immediately follow that family ego-
ism will be at the same time ever more and more
cherished ; whereas the Theocracy, as the reli-
gion of the future, seeks to establish marriage
on the basis of ever new conditions of love, for
the purpose of building up a most intimate fel-
lowship in the human family."* [See this mo-
tive also discussed and rejected by Michaelis,
Art. 106.— P. G.].
" It is well known that the hierarchy and its
theology has not only not explained ideaMy the
law of the marriages of relations, has not only
brought it over unchanged into the new covenant;
but has also stiffened it still more by another cal-
culation of the degrees of relationship, by the
addition of spiritual relationships, and by the
prohibition to marry the sister of a deceased
sister-f- [wife]. In regard to heathen marriage
customs, see Knobel, p. 502 sqq.
" That these marriage laws of Leviticus form
a great and sharp contrast to the immoral cus-
toms of the Egyptians and the Canaanites ex-
presses the very cause of this legislation. More
in regard to the immorality of the heathen may
be found in Knobel, p. 502 sqq., in Keil, p. 127
sqq." [Trans, p. 413 note, p. 418], "and espe-
cially in the Historisch-polituichen Brie/en of I. v.
Ranmer, p. 29 sqq. It is particularly worthy
of notice that the Arabian morals have the great-
est resemblance to these morals of the law, which
may perhaps be explained from their Semitic
character." [But the legislation of the Japhetic
Greeks and Bomans, and of the Hindoos for the
higher castes was even more strict, as noted by
Lange below ; and the doom pronounced upon
the Canaanites certainly implies that their sins
were such as might be recognized in any nation
by the light of nature. — F. G.]. " The lascivious
service of lust of the Egyptians, illustrated by
* Comp, 'Winer, Art. Eh^.. Herzog'B Berj^l-lilncj/cJoplidie, Ehe
fiei (few Sebr&ern u. a. Lexica. H. Spoudlin, JJeher das Ehe-
verbot wegen verwandUchaft mid das verbrechen de.f Incestm, Zu-
rich, 1844. Tlie same, p. 13 : " die richtige Begrwndung von Au-
t "Here cornea into Dotice the illiberal article in the Eng-
lish law, which haa already produced man; tragic occur-
rences."
Ptolemy's marriage with his sister, and by the
history of Cleopatra, would appear the more le-
markable since the Egyptian customs and reli-
gion on all sides admonished of death ; but per-
haps, indeed, this fact depends upon a connection
between sexual pleasure and the thought of death,
as e. g., in war and camp life, such a conueotiou
is to be observed. Besides the Arabian customs,
the harsher character of the Hindoo and of the
Boman legislation is to be particularly noticed."
Lange.
Vers. 6-18. The phrase uncover the naked-
ness continued to be used to express sexual in-
tercourse through many ages. Comp. Ezek. xvi.
36 ; xxiii. 18. The list of prohibited degrees
begins appropriately with the mother. Her na-
kedness is described as the nakedness of thy
father, since husband and wife constitute " one
flesh," Gen. ii. 24. " Strictly speaking TW^]! nbj
is used only with reference to the wife ; but in
the dishonoring of his wife the honor of the hus-
band is violated also, and his bed defiled. Gen.
xlix. 4." Keil. Comp. ver. 8. Eosenmiiller ex-
plains the phrase as meaning the nakedness which
is (or was) under the control of the father. The
Targ. of Jonathan assumes an ellipsis, and rea-
ders " a woman shall not cohabit with herfather,
nor a man with his mother," which is neither
agreeable to the Hebrew, nor consistent with the
fact that the whole law is addressed to the man.
Aben Ezra, as quoted by Eosenmiiller, well ex-
presses the arrangement: " He begins with the
father, who precedes the son, and declares for-
bidden all nakedness of the father and mother ;
the mother is placed first, then the nakedness of
the wife of the father who is not the mother,
then the sister who is the daup;htBr of the father
or of the mother." In ver. 8 thy father's wife
refers to another wife than the mother of the
person addressed, and the term v^ife is of course
broad enough to include the concubine. The
sinfulness of this act, as in the case of Eeuben
(Gen. XXXV. 22; xlix. 8, 4) was understood long
before the giving of the Mosaic law, and conti-
nued to be held in abomination among the Gen-
tiles in Apostolic days (1 Cor. v. 1) ; neverthe-
less it was one of the crimes of which Absalom
was deliberately guilty (2 Sam. xvi. 22), and as
already noticed, it was regularly practised by
themonarchs of Persia. — Thy father's naked-
ness is used in the same sense as in ver. 7.
Connection with a half-sister on either side being
forbidden in ver. 9, that with a full sister, since
ehe might be described as a half-sister on both
sides, is doubly forbidden. The expression born
at home or born abroad has been variously
interpreted. The true sense is undoubtedly
that given by Eosenmiiller, "a sister in what-
ever way she may be a sister, whether of the
same or of different parents, whether legiti-
mately or illegitimately born." Thus are in-
cluded the daughter of either father or mother
by either a previous or a subsequent marriage
(and these cases would have been much more
frequent under laws allowing of divorce and re-
marriage), or the daughter of the father by an-
other wife; also illegitimate children of either.
The marriage of Abraham and Sarah is often
referred to as an instance in opposition to thia
Hi
LEVITICUS.
law ; but it is more probable that the word siater
is there used in the broader Bense, and that Sa-
rah was really the niece of Abraham. Ver. 10.
Theirs' is thine own naliedness. — Because
of their direct descent, intercourse with them
would inTolve a sort of incest with one's self.
Of course this would apply & fortiori to the case
of a daughter which is not specifically men-
tioned, bul is included in the prohibition of ver. 17.
The prohibition of ver. 11 of the half-sister on the
fal her' s side seems already included in the broader
one of ver. 9. Various explanations have been
given to mark a difference between them, among
which perhaps the best is that of Keil : that ver.
9 treats of the connection of a sou by a second
marriage with a daughter by a first marriage,
while ver. 11 applies to the connection of a son
by a first marriage with a daughter by a subse-
quent marriage ; but this seems an undue limi-
tation of ver. 9. Probably there was at the time
some technical use of the terms which constituted
a distinction which is now lost. According to
Selden {Uxor Eebr. L. I. c. 4) ver. 11 admits of
the translation " The nakedness of thy father's
wife's daughter (but she who is begotten of thy
father is thy sister) thou shalt not uncover ;"
thereby meaning to forbid connection with the
daughter of a step-mother, and marking this as
a distinct prohibition from that of the half-sister.
Intercourse with an aunt on either the father's
or the mother's side is forbidden in vers. 12, 13,
on the principle of near blood relationship ; but
there is no prohibition of marriage with the cor-
responding relation of niece. The reason of this
distinction is not apparent. According to Ex.
vi. 20, Moses was himself the offspring of the
marriage of Amram with Jochebed, his paternal
aunt. This would indicate that this prohibited
degree is a matter of the Divine statute rather
than of natural law, and was not therefore ne-
cessarily extended to the niece. In ver. 14 the
prohibition is extended to the wife of the pater-
nal uncle, as having become an aunt by her union
with the uncle. It would not however follow
from this that the law forbade the marriage of a
woman with the husband of her aunt, since in
consequence of the dependence of the family upon
the male in the Hebrew polity, the correspond-
ing relations upon the mother's side stood in a
less intimate relation than those upon the fa-
ther's. In the reverse order, however, the pro-
hibition is more stringent upon the woman than
upon the man, since a woman is hereby forbidden
to marry her husband's nephew, while the man
is not forbidden to marry his wife's niece. The
application of this principle to ver. 15 would
fioem at first sight to lead to the permission of
*he abominable marriage of a woman with her
son-in-law ; but this is guarded against by ver.
17. The prohibition of intercourse with a bro-
ther's wife in connection with the more ancient
custom of the levirate marriage has already been
explained in the preliminary note. It is parti-
cularly to be observed that the levirate marriage
only took place in case the brother had died
childless, and she was still his wife at his death,
and that even then it was not so much a fresh
marriage, as a sort of continuance of the mar-
riage of the deceased by his nearest surviving
representative. The prohibitions of ver. 17 have
already been seen to complement several of the
other prohibitions, and the principle which for-
bids the connection with both a mother and a
daughter is extended also to the grand-daughter.
On ver. 18 see preliminary note.
" Keeping the seed sacred to its purpose, is as
has been said the fundamental thought of our
section. Hence over against the physico-spiritual
sins against nature of marriage of blood relations
is placed, as the other extreme, the violation of
nature in desecrating the blood with beasts or
demons. The first sin is, indeed, a violation of
nature which can take place in marriage itself,
the transgressing the unapproachableness of a
woman in her sickness. But a sickness in sexual
relation is certainly the condition of menstru-
ation, ver. 19." [After the list of prohibited
degrees, whether of consanguinity or of affinity,
naturally follows the prohibition of other unlaw-
ful conditions of sexual intercourse. First is
mentioned that of which there was the greatest
danger of violation. The feminine unclean-
ness here named is the m], including both the
monthly unoleanness (xv. 33) and the unclean-
ness after childbirth (xii. 2). The violation of
this is enumerated by Ezek. (xviii. 6 ; xxii. 10)
among sins of a most serious character. Next
comes adultery (ver. 20), then the giving of the
seed to Molech (ver. 21), and finally sodomy
(ver. 22), and bestial sins (ver. 23).— F. 6.].
" The second sin is adultery : it defiles a man in
three and four ways, since he commits treason
against the teleology of his seed, against his per-
sonal dignity, against the sacrifice of his plea-
sure, and against his betrayed neighbor. On
the punishment of adultery see Knobel, p. 506."
[Both parties were to be put to death, xx, 10;
bent. xxii. 22 ; Comp. Jno. viii. 5. Knobel fur-
ther notes that other nations of antiquity were
less rigorous ; they generally punished the adul-
terer with a fine (Died. 12, 21), but also more
severely. Among the Egyptians the adulterer
must submit to a thousand blows and have
his nose cut off (Diod. 1, 78) ; among the Indiana
both pecuniary and bodily punishment, as well
as exile and death were commanded (Manu 8,
352 ss.) ; among the Greeks, the woman suffered
repudiation and infamy, while the adulterer could
be put to death or receive from the court a se-
vere bodily punishment (Waohsmuth II. 1, p.
272). Knobel further mentions the punishments
among the Moslems and the modern Orientals. —
F. G.]. " The third sin is the sacrifice to Mo-
lech, here manifestly infanticide and falling away
from the name of Jehovah at once. Knobel:
" By this is meant not a mere lustration by
means of fire, but an actual burning. See Mo-
vers, Phonmer I., p. 328 sqq. On the Moleoh
sacrifice, see the same, p. 506 Opposed to this,
the deductions of Keil, that the expression here
indicates only a lustration or a februation (P.
130, 131 [Trans, p. 416, 417]) can hardly Be
maintained." [The precise purport of this pro-
hibition is very uncertain. In Deut. xii. 81, it
is mentioned as a sin of the Canaanites that
" even their sons and their daughters they have
burnt in the fire to their gods," and the Israel-
ites are warned against imitating them. It is
generally assumed by commentators that the
deity there intended is Molech, and that by seed
CHAP. XVIII. 1-
14B
in oar passage is meant cliildren, and that tins
b.iili refer to tlie same thing. But here we have
no mention of fire (see Textual Note 9), and it is
at least doubtful if seed here means offspring,
AUhough explanations are offered by the com-
mentators of such an abrupt change of subject,
yet it is far more in accordance with the context
and the general purpose of the chapter to un-
derstand seed here simply of the semen. Too
little is now known of the worship of Moleoh at
this very ancient date to determine precisely the
meaning of the expression. It is noticeable,
however, that there is no other prohibition of
the foul habit of masturbation, for which there
seems to be need ; may it not be conjectured that
this act was known as " giving one's seed to Mo-
leoh," and was associated with the practices of
idolatry ? The sin, whatever it was, connected
itself with the worship of a false god as is shown
by the clause neither shall thou profane the
name of thy God. It was not only itself to
be punished with death by stoning ; but punish-
ment was also denounced againstanyonewho saw
the sin committed and did not expose it (xx. 2-
6). If the above conjecture is right, it was very
natural that in after times this custom should
have advanced, as it did, to the actual burning
of children as a sacrifice to Molech (2 Ki. xxiii.
10; Ezek. xvi. 20, 21, etc.), though even this is
explained by many of merely passing the chil-
dren between two fires. — F. G.]. "The fourth
sin is the especially abominable sin of Sodom,
Poederastia, for which the Canaanites at last re-
ceived the sentence, that their land should "spue
them out;" nature herself could no more endure
them. See 1 Kings, Commentary p. 56" [Trans.
p. 75 ?] " The fifth sin is the acme of abomina-
bleness, conjunction with a beast, and yet this
was something that occurred, or else the law
would not have spoken of it. According to He-
rodotus and Pindar, women at Mendes let them-
selves be mounted by a he-goat (Herod. 2, 46,
tic.)." Knobel. See similar examples given by the
same." [The fearful prevalence of Sodomy,
(which takes its name from a Canaanitish city),
in the Rome of Apostolic days is evident from
Ebm. i. 24, 27, as well as from the classic au-
thors. The practice of it seems to have been
inveterate among the Hebrews, 1 Kings xiv. 24.
'■ Ver. 22. The ancient Persian law sternly con-
demned this offence [Vendid. viii. 10 a^. Knobel).
Also the Hindoo law (Menu xi. 174, 175), and
the Koran, vii. 78-8a Ver. 23. The story of
Pasiphsa may furnish proof that the early Greeks
abhorred this offence. The Hindoo law punishes
it severely Menu xi. 17, Gentoo laws, p. 280. The
Moslem law condemns it, Hediya II., p. 27."
Clark.— F. G.]. " The following inculcation of
these prohibitions, vers. 24-30, contains the most
expressive apology for the conquest of Canaan
on the part of the Israelites ; and that this was
no partiality of Jehovah, is plain from the fact
that He threatens the Israelites with entirely the
same punishment in case they should sin in the
same way, and moreover, that He enacts the
death penalty for the single offender." Lange.
The poetic representation of the land as vomit-
ing out its inhabitants is founded upon a truth
which required that the laws of this chapter
should be made binding upon the stranger that
Bojonrneth among you as well as upon the
Israelites themselves (ver. 26). The land which
the ancestors of Israel were not allowed to pos-
sess, " because the iniquity of the Amorites was
not yet full" (Gen. xv. 16), had now become
filled with a mass of festering moral corruption.
Its inhabitants were to be cast out and the holy
people planted in their stead. It could not be
allowed that "the stranger" should again intro-
duce the pollutions which were now being so se-
verely punished.
The only punishment here threatened for the
violation of these precepts is first the national
one, in case the sins became national, of being
treated as their predecessors had been ; and se-
condly, the individual punishment for individual
offenders (ver. 29), they shall be cut o2 from
among their people. They were to be ex-
communicated as violators of the holiness re-
quired of the covenant people. Israel, however,
constituted a state as well as a church, and later,
in ch. XX., the civil punishment of these Crimea
is fully prescribed. Here the legislator speaks
of the sin rather than of the crime, and conse-
quently of the spiritual rather than the civil
penalty.
The preterites of ver. 25 Xpffl (A. V. vomit-
eth out) and ver. 28 HKp (A. V. spaed out)
must necessarily be determined in their sense by
the whole context, and especially by the nbE'ip
= I am casting out, of ver. 24. The whole trans-
action is represented as one in progress, as in
XX. 23 (where the same participle is used), and
from any fair consideration of these chapters in
themselves it would be impossible to infer that
the casting out of the Canaanites wa? already an
accomplished fact. It is therefore quite unne-
cessary to speak of these preterites (Keil), as
prophetic.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL.
I. We have here set forth (ver. 5) the prin-
ciple which St. Paul declares (Bom. x. 5 ; Gal.
iii. 12) to be the fundamental principle of the
whole law, — that salvation depends upon obedi-
ence. On this ground he shows that man can
never attain justification, since it is impossible
for him to offer » perfect obedience. The law
by a practical demonstration of this fact becomes
" our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ." Ne-
vertheless, " the law is holy, and the command-
ment holy, and just, and good" (Rom. vii. 12),
and the faith which leads to salvation is dead
without the earnest effort at obedience. Hence
God sets forth His laws as that which if a man
do he shall live in them, and it has ever
proved that the path of obedience is the path of
life in every sense.
II. " The family relationship is itself ordained
by God. It is the birthplace of the children of
God — the first school, and generally the source
of all chastity and good manners. Any injury
inflicted on it would undermine the temporal and
eternal welfare both of individuals and of the
people. In this iies the abomination of incest.
This is the reason of that natural horror of it
which God has implanted in us. This is the rea-
son that, among all nations, marriage within oer-
146
LEVITICUS.
tain degrees was forbidden, altliough the laws
of the most moral nations wavered in respect to
the exact boundaries. . . . Because this was the
reason of the prohibited degrees, we see also why,
in the family of the first men, when there was
no difference between family and people, bro-
thers and sisters might marry without sin." 0.
von Gerlach.
III. The Canaanites were to be punished for
their offences against the marriage law. But
they would not have been guilty if they had had
no Itnowledge that what they did was wrong,
(Rom. iv. 15 ; v. 13). It is therefore evident
that there must be a natural law or a tradition
of primeval revelation which should have en-
abled them to recognize the sinfulness of their
customs.
IV. Although the Mosaic legislation recognizes
polygamy and divorce on trivial grounds, yet
still it cannot be arrayed as in opposition to the
higher law of Christian purity. On the con-
trary, like the laws of revenge and many others,
these laws were restrictions leading the people
as they were able to bear it towards the higher
law of the Gospel. That they fell short of this
was simply because God suffered it to be so tem-
porarily "because of the hardness of men's
hearts."
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL.
"The chapter about the forbidden degrees of
marriage has in its immediate form a much
greater meaning for dogmatics, morals, and the
legal and ecclesiastical ordinance of marriage,
than it has for homiletics. The New Testament
explanaliou and application of this law is so
great a subject and work, that here we must re-
fer to the literature relating thereto. But indi-
rectly, these laws are a treasury also for homi-
letics. By the prohibition of the marriage of
relations, God ever forms new sets of relation-
ships. By this He brings to view the universal
relationship which lies upon the foundation of
human manifoldness and diversity. He mani-
fests harmony in the contrasts of genealogies.
He freshens anew the duty of love in a thousand
ways ; and freshens, too, marriage in a thousand
ways through love. Sexual love, in its dignity.
is here hallowed through the law. Strangers
and aliens become, by this divine ordinance, re-
latives, brothers and friends ; a holy web of
love, in spite of single desecrations, spreads from
town to town, from land to land, from people to
people. The egoism of family, rank, and class,
is a kind of heathenism which this law combats
with a prefigurative force, and Christianity meets
by its consecration of the state of betrothal on
the foundation of Christian brotherly love and
universal philanthropy. The expression of these
prohibitions of marriage designates the trans-
gressions without any anxious fear except to op-
pose with strong words the lack of fear in life,
and to create a holy fear before the sources of
life, the mysterious darkness of the continuous
creation of man. When the ideality of the legal
life fails, there is made prominent the marked
unhallowed nakedness and rudeness of the sexual
relations. The various forms and degrees of
guilt are to be noticed. Over against the offences
against the family life in too near relationship,
come the horrors of the sexual crimes against
nature (ver. 21 sqq. Comp. Rom. i.). The fla-
grant violation of nature is emphasized by the
threat that the violated nature, the horrified
land, would itself undertake the punishment,
and spue out such sinners. But the positive
punishments also were not to be omitted (chap.
XX.). And it must not be overlooked that Jeho-
vah introduces and closes these commands with
the explanation of His name Jehovah, His holy
personality. The establishment of personal dig-
nity in a kingdom of true personal continuance
in love, is the purpose of the law." Lange.
Besides its moral and social bearings, the Le-
vitical law has another and most important as-
pect. It has been found historically that all
great deviations from the faith bear fruit, sooner
or later, in sensual sins; and conversely, all re-
laxation of the law of sexual purity has sustained
itself by the denial or perversion of fundamental
doctrine. The Levitical law was therefore a
safeguard of the truth, and herein men received
an essential part of their training, not merely
for the high morality, but also for the high reli-
gious truth of the Gospel. We see at Cormth
how danger to the one went hand in hand with
danger to the other.
THIRD SECTION.
Holiness of Conduct towards God and Man.
Chap. XIX. 1-16.
1, 2 And the Loed spate unto Moses, saying, Speak unto all the congregation' ot
the children of Israel, and say unto them, Ye shall be holy : for I the Loed your
God am holy.
3 Ye shall fear every man his mother," and his father, and keep my sabbaths: I
am the Loed your God.
" TEXTUAL and GEAMMATICAL.
1 Tor. 2. pny _ congregatton is omitted by 3 MSS. and the LXX.
2 Ver. 3. In the LXX., Vulg., and Syr., the order is reversed to his father and hit mother. The Sam and Onk. foUowthe
Hebrew.
CHAP. XIX. 1-37. 147
4 Turn ye not unto idols,' nor make to yourselves molten gods : i am the Loed
your God.
5 And if ye offer a sacrifice of peace offerings unto the Loed, ye shall offer it at
6 your own will [offerings, unto the Loed ye shall offer it for your acceptance*]. It
shall be eaten the same day ye offer it, and on the morrow : and if ought remain
7 until the third day, it shall be burnt in the fire. And if it be eaten at all on the
8 thu-d day, it m abominable ; it shall not be accepted. Therefore every one that
eateth' it shall bear his iniquity, because he hath profaned the hallowed thing of
the Loed: and that soul shall be cut off from among his people.
9 And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not wholly reap the cor-
10 ners of thy field, neither shalt thou gather the gleanings of thy harvest. And thou
shalt not glean thy vineyard [fruit garden'], neither shalt thou gather every grape
[the scattered fruit'] of thy vineyard [fruit garden'] ; thou shalt leave them for
the poor and stranger : I am the Loed your God.
11, 12 Ye shall not steal, neither deal falsely, neither lie one to another. And ye
shall not swear by my name falsely, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy
13 God : lam the Loed. Thou shalt not defraud [oppress'] thy neighbour, neither'
rob Aim; the wages of him that is hired shall not abide with thee all night until
the morning.
14 Thou shalt not curse the deaf, nor put a stumbling-block before the blind, but
shalt fear thy God : I am the Loed.
15 Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment :'» thou shalt not respect the person
of the poor, nor honour the person of the mighty : but in righteousness shalt thou
judge thy neighbour.
16 Thou shalt not go up and down as a talebearer among thy people :" neither"
17 shalt thou stand against the blood of thy neighbour : I am the Loed. Thou shalt
not hate thy brother in thine heart : thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour,
18 and not suffer sin upon him [and not bear sin on his account"]. Thou shalt not
avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love
thy neighbour as thyself: I am the Lokl.
19 Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse
kind :" thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled [diverse'^] seed : neither shall a
garment mingled [a diverse garment"] of linen and woollen^' come upon thee.
' Ver. 4. Q^7''7X = inania numina, Bosen. It is formed from 7X with a termination expresBive of contempt.
* Ver. 5. D3jyi7 =for your acceptance. See Textual Note » on i. 3.
s Ter. 8. The Heb. has the plural form V 7^355, but the Sam. and other versionB have the sing, as in the following verb
and noun.
* Ver. 10. D13 IB generally a -vineyard, but also (Judg. xv. 7) an olive yard. It is " a field or yard of the nobler plants
and treps, cultivate'! in the manner of a garden or orchard," Gesen. It is doubtless here used in its broadest sense, and the
vinesard of the A. V. is therefore too restricted.
' Ver. 10. t3*^2 =. tiial which is scattered, and hence meaning here both the fallen fruit (Chald., Yulg., Syr.), and also
the single berries (f the olive and the vine not gathered with the harvest.
^ Ver. 13. pj^^n. Ver. 11 forbids sins of craft and falsehood against one's neighbor; this, sins of violence and open
oppression. The ti-a'aslation given is that of the A. V. in Deut. xxiv. 14.
* Ver. 13. The Heb. X ; is without the conjunction which is supplied in 40 MSS. in the Sam. and the LXX.
"> Ver. 15. The conjunction 1 is preflxed in 7 MSS., the Sam., LXX., and Syr.
n Ver. 16. ^'B_J?a. The Sam. and 66 MSS. omit the \
** Ver. 16. Here again the Heb. omits the conjunction which is supplied in 40 MSS., and in the Syr.
^ Ver. IT. NDn * wU NKTi'K/l is a clause the meaning of which has been much questioned. It seems certain,
. : ■• yr T • :
however, that KE^J cannot mean mfer, (permit) as in the A. V., but must mean bear as in the margin. The marginal /or
. TT
hvm IB ambiguous, and it is better therefore to use the more explicit on Ma accmmt. For instances of precisely the same
sense of these wurds, see xxii. 9 ; Num. xviii. 32, and comp. also the very similar expression in I'a. Ixjx. 8.
" Ver. 19. 3 MSS., the Sam., LXX., and Syr., prefix the conjunction.
^ Ver. 19. D'X 73 (dual from X73 = Beparation) occurs only in this verse (three times) and in the parallel Deut. xxii.
9, but is frequent in the Talmud. It signifies of turn Tcinds, fieterogeneoue. The translation of the A. V. at its first occurrence
in the ver. diverse is good, and should by all means be retained in the other clauses, both for consistency's sake, and for the
force of the command. _ All the Semitic versions preservn the uniformity.
w Ver. 19. TJ£3J?ty occurs only here and in Deut. xxii. 11, where it is explained " of woolen and linen together." Its
etymology is obscure. See the Lexicons and Bochart, Mieroz. I., lib. 11., c. 35, p. 545, ed. Rosen. It is probably an Egyp-
tian word, although not yet satisfactorily explained. The Chald. retains the word, and the LXX translates /ct'pSTjAov =.
Jpttn'tMM, adulterated, probably by a mere conjecture. Rosenraiiller quotas Forster as explaining it of a costly Egyptian
dress woven in various figures of plants and animals in colors, having a symbolical idolatrous sigoilication. See Com.
148 LEVITICUST
20 And whosoever lieth carnally with a woman that is a bondmaid, betrothed" to
an husband, and not at all redeemed, nor freedom given her ; she shall be scourged
[there shall be punishment"], they shall not be put to death, because she was not
21 free. And he shall bring his trespass offering unto the Lord, unto the door of the
22 tabernacle of the congregation, even a ram for a trespass offering. And the priest
shall make an atonement for him with the ram of the trespass offering before the
Lord for his sin which he hath done ; and the sin which he hath done shall be
forgiven him.
23 And when ye shall come into the land, and shall have planted all manner of
trees for food, then ye shall count the fruit thereof as uncircumcised ■}' three years
24 shall it be as uncircumcised to you : it shall not be eaten of. But in the fourth
25 year all the fruit thereof shall be holy to praise™ the Lord withal. And in the fifth
year shall ye eat of the fruit thereof, that it may yield'" unto you the increase
thereof: I am the Lord your God.
26 Ye shall not eat any thing with the blood f neither'" shall ye use enchantment,
27 nor observe times. '^Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt
28 thou ''^ mar the corners of thy" beard. Ye shall not make any cuttings in your
flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you : I am the Lord.
29 Do not prostituto thy daughter, to cause her to be a whore ; lest the land fall to
whoredom, and the land become full of wickedness.
30 Ye shall keep my sabbaths, and reverence my sanctuary : I am the Lord.
31 Eegard not them that have familiar spirits, neither seek after wizards to be de-
filed by them : I am the Lord your God.
32 Thou shalt rise up before the hoary head, and honour the face of the old man,
and fear thy God : I am the Lord.
33 And if a stranger sojourn with thee^ in your land, ye shall not vex [oppress'*] him.
34 But [omit but"] the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one boru
among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself ; for ye were strangers in the land
of Egypt : I am the Lord your God.
35 Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment, La meteyard, ia weight, or in mea-
17 Ver. 20. n3*in3 Niph. from HTn = to tear oJT, to set apart. There Beems no donbt of the correctness of the text of
the A. v., and the margin ia therefore unneceBsary.
16 Ver. 20. n^nn r\^p2' TIus word ia an-. Key., but there seema little doubt of its meaning, investigation, and then
punishment. Authorities are much divided on the question whether both parties, or only the woman, was to be scourged.
The L XX ., Vulg., and Syr., are clear for the former, while the Sam. applies it only to the man. In the uncertainty it is
better to retain the indeflniteness of the Heb. as in the marg. of the A. V. The Sam. reading ia remarkable 1 7 H^nn mp3
= lie shaU ie punished, and then, in the aing. HDV N7 = he ahall not die. Thia givea a sense agreeing excellently with
the reason assigned because slie was not free, and henca the act did not legally couslitute adultery which was
punishable with death.
11 Ver. 23. " The singular suffix in 'inSlU " [and also in ri3] " refers to 7^ and the verb "711; is a denom. from
t t.'t ; •
T\7^^, to make into a foreskin, to treat as uncircumcised, i. e., to throw away as unclean or uneatable." Keil. The LXX.
rendering irepiKaBapteiTe Triy aKa9apa-Lav aurou ■= ye shall purge away its vmcleanness expresses very well the general
sense. . .
20 Ver. 24. □' 7l7n occurs only here and in Judg.ix. 27. In the latter place it seema to mean merry-making feasts to
idols, and Josephna (Ant. Iv. 8, 19) understands the law to be that the fruit of the fourth year should be carried to the place
of the Sanctuary, and there used in u holy feast with friends and the poor. But the following verse seems so clearly to
forbid the owner's partaking of it before the fifth year that it would be unsafe to change the translation. The marg. of
the A. V. holiness 0/ praises to tJie Lord does not convey any distinct idea. The idea of Murphy a praise offering ia hardly
Buatained by the text. The true sense is probably that incorporated into the Targ. Onk. it shai/ he consecrated to those ojfer-
ing praises before th^ Lord, i. e., it was to be given to the Lord through His priests, and used by them in leaata.
21 Ver. 25. For tl'DlilV that It may yield, the Sam., followed by the Vnlg., reads tl'DXilb for cotttcUng (in
itorehouses) the produce.
22 Ver. 26. Din~7J^. The LXX. muat have read *^ instead of T to auatain the version enl Twf opitav, and some
critics would adopt this to avoid the peculiarity of the conatruction of ^y, considering it justified by the frequency of the
practice in connection with idolatrous feasts (comp. Hos. iv. 1.1). But a mla-reading of the LXX. ia not a BuflQcient ground
for a change of the text ; for the construction of Sj^ aee Ex. xli. 8, and comp. Textual Note * on ii. 2.
23 Vera. 26, 27. In both placea the Sam., one or two MSS., and the LXX., supply the conjunction.
2* Ver. 27. The Sam, and most of the Ancient Versions put the verb and the pronoun in the plural in accordance with
the previous clause.
25 Vnr. 33. The Sam. and versiona have the plural.
26 Ver. 33. The marg. of the A V. expresses the sense of -Ijin better than the tazt.
'^ Ver. 34. There ia no occasion for the insertion of the but of the A. V.
CHAP. XIX. 1-37.
149
36 sure. Just balances, just weights,'' a just ephah, and a just tin, shall ye have : I
37 am the Lord your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt. Therefore
shall ye observe all my statutes, and all my judgments, and do them: I am the
Lord.
*8 Ver. 36. The marg. of the A. T. stones is unnecessary, that being merely the primary sense of !3^, while weighl is
the fally establlsbed derivative sense.
EXEGETIOAL AND CEIXICAL.
With this chapter begins a new Parashah of
the law extending to xx. 27. The parallel
Haphtarah from the prophets is Ezek. xx. 2-20,
recounting the disobedience of Israel in the wil-
derness to the commands of this chapter and
their consequent punishment; and the close of
Amos ix. 7-16, denouncing the punishment and
foretelling the final restoration of God's people
— a prophecy applied by S. James (Acts xv. 16,
17) to the gathering in of the Gentiles to the
Church of Christ.
"This remarkable chapter is perhaps the
most comprehensive, the most varied, and in
some respects the most important section of
Leviticus, if not of the Pentateuch ; it was by
the ancient Jews regarded as an epitome of the
whole Law ; it was adopted and paraphrased by
the best gnomic writers, such as Pseudo-Phocy-
lides ; and it has at all times been looked upon
as a counterpart of the Decalogue itself." Ka-
lisch.
It treats of the holiness in the daily life and
conversation which must characterize the cove-
nant people of a holy God. This basis of the
commands given is prominently brought forward
at the opening and continually kept in mind by
the phrase I am the Iiord throughout. This
expresses at once the basis of the command, and
the goal towards which the Israelite must strive.
It is as difiBcult to arrange these laws systemati-
cally as to do so with the duties of the daily
life, and an arrangement which would be sys-
tematic from one point of view would not be so
from another. The following analysis of the
chapter, from Murphy, presents a somewhat
different view from that given by Lange below :
"They are in communion with God (1-8), in
the communion of saints (9-22), and are about
to be in a land of holiness (23-32), and visited
by strangers (33-37). And each of these rela-
tions brings out a series of duties peculiar to
itself."
Lange says: "We hold that this section, as
being the summing up of the laws of the theo-
cratic humanity, is quite in place, as a contrast
to the characteristics of the heathen inhumanity
which the foregoing chapter has displayed ; and
in so far forth comprises in no part anything
repeated, varying, or in the more restricted
sense religious. It gives the characteristics of
the consecrated human personality in the theoc-
racy, and of its conduct as it should correspond
with the holy personality of Jehovah, and hence
it is said again and again : I am Jehovah.
From this constant refrain a liturgy of religious
humanity could be unfolded. First, in three-
fold distinctness : Ye sh^ll be holy, i. e. hal-
lowed personalities, for I Jehovah your God
am holy, and ever again I am Jehovah your
God (vers. 3, 4, 10, 25, 81, 34, 36), or I am
Jehovah (vers. 12, 14, 16, 18, 28, 30, 32, 87).
Evidently these statements together, as the cha-
racteristics of the private human conduct, stand
in connection with the legislation for the social
humanity in the section, Ex. xxi-xxiii.
"Disposition: vers. 1, 2. The principle of
humanity: Jehovah the Holy One. Vera. 3-8.
True and false piety. Vers. 9-18. Inwardly
grounded humanity. Vers. 19-32. Observance
of the moral laws of nature. Vers. 33-37. Ob-
servance of hospitality and the duties of trade.
"The first theocratic law of humanity is the
root of all that follow, the law of piety. And
here it is not said: 'Father and mother,' but
mother and father ; for the mother precedes
the father in the duty of mankind." Words-
worth says in reference to this order: "la the
former chapter God had displayed the evils con-
sequent on the abuse of woman, and here He
inculcates reverence towards her, as the founda-
tion of social happiness." This is the fifth com-
mandment of the Decalogue (Ex. xx. 12), and is
clearly necessary to be called to mind here ; for
as the family is the basis of all social organiza-
tion, so is reverence to parents the first necessity
of family order. Next follows the reiteration
of the fourth commandment (Ez. xx. 12) as the
first duty of man beyond the immediate respect
due from him to those from whom he derives
his being. The great prominence everywhere
given in Scripture to the observance of the Sab-
bath (comp. e. g. Ez. xx. 12, 13, 16, 20, 21, 24,
being the portion from the prophets read in the
synagogue in connection with this chapter), and
the universality of its obligation as grounded
upon the Divine rest, show how deeply this must
enter into all excellent social organization.
These two precepts are here coupled together as
they are in the Decalogue, and they are the only
commands given there in positive form. They
"express two great central points, the first be-
longing to natural law, and the second to posi-
tive law, in the maintenance of the well-being
of the social body of which Jehovah was the
acknowledged king." Clark. It is noticeable
that the same generality which is given to the
command in Ex. by the use of the sing, is here
attained also by the use of the plural ; for the
plural is not to be understood as used (Kalisch)
for the purpose of including other festivals than
the weekly day of rest.
Ver. 4. This precept includes the two first
commands of the Decalogue. The order of com-
mands in this chapter, in so far as the commands
themselves are the same, is diflFerent from that
in the Decalogue, because there the starting
point is from God Himself; here from man in
his family and social relations. In regard to
this precept, Lange says : " If the heart of man
becomes benumbed to the use of images of false
gods of any kind, he sinks down to the idols
which are his ideals, and becomes as dumb and
150
LEVITICuB.
unspiritual as they are, ver. 4. All gods of the
heathen are ElUim, nothingnesses, Ps. xcyi. 5;
cxv. 8; cxxxv. 18; Isa. xl. 18; xliv. 10, etc"
Comp. also Deut. xxvii. 15. It was a notion of
the Rabbins that this word was compounded of
hVi,z=not, and '7K=Gorf. Comp. 1 Cor. viii. 4;
x.'l9.
Vers. 5-8. The Legislator now turns to the
especial outward act of communion with God in
the peace offering. His object is not to speak
of sacrifices in general, nor even of any special
kind of peace offering; therefore the distinc-
tions of vii. 11-21 are not referred to. The
reference is rather to xvii. 3-7, according to
which, during the wilderness life, all food of
sacrificial animals was to be sanctified by the
peace offering. So here all holy feasting of
communion with God must be based upon a sac-
rifice for their acceptance, and must be treated
according to the commands already given. The
order of the precepts is therefore perfectly
natural : first, filial duty ; then the observance
of the fundamental divine institution for society ;
next, negatively, the entire turning away from
everything that could come into rivalry with
God ; and now the keeping holy of the appointed
means of communion with Him. After this
come (9-18) various precepts to guard the holi-
ness of conduct toward one's neighbor, especially
the poor and distressed, illustrated by one com-
mand of detail after another until the all inclu-
ding principle is announced, thou Shalt love
thy neighbor as thyself
Vers. 9, 10. The gaiherer of his harvest, out
of the abundance which God had given him,
must have a generous care for the poor and the
stranger ; the poor, as those unable to cultivate
their own land, or who had been obliged to sell
it until the next year of Jubilee ; and the stran-
ger, as those who by the organization of the
Hebrew commonwealth could have no possession
of land in their country. The LXX. and the
Syr. interpret stranger of proselytes, and are
followed by some Jewish commentators ; but
such restriction is plainly at variance with the
whole spirit of the command. The same precept
is repeated, in regard to the grain harvest, in
connection with the feast of weeks (xxiii. 22),
and more generally in Deut. xxiv. 19-22 with a
reminder of the privations and bondage they
had themselves endured in Egypt. The story
of Ruth is a beautiful exemplification of the ope-
ration of this statute.
Ver. 11. This and the following precepts take
the usual negative form of statutory law. The
eighth commandment is here joined with the
offences recounted in vi. 2-6 of falsehood and
fraud towards others. St. Augustine here (Qu.
68) enters at length into the casuistical question
of the jusiifiableness of lying under certain pe-
culiar circumstances, citing the example of Ra-
hab among others. He concludes that it was
not her lying, as such, which received the
divine approbation, but her desire to serve God,
which indeed prompted her lie. However this
may be, it is plain that the law here has in view
not extraordinary and exceptional cases, but the
ordinary dealings of man with man. Such law
is of universal obligation. Comp. Col. iii. 9.
Ver. 12 is of course covered by the third com-
mandment, but is not coextensive with it, since
the point of view here is that of conduct towards
one's neighbor. Comp. ch. vi. 6-
Vers. 13-17 relate to social offences of different
kinds, common enough in all ages and lands,
but all inconsistent with the character of a holy
people. Ver. 13 deals with faults of power,
" the conversion of might into right." The par-
ticulars mentioned are oppression (comp. xxv.
17-48), robbing, and undue retention of wages.
The last is spoken of more at length Deut. xxiv.
14, 15. Comp. Jas. v. 4. Ver. 14 mentions
crimes of mean advantage. Comp. Deut. xxvii.
18. The sense is, thou shalt not curse the
deaf, for though he hears not, God will hear
and avenge ; and so of the blind, God sees and
cares for him. Job remembered with satisfac-
tion that in his prosperity he had been " eyes to
the blind" and "feet to the lame" (Job xxix.
15). The precept in its literal sense belongs to
all times, and so also does its obvious spiritual
application, Rom. xiv. 13 ; 1 Cor. viii. 9-13.
Lange characterizes this verse as the " sanotifi-
cation of the human dignity of the infirm.' ' In
ver. 15 the Legislator turns to official wrong,
guarding against personal influence in judgment
from whatever source. — Respect the person
of the poor has reference not only to pity for
him, but to that instinctive tendency to sympa-
thy with the weaker side which still has such
powerful influence with the modern jury in the
perversion of justice. On the other hand,
honoring the person of the mighty repre-
sents the opposite perversion, perhaps almost
equally common, but less creditable to humanity.
Vers. 16 and 17 forbid offences of a meaner
kind. On ver. 16 Lange says : " Sanctity
of a neighbor's good name, and especially of his
life and blood. Casting aside of all inhumane
conduct, all ill-will, as manifested in malicious
belittling, blackening, and slandering, and espe-
cially in attempts against the life of a neighbor,
whether in court or in private life." The Rab-
bins, equally with the Hindoo laws, are particu-
larly severe upon the crime of tale-bearing.
The Targ. Jonathan paraphrases the clause, "Do
not go after the tale-bearing tongue, which is
harsh as a sword, slaying with both its edges."
The latter clause of ver. 16 is sometimes other-
wise interpreted; "most of the recent Jewish
versions follow the Talmud in giving another
sense to the words, which it appears the Hebrew
will bear: Thou shall not stand by idly when thy
neighbor's life is in danger. So Zunz, Luzzato,
Herxheimer, Leeser, Wogue." Clark. Ver. 17.
Lange : "Observance of good-will towards one's
neighbor. Blameworthiness of hate, and also
of the bitter keeping back of the reproof which
one owes to his neighbor. It is a fine reminder
that one may become a sharer in a neighbor's
fault by a lack of openness, and by a holding
back of required reproof" On the last clause,
see Textual, and on the whole verse comp. Prov.
xxvii. 6; Matt, xviii. 15-17.
In the close of ver. 18 all is summed up in the
royal law — thou shalt love thy neighbor as
thyself. This is twice quoted by our Lord
Himself (Matt. xix. 19 ; xxii. 39), and, next to
love to God, is made the great commandment of
CHAP. XIX. 1-37.
151
the law. It is repeatedly referred to by the
Apostles as the fulfilling of the whole law to-
wards one's neighbor (Rom. xiil. 9; Gal. v. 14;
Jas. ii. 8). It may be that at the time it was
given it was too far above the spiritual condition
of the people, who must first be trained by the
detailed pi-eeepts going before. Nevertheless, it
is imbedded in the law as the expression of the
divine will, and that it might be reached by such
as were able to receive it. Such passages as
Prov. xxiv. 17, 18; xxv. 21, 22, show that it did
not fail of exerting an influence upon the na-
tion, and in later times the Rabbins abundantly
recognized it as the very summary of all duty
toward's one's neighbor. That the precept has
no narrow limitations to their own people is
shown by ver. 34, in which it is expressly ex-
tended to " the stranger."
The second series of commands, vers. 19-32, is
introduced with the formula. Ye shall keep
my statutes, in which, says Kalisch, the word
"statutes must be taken in its original and
most pregnant sense as that which is ' engraven'
and unalterably ordained : yon shall not deviate
from the appointed order of things, nor abandon
the eternal laws of nature as fixed by Divine
wisdom." Ver. 19. Lange : " Observance of the
natural system, or of the simple laws of nature,
symbolically expressed in reference to the ten-
dency to allow the interbreeding of different
species of animals, to mix various seeds in the
field, and to wear garments made of mixed stuffs.
When it is said in regard to these things, Ye
shall keep my statutes, the laws of nature
are plainly meant as the laws of Jehovah, and
we must distinguish between the symbolical ex-
emplification of the law and such mixings as
nature herself or the necessities of life compel, —
to say nothing of the purpose of investigation."
This law is repeated in Deut. xxii. 9-11. It is
clearly to be looked upon as one of those many
educational laws given to train the Israelites to
the observance of the natural order and separa-
tion of things, to a sense of fitness and con-
gruity ; and hence, when the underlying princi-
ple has come to be comprehended, the particular
details by which it was enforced cease to be ob-
ligatory. As to the allegation that this command
was violated in the high-priest's dress, which is
said to have been woven of linen and wool, it is
unnecessary to say more than that the difBeully
arises entirely from a misapprehension in faking
the word scarlet to mean scarht wool, instead of
as a simple designation of color.
Vers. 20-22. The punishment for adultery was
death for both parties (xx. 10), and the same in
case of the seduction of a free virgin who was
betrothed (Deut. xxii. 23, 24); and it was still
death to the man in case the act might be pre-
sumed to have been by violence {ib. 25-27).
These laws were inapplicable in their full force
in the case of a slave, since she could not legally
contract marriage. Still, the moral ofl'euce ex-
isted, and therefore there must be punishment.
Versions and authorities vary as to whether the
punishment was to be inflicted on both parties
(LXX., Vulg., Syr.), on the man alone (Sam.),
or on the woman alone (A. V.). The last is sup-
ported on the ground that the man's pun-
Jshment consisted in his trespass offering ; but
this is 80 entirely inadequate that this view
may be dismissed. Probably both parties were
punished when the acquiescence of the woman
might be presumed, and the man alone in the
opposite case. This would be in accordance
with the analogy of Deut. xxii. 23-27, and would
account for the indefiniteness of the Hebrew ex-
pression. See Textual note 18. The supposi-
tion that both were ordinarily to be punished
also agrees best with the following plural — they
shall not be put to death. In the form of
sacrifice to be presented by the man, the trespass
offering (comp. v. 14 — vi. 7), the violation of the
rights of property of which he had also been
guilty is recognized.
Vers. 23-25. " Treatment of nature, in the case
of the culture of plants, after their analogy with
the life of man. Symbolic practice : the fruits
of trees for the first three years were to be con-
f idered as the foreskin of the tree, and were not
to be harvested nor eaten. The trees were to
be allowed to grow strong by having their fruit
hang on them. The fruit of the fourth year was
to be hallowed to Jehovah, and thus by a theo-
cratic consecration, the fruit of the following
years should be a consecrated food, analogous to
the food of the flesh that was slain before the
door of the Tabernacle. First, the fruits of the
trees were, so to speak, heathen ; then they were
hallowed in a priestly way; and then finally be-
came fruits to be enjoyed by the theocracy."
Lange. It is noticeable that this command, like
so many others, is wholly prospective, — ^vtrben
ye shall come into the land, — one of the
constantly recurring evidences that this legisla-
tion was actually given during the life in the
wilderness.
Vers. 26-28 forbid several heathen customs,
some of them associated with idolatrous or su-
perstitious rites, and all of them unbecoming the
holy people of God. " To the consecration of
the use of fruit is added for completeness once
more the consecration of the use of flesh, and in-
deed with a more strict prohibition of the use
of the blood : ye shall not eat any thing
^7ith the blood." Lange. "These words were
not a mere repetition of the law against eating
blood (xvii. 10), but a strengthening of the law.
Not only were they to eat no blood, but no flesh
to which any blood adhered." Keil. Patrick,
quoting from Maimonides and others, makes it
very probable that this has reference to a heathen
custom of eating flesh over the blood of the ani-
mal from which it had been taken as a means
of communion with demons who were supposed
to feast upon the blood itself. See Spencer, lib.
II., c. 15. Neither shall ye use enchant-
ment. — This is a different sin from that forbid-
den in Ter. 31 ; for in the parallel prohibitions,
Deut. xviii. 9-12, the two are distinguished.
tS?nj, primarily to whisper, to mutter, covers all
kinds of magical formulas, all attempts to secure
a desired result otherwise than by natural means
or the invocation of divine aid. The LXX. oim
o'uM/ielade and Syr. interpret it of augury by
means of birds ; but while the form of the He-
brew seems to connect the act primarily with the
serpent, its sense in use is certainly more gene-
ral. Comp. Gen. xliv. 5, 16. Nor observe
152
LEVITICUS.
times. — \yi))< according to some authorities, a
denom. verb from pj?=a cloud, and this sense has
been followed by the A. V.; according to Rab-
binical authorities, however, it is from |'J?^ Ver. 4. On the
23
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL.
in Dbj,'n and wbj?', see Text. Note w on iv. 13.
154 LEVITICUS.
5 of his seed unto Moleoh, and kill him not : then I will set my face against that man,
and against his family, and will cut him oif, and all that go a whoring after him,
6 to commit whoredom with Molech, from among their people. And the soul that
turneth after such as have familiar spirits, and after wizards, to go a whoring after
them, I will even set my face against that soul,'' and will cut him oif from among
7 his people. Sanctify yourselves therefore, and be ye holy : for I am the Lohd
8 your God.' And ye shall keep my statutes, and do them : I am the Lord which
sanctify you.
9 For* every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death:
he hath cursed his father or his mother ; his blood' shall be upon him.
10 And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that
commiteth adultery with his neighbor's wife,' the adulterer and the adulteress shall
11 surely be put to death. And the man that lieth with his father's wife hath unco-
vered his father's nakedness : both of them shall surely be put to death ; their
12 blood^ shall be upon them. And if a man lie with his daughter in law, both cf
them .''hall surely be put to death ; they have wrought confusion ; their blood" shall
13 be upon them. If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both
of them have committed an abomination : they shall surely be put to death; their
14 blood sliall be upon them. And if a man take a wife and her mother, it is wick-
edness : they shall be burnt with fire, both he and they ; that there be no wicked-
15 ness among you. And if a man lie with a beast, he shall surely be put to death:
16 and ye shall slay the beast. And if a woman approach unto any beast, and lie
down thereto, thou shalt kill the woman, and the beast : they shall surely be put
17 to death ; their blood* shall be upon them. And if a man shall take his sister, his
father's daughter, or his mother's daughter, and see her nakedness, and she see his
nakedness ; it is a wicked thing ; and they shall be cut off in the sight of their
people : he hath uncovered his sister's nakedness ; he' shall bear his ini-
18 quity. And if a man shall lie with a woman having her sickness, and shall uncover
her nakedness ; he hath discovered [uncovered*] her fountain, and she hath unco-
vered the fountain of her blood : and both of them shall be cut off from among
19 their people. And thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy mother's sister,
nor of thy father's sister : for he uncovereth his near kin : they shall bear their
20 iniquity. And if a man shall lie with his uncle's wife, he hath uncovered his un-
21 cle's nakedness: they shall bear their sin ; they shall die childless. And if a man
shall take his brother's wife, it is an unclean thing: he hath uncovered his bro-
ther's nakedness : they shall be childless.
22 Ye shall therefore keep all my statutes, and all my judgments, and do them :
23 that the land, whither I bring you to dwell therein, spue you not out. And ye
shall not walk in the manners [statutes'] of the nation," which I cast out before
24 you : for they committed all these things, and therefore I abhorred them. But I
have said unto you. Ye shall inherit their land, and I will give it unto you to pos-
sess it, a land that floweth with milk and honey: I am. the Lord your God, which
25 have separated you from other people. Ye shall therefore put difference between
clean beasts and unclean, and between unclean fowls and clean : and ye shall not
rnake your souls abominable by beast, or by fowl, or by any manner of living [omit
living"] thing that creepeth on the ground, which I have separated from you as
« Ver. 6. \il3p3- Four MSS. and Onfc. road t!?"X3, which Do Roasi prefers on account of the following 'ijljt. For
the last, however, the Sam. reads nHX.
' Yer. 7. The Sam., i MSS. and LXX. read: for I, the Iord your God, am holy.
* Ver. 9. ''J)=./or is omitted in two MSS., the LXX. and Vulg.
6 Vers. 9, 11, 12, 16. On the plnral form for hlond, comp. Gen. iT. 10 ; Ex. xxtl. 1.
1 ^'"' }^' .'^'''!°° "' Kennicott'a MSS. omit the first clause of tbis verse. RosonmUUer considers that the repetition
involves a distinction for the sake of emphasis, making j;"l in the second clau3e=relation, so that there ia a probibiiion,
f.rst of adultery in general, then apscifl'-ally of adultery with the wife of a relative. For this sense of the word he refers
to Dout. xni. 7: 2 Sam. xiii. 3. S. Angnstiao (Qu. 73 in Sept.) takes the same view.
8 v' ll' "^^^ LXX., Syr. and Vulg. have the plural.
Ver. 18. The same word should receive the same Translation in both clausoa.
,0 \?''- ^- StatuUs. See Text Note 2 on xviii. 3.
• ■ ^" '^® ®'^™' '■^'^^'^ D'Un, and B > one MS. fol owed by all the ancient versions, aa seems to be required by the
u'v^ "'«!' commilled. It is not unliknly tliat □ m .y have drooped out of the text.
Ver. 25. There ia nothing to express ihe word Uving in the Heb., and it is better omitted, as the referenca is wholly
to the dead bodiea of those auimals.
CHAP. XX. 1-27.
155
26 unclean. And ye shall be holy unto me : for I the Lord am, holy, and have
27 severed you from other people, that ye should be mine. A man also or woman
that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death : they
shall stone them with stones : their blood Bhaill he upon them.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL.
The whole of Lange's Commentary on this
chapter is here given.
" Our section forms a completion of the pro-
hibitions which have preceded in oh. xviii.,
while it still further joins the punishment of
death to seyeral of the very sins there mentioned.
Yet this is certainly no mere appendix, but pro-
ceeds from an entirely new point of view.
There the fundamental idea was : the sexual
relations, particularly, the theocratic seed, must
be kept holy ; here the fundamental idea is: the
holy land must be kept holy, it must not be out-
raged or stirred up to reaction and revolt
through an abomination which might determine
it to spue out the Israelites also (as v, person
spues out something nauseous from his mouth),
ver. 22. Ch. xviii. 28 had already expressed
this thought, but from the point of view that
the land would be thereby desecrated. It is
also here clearly brought out that the land
would be taken away from the Canaanites on
account of their constant abominations, and
given to the people of Israel; but that the like
punishment should befall them also, if they did
not keep the land clean by executing the penalty
of death upon the offenders. In the ooueeptiou
of the sickened land and the revolted nature
lies evidently the idea of the people consumed
by unnatural sins." [A. simpler view of the
relation of this to chs. xviii. and xix. is given
by Clark: "The crimes which are condemned
in those chapters on purely spiritual ground,
the absolute prohibition of Jehovah, have here
special punishments allotted to them as oflfences
against the well being of the nation." In ch.
xix. there is no mention at all of punishment
except in the single case of the betrothed slave
(vers. 20-22) ; in ch. xviii. there is no specific
punishment attached to each offence, but only
the general statement (vers. 28-30) of the penalty
to fall upon the trangressor of any of the sta-
tutes and upon the laud as a whole. For the
purpose of civil government, therefore, the pre-
sent chapter is a necessary supplement. — P. G.J
"Already i^schon fruh'T) has the decree of the
death-penalty been brought forward for sins
that were committed, Hm "1'3 (Num. xr. 30).
By this we can only understand stubborn or
arrogant sins ; therefore not every conscious
sin, as opposed to the unconscious, but every
sin which was maintained in opposition to the
theocratic jurisdiction. Single sins might always
prove to be such ; but the abominations here
mentioned were, for the most part, deadly sins,
those most befitting the Cherem, as blaspheming
the name of Jehovah, oh. xxiv. 11, and dese-
crating the Sabbath, Num. xv. 32.
"But also we have here different grades of
punishment with the different grades of offence.
The first class of sins is devilish, vers. 1-7 ; the
■econd class brutal, even beastly, vers. 10-16 ;
the third, of the carnal nature, unruly, vers.
17-21.
First Class.
" 1. The sacrifice to Molech. It is to be
understood that the stranger was included with
the Israelite under this prohibition ; for if, in
general, no sacrifice to false gods were allowed
in the land, so certainly not the sacrifice to Mo-
lech. The Jew, however, would become more
wicked by such an offering than a heathen. It
is also here plain that what is spoken of is the
giving up of children to death." [The expres-
sions used here, vers. 2, 3, 4, are an abbreviated
form of that in xviii. 21. It may be doubted
whether they refer to children at all, or if so, to
putting them to death. See Textual Note and
Comm. on xviii. 21.— P. G.]
" In regard to this, it sounds like a charge to
execute immediate judgment on the spot: the
people of the land shall stone him with
stones, properly, bury him under thrown
stones." [Doubtless in j. primitive state of
society all punishment was somewhat summary,
and this particular punishment is often provided
for in the law, ver. 27; xxiv. 14; Num. xv. 35,
36; Deut. xiii. 10; xvii. 5; xxi. 21; xxii. 21,
24, etc. But, nevertheless, it was only to be
administered on sufficient evidence, and with
due forms of law, Deut. xvii. 6; xix. 15, etc.—
F. G.] — "In this case the avenging is God's
personal affair: Jehovah sets His face against
him to consume him out of Jehovah's people;
for his sin is a three-fold one : he has given his
seed to Molech, and therein has judged himself;
he has defiled the sanctuary of Jehovah, that is,
the land hallowed by His sanctuary; and he
has profaned Jehovah's holy name, and dese-
crated the religion of His name. And even
if the people should let him go unpunished
in the last case, Jehovah Himself will pur-
sue him and even his race with His judg-
ment, until He has exterminated all who are
associated in his guilt. So strongly rules the
absolute Personality against all behaviour
that opposed personality. The judgment is in
this case as immanent in the guilty as a consu-
ming fire. One might also suppose that " the
face of Jehovah," in a constructio prsegnans, here
simified the Angel of His presence, and thus
expressed the thought that the spirit of the
revealed religion would exterminate the abomi-
nations mentioned together with their authors.
There were two grades, however, in complicity
in this guilt: in the first grade, it is an apos-
tasy to these men (as e. g. in the case of heathen
wives); in the second grade, through this
to Molech. Ver. 5."-[It is noticeable that
while the prohibition of the sin in vers. 1-5
extends to the stranger on the ground that such
abomination was not to be tolerated at all in
the consecrated land ; yet the extension of the
penalty to complicity in the sin by concealment
is applied only to the people of the land
(ver 4)— that is, to native Hebrews (comp. iv.
156
LEVITICUS.
27), and also to them alone (ver. 2) is committed
the execution of the penalty. — F. G]
" 2. Also the soul that turneth after such
as have familiar spirits (necromancers) and
after -wizards (LXX. cyyac!Tpiuv8oi=^ventrilo-
quists, ijraofdol = singing msigic charms, both
not exegetioally exhaustive) to go a whoring
after them — i. e., to engage in apostasy
from Jehovah to dark forms of supersti-
tion, — therefore against these also Jehovah
will set His face. It helps them nothing if they
remain unpunished of men ; they fall before the
more searching sentence upon presumptuous
wickedness. Jehovah pursues them even to
their extermination, for they are not to corrupt
His people for Him.
" In regard to these sins it is said, on (he
other hand : Sanctify yourselves therefore,
and be ye holy: raise yourselves to the dig-
nity of theocratic personalities, for your God is
in Jehovah, the absolutn, pure Personality.
While they observe the ordinances of this Holy
Being, they must understand that it is He who
is training them to be a holy people.
Second Class.
"FiEST Case. — Next the text speaks of the
unnatural and profligate child that curseth his
father or his mother. He shall be surely
put to death. And herewith commpnoes the
new class. But since the expression begins with
for ('3), it gives to the clause at the same time
a symbolic character in reference to the former
class : profaning the name of Jehovah is like this
sin of cursing father or mother, since He, as the
Holy One, creates for Himself His holy people.
But for the second class the expression is cha-
racteristic, his blood shall be upon him, or
upon them, vers. 9, 11, V2, 13, 16. It is to be
observed that ver. 14 brings out an increase in
regard to this form of punishment; but ver. 15
certainly falls under one category with ver. 16.
The ordinance of punishment, equalizing the
guilt of the unnatural curser with that of the
shedding of blood, brings upon him the penal
retribution of the latter. Ver. 9.
"Second and Third Cases. — The crime
of adultery with a neighbor's wife, and the crime
of incest with a father's wife (a step-mother) are
equalized under the sentence of blood-guiltiness
which incurred death, and this for both man and
woman alike. Vers. 10, 11.
" FouBTH Case. — The same applies to incest
with a daughter-in-law, 7Dn (mixing, confusion,
defilement). [Ver. 12.]
" Fifth Case. — Paederasty, moreover, is desig-
nated as an abomination, as contrary to nature,
a revolting crime; and the punishment of death
is here expressly made prominent. This sin is
called nS^in (abomination, horror). [Ver. 13.]
" Sixth Case. — The double incest is made
most particularly prominent when a man lies
both with a mother and her daughter. They
were to be burnt with each other (without doubt,
their bodies after they had been stoned). This
sin is called HHt (a refined or unheard of deed
T ■ ^
of shame. The law brings out prominently that
such moral enormities should not exist in Israel).
The same penalty was, moreover, imposed upon
the daughter of a priest who became a whore,
because she had put her father to shame, xxi. 9.
So Achan was first stoned in the valley of Achor,
then burned, since he had brought a curse, a
corrupting complicity in guilt upon Israel, Josh.
vii. But Josiah set burning against burning, the
theocratic burning against the burning to Mo-
leoh, when he burned the bones of the priests
upon their altars, and thereby purified Judah
and Jerusalem (2 Chr. xxxiv. 5; comp. 2 Kings
xxiii. 10). With this appears the embryo of the
Gehenna, as it comes out in symbolic form in the
Old Testament, Isa. Ixvi. 24. The Gehenna is
thus a representation of the fire of Moleoh, and
over it also the fire of judgment has at last come.
Ver. 14. The Old Testament fire penalty was
only symbolical, and involved no unnatural tor-
ture, like the mediseval mimicry of the flames of
hell. In this case, the ofi'ender was first put to
death ; and the same is true of the Old Testament
hanging.
"Seventh and Eiohth Cases. — Copu-
lation with a beast, either l)y a man or a woman.
With the beastly human being, the beast itself
was also to be destroyed. For examples, see
Knobel, p. 507. [Vers. 15, 16.]
Third Class.
" First Case. — Copulation with a half-sister."
[This also, as in xviii. 9, necessarily covers the
case of a full sister, for she was both the daugh-
ter of the father and the daughter of the mother.
— F. G.] "They shall be cut off in the
sight of their people. — Thus they should form
a warning spectacle." Here the crime is de-
scribed as ion and p^ disgrace and misdeed,
[Ver. 17.]
" Second Case. — He that lay with a menstru-
ous woman, who in such wise uncovered the
fountain of her blood— so to speak — exposed
her life-spring. The penalty of death is for
both. The sentence sounds with a more gentle
expression : destruction out of the midst of the
people." [Ver. 18. The punishment here refers
to the act knowingly committed; in xv. 24 the
light penalty is given for the same act uninten-
tionally committed. — F. G.]
"Third Case. — Intercourse with an aunt on
either the father's or the mother's side. They
shall bear their iniquity. — Thus sounds the
sentence indefinitely, in transition to the follow-
ing. [Ver. 19.]
"Fourth Case. — If one takes the wife of his
brother, it is mj (it induces the curse of the
first degree); The penalty is childlessness, and
is thus entirely a divine dispensation (ver. 21).
Here, as has been said, the prohibition can, in
the case of the Levirate marriage (Deut. xxv. 5-
10), become a command — an evidence of the
nicety of the law." [On the meaning of the pe-
nalty of childlessness see the preliminary note
to ch. xviii. It would be entirely out of analogy
with the Divine dealings with man to suppose a
perpetual special interposition through all the
ages of Israel's history in every case of violation
CHAP. XX. 1-27.
157
of this law, and there is nothing in the character
of the forbidden relation to induce childlessness
under those ordinary Divine appointments which
we call natural laws. It is also much more in
accordance with the general character of this
chapter that the penalty should be understood
of something inflicted by statute law, — the reck-
oning of the issue of such marriages to another
than the actual father. So rightly S. Augustin,
Qu. 76 in Hept. It is a striking fact that this
penalty was still carried out in the one case of
the prohibited degrees, when the prohibition was
changed to a command. In the Levirate mar-
riage no heirs were begotten to the actual fa-
ther, but they were reckoned to the deceased
brother.— F. G.]
"In conclusion, another exhortation follows
which, in the first place, marks out the ordi-
nances as judgments (ideas) ; secondly, ex-
presses the incongruity between the unnatural
behaviour and the nature of the land of God, for
which even Israel could be spued out from it ;
and this brings out, in the third place, that for
such very things the heathen were thrust out of
the land. To this threat a promise is appended
in conclusion. [Ver. 24.] And with this is
connected a noble idea: in the separation of clean
beasts from the unclean, the separation of Israel
from the heathen is to be symbolically mirrored
forth. The closing sentence [ver. 27] would be
unintelligible as a repetition (from chap. xix.
31); evidently it is the germ of the prohibition
of false enthusiasm and prophecy in Israel itself
(see Deut. xix. 11 sqq.)." [In xix. 31, in ac-
cordance with the general character of chaps,
xviii. and xix., we have simply the prohibition
on the spiritual ground of the opposition to God's
will, without mention of specific punishments ;
here we have throughout civil penalties attached
to the various offences as against the theocratic
state. Accordingly those that have familiar spi-
rits or are wizards require to be mentioned again
in order that the death penalty may be denounced
against them. — F. 6]
"Ver. 25 is particularly important, since it
contains the key to the understanding of the Le-
vitical distinction between clean and unclean
animals. Men have sought for physiological
reasons for this distinction, and quite lately an
Israelitiah author has referred to the discovery of
the Trichina as the foundation of the prohibition
of swine's flesh. In regard to many of the un-
clean animals, there is indeed the reason of the
physiological unhealthiness of the flesh, or of the
physical aversion to their hateful appearance ; to
which may be added, as connected, something of
the physical effect of the blood of wild beasts.
Also the limitation of Israel to the use and sacri-
fice of domestic animals must have an economic
significance, and be, so to speak, for the benefit of
the State, since it worked against the dissipa-
tions of the ancient hunting and the luxury of the
heathen, and with the cultivation of the land,
furthered at the same time domestic simplicity
and contentment." [This must be understood to
apply only in a limited degree to the Israelites;
for they were allowed freely to hunt and eat all
clean wild animals, as the "roebuck and the
hart" (Deut. xii. 15, etc.). In regard to all
physiological and other reasons, it is always to
be remembered that no animals are intrinsically
unclean ; none were excepted from the grant to
Noah, and none from the Christian abrogation
of the distinction. The law was wholly tempo-
rary, added "because of transgressions," to
constitute Israel a peculiar people F. G.]
" But the symbolic meaning of the animal world,
as a representation of Israel among the Gentiles,
is here expressly brought out as the religious
main reason. Israel was to have a constant re-
presentation of its separation from the heathen
world in the separation of the clean animals, and
thus also the heathen world, by which it was
surrounded, and from which it was to understand
that it differed in religion and in morals, was
to be represented in the sphere of the unclean
animals. The sacred observance of the laws of
food was thus a constant reminder for Israel of
its theocratic sanctity and dignity. Thus it is
plain that the old distinction between clean and
unclean animals must fall away after the bound-
ary between Israel and the heathen has fallen.
But it is also to be recollected that Judaism
clung very strongly to the old distinction, as it
did no less to the prohibition of the use of blood;
and the Apostolic ordinance in regard to the last
particular and cognate subjects is explained to
mean that these laws, which had been ended as
religious dogmas, must yet continue for a time as
Christian customs for the sake of a united Chris-
tian fellowship. The shadowing forth of the
heathen world in the world of unclean beasts,
which is here exprestly brought out, is denied by
Keil, in opposition to Kurtz, without reason (p.
95)." [Much as we may admire the beauty and
force of the symbolism here presented by Lange,
it is difficult to see how it "is here expressly
brought out," or eveo in any way alluded to in
the text. Certainly the observance of the dis-
tinction among animals is placed upon a religious
ground, and this observance would contribute to
make of Israel that separate people which God
had called them to be. Naturally then might
the Israelites themselves have compared the
heathen to unclean animals ; but so far is such
an idea from finding countenance in the word of
God that it is only recognised to be removed,
and the heathen are first represented as un-
clean animals in the vision of St. Peter (Acts x.
10-16) at the moment when such distinctions
were forever to be done away. The object of
the law was to make the distinction of animals
fixed and unalterable; but in regard to the
heathen, to encourage them to ofl'er sacrifices
and partake in the worship of God, and thus to
be drawn into ever increasing nearness of rela-
tion to Him.— F. G.]
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAI..
I. In chap, xviii. the law is given simply as
the will of God. Here punishments are attached
to disobedience as to civil offences against the
theocratic state. There seems no reason why
these two chapters should have been separated
except to mark this distinction emphatically.
Obedience to God's law is required simply be-
cause it is His will, and this is set forth by it-
self; afterwards and separately, punishments
are provided for those among His people who re-
fuse to be guided by Him.
158
LEVITICUS.
II. In the frequent expression his or their
blood shall be upon bim or them is a plain
intimation that the offender alone is responsible
for the evil that comes upon him. The divine
law, whether natural or revealed, is inexorable,
and he who thrusts himself across its path neces-
sarily incurs its penalties. There is no occasion
for a Divine interposition to punish, and there is
no room for tho charge of severity ; the offender
braves an irresistible will, and in doing this
must himself alone be held responsible for the
result.
III. The beast involved in the guilt of man or
woman must be put to death with them. There
could be no moral guilt on the pirt of the beast,
because there was no moral responsibility ; but
yet he must perish because he had been associated
in human sin. Whether this was in order to re-
move the tool of sin from sight simply, or whe-
ther it was because of the association of human
sin with the beast; in either case it is plain that
it was commanded not for the sake of the beast,
but of man. Here we have one of the many in-
stances in the law in which human associations
and feelings are cared for and protected, and
used also as means for the advancement of ho-
liness.
HOMILETICAL AND PEACTICAL.
Lange: "The chapter of the great theocratic
rigor (chap, xx.) forms a contrast to the chapter
of the great theocratic mildness and purity of
life. Here the various measures of punishment
come into consideration. Burning with fire, as
a symbolical addition to the punishment of death,
is only connected with the dead body which has
been put to death by stoning. Then follows the
particular capital punishment; and next to this in-
definite forms of punishment, he shall bear his
Iniquity ; and finally the punishment of child-
lessness, in wbioii also we are certainly to sup-
pose a physical basis. The conception of the
abominations is the conception of that which is
against nature (Rom. i.), of that which, even
according to natural instinct, is perverse, hor-
rible, and a revolt against the moral law in man's
nature; b\it in regard to this, indeed, nature it-
self comes to the j udgment like a spirit of retri-
bution."
The law of this, as of many other chapters, is
enforced on the ground that the Israelites were
called to be » holy people. With how great ad-
ditional force must this apply to Christians. Not
only the Israelite, but the stranger also, defiled
God's sanctuary and profaned His holy name by
sin. The same thing must be trnealways; there
is no escape from responsibility because one
chooses not to acknowledge allegiance to God.
The Divine commands still rest upon him. Only
he has less help and support in keeping them
while he remains aloof from the commonwealth
of Israel.
PART SECOND.
Holiness on the Part of the Priests and Holiness of the Offerings.
" The sacred observance of the priestly position, of the sacrifice, and of the priestly calling" Lanqb.
Chapteks XXI., XXII.
A.—" THE DESECRATION OF THE PRIESTLY POSITION AND
THE PRIESTLY CALLING."— Lahoe.
Chapter XXI.
1 And the Lord said unto Moses, Speak unto the priests the sons of Aaron, and
2 say unto them, There shall none be defiled for the dead among his people : but for
his kin, that is near unto him, that is, for his mother, and for his father, and for his
3 son, and for his daughter, and for his brother, and for his sister a virgin, that is
4 nigh unto him, which hath had no husband ; for her may he be defiled. But [omit
buC] he shall not defile himself, being a chief man' among his people, to profane
TEXTUAL AND GEAMMATICAL.
' Ver. 4. VBj^S 7j?3 NBH' X/- Tho interpretation of this obscure clause is very various. The LXX., mistakiug
1J12, read ov iiiayQ^aeTat e^an-ii/a ep Tui >.ao> atfToiJ, meaning that the priest shall not deflle himself rashly or lightly.
The Syr. and Tlllg. have transferred the preposition 3 from VBjt? to ^^3 and read bat he shall not be defiled far apntux,
etc., a sense adopted by several oitposltors. The A. V. has followed the Tnrg. of Onk. and th« Arab., which Is interpreted to
mean that the priest, as occupying a high official position, head of a family, etc., should not deflle himself; if this sense can
be sustained, it throws some light upon the occasional use of \T\2 tor primie. It is adopted by many expositors as Von
Gerlach and Keil. The Targ. Jonathan, and several Jewish expositors (Kalisch also, and Knobel) understand hV^ t*
mean hwihcmd, a sufficiently well-established meaning of the word, and one which is followed in the margin of the A. V.(
CHAP. XXI. 1-24.
169
5 himself. They' shall not make baldness upon their head, neither shall they shave
6 off the comer of their beard, nor make any cuttiogs in their flesh. They shall be
holy unto their God, and not profane the name of their God : for the offerings of
the LoED made by fire, and [omit and'} the bread of their God they do offer : there-
fore they shall be holy.*
7 They shall not take a wife thai is a whore, or profane : neither shall they take a
8 woman put away from her husband : for he^ is holy unto his God. Thou shalt
sanctify him therefore ; for he offereth the bread of thy God : he shall be holy unto
9 thee : for I the Loed, which sanctify you," am holy. And the daughter of any
priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father : she
shall be burnt with fire.
10 And he that is the high priest among his brethren, upon whose head the anointing
oil was poured, and that is consecrated to put on the garments, shall not uncover
11 his head, nor rend his clothes ; neither shall he go in to any dead body, nor defile
12 himself for his father, or for his mother ; neither shall he go out of the sanctuary,
nor profane the sanctuary of his God ; for the crown of the anointing oil of his God
13, 14 is upon him : I am the Lord. And he shall take a wife in her virginity. A
widow, or a divorced woman, or profane, or' an harlot, these shall he not take: but
15 he shall take a virgin of his own people to wife. Neither shall he profane his seed
among his people : for I the Lord do sanctify him.
16, 17 And the Loed spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto Aaron, saying. Whoso-
ever he be of thy seed in their generations that hath any blemish, let him not ap-
18 proach to offer the bread of his God. For whatsoever man he be that hath a blem-
ish, he shall not approach : a blind man, or a lame, or he that hath a flat nose, or
19, 20 any thing superfluous, or a man that is brokenfooted, or brokenhanded, or crook-
backt, or a dwarf,* or that hath a blemish in his eye, or be scurvy, or scabbed, or
21 hath his stones broken ; no man that hath a blemish of the seed of Aaron the priest
shall come nigh to offer the offerings of the Loed made by fire : he hath a blemish ;
22 he shall not come nigh to offer the bread of his God. He shall eat the bread of
23 his God, both of the most holy, and of the holy. Only he shall not go in unto the
vail, nor come nigh unto the altar, because he hath a blemish ; that he profane not
24 my sanctuaries :' for I the Loed do sanctify them. And Moses told it unto Aaron,
and to his sons, and unto all the children of Israel.
bnt thia requires /or hia wife to be supplied, for which therein no warrant, and it al^o eeeros highly improbable that mourn-
ing should be permitted for the relations mentioned in vers. 2, 3, and forbidden for the wife, Miohaelis understands the
high-priest to be intended by S y3 ! but his conduct is the special subject of vers. 10-12. On the whole, no other interpre-
tation seems sufBciently well-established to take the place of that In the A. V., although even that can hardly be considered
as satisikctory. In any case it is better to omit the interpolated tut at the beginning of the Ter=e, . , , ^, „ ,
a Vers. 6. The K'ri inlp' indicated by the Masoretic punctuation of the text iiriTp' is sustained by the bam. and
all the versions, . , , ^ ^ , v , ,_ , r, ^. -^^ a
' Ver. 6. The sense is rather obscured than helped by the interpolated mi, which is better omitted.
1 Ver. 6. The Hsb. has ttflp in the sing., doubtless to be understood as an abstract term. The Sam. and all the ver,
""s v™8. r,%^ TtaeMaiioffe of numbers creates a slight obscurity, but the A. V. faithfully follows the Heb.
• Ver. 8. The Sam,, LXX,, and Vuls:,, have the pronoun in the third person
' Ver 14. The missiuK conjunction is supplied in the Sam. and the versions. ,, ^ ^, . ,.. . ,
8 Ver. 20. pT signifies something smaS or (km. The text of the A. V., seems preferable to the margm, as it is scarcely
ta he supposed that the case of the dwarf woold be omitted. Fuerst, however, renders it cmsumptm ; Vulg., Uear-eyed,
and so Onk., and apparently the LXX. e<()ijAii5. Syr. = WUe. j i j j. . -j; »i, v, i „i „„ ^^n n,^ v,„i»
9 Ver 23. The LXX. has the sing, to oiyiov. The plural is generally understood to signify the holy place and the holy
•f holies ; some interpreters, however, (Boothroyd, Bosenmueller) would transhvte my hallowed Oivngs.
BXEGETICAL AND CEITICAL.
Lange: "The symbolic side of the Levitical
law, which was brought out so powerfully at the
close of the last chapter, is likewise not to be
mistaken in the commands for keeping holy the
priestly calling. Owing to the symbolic mean-
ing of these commands they are connected by
manifold analogies with heathen laws and cus-
toms enacted to secure the priestly dignity.
Compare the references on this subject in Kno-
bel, p. 617 sqq. ; Keil, p. HI." [Trans, p. 430,
432. " The testimonies which Knobel and seve-
ral of the older commentators have collected to
show that the priests of the Egyptians, Greeks,
Komans and other nations avoided funerals and
contact with the dead, afford but an imperfect
parallel to these Levitical laws concerning
the priests Wherever this feeling
was recognized in a ceremonial usage, the priest,
from his office, would naturally be expected to
observe the highest standard of purity. But the
laws which regulated the priesthood of the chosen
160
LEVITICUS.
people had a deeper basis than this. They had
to administer a law of life. ... St. Cyril truly
observes that the Hebrew priests were the in-
struments of the divine will for averting death,
that all their sacrifices were a type of the death
of Christ, which swallowed up death iu victory,
and that it would have been unsuitable that they
should have the same freedom as other people to
become mourners. Olaphyra in Lev., p. 430."
Clark.— F 6.].
" In the first place it is to be noticed that there
is here brought out a gradation of the symbolism
that the laws in regard to dignity are stronger
in the case of the high-priest than in the case
of the sons of Aaron, the common priests. While
these, who were at first Aaron's sons, were ele-
vated above the common people (as this also out-
ranked the heathen in its sanctity), so the high-
priest again was raised above his sons ; he
formed the symbolical centre and summit of the
personal sanctity towards God, and of exclusion
as respects the unclean or that which was Levi-
tically 'common.' " Lange.
With this chapter begins a new Parashah, or
Proper Lesson of the law extending through
ch. xxiv. " The parallel Haphtarah, or Proper
Lesson of the Prophe s, is Ezek. xliv. 15-31,
which contains ordinances for the priests, and
is the best commentary on the present chapter."
Wordsworth.
The purity and holiness required of the priest-
hood in this chap, is evidently a necessary con-
sequence of the peculiar relation in which they
stood to God and the people. It is substantially
the same as that required of all the holy people,
but is emphasized and extended somewhat be-
yond that which the people generally were able
to bear, because it especially devolved upon them
to " draw nigh unto the Lord." For the same
reason still more strict obligations are laid upon
the high-priests. In vers. 1-6 they are forbidden
to defile themselves by touching the dead, or by
signs of mourning ; in 7-9 they are required to
contract a spotless marriage and maintain purity
in their families; in 10-15 the same duties, some-
what extended, are still more emphatically re-
quired of the high-priest; and in conclusion,
vers. 16-24, the physical impediments to the ex-
ercise of the priestly office are detailed.
Vers. 1-4. The priest may not defile himself
on account of a dead person (tJ'3p lit. a soul),
with an exception however in the case of the
very nearest of kin. The virgin sister, as yet
unbetrothed, is included in the list ; but after
her betrothal or marriage, she passed into the
family of another, and the exemption ceases.
The principle of the exception seems to be sim-
ply a regard for human feelings. The fact that
the tent or house was defiled, ipso facto, by the
presence of a dead body, and therefore the priest
could not avoid defilement in such cases (Keil)
forms no sufficient explanation of the exception ;
for this would be true when a slave died in the
house, which is not included, and would often
not be true in the case of a father, which is in-
cluded. It is remarkable that there is no men-
tion of the wife — the Rabbins sny because she
and her husband were " one flesh." Lange (see
below) makes a distinction between a passive
defilement which was inevitable in the case of a
death in the house, and which is too self-evident
to require especial mention ; and the active de-
filement of proclaiming one's grief, using the
customary marks of mourning and burying the
dead, which he considers wore forbidden to the
priest, as belonging to the class of the chief men,
on occasion of the death of his wife. It seems
more probable that the instances mentioned in
ver. 2 are of the nature of limitations, and that
the marriage relationship is not mentioned be-
cause it is nearer than any of them, and there-
fore included within them all. Notwithstanding
the permission in the cases mentioned above, the
priest, by contact with the dead, still became
defiled for seven days, and was then required to
offer a sin offering (see Ezek. xliv. 25-27). No
penalty is provided for a violation of this law.
On ver. 4 see Textual Notes.
Vers. 5, 6. The prohibition to the priests of
the marks of mourning for the dead, customary
among the surrounding nations, is extended in
Dent. xiv. 1 to the whole body of the people.
The command to the priests is expressly made to
rest upon their official duties. On the expres-
sion bread of their God see on iii. 11. DhS
is indifferently rendered in the A. V. food, bread,
and meat. Only the last is objectionable on ac-
count of the change in the use of the English
word.
Vers. 7-9. The marriage of the priests and the
life of their families likewise must not be allowed
to present a contrast to their holy calling. They
might marry any reputable woman, whether Is-
raelite or foreigner, excepting of course women
from those idolatrous tribes of the Canaanites
which were forbidden to all the people. Exod.
xxxiv. 16 ; Deut. vii. 3. In after times this law
was made more stringent, Ezek. xliv. 22. They
might not take to wife a common prostitute, nor
one profane, i. e., a woman who had fallen, or
as some Jewish authorities hold, oilc of illegiti-
mate birth. Briefly, their wives must be of un-
blemished and spotless character, and hence they
were forbidden to take one already repudiated.
In ver. 8 the change of person is gene.-ally held
to indicate a change of address to the people of
Israel; but this is unnecessary. It is simply
the ordinary form of direct command. Because
it was the priest's office to offer the bread of
thy God, therefore his life and surroundings
must be in harmony with his holy calling. The
priest's family, also, by a propriety felt in all
ages, must be ordered in accordance with his
sacred duties, and the outrageous violation of
this in his daughter's becoming a prostitute must
not only be punished with death, but the dead
body be visited with the symbolical punishment
of burning.
Vers. 10-15. The same commands are applied
with greater emphasis, and with some extension,
to the high-priest. He is described by the pecu-
liar fulness of the anointing he had received
(vers. 10, 12), and by his being consecrated
to put on the garments, viz., those appointed
for the official costume of the high-priesi, in
which Aaron had been arrayed at his consecra-
tion, and which descended to his successors. To
him the accustomed marks of mourning, and all
CHAP. XXI. 1-24.
161
coataot with a dead body, even that of the near-
e^it relative, are forbidden. He must not go out
of the sanctuary for this purpose (not that
the sanctuary was to be his constant abode, Bahr
and Baumgarten), nor profane the sanctuary
by this defilement of his person. He was also
restricted in marriage to a virgin of Israel, ver.
14; by any other marriage he would profane
his seed,
Lange : " Whatever may belong to the defile-
ment by the dead, it is certainly to be noticed
that nothing is here said in any way of dying
persons, or of death itself, but of dead bodies.
The recollection of Egypt, especially of the Egyp-
tian cultus of dead bodies comes here into the
foreground. The defilement by the dead in-
cluded not merely the touching in itself, which
is so natural to excited grief, but also the parti-
cipation in the burial, and the customs of mourn-
ing. But that which among the heathen was an
expression of horror, so that it was said even of
Apollo himself. Let him shun the scenes of death,
appears here rather as a prelude of the subli-
mity of the Christian view of death. The hor-
ror would indeed appear strongest at the sight
of the dead body of a blood relative, yet here
humanity places itseVf on the opposite side as a
limit of the symbolism, and allows the defilement
in the case of the nearest family relations with
the exception of the married sister who now be-
longs to another family circle. Ver. 4 certainly
appears to say that a man as a husband shall
not defile himself for the dead body of his wife,
as the foregoing specification and determination
concerning the married sister might already in-
timate. Concerning this, see below," [above
under ver. 4]. " The reason is well expressed
in ver. 6 : for the offerings of the LORD
made by fire, the bread of their God they
do offer. — Since they know, or at least have
some idea of what the sacrifice signifies — an en-
tire resignation to the living God, — they cannot
mourn and despair as those who have little or
no hope, without strengthening the delusion of
despair, by which the Israelites would dishonor
the name of their God, .Jehovah. There is an
extravagance of lamentation which takes the ap-
pearance of a resentment and contention with
God in regard to the dead ; among the people of
God this shou'd be excluded by the feeling of
reverence : — the Lord has done it.
" Three kinds of women are excluded from
the priestly marriage : the ^yhore, the profane,
the divorced. To the high-priest the taking
of a widow is also forbidden. We call to mind
Thamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba, who be-
came ancestors in Israel (Matt, i.), and it is thus
plain that4;he subject is here a purely Old Tes-
tament regulation of symbolical signification.
By the marriage of the priest with a virgin is
signified that the theocratic marriage could and
should be consecrated to the rearing up of the
hereditary blessing (see Jno. i. l.S, 14). Thus
also he was to appear to the people as a conse-
crated personality. But the dark contrast is the
ruined priestly family,* and the saddest instance
- is the ruined priest's daughter ; if she has only
• "Or also 'he family of a pastor. In a poem by Heine it
1« depicted witli dark touohas."
begun to be a whore, she has fallen under the
judgment of fire.
" The third division treats of the sons of the
priests having bodily defects, or afilioted with
corporeal blemishes (wherein spiritual reasons
are evidently included). Here also the prevail-
ing symbolical purpose is not to be mistaken.
The sacrificers must appear as the type of per-
fection, as also the sacrifice in the following sec-
tion. Hence the blind and lame, the sons of
Aaron with misshapen noses and limbs, having
some bodily defect in hand or foot, etc. (vers. 18-
20) correspond to the faulty sacrificial animals,
oh. xxii. 23-25. The strong exclusion demanded
by the cultus for the sake of its symbolism was
compensated by the compassionate provision
that they should have their portion of all sacri-
ficial food of the active priests, whereby they are
in some sort to be compared with Emeritus offi-
cials who draw their full salary. They do not
offer the bread of their God, as the offerings
are collectively called, inasmuch as these culmi-
nated in the shew-bread ; but yet they eat the
bread of their God, as well of the most holy
as of the holy, i. e., not only of the wave offer-
ings, firstlings, etc. (Num. xviii. 11, 19, and 26-
29) but also of the peculiar priestly portion of
the sacrifices, the oblations, etc. See Keil, p. J?4
[Trans, p. 433]. But if the priestly access unto
the vail and unto the altar is denied them,
it appears that this is here spoken of their offi-
cial functions. Moreover it is emphasized that
Moses communicated these commands not only
unto Aaron and to his sons ; but unto all
the children of Israel who ought to kuow how
their priests should conduct themselves." Lange.
A death in a dwelling defiled every thing in
the dwelling, and every one who entered it.
Deaths, however, must necessarily occur in
priestly families beyond the limits of the allow-
able cases of defilement, and also in the house
of the high-priest to whom no defilement what-
ever was allowed. Lange therefore well says,
" i distinction must be made between passive
sorrow and defilement, which might happen even
to the high-priest in his own house, and active
uncleanness which came about by the rending
of the clothes and going to the dead body."
Accordingly the prohibition to the high-priest is
couched in terms (vers. 10-12) indicating the ac-
tive defilement.
Vers. 16-24. These directions concerning the
descendants of Aaron who should have any bodily
defect are founded upon the general principle,
appearing in every part of the law, that what-
ever is devoted to the service of God should be
as perfect as possible in its kind. "As the spi-
ritual nature of a man is reflected in his bodily
form, only a faultless condition of body could
correspond to the holiness of the priest; just as
the Greeks and Romans required, for the very
same reason, that the priests should be 616iiXr)poL,
integri corporis (Plato de legg. 6, 759 ; Seneca ex-
cerpt, controv. 4, 2; Plutarch qusest. rom. 73).
Consequently none of the descendants of Aaron
in their generations, i. «., in all future gene-
rations (see Ex. xii. 14), were to approach the
vail, i. e., enter the holy place, or draw near to
the altar (in the court) to offer the food of Jeho-
vah, viz., the sacrifices." Keil. Persons thus in-
162
LEVITICUS.
capacitated for the exercise of the active duties
of the priesthood are yet especially allowed to
partake of the priests' portion of the sacrifices
(ver. 22), and doubtless received their share of
the tithes for the support of the priests. By
custom they were employed in many duties per-
taining to the priesthood which did not require
the prohibited approach to the altar or entrance
into the holy place ; such as the examination of
leprous persons, houses, and things, the carrying
of the ashes without the camp, and many duties
of a similar character.
At the beginning of the chapter Moses is di-
rected to make this communication to the
priests the sons of Aaron; at the end (ver.
24) we read that he told it not only to them, but
unto all the children of Israel. This is in
accordance with the whole character of the law.
Each particular communication is immediately
addressed to those whose duties it concerns ; but
at the same time, no part of the law was to be
the exclusive possession, or under the exclusive
guardianship of any class. Every part of it was
to be diligently taught to every Israelite. The
Divine law was the common heritage of all, and
all were interested in seeing that it was observed.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL.
I. All the precepts of this chapter tend to a
single point — the peculiar purity and symbolical
holiness required of those who ministered before
God. From the centre of the absolute Divine
holiness spread out ever-widening circles, and to
each is attached a minimum of symbolical holi-
ness without which it cannot be entered. The
heathen in the outermost circle, as human beings,
still had the light of nature and conscience;
these laid upon them duties for the violation of
which they were cast out of their homes and de-
stroyed; the people of Israel formed an inner
circle of higher obligations ; but those chosen
from them to draw nigh to God on their behalf,
must come under a still stricter rule. All this
points unmistakably to the holiness of Him who
is the centre of all, and shows that the partaking
of His holiness is the necessary condition of ap-
proach to Him.
II. The families nf the priests were so inti-
mately associated with their own proper person-
ality, that something of the requirements for the
priests themselves must also be demanded of
them. This rests upon a fundamental principle
of fitness, and is again repeatedly insisted upon
in the New Testament in regard to the Christian
minister. See 1 Tim. iii. 11, 12; Tit. i. 6.
III. The absolute holiness required of those
who presented oiferings to God could be only
symbolical ; but the fact that it was symbolical
points to One who fulfilled the symbolism, even
to Christ, who was alone perfect in holiness ;
therefore through Him alone can any acceptable
gifts be offered to God.
V. Physical blemishes, because they symbo-
lized spiritual defects, hindered the priests from
ministering before God on man's behalf; yet
these did not prevent their eating of the sacri-
fices, thus at once receiving their own support,
and representing God in the receiving of that
which the sacrifioer offered. Thus is brought
out the two-fold relation in those who minister
for the people toward God : on the one hand they
may only draw nigh to Him on the basis of per-
fect holiness, and for sinful man this can be ac-
complished only through the mediation of Christ;
on the other, the grace proceeding from Him is
not hindered by the unworthiness of those
through whom it comes. Always we must "have
this treasure in earthen vessels." The feeble
stream from man to God would be turned back
by the obstacles in its channel but for the all-
availing efficacy of the intercession of Christ;
but the full flow of God's mercies in Christ ia
powerful enough to sweep by all such barriers.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL.
" The person, life and house of the'priest must
especially be kept holy. For this, the law of
God knows a more human way than the law of
the Pope (xxi. 13). The features of the symbo-
lical consecrated state of the priest are spiritu-
ally explained. The fearful picture of a dese-
crated, profane, or very vicious priestly house.
How far also can the sacrifice be designated as
the bread of God ? In reference to the Being of
God Himself, the true sacrifice is an object of
His good pleasure. In reference to the power
of God, it is the noblest and most fitting means
of drawing near to His fire. In reference to the
idea of God in the world, it is a perpetual means
of freshening, deepening, and strengthening it."
Lange.
The priestly requirement of holiness, symbo-
lical of old for those whose office it was to draw
near to God, must rest now in its literal force
upon all Christians, " a royal priesthood." who
must ever draw near by the new and living way
consecrated for them. As the headship of the
priest over his household required that they also
should present no striking contrast to his purity ;
so, on the same principle, it must be incumbent
upon all men that those over whom they have
influence and control should be so ordered in
their lives as not to present to the world a con-
trast to the principles they themselves profess.
Excessive mourning is forbidden to the priests;
all mourning is restricted to the circle of the
nearest relations, and to the high-priest is for-
bidden altogether. Thus is clearly shown that
however on earth something may be conceded to
the weakness of sorrowing humanity, yet sorrow
for the departed is not the proper garb in which
to draw near to God. This is more fully de-
clared through Him who is the Resurrection and
the Life, and the Christian cannot sorrow for
those who sleep in Him as men without hope.
Thus the reproof of excessive indulgence in sor-
row, so plainly brought out under the new dis-
pensation, is here foreshadowed by the laws
of the Mosaic covenant.
In ver. 24 we see that, although the priests
were separated from the people by their special
divine appointment, the laws for their govern-
ment were yet communicated to all the people
that they might be under the observation of the
whole community in their conduct. So it must
ever be if the ministry is to be preserved in its
purity ; and the germs of deoay are already sown
in that body which refuses to recognize its re-
sponsibility to the public opinion of the Chris-
tian community.
CHAP. XXII. 1-33. 163
B.— "KEEPING HOLT OP THE SACRIFICE, OR OF WHAT HAS BEEN HALLOWED."—
Lanqe.
Chapter XXII. 1-33.
1, 2 And the Loed spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto Aaron and to his sons,
that they separate themselves from the holy things of the children of Israel, and
that they profane not my holy name in those things which they hallow unto me : I
3 am the Loed. Say unto them, Whosoever he be of aU your seed among your
generations, that goeth unto the holy things, which the children of Israel hallow
unto the Loed, having his uncleanneas upon him, that soul shall be cut off from
4 my presence : I am the Loed. What man soever of the seed of Aaran is a leper,
or hath a running issue ; he shall not eat of the holy things, until he be clean.
And whoso toucheth any thing that is unclean by the dead, or a man whose seed
5 goeth from him ; or whosoever toucheth any^ creeping thing, whereby he may be
made unclean, or a man of whom he may take uncleanness," whatsoever uncleanness
6 he hath ; the soul which hath touched any such shall be unclean until even, and
7 shall not eat of the holy things, unless he wash [bathe'] his flesh with water. And
when the sun is down, he shall be clean, and shall afterward eat of the holy things;
8 because it is his food. That which dieth of itself, or is torn with beasts, he shall
9 not eat to defile himself therewith : I am the Loed. They shall therefore keep
mine ordinance,* lest they bear sin for it, and die therefore, if they profane it : I
the Loed do sanctify them.
10 There shall no stranger eat of the holy thing : a sojourner of the priest, or an
11 hired servant, shall not eat of the holy thing. But if the priest buy any soul with
his money, he shall eat of it, and he* that is born in his house : they shall eat of
12 his meat [food*]. If the priest's daughter also be married unto a stranger, she
13 may not eat of an offering of the holy things. But if the priest's daughter be a
widow, or divorced, and have no child, and is returned unto her father's house, as'
in hor youth, she shall eat of her father's meat [food*] : but there shall no stranger
14 eat thereof. And if a man eat of the holy thing unwittingly [inadvertently*], then
he shall put the fifth part thereof unto it, and shall give it unto the priest with the
15 holy thing. And they shall not profane the holy things of the children of Israel,
16 which they offer' unto the Loed ; or suffer them to bear the iniquity of trespass,
when they eat [or, lade themselves with the iniquity of trespass in their eating'"]
their holy things : for I the Loed do sanctify them.
TEXTUAL AND GEAMMATICAL.
> Ver. 5. The Sam. and LXX. supply the word malean. According to the law, the " creeping thing " could only com-
municate uncieannesa when dead.
^ Ver. S.jRosenmiiller translates : or a man who may ie unclean on accoutU of U, so. the creeping thing. Ho refers the
pronoun in V? to V'^K'.
8 Ver. 6. vni- ' See Textual Note »> on xiv. 8.
* Ver. 9. ^n^DlffD~n&5 ^IDE'. The want of an appropriate verb and noun from the same root in English makes it
impossible to give the full force of this phrase so often impressively repeated. See Gen. xxvi. 6 ; Lev. viii. 36 ; Num. iii
7; ix. 19. Lange uses a paraphrase : Ond sie soUtn beobachten^ viag gegen mich m beobachten ist.
5 Ter. 11. The Sam., LXX. and Chald. have the plural.
' Ver. 11. IBnSa. See Com. on xxi. 6. On the dagh^h in the H Bee Textual Note M on iv. 13.
7 Ver. 13. Sixteen' MS3. for the particle of comparison 2 liave 3.
8 Ver. 14. njJE'3. See Textual Note ' on iv. 2.
9 Ver. 15. ^D''^''', lit. which they heave or lift tip; but evidently the reference is more general than to the heave-ofifer-
Ingp, and the of^r of the A. V. ia by all means to be retained.
1" Ver. 18. The aenae of this verse ia doubtful. The A. V., Patrick, Pool, Keil and others refer the pronouns them and
they til the people, and understand the precept that the prieats ahould prevent the people from eating of the holy things
wiiich it bplonged to the prieats to eat; on the other hand, the margin of the A. V., Calvin, Knobel, Znnz, Kigga and Lange
- underfltiind it as mr^anin : lode thi'manlvs with the iniquity of tre-fpass in their eating. The latter ia more in accordance with
the general subject of the chapter, and is preferable. Bo the hXX. understood by the use of eauTous. So Eoubigant.
164
LEVITICUS.
17, 18 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying. Speak unto Aaron, and to his sons,
and unto all the children of Israel, and say unto them, Whatsoever he be of the
house of Israel, or of the strangers" in Israel, that will offer his oblation [offering"]
for all [any of] his vows, and for all [any of J his free-will offerings, which they
19 will offer unto the Lord for a burnt offering ; ye shall offer at your own will [for
your acceptance"] a male without blemish, of the beeves, of the sheep, or of the
20 goats. But whatsoever hath a blemish, that shall ye not offer : for it shall not be
21 acceptable for you And whosoever offereth a sacrifice of peace offerings unto the
LoED to accomplish his vow, or a freewill offering in beeves or sheep [of the flock"],
22 it shall be perfect to be accepted : there shall be no blemish therein. Blind, or
broken, or maimed,'' or having a wen [or ulcerous'*], or scurvy, or scabbed, ye
shall not offer these unto the Lord, nor make an offering by fire of them upon the
23 altar unto the Lord. Either a bullock or a lamb [one of the flock''] that hath
anything superfluous'* or lacking in his parts, that mayest thou offer for a freewill
24 offering ; but for a vow it shall not be accepted. Ye shall not offer unto the Lord
that which is bruised, or crushed, or broken, or cut; neither shall ye make any
25 offering thereof [make «i6cA'°] in your land. Neither from a stranger's^ hand shall
ye offer the bread of your God of any of these ; because their corruption is in them,
and blemishes be in them : they shall not be accepted for you
26, 27 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, When a bullock, or a sheep, or a
goat, is brought forth, then it shall be seven days under the dam ; and from the
eighth day and thenceforth it shall be accepted for an offering made by fire unto
28 the Lord. And whether it be cow or ewe [female of the flock''], ye shall not kill
it and her young both in one day.
29 And when ye will offer a sacrifice of thanksgiving unto the Lord, offer it at
30 your own will [for your acceptance"]. On the same day it shall be eaten up ; ye
shall leave none of it until the morrow : I am the Lord.
31 Therefore shall ye keep my commandments, and do them : I am the Lord.
32 Neither shall ye profane my holy name ; but I will be hallowed among the chil-
33 dren of Israel : I am the Lord which hallow you, that brought you out of the land
of Egypt, to be your God : I am the Lord.
" Ver. 18. Tho Sam., 14 MSS , and all the ancient versions snpply thai aojoum.
12 Ter. 18. pip. See Textual Note 2 on ii. 1.
" Ver. 19. DDJyiS. See Textual Note » on i. S. Comp. also ver. 21.
" Vor. 21. [NS3 includes both ehtep (A. T.) and goats (marg.). It is better therefore to use the ordinary comprehen-
sive term.
" Ver. 22. On the precise sense of Vllfli the authorities differ. LXX. y\ah p, on the other hand, signifies one having such
part smaller than its normally developed fellow.
10 Ver. 24 According to all authorities the preceding clause refers to the four ways of castration practised .imnng the
ancienta (see Aristot. hUl. cm. ix. 37, 3, and the other aiithoritii i cited by Knoliel and Keil); the latter clause contains, inci-
aentally, an ahsoluto prohibition of such customs in the land, and has nothing to do with sacrifice, there hein» no word
for offermg m the Ueb. Such Is the interpretation of Josephus (Ant. iv. 8, 40) and of the Jewish authorities generally,
so also the JjXX., the Targs., and the Vuig. The sense of the A. V., however, is found in the Syr., and is enstiiined by
ILnoUel end Lame who says expressly: "It is particularly to be noticed that castration of animals was not universally
loroioaen in Iniael. only no castrated animals might be offered in sacrifice."
Ver. 25. 1JJ |3, a different word from the II of ver. 10 and the 1J of ver. 18, and probably referring to a for-
eiener, not even sojou-ninK in the land.
21 Ver. 28. See Note " on ver. 23. 'ija-riNl "inS in masc. form; but Rosenmuller notes that in regard to brute ani-
mals, the verbs, as well as the nouns and ac^eotives, take no note of sex.
ter was (1) that no priest who had become nn-
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. "'**" ^"^ '° ^°'^°^ °'" ^^^ "'«" (^^'S. 2-9), and
_, ' (2) that no one was to eat of them who was not
ihe analysis of this chapter given by Keil is a member of the priestly family (vers 10-16).
a very clear one. "Vers. 1-16. Reverence Vers. 17-33. Acceptable Sacriaoea." Lange
lor tniugs sanctified. — The law on this mat- introduces the chapter thus: "The keeping
CHAP. XXII. 1-
165
holy of the eacnfioe was to correspond to the
keeping holy of the priesthood, since this Is
indeed at the bottom an expression of keeping
the priesthood holy. It was most strongly in-
sisted upon." The centre, however, of the
whole LeTitical system is rather the sacrifice
than the priest, and the priest is for the sake of
the sacrifice, as is distinctly brought out in this
chapter, rather than the reverse. Certainly the
sacrifice was earlier, and the necessity for it
more fundamental. The symbolical holiness of
the priesthood must therefore be considered as
an essential requirement in order to their ofiFer-
ing of acceptable sacrifices. Lange thus ana-
lyzes the chapter: "a. In relation to the con-
duct of the priest, vers. 3-9. 6. In relation to
the conduct of the laity, vers. 1016. c. In
relation to the coaditlon of the sacrificial ani-
mals, and especially to the fact that everything
defective was excluded, vers. 17-25 ; but also
that every proper offering vras to be offered to
the Lord in the right way, or to be eaten as a
thank-offering, vers. 26-33."
The chapter consists of three Divine commu-
nications, all given to Moses, the first (vers.
1-16) to be communicated to Aaron and his sons,
prescribing under what conditions the priests
are not to touch the offerings (1-9), and who
beside the priests might partake of them (10-16) ;
the second (17-25) is to be communicated not
only to Aaron, but unto all the children of
Israel, determining the quality of the victims ;
while the third (26-33) is to Moses alone, pre-
scribing certain conditions to be observed with
all victims, and concluding the chapter.
Vers. 1-9. For his view of the diflBcult passage
In ver. 2, Lange refers to his translation, which
runs thus : that they profane not my holy
name — even they, virho have it in charge
to keep holy for Me," thus referring the
relative T^^ to the name. Other commenta-
tors refer it to the holy things of the chil-
dren of Israel, as in the A. V., LXX. and
Vulg. (Rosenmiiller, Knobel, Kaliach, Murphy,
Keil, Clark, etc.). The sense of the whole verse
is certainly that the priests should not profane
the holy gifts of the people by approaching them
when themselves in a condition unlawful for
priestly ministrations. The expression sepa-
rate themselves from the holy things is
clearly to be understood as meaning under the
circumstances mentioned below. " 1J.^i7 with
jp, to keep away, separate one's self from any-
thing, i. e. not to regard or treat them as on a
par with unconsecrated things." Keil. The
Divine acceptance of the sacrifices was expressed
by the priests' eating certain parts of them as
the representatives of God. These were allowed
to be eaten by those who were permanently dis-
qualified by physical defects from offering the
sacrifices (xxi. 22) ; but if consumed by those
in a state of uncleanness, would be a profanation
of the name of the Lord. The prohibition ex-
tends not only to the eating, but to the touching
them at all. Ver. 3. Shall be cut off from
my presence is considered by Rosenmiiller
and others as equivalent to the expression " shall
be cut off from the midst of his people." A bet-
ter interpretation (Knobel, Clark) is that it
means : " shall be excluded from the sanctuary"
— 'deprived of his priestly office. Lange, how-
ever, interprets it that " the penalty of death is
pronounced upon every one of the priestly family
who approaches the holy things in a state of
uncleanness, whether it be to offer or to eat the
priestly sacrificial food." But he afterwards
adds : " With the positive death penalty is con-
nected at the same time a. mysterious destiny
of death, which Jehovah reserves to Himself.
The legislation has as yet no idea of the ruder
forms of desecration of the sacrifice in the future
as e. g. 1 Sam. ii. 12 sqq." This was the pe-
nalty attached to the violation of any of the pre-
cepts in this paragraph. The uncleannesses
mentioned in vers. 4-6 have already been treated
in their appropriate places. They are only
mentioned here as showing that they excluded
the priest from contact with holy things. Vers.
6, 7, prescribe for the priest, as for the people
in similar cases, the simplest forms of purifica-
tion, and when these are observed, limit the
time of the uncleanness to the going down of the
sun. In accordance with tbe considerate cha-
racter of the Divine legislation, it then allows
him to eat of the sacrifice, because it is his
food. In ver. 8 the eating of that which had
not been properly slain, and was therefore still
contaminated with the blood, is forbidden with
especial emphasis to the priests whose office was
to make atonement wiih the blood. This had
already been forbidden to all the people (xi. 39,
40) with but a slight penalty for transgression.
Here the transgression for the priest comes
under the heavier sentence of ver. 3. Calvin
notes that such a special prohibition was needed
lest the priests might think themselves, in virtue
of their office, exempt from the laws binding
upon the rest of the people. Ver. 9. Lest
they bear sin for it, and die therefore,
gives the penalty in general of a priestly ne-
glect to keep God's ordinance, but is not
necessarily to be understood of the penalty for
the breach of each particular precept mentioned.
The command here, as everywhere, is made to
rest upon the consideration, I the LORD do
sanctify them.
Vers. 10-16. This forms the second part of
the first Divine communication, and prescribes
who beside the priests themselves might or might
not eat of the holy things. It has nothing to do
with the most holy things which could be eaten
only by the priests themselves. "The "11 is
the stranger relatively ; accordingly those who
are not Israelites, not Levites, not relatives;
here, those who are not priests. He might not
eat of the holy food of the offerings, however
near he might stand to the priest as a neighbor,
or a day laborer; but on the other hand, the
purchased slave, since he had bersome by cir-
cumcision an Israelite and one of the household
of the priest, might certainly eat of it, together
with those born in the priest's house. And here
again the house appears in its full theocratic signifi-
cance. (Comp. Com. on Matt., p. 14t).) It re-
sults from this, that the married daughter of
a priest is excluded ; she belonged to another
house (if it were a priestly house, she might of
course eat there with them). Her right revives
166
LEVITICUS.
again, however, if she cornea back to her father's
house as a childless widow or divorced ; but if
she had children, she formed with the children
another bouse. If one who had no right ate of
the holy things by mistake, he must make resti-
tution to the priest for what he had eaten, and
add a fifth part thereto. "The verse refers only
to something unimportant, for in the case of
greater things he was commanded, moreover, to
offer a trespass oifering (oh. v. 15)." Knobel.
The difference is in this, that here the subject is
the transgression of eating the priestly portion
of the heave offering ; there, of heedless injury
done to the sanctuary in regard to the portion
hallowed to Jehovah." [It seems more proba-
ble that the case here referred to is exactly
included under that in v. 15, 16, and that the
trespass offering is not expressly mentioned here
because it is only necessary to show that this
case comes under the category of those for which
the trespass offering was required. Calvin well
observes that this prohibition was necessary to
prevent the "holy things being regarded as
common food." — F. G.] " Here too the law is
led back to I the LORD do sanctify them.
The history of David (1 Sam. xxi.) and the New
Testament explanation of it (Matt. xii. 3) show
that necessity provided exceptions to this rule.
But the rule rests upon the truth that religion
must be kept holy, in the strongest sense, even
in its sacrifices, otherwise guilt will accumulate
upon the people who profess the religion (ver.
16). When deceit is practised against Jehovah
in any way, e.g. by feigned fasts, by asceticism,
joined with secret sins, by fanatic faith joined
with a life of plunder, the manliness itself of
the natural man is buried more and more, and
the intercourse of the people loses more and more
of its saving salt of moral truth — not to speak
of the refining fire of the spirit of the new birth.
— When they eat their holy things. — That
which as holy things belonged to them no long-
er." Lange. On the meaning of the last clause
see Textual Note 10. The provision in regard
to the purchased servant in ver. 11 is of impor-
tance as showing how completely such servants
became identified with the house of their mas-
ters. The command was given only about a
year after the Exodus when the tribes of Israel
doubtless included a large number of the cir-
cumcised descendants of the servants of the
patriarchs; but there can be no stronger iden-
tification than is here given in allowing the pur-
chased servants of the priests from whatever
nation, in contradistinction to a servant hired
from any other family in Israel, to eat of the
priestly portion of the holy things.
Vers. 17-26. Moses is directed to convey this
communication unto all the children of
Israel, because it was imnortant to have them
all entirely familiar with the conditions neces-
sary to an acceptable victim. They were to
know all the laws ; but their attention would
naturally be more fixed upon those which were
immediately addressed to them. The law in
regard to the victims necessarily applies to all
cases, whether they were offered by persons of
the house of Israel, or of the strangers
(ver. 18), because it prescribes what was re-
quired in the victim itself in order to its accept-
ance. The burnt offering is first treated of
(vers. 18-20), and then the peace offering. Vow
and free-will offerings might be made of either
kind of sacrifice ; but the regulations concern-
ing the victim differed. If it was a burnt offer-
ing, it must be a male, as well as v7ithout
blemish, according to the. law of the burnt
offering in i. 3, 10; if it was a peace offering,
there was no law concerning the sex of the vic-
tim ; but it was still required (ver. 21) there
shall be no blemish therein. The rigidness
of the law was, however, somewhat relaxed in
case of the free-will offering (ver. 23), so that
for this purpose a victim was allowed to have
some thing superfluous or laclzing in his
parts. For ttie distinction between the vow
and the free-will offering, see Com. on vii. 15.
Ttie other kind of peace offering, the thank
offering, is not mentioned here; being the high-
est of all, it of course required the perfect vic-
tim. Among the Gentiles also a sense of natural
fitness generally required that the victim should
be integrus and tsXeIoq. See abundant references
in Rosenmiiller and Knobel here, in Outram L.
I. c. 9, and Bochart Hieroz. I. L. 11. o. 46. Ver.
24 absolutely prohibits the offering in sacrifice
of any castrated animals. See Textual Note.
Lange: "The minute, precise definition of this
defect requires the perfect fitness for breeding
in the male animals, without which it lost in a
great degree its signification of a worthy resig-
nation." In ver. 25 the priests are forbidden
to accept even from a stranger's hand victims
marked with any of the defects that have been
enumerated, because their corruption is in
them, i. e. because these deftots render them
unfit for sacrifice. The bread of your God
" must be derived from a perfect victim to rep-
resent that which is acceptable to God, which
in moral things is perfect righteousness." Mur-
phy.
Vers. 26-33. The final communication made
to Moses alone. Lange: "Even in the case of
sacrificial animals without blemish, there yet
appear particular conditions of acceptableness
for the offerers. First, the victim must be eiotht
days old ; it must be kept seven days under
the dam to enjoy the full pleasure of existence."
See the same law in Ex. xxii. 30 in regard to
firstlings. " The reason for this was, that the
young animal had not attained to a mature and
self-sustained life during the first week of its
existence." Keil. It is noticeable that the age
at which the animal became admissible for sac-
rifice is the same as that at which man was
received into covenant relation by circumcision.
At this age, too, the animal first began to be
eatable, and this fact doubtless had its signifi-
cance in the laws for the symbolical food of
Jehovah. Similar restrictions of age were in
use among the Romans, Pliny Nat. Hist. viii. 77.
The prohibition in ver. 28 of killing both dam
and offspring on the same day is analogous to
the thrice repeated precept: "Thou shalt not
seethe a kid in its mother's milk" (Ex. xxiii.
19; xxxiv. 26; Deut. xiv. 21), and rests upon
the same principle as the prohibition to take
from a bird's neat the mother together with the
young (Deut. xxii. 6, 7). All these precepts
were of an educational character and imposed
CHAP. XXII. 1-33.
167
upon the Israelites the duty of keeping sacred,
even among the lower animals, the relation
which God has established between parent and
offspring. The law could not have been for the
sake of the brute, but was altogether for man's
sake ; be must not allow himself to violate the
finer susceptibilities implanted in his nature,
even when mere utilitarian reasoning conld see
no use in the command. The Targ. Jon. pre-
faces the command with the words: "As our
Father is merciful in heaven, so be ye merciful
on earth." The connection here applies the
precept especially to killing for sacrifice ; but it
is noticeable that the word used is the more
general Dnttf, as if the command was meant to
apply to all killing whatever. In ver. 30 the
law for eat'ng the thank offering on the same
day on which it is presented is repeated from
vii. 15. Such repetitions, if not of necessity,
are yet at least highly desirable in a lengthened
code of laws. The conclusion, vers. 31-33, is
like that of chapters xviii. and xix., and rests
upon ihe fact that He who gives the commands
ia Jehovah — Jehovah who sanctifies them, and
who has brought them up out of the land of
Egypt. Lange : " I am Jehovah is said
again to seal this command, and the following
explanation shows plainly the educational view:
that Jehovah seeks to bring them up to be a
holy people of God by means of these fixed
directions. The educational idea is negative :
only certainly no kind of dishonor, or deceit, or
faithlessness is allowable in matters of reli-
gion."
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL.
I. "The symbolical and definite thought of
the whole chapter has the highest meaning for
every form of religion, but particularly for the
Christian Church. It seeks a faultless, normal
priesthood, a priesthood which does not darken,
but glorifies religion, the service of God. When
we think of the sad fact that priests have often
altogether, or in a great degree, corrupted their
religious community, or are now corrupting it,
that so many spiritual and hierarchical cripples
of every kind darken and disfigure so many
congregations, the contents of our section will
give us a strong witness against a laxity and
untruth which is guilty especially of the corrup-
tion of the religious life. The church training
was to be before all things self-training, the
ladder of the churchly life. How many reflec-
tions in regard to the choice of the theological
profession, the tests, the ordinations, and the
ecclesiastical visitations belong to this chapter.
Also the family circumstances of spiritual per-
sons are here estimated according to their sig-
nificance." Lange.
II. The relation of the priests to the people is
here again distinctly brought out. They were
under precisely the same laws as others, became
unclean from the same causes, and were to be
purified in the same way ; in short, they were
fully citizens of the commonwealth of Israel.
But inasmuch as they had also special duties
toward God, they were incapacitated for their
performance by this uncleanness.
III. The identification of the household with
its head, always strongly marked in the Hebrew
polity, appears in the case of the priest with
especial clearness. The family is the unit of
the Hebrew commonwealth and the basis of the
Mosaic legislation. On this see Maine's AncipM
Law.
IV. The law of the conditions of the accepta-
ble victim was precisely the same for the Israel-
ite and the stranger. The law thus intimates
not obscurely that in their approach to God .all
men stand on precisely the same footing.
" There is no distinction of persons."
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL.
Lange: "Chap. xxii. is concerned with the
pure conduct of the priests face to face with the
sacrifice of the congregation ; observances of
cleanness of the most varied kind, and especially
of sacrifices according to their spiritual mean-
ing."
As symbolical cleanness was required of thosn
who partook of the sacrifices which typified the
death of Christ, so is spiritual cleanness neces-
sary in those who feed upon the memorial of
the same. See 1 Cor. xi. 28, etc. Wordsworth.
The whole house of the priest was sanctified
through him to partake of the holy things ; so
is the whole house of the Great High Priest
sanctified through Him, even His body, the
blessed company of all faithful people.
But to be partakers of the table of this Great
High Priest men must not be merely sojourners
in His house, or serving Him as hired servants
for gain, but truly identified with Him, and
forming an actual part of His household. Words-
worth.
Again and again the law insists that the vic-
tim for the acceptable sacrifice must be without
blemish. Whatever is offered to God must be
of the best; especially must the offering of the
heart be perfect and complete. Christ Himself
is described as having offered Himself " without
spot," and the Church which He presents unto
Himself must "be holy and without blemish."
Bph. V. 27.
By forbidding the Israelites to kill on the
same day the dam and its offspring God taught
them, and through them the church in all ages,
to be merciful ; not only merciful to those who
can understand and appreciate it, but to exer-
cise this virtue for its own sake — to be merciful
always and everywhere, even as our Father in
heaven is merciful.
Calvin draws from the often repeated and
here extended precept that the sacrifice must be
perfect and without blemish, this lesson: that
whatever we offer to God must be whole-hearted
and true. We cannot serve God and mammon.
He applies this to prayers in which the heart is
not engaged, and a multitude of other things in
which man may undertake to offer an imperfect
and divided, and tlverefore unacceptable service.
168
LEVITICUS.
PART THIRD.
Sanctification of the Feasts.
holy the theocratic times and places, the feasts and their culttis, the most holy name
of the covenant God and His holy land." — Lanoe.
Chaps. XXIII.— XXV.
FIRST SECTION.
Of the Sabbaths and Annual Feasts.
"The Holy Seasons, Laws of the Feasts. Sabbath, Easter, Pentecost, the Seventh New-Moon or Sabbath
of the Year, the Day of Ato7iement and the Feast of Tabernacles." — Lanqe.
Chap. XXIII. 1-44.
PRELIMINARY NOTE.
The following, under Lange'a Exegetical, mny
properly be placed here. " The foundation of
these developed ordinances for the feasts has
already presented itself in Ex. xx. 8-11 and xxxi.
14" [add Ex. xxiii. 14-19; xxxiv. 21-26, and in
regard to the Passover, the full account of its
institution, Ex. xii. 3-27, 43-50,— P. G.] ; "the
section, Num. xxviii, xxix., contains more spe-
cific directions about the sacrifices which were
(o be offered on the feast days." [The three
great festivals are also described in Deut. xvi. 1-
17. and the reading of the law required at the
feast of tabernacles in the Sabbatical year, Deut.
xxxi. 10-13. — F. G.]. "Here the treatment is
of the organic appearance of the whole festivity
of Israel in the unity of its collective holy feasts,
with the ordinance of the festal cultus (" Feast-
calendar," Knobel says, which is set aside by
Keil) ; in the Book of Numbers the sacrifices are
plainly specified as the requirements of the the-
ocratic state, an indication that they were not
the principal things in the ideas of the cultus.
" Upon this important section the article Festc
in Winer and others, is to be compared, as well
as the rich literature in Knobel, p. 541, to which
add Kranold, commentatio de anno Hebrseorum Ju-
hilmo. Gottingse, Dietrich, 1838." [See also
Philo vtpX T^g 'E^Sdfitjc: Baehb, Si/mboli.k hk.
iv.; EwALD Alterthiimer ; Kalisch on Ex. xx.,
etc. ; MiCHAELis Laws of Moses, Art. 74-76, 194-
201 ; BoOHABT, Hieroz. ; and the appropriate
articles in Smith's Bible Diet., Kitto's Cyclop,
of Bib. lit., Hbrzoo's Real-Encykl., and the vari-
ous literature cited in these. — F. G.].
" The Hebrew festivals are to be regarded es-
pecially in a two- fold aspect: 1. The holy sea-
sons (Vi\r\] nj;iD). 2. The ideas of the differ-
ent feasts, the holy convocations (''K'^pp
"The holy seasons are, according to their
prevalent fundamental number, the number
seven, collectively, memorial feasts of the cre-
ation ; the Sabbath, as the seventh day ; Pente-
cost, as the feast of the seventh week ; the se-
venth new moon, with its following Day of
atonement and feast of tabernacles, as the feast
of the seventh mouth; the Sabbatical year, as
the festival of the seven Sabbath years ; and the
Praise year or year of Jubilee ; the 50th year,
as the festival of the completed seven, the seven
times seven, the prophetic festival of the new
eternal festal season, (ch. xxv.).
" Even through the single feasts the number
seven runs again : seven days of unleavened
bread, seven days in tabernacles, and no less in-
deed is it reflected in the sevenfold number of
the festal sacrifices.
" The datum, however, from which the whole
construction of the festal season proceeds, on
which the whole building rests, is the datum of
the typical deliverance of Israel (ver. 15). The
line of feasts culminates indeed in a festival
[Tabernacles, the last feast of the year] which
plainly, as a symbol of the completed deliverance
stands over against the [Passover as a symbol
of the] beginning of deliverance." [From an-
other point of view the Passover (which, as such,
is not mentioned in this chapter) is generally
regarded as a memorial of the deliverance from
Egypt in its totality, and in its typical signifi-
cance it points forward to the deliverance from
sin through the death of Christ; and this again
has its memorial in the Lord's Supper, pointing
forward to the feast of the Lamb in heaven. The
feast of tabernacles, on the other hand, was ex-
pressly commemorative of the very temporary
dwelling in booths (n'l3Q = huts made of
branches; the DSD is to be distinguished from
CHAP. XXIII. i-44.
169
the 7nx = tent, the comparatively permanent
dwelling of the wilderness) see vers. 42, 43, and
comp. Ex. xii. 37; xiii. 20.— F. G.]. * * *
"With regard to the natural aspect of the Is-
raelitish feasts, they are diTiJed into pre-Mosaio,
Mosaic (for that the feasts here appointed belong
to the original Mosaic legislation is adm tted
by Knobel), and later feasts.
" In the first class, however, can only be placed
with certainty a tradition of the Sabbath, the
feast of the new moon, and the harvest feast.
Upon the heathen festal seasons see the full
notes of Knobel, p. 537 sqq.
" It is however in the highest degree note-
worthy, that the Israelitish ordering of the feasts
forms an unmistakable contrast to the heathen
customs. At the time of the Spring feast the
Jewish Easter was kept, which, in connection
with its unleavened bread, expresses a very so-
lemn meaning, and is not at all to be judged by
the Christian Easier. At the time of the autum-
nal equinox, however, when the Syrians (and
the Egyptians) mourned over the death of Ado-
nis the summer sun (like the Germanic Baldur),
the Jews kept their most joyful feast, and freely
used the green branches of summer before they
faded." [The contrast would bear to be even
more strongly expressed, for the feast of Taber-
nacles occurred more than a month later than
the autumnal equinox. — F. G.]. " It was as if
they had wished to celebrate the triumph of the
theocratic spirit over the natural sadness for the
death of beautiful nature ; as they certainly ac-
cent the blessing of God and His judgment in
this present life in contrast to the dark Egyp-
tian necromancy with its prophecy inspired this
side the grave, and in contrast to the melancholy
cultus of the world of death beyond the grave.
" As to the explanation of the apparently su-
perfluous days in the seven day feasts, the eighth
day of unleavened bread, and the eighth day of
the feast of Tabernacles (a question which also
concerns the 50th week of the 50th year as a year
of Jubilee), it is certainly sufficient to say, that
the festal close of such great days or weeks and
years was to be particularly emphasized. (Comp.
Knobel, p. 549).
" The second Easter day as the feast of the
first beginning of the harvest, the beginning of
the barley harvest, the feast of the ears (Abib,
ear month), corresponds to the completed wheat
harvest which was celebrated at the feast of Ta-
bernacles (later, Pentecost because fifty days
were reckoned from Easter to its celebration),
and both these harvest feasts, of the necessities
of life and of the abundance of life, form a con-
trast to the harvest feast of joy [feast of Taber-
nacles] for the refreshing and comforting gifts
of God, the fruit, the oil and the wine.
"A strikingly isolated position is given to the
feast of Pentecost between the other feasts. Since
as the chief harvest feast it seems to be only a
natural feast, there was sought, and later, there
was also found, in addition to its natural aspect,
a holy and theocratic aspect also, in that this
feast has been described as the feast of the law
(since Maimonides. See on the other hand Keil,
p. 151") [Translation p. 444, note]. * * *
" The increased sacrifices of the yearly feasts
26
must form a symbolical expression of the self-
surrender of the nation to Jehovah, renewed by
the feasts, as it was elevated by the thanksgiving
for His gifts, — the ever new gifts of creation, the
ever new gifts of atonement and of deliverance.
"That which makes feasts to be feasts is as
follows : 1) They are high seasons appointed by
God, seasons of the fulfilment of Divine promise
and of human hope. 2) Seasons in which the
union of God and man, as well as of men with
one another, and thus fellowship with God and
brotherhood with man was celebrated. 3) Sea-
sons in which nature, together with man, ap-
pears in the dress of theocratic sanctificalion.
4) In which the highest happiness of human
fellowship arises from the highest joyfulness of
sacrifice to Jehovah. 6) Seasons which have a
great sequence, and form a chain from the feast
of deliverance in the night of judgment and of
fear (Passover) to the feast of holy freedom and
joy (Tabernacles)." Lange.
In regard to the times of the festivals, it is to
be remembered that God in His dealings with
man always shows a tender regard for the na-
ture with which He has constituted man. The
Hebrew festivals were therefore so arranged as
to combine the most important religious memo-
rials and types with the occasions of national
and social need. The Passover was the greatest
of all the annual festivals of the Hebrews, and
was the only one resting upon a distinct histo-
rical and miraculous event, and the only one,
too, the neglect of which was accompanied with
the penalty of excision (Num. ix. 13). The ob-
ligation to observe it was so urgent upon every
adult circumcised Israelite, that alone of all the
feasts it had attached to it a second observance
at the same time in the following month for those
who were prevented from keeping it by absence
on a journey, or by defilement from contact with
a dead body — the only causes which interfered
with the eating of the paschal lamb. Histori-
cally, it was far more generally observed than
either of the other festivals. Attached to this,
and often included in the general name of Pass-
over, was the week of unleavened bread ; but
the strictness of the command for the observance
of the Passover itself did not apply to this. See
Deut. xvi. 7. The Passover was celebrated in
the month Abib or Nisan ; and this month, as the
month of the great national deliverance from
Egypt, became the first of the ecclesiastical year.
Just at this time occurred the beginning of the
barh'y harvest, and the festival for this was ac-
cordingly so associated with the Passover, that a
sheaf of the first-fruits was to be waved before
the Lord on the morrow after the Sabbath. The
time of the feast of weeks, or Pentecost, was de-
termined by the Passover, from which it was
distant just fifty-two days, as we still reckon from
Good-Friday to Whitsunday ; for seven weeks
complete, or forty-nine days were reckoned from
"the morrow after the Sabbath," or the second
day after the eating of the Paschal lamb itself,
making fifty-onC days, and then the feast was to
be held on the following day. The symbolism
of the sevens is therefore to be sought rather in
the means of computing the time than in the re-
lation of the festivals lo one another. Pentecost
occurred at the close of the grain harvest, and
170
LEVITICUS.
was celebrated as a thanksgiving, with especial
liberality to the poor and needy in remembrance
that thelsraelites themselves had been bondmen
in Egypt. (Deut. xvi. 9-12). This feast con-
tinued but a single day, and its distinguishing
rite was the waving before the Lord of two ha-
vened loaves prepared from the first fruits of the
wheat.
With the coming in of the seventh month the
civil year began. Of the existence of this year
as distinguished from the ecclesiastical year,
there can be no reasonable doubt. It has iudeed
been called in question ; " but the form of ex-
pression in Ex. xii. 2, the commencement of the
Sabbatical and Jubilee years in the month
Ethanim, or Tisri, the tradition of both the rab-
binical and Alexandrian Jews, and the fact that
the new moon festival of Tisri is the only one —
not excepting that of Nisan — which is distin-
guished by peculiar observance, seem to bear
sufficient testimony to a more ancient computa-
tion of time than that instituted by Moses in
connection with the Passover. Another argu-
ment is furnished by Ex. xxiii. 16." Clark.
Accordingly, as generally in all times and among
all nations, the New Year was ushered in by a
special observance. Among the Hebrews this
took the form of "the Feast of Trumpets." This
was marked by " an holy convocation ;" but at-
tendance upon it was not obligatory. On the
tenth day of the same month occurred the solemn
fast of the Day of Atonement already treated in
ch. xvi. Both these continued but a single day.
On the fifteenth day of the same month (which
was thus far more marked by religious solemni-
ties than any other), began the Feast of Taber-
nacles, continuing for seven days with "an holy
convocation" following on the eighth day. Tlie
attendance obligatory at this would naturally
have led to a large presence of the people on
the Day of Atonement, only five days before.
It was the great harvest festival at the close of
the agricultural season, corresponding to our
Thanksgiving day, and was very joyfully cele-
brated. It was also connected with the theo-
cratic system by the injunction to dwell in
booths in memory of the Exodus from Egypt.
With all these, and pervading them, was the
weekly Sabbath, a remembrancer in its recur-
rence of God's rest from the work of creation
(Ex. XX. 11), and in its determination to the
seventh day of the week of the deliverance from
Egypt (Deut. v. 15).
In regard to (he detail of these several festi-
vals, see the Exegetioal.
The Jews were prohibited by the law from all
work only on the fifty-two weekly Sabbaths and
on the Day of Atonement ; they were also pro-
hibited from all servile work on the days of holy
convocation, vie. two each in connection with
the Passover and the Feast of Tabernacles, one
at the Feast of Pentecost, and one at the New
Moon of Tisri, the seventh month. There is no
prescription in the law in regard to cessation
of work on the other New Moons; but from
Amos viii. 5 they appear to have been, at least
in later times, observed as Sabbaths. These
would make in all seventy days, which would be
reduced somewhat by the occurrence of some of
the other days, and especially of the festival
Sabbaths, one year with another, upon the
weekly Sabbath ; but on several of these days
the prohibition extended only to servile work,
and the feasts were probably largely used like
European fairs, for purposes of trade. See a
slightly different computation in Miohaelis,
Law», Art. 201.
The three greater festivals, Passover, Pente-
cost and Tabernacles, were required to be ob-
served by the assembling of the whole adult
male population at the place of the sanctuary.
This was doubtless fully carried out during the
life in the wilderness, but does not appear to
have been ever completely observed in subse-
quent history. All these festivals were, how-
ever, attended by large numbers, and the de-
vouter part of the people went up to the sanctu-
ary at least once in the year (1 Sam. i. 3, 21 ;
Luke ii. 41, etc.), which appears to have been
most commonly at the Passover. The women
were not obliged, but were allowed to attend,
and frequently did so, as well as partake of the
Paschal lamb.
Besides these annual feasts, there were the
Sabbatical years, when the land was required to
lie fallow, and all fruits were common property.
This command could hardly have been complied
with at all until after the return from the cap-
tivity (see 2 Chron. xxxvi. 21), and the exist-
ence of such an unobserved law is a strong
proof of the genuineness of the Mosaic legisla-
tion. There was also the Tear of Jubilee, the
fiftieth year, which as it afi'ected the tenure of
land that had been sold, is likely to have been
more continuously observed. It certainly was
recognized in the days of Jeremiah (Jer. xxxii.
6-15). On the question whether it had conti-
nued to be observed in the intervening time, see
Maimonides and Ewald in the affirmative, Mi-
ohaelis (Laws, Art. 76) and Winer (sub voce),
who are in doubt, and Kranold (p. 80) and Hup-
frtld (pt. iii., p. 20), who confidently deny that
the provisions for this year ever came into actual
operation.
Precisely what was meant by an holy con-
vocation we have no means of ascertaining,
except from the word itself Doubtless in the
wilderness life it would have meant a general
assembling of the people for the purposes of the
day, and the same sense may be held to apply
to the three great festivals when all malps were
required to appear at the place of the sanctuary,
but this cannot be true, after the settlement ia
Canaan, of the weekly Sabbath and of the Day
of Atonement. Probably there were on these
days gatherings for religious edification accom-
panied with rest from work in the various towns
and villages throughout the land, just as there
were in the Synagogues after the return from
the Captivity. There were also probably such
gatherings at the time of the Convocations of the
greater festivals of those who did not go up to
tne Sanctuary.
Besides the weekly Sabbaths, there were in
all seven Convocations in the year : the first and
last days of the feasts of unleavened bread, and
of Tabernacles, the days of Pentecost and of
Atonement, and the Feast of Trumpets.
CHAP. XXIII. 1-44. 171
Chaptee XXIIl. 1-44.
1, 2 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel,
and say unto them, (Jonoeming the feasts of the Lord, which ye shall proclaim to
he holy convocations, even these are my feasts [unto them, The appointed times of
the Lord which ye shall proclaim as holy convocations, these are my appointed
times'].
3 Six days shall work be done : but the seventh day is the sabbath of rest,' an holy
convocation ; ye shall do no work therein : it is the sabbath of the Lord in all
your dwellings.
4 These* are the feasts of the Lord, eoen [These appointed times' of the Lord are]
holy convocations, which ye shall proclaim in their seasons [appointed times'].
5, 6 In the fourteenth rfat/* of the first month at even is the Lord's passover. And
on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto the
7 Lord : seven days ye must eat unleavened bread. In the firsfr.day ye shall have
8 an holy convocation : ye shall do no servile' work therein. But ye shall ofier an
ofiering made by fire unto the Lord seven days : in the seventhvday is an holy con-
vocation : ye shall do no servile work therein.
■ 9, 10 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel,
and say unto them, When ye be come into the land which I give unto you, and
shall reap the harvest thereof, then ye shall bring a sheaf of the firstfruits of your
11 harvest unto the priest : and he shall wave the sheaf before the Lord, to be ac-
12 cepted for you : on the morrow after the sabbath the priest shall wave it. And ye
shall ofier that day when ye wave the sheaf an he lamb [a ram'] without blemish
13 of the first year for a burnt ofiering unto the Lord. And the meat ofiering [ob-
lation'] thereof shall he two tenth deals of fine fiour mingled with oil, an offering
made by fire unto the Lord jor a sweet savour : and the' drink offering thereof
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL.
1 Ver. 2. The word nj?1D according to all authorities means primarily ajized, appointed time (Ggii. xxi. 2 ; Jer, viii. 7,
etc.) and it is so translated in ver. 4 in their seaaovs. Thence it came to he used for the festivals occurring at set times (Zech.
viii. 19). Besides these meanings the word has the divided signification of the assembly which came together at these
times, and then the assembly or congregation generally (whence the expret-s'on Tabernacle of congregation), and then also
the place of the assembly. The derivative significations are here out of the question. It occurs in this chapter five times,
and is not elsewhfre used in Lev. except in the phrase Tabernacle of cimgregation. With the same exception, it is uni-
formly translated time or aeason (set or appointed) in Gen, and Ex., and generally in Num. The translation four times by
feaets in this chap, is therefore exceptional and supported only by a few instances in Num. It is bettor therefore to con-
form the translation here to the usage. There is a difficulty with either translation in the &ct that a lll©ly convoca-
tion was not proclaimed on the Day of Atonement ;— that is broadly applied to all, which was strictly true of nearly all
the particulars mentioned. But/ea«te labora under the further disadvantage that the Day of atonement was a fiist.
' Ver. 3. The translation necessarily fails to convey the full force of the Hob. tin3E^ TS^ » fery strong expression
used only of the days and years of rest appointed in the Mosaic legislation.
' Ver. 4. The Heb. haB nHs, the Sam. prefixes 1. According to Houbigant the former refers to what has preceded,
the latter to what follows. In this case the Sam. reading is preferable. ,
* Ver. S. The missing DV is supplied in 15 MSS. and the Sam.
s Ver. 7. " mij? HJxSd, occupation of a work, signifies labor at some definite ocenpation, e. j, the bnilding of the
tabernacle, Ex. xxxv. 24 ; 'xxxvi. 1, 3; hence ocenpation in connection with trade or one's social calling, such as agricul-
ture, handicraft, etc. ; whilst TIOkSd is the performance of any kind of work, e. g., kindling fire for cooking food (Ex.
T T ;
xxxv. 2, 3)." Keil.
• Ver. 10. IDJ'. The A V. is probably right in translating here sMaf, which according to the lexicographers is the
primary meaning of the word. See Dent. xxiv. 19 ; Bnth H. 7, 15, etc. It is so translated by the LXX., Vu)g., and Luther,
as well as by Gesen., FUrst, Lee, and others. On the other hand Josephus (Ant. iii. 10, 6), and the Mishna, tak« it in its de.
rivod and more usual sense of an Omer, to., of the flour frcim the grain, offered with oil pud frankincense as an oblation.
Perhaps in later times the omer of the fiour was substituted for thu original sheaf of the grain.
' Ver. 12. i2'33. See Textual Note 6 on iii. 7. Here the sex is indicated.
8 Ver. 13. ^jinjD. See Textual Note 2 on ii. 1. The pronoun is masc. with reference to the sex of the sacrifice.
8 Ver. 13. The A. V. here and in the previous clause substitutes the def. art. for the masc. pronoun. The Heb. tell
rl3DJ i8 pointed in accordance with the l^ri OO J which is also the Sam. reading.
172 LEVITICUS.
14 shall be of wiue, the fourth part of an hin. And ye shall eat neither bread, nor
parched corn [grain], nor green ears, until the selfsame day that ye have brought
an offering unto your God : it shall be a statute for ever throughout your genera-
tions in all your dwellings.
15 And ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the sabbath, from the day
that ye brought the sheaf of the wave offering ; seven sabbaths'" shall be complete :
16 even unto the morrow after the seventh sabbath" shall ye number fifty days ; and
17 ye shall offer a new meat offering [oblation'] unto the Lord. Ye shall bring out
of your habitations two wave loaves" of two tenth deals : they shall be of fine flour ;
18 they shall be baken with leaven ; they are the firstfruits unto the Loed. And ye
shall offer with the bread seven lambs [rams'] without blemish of the first year,
and one young bullock, and two [full-grown"] rams : they shall be for a burnt of-
fering unto the Loed, with their meat offering [oblation*], and their drink offer-
19 ings, -even an offering made by fire, of sweet savour unto the Loed. Then ye shall
sacrifice one kid [buck"'] of the goats for a sin offering, and two lambs [rams'] of
20 the first year for a sacrifice of peace offerings. And the priest shall wave them
with the bread of the firstfruits for a wave offering before the Loed, with the two
21 lambs [rams'] : they shall be holy to the Loed for the priest. And ye shall pro-
claim on the selfsame day, that it may be an holy convocation unto you : ye shall
do no servile work therein : it shall be a statute for ever in all your dwellings
throughout your generations.
22 And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not make clean riddance
of the corners of thy field when thou reapest, neither shalt thou gather any glean-
ing of thy harvest : thou shalt leave them unto the poor, and to the stranger: I am
the Loed your God.
23, 24 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying. Speak unto the children of Israel,
saying, In the seventh month, in the first day of the month, shall ye have a sab-
bath [a sabbath rest'*], a memorial of blowing of trumpets,'* an holy convocation.
25 Ye shall do no servile work therein, : but ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto
the Lord.
26, 27 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Also on the tenth day of this seventh
month there shall he [only the tenth of this seventh month is'*] a day of atonement :
it shall be an holy convocation unto you ; and ye shall afflict your souls, and offer
28 an offering made by fire unto the Loed. And ye shall do no work in that same
day : for it m a day of atonement, to make an atonement for you before the Loed
29 your God. For whatsoever soul it be that shall not be afflicted in that same day,
30 he shall be cut off from among his people. And whatsoever soul it be that doeth
any work in that same day, the same soul will I destroy from among his people.
31 Ye shall do no manner of work : it shall be a statute for ever throughout your ge-
10 Ter. 15. Some critics (Kcil, Clark, aDd others) would render here and in xxt. 8 geven weeks, in accordance with the
use of nSiy iu the Talmud, and of o-a)3/3aToc in the N. T. The word seems to be used here, however, rather by a figure of
speech as in xxT. 2, 4, etc., and the definite meaning of week to be of later origin. The n'o'DO on which Keil relies,
agree"? with the main idea.
" Ver. 17. The Sam. here supplies the word Hlvn which is uniformly translated cakei in the A. V , and may indicatt
the kind of bread used.
12 Ver. 18 DTK indicatps strong and full-grown rams of maturer age than the D''!£'33 of the first clause. The Sam.
3 MSS. and LXX. add " without blemish."
w Ver. 19. U^jy-yy'i,. See Textual Note a on iv. 23.
" Ver. 24. I'lnaK' here stands by itself without the n3^ nsed in ver. 3. When thus used by itself Eosenmllller sayi
" do lis tantnm feriis dicitur, qnse non in septimum hebdomadis diem, qui t\2W, ceasatio ab opere icar' efoxV dicitnr, in-
cidit." It should therefore be rendered by another term, and the one suggested by Clark is adopted.
15 Ver. 24. There is nothing in the Heb. corresponding to the words oftrumrets, which should therefore be in italics.
The Heb. reads simply n^.l-|n [n Jt = a inemorial of a joyful noise. T\^i,-\r\ is frequently used in couuection with va-
rious kinds of trumpets and other instruments (Num. xxxi. 6 ; Lev. xxv. 9 ; Ps. cl. 5), denoting the clangor of those instra-
""*"..!' „"* '' '" ™ I'l't^as frequently used without reference to an instrument of any kind (Num. xxiii.21-. Job \iii. 21|;
xxxiii. 26 ; Ezra iii. 11, 13, e(c.). The silver trumpets of the temple were however blown on all the festivals, including the
now moons (Num. x. 10), and there is no reason to question the tradition that on " the feast of trumpets " horns or cornets
dT^maimtub^^^ '^ generally throughout the land. The LXX. has iiv7,ix6,7vvov a-a\iriyyo^y, the Vulg. memoriaU
10 VcT. 27. ^N is a particle of limitation, and thus in this case of emphasis. It is better to omit the italicised words
there shall be, and translate according to the usual construction of a Heb. clause ending with NIPI.
CHAP. XXIII. 1-44. 173
32 Derations iu all your dwellings. It shall be unto you a sabbath of rest,' and ye shall
afflict your souls ; in the ninth day of the month at even," from even unto even,
shall ye celebrate your sabbath [your rest''].
33, 34 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel,
saying. The fifteenth day of this seventh month shall be the feast of tabernacles fov
35 seven days unto the Lord. On the first day shall be an holy convocation : ye shall
36 do no servile work therein. Seven days ye shall ofier an ofiering made by fire unto
the Lord : on the eighth day shall be an holy convocation unto you ; and ye shall
ofier an offering made by fire unto the Lord : it ia a solemn assembly,'' and ye
shall do no servile work therein.
37 These are the feasts [appointed times'] of the Lord, which ye shall proclaim to
be holy convocations, to offer an offering made by fire unto the Lord, a burnt of-
fering, and a meat offering [an oblation*], a sacrifice, and drink offerings, every
38 thing upon his day : beside the sabbaths of the Lord, and beside your gifts, and
beside all your vows, and beside all your freewill offerings, which ye give unto the
Lord.
39 Also [Only''] in the fifteenth day of the seventh month, when ye have gathered
[at your gathering in™] in the fruit of the land, ye shall keep a feast unto the Lord
seven days : on the first day shall be a sabbath, and on the eighth day shall be a
40 sabbath. And ye shall take you on the first day the boughs [fruit''] of goodly
trees,'"' branches of palm trees, and the boughs of thick trees,^ and willows of the
41 brook ; and ye shall rejoice before the Lord your God seven days. And ye shall
keep it a feast unto the Lord seven days in the year. It shall be a statute for ever
42 in your generations : ye shall celebrate it in the seventh month. Ye shall dwell in
43 booths seven days ; all that are Israelites born shall dwell in booths : that your
generations may know that I made the children of Israel to dwell in booths, when
I brought them out of the land of Egypt : I am the Lord your God.
44 And Moses declared unto the children of Israel the feasts [appointed times'] of
the Lord.
" Ver. 32. The word aiVS = at mm ia omitted in one MS., LXX., and Vnlg.
18 Ver. 32. The margin of the A. V. is more correct than the text. The Hob. is D3P|E' ?n3tyn-
» Ver. 86. rnSi> is a word the signification of which has been much questioned. The translation of the LXX, ei6&l6r
liTTi. meaning the'doZ of the festival, is defended by FUrst, and adopted by Patriclt ; so also Theodoret, referring not only
to this feast, but to the whole cycle of feasts, to tj^os ™v ioprav, and so also Keil. Michaelis, using an Arabic ftymology,
interprets it otpreidng mt the grapes. The sense of the margin of the A. V. day of rodraint is said to be advocated by Ikm
n aTp-cial dis-frtatjon (Con. Ikenii VissertaU. Ludg. Batay. 1749) and is adopted by Abarbanel and other Jewish writers.
The tSxt of the A. V. as^Wy is defended by BosenmilUer (3d Ed.), advocated by Geaemus and is that g ven by Onkelos,
the Vnlg,, and Syr. The LXX. also elsewhere translites the word 7rav,v"P's (Amos v, 2) and " ™;°*J" 'f "^-Jf-if M
it clearly means assembly. Josephus (Anl. iii. 10, 6) applies it as a customary phrase to the feast of Pentecost. It is the
day referred to in Jno. yii. 37 as " the last day, that great day of the feast.
to Ver. 39, DJSDNa. It is better to preserve the indefiniteness of the original which does not determiM whether the
harvest was already fully gathered. Clark thinks that this oonld rarely have been the case.
n Ver 40 The Heb., as noted in the margin of the A. V., i.i /ru!(, and it is better to retain the word even if it be ex-
plained (KeU) of "the shoots and branches ot' the trees." According to the most a^nclent traditions, however, it was cue-
ternary at this feast to carry in one hand some fruit, and the word is retained in all the anc.ent versions.
22 Ver. 40. mn Y}!, lit. oraomente! trees, a generic word including the various kinds specified Just below. So the
Sam LXX., Syr.^'a'nd Vnlg., the lexicons, and most interpreters, Jewish tradition, however, incorporated into the Tar-
gums' and Josephus (Ant. xiii. 13, 6) understands it specifionUy of the Otrim.
23 Ver, 40. nh;?-VJ?- The rendering of tho A. V, is sustained by almost all authorities, meaning trees of various
kinds having thick foliage. The Targuma all interpret it specifically of myrte which cannot be right, as In the account
of the celebration of this feast in Neh, viii. 15 the myrtie and the IMch trees are distinguished.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL.
Tliia chapter consists of five Divine communi-
cations to Moses, beginning respectively with
vers. 1, 9, 23, 26 and 33, all of which, except
that concerning the day of Atonement, ver. 26,
he is directed to speak unto the children
of Israel. The first of these (1-8) relates to
the weekly Sabbath, the Passover, and the fol-
lowing feast of unleavened bread; the second
(9-22) to the wave sheaf in connection with the
last feast, and the feast of weeks, or Pentecost ;
the third (28-25) to the civil New Tear, or the
New Moon of the seventh month of the ecclesi-
astical year; the fourth (26-32) to the great
Day of Atonement ; the last (38-44) to the feast
of tabernacles,
Ver, 2 forms the heading or introduction to
the whole chapter. This is a full list of all
those days and years, all the appointed times
which the Lord had marked out as to be sepa-
rated and distinguished from the ordinary course
of the daily life; yet it does not include the
174
LEVITICUS.
ordinary new moons on whicli special sacrifices
were also to be offered. Num. xxviii. 11-15.
Ver. 3. First of all comes the weelily Sabbath,
a day to be observed by a total cessation from
all work and by an holy Invocation. On
the last expression see the close of the prelimi-
nary note. The weekly Sabbath is placed in
the same way before the annual appointed
times in Ex. xxiii. 12-17; Num. xxyiii. 9—
xxix. No reason is here given for this obser-
vance. It was certainly pre-Mosaic, and in the
fourth commandment is made to rest upon the
example of the Divine cessation from the works
of creation. But this refers only to the obser-
vance of rest in a proportionate part of the
time — one day in every seven, and therefore has
no bearing upon the actual length of the crea-
tive work. In the repetition of the command-
ments in Deut. f., the observance of this rest on
the particular day of the week, Saturday, is
grounded on the deliverance from Egypt, that
great mark of the Divine favor and national
birth-day which enters more or less into nearly
all the feasts.
A great part of Lange's Exegetical under this
chapter has been already given in the prelimi-
nary note. All that follows what is given there
will be found below.
"1. The Sabbath. — The six days of work
ure the foundation and the condition of the rest
of the seventh day. The prohibition not only
of servile labor {Tnh^,), but also of the higher
and freer business (njS/D), forces the nobler
sort of men directly to look in upon themselves,
to devotion, and so to celebrate the feast. The
Sabbath Sabbalhon (the Sabbath feast) has, how-
ever, been here already appointed for the as-
sembling in the Sanctuary, a thing which was
possible in the desert journeys, and later in
Canaan, was fulfilled by the substitution of the
synagogues (see Winer, Synagogen), and thus
was the germ of all festivals." Lange. On the
interval of nearly a thousand years between the
desert journeys and the institution of Syna-
gogues, see preliminary note.
The weekly Sabbaths are in a sense included
among the appointed times of ver. 2, but
yet are distinguished from them by the fresh
heading of ver. 4 and by vers. 37, 38. They
were indeed appointed times, but appointed
from the creation of man, not first prescribed
by the Mosaic law. The expression a( the close
of the verse in all your dwellings is inter-
preted by the Jewish writers to mean everywhere,
in or out of the Holy Land. Certainly it is thus
comprehensive ; but the expression is more im-
portant as distinguishing the convocation of
these days from those of the annual festivals.
These were to be celebrated at home, in each
town and village and hamlet, and thus "kept
alive the knowledge and piety of the simple yeo-
man in all the land This single verse
affords an interesting prospect of the unwritten
history of Israel's rural piety." Murphy.
Vers. 4-8. Ver. 4 is simply the heading in
substance of ver. 2 repeated to distinguish the
annual from the weekly festival. Vers. 5-8
relate to the Passover and the feast of unleavened
bread, which are here, as in Ex. xii. and Num.
xxviii. 16, 17, clearly distinguished from each
other. The same distinction is observed by
Josephus {Ant. III. 10, 5), but both names came
to be used interchangeably as in the New Test.,
especially in St. John. Of all the annual festi-
vals the Passover came first in the cycle of the
ecclesiastical year, first in the great historic
event it commemorated, first in its obligation,
and first in its spiritual and typical significance.
The Paschal lamb was to be slain on the 14th
Nisan "between the evenings," and eaten in the
following evening, i. e. according to the Hebrew
division of the days, on the beginning of the
15th. But with the 15th began the first day of
holy convocation, so that the two feasts were
thus actually blended into one. Lange: "2.
The feast of unleavened bread. — With this
begin the feasts in the more peculiar sense,
which were proclaimed, and in Canaan are also
feasts of convocation of Israel at the sanctu-
ary (for the male youth and men) The
15th day is particularly the feast of Mazzolh,
which lasts seven days, but in such wise that
only the first and last day are in the more strict
sense festival days which exclude all business.
To these two feasts was appended in a certain
sense as a third the preliminary feast of the
harvest. It speaks for the antiquity of the text
that this feast was postponed to the future.
Not until they came into Palestine could Israel
gather in harvests and offer sheaves of the first
fruits. The first sheaf cut from the first field
produce is meant, viz. barley (on the barley
harvest in Palestine, see Keil, p. 148)." [Trans.,
p. 439. Keil refers to Philo and Josephus for
the statement that the sheaf was of barley, and
says this is not expressly mentioned because it
was a matter of course. " In the warmer parts
of Palestine the barley ripens about the middle
of April, and is reaped in April or the beginning
of May, whereas the wheat ripens two or three
weeks later (Seetzen; Robinson's Pal. ii. 263,
278)." F. G.] " The sheaf was to be waved
before Jehovah. Does this mean : hallowed in-
deed to Jehovah, but given to the priest ? So
it seems from ver. 20. But according to Ex.
xxix. 24, 27, that which was waved was in part
brought to the altar and in part designated as
for Moses [i. e. for Aaron and his sons]. So
the sanctificatiou to Jehovah was to be the prin-
cipal idea of the waving, but certainly with the
secondary idea that it was only ideally offered
to Jehovah for the use of the priest. The fir.st
day of the Mazzolh was reckoned as a Sabbath,
and the sheaf of the first fruits was presented
on the second of the seven days. That day was
distinguished by a festal sacrifice. But the sai^-
rifice is small, for the year is yet poor — of less
value than the later sacrifices : one lamb for the
burnt offering, fwo tenths (of an Ephah) of
wheat flour moistened with oil for the oblation,
to which was added the fourth part of an
hin for a drink offering. Under this condition
only was Israel acceptable in its preliminary
feast of the harvest, and the prohibition is a
very prominent thing : before Jehovah has re-
ceived His sheaf of the first fruits nothing of the
new bread can be eaten. A law for posieri y 1
says the legislation in the wilderness." [The
CHAP. xxm. l-i4.
175
first Divine communicatioD of this chapter cloaes
with ver. 8. It contains the command for the
observance of the Sabbath, of the Passover, and
the general direction for the observance of the
feast of unleavened bread. Here it ends, and a
now communication begins with ver. 9, and ex-
tends to ver. 22 containing the commands for
ihe wave sheaf, which was a part of the feast
of unleavened bread, and for the feast of Pente-
cost. The reason for this apparent dislocation
of the logical arrangement is obvious: what
was directed in the first communicaiion was to
be immediately observed during the wilderness
life, while the wave sheaf and Pentecost could
not be, and were not intended to be observed
until the entrance upon the land of Canaan.
There is here therefore an incidental, but very
strong evidence of the date of this legislation.
At any other time than during the wilderness-
life, all the precepts for the feast of unleavened
bread would certainly have been arranged in
the same paragraph. Ver. 11. On the mor-
row after the Sabbath. — Various opinions
have been held in regard to this Sabbath. Ac-
cording to the Boethoseans (see Lightfoot on
Luke vi. 1) the beginning of Ihe ecclesiastical
year was so arranged that the PMSSover always
fell on the Sabbath, and consequently " the
morrow after the Sabbath" and the feast of
Pentecost were always observed on the first day
of the week. This opinion has been adopted by
several modern authorities, as Hitzig, Hupfeld,
Knobel, Kurtz The two former of these think
that the sheaf was waved after the conclusion
of lae feast on the 22d of the month ; the two
later, on the 15th, the first day of holy convo-
cation. It has been confuted by Bahr and
Weiseler, and is rejected by Keil and- Clark on
the ground that such an arrangement would in-
volve a broken or partial week almost invariably
at the close of the year, which is of course inad-
missible. It may be added further that the first
day and the seventh day of the feast could not
possibly have both fallen upon the weekly Sab-
bath, and that the provision for both is the
same (vers. 7, 8) forbidding only servile work.
Another opinion is that the Sabbath was that
weekly Sabbath which must occur on one of the
days of the feast. This was the view of the
Sadducees and of the Karaite Jews, but while it
rests upon no positive support, seems suflBciently
refuted by the argument of Keil (note, p. 440)
that "if the Sabbath was not fixed, but migbt
fall upon any day of the seven' days' feast of
Mazzo'h, and therefore as much as five or six
days after the Passover, the feast of Passover
itself would be forced out of the fundamental
position which it occupied in the series of an-
nual festivals (comp. Banke, Peniateueh II. 108)."
The better view is that found in the LXX.,
Philo, Josephus, the Targums, and the Rabbini-
cal writers generally, and which seems most
in accordance with the text itself, that the Sab-
bath was simply the festival Sabbath, the 15th
Abib, on whatever day of the week it might
happen to fall. So Lange below. The sheaf
of first fruits was then waved on the 1 6th. and
from that day the time was reckoned to the
feast of Pentecost. "By offering the sheaf of
first fruits of the harvest, the Israelites were to
consecrate their daily bread to the Lord Iheii
God, and practically to acknowledge that they
owed the blessing of the harvest to the grace of
God." Keil. The offerings of vers. 12, 13, were
especially connected with the wave sheaf, and
were additional to the regular feast day sacri-
fices prescribed in Num. xxviii. 19-24. The ob-
lation was doubled (see Ex. xxix. 40 ; Num. xv.
4; xxviii. 21) as was appropriate to a harvest
festival ; but the drink ofi'ering (which in Le-
viticus is mentioned only here and in vers. 18,
37) remained as usual. Ver. 14. Bread ....
parched grain .... green ears are the three
forms in which grain was commonly eaten, and
the expression is equivalent to forbidding its use
in any form whatever before the waving of the
sheaf of first-fruits. — F. G.].
" 3. The Feast of Weeks. [Vers. 15-22]. De-
termination of the time : From the second day
of the Mazzoth seven Sabbaths were counted, i. p.,
forty-nine days. The following day, the fif-
tieth, is the feast of weeks (nj;?2' JH). The
leading thought is the new oblation which was
brought to Jehovah from the completed grain
harvest. It was to be brought out of all dweil-
ings, and thus not out of the regular temple re-
venues : fwo Twave loaves of two-tenths (of
an Ephah) of fine wheaten flour. The baked
bread must be leavened, which shows thatleaveu
does not, in and of itself, signify the evil (comp.
Comm. on Matt. p. 197) [xi. 33, Am. Ed., p. 245].
This was the first-fruits of the whole grain har-
vest which must be hallowed to Jehovah before
the bread from the new harvest might be eaten."
[This is not stated in the Text, and while it was
undoubtedly true in regard to the wheat, must
not be understood to include also the barley
which it became lawful to use immediately after
the offering of the wave sheaf during the feast
of unleavened bread. — F. G.]. "The year has
now become richer, and hence seven lambs must
be offered for a burnt offering besides a young
ox (bullock) and two rams, and with all these
the proportionate drink offerings. Besides the^e
there was a he-goat for the sin offering — hardly
with reference to the unleavened bread (accord-
ing to Keil, p. 151), but certainly with reference
to the sins which were wont to accompany the
harvesting." [The precise remark of Keil,
(trans, p. 443) is as follows : " The sin offering
was to excite the feeling and consciousness of
sin on the part of the congregation of Israel, (hat
whilst eating their daily leavened bread they
might not serve the leaven of their old nature,
but seek and implore from the Lord their God
the forgiveness and cleansing away of their sin."
It is to be observed that this sin offering was
neither that required for a definite sin of the
whole congregation, a bullock (Iv. 14), nor yet
that for an individual, a she-goat (ib. 28), but
was the same as that required for a prince [ib
23). The reason for it is to be sought, not in
any especial and definite sin, but in that general
and continual sinfulness which the chosen people
were commanded to recognize on all occasions
of especial solemnity.— F. G.]. " Finally two
Iambs as a peace offering, or thank offering,
closed the feast. These peace offerings were
waved with the loaves of first-fruits, i. e., were
176
LEVITICUS.
Banotified to Jehovah, and then fell to the priest.
A principal direction for even this day is that it
was proclaimed as a convocation of the sanc-
tuary, and that on it even domestic work itself
was forbidden as well as servile labor." [The
text however (ver. 21) contains only the prohi-
bition of servile vsrork. It is noticeable that
this Pentecostal offering of two young rams was
the only peace offering required of the whole
congregation in the Mosaic ritual. — F. G.].
" With this memorable religious command is
connected the humane one, that the reaper of
the harvest must let some remain in the borders
of the field, and that gleaning was forbidden in
favor of the poor (comp. Ruth). It is plainly
said again with this command : I am the Lord
your God." [This feast was not to be observed
until ye be come into the land which I give
nnto you, and Theodoret (Qu.32 in L'v.), says
that it then " renewed the memory of the en-
trance into the land of promise." Since Maimo-
nides (see Lange above) it has been customary
10 connect it with the giving of the law. Nei-
ther of these associations, however, rest on any
sure foundation. In Ex. xxxiv. 22 this festival
is more particularly described, as indeed is im-
plied here, as the first-fruits of the wheat har-
vest. The loaves differed from all ordinary ob-
lations in being leavened, as an offering from (he
people's daily bread to the Lord who had blessed
the harvest (comp. ii. 11, 12), but in accordance
with the general law, they were not to be placed
upon the altar. " The iojunoiion out of your
habitations is not to be understood, as Calvin
and others suppose [so also Corn, a Lapide,
and Lange above], assignifying that every house-
holder was to present two such loaves ; it sim-
ply expresses the idea, that they were to be
loaves madeforthe daily food of a household,
and not prepared expressly for holy purposes."
Keil. A moment's reflection upon the immense
mass of bread that would be required from the
600,0t)0 men of Israel, to be eaten only by the
priests and their families, is sufBcient to show
that Keil's explanation must be right. The vic-
tims to be offered, according to vers. 18, 19, differ
from those prescribed in Num. xxviii. 28-31 for
the same occasion iu two particulars: there is
no mention there of the peace offerings required
here (ver. 19), but this is merely a difference in
the particularity of the command which fre-
quently occurs ; and there two young bullocks
and one ram are required, while here it is one of
tlie former and two of the latter, the offerings in
all other respects being the same. On this ac-
count many commentators have supposed that
the offerings in Num. were simply a festival en-
largement of the daily burnt offering, while those
here commanded were additional sacrifices ac-
companying the special rites of the festival. It
cvin hardly, however, be considered a rash con-
jecture that in one place or the other the nu-
merals may have changed places in the hands of
the scribes. Josephus {Ant. iii. 10, 5) follows
the statement in Num. Vers. 19, 20. The sin
and peace offerings were to be waved. Accord-
ing to Jewish tradition this was accomplished
by leading the animals backwards and forwards
according to an established custom. With the
waving of the sin offering comp. the waving of
the leper's trespass offering, xiv. 12. The flesh
of both these offerings, unlike the ordinary peace
offerings, was. to belong to the priest. Ver. 21.
On the selfsame day. The feast of weeks is
distinguished from the two other great festivals
in lasting but^ a single day; but it is said to have
been the custom in later times to give a festal
character to the six days following, and to con-
tinue to offer abundant sacrifices upon them.
The feast is only described here as an holy
convocation, and is ca.\\ei the feast of harvest
in Ex. xxiii. 16, the feast of weeks, of the first-
fruits of wh at harvest, Ex. xxxiv. 22 ; Deut. xvi.
10, day of the first-fruils Num. xxviii. 26. The
name Penter.ost belongs to a later time, and ap-
pears in the Apocrypha (Tobit ii. 1 ; 2 Mace,
xii. 32), and in the N. Test. (Acts ii. 1 ; xx. 16 ;
1 Cor. xvi. 8). By Jewish writers it is fre-
quently called n^Xi! (see Text. Note 19 on ver.
86), Gr. 'Aaapdi. As in nature the ripening of
the later grain was connected with tliat of the
earlier, so in the law the time of the festival for
the one was made dependent upon that of the
other ; just .is when the type was absorbed in
the Antitype the descent of the Holy Ghost was
dependent upon the Resurrection of Christ, the
First-fruits from the dead on the morrow after
the Sabbath of the Passover ; and the commemo-
ration festival of Whitsunday has ever been ob-
served by the Christian Church in dependence
upon Easter. In ver. 22 the command already
given in xix. 9, 10, is appropriately repeated in
connection with the harvest feast, and this is
again reiterated in Deut. xxiv. 19 in connection
with precepts of kindness to the needy.
Vers. 23-25. Here begins a fresh Divine com-
munication (the third of this chapter) because
the present feast was, like those of the first, to
come into immediate use. Lange: "4. 'The
feast of Trombones, or the new-moon feast of
the seventh day of the first month." [This is
apparently a slip of the pen for the first day of
the seventh month. — F. G.]. "The lesser new
moon feasts are not mentioned here : they be-
long more to the ordinary life of the people and
to the State (hence Num. xxviii. 11). Also the
seventh new moon is here only very briefly men-
tioned, and significantly described as Sabbaihon
Zikron, us a feast Sabbath which was to be a
Sabbath of memorial. The festal remembrance,
however, had respect to the new holy season
which dawned with the seventh month. Thus
as the first feasts — Easter, Mazzoth, and First-
fruits — form a trilogy, so the great new moon
feast makes also a trilogy with the following Day
of Atonement and Feast of Tabernacles. It is a
feast of joyous sounds (nj?nil) to awaken a na-
tional festal disposition by means of a festival
blowing, not however with 'trumpets' which
were not ordered till Num. x., and with their
clear piercing tone were fitted for the march of
the army of God; but with the deep droning of
horns, trombones, which like bells, rather affect
deeply than arouse." There is nothing said in
the text of any instrument, see Textual Note 15
on ver. 24; but as the silver trumpets were to
be blown on all the new moons, and on all other
festal oci'asions (Num. x. 10), they must have
been blown also ou this new moon, whatever
CHAP. XXIII. 1-44.
177
other instruments may have been used besides.
" In the modern service of the Synagogue, Ps.
Ixxxi. is used at the feast of Trumpets." Clark.
The general yiew of the Eabbinists is said to
have been that it was a commemoration of the
creation vfheu " all the sons of God shouted for
joy," Job xxxviii. 7. Other commemorations,
equally fanciful, have been proposed, but it is
unnecessary to look beyond the fact that it was
New Tear's day. This being a feast when it was
not required that all the people should appear
at the Sanctuary, the "holy convocation" was
probably observed, like the weekly Sabbath, in
each town and village throughout the land. Ne-
vertheless a special burnt offering (ver. 26) was
to be offered at the Sanctuary, and this is spe-
cified in Num. xxix. 1-6, as consisting of a bul-
lock, a' ram, and seven lambs, with their obla-
tions and drink offerings.
Vers. 26-32. A new oommunication is made
in regard to the Day of Atonement, not for the
reasons given before, but to mark the import-
ance of the day. This subject has been so fully
treated in ch. xvi. that little need be said here.
It was on this day and not on the first of the
month that the year of Jubilee was to be pro-
claimed (xxv. 9). On this day also the peo-
ple were not required to assemble at the Sanc-
tuary, and the holy convocatioa must have
been kept at their homes. Lange : " 5. The
Day of Atonement. It is a noticeable anomaly
that it falls upon the tenth day. Ten is the
number of the closed history, the reckoning up
of the double five, the well-used or badly-used
freedom, the number of judgment. The Day of
Atonement forms the climax as a day of purifi-
cation, ch. xvi. ; here it is an introduction, a
preliminary condition for the great feast of Ta-
bernacles (this relation is shown by the ^X ver.
27." ["By the restrictive IJX, the observance
of the day of atonement is represented a priori
as a peculiar one. The ^S refers less to the
tenth day, than to the leading directions re-
specting this feast." Keil]. Num. xxix. 7 sup-
plies still a third meaning, as a social or political
fist day. It was named the day of expiation
tD'"}33n). Ye shall af&ict your souls ; Lu-
ther translates arbitrarily : ' Ye shall afflict your
body, mortify your body, mortify your bodies.'
Certainly from the expression of the original
text, the fast is meant in Isa. Iviii. 3, etc. In or-
der that the neglect might be visible and could
be punished, and that the limits might be fixed,
it is said: from even unto even. For this
feast also, as well as the former one, every busi-
ness (not only labor) was forbidden." [This
cannot be meant of the new moon of the seventh
month, on which only servile work (ver. 25) was
forbidden. — F. Q.]. " The great rigor is to be
noticed with which the penalty of death was
threatened for every transgression against the
rest of the Sabbath and against the fast."
Vers. 33-36. The ordinance for the feast of
Tabernacles is given in a separate oommunica-
tion since this was not to be observed until the
entrance into the land of Canaan. Lange: "6,
The feast of Taberuacles (nispn JH). The feast
is made prominent by being celebrated upon the
Ijth and not on the 14th day." [Just as the
feast of unleavened bread began on the 15th of
the first month. — F. G.]. "And moreover, by
being completed by an eighth day (H'lS^), the
closing festal assembly, see Jno. vii. 37." [There
is here also an analogy to the feast of unleavened
bread, the seven days of which were preceded
by the day of the Passover. In strictness the
eighth day was not a part of the feast which, in
vers. 34 and 40, is declared to be of seven days,
and in Deut. xvi. 13-15, and Ez. xlv. 25, there
is no mention at all of tbe eightti day ; and it is
also distinguished from the days of the feast pro-
per by the much smaller number of the victims
to be offered in sacrifice, Num. xxix. 36. More-
over on this day among the Hebrews the booths
were dismantled and the people returned to their
houses.— F. G.]. "The first and eighth days
are holy Sabbaths which exclude every kind of
work." [The text, however, vers. 35, 36, only
forbids servile vrork. — F. G.]. " But every-
thing else which distinguishes the feasts of the
Lord, burnt offerings, oblations, etc., (vers. 37,
38) distinguish this feast abundantly," [These
offerings are specified in Num. xxix. 12-38. They
consisted of a he-goat for a sin offering and a
burnt offering on each day. The latter included
two rams and fourteen lambs on each of the
days, with a varying number of bullocks. Be-
ginning with thirteen on the first day, they were
diminished by one on each successive day, until
on the seventh only seven were offered. The
burnt offering of the eighth day was only one
bullock, one ram, and seven lambs. In all se-
venty-one bullocks were wholly consumed upon
the altar, together with fifteen rams and one
hundred and five lambs. — F. G.]. " It is also
again a double feast : in the first place the feast
of the garnered harvest, the third harvest, which
includes both the former ones, and especially
hallows to the Lord the noblest produce of the
land : the inspiriting fruits, for the children
(fruit), for the old (wine), and for the priests
(oil)." [The fruit, the oil, and the wine, were
however all alike used by all classes in the com-
munity. — F. G.]. " And then, in the second
place, it was the feast of the memorial of the
booths in which Israel had dwelt in the wilder-
ness. The sojourn in the wilderness must have
been a hardship during a great part of the year,
and they usually dwelt in tents ; but then came
the Spring and Summer time, when they could
build booths, and such a time would be partiju-
larly festive, a picture of a paradisaical life of
nature. And it is plain that here the subject
must be neither the lasting sufferings of the wil-
derness nor the settlement in Canaan. Hence
also the tents must be made from goodly trees."
[The feast of Tabernacles did not itself occur in
the Spring or Summer, but late in the fall, a
month or more after the autumnal equinox. No
evidence is adduced to show that the Israelites
in the wilderness at any time lived otherwise
than in tents, and indeed during a large part
of their wanderings the construction of booths
would have been impossible from ihe scarcity of
trees. The reference to the booths (mccolh)
seems to be rather to the first encampments of
the Exodus (oomp. Ex. xii. 37 ; xiii. 20), when
they must have been as yet very imperfectly sup-
plied with tents. — F. G.J. " So the feast of ta-
178
LEVITICUS.
bernaolea was the highest feast in Israel (a
bright contrast to the feast of Purim introduced
at'ierwards, which was darkened by fanaticism),
and was a tjpe of the highest and most beaatiful
Christian popular feasts. Upon the single feast
coinp. the Lexicons, also Keil (p. 153 [Trans, p.
44fi]), and Knobel (p. 549). That this feast
could readily bring in peculiar temptations is
shown by the story of the adulteress, Jno. viii."
[This inference must depend upon the decision
that the passage referred to is a genuine part of
the Gospel, and is found in its proper place. It
is also further to he noticed that the women of
Israel were not required to dwell in the booths.
— F. G.]. " But we may see also partially from
Jno. viip, how it had been in the course of time
endowed with the richest symbolism, as a preach-
er-ftast, as a fountain-feast, as a feast of
lights, the culmination of the Old Testament fes-
tival seasons." [It is noticeable that this feast
was the time chosen by Solomon for the dedica-
tion of the temple, 1 Kings viii. 2. — F. G.].
" Upon the observance of the line of feasts in
the sabbatical year and year of Jubilee, see ch.
XXV. On the later Jewish feasts, see Bibl. Wor-
tcrbuch fur das Christl. Volk under the article
Fesle. So too the feasts of the later Jews in
Herzog's Eeal-Encyclopddie." For additional
matter concerning this feast, see under verses
39-42.
In vers. 37, 38, is a summary distinctly speci-
fying that these appointed times, with their of-
ferings, are additional to the weekly Sabbaths
mentioned in ver. 3, and their offerings. Be-
side the Sabbaths is comprehensive, including
both the day and the sacrifice offered upon it. It
means beside them in regard to the other ap-
pointed days, and beside their offerings as re-
gards the offerings belonging to these.
Vers. 39-43 contain additional directions for
the feast of Tabernacles. Nothing has been said
in the previous verses of the dwelling in booths,
as the object there was only to treat of it as an
appointed time with its days of holy convoca-
tion. Here, however, this is introduced by it-
self, as a necessary direction, yet so as not to
disturb the singleness of view in which the whole
cycle of feasts has been presented. There is no
occasion, therefore, to suppose that this is a dis-
tinct document subsequently added. As this
precept has reference simply to the dwelling in
booths, there is no repetition of the command
for the holy convocations, or for the sacrifices,
and no mention of the eighth day, on which they
returned to their houses. It was pre-eminently
a joyous festival (ver. 40), as comported with its
character as a harvest feast. On the Sabbatical
year at this time the law was to be publicly read
in the hearing of all the people of all classes, in-
cluding the " strangers," Deut. xxxi. 9-13 ; Neh.
viii. 18.
In later times two significant customs were
added to the daily observances of the feast. At
the time of the morning sacrifice on each day a
priest drew water from the pool of Siloam in a
golden pitcher and bringing it in to the altar
poured it out with the libation of wine. This
probably suggested the words of our Lord in
Jno. vii. 37, 38. Also in the evening the men
and women assembled together in the court of
the women to rejoice over the ceremony of the
morning, the occasion being marked by great
hilarity. At this time two tall stands were set
up in the court, each bearing faur lamps of large
size, the wicks being made of the cast off gar-
ments of the priests, and the oil supplied by the
sons of the priests. Many of the people also
carried flambeaux, and the light is said to have
been cast over nearly the whole city. This ce-
remony seems to have called forth our Lord's
words in Jno. viii. 12, "I am the Light of the
world." During both these ceremonies the
choiis of Levites chanted appropriate psalais,
and the people participated by carrying in their
hands green branches and fruit. There is a cu-
rious contrast between the cycle of annual festi-
vals in the Jewish and iu the Christian Church •
in both of them the festivals extend through
about six months, but in the former, iu which
earthly blessings are everywhere prominent, it
began with the 14th Nisan, and extended through
the summer; in the latter, iu which the thought
is more directed to spiritual blessings, it begins
with the early winter and extend.s round to the
summer.
DOCTEINAI, AND ETHICAL.
I. The weekly Sabbath is the beginning and
foundation of all the festivals, for herein God is
acknowledged as the Creator of all things and
of man. By that the people were joined to God,
and so made ready for keeping the other festi-
vals of His appointment. This was fixed for the
older church upon the seventh day, in memorial
of their deliverance from Egypt, the era of their
national existence; just as for the Christian
Church it is fixed upon the first day in memorial
of Christ's resurrection, on which rests the whole
existence and constitution of that Church.
II. By the offering of the first-fruits to Got!
the whole harvest was sanctified, comp. Bom. xi.
16. Until this had been done, no Israelite might
partake of the harvest at all. God's gifts are
freely bestowed upon men; but they may not «
lawfully appropriate them to their own use until
they have acknowledged the Giver.
III. In the three harvest festivals the domi-
nion of God over nature is emphatically asserted.
It is asserted in opposition alike to that Pan-
theism which underlay so much of the ancient
heathen mythology, and which would worship
the earth itself as the giver of its fruits, while
here the homage is rendered to the Lord of the
earth as distinct from and infinitely exalted
above the earth; and it is asserted in opposition
10 Deism, which would so separate the Deity from
His works as to make them in a sense indepen-
dent of Him, while here He is recognized aa
their immediate Ruler and the Author of every
earthly blessing.
IV. Leaven, which is for the most part for-
bidden in oblations, and altogether prohibited
from coming upon the altar, is here oommandoJ
for the- wave offering of the first-fruits of the
wheat harvest, very plainly for the Express ob-
ject of teaching that the ordinary food of the
people is to be sanctified by an offering to God,
and thus in all things He is first of all to be re-
cognized.
CHAP. XXIV. 1-9.
179
V. The peculiarity of a peace offering from
the whole congregation marks the Pentecostal
feast alone. At the beginning of the wheat har-
vest, the principal harvest of human food, it was
peculiarly appropriate that it should be marked
by the sacrifice of communion with God.
VI. In connection with the feast of the har-
vest comes again into prominence the care for
the poor in the prohibition of gleaning. God
leaves the poor always with us that man may
learn through them to imitate Himself in giving
freely to those who need out of the abundance
He has given to us.
HOMILETIOAL AND PRACTICAL.
Lange : " The feasts of the Lord and the festal
ordinances (ch. xxiii.). Their double basis: 1)
the work, 2) the Sabbath. The Sabbath is the
end of the trouble of labor, as Sunday is the be-
ginning of festal work. The Old Testament
feasts in the light of the New Testament. The
Jewish Passover is a double feast; a type of
Christmas and of Easter. The Jewish and the
Christian Pentecostal feast. The Jewish feast
of Atonement and the Christian Ascension-Day
(comp. Heb. ix. 24). The Jewish feast of Ta-
bernacles and the Christian harvest feast. The
threefold Jewish harvest feast, Easter, Pentecost
and Tabernacles, a threefold type of the Divine
blessing in the kingdom of nature, and in the
kingdom of grace (the first-fruits, the daily bread,
the festival wine). The great Day of Atonement,
as a day of repentance, and as a day of the Gos-
pel. Comparison between the Day of Atonement
and Good-Friday, between Christmas and the
feast of Tabernacles. How all feasts by their
historical significance are linked with one an-
other, and by their spiritual significance play
into one another. The feast is made gay with
green boughs."
As the Sabbath is made the foundation of all
festivals, so must the sanctification of the weekly
day of rest ever be the condition of all accepta-
ble consecration of "appointed times" to the
Lord. The days on which no work at all might
be done are only the weekly Sabbaths and the
Day of Atonement ; but the additional days on
which no servile work might be done were nearly
half as many more. These last therefore were
days of rest to the slave and the hired laborer.
The law would have days when the hard labor
of life must cease without suspending its activity
altogether, and gives its most numerous days of
rest to those who must be employed in life's
drudgery.
The rejoicing before the Lord which is here,
ver. 40, and in Deut. xvi. 11 commanded with
especial reference to the feasts of Tabernacles
and of Pentecost, is elsewhere made into a more
general duty, Deut. xii. 12, 18; xxvii. 7. If joy
was a commanded duty under the Old Dispensa-
tion, how much more under the Christian. See
Phil. iv. 4, etc.
The three great festivals were occasions of
gathering all the males of Israel together, and
promoting the sense of their common brother-
hood. The effect in this regard of united wor-
ship is very plain. But especially at the feast
of Tabernacles, all were required to dwell in
booths, and for the time distinctions of rank and
social position were levelled. Thus, as every-
where under the Old Dispensation, principles of
the Gospel were taught by symbolical acts, and
the brotherhood of all the people of God pre-
sented in sensible type and act.
SECOND SECTION.
Of the Holy Lamps, and the Shew Bread.
Chapter XXIV. 1-9.
1, 2 And the Loed spake unto Moses, saying, Command the children of Israel, that
they bring unto thee pure oil olive beaten for the light, to cause the lamps to burn
3 continually. Without the vail of the testimony, in the tabernacle of the [omit the]
congregation, shall Aaron' order it from the evening unto the morning before the
4 Loed continually : it shall be a statute for ever in your generations. He shall
order the lamps upon the pure candlestick before the Lord continually.
5 And thou shalt take fine flour, and bake twelve cakes thereof: two tenth deals
6 shall be in one cake. And thou shalt set them in two rows [piles'^], six on a row
7 [pile"], upon the pure table before the Loud. And thou shalt put pure frankin-
cense' upon each row [pile''], that it may be on* the bread for a memorial, even an
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL.
1 Ver. 3. The Sam. aad LXX. here inSHrt and his sons from Ex. xxvii. 21.
2 Vers. 6 7. The Heb. 7131J7Dj referring etymologically to an orderly arrangement, means either a row or a pUe, and
is nsed in both senses. The size of the loaves, however, containing each about six pounds and a quarter of flour, sa com-
pared with the size of the table, two cubits long by one bioad, makes it more probable that ijite was intended here. Joso-
phus (Ant III. 6, 6 ; 10, 7) expressly says, that this was the arrangeluent.
180
LEVITICUS.
8 offering made by fire unto the Lord. Every sabbath he shall set it in order before the
LoED continually, bdng taken from the children of Israel by an everlasting covenant
9 And it shall be Aaron's and his sons' ; and they shall eat it* in the holy place:
for it is most holy imto him of the offerings of the Lord made by fire by a perpe-
tual statute.
3 Ver. 7. The LXX. adds and saZ(, which is probably to be understood in accordance with ii. 13, or the salt may liaTe
been used in malting up the loaves.
* Ver. 7. □nS'?- The force of the preposition is questioned. Both the seuees o« and /or are true in themselves. The
incense was placed' np-m the piles, according to Josephus (ubi sup.) in golden cups, and it waa also burned for the bread u
a memorial. The latter sense, however, is sufficiently expressed by the wor Is for a memorial.
6 Ver. 9. The pronoun, wanting in the Heb., is supplied lu the Sam, and in 8 MSS.
removed from the table they might be eaten only
by the priests in a, holy place. The action of
Abimelech therefore in giving them to David (1
Sam. xxi. 4-6) was a clear violation of the law,
and is justified by our Lord (Matt. xii. 4) on the
principle that there are cases of urgency which
override the technical provisions of the statute.
Langc : " The holy candlestick, with the shew-
bread, here makes the tabernacle the inner cen-
tre of all consecrations, the holy place /car" e^oxWi
which moves forth unJ spreads far into the holy
land ; and the innermost principle of this centre
is the name of Jehovah which comes to be
spoken farther on.
"On the holy candlestick see the particular
directions, Ex. xxv. 30 ; xxxvii. 17, and Num.
viii. 2 ; ccfnip. Zeoh. iv. 2. But it is mentioned
here the second time, not because according to
the first command only Aaron was fitted for the
function ; but because it here forms the soul of
the cultus, as farther on, in Num., it becomes
the very climax of the theocratic political life,
the light of the nation. Even less here than be-
fore can one speak of the lamp of good works.
There is a strange propensity to place human
attributes in place of Divine in the very house
of God, even as far as to the Cherubim in the
holy of holies.* The candlestick is the seven-
fold figure of the revelation of Jehovah, the type
of the Seven Spirits, Rev. i. But it must be no-
tici d that the congregation bad to furnish the
anointing oil" [Salbol, i. e., the oil for this sa-
cred use, not the oil for anointing the priests,
— F. G.], " for the congregation was to be the
substratum of all illuminations, not the priest-
hood alone. In like manner is the command
significant that the lamps were to be lit forever
and ever.
"The shewbread is called 'bread of the pre-
sence,' ' of my presence ' (Ex. xxv. 30) in that
they lay before the presence of Jehovah, who,
in a symbolical sense, here holds a meal with
His priests (see Rev. iii. 20) as they in the first
place represent the twelve tribes of (he holy
people. On this account, then, the loaves were
twelve, and since they were arranged in two or-
dered rows of six opposite six loaves (differing
from the twelve precious stones of the breast-
plate) they were called also the loaves of the
ranging together, the table of the succession and
similarly. Keil, p. 158." [Trans, p. 452. Keil
* Keil : " This service consisted in the fact, that in the oil
of the lamps of the seven branched cancileatick. which burned
before Jehovah, the nation of Israel manifested itself as a
congregation which caused its light to shine in the darkness
of this world ; and that in the shewbread it offered the fruits
of its labor in the field of the Idnsdnm of God, as a spiritual
sacrifice to Jehovah." [Trans, p. 451J,
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL.
The commands for the holy lights and the
shewbread here follow in a special communica-
tion, to complete the provisions for the typical
holiness of the Hebrew cultus. The former has
already been given, almost verbatim in Ex. xxvii.
20, 21, prospectively in connection with the pro-
visions for the whole service of the sanctuary.
Now the command is actually given, and in Num.
viii. 3 its fulfilment is recorded. The phrase-
ology of ver. 2, Command the children of
Israel that they bring, with that in ver. 8,
taken from the children of Israel, shows
that both the oil and the flour for the shewbread
were of the nature of oblations, gifts to the Lord
from the people continually. Vers. 2-4 relate to
the oil and the lamps; vers. 5-9 to the shew-
bread.
Ver. 2. Pure oil olive beaten — pure in
being freed before the berries were crushed from
all leaves, twigs, dust, etc.; and beaten in con-
tradistinction to pressed in the oil-presses. By
this beating the oil of the best quality flowed out
nearly colorless. Continually, ver. 3, refers
to the perpetuity of the ordinance, not to the un-
interrupted burning of the lamps ; for according
to the previous part of the verse, Aaron was to
order it from the evening unto the morn-
ing, and according to Ex. xxx. 7, 8, he was to
dress the lamps in the morning and to light them
at even. The pure candlestick of ver. 4, like
the pure table of ver. 6, refers to the pure gold
with which they were made, and which was of
course kept free from all stain.
Vers. 5-9. Pine flour always means of wheat.
The frankincense, as a gift from the people,
must necessarily be the natural gum, and is to
be distinguished from the compound incense
which was burnt daily upon the altar of incense.
Lange (see below) is inclined to admit the opi-
nion of Knobel that the loaves of shewbread
were leavened ; Josephus, however (Ant. III. 6,
6; 10, 7), distinctly asserts the contrary and
nearly all Jewish and other authorities agree
with him. " Since the bread was brought into
the Holy place (which was not the case with the
Pentecostal bread) it almost certainly came un-
der the general law of the meat off'erings, which
excluded the use of leaven (ii. 11)." Clark. It
may be added that the shewbread was changed
only once a week, and leavened bread, exposed
to the air, could hardly have been kept in condi-
tion for eating so long. The loaves were twelve
in accordance with the number of the tribes of
Israel, They were most holy, so that when
CHAP. XXIV. 1-9.
181
thinks that the loaves were placed in rows, but
does not mention these names. On the arrange-
ment, see Textual Note 2 ou ver. 6.— F. G.].
"And since it is known that leaven in itself con-
tains nothing evil, although like honey it might
not be placed upon the altar, the supposition of
Knobel (Keil to the contrary) has nothing hazar-
dous, that the shewbread was leavened. Un-
doubtedly it is to be considered that among the
later Jews they were unleavened; but against this
must be weighed the fact that they formed an im-
portant constituent of the food of the officiating
priests who ate them as a most holy thing, after
they were carried out, and that these loaves
were never actually offered, but only hallowed
to Jehovah, while their offering was signified by
the incense which went with them as a memo-
rial (ver. 7, Azkara). The view that the in-
cense was not strewed upon the bread, but placed
beside it in golden shells, is certainly strength-
ened by the purpose of incense, which was
burned as an offering made by fire unto Jeho-
vah. It is the sacrifice of prayer which is espe-
cially associated with the priestly communion, a
"Grace" said before the Lord in the highest
sense.
" The supposition of Knobel and others that
the table, with shewbread and kindred things,
represented the house of God as an imitation of
a human house, is a flat travesty of the holy
house into that which is common ; it rests upon
a misunderstanding of the religious symbolism
of the house of God, and in it the sleeping cham-
ber, e. g., the bed, and similar things must be
missed." [To define the exact boundaries be-
tween anthropomorphic language and representa-
tions on the one hand, and pure statements of
truth and pure symbolism on the other, is ex-
tremely difficult, and will probably always re-
main impossible, while man is still compelled to
use so much of anthropomorphic terms even in
the most abstract and philosophical discussion
of Divine things. Undoubtedly the Hebrew mind
was gradually led up to the conception of Di-
vine realities by the exaltation of human expres-
sions, and hence occur such forms as " the food,"
" the table," " the house of the Lord ;" in grosser
minds these would have been associated with
grosser ideas, while for those of higher spiritual
elevation, there was just enough of symbolism in
these terms to enable them, by their means, to
rise above them to more spiritual and exalted
conceptions. To this it was essential that the
human imagery should be imperfect and wanting
in many particulars. — P. G.].
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL.
I. The symbolism of the seven-branched can-
dlestick is applied in the Apooalyuse to the Holy
Spirit. Meantime in its perpetual burning du-
ring the night there is also the subordinate
teaching that from the worship of God all dark-
ness and obscurity are to be banished by the in-
fluence of that Spirit. To this the people are
themselves to contribute by bringing the pun st
oil for the feeding of the lamps. The Holy Spirit
ever works upon man through that which is in
man, and man may receive the Divine Guest in
his heart, or may grieve Him and quench His
holy influence.
II. In the shewbread, as the culmination of
all oblations, is expressed on the one hand the
consecration to God of all that belongs to man
by placing bread, the staff of human life, con-
tinually before His presence; and on the other,
the condescension of God to communion wiih
man in making these loaves the food of His
priests. The incense, burned as a memorial,
represented the Divine acceptance of the gift,
and, as Lange has suggested, symbolized the
prayer with which the priests must draw near to
this communion. It is further to be noted that
this was not the sacred incense of the sanctuary,
but the frankincense of the people's offering. As
the loaves represented the twelve tribes, so this
frankincense represented the people's prayers ;
and in this symbolic act of communion, the
priests on God's behalf pratook of the food, as in
the case of the sin offering.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL.
Lange : " The proper maintenance for the can-
dlestick in the house of God. The table of the
Lord in the Old Testament and in the New Tes-
tament forms. The Lord at His table : 1) as the
Bread of heaven ; 2) as the Host ; 3) as the
Guest."
In the worship of God light and clearness are
ever to take the place of darkness and obscurity.
The clear shining of the Holy Spirit's direction
is always to be sought in all approach to God,
and to this end the pure oil is to be furnished by
the people for the lamps ; an honest and good
heart is to be prepared for the Spirit's dwelling.
Through the grace of God man becomes a par-
taker of the table of the Lord. This must be ac-
companied with the Incense of prayer. It was
to be a statute for ever, a perpetually recurring
act of communion with God.
Origen : The light of the Jews grew dim as the
oil of their piety failed ; the foolish virgins were
excluded from the marriage when their lamps
were gone out for the want of oil; so Christians
must furnish the oil of earnest effort after holi-
ness, that the flame of the Spirit may burn in
their hearts, so that men may see their good
works, and that their lamps may be burning
when the Master comes.
182 LEVITICUS.
THIRD SECTION.
Historical. — The Punishment of a Blasphemer.
" The keeping holy of the Theocratic Religion, and of the Name of Jehovah, by means of an explicit
example^ — Vers. 10-16.
" The keeping holy of punishnent, and of the distinction of punishment, whose
culmination is stoning." Vers. 17—23. — Lanqe.
Chapter XXIV. 10-23.
10 And the son of an Israelhish woman, whose father was an Egyptian, went out
among the children of Israel : and this son of the Israelitish woman and a man of
11 Israel strove together in the camp ; and the Israelitish woman's son blasphemed'
the name of the LORD [omit of the LORD^}, and cursed. And they brought him
unto Moses : (and his mother's name was Shelomith, the daughter of Dibri, of the
12 tribe of Dan:) and they put him in ward, that the mind of the Lord might be
shewed them.
13, 14 And the Lobd spake unto Moses, saying, Bring forth him that hath cursed
without the camp ; and let all that heard him lay their hands upon his head, and
15 let all the congregation stone him. And thou shalt speak unto the children of
16 Israel, saying. Whosoever curseth his God shall bear hia sin. And he that blas-
phemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death, and all the con-
gregation shall certainly stone him : as well the stranger as he that is born in the
land, when he blasphemeth' the name of the LORD [omit of the LORD''} shall be
put to death.
17, 18 And he that killeth' any man shall surely be put to death. And he that kUl-
19 eth' a beast shall make it good; beast' for beast.' And if a man cause a blemish
20 in his neighbour ; as he hath done, so shall it be done to him ; breach for breach,
eye for eye, tooth for tooth : as he hath caused a blemish in a man, so shall it be
21 done to him again. And he that killeth' a beast, he shall restore it : and he that
22 killeth' a man, he shall be put to death. Ye* shall have one manner of law, as
well for the stranger as for one of your own country : for I am the Lord your God.
23 And Moses spake to the children of Israel, that they should bring forth him that
had cursed out of the camp, and stone him with stones. And the children of Israel
did as the Lord commanded Moses.
TEXTUAL and GRAMMATICAL.
1 Vers. 11, 16. 3pJ according to ail the best critical authorities, means to retrtle, to bhipheme ; the LXX. and Targnms,
however, interpret it as meaning to utler distinctly, thus embodying the Jewish tradition of the nnlawfiilness of uttering the
name of Jehovah. See the Bxeg.
2 Vers. 11, 10. Tbe words in itaiics are better omitted, allowing the sense to stand exactly as in the Heb. and all the
Ancient Versions, where tSie Name evidenily meana the Name jcar efox^i', the name of Jehovah. In ver. 16 th.i article
is omitted iu the Hub., but supplied in the Sam,
8 Vera. 17, 18, 21. The Heb. here u-es the word t^Sj very freely, as is in part indicated in the marginal readings of tbe
A. V. Translating I^£]J soul, vers. 17, 18 will read litcally, And he that smiteth the soul of any man shall die the death,
Hnd he that smiteth the soul of a beast shall make it good ; soul for soul. Similarly in ver. 21. A few MSS. omit the t£^£]}
before beast in vers. 18 and 21.
* Ver. 22. The Sam. has the sing. Seven MSS. of that version, however, follow the plural form of the Heb.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL.
The whole of Lange's Exegetioal is here given.
"According to Knobel the foregoing section
stands disconnectedly in this place. Bnt cer-
tainly in this place ought to stand the principle
of all consecrations, the name of Jehovah, and it
fits in with the high importance of keeping this
Name holy that the law, in its genesis, should be
introduced with a fearful example. Similarly
the history of the Sabbath-brealier is introduoei
CHAP. XXIV. 10-23.
183
Num. XV. 82." [Of course the immediate reason
for the introduction of the narrative is that the
event actually occurred just at this point in
the communication of this legislation to the
people, and it thus constitutes one of the
strong incidental marks of the time when
that legislation was given. Lange shows
that its mention was the very reverse of inop-
portune. It is noticeable that the patronymic
Israelite is found elsewhere only in 2 Sam. xvii.
25 ; and the adjective laraelitwh occurs only here.
It is used in opposition to Egyptian as the two
terms are likely to have been used at the time
in the camp. So in 2 Sam. xvii. 25 it is used of
a man of the ten tribes in opposition to the two.
— F. G.].
" The son of an Israelitish woman and an
Egyptian man went out into the midst of the
Israelites, i. e., he betook himself to the camp
of the latter. He belonged to the strangers who
journeyed with Israel (Ex. xii. 38). As an
Egyptian, he dwelt certainly somewhat removed,
since he was not a member of the congregation
of Jehovah ; for only in the third generation was
an Egyptian to be taken in (Deut. xxiii. 8)."
[Although this law had not yet been announced,
Lange's supposition is altogether probable, and
the man doubtless formed one of the "mixed
multitude " who lived on the outskirts of the
camp, comp. Num. xi. 1, 4. — F. G.]. " The Is-
raelites encamped according to the houses of
their tribes" (Num. ii. 2). In the camp a strife
arose ; " a quarrel sprang up between him and
the Israelitish man, that is, between him and the
men of Israel" (Knobel). Against the very ap
propriate view that t^'X stands collectively, see
the grammatical note of Keil, p. 168.
" The history certainly tells us how the Egyp-
tian offended in an ascending scale, even up to
the blaspheming Jehovah. The text, ver. 10,
shows that the Egyptian man had come in with
a certain degree of impudence info the midst of
the camp of Israel, where he did not belong.
From this it is also to be concluded that he ex-
cited here a religious quarrel, and it could only
have been with one, as the issue proves." [In
the entire absence of reliable knowledge of the
cause of this quarrel the tradiuou embodied in
the Targs. of Jerus. and Jon. may be noted. Ac-
cording to these the Egyptian was the son of an
Egyptian who had slain an Israelite in the land
of Egypt and then had gone in to his wife. She
had borne the child among the Israelites, being
herself of the tribe of Dan. la the desert this
man claimed the right to pitch his tent with the
tribe of Dan, and the right being resisted by a
man of that tribe, they look the case before the
judge, where it was decided against the Egyp-
tian. On coming out under this adverse judg-
ment, he committed his offense. — P. G.]. " Thus
his insolence rose to blaspheming "the Name."
This expression: the Name, absolutely, raises
the name of Jehovah above all names, and blas-
phemy against it was not only blasphemy against
the God of Israel, but also against the religion
of His revelation, against the covenant with Je-
hovah, and thus against the holy Source of all
consecrations. So he was led before Moses.
That he was put in -vraid shows that the mea-
sure of punishment for this unheard of trans-
gression had not yet been made clear. And it
had not been settled for the reason that he did
not belong to the commonwealth of Israel in the
stricter sense. Hence the punishment was made
known to Moses by an especial revelation from
Jehovah. The greatness of the crime is shovpa
by the following particulars :
" 1. The punishment of stoning was to be so-
lemnly performed by the whole congregation,
because the blasphemy rested, like a curse, upon
the whole congregation.
" 2. All who had heard the blasphemy must
lay their hands on the head of the criminal be-
fore the execution. Until this expiation they
are contaminated with a complicity in guilt (see
ch. V, 1), which they must discharge from them-
selves upon the guilty head." [Keil refers to
the washing of hands in Deut. xxi. 6 as analo-
gous. Knobel, however, considers that the com-
mand is connected with Deut. xvii. 7, requiring
the witnesses to throw the first stones. They
were in either case thus to make themselves re-
sponsible for the truth of the accusation. — F. G.].
" 3. The greatness of the guilt is in the first
place to be compared with the lesser guilt of a
man's cursing his God, i. e., his ELohim in His
peculiar relation to him, wherein he might mean,
e. g. that this Elohim had done him wrong. This
77p may have very different degrees, even to
speaking evil ; therefore he shall bear his sin :
in the first place, his evil conscience ; then his
sentence according to the judgment of the theo-
cratic tribunal." [As this particular offender
was an Egyptian, and as the law (ver. 16) in-
cludes the stranger generally, many commen-
tators have understood the expression his God
to mean the Deity whom he is accustomed to
worship. In confirmation of this it is urged that
penalty for him that cursetb his God in ver.
15 is only that he shall bear his sin ; while in
ver. 16 he that blasphemeth (or revileth, a
feebler expression than curseth) the name of
the IiORD, he shall surely be put to death.
For the last reason, others have maintained that
D'mX does not here signify God at all, but hu-
man magistrates. The reason, however, is of
little weight. In ver. 15 is given the general law
with the indefinite penalty; in ver. 16 it is re-
peated for the sake of emphasis, with definite-
ness in regard to every particular, the sin, the
punishment, the executioners, and the applica-
tion of the law to the stranger as well as the na-
tive. The reference of ver. 15 to the gods of
the strangers is peculiarly unfortunate. It can-
not be imagined that the law of Jehovah should
thus provide for the honor of those false gods
whom it aims to bring into contempt. — F. G.].
" 4. This punishment of stoning should apply
to the stranger as well as to the Israelite, be-
cause in the first place, he entered the congre-
gation of Israel as a blasphemer of its name;
and in the second place, proved thereby that he
did not do it unconsciously, but had an idea of
the signification of this name.
"5. If then the object of the ordinances for
punishment next following was that the penal
law of the Israelites should also apply to the
stranger who sojourned in their community ;
184
LEViTICCS.
yet the immediately following degrees of punish-
nieat form a scale which gives one a clear idea
of the greatness of the blasphemer's crime against
Majesty. The death penalty for the murderer
forma a basis. Behind this follow the various
degrees, severe according to the law of compen-
sation (Ex. xxi. 23), but yet the blasphemer
stands pre-eminent, far above the murderer.
The principal reason for this arrangement lies
indeed in this : that the capital punishment of
the Egyptian migbt easily excite a fanatical con-
tempt and misusage of the stranger ; therefore
it is here most fittingly made prominent that the
Jews [Israelites] and strangers, stand under the
same law, and that the murdering of the stranger
must also be punished with death. With the
elevation and hallowing of the punishment here
appointed above all partisan fanaticism, it be-
came self-evident that the same punishment must
fall upon the Jews [Israelites]. How proper is
it that the name of Jehovah should be again in-
serted for the purpose that the stranger might
have equal administration of justice with the
Jew [Israelite]. Manifold misunderstanding
has attached itself to this legislation. The Jew-
ish misinterpretation of 3pJ (in the sense of
to name, instead of to revile, to blaspheme) has had
for its consequence the Jewish superstition that
man may not pronounce the name of Jehovah,
and the after effect no less that in the LXX. the
name Kvpiog is in the place of Jehovah, and also
the placing of the name Lord in the German Bi-
ble " [and in the English, but here distinguished
by small capital letters — F. G.], " also indirectly
that the name Jehovah is now translated with
the Jews : the Eternal.
" The Mediseval misinterpretation drew over
into the New Testament time the penal justice
touching it, and the reflection thereof still shows
itself in the history of the Church of Geneva.
The mention of the mother of the blasphemer,
Shelomith (the peaceable), daughter of Dibri
(my word), of the tribe of Dan appears to be
only a mark of definite remembrance. A com-
munity which suffers the reviling of the prin-
ciple of their community without reaction, is mo-
rally fallen to pieces. This holds good also of
the religious community. The reaction of the
theocracy could not and should not transplant
itself into the Church ; but since it was outstrip-
ped by the middle ages, there has come in more
recent time, over against this extreme, a fearful
relaxation, which misses the dynamic reaction
against the impudent and the blasphemers of
the principle of the community."
This chapter is founded upon the fact that
among the Hebrews the child followed the con-
dition of the father and not of the mother. It is
probably only one of a multitude of instances of
children born in Egypt of parentage of different
nations, and many of the " mixed multitude "
who followed the Israelites may have had Isra-
elitish mothers. The doubt arising as to the
punishment of a blasphemer who was not one
of the covenant people, led to Moses' asking for
Divine direction. In answer, not only this par-
ticular case is settled, but the Hebrew law gene-
rally is made applicable to the sojourner. In
connection with the penalty for killing cattle is
announced in express terms (vers. 18, 21), that
which had only been implied before (Ex. xxi.
33-3t>). The law for the punishment of blas-
phemy in ver. 16 is perfectly clear ; it was from
a wrong conception of the fact, not of the law,
that the Jews stoned St. Stephen, and would
gladly have stoned our Lord Himself. The ca-
pital punishment of the murderer in vers. 17, 21,
is not to be considered as a part simply of the
lex talionis, but rather as a positive Divine com-
mand given in accordance with Gen. ix. 6. The
lex talionis on the other hand, of vers. 19, 20, is
permissive and restrictive, like so much else in
the Mosaic legislation. The fundamental prin-
ciple which should govern man's conduct tow-
ards his neighbor is given in xix. 18; but as the
people were so little able to bear this, the an-
cient indulgence of unlimited revenge is re-
stricted at least to the equivalent of the injury
suffered. After the announcement of these gen-
eral laws, the people carried into execution the
sentence pronounced upon the Egyptian blas-
phemer.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL.
I. The fundamental moral laws apply equally
to all mankind. No one can be exempted from
them on the ground that he is not in covenant
relation with their author, or does not acknow-
ledge himself to be bound by them.
II. Blasphemy against God is a crime of the
deepest character, and demands the severest
punishment.
III. Exact justice demands the restoration to
one's neighbor of the precise equivalent of any
harm done to him, and in case this is a personal
injury, of a corresponding injury to the offender.
The law of love comes in to forbid the exaction
of this penalty on the part of him who is injured;
but the same law should lead the offender to re-
store in more ample measure.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL.
Lange : " Blasphemy against the name of Je-
hovah as the great mortal offence in Israel. Cul-
mination of the revelation of salvation in Chris-
tianity ; wherefore here especially the death
penalty must fall away. The accusation of
Christ, that He blasphemed God. The blas-
phemy in the New Testament era, above all
others, a blasphemy against the grace of God In
Christ. The name of Jehovah is the witness of
His covenant truth. — The fearful decree of death
which lies in this blasphemy itself."
The evil of marriages with the ungodly is here
apparent ; also the influence of an ungodly fa-
ther upon the life and character of Ms child.
The law requires every accusation to be sub-
stantiated by the most solemn act of the accu-
ser ; no one has the right to bring a charge
against another to the truth of which he cannot
positively testify, and which he is not prepared
to support in such wise that, if untrue, guilt
must recoil on his own head. The equality of
all men before the law of God is here, as every,
where in the law, made very prominent. In the
sufferance of the law of revenge, we see that
God's will is not always to be known by what
CHAP. XXV. 1-55. 185
He may permit to einful man ; He suffers many
things " for the hardness of their hearts." All
these commands, and all commands given to man
rest upon the ultimate ground I am the LORD
your God.
But little is said in the New Testament of
blasphemy, God's displeasure at this sin having
been expressed so plainly in the Old, and Hia
will remaining always unalterably the same.
FOURTH SECTION.
Of the Sabbatical and Jubilee ^ears.
"The keeping holy of the hallowed territory, the holy land, by the Sabbatical year ; of the consecrated
inheritance by the jFubilee l^ear, and thtis also of those who had become impoverished, the Israel-
ites who had fallen into servitude ; the keeping holy of the outward appearance of the holy land
{streets and ways) ; of the public Sabbath feast and of the Sanctuary of the religion of the land.
Ch. XXV. I — xxvi. 2." — Lange.
Chapter XXV. 1-55.
1, 2 And the Loed spake unto Moses in mount Sinai, saying, Speak unto the chil-
dren of Israel, and say unto them, When ye come into the land which I give you,
3 then shall the land keep a sabbath unto the Lord. Six years thou shalt sow thy
field, and six years thou shalt prune thy vineyard [fruit garden'], and gather in
4 the fruit thereof; but in the seventh year shall be a sabbath of rest unto the land,
a sabbath for the Lord : thou shalt neither sow thy field, nor prune thy vineyard
5 [fruit garden']. ' That which groweth of its own accord of thy harvest thou shalt
not reap, neither gather the grapes of thy vine undressed :' for it is a year of rest
6 unto the land. And the sabbath of the land shall be meat for you ; for thee, and
for thy servant,* and for thy maid, and for thy hired servant, and for thy stranger
7 that sojourneth with thee, and for thy cattle, and for the beasts [animals'] that are
in thy land, shall all the increase thereof be meat.
8 And thou shalt number seven sabbaths' of years unto thee, seven times seven
years ; and the space of the seven sabbaths* of years shall be unto thee forty and
9 nine years. Then shalt thou cause the trumpet of the jubile to sound [cause the
sound of the cornet to go through the fawrf] on the tenth day of the seventh
month, in the day of atonement shall ye make the trumpet sound throughout
10 all your land. And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty
throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof: it shall be a jubile'
unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL.
1 Vers. 3, i. D13- See Textual Note • on xix. 10.
> Ver. 5. The Sam., IXX. and Syr. prefix tlie conjnnction.
' Vers. 5, 11. "Vti means primarily Ihe separated (see Gen. xlix. 26 ; Dent, xxxiii. 16), then (hi amiecrated. Except in
the passages referred to, and in this chap , it is always nsed of the Namriie. It is applied to the Tine either as for this year
consecrated, so LXX. ayiAiiiiam the Misbna, of chamois or wild goat), or made of metal in the fashion of a horn. The LXX. renders {raKmyi, the Vulg.
hucdna. I . , ., „ , »T ■ J
8 Vers. 10, 11, 12, 13, efc. 73V is translated throughout this chapter and ch. xxvu , jubiU. So also Num. xxxvi. 4.
In Ex. xix. 13 it is rendered trumpet (marg. comet), and in the only other places where it occurs, Josh. vi. 4. 5, 6, 8, 13, ramCa
ftoras." Outside of the Bible the word is always vpfAt jubilee, but being here spelt yu&t^e, Clark considers that it was intended
to bo pronounced as a dissyllable, making a close imitation of the Heb. word. Authorities differ as to its sense etymologi-
cally See the subject discussed in liochart, Hieroz. I. c. 43 (vol. I., pp. 463-466 ed. Boson.), and Gesen. Thes. i. v. The
LXX renders ai^« Ver. 31. OE^rr is sing. The Sam., LXX. and Syr. have the plural,
i« Ver. 32. On this use of the particle 1 see Nordheimer's Heb. Or. § 1093, 6, c, h. It U evident that there is nothing
said I'bout the redemption of the cities, which the form of the A. V. would seem to imply, but only of the houses in them.
1" Ver. 33. There is much diversity of opinion as to the meaning of this clause. The text of the A. V. Is supported by
CHAP. XXV. 1-55. 187
of his possession, shall go out in the year of jubile :' for the houses of the cities of
34 the Levites are their possession among the children of Israel. But the field of the
suburbs of their cities may not be sold ; for it is their perpetual possession.
35 And if thy brother be waxen poor, and fallen in decay with thee ; then thou
shalt relieve him : yea, though he he a stranger [poor, and his hand trembles by
thee, thou shalt hold him up as a stranger''], or a sojourner; that he may live^
36 with thee. Take thou no usury of him, or increase : but fear thy God ; that thy
37 brother may live with thee. Thou shalt not give him thy money" upon usury, nor
38 lend him thy victuals for increase. I am the Lord your God, which brought' you
forth out of the land of Egypt, to give you the land of Canaan, and to be your God.
39 And if thy brother that dwelleth by thee be waxen poor, and be sold unto thee ;
40 thou shalt not compel him to serve as a bondservant : but as an hired servant, and
as a sojourner, he shall be with thee, and shall serve thee unto the yearof jubile ■?
41 and then shall he depart from thee, both he and his childreu with him, and shall
return unto his own family, and unto the possession of his fathers shall he return.
42 For they are my servants, which I brought forth out of the land of Egypt : they
43 shall not be sold as bondmen. Thou shalt not rule over him with rigor; but shalt
44 fear thy God. Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have,
shall he of the heathen that are round about you ; of them shall ye buy bondmen
45 and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among
you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat
46 in your land : and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an
inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession ; they shall
be your bondmen for ever : but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall
not rule one over another with rigor.
47 And if a sojourner or stranger wax rich by thee, and thy brother that dwelleth by
him wax poor, and sell himself unto the stranger or'^^ sojourner by thee, or to the stock
48 of the stranger's family : after that he is sold he may be redeemed again; one of his
49 brethren may redeem him ; either his uncle, or his uncle's son, may redeem him,
or any that is nigh of kin'^ unto him of his family may redeem him ; or if he be
50 able, he may redeem himself. And he shall reckon with him that bought him
from the year that he was sold to him unto the year of jubile :* and the price of
his sale shall be according unto the number of years, according to the time of an
51 hired servant shall it be with him. If there he yet many years behind, accordirtg
unto them he shall give again the price of his redemption out of the money that
52 he was bought for. And if there remain but few years unto the year of jubile,^
then he shall count with him, and according unto his years shall he give him again
53 the price of his redemption. And as a yearly hired servant shall he be with him :
54 and the other shall not rule with rigor over him in thy sight. And if he be not
redeemed in these years [by these means''^], then he shall go out in the year of jubi-
the IiXX. and by the Targnms, and ia defended by Keil. A difficulty arises from the use of the word ^KT— redeem ; but
Keil maintains, on the authority of the lUbbins, that this is used in the sense of njp='o Imy. He grounds the usage on
TlT
the fact that the Levitical cities were originally ass'gned to the tribes as a part of tbeir inheritancp ; they relinquished the
houses, or a part of the houses in them (together with pasture grounds) to the Levites tordW' lling-piacts. When therefore
one of another tribe purchased of a levite, he was in fact redeeming tlie inhiTitniice of his tribe. Su Murphy. On the other
hand, the reading: If one of the Levites redeems a house in the city (according to the marg. of the A, V.), is preferred by CiJirk
following Rosenmhller, I>e" Wette, Kranold, Herxheimer and others. The meaning will then be, that if a Levite has sold
a house to one of another tribe, and aootht-r Levite redeem it, then in the Jubilee year it must revert to its original pos-
serisor. But it is more than questionable whether the Levites had any such general right of redemption on behalf of their
felliw Levites as this would suppose. The Vulg. inserts a nef^ative, 8i redfmploe (sc. cedes) von fuerint, and this is sustained
b.v Houbigant, and preferred by Woide, Ewald, Bunsen and Knobel. It is adopted by Lunge in the translation and exege-
sis ; but it is a serious objei^tion that it would require a change in the Ueb. On the whole, the text of the A. V. seems best
sustained, and gives the clearest sense.
13 Ver, 33. On the use of 1 in the figure Hendiadys see Gesen. s. v. 1, b.
" Yer. 35. The particle ai is in 'IP ^7n {to go to a meeting with a
person, i. e.., to meet a person in a hostile man-
ner, to tight against him) only occurs here in
vers. 21 and 23, and is strengthened in vers. 24,
27, 28, 40, 41, into D;? '"Ipa ^Sn, to engage
in a hostile encounter with a person." Keil.
Vers. 23-26. Lange: "The punishment in the
fourth grade. Now Jehovah also becomes ag-
gressive and acts inimically towards them, as if
He would destroy them. Now the breach of the
covenant is decided, and the sword comes over
them as the avenger of the covenant. Pictu-
resque delineation of the three dark riders. Rev.
vi., only that here the plague goes before the
famine." The idea of the text is clearly that
by the inroads of the enemy Israel would be
sbut up in their citie'i, and while besieged there,
would be visited with pestilence and famine.
Such calamities were repeatedly experienced, 2
Kings vi. 24-29, etc. Comp. Isa. iii. 1 ; Jer.
xiv. 18; Ezek. iv. 16; v. 12, and especially the
story of the siecre of .lerusalem by the Romans.
To break the staff of bread is a frequent prover-
bial expression for the infliction of extreme
scarcity. One oven should suffice for the bread
of families ordinarily baked in ten, and in its
scarcity it should be dealt out by weight.
Vers. 27-33. Lange: " The punishment in the
fifth grade. Now Jehovah moves against them
verily in fury, and the last catastrophes follow :
despair even to madness; the eating of their
own chiMren (Knobel, Keil, and the Jewish
history) [oomp. Deut. xxviii. 53; 2 Kings vi.
28, 29; Jer. xiv. 12; Lam. ii. 20: iv. 10; Ezek.
V. 10. Also Jos. Bel. Jud. V. 10, 3.— F. G.];
overthrow of their idolatrous cultus, in the sar-
castic conception th.it the dead bodies of men
fall down on the mock dead bodies of their idols,
carcases upon carcases" [comp. 2 Kings xxiii.
16; Ezek. vi. 4. The high places refer to
places of idolatrous worship as in use among
the Canaanites and most other nations, and
which must have been already sufficiently fami-
liar to Moses and his people. — F. G.]; "over-
throw of even the real historical sanctuary;
repudiation of the sacrificial eultus, ver. 31 "
[comp. 2 Kings xxv. 9; Ps. Ixxiv. 6, 7]; "de-
solation of the land, so that even the enemies
settling therein recognize the dismal footprints
of punitive justice, deportations of the people
(one after another, comp. the Jewish history
from Alexander to Hadrian)." Comp. Jer. ix.
16-22; xviii. 16; xix. 8; Ezek. v. Also Deut.
iv. 27, 28; xxviii. 37, 64-68.
Effects of these Visitations. Vers. 84-39.
Vers. 34, 35, express the restorative effect
accomplished by the punishment itself. The
land must needs enjoy its Sabbaths while it lay
desolate. In regard to the kingdom of Judah,
2 Chron. xxxvi. 21 expressly fixes the length of
the Babylonish captivity with reference to the
number of unobserved Sabbatical years. These
constituted the Sabbaths of the land, the weekly
Sabbath of one day being too brief for effect
upon the soil. Vers. 36-39 describe in fearful
terms the effect of the Divine visitation upon
the remnant who should escape immediate de-
struction. On the language of ver. 38 comp.
Num. xiii. 32 ; Ezek. xxxvi. 13,
C. The Restoration of the Covenant.
Vers. 40-45.
Lange: "The first thing is the acknowledg-
ment and confession of guilt. But the repent-
tance would be thorough only in case the
misdeeds of the fathers were acknowledged
along with their own misdeeds, see Ps. li.
The view that Jehovah has interposed, con-
tending against them because they contended
against Him, is the second thing, ver. 41. —
(Repeated declaration in regard to the cause
of the punishments.) The humiliation under
the judgment of their having an uncircumcised
heart, i. e., of their being heathen in a spiritual
sense, is the third. Yes, they come now to bleaa
the punishments of their misdeeds, to rejoice
over them, since God has visited them in this
manner (IS"]'). Keil accepts the translation of
the LXX. £vSoKT](yovaLv ra^ dfiapria^ avrav, " they
will take pleasure, rejoice in their misdeeds,
i. e., in the consequences and results of them."
We hold with Luther to the idea of t'lj? (see
Gesen.) as sufficient punishment; the paradox
itself Ofelix culpa could not be translated: they
have pleasure in their misdeeds. But to salute
the cross is a proof in action of a deeper reli-
giousness, which here already germinates."
[See, however. Textual Note 24. — F. G.]
"Ver. 41. In a religious sense the divine par-
don is the cause, in a moral sense the conse-
quence of the repentance of the people ; the
remembrance of the Covenant with Jacob and
Isaac and Abraham, i. e. an ever-deepening,
inward remembrance of the old love, appears to
awake in Jehovah, for it does awake in the con-
sciousness of the people. The holy land itself,
which cannot be forgotten and is kindly, receives
now a peculiarly affecting form. The land
whose mourning is changed to feasts, and the
people whose penitence is changed to feasts,
accord so affectingly with Jehovah, that, so to
speak. He reveals Himself again as justifying:
because, even because they despised my
judgments, and because their soul ab-
horred my statutes. And yet for all that—
their pardon is approaching : viz. the restoration,
and that truly entirely according to the analogy of
the restoration from the land of Egypt. That this
promise is effective for the nation of Israel, but is
not to be understood of the spiritual Israel as
such, needs no argument. At the close again,
'^J^.' V^-" [The promise of mercy upon Israel
when they should repent and turn to the Lord,
was certainly a promise to the covenant people,
and was repeatedly fulfilled in their history,
especially in the restoration from the captivity
CHAP. XXVI. 1-46.
199
of Babylon. But the promise (Jer. xxxi. 31-34)
was that in the days to come God would make a
new covenant with His people of a more spirit-
ual character, and in the Ep. to the Heb (viii.
10-12; X. 15-18)' we are told that this has been
accomplished in the Christian Church springing
from the bosom of the Jewish. The continued
faithfulness of God to His people according to
the promises of this section, must therefore be
now looked for after a Christian and spiritual,
rather than a Jewish and temporal fashion. —
F. G.]
"And thus it is conformable to the truth of a
personal God that He should attach the utmost
importance to affliofing the personal life of His
people, and then reanimating it again. If it is
said; What shall it profit a man, if he shall gain
the whole world, and lose his own soul? so is it
likewise said : What shall it harm a man, if he
shall lose the whole world, and his soul thereby
be delivered ? Would a philosophy in opposi-
tion to this, which has sunk the personal life in
impersonal things, be a higher wisdom?
"It is to be understood that the principles of
this Divine government over Israel apply, ac-
cording to their modifications, to His govern-
ment over every nation."
At the beginning of this chapter Lange says :
" It cannot be concluded from ver. 46 that Levi-
ticus should properly end with this section ;
ver. 46 much rather looks back to ver. 3, and
makes it clear that the subject here is the Cove-
nant bond between Jehovah and the people of
Israel." Ver. 46 undoubtedly looks back imme-
diately to XXV. 1, the beginning of the Divine
communication of which this is the end ; but as
it also forms the close of ch. xxvi., so we cannot
but regard this chapter itself as closing the
Book of Leviticus proper. The analogy of this
with other portions of the law has already been
pointed out, and the reasons for regarding ch.
xxvii. as an appendix will be mentioned in the
treatment of that chapter.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL.
I. The warnings and promises of this chapter
show it was foreseen that much of the Mosaic
legislation was likely to be neglected by the
people. Nevertheless God gave it. The same
is true of much of Christian duty, both in regard
to definite observances as baptism and the Lord's
Supper, and still more in regard to the standard
of Christian life and character. But because
man does not come up to its requirements, the
law is not thereby foiled of its purpose ; its re-
quirements were not lowered to the level of
human weakness and sinfulness, but rather de-
signed to set forth so much of the Divine holi-
ness and purity as would be instrumental in
raising man to a higher level. " It was not like
the legislation of ordinary states, intended pri-
marily to meet the exigencies of existing facts
and to keep offenders in order. Its purpose was
to help and instruct the best of the people, not
merely to chastise the worst. Other legislators
have taken their starting points from human
facts- Moses took his from the character and
purpose of God." Clark. And in this, to the
thoughtful man, is a really powerful evidence
of the Divine authorship of the legislation.
II. In vers. 39, 40, the iniquity of their
fathers is made a part of the sin for which the
people were to suffer, and on the confession of
which they were to be forgiven. As this is
God's revealed word, so does all history show
that it is in accordance with His government of
nature that in nations, as in individuals, the
sins of the fathers are visited upon the children ;
but all this is nevertheless under the law that
the sincere repentance of the children shall
avert from them the punishment of their fore-
fathers' sins as well as of their own.
III. Illustrative of ver. 41 is 2 Cor. vii. 10
and Heb. xii. 11. The punishments of God
leading to repentance, however grievous they
may seem, are yet truly occasions of rejoicing
in view of their higher object.
IV. In ver. 46 the covenant legislation of Mt.
Sinai is expressly said to have been given by
the band of Moses. This fact is sufficiently
patent throughout the whole story of the legis-
lation ; but its emphatic mention here has a
double use: first, in showing that this book
claims a contemporary origin; and second, in
bringing out the fact of the necessity of a medi-
ator between man and God. If Moses was only
a human mediator, especially strengthened and
authorized for this purpose ; yet he points for-
ward typically to the one true Mediator from
whom alone man may know the will of God, and
through whom alone he may draw near to His
inapproachable majesty.
V. Although it is abundantly evident from
the warnings of this chapter that man is unable
so to keep God's commandments as to claim any
reward as of merit ; yet it is also clear from its
promises, and especially from these as contrasted
with the warnings, that He does look with favor
upon and will bless and reward the honest effort
to do His will. These things are spoken of
Israel as a nation, and are true of all nations in
all time ; but nations are made up of individuals,
and the principles of the Divine bearing towards
man are as true of the component elements as
of the mass in its totality.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL.
Lange: " The great contrast of blessing and
of curse which lies in the law— which the law
strengthens. The law speaks not only of curse,
as many imagine; it speaks also of blessing.
For it is one thing to be occupied with the
works of the law and to seek righteousness
throu-'h the law and by means of works (ac-
cording to Gal. iii. 10 sqq.), and another thing
to stand under the law in the true fear of God,
and to strive after its righteousness until one
comes to the righteousness which is of faith
(according to Bom. vii.). The law of Jehovah
ever stands under the protection of the Law-
giver. It is the rule of His power ; it is the
Spirit of the world's history ; it is the ^otceot
conscience (Bom. ii.), and the disposition of the
heart. The blessings of fidelity to the law : the
piety of a people, the fruitfulness of the land,
peace, victory, etc., etc. (xxvi. 1 sqq-)- . ^he
fearful gradations of the curse. Particular
blessings. Particular curses. The final pro-
mise of the restoration of Israel out of the state
200
LEVITICUS.
of the curse. Jehovah will remember Hie cove-
nant for all those who reform themselves."
" There is a marvellous and grand display of
the greatness of God in the fact, that He holds
out before the people, whom He has just deli-
vered from the hands of the heathen and gathered
round Himself, the prospect of being scattered
again among the heathen, and that, even before
the land is taken by the Israelites, He predicts
its return to desolation. These words could
only be spoken by One who has the future really
before His mind, who sees through the whole
depth of sin, and who can destroy His own
work, and yet attain His end. But so much the
more adorable and marvellous is the grace,
which nevertheless begins its work among such
sinners, and is certain of victory notwithstand-
ing all retarding and opposing influences."
Auberlen.
God promises in vers. 11, 12, that He will set
His tabernacle and will walk among His people
— a typical promise, fulfilled in Christ who
tabernacled in us (John i. 14), and through
whom we become Temples of God the Holy
Ghost (1 Cor. iii. 16, 17; vi. 19), and God will
•'tabernacle for ever" with us (Rev. vii. 16;
xxi. 3). Wordsworth.
Origen deduces from this chapter a commen-
tary on 2 Timothy ii. 5: "If a man strive for
masteries, yet is he not crowned except he strive
lawfully." Our efforts to obtain God's blessing,
our hope of avoiding His wrath, must be in the
way of His commandment. We can only please
Him by seeking to do His will, and He has made
it known to us.
There is ever a due relation between the tem-
poral and the spiritual, and these promises show
that the rewards held out before the Israelites
were of a spiritual as well as a temporal charac-
ter; so it is to be remembered that along with
the more spiritual rewards of the Christian reli-
gion, it has the ** promise of the life that now
is," as well as of that which is to come. Calvin.
-A. F I=» E iTID 1 22:.
Of Vows.
Chap. XXVII. 1-34.
1, 2 And the Loed spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, and
say unto them. When a man shall make a singular vow, the persons shall be for
the Lord by thy estimation [speciaP vow, the souls shall be to the Lord according
3 to an^ estimation]. And thy' estimation shall be of the male from twenty years
old even unto sixty years old, even thy' estimation shall be fifty shekels of silver,
4 after the shekel of the sanctuary. And if it be a female, then thy' estimation shall
5 be thirty shekels. And if it be from five years old even unto twenty years old, then
thy' estimation shall be of the male twenty shekels, and for the female ten shekels.
6 And if it be for a month old even unto five years old, then thy' estimation shall be
of the male five shekels of silver, and for the female thy' estimation shaU be three
7 shekels of silver. And if it be from sixty years old and above ; if it be a male,
8 then thy' estimation shall be fifteen shekels, and for the female ten shekels. But
if he be poorer than thy' [be too poor to pay the'] estimation, then he shall present
himself before the priest, and the priest shall value him : according to his ability
that vowed shall the priest value him.
9 And if it be a beast, whereof men bring an ofiering unto the Lord, all that any
10 man giveth of such unto the Loed shall be holy. He shall not alter it, nor change
it, a good for a bad, or a bad for a good : and if he shall at all change beast for
11 beast, then it and the exchange thereof shall be holy. And if it be any unclean
beast, of which they do not offer a sacrifice [an offering'] unto the Loed, then he
TEXTUAL AND GEAMMATICAL.
* Ver. 2. " ^^J N^/Sn does Dot mean to dedicate or set apart a tow, bnt to make a special vow." Keil.
* Vera. 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, etc. " The second 3 in ?|3'ljf3 is formatiTe of the noun, by rednplication of the third radical ;
It is not the pronominal Butfix." Horsley. "The Heb. suljat. 'j'ljf, estimation or voZue, is never found in Scripture, but with
the pronoun of the second person joined to it ; and which is an etepletive, having no use but to distinguish it from the mean*
ing of an ordinance, or laying in order." Delgado. According to FUrst "the «l^. refers to the person valued." The T.YY,
Onls., Tulg. and Syr, omit the pronoun altogether.
» Ver. 11. ]3-|p. See Textual Note > on ii. 1.
CHAP. XXVII. 1-34. 2J1
f!*'),P'"^ent the beast before the priest: and the priest shall value [estimate*! it
13 r=7; !■ , %?u°^ °^ ^f '■ ^? ^^^J" y^^"^'* ^*' ^^"■"'^ t'le priest [according to the'
sh^lT ^„hT "Xi^" P'ffu^' 'V^4' \^f ^^* "■ ^^ ^^^1 ^-^ ^11 ^^deem it, then he
snail add a fifth ^ar< thereof unto thy' estimation.
14 And when a man shall sanctify his house to be holy unto the Lord then the
priest shall estimate it whether it be good or bad: as the priest shall estimate it,
AA.^^^ It stand. And if he that sanctified it will redeem his house, then he shall
1ft A <^°e.J"'ii'«»'' of tae money of thy' estimation unto it, and it shall be his.
r- T"^ ■/ S^°, , sanctify unto the Lord some pari of a field of his possession
[inheritance'], then thy' estimation shall be according to the seed thereof: an homer
i^ of barley seed sW^ be valued at fifty shekels of silver. 'If he sanctify his field from
18 the year of jubile,_ according to thy' estimation it shall stand. But if he sanctify
his field after the jubile, then the priest shall reckon unto him the money according
,„ *P the years that remain, even unto the year of the jubile, and it shall be abated
19 from thy estimation. And if he that sanctified the field will in apy wise redeem
It, then he shall add the Mthpart of the money of thy' estimation v unto it, and it
20 shall be assured to him. And if he will not redeem the field, or if he have sold the
21 field to another man, it shall not be redeemed any more. But the field, when it
goeth out in the jubile, shall be holy unto the Lord, as a field devoted;' the pos-
22 session [inheritance^] thereof shall be the priest's. And if a man sanctify unto the
Lord a field which he hath bought, which is not of the fields of his possession
23 [inheritance*] ; then the priest shall reckon unto him the worth of thy' estimation,
ewew unto the year of the jubile: and he shall give thine' estimation in that day,
24 cw a holy thing unto the Lord. In the year of the jubile the field shall return
unto him of whom it was bought, even to him to whom the possession [inheritancb']
of the land did belong.
25 And all thy' estimations shall be according to the shekel of the sanctuary :
twenty gerahs shall be the shekel.
26 Only the firatling of the beasts, which should be the Lord's firstling, no man
shall sanctify it ; whether it be ox, or sheep [one of the flock'], it is the Lord's.
27 And if it be of an unclean beast, then he shall redeem [free*] it according to thine'
estimation, and shall add a fifth part of it thereto : or if it be not redeemed, then it
shall be sold according to thy' estimation.
28 Notwithstanding no devoted thing, that a man shall devote unto the Lord of
all that he hath, both of man and beast, and of the field of his possession, shall be
29 sold or redeemed : every devoted thing is most holy unto the Lord. None devoted,
which shall be devoted of men, shall be redeemed [freed*], but shall surely be put
to death.
30 And all the tithe of the land, whether of the seed of the land, or of the fruit of
31 the tree, is the Lord's : it is holy unto the Lord. And if a man will at all redeem
ought of his tithes, he shall add thereto the fifth part thereof.
32 And concerning the tithe of the herd, or of the flock, even of whatsoever passeth
33 under the rod, the tenth shall be holy unto the Lord. He shall not search whe-
ther it be good or bad, neither shall he change it : and if he change it at all, then
both it and the change thereof shall be holy ; it shall not be redeemed.
84 These are the commandments, which the Lord commanded Moses for the chil-
dren of Israel in mount Sinai.
* Yer. 12. FoZitofum is quite as good a translation of 7|1j?; but afi the A. V. has esUmation in all other plactis in this
chapter, it should be retained here.
^ Ver. 16. ')r)^r\i^=poS8''s8ion here m^a-ns possewion by inharitanoe, and it ia better to marls this in the translation as
pnrrhased fields (ver. 22) come under another law.
* Ver. 17. A conjunction is here supplied by the Sam., 16 MSS., rds in the law but seldom (Num. xviii.
14; Deut. vii. 26, 6m; xiii. 17). It is introduced
as a term already familiar. It is translated by
various words in the A. V. (as curse, accursed,
dedicated, devoted, appointed to utter destruction,
etc.), but etymologioally and by usage always
means irrevocably cut off from all common use-
in the case of persons, devoted to destruction — in
the case of things entirely surrendered to the
Lord to be disposed of at His will. "What
was devoted could never be offered in sacri-
fice; but in all places where mention is else-
where made of the ban laid on any thing (Num.
xviii. 14; xxxi. ; Deut. ii. 34; xiii. 12-18; xxv.
19 ; Josh. vi. 17-19 ; Mai. iv. 6) this appears as
a dedication to destruction, as a fulfilling of the
Divine vengeance, as an honoring of God on
those in whom He cannot show Himself holy and
glorious." Von Qerlach. In regard to inani-
mate objects the meaning is therefore clear
enough ; but the expression -which shall be
devoted of men (ver. 29) has been the occa-
sion of some difficulty. This much is certainly
plain: that the sentence of cherem once pro-
nounced was absolutely irrevocable, and in 1
Sam. XV. 21, 33, we have an instance of the pro-
phet's indignant rebuke of the attempt to set it
aside. Beyond this, the only instances of the
cherem in Scripture are those which rested upon
an express Divine command. Jephthah's vow
does not come under this category at all, for that
was a vow either to offer a burnt offering, or to
devote to the Lord ; but the cherem is not treated
as a vow at all, and is separated from ordinary
vows by being irredeemable. The general sense
of the passage, historically interpreted, is there-
fore that man may not interfere to thwart the
purpose of the Almighty : Jehovah's sentence of
destruction must aiways be unflinchiogly carried
out. Ver. 28, however, clearly asserts that an
individual man might devote persons belonging
to him in the same way that he could his ani-
mals or fields, while ver. 29 requires that any
one so devoted must be put to death. The mean-
ing of this very mysterious provision must be
gathered from the historical instances of the che-
rem. It could have applied only to the devoting
of those who were already manifestly under the
ban of Jehovah — those guilty of such outrageous
and flagrant violation of the fundamental law of
the covenant that they manifestly came under
the penalty of death. Such persons, instead of
being tried and condemned, might be at once
devoted and put to death. Lange's exegesis
is as follows: " That which had been placed un-
der the ban was absolutely irredeemable. No ob-
ject was banned, however, or consecrated to Je-
hovah by an irrevocable reversion (for the use
of the Sanctuary in the case" of impersonal things,
or for death instead of capital punishment in the
case of persons) through any private will ; only
.IihoTih, or the community in His service, exe-
cuted the ban. The various particulars of the
ban are explained by Knobel, p. 588." See also
Selden de Jure Gent. IV., vi.-xi.; Waterland
Scripture vindicated. Works IV., p. 226-229.
Vers. 30-33. Tithes also are to be excluded
from the possible subjects of vows, since they
already belonged to the Lord ; in certain cases,
however, they might be redeemed like vows.
The tithe, like the thing devoted, is referred to
as something already familiar. From Abra-
ham's tithe to Molchizedec (Gen. xiv. 20) and
Jacob's vow (Gen. xxviii. 22), and probably from
still far earlier times, it had been immemorially
an essential part of the worship of God. The
tithe is here spoken of, therefore, not for the
purpose of enjoining it, but to exclude it from
vows, and to prescribe how far and under what
conditions, like vows, it might be redeemed. In
Nutn. xviii. 20-32; Deut. xii. 6, 11 ; xiv. 22, di-
rections are given as to the use and the collec-
tion of the tithes. "According to Rabbinical
tradition, the animals to be tithed were enclosed
in a pen, and as they went out, one by one at
the opening, every tenth animal was touched
with a rod dipped in vermilion. Comp. Jereta.
xxxiii. 13; Ezek. xx. 37." Clark. The tithe was
applied, of course, only to the increase of the
flock and the herd, i. e., to animals which had
never been tithed before. Lange : " It must not
be overlooked that the tithes were a ground-rent
in favor of the hierarchy, primarily of the Le-
vites, who again must themselves pay tithes to
the priest ; and were also a perpetual theocratic
civil tax which could not properly be maintained
in Christian times by the side of other taxes,
notwithstanding the strong Old Testament dispo-
sition of the middle ages in this matter. It is
easy to see that at the present day, by the side
of the modern forms of voluntary and involun-
tary taxes, ecclesiastical and secular, tithes can
only be claimed by an overstrained literal zeal."
The law (32, 33) absolutely forbade the redemp-
tion or exchange of the tithe of sacrificial ani-
mals, as in case of a vow ; other tithes were also
under the same law as the vow, and mijjht be
redeemed by the payment of their value with one-
fifth in addition.
Ver. 34 closes this appendix, and forms, as it
were, a second close to the whole book of Levi-
ticus, the aim and object of which has been holi-
ness — holiness to be typically acquired by the
sacrificial system prescribed to point to " the
Lord our righteousness ;" and to be preserved by
those many legal enactments superadded to the
great law of faith, " because of transgressions,
until the promised seed should come."
DOCTEINAL AND ETHICAL.
I. In the law for the redemption of personal
vows is again brought out very strongly the
equality of all men before God. Differences were
made according to sex and age, but none accord-
ing to social position and rank. The redemption
for the high-priest himself was precisely the
same as for the day-laborer.
II. In the prohibition of vows of the first-born,
of tithes, etc., which already belonged to the
Lord, the general principle is taught that man
may not make that a matter of extraordinary
piety which already forma a part of his ordinary
duty. In a sense this would absolutely exclude
all vows, since the Christian requirement is that
we should devote ourselves with all that we have
to Him who gave Himself for us, and indeed the
highest standard of the Christian life, making
206
LEVITICUS.
of that life itself one perpetual vow, neoeasarily
supercedes all minor vows ; but nevertheless
practically, special dedications of ourselves and
ours may be made, and when made are to be sa-
credly kept. See Eool. v. 4, 6.
III. Here as elsewhere Moses is made only
the channel and instrument by whom the laws
are given ; their authorship is expressly referred
to the Lord Himself. Accepting this as a truth,
the wonderful character of this legislation occa-
sions no diffiouliy; but if with the negative cri-
tics, it be denied and the legislation be referred
to human authorship, we have in this book the
impossible phenomenon of a legislation wholly
occupied with the promotion of holiness, and
yet stamped with fraud and deliberate forgery
upon its very front. We have also a legislation
far superior to that of any nation of antiquity,
and indeed morally superior to any that has
ever existed except under the influence of Chris-
tianity, proceeding from a people whose history
shows them to have been unfitted for the concep-
tion, much more the enactment of even a very
inferior code.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL.
Lange: "The religious observance of vows.
Before all things man must not be willing to
cheat Jehovah; also he must be thoroughly ho-
nest and true in his vows, his professions, his
fasts, his devotion, and his religious duties gen-
erally."
Also under exegetical : " The importance of
these prescriptions is that they oppose all un-
manliness in relation to a pledged word, confir-
maLion vows, marriage vows, ordination vows,
false discharge of fasting that has been vowed
by fish-eating and the like ; the removal of all
evasions of criminal justice and of churchly dis-
cipline, and finally, of all frauds in regard to
the duties which one owes to the cultus and to
the religious rights of the community. The or-
dinance concerning the irremissibility of various
actions shows clearly that there can be a true
freedom within this obligation. The sanctifioa-
tion of manliness — thus might the whole section
be entitled."
Also under the same : " It is an old story that
worldliness, cunning, and impiety, very willingly
put obstructions in the way of religious, theo-
cratic, and ecclesiastical discharge of duty, and
the complaints of the Old Testament of the want
of manliness in this matter, which was connected
with dimness of faith in the Omniscient, have
been continually repeated even to the present.
But here Jehovah, who deals faithfully and re-
liably with His holy people, approaches with the
demand in regard to them, that they should hold
themselves holy, and faithful, and trustworthy
in all their business in regard to Him. If moral
laxity begins first in concealments in relation to
God and His institutions, it will diffuse itself
more widely until it completes its process of dis-
solution in religious and moral deceptions, espe-
cially in the province of all religious and moral
vows."
TOHTS Eisrx).
mmm^
x»m