| Back to Home Page | Back to Book Index
|
Exodus Chapter
Twenty-two
New King James Version
(NKJV)
INTRODUCTION TO
EXODUS 22
This chapter contains
various laws concerning theft
Exodus 22:1
concerning damage done to fields and vineyards by beasts
and to corn in stacks
or standing
by fire
Exodus 22:5
concerning anything or creature deposited in the hands of a neighbour
and they
be stolen or lost by one means or another
Exodus 22:7
concerning anything borrowed
and it comes to any damage
Exodus 22:14
concerning fornication
Exodus 22:16
concerning witchcraft
bestiality
and idolatry
Exodus 22:18
concerning oppression
and affliction of the stranger
fatherless
and widow
Exodus 22:21 concerning
taking usury and pledges
Exodus 22:25
concerning irreverence to magistrates
Exodus 22:28
concerning the offering of firstfruits to God
Exodus 22:29 and
the chapter is concluded with a prohibition of eating anything torn by beasts
Exodus 22:31
Exodus 22:1 “If
a man steals an ox or a sheep
and slaughters it or sells it
he shall restore
five oxen for an ox and four sheep for a sheep.
YLT 1`When a man doth steal an ox or sheep
and
hath slaughtered it or sold it
five of the herd he doth repay for the ox
and
four of the flock for the sheep.
If a man shall
steal an ox or a sheep
.... In which the substance of men chiefly lay in those times
and particularly the people of Israel
who were now come out of Egypt
with
their flocks and herds
and these lying near together
were the more liable to
be stolen; and hence also the laws in the preceding chapter concerning oxen and
damages done by them
and oxen and sheep are only mentioned; perhaps chiefly
because used in sacrifice
as well as serviceable for other things; not but
that stealing other cattle and other things were criminal and forbidden
and to
be punished in proportion:
and kill it
or
sell it; either of which cases would plainly show that he took it away
with an intention to deprive the owner of it
and to convert it to his own use:
he shall
restore five oxen for an ox
and four sheep for a sheep; the reason of
this difference
five being obliged to be given for the one
and but four for
the other
is
because the one was more valuable than the other
as well as
more useful
and also more easily stolen
and therefore the greater mulct or
fine was laid upon the theft of it
to deter from it: the Targum of Jonathan
expresses the reason of the law thus; five for oxen
because the theft of them
hindered from ploughing
or made to cease from it; and for sheep but four
because there was trouble in the theft of them
and there was no tillage or
agriculture by them: and Saadiah Gaon observes
that the damage that comes to
the owner of the ox is more than that by a lamb
because with it
the ox
he
ploughs
which is a creature that was used in those countries to be employed in
that service
as well as in treading out the corn: MaimonidesF21Moreh
Nevochim
par. 3. c. 41. accounts for it thus
"the restitution of the
theft of oxen is increased by one
because the theft of them is easy; sheep are
fed in flocks
and are easily kept and watched
and can scarcely be taken away
by theft but in the night; but oxen are fed scattered here and there
and
therefore cannot be so easily kept by the herdsmen; hence also their theft used
to be more common:'four fold restitution was in use with the ancient Persians
with whom it was a rule
"whoever took any substance of another
in
retaliation they took fourfold from him
and if he restored it
he gave fourfold
of the sameF23Lib. Shed-dar
apud Hyde Relig. Vet. Pers. p. 472. .'
Exodus 22:2 2 If
the thief is found breaking in
and he is struck so that he dies
there
shall be no guilt for his bloodshed.
YLT 2`If in the breaking through
the thief is
found
and he hath been smitten
and hath died
there is no blood for him;
If a thief be
found breaking up
.... An house
in order to steal money
jewels
household goods
&c. or breaking through any fence
hedge
or wall of any enclosure
where
oxen
or sheep
or any other creatures are
in order to take them away: the
Targum of Jonathan is
"if in the hole of a wall (or window of it) a thief
be found;'that is
in the night
as appears from the following verse
"if
the sun"
&c. to which this is opposed
as Aben Ezra observes; some
render it
with a digging instrumentF24במחתרת
"cum perfossorio"
Pagninus; "cum instrumento perfosserio"
Tigurine version. ; and it is a Jewish canonF25Misn. Sanhedrin
c.
8. sect. 6.
that"if anyone enter with a digging instrument: he is
condemned on account of his end;'his design
which is apparent by the
instrument found upon him; for
as MaimonidesF26Comment. in ib.
observes
"it is well known
that if anyone enters with a digging
instrument
that he intends
if the master of the house opposes him to deliver
his goods out of his power
that he will kill him
and therefore it is lawful
to kill him; but it does not signify whether he enters with a digging
instrument
either by the way of the court
or roof;"
and be smitten
that he die be knocked down with a club
by the master of the house
or any
of his servants
or be run through with a sword
or be struck with any other
weapon
to hinder him from entrance and carrying off any of the goods of the
house
and the blow be mortal: there shall no blood be shed for him: as for a
man that is murdered; for to kill a man when breaking into a house
and
by all
appearance
with an intention to commit murder
if resisted
in defence of a
man's self
his life and property
was not to be reckoned murder
and so not
punishable with death: or
"no blood" shall be "unto him"F1אין לו דמים
"non ei sanguines"
Montanus
Vatablus
Drusius. ; shall be imputed
to him
the man that kills the thief shall not be chargeable with his blood
or
suffer for shedding it; because his own life was risked
and it being at such a
time
could call none to his assistance
nor easily discern the person
nor
could know well where and whom he struck.
Exodus 22:3 3 If
the sun has risen on him
there shall be guilt for his bloodshed. He
should make full restitution; if he has nothing
then he shall be sold for his
theft.
YLT 3if the sun hath risen upon him
blood [is]
for him
he doth certainly repay; if he have nothing
then he hath been sold
for his theft;
If the sun be
risen upon him
.... Either upon the thief
or upon the master of the house
or
the person that finds the thief and smites him that he dies; it matters not
which it is interpreted
it is true of both
for when it is risen on the one
it is on the other:
there shall be blood shed for him; the person that kills
him shall die for it: the Targum of Jonathan is
"if it is as clear as the
sun (and so Jarchi)
that not to kill any he entered
and he should kill him
there is guilt of shedding innocent blood:'because coming at broad daylight
and when the sun was up
it was a plain case he came not with a design to
murder
but only to steal; besides
being at such a time
the master of the
house could call for help and assistance
and take him; which is what is
suggested he should do
and not take away his life
but oblige him
if he had
got any of his goods
to restore them
as follows:
for he should
makes full restitution; by returning them and as much more
as the following verse
shows:
if he have
nothing
then he shall be sold for his theft
by the sanhedrim
or
court
of judicature: as the Targum of Jonathan
before whom he should be
brought
and the theft proved upon him
and unto the year of the remission or
release
as the same Targum; nor were such to be sold to strangers
or to serve
forever
for they were to be dismissed after six years
as JosephusF2Antiqu.
l. 16. c. 1. sect. 1. observes: and it is a canon with the JewsF3Maimon.
Abadim. c. 1. sect. 3.
that
"an Hebrew servant whom the sanhedrim sell
they do not sell him but to an Israelite
or to a proselyte of righteousness;'according
to the Targum of Jonathan
it seems as if he was to be sold to the person from
whom he stole
since it is
"he shall he sold to him;'but if not
however
the price he was sold at was to be given to him for a recompence of his loss;
so says MaimonidesF4Hilchot Genubah
c. 3. sect. 11.
"if he
have not goods
neither movable nor immovable the sanhedrim sell him
and give
the price to him that is injured
as it is said: "if he have
nothing"
&c. and adds
a man is sold for his theft but not a womanF5So
Misn. Sotah
c. 3. sect
8. :'from hence it appears that theft was not a
capital crime by the law of Moses: Draco is said to be the first who made it
so; but his law being thought by the Athenians to be too severe
was annulled
by themF6A. Gell Noct. Attic. l. 11. c. 18. : the law of the twelve
tables
with the Romans greatly agrees with the Mosaic laws about theft; these
permitted to kill a thief who should be taken in open theft
if either when he
committed the theft it was night or if in the daytime
and he defended himself
with weapons when about to be takenF7Ib. or
as elsewhere expressedF8Ib.
l. 20. c. 1.
an open thief was delivered to servitude to him who was robbed
but nocturnal thief it was lawful to kill by the law of the twelve tables.
Exodus 22:4 4 If
the theft is certainly found alive in his hand
whether it is an ox or donkey
or sheep
he shall restore double.
YLT 4if the theft is certainly found in his hand
alive
whether ox
or ass
or sheep -- double he repayeth.
If the theft be
certainly found in his hand alive
.... Or
"in finding
be found"F9המצא תמצא
"inveniendo inventum fuerit"
Pagninus
Montanus
Piscator.
be
plainly and evidently found upon him
before witnesses
as the Targum of
Jonathan; so that there is no doubt of the theft; and it is a clear case that
he had neither as yet killed nor sold the creature he had stolen
and to could
be had again directly
and without any damage well as it would appear by this
that he was not an old expert thief
and used to such practices
since he would
soon have made away with this theft in some way or another:
whether it be
ox
or ass
or sheep
or any other creature; and even
as Jarchi thinks
anything
else
as raiment
goods
&c.
he shall
restore double; two oxen for an ox
two asses for an ass
and two sheep for a
sheep: and
as the same commentator observes
two living ones
and not dead
ones
or the price of two living ones: so Solon made theft
by his law
punishable with death
but with a double restitutionF11A. Gell
l.
11. c. 18. ; and the reason why here only a double restitution and not fourfold
is insisted on
as in Exodus 22:1 is
because there the theft is persisted in
here not; but either the thief being
convicted in his own conscience of his evil
makes confession
or
however
the
creatures are found with alive
and so more useful being restored
and
being
had again sooner
the loss is not quite so great.
Exodus 22:5 5 “If
a man causes a field or vineyard to be grazed
and lets loose his animal
and
it feeds in another man’s field
he shall make restitution from the best of his
own field and the best of his own vineyard.
YLT 5`When a man depastureth a field or vineyard
and hath sent out his beast
and it hath pastured in the field of another
[of]
the best of his field
and the best of his vineyard
he doth repay.
If a man shall
cause a field or vineyard to be eaten
.... Which is not his
own
by putting cattle into it to feed upon it
as it is explained in the next
clause:
and shall put
in his beast
and shall feed in another man's field; do damage in
one or both those two ways
either by his feet treading down the grass and
fruits of the earth
which the Rabbins
as Jarchi says
think
is meant by
putting in his beast; or with his beast eating up the same
which is intended
by the latter phrase:
of the best of
his own field
and of the best of his own vineyard
shall he make restitution for what
damage is done by his beast in his neighbour's field or vineyard; and this held
good of any garden or orchard injured in like manner; and it is a general rule
with the Jews
that when any damage is sustained
he that does the damage is
obliged to pay with the best the earth producesF12Misc. Bava Kama
c. 1. sect. 1.
even though better than was the man's that suffered the loss
that for the future he might be more careful of doing injury to anotherF13Bartenora
in Misn. Gittin
c. 5. sect. 1. .
Exodus 22:6 6 “If
fire breaks out and catches in thorns
so that stacked grain
standing grain
or the field is consumed
he who kindled the fire shall surely make restitution.
YLT 6`When fire goeth forth
and hath found
thorns
and a stack
or the standing corn
or the field
hath been consumed
he
who causeth the burning doth certainly repay.
If fire break
out
.... Even though of itself
as Jarchi interprets it:
and catch in
thorns a thorn hedge or fence
with which cornfields might be en closed:
so that the
stacks of corn
or the standing corn
or the field
be consumed therewith; whether it be
corn cut down
bound up in sheaves
and laid up in heaps or stacks
or whether
it be yet growing
and not fully ripe
at least not cut down
or any other
fruits of the field; if the fire that takes the thorns which are near them
should reach to those
and kindle upon them and destroy them:
he that
kindleth the fire
shall surely make restitution: that is
though he
kindles the fire upon his own ground
yet being careless of it
it breaks out
without his intention and design
and catches hold on a thorn hedge between him
and his neighbour's field
and so spreads itself to the corn there
whether
standing or in stacks
or to other fruits either lying or growing there; now
though he did not kindle the fire in the corn
and among the stacks or heaps of
fruit in his neighbours field
yet
for his carelessness in not looking after the
fire he had kindled in his own field
he was to make good all the damages his
neighbour sustained hereby: the Jewish canons relating to this affair are
these;"if a man kindles a fire by the hands of a deaf man
or a fool
or a
child
he is free by human judgment
but he is bound by the judgment of heaven
(that is
to make restitution); if he kindles it by the hand of a knowing and
understanding man
he is bound; one brings fire and another
"afterwards" brings wood
he that brings the wood is bound; one brings
wood and another "afterwards" brings fire
he that brings the fire is
bound; "after that"
another comes and blows the flame (or fire)
he
is bound; "but if" the wind blows it they are all free; he that
kindles fire and it consumes wood or stones
or dust
he is bound
as it is
said
Exodus 22:6
"if fire break out"
&c. if the fire passes over a fence four
cubits high
or a public road
or a river
he is freeF14Bartenora in
Misn. Gittin
c. 5. sect. 4. ;'those two things last mentioned
feeding on
another man's field and fire
with the ox and the pit
observed in the
preceding chapter
are with the Misnic doctorsF15Ib. c. 1. sect. 1.
the four fathers' fountains
or sources of damages.
Exodus 22:7 7 “If
a man delivers to his neighbor money or articles to keep
and it is stolen out
of the man’s house
if the thief is found
he shall pay double.
YLT 7`When a man doth give unto his neighbour
silver
or vessels to keep
and it hath been stolen out of the man's house; if
the thief is found
he repayeth double.
If a man shall
deliver unto his neighbour money or stock to keep
.... Without
any reward for keeping it
as the Targum of Jonathan; and so other Jewish
writersF16Jarchi in ver. 10. Bartenora in Misn. Shebuot
c. 6. sect.
5. understand this passage of such as keep a deposit freely
having nothing for
it; whether it be money or goods
gold
silver
jewels
raiment
household
stuff or any kind of vessels or instruments used in the house
or in trade; and
also cattle
as appears from Exodus 22:9.
and if it be
stolen out of the man's house; into whose custody it was delivered:
if the thief be
found
let him pay double: the worth of what is stolen
agreeably to
the law in Exodus 22:4 that
is
if it was found in his hands; but if he had disposed of it
then he was to
pay five fold or four fold
as in Exodus 22:1
and so
runs the Jewish canonF17Misn. Bava Metzia
c. 3. sect. 1.
"if
anyone delivers to his neighbour a beast or vessels
and they are stolen or
lost
he shall make restitution; but if he will not swear
for they say
one
that keeps for nothing
may swear and be free; then if the thief should be
found he shall pay double; if he has killed or sold
he shall pay four fold or
five fold: to whom shall he pay? to him with whom the depositum is: if he
swears
and will not pay
and the thief is found
he shall pay double; if he
has killed or sold he shall pay four fold and five fold: to whom shall he pay?
to the owner of the depositum.'
Exodus 22:8 8 If
the thief is not found
then the master of the house shall be brought to the
judges to see whether he has put his hand into his neighbor’s goods.
YLT 8`If the thief is not found
then the master
of the house hath been brought near unto God
whether he hath not put forth his
hand against the work of his neighbour;
If the thief be
not found
.... And so no account can be given of the goods deposited
what
is become of them
and it becomes a doubtful case whether they have been stolen
or embezzled
and there is suspicion of the latter:
then the master
of the house shall be brought unto the judges: here called Elohim
gods
because they were God's vicegerents
and represented him
and acted under
his power and authority; and who at this present were Moses
and those that
judged the people under him
and afterwards the seventy elders
and all such
who in succeeding times were judges in Israel
and bore the office of civil
magistrates; before these the master of the house
or the person who had any
goods committed to his care
and they were lost
was to be brought and put to
his oath
and upon it examined
in order to find out what was become of the
goods committed to him: to see whether he has put his hand to his neighbour's
goods: took them to himself
made use of them
or disposed of them to his own
advantage
and which was no other than a kind of theft.
Exodus 22:9 9 “For
any kind of trespass
whether it concerns an ox
a donkey
a sheep
or
clothing
or for any kind of lost thing which another claims to
be his
the cause of both parties shall come before the judges; and
whomever the judges condemn shall pay double to his neighbor.
YLT 9for every matter of transgression
for ox
for ass
for sheep
for raiment
for any lost thing of which it is said that it
is his; unto God cometh the matter of them both; he whom God doth condemn
he
repayeth double to his neighbour.
For all manner
of trespass
.... With respect to what is committed to a man's trust
and it
is lost to the owner of it
there must be somewhere or other a trespass
committed
either by the person into whose hands it was put
or by a thief that
has stolen it from him:
whether it be
for ox
for ass
for sheep
for raiment
or for any manner of lost thing by which it
appears that either of these
or any other cattle not named
as well as money
and vessels
or household goods
or goods in trade
were sometimes
or might be
lodged in the hands of another as a depositum for safety or convenience; and
for which
or any other so deposited
and lost:
which another
challengeth to be his
or affirms that he put into the hands of his neighbour
to be
kept by him for him; "or who shall say this is he"
or "he
is" the person into whose hands I put it
or this is "it"F18אשר יאמר כי
הוא זה "qui dixerit
quod illud hoc"
Montanus; "quum dixerit illud ipsum esse"
Junius & Tremellius; "de qua dixerit aliquis illum ipsum esse"
Piscator; so Ainsworth. ; such and such were the thing or things I delivered to
him:
the cause of
both parties shall come before the judges; who were to hear what
each party had to say
and to examine the witnesses each of them brought
and
consider the nature of the evidence given
and to judge and determine:
and whom the
judges shall condemn; or "pronounce wicked"F19ירשיען
Vid. Ainsworth.
as having done a wicked thing; either the one as having
brought a false accusation against his neighbour
charging him with a depositum
he never had
or the other as having converted it to his own use:
he shall pay
double unto his neighbour; either the depositor
who pretended to be
so and was not
but brought a false charge against his neighbour
or a false
witness
as Jarchi
such as one was to pay double to the person charged
wrongfully; or
on the other hand
the person with whom the depositum was put
if it appeared that he had acted a fraudulent part
and abused his trust
then
he was to pay double to the depositor.
Exodus 22:10 10 If
a man delivers to his neighbor a donkey
an ox
a sheep
or any animal to keep
and it dies
is hurt
or driven away
no one seeing it
YLT 10`When a man doth give unto his neighbour an
ass
or ox
or sheep
or any beast to keep
and it hath died
or hath been
hurt
or taken captive
none seeing –
If a man
deliver to his neighbour an ass
or an ox
or a sheep
or any beast to keep
.... And he
keeps it without a reward
as the Targum of Jonathan; but Jarchi and Aben Ezra
more rightly interpret this of one that keeps for hire
as herdsmen
shepherds
&c. The Jews sayF20Misn. Bava Metzia
c. 7. sect. 8. there
are"four sorts of keepers; he that keeps for nought (or freely)
he that
borrows
he that takes hire
and he that hires; he that keeps for nought swears
in all cases (and is free)
he that borrows pays for all (that is lost or
stolen
&c.) he that takes hire
and he that hires
swear on account of
that which is torn
or carried away
or dies
and they pay for that which is
lost or stolen
'which are the cases after supposed:
and it die; either of the
above
or any other under the care of another; that is
dies of itself
not
being killed by any
and its death sudden
and not easily accounted for:
or be hurt; receive any
damage in any part
though it die not; or "be broken"F21נשבר "confractum"
Pagninus
Montanus;
"fractum"
Junius & Tremelius
Piscator
Drusius; so Ainsworth. ;
have any of its limbs or bones broken; or be torn by a wild beast
as the
Targum of Jonathan adds:
or driven away; from the
flock or herd by thieves or robbers
or rather carried captive by an enemy in
an hostile way
see Exodus 22:12
no man seeing
it; die
or be hurt
or carried off; and so
as the above Targum
paraphrases it
there is no witness that sees and can bear witness
that is
to
any of the said things which have happened to it.
Exodus 22:11 11 then
an oath of the Lord
shall be between them both
that he has not put his hand into his neighbor’s
goods; and the owner of it shall accept that
and he shall not make it
good.
YLT 11an oath of Jehovah is between them both
that
he hath not put forth his hand against the work of his neighbour
and its owner
hath accepted
and he doth not repay;
Then shall an
oath of the Lord be between them both
.... Either by the one
the keeper
for the satisfaction of the owner
or by them both; by the owner
that he delivered such and such cattle to the keeper; and by the keeper
that
he was no ways concerned in the death
hurt
or carrying off of the same: and
this is called "the oath of the Lord"
not only because in this law
required by him
but because sworn by him
or in his name
and made before him
in his presence
who is hereby appealed unto; and who is called upon to take
vengeance on the person that takes the oath of perjury; and such an oath only
is a lawful one
men are to swear only by the Lord. But this oath was not
tendered to anyone:"if a man was suspected of an oath (i.e. of perjury)
they might not give him his oath
neither the oath of the law
nor the oath
from their words (the scribes)
nor the oath of imposition (imposed by the wise
wen); and even though he that brought the action would have it
they might not
hearken unto him: if a man has swore falsely a rash oath
or an oath of
testimony
or an oath concerning anything deposited
or a vain oath
lo
he is
suspected of an oath
and so everyone that is rejected for witness on account
of any transgressionF23Maimon. Hilchot Toan Venitan
c. 2. sect.
1
2. .'The oath to be taken by the keeper
and who indeed seems to be the only
person that was to take one
was
"that he hath not put his hand unto his
neighbour's goods"; so as either to kill or maim
or drive away
or suffer
to be driven away
any of the cattle committed to his care
or that he had not
disposed of them to his own use and profit:
and the owner
of it shall accept thereof; of the oath
as the Targum of Jonathan and
Jarchi
and so be satisfied
and give no further trouble
such an oath being
for the confirmation of the thing
and to put an end to strife; or he shall
take the ass
ox
or sheep
as it was
and be content; but then
though he
might take the dead or maimed one
he could not take that which was driven or
carried away
wherefore the first sense
is best:
and he shall
not make it good; or pay for it to the owner what it was worth.
Exodus 22:12 12 But
if
in fact
it is stolen from him
he shall make restitution to the owner of
it.
YLT 12but if it is certainly stolen from him
he
doth repay to its owner;
And if it be
stolen from him
.... Or "but if"F24כי
אם "si autem"
Drusius. it was taken away
by theft; and that "from with him"F25מעמו
"e cum eo"
Montanus.
as it may be literally rendered
from among
his own cattle
and they not taken; and he being present
pretending to have an
eye upon them and keep them
but was careless and negligent
at least
if he
did not connive at the theft:
he shall make
restitution to the owner thereof; for in such a case there
was ground for suspicion of fraud; however
there was apparent carelessness
and it was but just he should make restitution
since he had hire or wages for
keeping it; which is the reason Aben Ezra gives for it
and is suggested by the
Targum of Jonathan; which adds to the former clause
by way of
explanation
"that which was with him to be kept for a reward.'
Exodus 22:13 13 If
it is torn to pieces by a beast
then he shall bring it as evidence
and
he shall not make good what was torn.
YLT 13if it is certainly torn
he bringeth it in --
a witness; the torn thing he doth not repay.
If it be torn
in pieces
.... By some wild beast
at least as pretended:
then let him bring it for witness; part of that which is
torn
that it may be witness for him that it was torn
as in Amos 3:12 as Aben
Ezra observes; and so the Jerusalem Targurn
"let him bring of the members
of it a witness
'which would make it a clear case that it had been so used; but
it is possible that the whole carcass might be carried off
and nothing remain
to be brought as a proof of it; wherefore the Targum of Jonathan is
"let
him bring witnesses;'and so some versions render itF26יבאהו עד "adducet eum
testem"
Pagninus
Montanus; "adducat ille testem"
Munster
Fagius. ; and to this agrees Jarchi
whose note is
"let him bring
witnesses of its being torn by violence
and he is free
'such who saw it done;
but it is before supposed
that such cattle may be hurt
broken
or maimed
no
man seeing it
Exodus 22:10 and
therefore in such a case no witnesses could be brought
wherefore the first sense
seems best:
and he shall not make good that which was torn; or shall not
pay for it
pay the price of it
as much as it is worth. Here Jarchi
distinguishes
"there is that which is torn
for which a man pays
and
there is that which is torn
for which he does not pay; that which is torn by a
cat
or a fox
or a marten (a kind of weasel)
he pays for
but that which is
torn by a wolf
a lion
or a bear
he does not pay for:'the reason of which is
because it is thought the keeper might have preserved and delivered from the
former
and therefore was culpable
when it was not in his power to save from
the latter; and the Misnic doctors observe
that one wolf is not violence
but
two are; so that what is torn by one
the keeper is bound to pay for
but not what
is torn by more. But two dogs are not violence
unless they come from two
different quarters
and then they are: a single thief is violence
and so is a
lion
a bear
a leopard
a basilisk
and a serpent
and this only when they
come willingly
and of themselves; but if they (the cattle) are brought to
places where there are troops of wild beasts
and thieves
it is no violenceF1Misn.
Bava Metzia
c. 7. sect. 9.
and in such a case the keepers are liable to pay;
and so unless he makes use of staves
and calls in other shepherds to his
assistance
as MaimonidesF2Hilchot Shecirat
c. 3. sect. 6.
observes
when it is in his power to do it; and so at least might make an
attempt to save or rescue the cattle.
Exodus 22:14 14 “And
if a man borrows anything from his neighbor
and it becomes injured or
dies
the owner of it not being with it
he shall surely make it
good.
YLT 14`And when a man doth ask [anything] from his
neighbour
and it hath been hurt or hath died -- its owner not being with it --
he doth certainly repay;
And if a man
borrow ought of his neighbour
.... Any beast
as it
should seem
as an ox to plough with
an ass
horse
or camel to ride on
though
the Jewish writers carry it also to any kind of household stuff:
and if he be
hurt or die; if any damage comes to it
or it dies while it is in the
borrower's hands
and when employed in that work for which he borrowed it; the
Targum of Jonathan is
"and the vessel should be broke
or the beast
die:'and the owner thereof being not with it; at the time of its being hurt
or
of its death
and so could not be so well satisfied whether used well or not
nor how the damage and death came to it:
he shall surely
make it good; pay the full price for it it is worth; which
though it may seem
hard
was necessary
in order to make men careful of things they borrowed
and
that lenders may not be losers for their kindness.
Exodus 22:15 15 If
its owner was with it
he shall not make it good; if it was
hired
it came for its hire.
YLT 15if its owner [is] with it
he doth not repay
-- if it [is] a hired thing
it hath come for its hire.
But if the
owner thereof be with it
.... When it is hurt or dies; for in some cases the owner might
go along with his beast
being borrowed or hired to do work with it; or
however
being upon the spot
must be satisfied that it was not ill used; and
it may be reasonably presumed he would do all he could to preserve it: and this
being the case:
he shall not
make it good; that is
the borrower
but the loss would lie upon the lender;
seeing this might have been the case if it had been at home
and not borrowed
or lent. The Jewish writers understand all this in a different manner
that if
the owner is not with it in the time of borrowing
though he is with it in the
time of its being hurt
or of its death
the borrower must pay; but if he was with
it in the time of borrowing
though not in the time of its receiving damage
or
of its death
the borrower was freeF3Misn. Bava Metzia
c. 8. sect.
1. Maimon. & Bartenora in ib. ; for
as Jarchi says
whether it be in that
work (for which he was borrowed)
or in another work (it matters not)
if he
was with it at the time of borrowing
there was no necessity of his being with
it at the time of its hurt or death. The reason of which
I must confess
I do
not understand; unless the meaning is
that it was necessary that the owner
and the beast
should be both borrowed or hired together; and which indeed
seems to be the sense of the Misnah
or traditionF4Ibid.
which
runs thus
"if a man borrows a cow
and borrows or hires its owner with it;
or if he hires or borrows the owner
and after that borrows the cow
and it
dies
he is free
as it is said
Exodus 22:15 but if
he borrows the cow
and afterwards borrows or hires the owner
and it dies
he
is bound to pay
as it is said
Exodus 22:13 if his
owner is not with it
&c.'If it be an hired thing
it came for its hire;
that is
if the beast which was come to some damage
or was dead
was hired
and not borrowed
then
whether the owner was with it or not at that time
he
could demand no more than hire
and the person that hired it was obliged to pay
that and no more; or if the owner himself was hired along with his beast
and
so was present when it received its damage
or its death
nothing more could
come to him than what he agreed for.
Exodus 22:16 16 “If
a man entices a virgin who is not betrothed
and lies with her
he shall surely
pay the bride-price for her to be his wife.
YLT 16`And when a man doth entice a virgin who [is]
not betrothed
and hath lain with her
he doth certainly endow her to himself
for a wife;
And if a man
entice a maid
that is not betrothed
.... For one might be
betrothed according to the custom of those times
and not be married
or the
nuptials consummated
and so be yet a maid or virgin; but being betrothed
it
made the case different
because such an one was as a wife to a man: but the
case here supposed is of a maid not betrothed
and also not forced
but
yielding to the solicitations of a man
as is implied by her being enticed;
which signifies his gaining upon her affections
and obtaining her consent by
expressing strong affection for her
and making large promises to her
and so
both by words and gestures prevailing with her to yield to his desire:
and lie with
her; in a way of carnal copulation; and such an action between two
single persons
by consent
is what is called simple fornication: if this was
done in a field
the maid was supposed to be forced
since there she might cry
out
and not be heard; but if in a city
she is supposed to be enticed
and
consent
since if she cried out she might be heard; this the Jewish writers
gather from Deuteronomy 22:23
though the law there respects a betrothed damsel:
he shall surely
endow her to be his wife; give her a dowry in order to be his wife
or
however
such an
one as he would or must give if she became his wife
even one suitable to her
rank and dignity
whether he married her or not; for he was not obliged to it
whether he would or not
and in some cases could not if he would
as follows.
Exodus 22:17 17 If
her father utterly refuses to give her to him
he shall pay money according to
the bride-price of virgins.
YLT 17if her father utterly refuse to give her to
him
money he doth weigh out according to the dowry of virgins.
If her father
utterly refuse to give her unto him
.... For wife
either
because of his character
family
or circumstances; or
however
being
disagreeable to him on one account or another
and therefore will by no means
agree to marry his daughter to him
and not only give him an absolute denial
but resolutely persist in it: the Targum of Jonathan has it
"if it seems
not good to him;'if he do not like nor choose to marry her; and some add also
if she herself do not approve of marrying him:
he shall pay
money according to the dowry of virgins; as virgins on marriage
have usually given them
according to their rank and dignity: here is no sum
fixed
but the Targum of Jonathan is
"he shall be mulcted in fifty shekels
of silver
'which is taken from Deuteronomy 22:29
though that seems to be not altogether a like case with this; for though it
respects a virgin not betrothed
as here
yet one that has been forced
and
therefore the man was obliged to marry her
and never put her away; and the mulct
or fine was to be paid to the damsel's father and not to her: the Septuagint
version here says
it was to be paid to the father.
Exodus 22:18 18 “You
shall not permit a sorceress to live.
YLT 18`A witch thou dost not keep alive.
Thou shall not
suffer a witch to live. Such that had familiar spirits
and conversed with them
and by
means thereof got knowledge of many things relating to persons
at least pretending
they did; and who did or seemed to do many strange and surprising feats
as
even to raise the spirits of departed persons
to converse with them and gain
knowledge by them
though in reality they did not
and could not do such
things
but used some juggling tricks to deceive the people
and in which they
might be assisted by evil spirits; as appears from the case of the witch of
Endor
who was surprised at the appearance of Samuel
it being out of the
ordinary course of her art and practice really to bring up the spirit of a man
deceased
whatever pretensions might be made to it; however
such being
deceivers of the people
and leading them into unwarrantable practices
and off
of a dependence on God and his providence
and from seeking to him
and asking
counsel of him
they are by this law condemned to death
such an one was not to
be suffered to live; not that it was lawful for anybody to kill her
or that
any private person might or must do it that knew her
or took her to be a
witch; but she was to be had before a court of judicature and tried there
and
if found guilty
to be put to death by the civil magistrate: so Jarchi's note
is
"but she shall die by the house of judgment;'or the sanhedrim; for
these words are spoken to Moses the chief judge
and to those that were under
him
and succeeded him and them; though the Targum of Jonathan prefaces them
thus:"and my people
the children of Israel
thou shalt not
&c.'and
though only a witch is mentioned
or this is only expressed in the feminine gender
because a multitude of this sort of people were found among women
as Ben
Melech observes
and so Aben Ezra; yet wizards
or men that dealt with familiar
spirits
are included; and it may be reasonably concluded from hence
that if
women
who generally have more mercy and compassion shown them
yet were not
suffered to live when found criminal in this way
then much less men: and this
law is thought by some to follow upon the other
concerning enticing and lying
with a virgin not betrothed; because such sort of persons were made use of to
entice and decoy maids to gratify the lusts of men.
Exodus 22:19 19 “Whoever
lies with an animal shall surely be put to death.
YLT 19`Whoever lieth with a beast is certainly put
to death.
In like manner as a man
and woman
by carnal copulation; this is a crime so detestable and abominable
so shocking and dishonourable to human nature
that one would think it could
never be committed by any of the human species
and that there was no occasion
for making a law against it; but
such is the depravity and corruption of
mankind
that divine wisdom saw it necessary
and
to deter from it
made it
death
as follows; such an one
shall surely be
put to death; no mercy shown him
no pardon or respite given him by the civil
magistrate: according to the Targum of Jonathan
the death of such a person was
by stoning
for it paraphrases the words
"he shall be killed with the
casting of stones.'
Exodus 22:20 20 “He
who sacrifices to any god
except to the Lord only
he shall
be utterly destroyed.
YLT 20`He who is sacrificing to a god
save to Jehovah
alone
is devoted.
He that
sacrificeth unto any god
.... To Elohim
to strange gods
to the
idols of the people
as the Targum of Jonathan; to the Egyptian deities
to the
gods of the Moabites
Amorites
Edomites
Canaanites
Philistines
or any other:
Aben Ezra says the word Elohim comprehends angels; and by the exceptive clause
it is plain it takes in all that had been
were
or ever would be the objects
of idolatrous worship
especially the sun
moon
and stars
the principal
objects of worship in those days:
save unto the
Lord only; the true and living God; Jehovah
the self-existent
immutable
and eternal Being; the Creator of all things
the possessor of heaven and
earth
the most high God
and the only one: sacrificing takes in all the acts
of service performed to an idol as to the true God
as offering incense
pouring out a libation
as well as slaying and burning an animal as Jarchi
observes: he shall be utterly destroyed; be accursed
anathematized
devoted to
destruction
as the word used signifies: the Targum of Jonathan is
"he
shall be killed with the sword
and his goods consumed
'not only lose his life
but his substance
and so be destroyed in body and estate.
Exodus 22:21 21 “You shall neither
mistreat a stranger nor oppress him
for you were strangers in the land of
Egypt.
YLT 21`And a sojourner thou dost not oppress
nor
crush him
for sojourners ye have been in the land of Egypt.
Thou shall not
vex a stranger
.... One that is not born in the same country
but comes into
another country to sojourn
as Jarchi; not a native of the place
but of
another kingdom or country; a stranger to the commonwealth of Israel
that is
only in it for a time on trade and business
or through one providence or
another; or else a proselyte is meant
not a proselyte of righteousness
who
has embraced the true religion; but a proselyte of the gate
that takes upon
him the commands of the sons of Noah; or
as Aben Ezra here expresses it
who
takes upon him not to serve idols; such were allowed to dwell among the
Israelites
and they were to carry it friendly and kindly to them
and
"not vex" them
nor irritate them with words
as the Targum of
Jonathan
and so Jarchi; by calling them names
Gentiles
uncircumcised
persons
and the like; upbraiding them with their country
ignorance
and
manner of life; they were not to say to a proselyte
as Ben Melech observes
remember thy former works; or
if the son of a proselyte
remember thy father's
works:
nor oppress him; by taking his
goods
as the above Targum
and so Jarchi; by refusing to assist him with
advice or otherwise
to trade with him
or to give him lodging
and furnish him
with the necessaries of life:
for ye were
strangers in the land of Egypt: out of which they were but just come
and
therefore such a reason must be very striking and moving upon them: the Targum
of Jonathan prefaces it
"and my people
the house of Israel
remember that
ye were strangers
&c.'this they could not have forgot in so short a time
and the remembrance of this should move their compassion to strangers
hereafter
when they came to settle in their own land; and therefore
as they
would that men should have done to them when in such circumstances
the same
they should do to others; and besides
the remembrance of this would serve to
abate their pride and vanity
and their overbearing disposition.
Exodus 22:22 22 “You
shall not afflict any widow or fatherless child.
YLT 22`Any widow or orphan ye do not afflict;
Ye shall not
afflict any widow or fatherless child. Who have no friends
husband
or father to be on their side and protect them
and are weak and
helpless to defend themselves
and therefore it must be barbarous to do them
any injury
either to their persons or property; no one ought to be afflicted
and distressed by another
either in body or mind
or substance
and especially
such as have no helper
not any to assist them and sympathize with them; for
this is a law for every man
as Jarchi observes
is binding upon all; only the
Scripture speaks of these
because of their weakness
and because they are more
frequently afflicted than others
cruel and unmerciful men taking the advantage
of their inability to defend themselves.
Exodus 22:23 23 If
you afflict them in any way
and they cry at all to Me
I will surely
hear their cry;
YLT 23if thou dost really afflict him
surely if he
at all cry unto Me
I certainly hear his cry;
If thou afflict
them in any wise
..... In any way
or by any means whatever; their minds
by
reproaches
censures
insults
and their bodies by stripes
false imprisonment
&c. and in their substance
by withholding from them what belongs to them
taking what they have
or cheating and defrauding them in any respect; or
"in afflicting afflict them"F5ענה
תענה "affligendo afflixeris"
Pagninus
Piscator
Ainsworth
Montanus
Junius & Tremellius. ; afflict them much
and continue to do so:
and they cry at
all unto me; in prayer
as the Targum of Jonathan; or
"in crying
cry"F6צעק יצעק
"clamando clamaverit"
Pagninus
Montanus
Piscator
Ainsworth. ; cry
vehemently
or importunately
and with constancy
or rather
cry ever so
little:
I will surely
hear their cry; the voice of their prayer
as the same Targum; or
"in
hearing I will hear"F7שמע אשמע "audiendo audiam"
Pagninus
Montanus
Piscator
Ainsworth. ; will certainly take notice of their cries
and return an
answer to them
by appearing on their side
and avenging their injuries; for
God is the Father of the fatherless
and the husband of the widow
and the
Judge of them both: the manner of speaking or form of expression is the same in
all these clauses
the words being doubled.
Exodus 22:24 24 and
My wrath will become hot
and I will kill you with the sword; your wives shall
be widows
and your children fatherless.
YLT 24and Mine anger hath burned
and I have slain
you by the sword
and your wives have been widows
and your sons orphans.
And my wrath
shall wax hot
.... Against those that afflict them
being so devoid of
humanity
compassion
and tenderness
and so guilty of oppression and
injustice
which are aggravated by the circumstances of the persons they ill
treat
and therefore the more provoking to God:
and I will kill
you with the sword; with the sword of death
says the Targum of Jonathan; it designs
one of God's sore judgments
the sword of an enemy; the meaning is
that when
such evils should become frequent among them
God would suffer a neighbouring
nation to break in upon them in an hostile way
and put them to the sword;
hence it follows:
and your wives
shall be widows
and your children fatherless; be in the same
circumstances with those they have injured
and therefore should consider not
only the destruction that would come upon themselves
being cutoff by the
sword
but the case of their families; and how
could they be sensible of it
they would like to have their wives and children used as they have used the
widows and fatherless.
Exodus 22:25 25 “If
you lend money to any of My people who are poor among you
you
shall not be like a moneylender to him; you shall not charge him interest.
YLT 25`If thou dost lend My poor people with thee
money
thou art not to him as a usurer; thou dost not lay on him usury;
If thou lend
money to any of my people that is poor by thee
Such only need to borrow
money
and to whom it should be freely lent
when it may be to the good of the
borrower
and not any injury to the lender: this law
according to the Jewish
writers
only respects Israelites
and not Gentiles; agreeably to which is
Jarchi's note
"if thou lend
that is
not to a Gentile; and to which of my
people? the poor
and to which of the poor? that is with thee:"
thou shalt not
be to him as an usurer; that will not lend without usury
nor without an exorbitant
interest
and deals very hardly with the borrower if he is not punctual in the
payment of it; the Israelites were not only not to be usurers
but they were
not to be like them; they were not to require anything for lending a poor man a
little money; as not any settled interest
so neither were they to take any
previous gift or reward later
see Luke 6:34.
neither shalt
thou lay upon him usury; or oblige him to give interest for money borrowed: it is in the
plural
number
"neither shall ye lay"; and Aben Ezra observes
that
the lender
scribe
and witness
all transgress this law; that is
when a man
lends money on interest
and a bond is made by the scribe for it
and this
signed by witnesses
all are guilty of the breach of it: yea
some Jewish
writersF8Misn. Bava Metzia
c. 5. sect. 11. Maimon. & Bartenora
in ib. say
not only those
but whoever is a surety or bondsman for the
payment
and even the borrower himself; see Gill on Psalm 15:5.
Exodus 22:26 26 If
you ever take your neighbor’s garment as a pledge
you shall return it to him
before the sun goes down.
YLT 26if thou dost at all take in pledge the
garment of thy neighbour
during the going in of the sun thou dost return it to
him:
If thou at all
take thy neighbour's raiment to pledge
.... So that it seems
that the lender
though he might not impose usury on the borrower
or oblige
him to pay interest for what he lent him
yet for the security of his money he
might take his clothes
either his bed clothes or wearing apparel
or any
instruments or goods of his; but when he did
he was bound to what follows:
thou shalt
deliver it to him by that the sun goeth down; the reason of which
appears in the next verse
with respect to his bed clothes
should that be the
pledge: but Jarchi interprets it
not of his nocturnal clothes
but of his
apparel in the daytime
and paraphrases it thus
"all the day thou shalt
restore it to him until the setting of the sun; and when the sun is set
thou
shalt return and take it until the morning of the morrow comes; the Scripture
speaks of the covering of the day
of which there is no need at night;'but rather
night clothes are meant by what follows.
Exodus 22:27 27 For
that is his only covering
it is his garment for his skin. What
will he sleep in? And it will be that when he cries to Me
I will hear
for I am
gracious.
YLT 27for it alone is his covering
it [is] his
garment for his skin; wherein doth he lie down? and it hath come to pass
when
he doth cry unto Me
that I have heard
for I [am] gracious.
For that is his
covering only
.... All that he has to cover him
the only covering he has when
he lies down to sleep; and therefore should be restored to him by the time of
sunset
at which time he returns from his labour; and after some refreshment
retires to his bed for rest
when his covering will be necessary:
it is his
raiment for his skin; which is next to his skin
and covers his naked body
as it is
when he lies down to sleep; and therefore if not returned
he must lie naked
without any covering
which to deprive him of would be cruel: Jarchi interprets
this covering of his shirt
but it rather means his bed clothes: the Septuagint
version calls it the clothes of his shame
what cover and hide the shame of
nakedness:
wherein shall
he sleep? what shall he have to sleep in if this is detained from him?
nothing at all; or it may be read without an interrogation
wherein he should
sleep
or was used to sleep:
and it shall
come to pass
when he crieth unto me; and complains of ill
usage
that he has nothing to cover him in the night season
when he lies down
to sleep
which is very uncomfortable
as well as unhealthful and dangerous:
that I will
hear; his cry and complaint
take notice of it
and resent the usage
of him:
for I am
gracious; or merciful; and therefore everything cruel and uncompassionate
is disagreeable
and even abominable to him
and he will take care in his
providence that the injured person shall be redressed and the injurer punished.
Exodus 22:28 28 “You
shall not revile God
nor curse a ruler of your people.
YLT 28`God thou dost not revile
and a prince among
thy people thou dost not curse.
Thou shalt not
revile the gods
.... Meaning not the idols of the Gentiles
which they reckon
gods
and worship as such; which is the sense of Philo
and some others
particularly JosephusF9Antiqu. l. 4. c. 8. sect. 10. Contr. Apion.
1. 2. c. 33.
who
to curry favour with the Roman emperors given to idolatry
has from hence inserted the following among the laws given to Moses;"let
no man blaspheme the gods
which other cities think are such
nor rob strange
sacred places
nor receive a gift dedicated to any deity;'but this cannot be
the sense of the text
being contrary to Deuteronomy 12:2
nor can it be thought that care should be taken
lest the honour of the Heathen
deities should be detracted from; but civil magistrates
the judges of the
land
and the like
are meant
who are powers ordained of God
are in his
stead
and represent him
and therefore respect should be shown them; nor
should they be treated with any degree of slight and contempt
which may discourage
and intimidate them
and deter them from the execution of their office: the
Targum of Jonathan interprets them of judges very rightly
agreeably to Psalm 82:1 and so
Aben Ezra says
"they are the judges and the priests
the sons of Levi
with whom the law is:"
nor curse the
ruler of thy people whether civil or ecclesiastic; the last mentioned Jewish writer
intend of the king
who is the supreme ruler in things civil
and ought to be
honoured and loved
served and obeyed
and not hated and cursed
no
not
secretly
not in the bedchamber
nor in the thought of the heart
since not
only the thing is criminal but dangerous; it is much if it is not discovered
and
then ruin follows upon it
Ecclesiastes 10:20.
The Apostle Paul applies it to the high priest among the Jews
who was the
ruler in sacred things
Acts 23:5 and may
be applicable to the prince of the sanhedrim
or chief in the grand court of
judicature; and even to all dignified persons
who ought not to be spoken ill
of
and to be abused in the execution of their office
and especially when they
perform well.
Exodus 22:29 29 “You
shall not delay to offer the first of your ripe produce and your juices.
The firstborn of your sons you shall give to Me.
YLT 29`Thy fulness and thy liquids thou dost not
delay; the first-born of thy sons thou dost give to Me;
Thou shall not
delay to offer the first of thy ripe fruits
.... Which
according to
MaimonidesF11Hilchot Biccurim
c. 2. sect. 2.
were of seven kinds
only; for he says
"they do not bring the firstfruits
but of the seven
kinds
said in the praise of the land
(the land of Canaan)
Deuteronomy 8:8 and
they are wheat
barley
grapes
figs
pomegranates
olives
and dates;'and how
much of these were to be offered is not fixed by the law
but were left to the
generosity of the people: the above mentioned writer asksF12Hilchot
Trumot
c. 3. sect. 2.
"what measure do the wise men set? a good eye (or
a bountiful man) brings one of forty (or the fortieth part of his fruits); a
middling one (one that is neither liberal nor niggardly) brings one of fifty
(or the fiftieth part); and an evil one (a covetous man) one of sixty (or the
sixtieth part)
but never less than that.'Now this was not to be delayed
but
to be brought as soon and as early as could be: the Jewish writers seem to understand
this of postponing things
or inverting the order of them
bringing that first
which should be last
and that last which should be first; so Jarchi interprets
it
"thou shall not change the order of their separation
to postpone that
which should be first
and to put before that which should be last; for the
first oblation should not be brought before the firstfruits
and the tithes
before the first oblation.'And thus runs one of their canons or traditionsF13Misn.
Trumot
c. 3. sect. 6.
"if anyone brings the first oblation before the
firstfruits
the first tithe before the first oblation
the second tithe before
the first
it is as if he transgressed a negative precept: "thou shalt not
delay or postpone"
&c. Exodus 22:29 '
And of thy
liquors: and these
according to MaimonidesF14
were only the
firstfruits of liquors of olives and grapes:
the firstborn
of thy sons thou shall give unto me; which is a repetition of
the law. See Gill on Exodus 13:2.
Exodus 22:30 30 Likewise
you shall do with your oxen and your sheep. It shall be with its mother
seven days; on the eighth day you shall give it to Me.
YLT 30so thou dost to thine ox
to thy sheep; seven
days it is with its dam
on the eighth day thou dost give it to Me.
Likewise shalt
thou do with thine oxen
and with thy sheep
.... That is
with the
firstborn
which were to be set apart to the Lord; and so the Targum of
Jonathan paraphrases it
"the firstborn of thine oxen
and of thy
sheep;'for having spoken of the firstborn of men
the Scripture proceeds to
speak of the firstborn of cattle
great and small
the separation of which was
enjoined in one and the same precept
Exodus 13:2
seven days it
shall be with his dam; whether it be a calf or a lamb; before it was seven days old it
was not to be taken from it
and given to the Lord:
on the eighth
day thou shall give it me; that is
they might do it then
but not
before; yet they were not obliged to bring it exactly on that day
but they
might do it any time within the month
and at a month's end they were obliged
to redeem it
that is
give the priest the sum of five shekels for it
Numbers 18:16. The
Jewish canon runs thusF14Misn. Becorot
c. 4. sect. 1. ;"how
long are Israelites bound for the bringing of the firstborn
i.e. before they
offer it to the priest? in small cattle thirty days
in large cattle fifty
days.'
Exodus 22:31 31 “And you shall be holy men
to Me: you shall not eat meat torn by beasts in the field; you shall
throw it to the dogs.
YLT 31`And ye are holy men to Me
and flesh torn in
the field ye do not eat
to a dog ye do cast it.
And ye shall be
holy men unto me
.... They were so by God's act of election
not special and
particular
but general and national; choosing and separating them to be an
holy people to him
above all the people on the face of the earth
and in a
ceremonial sense they observing laws and appointments of God of this kind;
which is the sense here intended
as appears by what follows: all men
and so these
Israelites
ought to be holy in a moral sense
and some are holy in a spiritual
and evangelical sense
being made holy by the Spirit of God; of these the
Apostle Peter speaks
in allusion to this
and such like passages
1 Peter 2:9.
neither shall
ye eat any flesh that is torn of beasts in the field; or in the
house
as Jarchi notes; but the Scripture
as he observes
speaks of the place
where it is more usual for beasts to tear
and so Aben Ezra; otherwise what is
torn elsewhere
or by whatsoever accident it is bruised and maimed
was not to
be eaten: ye shall cast it to the dogs: for even a stranger was not to eat of
it
or if he did he was unclean
and was obliged to wash his clothes
and bathe
himself
Leviticus 17:15 and
yet Jarchi interprets this figuratively of such as are like dogs
meaning the
Gentiles
whom the Jews used to call so
see Matthew 15:26. An
Heathen poet gives instructions perfectly agreeable to this law;"do not
(says he) eat flesh fed upon by beasts
but leave the remains to the swift dogsF15 μηδε τι θηροβορον &c.
Phocylides
ver. 136
137. .'
──《John Gill’s
Exposition of the Bible》