Exodus Sermons (written)

Exodus 22:1-15
The Responsible Thing to Do

I bet every one of us can look back on our past life and think of a jillion times when we have either been wronged by another or we have wronged another in regards to personal property. Maybe you lent somebody something and they broke it or lost it.

Maybe you borrowed a car and got it scratched or dented while it was in your care. It could be that you went on a vacation and took one of your pets to a shelter or to a friend for it to be taken care of while you were gone… When you got back, poor Fifi the cat was missing or poor Rover the dog was dead.

When something like that happens in life, there are times when no resolution between the two parties seems possible without either checking with what the law says, or even being compelled to take the matter to a civil court for a decision.

The law of Israel did not foresee every situation that could arise in advance, but it gave great general guidelines for many such situations. Some of these guidelines are still in effect in societies of the world today. They are common sense and they are precise as to what should be done.

And then there are those times when the law didn’t provide specifics. At those times, the law was still specific in its own way – bring the matter before the Lord and to those who judge for a decision.

Text Verse: “Gather the people together, men and women and little ones, and the stranger who is within your gates, that they may hear and that they may learn to fear the Lord your God and carefully observe all the words of this law, ¹³ and that their children, who have not known it, may hear and learn to fear the Lord your God as long as you live in the land which you cross the Jordan to possess.” Deuteronomy 31:12, 13

Israel was instructed to bring the people together every seven years to hear the words of the law. It was to be a reminder to them of their responsibilities towards the Lord and towards their fellow man. Some of the responsible things they were to do in regards to their property and the property of their fellow man are detailed in today’s verses.

In keeping them, or ensuring that they were properly judged when they weren’t kept, was important in order for the society to function properly. These and so many other fine details of the law are to be found in His superior word. And so let’s turn to that precious word once again and… May God speak to us through His word today and may His glorious name ever be praised.

I. Laws for Theft (verses 1-4)

The following laws for theft are very brief and detail only three circumstances. The first is stealing property and converting it for another use; second is housebreaking, or burglary; and third is stealing without having converted the stolen goods for another use.

The ox and the sheep were principle types of valuable property within Israel and so they are used as representative of stealing in general. The punishments, in principle, can then be considered representative of what is proper for other thefts as well.

“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.

In just the first verse of this chapter, there is a lot to consider. First, the idea of this and the following verses is theft. And certainly more than just that is the intent of the heart. This is because different penalties are given for the act of theft based on what happens to what is stolen.

If the main crime is simply theft of any kind, then there would be a unified punishment regardless of what happened to what was stolen, but there isn’t. As we progress, this will be seen and looked into. In the case of verse 1, if someone steals an animal as described and slaughters it or sells it, the penalty is stated.

Second, the word for “slaughter” is tabach. This is only the second of eleven times is it used in the OT. Rather than a sacrificial type of slaughtering, this gives more the idea of butchering an animal for food. The thief willfully steals and then willfully sells, or kills the animal to eat or sell as food. He thus profits off of the animal through his actions.

Third, with the exception of Young’s Literal Translation of the Bible, no translation gives the proper sense of the verse.  Two different Hebrew words are translated as “ox” and two different words are translated as “sheep” in all other versions except Young’s.

The verse says, “If a man steals an ox (shor) or a sheep (seh), and slaughters it or sells it, he shall restore five oxen (bakar) for an ox (shor) and four sheep (tson) for a sheep (seh). It’s obvious that a distinction is being made between what is stolen and what is to be returned. Otherwise, it would have just used the same words.

Instead of repeating the same word in English, the word “herd” is certainly more appropriate. An animal of the herd would be used to replace the specific ox or sheep. Therefore, it could be five bulls or five heifers for the ox (or any combination), and it could be four sheep or four goats (or any combination) for the sheep.

No matter what, he is to repay fourfold for having first stolen the animal and then having sold it or eaten it. His benefiting off the stolen animal is what is being considered in conjunction with the theft.

Fourth, there is a difference in the required payment for an ox as opposed to a sheep – fivefold instead of fourfold. Scholars have varying ideas as to why. Some argue that it is more brazen or audacious to steal an ox than it is to steal a goat. Others see that the penalty is higher for an ox because it is an animal from which profit can be derived, such as in plowing fields.

I would think it is a mixture of the two. If it is true that one can benefit more from an ox than a sheep, then the one stealing the ox intends to benefit more from it as well. If he slaughters it and sells its meat, or if he simply sells it outright, the profit to him will be greater than for doing the same thing with a sheep.

There is a strong purpose behind his evil intent to take the larger and more valuable animal. It is the heart which is being looked on as well as the act itself. This principle was adhered to and acted upon elsewhere in the Bible. When Nathan the prophet came to King David with the story of a person who wrongfully took a man’s only precious lamb, David’s response to Nathan’s words was one of great anger –

“So David’s anger was greatly aroused against the man, and he said to Nathan, ‘As the Lord lives, the man who has done this shall surely die! ⁶ And he shall restore fourfold for the lamb, because he did this thing and because he had no pity.'” 2 Samuel 12:5, 6

Unfortunately for David, Nathan was using the lamb as a metaphor for Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah whom David took as his own. It was he who was in the wrong.

In the New Testament, Zacchaeus, the wee little man in the sycamore fig tree, was so elated that Jesus desired to eat in his home, that he rushed down the tree and entertained the Lord. In his great joy, we read this –

“Then Zacchaeus stood and said to the Lord, ‘Look, Lord, I give half of my goods to the poor; and if I have taken anything from anyone by false accusation, I restore fourfold.'” Luke 19:8

² If the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies, there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed.

The second law of theft is concerning burglary. The word for “breaking in” is makhtereth. This is its first of only two uses in the Bible. It means “burglary” or “secret search” and it comes from the word khatar which means to “dig.”

The idea is that one has to, as it were, dig in order to forcibly break into a house or to conduct a secret search. This would involve the use of an implement to either dig through the earthen wall or to dig through the bolted door of the house.

In the case of a person who so breaks in, if he is struck and is killed, the person who killed him is to be absolved of any wrongdoing and bloodguilt. What this means is that the avenger of blood may not come after him to claim his right of vengeance.

There are several reasons for this. The first is that by digging into a house, any implement he had could have been used as a weapon. This would immediately come to mind in anyone who was quietly sleeping and then suddenly awakened by a thief. The thought of murderous intent would be at the forefront of his thoughts.

The second reason is that at such a dark hour, the thief couldn’t be identified. His features, his size, the intent of his eyes, and so on couldn’t be determined. The one in the house would have no idea who they were up against or even if they could safely flee.

And third, anyone who did commit such burglary and who got away couldn’t be identified later. Therefore, there would be no justice for his offenses. By breaking in at night, and under the law which was given to the people of the land, he would subject himself to the possible penalty of that law by forfeiting his life.

³ If the sun has risen on him, there shall be guilt for his bloodshed.

The word for “has risen” here is zarakh. It means the dawning of the sun when it shoots forth beams. At such a time, the sky would be illuminated enough to send light into a house and make a thief recognizable. A burglar in such an instance was not to be killed or the guilt of blood would be on the head of the one who killed him.

The idea is surely that the person could recognize the intruder and flee for his own safety and then later he could identify the burglar who would then be convicted for his crime. He would be required to pay for his theft according to the other precepts within the law.

^3 (con’t) He should make full restitution; if he has nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft.

This portion of verse 3 is said by some scholars to be out of place because the first half of it notes that there would be guilt for his bloodshed. They say that it thus presupposes that there was bloodshed. This is incorrect. Rather, it presupposes that the one in the house won’t shed his blood, just as the law requires.

Instead, of killing the burglar, it says shelem y’shalem, restoring he shall restore. In place of vengeance on the offender, there will be justice for the offended. The guilty will keep his life and he will hopefully learn his lesson through restoring damages and losses incurred by the owner.

However, if he is unable to restore according to the law, then according to the law he is to be sold for his theft. The word “theft” is genebah. In the OT it is only used here and in the next verse. It is the noun form of the act of stealing. It is the thing stolen.

The thief becomes liable to become property for having put his hand into another man’s property. In this, the words “shall be sold” would be better translated as “should be sold.” The entire verse then is one of justice. To paraphrase it, one could say, “If the sun has risen, instead of killing the person and incurring blood guilt, the thief should fully restore what he has stolen or he should be sold to replace the thing stolen.”

⁴ If the theft is certainly found alive in his hand, whether it is an ox or donkey or sheep, he shall restore double.

An emphasis is given in this verse which is translated as “certainly.” In Hebrew it says im himmatse timmatse b’yaddow ha’gennebah, “If finding is found in his hand the theft.” It is what we would say, “being caught red-handed.”

If a thief is so caught and the animal which was stolen is still alive, then only double restoration is required. This then is a justice of retaliation. The thief loses the very amount that he anticipated gaining. In contrast to verse 1 where the animal was butchered or stolen, the matter is looking at the intent of the heart.

Until the animal or thing was disposed of, there was always the chance that the thief would own up to his theft and restore it. It would mean he would incur a double cost of restoration, but he would be spared an even higher cost. And it could be that he could seek mercy and not even have to pay back a double amount.

But once the animal was dead, such a chance of restoration was impossible. It had become an aggravated crime from a hardened heart. As long as the animal was alive and in his possession, the possibility for repentance and full restoration was available.

This is similar to what happened to the sons of Jacob when they went down to Egypt to buy grain during the great famine in the land. When they came back, the money they had taken to buy grain was found in their sacks. In order to ensure that the mistake was covered, Jacob instructed them with these words –

“Take double money in your hand, and take back in your hand the money that was returned in the mouth of your sacks; perhaps it was an oversight.” Genesis 43:12

On a spiritual level, double repayment for wrongdoing is also a biblical consideration. The people of Israel had sinned against the Lord and the people were punished for it, double in fact. These verses concerning the protection of the physical assets of the people are also given to show what is just and due concerning the people’s relationship with the Lord –

“Comfort, yes, comfort My people!”
Says your God.
² “Speak comfort to Jerusalem, and cry out to her,
That her warfare is ended,
That her iniquity is pardoned;
For she has received from the Lord’s hand
Double for all her sins.”  Isaiah 40:1, 2

The idea of double punishment for the sins of the people is not unique to Isaiah, but it is also found in the books of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Zechariah. In the end, the double punishment of the people was literally carried out in a double exile – first to Babylon and then by the Romans in AD70.

However, after the times of double punishment, the Lord promises not just restoration, but double restoration –

“As for you also,
Because of the blood of your covenant,
I will set your prisoners free from the waterless pit.
¹² Return to the stronghold,
You prisoners of hope.
Even today I declare
That I will restore double to you.
¹³ For I have bent Judah, My bow,
Fitted the bow with Ephraim,
And raised up your sons, O Zion,
Against your sons, O Greece,
And made you like the sword of a mighty man.” Zechariah 9:11-13

Comfort, yes, comfort My people, says your God
Speak comfort to Jerusalem and cry out to her
That her warfare is ended, peaceful streets she shall trod
Her iniquity is pardoned, and she is made pure

For she has received from the Lord’s hand
Double for all her sins, the payment has been made
And now her future lies ahead ever so grand
For her dirty rags, garments of white she will trade

The double punishment was due and it was just
But now double blessing will come upon Israel
For her will come joy and health, so robust
To My jewel Israel, this promise I now tell

II. Laws for Negligence or Fraud (verses 5-15)

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.

Like many of the verses so far, this one implies a permanent dwelling in the land of Canaan and it also implies private property. The law was given in anticipation of both and it implies both – possession of the land of Israel by Israel, and possession of parcels of the land by individuals.

The last time a vineyard was mentioned was all the way back in Genesis 9:6 when Noah planted a vineyard and got drunk off wine from it. Israel is being given directives for something that they will inherit and which they will have a right to. When that comes about, protections will be in place for their land and their labors.

Translators vary in how they translate this verse in one of two main ways. One is willful negligence, as if the animal was purposely let loose and allowed to go into another man’s field. The other is careless negligence where an animal is let out to eat and it wanders over to another man’s field.

Whichever is the case, the owner is negligent and he is to be held accountable for his actions. The restitution, though, is not a double forfeiture, but rather simple restitution. However, it is to be from the best of his vineyard.

The word “best,” or metav, is rare, being used only six times in the Bible. It always refers to either the best of the land or the best of animals. On a spiritual level, this verse can be equated with taking the best of something from someone for their having taken that to which they had no right to when they took it. This is explained in Jesus’ parable to the people in Luke 14 –

“‘”So He told a parable to those who were invited, when He noted how they chose the best places, saying to them: ⁸ “When you are invited by anyone to a wedding feast, do not sit down in the best place, lest one more honorable than you be invited by him; ⁹ and he who invited you and him come and say to you, ‘Give place to this man,’ and then you begin with shame to take the lowest place. ¹⁰ But when you are invited, go and sit down in the lowest place, so that when he who invited you comes he may say to you, ‘Friend, go up higher.’ Then you will have glory in the presence of those who sit at the table with you. ¹¹ For whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.”‘” Luke 14:7-11

In other words, we are to carefully ensure that we only to take that to which we are entitled. We are to be responsible to not tread into areas which we are not entitled because when we step out of those bounds, then we are liable for having our own best taken from us.

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.

This verse is filled with fun words. “Thorns,” or qots, hasn’t been seen in the Bible since the Lord cursed the ground in Genesis 3 –

“Cursed is the ground for your sake;
In toil you shall eat of it
All the days of your life.
¹⁸ Both thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you,
And you shall eat the herb of the field.
¹⁹ In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread
Till you return to the ground,
For out of it you were taken;
For dust you are,
And to dust you shall return.” Genesis 3:17-19

It implies to the people that they will still be living in a fallen world when they enter Canaan. The thorns will be so abundant that fields will be set on fire to burn them out in order to prepare fields for use. Jamieson-Faucett-Brown notes that –

“This refers to the common practice in the East of setting fire to the dry grass before the fall of the autumnal rains, which prevents the ravages of vermin, and is considered a good preparation of the ground for the next crop. The very parched state of the herbage and the long droughts of summer, make the kindling of a fire an operation often dangerous, and always requiring caution from its liability to spread rapidly.” JFB

The word qots comes from quwts which means “summer.” Thus the thorns are those things which spring up rapidly in the heat of the summer when other things struggle in the heat and lack of rain.

The word for “stacked grain” is gadyish. It’s the first of four times it will be used in the Bible. It means a heap of something or a tomb, because a tomb is raised up like a heap. The word for “standing grain” is ha’qamah or “the standing.” This comes from qum, which means to arise, or stand up.

And finally, the word for “the fire” is an unusual noun form of a word used only this once in the Bible ha’beerah. It means “the burning.” Taken together, the words supply us with a picture of what is going on.

Much has to be inferred, but the inferences clear up the difficulty of the verse to us. A person is preparing a field at the end of the summer for the next crop to be planted. In order to do so, he sets the field on fire to clear out the thorns.

When he does, the fire gets out of control and moves into the next field where the farmer is still working on this year’s crops. He either has stalks piled up in heaps or still-standing grain waiting to be harvested, or even both. When the fire gets to his field, it destroys his grain and all of the work he has done.

Hence the use of the word ha’beerah for “the burning” instead of the usual word for “fire” which is esh. As John Lange says about the consequences of his actions –

“The carelessness is imputed to him as a virtual incendiary, because he did not guard the fire” John Lange

His own profits are to be consumed because of his negligence in not keeping “the burning” restrained. Although not nearly a literal translation, the New Living Translation gives probably the best sense of this verse for us to comprehend –

“If you are burning thornbushes and the fire gets out of control and spreads into another person’s field, destroying the sheaves or the uncut grain or the whole crop, the one who started the fire must pay for the lost crop.” NLT

Although looking over a bunch of obscure words in an obscure verse of the law seems like an unimportant thing to do, by doing so, we can almost mentally insert ourselves into the field work of ancient Israel and understand the trials and difficulties of those tedious labors.

And so if you enjoy understanding the nuances of farm life in Israel and seeing them in your mind’s eye, the word studies are far from pointless!

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.

Delivering money or articles to a neighbor to keep was a common thing for people to do in the past. Before there were banks, if someone went on a journey or was going to be gone from their house for whatever reason, they would entrust their valuables to a neighbor for safekeeping.

There was also was the practice of depositing goods by a debtor to a creditor. As a fellow Israelite, he would be considered a neighbor even if a creditor. When the debt was paid off, the personal goods were to be returned.

In such a circumstance, if that property was stolen and the thief was found, the thief was required to pay double, just as would the thief pay in verse 4. After that, the matter would be considered settled. However…

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.

Should no thief be apprehended in the matter, then the suspicion would naturally fall on ba’al ha’beyit or the “master of the house.” If this were the case, the owner of the property had a right to bring them forward to have the matter settled. However, from this point on a dispute arises as to whom the matter is brought to.

The Hebrew reads el ha’elohim, or literally “to the God” or “to the gods.” For this reason, translations vary. If it means, “the gods” then it is speaking of human judges who are referred to as elohim, or “gods.” However, because Hebrew also has the commonly used word shophtim which mean “judges,” this is not likely.

Rather, the verse is more appropriately translated as the English Standard Version renders it –

“If the thief is not found, the owner of the house shall come near to God to show whether or not he has put his hand to his neighbor’s property.” ESV

In Israel, there was a way of inquiring of God using stones known as the Urim and Thummim. These would be used in a case such as this to determine whether the master of the house was guilty or not. Knowing that this type of inquiring of God was available would be a deterrent in and of itself.

However, if guilt was found, punishment was to be brought to the one who was guilty…

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.

Whatever was entrusted to the individual and which was then lost or unrightfully claimed as the possession of another, the parties were given the opportunity to make their case. The word for “lost thing” is abedah – it is the noun form of the word abad, which means to lose. It is used for the first of only four times and it is found only in the books of Moses.

What is implied with this is that it is the property of one person which is claimed as belonging to another, hence a “lost thing.” In such an instance of fraud, the two parties were to come before ha’elohim, or literally, “the God” for a decision.

When so presented, it says that whomever elohim or “God” condemns will be required to pay double to the neighbor. In this verse, like the previous verse, the translation is far better using “God” than judges. It should literally read –

“…the case of both parties shall come before the God. The one whom God condemns shall pay double to his neighbor.” (Charlie’s translation based on a correction of the ESV)

It is God who looks upon the heart and it is God who decides who is to be condemned. This word, condemn, or rasha is introduced into the Bible here. It means “to find wicked” or “to condemn.” The one who has acted wickedly and is found out is then required to pay double for the theft.

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,

This verse is parallel to verse 7. It could be that the owner of the animal went on a vacation or on some other business, or it could be that he entrusted his animal to a herdsman whose business it was to take care of flocks and herds.

In whatever case, the one who received the animal became responsible for the care of the animal, whatever type it was. Should it die in his care, or should it be hurt in his care, or should it be taken captive by marauding raiders, or for any such reason as this, then the rights of both parties needed to be protected.

¹¹ then an oath of the Lord shall be between them both, that he has not put his hand into his neighbor’s goods;

In such a case, then a shevuat Yehovah or an “oath of the Lord” shall be made by the one who had custody of the animal that he did not transgress the law in the case of it. The mentioning of the oath of the Lord is a rare thing in Scripture. As Matthew Poole says concerning the oath of the Lord –

“…because it is taken by his authority and appointment, and for his honour, and in his name alone, God being made both witness, and judge, and avenger thereby.” Matthew Poole

Such an oath was considered so weighty and so terrible to be violated that in such a case, the matter is to be considered settled…

^{11 (con’t)} and the owner of it shall accept that, and he shall not make it good.

Because of the weighty and terrifying nature of such an oath, and the consequences for lying in connection with it, the owner was to accept what was spoken before the Lord and the one who had custody of the animal was freed from any further liability.

As a short diversion, let’s take a quick look at the penalty for violating the shevuat Yehovah, or the “oath of the Lord” from 1 Kings 2 –

“Then the king sent and called for Shimei, and said to him, ‘Build yourself a house in Jerusalem and dwell there, and do not go out from there anywhere. ³⁷ For it shall be, on the day you go out and cross the Brook Kidron, know for certain you shall surely die; your blood shall be on your own head.’
³⁸ And Shimei said to the king, ‘The saying is good. As my lord the king has said, so your servant will do.’ So Shimei dwelt in Jerusalem many days.
³⁹ Now it happened at the end of three years, that two slaves of Shimei ran away to Achish the son of Maachah, king of Gath. And they told Shimei, saying, ‘Look, your slaves are in Gath!’ ⁴⁰ So Shimei arose, saddled his donkey, and went to Achish at Gath to seek his slaves. And Shimei went and brought his slaves from Gath. ⁴¹ And Solomon was told that Shimei had gone from Jerusalem to Gath and had come back. ⁴² Then the king sent and called for Shimei, and said to him, “Did I not make you swear by the Lord, and warn you, saying, ‘Know for certain that on the day you go out and travel anywhere, you shall surely die’? And you said to me, ‘The word I have heard is good.’ ⁴³ Why then have you not kept the oath of the Lord and the commandment that I gave you?” ⁴⁴ The king said moreover to Shimei, “You know, as your heart acknowledges, all the wickedness that you did to my father David; therefore the Lord will return your wickedness on your own head. ⁴⁵ But King Solomon shall be blessed, and the throne of David shall be established before the Lord forever.”
⁴⁶ So the king commanded Benaiah the son of Jehoiada; and he went out and struck him down, and he died. Thus the kingdom was established in the hand of Solomon.” 1 Kings 2:36-46

¹² But if, in fact, it is stolen from him, he shall make restitution to the owner of it.

v’im ganov yigganev me’immow – “But if stealing it was stolen from with him…” The statement is emphatic, especially the words “from with him.” It implies that there was either negligence or an underhanded aspect to what occurred.

The property was either stolen from among the caretaker’s own things and yet his own things weren’t stolen, which would then suppose there was fraud involved, or it might imply that with simple diligence the loss would have been prevented. In other words, he was grossly negligent.

In either case, the one who had custody would be required to make full restitution for the loss. This thought harkens back to their forefather Jacob who bore the loss of his uncle’s flocks even when he was diligent and was not in the wrong –

“These twenty years I have been with you; your ewes and your female goats have not miscarried their young, and I have not eaten the rams of your flock. ³⁹ That which was torn by beasts I did not bring to you; I bore the loss of it. You required it from my hand, whether stolen by day or stolen by night.” Genesis 31:38, 39

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.

im taroph y’tareph – Another statement of stress – “If tearing it was torn.” It implies that a beast got hold of the animal and tore at it until it died. In such a case, the one with custody over the animal was not to be held liable. Though the account of Jacob precedes the law, these words demonstrated the unfair treatment Jacob received at the hands of his uncle as he tended to his flocks.

In bringing the remains of the animal, then it was considered sufficient evidence that he had acted properly. Though a beast had attacked an animal under his care, he had been vigilant enough to go after it and courageous enough to take what remained from the beast. This is something that David claimed he had done to prove that he had the courage to face Goliath. In 1 Samuel 17, we read –

“Your servant used to keep his father’s sheep, and when a lion or a bear came and took a lamb out of the flock, ³⁵ I went out after it and struck it, and delivered the lamb from its mouth; and when it arose against me, I caught it by its beard, and struck and killed it. ³⁶ Your servant has killed both lion and bear; and this uncircumcised Philistine will be like one of them, seeing he has defied the armies of the living God.” ³⁷ Moreover David said, “The Lord, who delivered me from the paw of the lion and from the paw of the bear, He will deliver me from the hand of this Philistine.”

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.

This verse, deals with lending which is intended for the benefit of the one to whom a loan is made, not for the one lending. To borrow implies that one expects to gain advantage from what is borrowed. Because of this, the borrower was under the full obligation of protecting and returning whatever he borrowed.

Therefore, regardless of how it was hurt or how it died, it was the responsibility of the borrower to make good on the loan. As an exception, the words “the owner of it not being with it” implies that if during the time of the loan the owner happened to have it under his care when it was injured or it died, then he wouldn’t have to make good on the loan. This becomes explicit in the next verse…

¹⁵ If its owner was with it, he shall not make it good;

This is a very fine point within the law which is given for the protection of a borrower. If, in fact, he had borrowed something and yet it happened to be in the possession of the owner when it was hurt, then there would be no need for restitution.

As an example, a man borrows an ox for two weeks to plow his field. If the owner came by to use his ox for 20 minutes to remove a large bolder from his own field and the ox was hurt at that time, then the owner could not say to the borrower, “You have to pay for the ox because it has been lent to you for two weeks and you still have a week of use left.”

This statement preempts any such claim and would help keep the courts clear of any such niggling over minutiae in this type of arrangement.

*^15 (fin) if it was hired, it came for its hire.

As one final point these words are given. Hiring out an animal is different than both borrowing an animal and having an animal entrusted into another’s care. In the case of hiring it out, the risk of the hire was to be considered as part of the calculation the owner should make upon fixing his price for the hire.

If he had an ox and the neighbor wanted to hire it out for 50 shekels of silver, then he had to consider if that was sufficient for renting it out in case it got hurt or died. If so, then should that happen, he had received his payment in advance and the one who hired was absolved from any further responsibility for the animal.

In these past 15 verses, there is the intent that the people would be protected in matters of private property. It is taken as an axiom throughout the Bible that man has a right to his own property and that when someone unlawfully takes it or is negligent in caring for it, that they were responsible under the law for their actions.

It might seem trivial that God would set down such minute precepts when He is God and all things ultimately belong to Him, but if we consider that God has made us free moral entities and that He cares for us in that regard, then it follows naturally that He would want His people to be cared for and free from loss or worry.

In other words, it shows an immensely loving attitude by the Lord to set down these laws for His people. From that point, we can then logically see that if He cares about our welfare and our protection in this worldly life, how much more do you think He cares about our welfare and our salvation unto eternal life!

And then considering that He allows us the choice to either obey His laws or reject them, and to either return our love to Him or shun Him, it shows how truly loving He is. God doesn’t force Himself upon us, but rather makes Himself known to us so that we will want to fellowship with Him.

And the greatest such demonstration of all is when He entered into the stream of humanity and walked among us. In doing so, He showed us His very heart. He said, “I know that this law is big, it’s filled with mandates, and it is impossible for you to live it out perfectly. But I have come to do that for you. If you will just trust Me, I will live out the law on your behalf.

This is what Christ did for us. He came as a Man, born under the law, to redeem us from the law. As you read these commands and precepts, don’t be overwhelmed by what God has mandated. Rather, be overwhelmed that Christ was born under it and lived it out for us in order to set us free from it.

Trust… this is what God would ask you to do. Trust that He can save You from the law by fulfilling it for you. Trust in Jesus and be saved. Call on Jesus and everything in this law that you have violated will be washed clean by His shed blood. Do it today!

Closing Verse: “Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. ²⁰ Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.” Romans 3:19, 20

Next Week: Exodus 22:16-31 Living properly both day and night (That Which is Morally Right) (61st Exodus Sermon)

The Lord has you exactly where He wants you. He has a good plan and purpose for you. Even if a deep ocean lies ahead of You, He can part the waters and lead you through it on dry ground. So follow Him and trust Him and He will do marvelous things for you and through you.

The Responsible Thing to Do

If a man steals an ox or a sheep
And slaughters it or sells it; it he does not keep
He shall restore five oxen for an ox
And four sheep for a sheep

If the thief is found breaking in
And he is struck so that he dies
There shall be no guilt for his bloodshed
His penalty is the spot where he lies

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 instead

If the theft is certainly found alive in his hand
Whether it is an ox or donkey or sheep
He shall restore double
Even if this penalty sounds kind of steep

If a man causes a field or vineyard to be grazed
And his animal he lets loose
And it feeds in another man’s field
Which was not for his personal use

He shall make restitution from the best
Of his own personal field
And the best of his own vineyard
This to the one wronged he shall yield

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
For the losses which the owner assumed

If a man delivers to his neighbor
Money or articles to keep, and along comes trouble
And it is stolen out of the man’s house
If the thief is found, he shall pay double

If the thief is not found
Then the master of the house, you shall understand
Shall be brought to the judges
To see whether he has into his neighbor’s goods put his hand

For any kind of trespass
Whether it concerns an ox, a donkey, a sheep, or clothes
Or for any kind of lost thing
Which another claims to be his, but for sure no one knows

The cause of both parties
Shall come before the judges
And whomever the judges condemn
Shall pay double to his neighbor, despite his grumps and grudges

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 and no one makes a peep

Then an oath of the Lord shall be between them both
That he has not put his hand into his neighbor’s stuff
And the owner of it shall accept that
And he shall not make it good; the oath is enough

But if, in fact, it is stolen from him, to you I submit
He shall make restitution to the owner of it

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
It falls under the hand of Providence

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; this I do apprise

If its owner was with it, he shall not make it good
If it was hired, it came for its hire – this is understood

Thank You O God for watching over us
And for caring about even the small things we face
Thank you above all for sending Jesus
And for His overwhelmingly abundant grace

For this law which we have time and time again failed
To His cross our failings have forever been nailed

Hallelujah and Amen…

Exodus 21:28-36
The Price of a Life

What does a passage about oxen goring people, animals falling into pits, and oxen causing the death of other oxen have to do with Christ Jesus? Well in one way or another it all points to Him. We have the finer points of the law which show us how burdensome the law really is.

We have things that are expected of us and when we fail at them, we are held accountable for our actions. We have valuations which are set according to animals and people, free men and slaves. There are so many little points to consider.

In the end, and if nothing else, the law continues to show us that even things which we do wrong and which may not even be intentional can still bring guilt upon us. When this happens, we may have to make restitution, or we may even forfeit our lives.

A truth concerning Adam, sin, and death is actually seen in the final few verses of Chapter 21 today. They are verses about an ox which causes the death of another ox, and yet they reveal a truth that Paul wrote about 1500 years later…

Text Verse: “Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned— ¹³ (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. ¹⁴ Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.” Romans 5:12-14

How can it be that an owner’s responsibility concerning the death of another person’s ox has anything to do with Adam, the law, and Jesus? The answer is that even seemingly obscure passages about normal, physical life still contain spiritual truths. This is the wonder and marvel of the Bible.

It is a story which reveals the very heart of God towards His creatures and it’s all to be found in His superior word. And so let’s turn to that precious word once again and… May God speak to us through His word today and may His glorious name ever be praised.

I. A Reckoning for the Lifeblood of Man (verses 28-32)

The final portion of Exodus 21 deals with laws in relation to animals which are owned and to which a responsibility is connected. Some of this will deal with the animals owned by an individual which causes harm to another, and some will deal with harm which has come to an animal owned by another.

The animal is a man’s property and often his livelihood. And so laws needed to be given in order to ensure that the rights of property, as well as the rights of those who interact with it, are maintained.

²⁸ “If an ox gores a man or a woman to death, then the ox shall surely be stoned,

In this passage, we are given a fuller insight into the sanctity of human life than that first defined in Genesis 9:5. In Genesis 8, after the flood, Noah built an altar and sacrificed to the Lord. The Bible makes no note of wrongdoing on Noah’s part and, in fact, the opposite is true. Upon making his offering, we next read this –

“And the Lord smelled a soothing aroma. Then the Lord said in His heart, ‘I will never again curse the ground for man’s sake, although the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth; nor will I again destroy every living thing as I have done.
²² “While the earth remains,
Seedtime and harvest,
Cold and heat,
Winter and summer,
And day and night
Shall not cease.'” Genesis 8:21, 22

The fact that an animal had its life taken from it was acceptable to the Lord. After that note, the focus was on man and on the grace that the Lord would bestow upon him. Immediately after this came the first words of chapter 9 –

“So God blessed Noah and his sons, and said to them: ‘Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth. ² And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be on every beast of the earth, on every bird of the air, on all that move on the earth, and on all the fish of the sea. They are given into your hand. ³ Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. I have given you all things, even as the green herbs.'” Genesis 9:1-3

Concerning animals, several things of note are seen. First, there will be a marked difference in how the animals responded to man. Fear and dread of man would be on them. The implication is that this was not the case before the flood.

Secondly, the animals of the earth were, at this time, given into the hand of man. The verse is clear in that “every moving thing that lives shall be food for you.” Animals are given into man’s hand for his benefit. The life of the animal is wholly at the discretion and taste of the man. Chinese continue to fulfill this precept absolutely. They have a saying, “If it flies in the sky, if it walks or crawls on the earth, or if it swims in the ocean… we will eat it.”

At this point in time, no distinction was made between what could be eaten and what was forbidden. If the man was hungry and the animal looked nummy, then the animal was ready for the oven. Although this is a side issue, not pertaining to the verses we’re looking at, it needs to be addressed from time to time.

The only dietary restrictions concerning animals are those which belong to the Law of Moses. For this reason, two things are to be inferred from this. First, only the Israelite nation, and only until the fulfilling of the law in Christ, were these restrictions in force.

And secondly, the eating of meat, meaning any kind of meat, is both acceptable and approved of by God. If someone wants to only eat vegetables, that is their prerogative. However, no person should ever be placed under such a dietary restriction by a religious edict.

Such a tenet is contrary to the Bible and it usurps what God has allowed. It isn’t just bad doctrine, but it is heretical to so force such a tenet on others. Reinserting the law, or adding a precept not commanded by God, is to be utterly rejected.

With that issue out of the way, we can return to the principle line of thought here. The animal is in a different category than man and is given for the benefit of man. If an animal were to cause the death of a person, then its life is forfeit. This is first seen in Genesis 9:5 –

“Surely for your lifeblood I will demand a reckoning; from the hand of every beast I will require it, and from the hand of man. From the hand of every man’s brother I will require the life of man.” Genesis 9:5

The words of this first verse today are given to further define what those words meant. In this, the ox is taken as the prime example for us to consider, probably because it was a common animal and because it would not be unusual for an ox to so gore a person.

The ox then stands for any animal that would bring death to a person, and the horns are to be taken in place of any other way an animal could kill a man – by teeth, by stomping, or whatever else caused a man to die.

The verb for “gores” is nagakh. This is its first of 11 uses in the Bible. It means “to butt with the horns,” but figuratively, it is also used to mean “to war against.” It is used in this way in 1 Kings 22 –

“Now Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah had made horns of iron for himself; and he said, “Thus says the Lord: ‘With these you shall gore the Syrians until they are destroyed.'” 1 Kings 22:11

The act of goring there was a metaphor for defeating the enemy in battle until they were finished off. In the case an ox goring a person to death, then that animal was to die the death of a murderer, the penalty of which was stoning. As it says saqowl yisaqel ha’shor – “stoning you shall stone the ox.”

^{28 (con’t)} and its flesh shall not be eaten;

There are several suggestions as to why these words have been given. The first is that it is “laden with the guilt of murder” (KD). The second is that the animal would not have been “bled in the usual way, and would be ‘unclean’ food for Hebrews” (Ellicott). A third is that “he has become the symbol of a homicide, and so the victim of a curse (םחֶרֶ).” (Lange).

The third is certainly the case. Although the animal was “laden with the guilt of murder,” that doesn’t fully explain why it wasn’t to be eaten. And the fact that it hadn’t been bled in the usual way only prohibited those of Israel from partaking in it. These two options are both refuted by verses 34 and 35.

If it were simply a matter of meat, then the dead animal could be sold to a non-Israelite. Rather, the animal has been placed under the ban of kharem, or a “thing devoted to God to be destroyed.” This then explains the words of Genesis 9:5 – “Surely for your lifeblood I will demand a reckoning; from the hand of every beast I will require it.”

^{28 (con’t)} but the owner of the ox shall be acquitted.

It’s the natural instinct of an ox to hook with its horns. Because of this, it would be impossible to foresee every time this would happen. And so, it would be impossible to prevent it from happening.

It would be unjust to hold an owner responsible for his ox’s actions if it had no previous record of harming others, or if there were negligence on the part of another who should have known better than to get too close to an ox, irritate it, or whatever.

In such a case, the person was to be released from guilt and considered blameless in the matter. However, if the circumstances were different, then the outcome would also be different…

²⁹ But if the ox tended to thrust with its horn in times past, and it has been made known to his owner, and he has not kept it confined, so that it has killed a man or a woman,

The term “in times past” is mitemol shilshom, or literally “from yesterday, to the third.” It is an idiom which means “in times past,” as it is rightly translated. Unfortunately, the rabbis left the obvious use of the term and invented an abusive system of legalities in regards to this command of the Lord. As John Gill explains –

“Concerning this testimony Maimonides (n) thus writes, ‘this is a testification, all that testify of it three days; but if he pushes, or bites, or kicks, or strikes even an hundred times on one day, this is no testification (not a sufficient one): three companies of witnesses testify of it in one day, lo, this is a doubt, whether it is a (proper) testimony or not; there is no testification but before the owner, and before the sanhedrin:”

In other words, the obvious nature of the intent of the verse was discarded and in its place came a convoluted set of rules and exceptions. This is exactly what Jesus argued against concerning their mishandling of the law.

The verse is clear on its surface. The verb for “gores” of the previous verse is here exchanged for an adjective, naggakh. It is only used two times in the Bible, here and in verse 36. It reflects a sentiment that the ox was prone to goring but it was left unrestrained, despite the owner’s knowledge of it.

This would be comparable to someone having a dangerous pit-bull who had been known to attack in the past and yet it was allowed to roam around freely. In such a case, the owner is guilty for whatever harm the pit-bull causes.

In the case of this bull and the resulting death, it would pertain to a free man, not a slave. In the case of the death of a slave, the later verses in this section will provide more direction.

^{29 (con’t)} the ox shall be stoned and its owner also shall be put to death.

These words further define both the demand upon the animal and the demand upon the man who owns the animal which was originally given in Genesis 9:5 –

“Surely for your lifeblood I will demand a reckoning; from the hand of every beast I will require it, and from the hand of man.” Genesis 9:5

There is a difference in the punishment though. It only says that the ox was to be stoned as the ox is the principle in the murder. However, the means of execution of the man is not specified. It only says that he “shall be put to death.”

This law of the animal is not unique to Israel. Several scholars comment on various practices which are comparable to this law given by Moses. A guy named Pausanias is said to have noted two cases where statues caused the death of people. One was cast into the sea, and the other was ceremonially purified.

Plato would have an animal, or even an inanimate object, which had killed a man tried. If guilt was found, they were to be expelled from the country. In the case of the animal, it would first be slain and then expelled. Whatever good that would do!

In Rome, it is said that hay was twisted around the horns of any dangerous cattle so that the people could see it and be cautious to not approach the animal. And finally, the scholars at Cambridge note that, “In mediaeval Europe animals charged with causing a death were often tried in a court of law, and, if found guilty, killed.” They note that a cow was executed in this manner in France in the year 1740.

It appears that the substance of the words of Genesis 9:5 have continued to be remembered by nations around the world long after they were spoken to Noah. The general concept continues to be held to in the modern world today, but unfortunately, there are those who would prefer saving the life of such an animal even after the loss of a human life.

When we learn to place the value of animal life above that of human life, we upturn the mandates of God and we show both disrespect towards Him directly by acting against His word, and indirectly by disregarding the rights of His image bearers.

³⁰ If there is imposed on him a sum of money, then he shall pay to redeem his life, whatever is imposed on him.

In the case of being the owner of a bull known to be aggressive and which took the life of another, a ransom for his life could be made. This verse records the only time in the Law of Moses where a covering could be made for a capital offense.

This was then both as an allowance of mercy by the family of the person who was killed, and a way for them to being recompensed for their great loss. Rather than demand the offender’s death, they could impose on him a sum; a ransom.

The word is kopher and it has a wide range of meanings which are all interrelated. It can be translated as bribe, pitch, ransom, satisfaction, sum of money, village, and even as the dye known as henna. All of the words carry the same connotation of “covering.”

If you live in a village, you live in a covered area. If you use pitch as Noah did, you use it to cover the leaky spots in a vessel. If you use henna, you cover your skin like a tattoo, and if you pay a ransom, you cover over an offense in the eyes of the offended with the exchanged money.

This word, kopher, comes from the verb kaphar means to appease, or atone. And this is exactly what is implied in such a ransom – a covering in order to atone for wrongdoing. Understanding these unusual connections between the various uses of such words opens up a great deal of understanding in why such words are used throughout the Bible.

And so we go right from the kopher, or sum of money, to the words which the NKJV translates as “to redeem his life.” This is translated from the noun pidyowm. This is the first of three times it will be used and comes from the verb padah meaning “to ransom.”

As it is a noun, the NKJV gets a demerit in their translation. It should say something like “for a ransom of his life” rather than “to redeem his life.” Though the final meaning is understood in both, it is more in line with the original to call it “a ransom for his life” as an exchange is being made between the two – the sum and the life. And that exchange is “whatever is imposed on him.”

Many scholars insert here that the sum was up to the judges to decide. For example, Ellicott says the fine was imposed –

“Primarily, by the aggrieved relatives; but in the case of an exorbitant demand there was, no doubt, an appeal to the judges, who would then fix the amount.”

However, this is incorrect. The family of the dead person had the right of the avenger of blood. Thus they also had the right of granting the mercy. The man’s life is already forfeit, and so there is every reason to assume that any amount, up to all of his possessions, could be demanded.

If the man had his own family, he would have to then decide, “Is my life worth my family’s inheritance? Is it worth the poverty of my wife and children?” This is certainly the case. One of only two other times this word pidyowm is used in the Bible is found in the 49th Psalm. There, it is again used in connection with the word nephesh, or soul –

“Why should I fear in the days of evil,
When the iniquity at my heels surrounds me?
⁶ Those who trust in their wealth
And boast in the multitude of their riches,
⁷ None of them can by any means redeem his brother,
Nor give to God a ransom for him—
⁸ For the redemption of their souls is costly,
And it shall cease forever—
⁹ That he should continue to live eternally,
And not see the Pit.” Psalm 49:5-9

Even Jesus in the New Testament raises the issue in a similar way. Though it is referring to a spiritual matter, the idea of making an exchange for one’s soul, or life force, still applies –

“For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul? ³⁷ Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?” Mark 8:36, 37

The choice for a man of Israel to continue to be redeemed from the grave before he dies, or the choice for a man to be redeemed from the grave after death both carry the thought of a high cost. And so the question is, “What will a man give in exchange for his soul?”

³¹ Whether it has gored a son or gored a daughter, according to this judgment it shall be done to him.

It is amazing to read varied opinions on why this verse is added. One scholar says this was added in order to show that a lesser value for the redemption is implied because they are youths. That has nothing to do with it.

This verse is given between the verse concerning a man or a woman and that of slaves to show that a free person, even if a son or a daughter, has full rights and is of equal value. Neither age nor sex has any bearing on the amount of the claim.

The same law is to be recognized whether a man, a woman, a son, or a daughter is killed. The life of the irresponsible owner is forfeit unless he is willing to pay whatever ransom is demanded. He cannot claim that it was “only a daughter” and thus it didn’t matter. The child’s life was held in the same esteem as any other.

³² If the ox gores a male or female servant, he shall give to their master thirty shekels of silver, and the ox shall be stoned.

As a slave is the property of the owner, no claim could be made by an avenger of blood. Therefore, in lieu of an arbitrary fine, a standard valuation was given for the life of a slave – thirty shekels of silver. In order to justify this amount as being appropriate, scholars show that people devoted to God were given a set value according to their sex and age in Leviticus 27 –

Now the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, ² “Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: ‘When a man consecrates by a vow certain persons to the Lord, according to your valuation, ³ if your valuation is of a male from twenty years old up to sixty years old, then your valuation shall be fifty shekels of silver, according to the shekel of the sanctuary. ⁴ If it is a female, then your valuation shall be thirty shekels; ⁵ and if from five years old up to twenty years old, then your valuation for a male shall be twenty shekels, and for a female ten shekels; ⁶ and if from a month old up to five years old, then your valuation for a male shall be five shekels of silver, and for a female your valuation shall be three shekels of silver; ⁷ and if from sixty years old and above, if it is a male, then your valuation shall be fifteen shekels, and for a female ten shekels.

The idea is that the highest value considered was that of a male from twenty to sixty years – fifty shekels. Therefore, valuing a slave at thirty shekels was not undervaluing the life of the slave in comparison to a free person.

But this isn’t entirely correct. If this standard of Leviticus 27 applied as they are inferring, then there would have been a set value on the life of the people who were gored in verses 29-31, but there was not. Therefore, it cannot be said that Leviticus 27 is an apple-to-apple comparison.

It is a different context with a different purpose. There, it is a set valuation on a person devoted to the Lord as an offering. It is not the valuation of the life of a person who is a servant. The reason this is important isn’t really realized until we get to the account of Jesus’ betrayal. In the book of Matthew, we read these passages concerning the price that was paid for the life of the Messiah –

“Then one of the twelve, called Judas Iscariot, went to the chief priests ¹⁵ and said, ‘What are you willing to give me if I deliver Him to you?’ And they counted out to him thirty pieces of silver. ¹⁶ So from that time he sought opportunity to betray Him.” Matthew 26:14-16

“Then Judas, His betrayer, seeing that He had been condemned, was remorseful and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, ⁴ saying, ‘I have sinned by betraying innocent blood.’
And they said, ‘What is that to us? You see to it!‘
⁵ Then he threw down the pieces of silver in the temple and departed, and went and hanged himself.
⁶ But the chief priests took the silver pieces and said, ‘It is not lawful to put them into the treasury, because they are the price of blood.’ ⁷ And they consulted together and bought with them the potter’s field, to bury strangers in. ⁸ Therefore that field has been called the Field of Blood to this day.
⁹ Then was fulfilled what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying, ‘And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the value of Him who was priced, whom they of the children of Israel priced, ¹⁰ and gave them for the potter’s field, as the Lord directed me.'” Matthew 27:3-10

The valuation for the life of a mere slave in Israel was the value which the Lord, who gave them this same law, was valued at by His betrayer. Judas probably didn’t see the irony in the exchange that the chief priests did as they weighed out the silver for that Servant of infinite value. That sale led directly to His death, a death as if gored by bulls and torn by lions. The 22nd Psalm describes the scene –

Many bulls have surrounded Me;
Strong bulls of Bashan have encircled Me.
¹³ They gape at Me with their mouths,
Like a raging and roaring lion.
¹⁴ I am poured out like water,
And all My bones are out of joint;
My heart is like wax;
It has melted within Me.
¹⁵ My strength is dried up like a potsherd,
And My tongue clings to My jaws;
You have brought Me to the dust of death.
¹⁶ For dogs have surrounded Me;
The congregation of the wicked has enclosed Me.
They pierced My hands and My feet;
¹⁷ I can count all My bones.
They look and stare at Me.
¹⁸ They divide My garments among them,
And for My clothing they cast lots. Psalm 22:12-18

It was His people who sold him to His death and it was men, portrayed as animals, which tore at Him as He died for them. And then, concerning this same group of people who so willingly sold away their Lord for such a pittance, Adam Clarke notes this –

“And in return, the justice of God has ordered it so, that they have been sold for slaves into every country of the universe. And yet, strange to tell, they see not the hand of God in so visible a retribution!” Adam Clarke

Adam Clarke rightly noted that as they sold Christ for the price of a slave, so they were sold to be slaves among the nations, exactly as the Bible prophesied. What he wasn’t alive to see is that just as they were sold, they are now being bought back. The irony of it is that that they are being redeemed by the very One whom they sold off. Isaiah gives us a beginning clue with these words –

“You have sold yourselves for nothing,
And you shall be redeemed without money.” Isaiah 52:3

The suffering Servant who was sold for servant’s wages gave His life to redeem those who sold Him. The Servant has become their Master and those who were His masters have become His servants.

For thirty pieces of silver was sold my Lord
For the price of a slave was His life taken away
But the suffering Servant did this to fulfill the word
And to usher in for us a glorious new day

For thirty pieces of silver was He betrayed
And then He was beaten and hung on a tree
But in His death, God’s wrath towards me was stayed
Yes, for thirty pieces of silver, Christ died for me

Oh that such a thing as this is true!
That God allowed the hands of the wicked to purchase Jesus
For thirty pieces of silver, He redeemed me and you
Yes, for the price of a slave God did this for us

II. Making Good on One’s Responsibilities (verses 33-35)

³³ “And if a man opens a pit, or if a man digs a pit and does not cover it, and an ox or a donkey falls in it,

These final verses pass from the value of human life to the value of non-human property. Here in this verse, two different concepts are given. The first is if a man opens a pit that already existed. Such a pit would have been kept covered for the reason we will see.

The second concept is that of a man digging a new pit and leaving it uncovered for some reason. Maybe he was still in the process of digging it, or maybe he had taken his animals to it and made them aware of where it was so that they wouldn’t later fall into it.

In either case, however, he is considered negligent in his actions towards the animals of another person, and he becomes liable for any damages that occur such as the loss of his ox or donkey. These two are surely selected because of their high value, but the precept would remain true even if a less valuable animal fell in, such as a sheep or a goat.

Pits were, and still are, used for numerous things. They may be cisterns where water comes out. This is seen in the account of Jacob arriving in Padan Aram in Genesis 29:1-3 –

“So Jacob went on his journey and came to the land of the people of the East. ² And he looked, and saw a well in the field; and behold, there were three flocks of sheep lying by it; for out of that well they watered the flocks. A large stone was on the well’s mouth. ³ Now all the flocks would be gathered there; and they would roll the stone from the well’s mouth, water the sheep, and put the stone back in its place on the well’s mouth.”

A pit could also be used for trapping animals, or for storage such as grain. If such a pit existed and it was uncovered by someone, they were under obligation to cover it back up as a safety measure. If they failed to do so, it became their liability to make any damages right. To emphasize the value of the matter, Jesus even gave this example in Matthew –

“Then He said to them, ‘What man is there among you who has one sheep, and if it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will not lay hold of it and lift it out?'” Matthew 12:11

The care of an animal and the cost of it to the owner, made it justifiable to even do what would otherwise be considered work on a Sabbath day. It is for this reason that…

³⁴ the owner of the pit shall make it good;

The word for “owner” here is baal. It means “master” or “lord” and so by implication, the translators say “owner.” This may not be the best translation because a pit may have common use, such as the example earlier of Jacob at the well in Padan Aram.

In this case, it may be better to think of it as the person responsible for the pit, whether he is the owner or not. It may be that one joint-owner of a pit isn’t the one that uncovered it. If that were the case, then it would be wrong to penalize him as responsible for someone else’s negligence.

Rather, it is the man who uncovers or digs the pit who is to make good on the loss. It was his responsibility when he uncovered it and then failed to cover it back up. And this extended to any location. Several scholars say that this only applied on public property. Here’s how Matthew Poole states it –

“…to wit, in a public way, as the reason of the law shows; for if it were done in a man’s own house or ground, there was no danger of such an accident, except the beast transgressed his bounds, and then the man was not culpable.” Matthew Poole

This is wholly incorrect. The liability extended to the loss of the animal regardless of where it fell into a pit. A good verse to substantiate that private property still had to protect the well-being of others is found in Deuteronomy –

“When you build a new house, then you shall make a parapet for your roof, that you may not bring guilt of bloodshed on your household if anyone falls from it.” Deuteronomy 22:8

You might ask, “What was someone doing on someone else’s roof?” That is of less matter than the protection of someone on the roof. Even if houses were joined together and walking on the roof between them was a commonly accepted practice, it still occurred on one’s private property, just as would be the case with an animal falling into a private pit.

^34(con’t) he shall give money to their owner, but the dead animal shall be his.

In such a case, the one who uncovered the pit and failed to cover it again was to pay for the loss of the animal, but the dead animal would be his as a fair exchange. This verse and the next one show that the animal that gored a human in verse 28 was under a ban from being eaten.

It wasn’t because it wasn’t properly bled that it couldn’t be eaten, but because it was devoted to God for destruction. However, in the case of an animal that fell into a pit and died, it still had value to the owner as it could be sold to a foreigner to help recoup the loss he faced through his own stupid negligence. This is seen here –

“You shall not eat anything that dies of itself; you may give it to the alien who is within your gates, that he may eat it, or you may sell it to a foreigner; for you are a holy people to the Lord your God.” Deuteronomy 14:21

The meat could be sold for non-Israelite food, and the skin could be sold to a tanner for leather, a donkey blanket, or whatever else such a hide could be used for. As you can see, even though he had to bear the penalty for his negligence, he was still given a sort of grace in the process.

³⁵ “If one man’s ox hurts another’s, so that it dies, then they shall sell the live ox and divide the money from it;

This is an especially fine aspect within the law. One ox has hurt another and death has resulted. This is the natural order of things and there is nothing offensive or repulsive about the animal. It could even be that the two animals were sparring over a lovely female as oxen will do.

In this case though, the animal is to be sold, not kept. What this implies is that there is now a stain on the ox and it is to be replaced with another which has no fault in it. And isn’t that a beautiful picture of Christ replacing Adam. There was guilt in Adam and so he had to be replaced with another which bore no guilt.

The money was to be divided between the two owners and then they were to do with it as they wished. If they wanted a new ox, they could use the silver from the defective one towards another. Likewise, they were to take action concerning the dead ox…

^{35 (con’t)} and the dead ox they shall also divide.

When we started today, I mentioned the value of animals in regards to humans. This is another verse which shows us this precept. When an ox gores a human and the human dies, it was to be stoned and not eaten. Nothing was mentioned about selling it, or dividing it, or anything else.

It was simply to be stoned and that was that – it received a murderer’s penalty. It bore the bloodguilt of man. This makes a spiritual picture which is explained in 1 John 3 –

“For this is the message that you heard from the beginning, that we should love one another, ¹² not as Cain who was of the wicked one and murdered his brother. And why did he murder him? Because his works were evil and his brother’s righteous.
¹³ Do not marvel, my brethren, if the world hates you. ¹⁴ We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love the brethren. He who does not love his brother abides in death. ¹⁵ Whoever hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.” 1 John 3:11-15

However, when an ox were to cause the death of another ox, then the live ox was to be sold and the money for it was to be divided between the two. Along with that, the dead ox was to be divided. Again, the dead animal still had value, even if an Israelite couldn’t eat it. The proceeds from the dead would help to make up the difference towards buying a new ox.

If you think about it, it is a great picture of what is going on in the world. There is the devil who became the owner of this world. All men were under His power. There is death in Adam, but life also comes through Adam in the sense that Christ came from Adam.

The division of the dead ox shows us this. The dead ox is Adam and his offspring, but because Jesus is a Son of Adam, life came from death pictured by the purchase of a new, unstained ox. The proceeds came from both the live, stained ox and from the dead ox.

It is the dual nature of man – physically alive and yet stained, and spiritually dead. Christ, the replacement, is both alive and unstained and so through Him we can move under His ownership. Like the oxen, there are at this time two owners of men.

This is the division in the world. One side is working death for death and one side is working death for life. The stream of Adam is divided leading to one purpose or the other. Either man stays under the original owner and remains dead, or he moves to the new Owner and is replaced with unstained life.

Even in a simple passage about one oxen causing the death of another, there are spiritual truths to be found. This is further defined in our final verse of the chapter and of the sermon…

*³⁶ Or if it was known that the ox tended to thrust in time past, and its owner has not kept it confined, he shall surely pay ox for ox, and the dead animal shall be his own.

The chapter ends with this final thought concerning culpability.  If the owner knew of the harm that the ox was capable of because of past events, then he became liable for the entire cost of a live ox and only the dead ox would be his. In this, it says shalem ye’shalem – “paying he shall surely pay.”

The entire burden for the matter rests on him, and yet he is allowed at least to keep the dead ox. Again, it is a point of grace in an otherwise sad state of affairs. But again, it points to a spiritual matter. It is a picture of remaining dead in one’s transgressions.

A person who willfully acts against what he knows will bring life remains spiritually dead. Only through active obedience of what is right can one receive what is life. This person has walked away from that and only receives death.

However, as a matter of grace, he has been given this physical life, even if it is a life of spiritual death. The proceeds from it are only death, but they are the proceeds which he is granted by the law.

As was seen at the giving of the law, and as will be seen throughout the law, the law can save no man because no man can fulfill it. And yet, at the same time, the law is the only thing which can bring about salvation. And so, Christ came under the law and fulfilled it for us.

This is what we see in these verses again today. The proceeds of the law for one who has failed to keep the law are death. But the proceeds of the law for one who has met the standards of the law are life. As we are already guilty before the law, then in order to have that life we must yield ourselves to the One who has fulfilled it in our place. Thank God for Jesus Christ.

If you have never asked Him to simply forgive you of your sins and to take away the guilt you bear, do it today…

Closing Verse: “Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. ²⁰ Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.” Romans 3:19, 20

Next Week: Exodus 22:1-15 Something important to relay to you (The Responsible Thing to Do) (60th Exodus Sermon)

The Lord has you exactly where He wants you. He has a good plan and purpose for you. Even if a deep ocean lies ahead of You, He can part the waters and lead you through it on dry ground. So follow Him and trust Him and He will do marvelous things for you and through you.

The Price of a Life

If an ox gores a man or a woman to death
Then the ox shall surely be stoned, as is fit
And its flesh shall not be eaten
But the owner of the ox you shall acquit

But if the ox tended to thrust with its horn in times past
And to his owner with this knowledge he has been filled
And he has not kept it confined
So that it has a man or a woman killed

The ox shall be stoned as directed by Me
And put to death shall its owner also be

If there is imposed on him a sum of money
Then he shall pay, his life to redeem
Whatever is imposed on him
Whatever is fitting as it would seem

Whether it has gored a son or gored a daughter, either one
According to this judgment to him it shall be done

If the ox gores a male or female servant
He shall give thirty shekels of silver to their master
And the ox shall be stoned
For having caused this disaster

And if a man opens a pit
Or if a man digs a pit and does not cover it
And an ox or a donkey falls in it
The owner of the pit shall make it good, as is just, proper, and fit

He shall give money to their owner
But the dead animal shall be his, not just a loner

If one man’s ox hurts another’s
So that it dies, this I to you decide
Then they shall sell the live ox
And the money from it divide

And the dead ox they shall divide also
Such is how the affair shall go

Or if it was known that the ox
Tended to thrust in time past
And its owner has not kept it confined
Then you shall do this at last

He shall surely pay ox for ox
And the dead animal shall be his own
It was he who got himself into this box

Simple laws but which teach of other things
Pictures of Christ and of His work for us
And in them, O how my heart sings
Of the marvelous wonders of our Lord Jesus

Thank You, O God, for this hope You have given to us
Though in Adam we are dead in our sin
Through Your Son we are made alive, yes, through Jesus
A new and eternal life we have been granted to live in

Thank You! Thank You O God, hear our praise
That our hearts will sing to You for eternal days

Hallelujah and Amen…

 

 

Exodus 21:12-27
Keeping Violence in Check

Today, we will continue on with the Law of Moses and the many fine points which it details. They were given to a people to keep them as a properly functioning society. But of course such laws are only as good as the obedience of the people. And the obedience of the people can only be expected if the punishments for infractions are detailed and executed.

And so we will see what was expected of Israel concerning some things which may still apply today and some things which we think might not only be outdated, but even barbarous. But such is not the case. In the end, I think you will see the logic behind each precept that we examine.

Text Verse: “But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully, ⁹ knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, ¹⁰ for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine, ¹¹ according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God which was committed to my trust.” 1 Timothy 1:8-11

Paul says the law is good if one uses it lawfully. And in fact, it is only good if it is used in this way. The trouble with us is that we often use it in unintended ways – be it the Law of Moses or the law of our land. When this occurs, societal breakdown is inevitable.

Let us remember this and attempt to use common sense as we evaluate the Bible and as we apply it to our own lives in the place where we live and under the government which we are obligated to. Everything in context… just as the Bible would teach us.

It’s all to be found in His superior word. And so let’s turn to that precious word once again and… May God speak to us through His word today and may His glorious name ever be praised.

I. Punishable by Death (verses 12-17)

¹² “He who strikes a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death.

The law concerning violence committed to another follows directly after the law concerning slaves. This is not haphazardly stuck here, but intent is seen in this placement. As Keil notes –

“Still higher than personal liberty, however, is life itself, the right of existence and personality; and the infliction of injury upon this was not only prohibited, but to be followed by punishment corresponding to the crime.”

And, as we will see, there is a difference in how a slave is treated and how a free man is treated. Thus, the law of the slave from the previous section is further refined here in this section concerning violence to another.

For now though, the section begins with just a general statement concerning the striking of another which leads to death. From it, various distinctions will be made between murder, manslaughter, etc., which will all be detailed.

There are two main verses concerning killing another which have already been seen in the Bible’s pages. The first came just after the flood of Noah. In Genesis 9, we read these words which make a distinction between the animal life and the human life which is found in the world –

“So God blessed Noah and his sons, and said to them: ‘Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth. ² And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be on every beast of the earth, on every bird of the air, on all that move on the earth, and on all the fish of the sea. They are given into your hand. ³ Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. I have given you all things, even as the green herbs. ⁴ But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood. ⁵ Surely for your lifeblood I will demand a reckoning; from the hand of every beast I will require it, and from the hand of man. From the hand of every man’s brother I will require the life of man.
⁶ ‘Whoever sheds man’s blood,
By man his blood shall be shed;
For in the image of God
He made man.
⁷ And as for you, be fruitful and multiply;
Bring forth abundantly in the earth
And multiply in it.'”

What is implied in Genesis 9 is that the killing of an animal is not murder. Words concerning the care of animals are found within the Bible, but the killing of animals cannot be considered murder. Unfortunately, in religions of the world, and in the minds of even many weak or uninformed Christians, confusion over this exists.

It is for the care of man that the Bible’s attention is directed. And so, once again in Exodus 20, we read these words –

“You shall not murder.” Exodus 20:13

That is explicit, and yet it leaves as much unsaid as it reveals. What the definition of murder is still requires more analysis from the Bible, including the verses of today’s passage. Further, though the command is given, it doesn’t detail any penalties for violating the command.

Laws which are not enforced by penalties are rather pointless. They remain inoperative because there is no accountability for a violation of the law. All we need to do is look at obama’s America today and this is more than evident. Only anarchy can result. Now the penalty for murder is given – the murderer shall be put to death. The reason for this is explicitly stated in Numbers 35 –

“So you shall not pollute the land where you are; for blood defiles the land, and no atonement can be made for the land, for the blood that is shed on it, except by the blood of him who shed it.” Numbers 35:33

Murder is bloodshed and bloodshed defiles the land. Without taking the life of the offender, there is no atonement for the bloodshed and when there is no atonement, then the Lord will respond in judgment. What is implied is that this is an eternal standard of God. This means that when we fail to punish capital crimes in our nations, even today, we heap up guilt upon ourselves.

But Numbers 35 gives more details concerning the murderer –

“Whoever kills a person, the murderer shall be put to death on the testimony of witnesses; but one witness is not sufficient testimony against a person for the death penalty. ³¹ Moreover you shall take no ransom for the life of a murderer who is guilty of death, but he shall surely be put to death.” Numbers 35:30, 31

More than one witness is required in order to find a sentence of guilt concerning murder, and if a person is found guilty of murder, no amount of ransom is sufficient to redeem the offender from the penalty of death. His life is forfeit. As you can see, there are protections and there are prohibitions associated with the crime.

¹³ However, if he did not lie in wait,

It would be inappropriate to have the same punishments for different levels of homicide. The willful murder of another bears one type of penalty, the unintentional killing of another is to be handled in another way.

The word for “lie in wait” here is tsadah. It is used for the first of just three times in the Bible and this is exactly what it means. It means that someone willfully and with preplanning came to destroy another person.

^{13 (con’t)} but God delivered him into his hand,

In contrast to a purposeful action, it says v’ha’elohim innah l’yadow – “but the God allowed into his hand.” It is an interesting set of words. First, there is an article in front of “God.” This is speaking of the One true God who has divinely purposed all things.

The article is important because elohim can mean more than just God. Elohim can be judges or spirits or even false gods. Ha’elohim is “the God.” He is the One who has predestined all things according to His will. In this case, the tragedy was allowed to occur by Him for His own sovereign reasons.

The rare word translated as “deliver” is anah. It is the first of just six times it will be used and it means “to befall.” The Creator God allowed the person to die at the hands of another. The implication is that this was a part of his purposes from creation itself.

^{13 (con’t)} then I will appoint for you a place where he may flee.

The one guilty of unintentional manslaughter will have a place appointed to where he may flee. Such a place is known as a city of refuge, and the law concerning it is detailed in Numbers 35:9-28.

These cities of refuge were placed throughout Israel so that the offender could flee quickly to such a city and have his life spared. Because he had killed, even though unintentionally, the near kin of the deceased had the right, and even the obligation to kill him based on Genesis 9.

However, if the offender were to reach the city of refuge, the near kin had no right to take his life. If at anytime he left the city of refuge, the near kin could pursue him and take him. However, at the death of the high priest of Israel, all cases of manslaughter were forgiven and the near kin no longer had a right to kill the offender. He instead could return to his home without fear.

What a picture of Christ, our true High Priest, who removes our guilt through His death! It is a lesson that only through death can the guilt of the shedding of blood be atoned. Thank God for Jesus!

¹⁴ “But if a man acts with premeditation against his neighbor,

This verse stands in contrast to the previous one. Instead of not lying in wait in order to kill, this person acts with premeditation. The word is zud and means arrogantly, or proudly, or rebelliously. Zud is the word which describes the sound of boiling (zud zud zud) and so it is a metaphor for being boiled up and thus prideful. Instead of the previous example of innocent intent, this example is one of true guilt.

^{14 (cont’t)} to kill him by treachery,

The word for “treachery” is ormah. This is its first of only five uses in the Bible. It indicates craftiness or prudence and comes from the verb arom which means “to act craftily.” This then is set in contrast to the words of verse 13 which said, “…but God delivered him into his hand.”

^{14 (cont’t)} you shall take him from My altar, that he may die.

The altar is the place of mercy. When one first came into the tabernacle, they would come to the altar of burnt sacrifice. The altar is where sins were expiated, where mercy was granted, and from which a propitious relationship was re-established with God. Charles Ellicott, citing several ancient sources, says that –

“In most parts of the ancient world a scruple was felt about putting criminals to death when once they had taken sanctuary, and those who did so were regarded as accursed … The Mosaic Law regarded this scruple as a superstition, and refused to sanction it.” Charles Ellicott

A person who had willfully and intentionally killed another was not to find mercy, even at this place of mercy. Thus this is the antithesis of the words of verse 13 which said, “… then I will appoint for you a place where he may flee.”

If the place where restoration with God was not available, then there would be no other place that he could flee to. He was to be taken from the altar and put to death. To understand this from an actual account in the Bible, we will take a brief diversion and go to the account of Joab, the commander of David’s armies to see this precept come to life.

In 1 Kings 2:5 & 6, David gave Solomon his final instructions before his death. This included a charge to bring the misdeeds of Joab back upon his own head –

“Moreover you know also what Joab the son of Zeruiah did to me, and what he did to the two commanders of the armies of Israel, to Abner the son of Ner and Amasa the son of Jether, whom he killed. And he shed the blood of war in peacetime, and put the blood of war on his belt that was around his waist, and on his sandals that were on his feet. ⁶ Therefore do according to your wisdom, and do not let his gray hair go down to the grave in peace.”

The killing of Abner and Amasa were exactly what this verse in Exodus is describing. He acted on his own accord, and in a prideful manner against David’s orders, zud zud zud. He used the death of his own brother, Asahel, as a pretext for killing these two men. Because of his actions which brought a stain on David’s name, David so charged Solomon. After David’s death, Solomon took the requested action against Joab –

“Then news came to Joab, for Joab had defected to Adonijah, though he had not defected to Absalom. So Joab fled to the tabernacle of the Lord, and took hold of the horns of the altar. ²⁹ And King Solomon was told, ‘Joab has fled to the tabernacle of the Lord; there he is, by the altar.’ Then Solomon sent Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, saying, ‘Go, strike him down.’ ³⁰ So Benaiah went to the tabernacle of the Lord, and said to him, ‘Thus says the king, ‘Come out!’|And he said, ‘No, but I will die here.’ And Benaiah brought back word to the king, saying, “Thus said Joab, and thus he answered me.”
³¹ Then the king said to him, ‘Do as he has said, and strike him down and bury him, that you may take away from me and from the house of my father the innocent blood which Joab shed. ³² So the Lord will return his blood on his head, because he struck down two men more righteous and better than he, and killed them with the sword—Abner the son of Ner, the commander of the army of Israel, and Amasa the son of Jether, the commander of the army of Judah—though my father David did not know it. ³³ Their blood shall therefore return upon the head of Joab and upon the head of his descendants forever. But upon David and his descendants, upon his house and his throne, there shall be peace forever from the Lord.’
³⁴ So Benaiah the son of Jehoiada went up and struck and killed him; and he was buried in his own house in the wilderness. ³⁵ The king put Benaiah the son of Jehoiada in his place over the army, and the king put Zadok the priest in the place of Abiathar.” 1 Kings 2:28-35

Joab died without mercy at the horns of the altar for the willful murder of innocent men – zud zud zud. Thus, the command of Exodus 21:14 was fulfilled in him with the exception of first removing him from the altar. As the Geneva Bible states –

“The holiness of the place should not defend the murderer.” Geneva

¹⁵ “And he who strikes his father or his mother shall surely be put to death.

Some scholars try to define this striking as one that leads to the death of the parents. This is incorrect. When death is associated with such an action, it is explicitly stated. This command can mean nothing less than a willful strike against the parents is a capital crime, regardless if they are seriously harmed, or die, or not.

In fact, Keil notes that, “The murder of parents is not mentioned at all, as not likely to occur and hardly conceivable.” Such an act would be regarded as so vile that it is left out of Scripture entirely. The reason for the harshness of this command is that, “The parents are God’s vicegerents for the children” (Lange).

As they have been placed in this position, an attack against them is an implicit attack against God who has placed them there.

¹⁶ “He who kidnaps a man and sells him, or if he is found in his hand, shall surely be put to death.

This law is general in nature and appears to apply to any kidnapping of a man. However, in Deuteronomy 24, it is said to apply explicitly to fellow Israelites –

“If a man is found kidnapping any of his brethren of the children of Israel, and mistreats him or sells him, then that kidnapper shall die; and you shall put away the evil from among you.” Deuteronomy 24:7

In this verse in Deuteronomy, instead of a “man” being kidnapped, it says nephesh, or soul. Thus it is inclusive of women. Therefore, the kidnapping of any man is explicitly forbidden in all circumstances while the kidnapping of any male or female Israelite is forbidden.

Paul in 1 Timothy 1, brings this law back to mind without regard to Jew or Gentile. Therefore, it appears that the intent is that kidnapping was not to be condoned in any form. However, in the kidnapping of an Israelite and mistreating them or selling them off, an especially grievous thing would occur.

The Israelites were free people unless they were sold into slavery. To force them into slavery without regard to the law would then deprive them of their freedoms which the law itself gave to them.

¹⁷ “And he who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death.

Cursing one’s parents is placed on the same level as striking a parent because it stems from the same attitude of the heart. God’s appointed authority and His personal majesty are violated when the parents are violated. He ordained the parents of the child and therefore He is cursed implicitly in the curse. Thus it is seen in the Bible that the cursing of parents and blaspheme against God are the two sins of the tongue which are to be punished with death –

“Then you shall speak to the children of Israel, saying: ‘Whoever curses his God shall bear his sin. ¹⁶ And whoever blasphemes the name of the Lord shall surely be put to death. All the congregation shall certainly stone him, the stranger as well as him who is born in the land. When he blasphemes the name of the Lord, he shall be put to death.'” Leviticus 24:15, 16

The Lord’s care of the honoring of the parents is so prominent, that in the book of Proverbs, we read these ominous words –

“Whoever curses his father or his mother,
His lamp will be put out in deep darkness.” Proverbs 20:20

Man is filled with violent tendencies
And when acted upon he must be corrected
Whether through punishment or tender mercies
If he isn’t restrained, all of society is affected

To kill another is to deprive him of his life
A son will be left fatherless when his dad is killed
A woman who loses her husband is no longer a wife
When someone takes him away; when his blood is spilled

And so we are given laws in order to restrain
And punishments to ensure the laws we do obey
With these measures peace in society we maintain
And the people are free to enjoy life from day to day

II. When Punishment is Due (verses 18-21)

¹⁸ “If men contend with each other, and one strikes the other with a stone or with his fist,

People fight as people do. In this verse, there is no sense of premeditation like there was in verse 14. There was simply a quarrel which resulted in a fight. The term “with a stone or with his fist” is intended to show this. A person always has a fist available and stones are likewise everywhere.

Having a knife or some other weapon could imply premeditation (zud zud zud), but the fist or a stone are not considered things you would use if you had evil intent in advance. And so, unless death resulted, which would then be considered murder under any circumstances, another avenue would be pursued in executing justice.

The word “fist” here is used in a surprisingly sparse manner in the Bible. It is egroph and this is the first of but two times it will be seen. The other is in Isaiah 58:4.

^{18 (con’t)} and he does not die but is confined to his bed,

There is a reason for this specificity. The law required an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. However, in this case, such a law was neither practical nor feasible. Practically, it would serve no useful purpose for the offended person.

Feasibly, it could not be guaranteed that an in-kind punishment would result. To punch the offender or crack him over the head with a stone could kill him. Thus the punishment would not fit the crime. Instead it would be greater than the offense.

Or, instead of being confined to his bed, he may only be knocked out for 10 minutes and wake up with a headache. Thus the punishment would be less than the offense.

¹⁹ if he rises again and walks about outside with his staff,

A second damage is recorded. The first is being confined to the bed; this is rising but needing a staff. The word for staff is mish’enah. This is its first of 12 uses in the Bible, the most famous certainly being the comforting staff of the 23rd Psalm. It is a literal staff which he must use to support himself, but despite this…

^{19 (con’t)} then he who struck him shall be acquitted.

What this means is that he would be acquitted of blood guilt. The man may die sometime afterwards, be it soon or in many years, but the bloodshed was not to be imputed to him. He had healed sufficiently to prove that any later death was not connected to the incident. In such a case, justice would be served in another way…

^{19 (con’t)} He shall only pay for the loss of his time, and shall provide for him to be thoroughly healed.

This was such a noble idea that since it was prescribed within the law of Israel, it has spread out to many other societies. A society does not benefit from the death of its people, and so rather than executing a citizen for such a crime, but to ensure that he is restrained in the future and that the offended party is taken care of, this marvelous provision was commanded.

²⁰ “And if a man beats his male or female servant with a rod, so that he dies under his hand, he shall surely be punished.

This verse, on the surface, and to our modern sensibilities, may seem harsh or even inappropriate, but it is actually a protection for the slave which had not been seen before and continued to not be seen in the ancient world.

According to the Dictionary of Roman and Greek Antiquities, for the slaves in Rome, “the master could treat the slave as he pleased, could sell him, punish him, and put him to death.” However, this was not the case in the Hebrew society.

First, the beating is noted for male and female alike. Both sexes were expected to be treated with equal fairness. Secondly, the word for “rod” here is not the same as the previous verse. It is shevet. This is literally a stick used for punishing, writing, fighting, ruling, walking, and so on. In this context, it is what is used for discipline. In the proverbs, it is used in exactly this manner –

“He who spares his rod hates his son,
But he who loves him disciplines him promptly.” Proverbs 13:24

The striking of a slave with such a rod was used for correction. In fact, a rebellious slave could be corrected no other way. Therefore, if a slave were to die from such punishment, it wasn’t handled as a case of murder. The punishment is not specified, but if death were mandated, it would have said that death was due. It does not.

The intent of a master to kill his slave could not be readily assumed, because there was a monetary value associated with such a slave. It would be contrary to assume that a slave owner intended to kill his slave and thus destroy his own wealth. Therefore, the law sided with the slave owner.  Having said this, the law here will be defined further in Leviticus and it will show that Hebrews were to be exempt from such harsh service –

“And if one of your brethren who dwells by you becomes poor, and sells himself to you, you shall not compel him to serve as a slave. ⁴⁰ As a hired servant and a sojourner he shall be with you, and shall serve you until the Year of Jubilee. ⁴¹ And then he shall depart from you—he and his children with him—and shall return to his own family. He shall return to the possession of his fathers. ⁴² For they are My servants, whom I brought out of the land of Egypt; they shall not be sold as slaves. ⁴³ You shall not rule over him with rigor, but you shall fear your God. ⁴⁴ And as for your male and female slaves whom you may have—from the nations that are around you, from them you may buy male and female slaves. ⁴⁵ Moreover you may buy the children of the strangers who dwell among you, and their families who are with you, which they beget in your land; and they shall become your property. ⁴⁶ And you may take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them as a possession; they shall be your permanent slaves. But regarding your brethren, the children of Israel, you shall not rule over one another with rigor.” Leviticus 25:39-46

²¹ Notwithstanding, if he remains alive a day or two, he shall not be punished; for he is his property.

The slave is the property of the owner. If his slave needed a beating in order to become submissive, even if that meant lost productivity, then the punishment was to be the loss of the productivity for the owner, and a painful lesson for the slave.

The word for “property” here is keseph. It literally means “silver” and thus implicitly “money.” The owner’s wealth is tied up in the slave and therefore, the slave rights are tied up in the rod of the owner; they go no further unless death results.

In all, the laws given here are not only fair and just, they are exceptional for a world which had no such prescriptions before. They protected the rights of both master and slave with fairness while maintaining human dignity and established lines of authority.

How often have we hurt another without evil intent?
A sudden angry burst which sets our soul on fire
And we lash out with our fists, until our rage is spent
We live our lives walking on such a tightened wire

The law is good, for it reminds us to keep our cool
Without it, many would be unrestrained in society
But even the law is rejected by many a fool
And they act towards their fellow man with great impropriety

For them, punishment is necessary, this is certain
For some it might be forty lashes or five years in jail
But for others it might be time to draw the in the curtain
And then to put the top on the box and secure it with the final nail

III. Justice in the Face of Harm (verses 22-27)

²² “If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman’s husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

This is one of the most important verses in the Bible for understanding the nature of the unborn. In our world today, almost no consideration is given to the rights of the unborn, and those that are given are both convoluted and often manipulated.

Within just the past few weeks, the supreme court of New York determined that an unborn child has no rights at all because the law doesn’t consider them as people. Their law may not, but God’s law does, explicitly.

Of first note is that the woman is said to be with child. The word is harah and it means exactly that, she has conceived. The attention is given to the fact that she has a baby in her womb, not to her. She is already alive and protected by the laws of Israel. The focus is on the unborn.

Secondly, it notes that the woman is hurt and gives birth prematurely. Again, the focus is not on the woman, but on the child. What will happen to the child?

The term “yet no harm follows” is speaking of the child in the womb, not the mother who bears the child. This is obvious on the surface because if it was concerning the wife, it would be superfluous to have mentioned the fact that she was pregnant.

The word for prematurely is yeladeha. The word yeled means “child” here – whether born or unborn. No distinction is made between the two. But the word is plural yeladeha or “children.” And thus it is an indication of indefiniteness.

Could there be more than one child? If so, then the death of either or both carries the same offense. Thus it cannot be speaking of the woman, but of the unborn.

To add to the emphasis here, three words have to be noted. The word “harm” is ason. This verse and the next have the last two of five times it will be seen in the Bible. Then there is the word “punished” which is anash. In this verse are the first two of nine times it will be used in the Bible.

And finally there is the word for “judges” which is palil. This is a rare and poetic term used for the first of just three times. But as others note, this word doesn’t make sense because the fine was imposed by the husband. Unless we are being told that judges must arbitrate the claim.

However, the Greek Old Testament doesn’t mention judges. It just says that he shall give by means of what is fit. Therefore, it is more probable that instead of the Hebrew word for judges, the word for untimely birth, which is very similar, is what is being referred to.

As Jewish Rabbinical sentiment unfortunately and incorrectly has been that this harm is only referring to the woman and not the unborn, it makes all the sense in the world that they would find the word judges more satisfactory than the word for “untimely birth.”

Regardless of this final word, the context and intent is clear. The child in the womb is considered a human and the focus is on the harm it receives. Thus verse 23 provides the penalty when harm follows…

²³ But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life,

The focus has been on the child – was it born alive and in good shape or did the child die? We must remember that this entire section has been based on the words of verse 12 –

“He who strikes a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death.”

From that point on, what constitutes a capital offense has been outlined. In the same way, the same words are found in Leviticus 24:17 which are given based on the stoning of a blasphemer who was the son of a Jewish mother and an Egyptian father.

Thus the tenets are given for Jews and Gentiles, men and women, and those out of the womb and those in the womb. The Lord’s protections and His judgments follow through to all, including what today we so arbitrarily call a “fetus.” When the unborn is harmed and it dies, the offender’s life is forfeit. A life is demanded for the loss of the life.

²⁴ eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,

These words form the earliest known record of the lex talionis, or “law of like-for-like,” known to man. It was later incorporated into other societies. Though seemingly harsh, they are actually as much a curb on retribution as they are a means of punishing an offender.

No greater punishment was to be meted out than that which had been inflicted. Thus the punisher was not unduly or overly punished. After life itself, these first three are each parts of the body which can either be lost or ruined.

If the baby were born with the loss of a foot, the one who struck the woman would forfeit his own foot – into no shoe could he it put. If a fight between two men resulted in the loss of an eye, then the offender was to lose his eye. However, that would be a difficult pill to swallow for a man with but one eye. Especially if his name were one-eye Guy.

If a tooth was knocked out by another child at school, the offending child was to have his matching tooth knocked out. But that wouldn’t be so bad if his name was Keith and he still had his baby teeth.

And if a woman purposely dropped a millstone on another woman’s hand, then her hand would be forfeit. One would hope she wasn’t also mute, or sign language would be rather difficult. She would be Deaf-Beth with no hand for us to understand.

²⁵ burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

These three don’t deal with specific body parts, but rather what can happen to the body through the abuse of another. The word for “burn” is keviyyah. It is only used twice and both are here in this verse. It means a burning or a branding. It would be a painful lesson for the offender to also face what he had done to another.

The word for “wound” is petsa. It hasn’t been seen since Genesis 4:23 and it will only be used eight times total. It comes from the verb patsa which means bruising or even emasculation. If one were to harm another in this way, it was to also be done to him.

And the word for stripe is khabburah. It was also last seen in Genesis 4:23 and will only be used seven times total in the Bible. It indicates blueness or a bruise or some other similar type of wound.

These punishments were intended as judicial measures for actual wrongs perpetrated against another. They allowed like-punishment to protect the rights of the people and to keep people restrained within the confines of society.

However, by Jesus’ time, they were taken as a moral precept and imperative. They missed the spirit and the intent of the law. Because of this, Jesus corrected them on the purpose of the very law that He had given 1500 years earlier –

“You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ ³⁹ But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. ⁴⁰ If anyone wants to sue you and take away your tunic, let him have your cloak also. ⁴¹ And whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two. ⁴² Give to him who asks you, and from him who wants to borrow from you do not turn away.'” Matthew 5:38-42

Jesus would rather that the law be upheld, while at the same time mercy would be given when it was right to give it. And even more than mercy would be grace added on top of it.

²⁶ “If a man strikes the eye of his male or female servant, and destroys it, he shall let him go free for the sake of his eye.

Once again, the rights of the slave are highlighted. Though they are in a different category because they are the property of their owners, they were to be given freedoms if the owner abused the rights the same law granted to him.

Even more, the laws applied equally to male and female. No hint of inequality can be found in these words. However, rather than the law of like-for-like for the free members of the society, the slave is an exception. Because the master was a free man, it would be a social injustice to allow for an in-kind retaliation.

And so rather than like-for-like, they were to go out free. It is the same word which was first used in verse 2 when speaking of the freed Hebrew slave in the seventh year of their service. They were granted unconditional release because of the loss of their eye.

* ²⁷ And if he knocks out the tooth of his male or female servant, he shall let him go free for the sake of his tooth.

Of this verse, the Geneva Bible says –

“So God revenges cruelty in the even the least things.” Geneva

What do they mean by this? The answer is that the previous verse and this verse are set in contrast to one another. The eye is looked at as the most precious of the organs. The loss of the eye is considered especially trying and difficult to deal with.

On the other hand, the loss of a tooth is almost normal and was commonly expected. And if you lost one, there were still thirty some others to use, until they too fell out. And how quickly that occurred in times past before modern dental care came about!

They didn’t have Oral B supersonic toothbrushes and Crest fluoride-enhanced, peroxide whitening, sensitivity eliminating, and minty-fresh flavored toothpaste in every store in town. Rather, they suffered with the degradation of their teeth even from youth.

In the Song of Solomon, the king praises his young bride with these words –

“Your teeth are like a flock of newly shorn sheep
coming up from washing,
each one having a twin,
and not one missing. ” Song of Solomon 4:2

He praises her for her beautiful teeth, comparing them to a flock of newly shorn sheep that have just been washed, but he also praises her for having all of them. It is something that would have been unusual, and so he highlights the fact for us to know.

In other words, the contrast between the eye of verse 26, and the tooth of verse 27, is given as an all encompassing thought concerning the slave – from the most precious to the least valued. If they received harm beyond what was considered normal, they were to be set free.

Now that our verses are done for the day, let us remember Jesus’ words concerning the law of murder that we looked at earlier –

“You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder, and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.’ ²² But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment.” Matthew 5:21, 22

Has anyone here ever been angry with his brother without a cause? It is as if you have committed murder to God. Has anyone ever looked at another in lust? It is as if you’ve committed adultery in His presence. God looks beyond the externals to the very inner parts of man, to things that we don’t even know are there.

And in His holiness, He must judge our sin. Can anyone here say that they are without guilt? I dare say that none of us can. But though a law was given that condemns us, a Son was given to forgive us. The law and all of its associated punishment is there to show us of our need for something else… mercy. Let me tell you about God’s mercy in the giving of His own Son…

Closing Verse: “Moreover the law entered that the offense might abound. But where sin abounded, grace abounded much more, ²¹ so that as sin reigned in death, even so grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” Romans 5:20, 21

Next Week: Exodus 21:28-36 What happens if an ox gores your husband or your wife? (The Price of a Life) (59th Exodus Sermon)

The Lord has you exactly where He wants you. He has a good plan and purpose for you. Even if a deep ocean lies ahead of You, He can part the waters and lead you through it on dry ground. So follow Him and trust Him and He will do marvelous things for you and through you.

Keeping Violence in Check

He who strikes a man so that he dies, understand
Shall be put to death surely
Yet, if he did not lie in wait, but God delivered him into his hand
Then I will appoint for you a place where he may flee

But if a man acts with premeditation
Against his neighbor, to kill him by treachery
You shall take him from My altar, that he may die
This is how it is to be

And he who strikes his father or his mother, so I say
Shall surely be put to death; it shall be this way

He who kidnaps a man and sells him
Or if he is found in his hand
Shall surely be put to death
This is what My law does demand

And he who curses his father or his mother, as I tell you
Shall surely be put to death; this is what you are to do

If men contend with each other
And one strikes the other with a stone or with his fist
And he does not die but is confined to his bed
Yes, if the pain of death was missed

If he rises again and walks about
Outside with his staff
Then he who struck him shall be acquitted
He is not to receive capital wrath

He shall only pay for the loss of his time; as my word has revealed
And shall provide for him to be thoroughly healed

And if a man beats his male or female servant
With a rod, so that he dies under his hand
He shall surely be punished
As the law does demand

Notwithstanding, if he remains alive a day or two
He shall not be punished; for he is his property
It is his right to so punish as he did do

If men fight, and hurt a woman with child
So that she gives birth prematurely
Yet no harm follows
He shall surely be punished accordingly

As the woman’s husband imposes on him
Such terms as he will set
And he shall pay as the judges determine
Whatever sentence is rendered, it shall be met

But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life
Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot
Burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe
This law of the talion is the one upon the offender you shall put

If a man strikes the eye of his male or female servant
And destroys it, he shall let him go free
For the sake of his eye
The poor fellow with that eye can no longer see

And if he knocks out the tooth of his male or female servant
He shall let him go free for the tooth’s sake
Because he now talks with a whistle or a lisp
He shall go free, because of the funny sound he does now make

God is not unfair in His commands
They are set for the protection of both the offended and offender
Israel would have done well to comply with these demands
They would have remained in the land, guarded by His splendor

But they, like us, have failed to live in a right manner
And they were punished in exile from their sweet land
Until He whistled for their return to His highly raised banner
And once again they are nourished from His loving hand

Let us learn though from the lesson of Israel
That the law can never save us, instead it can only condemn
This is the message that the Bible does tell
And so for the coming of Jesus, we must surely cry “Amen!”

Yes Lord, You freed us from the bondage and have set us free
And now, we in freedom can praise You for all eternity

Hallelujah and Amen…

Exodus 21:1-11
The Law of the Hebrew Slave

On 28 October of 2003, I decided to put my commitment to Christ in writing so that I would always have it to refer to in the future. I even took it to the bank and had my wife and a notary witness it. It deals with the passage that we’re looking at today.

Subject: An Awl Through My Earlobe

To: My Master and Redeemer, Jesus Christ

As your bondservant, it is my heartfelt desire to give my life entirely to you forever. In accordance with Exodus 21:5 & 6, I declare the following:

I love you as my Master. I and my wife and children have committed our lives to You and do not want to go free from Your presence. May my signature below be acceptable as an awl through my ear into You, the Door of Salvation.

When You brought me out of spiritual Egypt and called me as Yours, it was with the love of a caring and gracious Master. Since that time, you have blessed me in every way. May my every breath and step be in line with Your wishes. When I stray, rebuke me gently and have mercy on my family and me. May Your Holy Spirit indwell me at all times and continue to fill me with each passing moment. I look forward to eternity with You, ever mindful of my position as Your lowly and humble bondservant.

Emlen S. Garrett
A Bondservant of Christ

Text Verse: “We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, ¹⁶ knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.” Galatians 2:15, 16

Exodus 21 is a part of the law, a law which is annulled in Christ. And so it would seem that my letter to the Lord would not be fitting. We are under the New Covenant, not the Old. But what this Old Testament passage pictures is actually revealed in Christ Jesus in the New Testament. And so it applies.

When I typed that letter, I was young in the faith and my doctrine was still undeveloped, but I realized even then that every word of the Bible points to Jesus. I never in my wildest dreams would have thought that I would be preaching on this passage to you all at the Superior Word today. It seems unimaginable to me that this would be the case.

But the greatness of God is revealed in the fact that He can use a guy as unworthy as me to preach His word. I mean,,, this is an amazingly great God. And I thank Him for His grace and His tender mercies on my life and on that of my family, just as I requested those 13 long years ago.

Well, let’s get into this passage and see what got me all stirred up about it back in 2003. Wonderful stuff from His superior word! And so let’s turn to that precious word once again and… May God speak to us through His word today and may His glorious name ever be praised.

I. The Lord’s Freed Man (verses 1-6)

“Now these are the judgments which you shall set before them:

Immediately following the giving of the Ten Commandments came the people’s request to Moses to not let them hear the words of the Lord any longer, lest they die. Directly following that, it says that Moses drew near where God was in order to continue to hear what the Lord would direct for the people.

The first words from Him closed Chapter 20 with a further prohibition against idolatry and the instructions for the earthen altar. Now, Chapter 21 begins a long list of instructions which will form the basis of the regular conduct of the Israelite society. It will comprise most of this and the next two chapters after it.

The words to begin the chapter and the instructions say, v’elleh ha’mishpatim asher tasim liphnehem. The word rendered here as “judgments” is mishpat. It indicates justice and comes from the word shaphat, a verb meaning to “govern” or “judge.”

This word is widely translated as laws, regulations, rules, ordinances, decisions, legal decisions, rights, etc. Matthew Poole gives the full meaning of the word with the paraphrase “the rules which shall guide judicial decisions.” These judicial decisions belong to both civil and criminal law, but they are also used to guide both moral and religious rulings as well.

It has to be remembered from this point on, that the government is established as a pure theocracy. In other governments, humans made the laws and humans decided whether they were violated and what type of punishment to inflict.

This is not the case with Israel at this time. Instead, the laws are given by God and the punishments for violations are often mandated by Him as well. However, He also allows the people to render judgments. When a case was not covered by His words, it could be brought directly to Him.

God is giving Israel general statutes to resolve particular cases under His theocratic rule. It is the first stage of Israelite society and it will continue through the time of the judges in this particular fashion. It will fail due to the people’s inability to keep the laws and be obedient to God, and the type of rule will change to a kingship under a human king.

The statutes will continue to be in effect, at that time, but the time of the kings will be used to show that, once again, man fails to adhere to God’s perfect standards of justice. Every step of the way, the time of the law is given to show us our need for something else. Only in the coming of Christ is that need filled. Concerning these rules of governance, Adam Clarke notes the following –

“There is so much good sense, feeling, humanity, equity, and justice in the following laws, that they cannot but be admired by every intelligent reader; and they are so very plain as to require very little comment.” Adam Clarke

Despite his comment that these laws require very little comment, Clarke commented quite a bit on them. Such is the joy of reading Clarke and knowing that his comments often override his own comments in his joy to search out the word.

And so let us begin our look into these equitable and just laws which the Lord will now utter. It is these same rules of governance that Moses is instructed to set liphnehem, or “before their faces.”

² If you buy a Hebrew servant, he shall serve six years;

The term “Hebrew” is used only 34 times and 14 are in Exodus. Not only that, but it was last used in Exodus 10:3. That was 30 sermons ago, and now this is the last time it will be used in Exodus. It won’t be used again until Deuteronomy 15:12.

It is then of singular importance to understand that this word is being used for a specific reason. The name Hebrew means “to cross over.” The use and its meaning are tied directly to the reason for these instructions now.

The word for “servant” here is ebed. It means a servant or a slave. In the context of what is being relayed, it is referring more to a bondman, or a slave, than it is a mere servant. There is no pay involved and the means of one becoming indentured show that this is not mere servant-hood.

The Lord begins these rules of society with slavery probably for at least three reasons. The first is that this physical slavery pictures spiritual slavery. This has already been the case and it will continue to be seen in the Bible’s pages.

The second reason is that the Israelites had been slaves themselves in Egypt. Now, just a couple months later, they were organized as a nation of free people, but some of whom may be brought into slavery for one of various reasons. As this was expected, the new masters who were once under the yoke of slavery would be instructed how to properly handle this issue themselves.

The third reason is that the slave was more likely to be an offender within the household than a member of the household, and the slave was also more likely to be mistreated within the household than anyone else. In order to ensure that none would be mistreated and to ensure the master’s rights were also known, the issue is raised right at the beginning of the judicial laws.

The idea of slavery is taken as an axiom here. It was an existing institution and it would continue under the time of the law. In the New Testament, there is nothing which prohibits the idea of slavery, and it is noted in the New Testament without regards to whether it is right or wrong. It simply exists and is a part of the human experience.

However, there is a truth which needs to be addressed concerning slavery before we actually consider this verse. No man is free. According to the words of Jesus, such as in John 8:34, and elsewhere in the words of the New Testament, we are either a slave of sin, or we are a slave of Christ and to His righteousness. Paul goes into great detail in Romans 6 on this subject.

Concerning Hebrew slaves, there are at least six different reasons why a Hebrew might become a slave: 1) If someone became extremely poor, they could sell their freedom. This is found in Leviticus 25:39. 2) A father might sell his child. An example is found in Nehemiah 5:5. 3) A debtor who couldn’t pay his debts could become the slave of the creditor. An example of this is found in 2 Kings 4:1. 4) If a thief didn’t have enough to pay a fine levied on him, he was to be sold to pay the fine. This is found in Exodus 22:3. 5) A Hebrew might become a slave when captured in war. 6) A Hebrew who was ransomed from a Gentile might then be sold by the one who ransomed him to another Hebrew. This is found in Leviticus 25:47-55.

The circumstances concerning the slave in each of these will vary based on how they became slaves and to whom they were enslaved.

^2 (con’t) and in the seventh he shall go out free and pay nothing.

One of the greatest protections for the Hebrew slave, even if he was a slave because of a crime such as theft, was that they were to be released in the seventh year of their bondage. This means no more than six years of bondage and then release at the beginning of the seventh. There is a dispute as to what this seven year period actually details. In Exodus 23, there is what is known as the Sabbath year –

“Six years you shall sow your land and gather in its produce, ¹¹ but the seventh year you shall let it rest and lie fallow, that the poor of your people may eat; and what they leave, the beasts of the field may eat. In like manner you shall do with your vineyard and your olive grove. ¹² Six days you shall do your work, and on the seventh day you shall rest, that your ox and your donkey may rest, and the son of your female servant and the stranger may be refreshed.” Exodus 23

Because of this Sabbath year, some scholars say that Hebrew slaves were to be released in this year whether they had been slaves for one year or six years. In other words, a Hebrew could serve no more than six years at the outside.

Other scholars disagree, saying that there is nothing specific to justify this interpretation. I would agree with this. However, there is also what is known as the Year of Jubilee. This is found in Leviticus 25. Any Hebrew slave, with but one exception, was to be released in the fiftieth year, the Year of Jubilee, regardless of how many years he had been a slave, one or six.

The word translated as “free” is khopheshi. It is an adjective used for the first of just 17 times in the OT. It comes from the verb khaphash meaning “to free.” But not only was the slave to be set free, the Lord includes the word khinnam. He was to pay nothing on the way out the door. Any further debts he had were to be wiped clean. But even more, provisions for the freed Hebrew slave are noted in Deuteronomy 25 –

“If your brother, a Hebrew man, or a Hebrew woman, is sold to you and serves you six years, then in the seventh year you shall let him go free from you. ¹³ And when you send him away free from you, you shall not let him go away empty-handed; ¹⁴ you shall supply him liberally from your flock, from your threshing floor, and from your winepress. From what the Lord your God has blessed you with, you shall give to him. Deuteronomy 15:12-14

The reason for this care of the Hebrew slaves is explicitly stated at the end of Leviticus 25 –

“For the children of Israel are servants to Me; they are My servants whom I brought out of the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.” Leviticus 25:55

In viewing slavery as the consequences of sin, those words give us a lovely lesson to remember. The people of God have been redeemed from that life, and so we are to then interact with others as redeemed sinners rather than righteous saints. This is why the master was to treat his fellow Hebrew slaves so generously.

And this limitation on the length of bondage is certainly making a picture of man’s bondage to the devil. The Bible shows that all people are born under the devil’s power. Our sin is inherited and John says that “He who sins is of the devil” (1 John 3:8). As all have sinned, then all are born under the devil’s power and authority.

But the good news is that Jesus came to correct this. In it’s entirety, 1 John 3:8 says –

“He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has sinned from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil.” 1 John 3:8

When we call on Christ, we move from the bondage of the devil to being servants of a new Master. And so the six years of slavery, followed by the seventh year of freedom, surely has a dual purpose. First, it pictures our time before coming to Christ and then the freedom we have in Him. This follows in picture from the six days of work followed by the seventh day of Sabbath rest.

And secondly, it is a picture of the six thousand years of man, living in the world of sin from the time of the fall. This is followed by the final thousand years which we call the millennium. It is a time where Christ will rule over all the nations. It is a time of liberty from the yoke of the devil and rest in Christ.

³ If he comes in by himself, he shall go out by himself; if he comes in married, then his wife shall go out with him.

Why would the Lord specify this? If this verse seems peculiar at first, it clears up with a moment of thought. Should a man come in single, it would be obvious that he would leave single unless he got married while a slave. This is further explained in the next verse.

However, if he were married when he came, the master could not say, “Hey, you still owe me from when you stole from me. I’m keeping your wife as my final payment.” In other words, a wife was not considered as property which could be bought and sold by the slave owner.

It is a protection of the family unit and of the woman who belonged with her man. It goes all the way back to the very beginning of the Bible where this is recorded –

“Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.” Genesis 2:24

The bonds of a free marriage for a Hebrew were to be considered binding, even above the bonds of slavery. If a woman wanted to follow her husband into his bondage, she was to be allowed to follow him again into his freedom.

As a squiggle for your brain, the word for “by himself” here is gaph. It is used just four times in the Bible and three of them are in verses 3 and 4. The only other use is found in Proverbs and is translated in a completely different way –

“She has sent out her maidens,
She cries out from the highest places of the city,” Proverbs 9:3

The word comes from a root which means “to arch.” From this comes the idea of the back, which we can arch our back. And from this comes the idea of the body of the person which alone belongs to the person. Thus it means “by himself” or “alone.” In the case of Proverbs, the arches of the building would be the highest places, where wisdom alone cries out.

⁴ If his master has given him a wife, and she has borne him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall be her master’s, and he shall go out by himself.

This verse may seem contrary to our modern sensibilities, but it is perfectly logical and appropriate. When it was time for the slave to claim his freedom, it does not follow that another slave could also claim theirs.

From this, we see that birth follows the belly. In Genesis 21:10, Abraham was told to dismiss his maidservant Hagar and his son Ishmael went with her. The bond between the woman and the child was to take preeminence.

As she was a slave and the property of the master, then he had a right to keep her and her children just as the owner of the tree has the right to the fruit it bears. If in his kindness to the Hebrew he wanted to allow him to have her for a spell, it didn’t change the right of ownership. Both she, and any children she bore, would belong to him.

Further, this ownership implies that she is not a Hebrew. If she were, she would have to be released in her seventh year of bondage as well. Rather than being unfair, this verse shows grace by the owner to allow his Hebrew slave to enjoy companionship during the time of his bondage.

⁵ But if the servant plainly says, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free,’

By a voluntary act of the will, the servant is given a choice about his status as a slave. Note that the love of the master is mentioned first. The giving of the wife came from the gracious hand of the master. The children who only temporarily belonged to the slave could only have come through the kindness of him as well.

Therefore, it is a devotion to the master, first and foremost, to which the rest logically follows. He loves his wife, given to him by his master, he loves his children who came from the wife given to him by his master, and therefore he desires to not be freed from his master. If this is the case, then there are provisions to allow this…

⁶ then his master shall bring him to the judges.

The term here is el ha’elohim or “to the God.” This is why some translations say that he is to be brought “to God” rather than “to the judges.” In what this pictures, the term “to the God” is certainly correct, even if it is earthly judges who will witness the affirmation.

Even the Greek OT understood this and translates this as pros to kriterion Theo, or “to the judgment of God.” In the end, it is God who will see the act and accept it. The wording is specific and necessary for us to see what is being pictured.

^{6 (con’t)} He shall also bring him to the door, or to the doorpost,

el ha’delet ow el ha’mezuzah – to the door or to the doorpost. The door is the access point of the home. It signifies the way in. The doorpost is what holds the door. The doorposts were first mentioned at the time of the Passover when the blood of the lamb was sprinkled on them. That signified an open profession was made in the sufficiency of the death of the lamb to save.

^{6 (con’t)} and his master shall pierce his ear with an awl;

The master is the one to pierce the servant, thus laying claim on the ownership of him and everything that he would possess from that point on. The word for “pierce” is ratza and it is only used here in the Bible. The word for “awl” or martzea is derived from ratza and it is only used here and in Deuteronomy 15, which says –

“…then you shall take an awl and thrust it through his ear to the door, and he shall be your servant forever.” Deuteronomy 15:17

In that verse, the words “ear” and “door” are parallels. The two are tied together, as if they have become one.

^{6 (con’t)} and he shall serve him forever.

v’abadow l’olam – The servant-hood is a permanent action described by the word l’olam, or “to forever.” Rather than a long time, it is to never be undone. The act is a declaration that the man belonged to the house as long as he lived.

So what is this account picturing, if anything? The answer is that it pictures the work of Christ for each of us. It is we who are being pictured here. We, the bondservants of Christ.

Scholars agree that this boring through the ear is what is being referred to in Psalm 40:6, even though a different word is used which is translated as “open.” Psalm 40 is a messianic psalm which speaks of Christ’s work. There in Psalm 40, we read this –

“Sacrifice and offering You did not desire;
My ears You have opened.
Burnt offering and sin offering You did not require.
⁷ Then I said, “Behold, I come;
In the scroll of the book it is written of me.
⁸ I delight to do Your will, O my God,
And Your law is within my heart.” Psalm 40:6-8

These words are again used to describe the work of the Lord in Hebrews 10. However, there the author of Hebrews modifies the psalm just enough to show us that Christ’s work is what is being pictured here. In Hebrews 10:5, it reads this way –

“Sacrifice and offering You did not desire,
But a body You have prepared for Me.

Instead of “My ears You have opened,” it says “a body You prepared for me.” The ears are being used in parallel with the entire body. Thus, the piercing of the ear to the door is a picture of Christ’s crucifixion and thus our being crucified with Christ, who is the Door of salvation as He claims in John 10 –

“Most assuredly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. ⁸ All who ever came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them. ⁹ I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture.” John 10:7, 8

The slave willingly gave up his freedom and his rights in one economy and transferred them to another. When he was a free man of Israel, he was bound to the Law of Moses. As Paul shows in Galatians, the law is bondage. It is what shows us our sin and it is what condemns us. The law is not freedom; it is bondage –

“Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law? ²² For it is written that Abraham had two sons: the one by a bondwoman, the other by a freewoman. ²³ But he who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and he of the freewoman through promise, ²⁴ which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar— ²⁵ for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children— ²⁶ but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all.”  Galatians 4:21-26

The very thing that we think is freedom is in fact only another type of bondage. But for the slave of his master, it is his master who was bound to the law and the slave is bound to his master under the law. It is a picture of Christ fulfilling the law on our behalf. He is the Master, we are His slave and we are crucified with Him. Paul could not be clearer in this. In Galatians 2:19-21 we read –

“For I through the law died to the law that I might live to God. ²⁰ I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me. ²¹ I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain.”

But there was always the chance that the master might have forced his slave to remain in bondage against his will. Who could tell if no public affirmation of his intent was made known? This is why he had to be taken el ha’elohim, or to the judgment of “the God.”

The affirmation is one which is voluntarily made and openly witnessed. The slavery is not forced, but willingly accepted. This is an obvious picture of the free-will of man in his voluntary surrender to His Lord in the presence of “the God.” Nothing could be clearer. We who are in Christ are free from the law because He fulfilled it on our behalf. As Paul says –

“For he who is called in the Lord while a slave is the Lord’s freedman. Likewise he who is called while free is Christ’s slave. ²³ You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of men.” 1 Corinthians 7:22

And this freedom we possess as the Lord’s bondservants is, as this verse says, l’olam. This one word, used in connection with the marvelous verse, is an explanation of our eternal salvation. We actually need go no further to defend how long we are saved for, or if we could ever lose our salvation. The picture given to us from 1500 years before the coming of Christ tells us all we need to know. We are His servants forever. Hallelujah!

I was a slave to the law which only pointed out my sin
I couldn’t meet its expectations though I tried so hard
|But in my place My Lord Jesus, the victory did win
Now my yoke is light and easy, not heavy and hard

And so with Him I desire ever to stay
As His slave may I forevermore remain
May the joy of serving Him begin right now today
I give up my freedom to sin and receive heavenly gain

My Master is tender and caring; to Him I will cleave
All of eternity in His presence I will stay
Who could say, “I don’t want this and so I will leave?”
Why life under my Master gets sweeter each day

II. Bondage to Whom? (Verses 7-11)

⁷ “And if a man sells his daughter to be a female slave, she shall not go out as the male slaves do.

The five verses on the female slave seem to offend the senses of our modern society and are frowned upon by feminists who call them shocking, demeaning, etc. And yet, these verses actually provide more protection for the woman than the man. Both could be sold into slavery, but the women enjoyed extra protections.

Some translations say, “She shall not go free as male servants do.” But the word isn’t the same as with the man in verse 2. There it said, yetse l’khapheshi khinnam – he shall go out free. Here it says, lo tetze ketzet ha’abadim – “no she shall go out as do the menservants.”

This isn’t speaking of the man working six years and then being freed. Rather it is speaking of her treatment during the six years. She has a right to be freed earlier if certain conditions aren’t met. This is evident from Deuteronomy 15 which says –

“If your brother, a Hebrew man, or a Hebrew woman, is sold to you and serves you six years, then in the seventh year you shall let him go free from you.” Deuteronomy 15:12

So any slave who is sold may go free in the seventh year, but the woman’s freedom may come earlier. And the reasons for this become evident as we continue…

⁸ If she does not please her master, who has betrothed her to himself, then he shall let her be redeemed.

The word translated here as “betrothed” shows the Elizabethan attitude of the translators. It is yaad, and this is its first use in Scripture. It means to agree or to designate. Some translations say “espouse” while others say “married.” What it implies is that a sexual union took place.

A clearer explicit reference is found in verse 10. He has a right to her as his slave just as he had a right to give his female slave to his male slave in verse 4. The body of the slave belongs to the master. However, after whatever time with her he decides he’s not keen on her, then he must allow her to be redeemed.

It doesn’t specify any particular reason for being displeased. Maybe she wouldn’t cook him his favorite meal, maybe she said she was excited about leaving at the end of the six years and it broke his heart. The reason doesn’t matter. What matters are her protections. She could be redeemed earlier if this were the case.

The first time being redeemed was mentioned in the Bible was in Exodus 13, at the time of the Passover. Now the concept is reintroduced into the Bible concerning this slave woman’s rights. This alone shows the care the Lord had for women. He designated that there must be a chance for her to be bought back.

^8 (con’t) He shall have no right to sell her to a foreign people, since he has dealt deceitfully with her.

As a Hebrew, and as a woman that he has dealt deceitfully with, he could not sell her to anyone not of Israel. This word “deceitfully” is bagad. Again, a new word is introduced into the Bible here. The implication is that he is the offender and he has acted in a treacherous manner toward this woman; he has broken faith with her, not the other way around.

He must let a person of Israel redeem her, or he must continue to care for her, or he must let her go without any further debt attributed to her. Were he to sell her to a foreign people, he would actually violate the theocratic law by stripping her of her rights under the law.

⁹ And if he has betrothed her to his son, he shall deal with her according to the custom of daughters.

If a man were to buy a female as a slave intending for her to be given to his son, then that means that he intended her to be within the family as a daughter. As this is so, then she would be entitled to the customary bride-price of a daughter. This is something entirely extra than a male slave would be entitled to. Again, it shows that the Lord has the minutest care for the weaker sex in mind.

Along with this right, she was to be treated as a daughter of the house, with all of the same benefits of a blood borne daughter – food, clothing, and etc.

¹⁰ If he takes another wife, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, and her marriage rights.

The question is, who is this speaking of – the master of the house of verse 8? If so, then why wasn’t this stated before verse 9? If it is speaking of the son of verse 9, then there has been a change in the subject without any indication of it.

Because of this, and because it precedes verse 11 which says “these three” which are speaking of her marital rights, this is speaking of either the master of the house or the son. Whichever takes her as a wife and then takes another wife, whether she is a slave or a legitimate wife, is still responsible to maintain her sheerah, kesuta, v’onatah – her food, clothing, and marriage rights.

Each of these is a rather unusual word. The sheer, or “food,” is mentioned for the first time in the Bible. It means “a relative,” as in a kin-folk, but in this case it is food which is related to the relative.

The kesut, or “clothing,” is a word used only 8 times in the Bible and means a covering. And the ownah, or “marriage rights”, is used only here in the Bible and it corresponds directly to Paul’s statement in 1 Corinthians 7 –

“Let the husband render to his wife the affection due her, and likewise also the wife to her husband.” 1 Corinthians 7:3

This refers specifically to her conjugal rights. He cannot deny her this without violating the law of the Hebrew female slave.

*¹¹ And if he does not do these three for her, then she shall go out free, without paying money.

We conclude verse 11 with a question. Which three things is it referring to? Some scholars say it is the three things in verse 10 – giving her food, clothing, and marital rights. Others say he must do one of the three things of verses 8, 9, and 10, meaning that he is to either marry her himself, marry her to his son, or allow her to be redeemed according to the law.

If he didn’t do one of those three things, then he was obliged to let her go out freely without her or her family owing him anything further. Based on what these verses are picturing, the answer is the three things mentioned in verse 10, but as they relate to the other three. In other words, the assumption is made that the woman is taken as a female slave for the purpose of a relationship.

Like the previous verses, these are not just telling us a set of laws for individual cases which might arise in Israel. They are also showing us a spiritual picture of how the Lord has dealt, and still deals, with His people. Specifically, this is referring to the people of Israel collectively.

They were purchased and taken in by the Lord becoming His possession. Unlike a male slave, the rights in this type of agreement are immediate and permanent. Thus, Israel is not to be dismissed without considering her rights.

The Lord purchased them in order to be a husband to them, and yet they were found to be unpleasing to Him. This is testified to throughout the Old Testament. However, He has set the limitations by showing that He will remain faithful to them despite them not being pleasing to Him. He cannot just arbitrarily reject them.

Instead, He must allow them to be redeemed and He cannot simply sell them to a foreign people. However, as they are His people and as He is their Redeemer, only He can redeem them once again. Until He does so, He must continue to provide for them.

After this, the option is given that He would betroth them to His Son. In doing so, He must deal with them according to the customs of a daughter. And in fact, He did do this. He promised a New Covenant to them in Jeremiah 31:31. This covenant was not made with the Gentile church. Rather this is how the Bible reads –

“Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah— ³² not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them, says the Lord.”

It was Israel who was displeasing in His sight, and yet He promised them a New Covenant with them; a new marriage contract with them. As we know, it is with Jesus, the Son of God, and it is testified to through the shedding of His blood. The agreement was made, and God has promised to care for Israel as is according to the custom of a daughter. Isaiah 52 speaks of the daughter’s redemption –

“Awake, awake!
Put on your strength, O Zion;
Put on your beautiful garments,
O Jerusalem, the holy city!
For the uncircumcised and the unclean
Shall no longer come to you.
² Shake yourself from the dust, arise;
Sit down, O Jerusalem!
Loose yourself from the bonds of your neck,
O captive daughter of Zion!
³ For thus says the Lord:
‘You have sold yourselves for nothing,
And you shall be redeemed without money.'” Isaiah 52:1-3

Only He could redeem them and only He has redeemed them. And even more, He has offered them a New Covenant through Christ the Son of God. But, there is still another precept which is included here. It concerns the man taking another wife. Not only did the Lord take Israel, he has also taken a Gentile bride.

This is the reason for including this provision. Despite having received the Gentiles because of Israel’s unfaithfulness, He has levied upon Himself the requirement to not diminish the rights of the first wife. It is the same wife, Israel, who has been unfaithful to the Lord, not the other way around. And yet, He has remained ever faithful to them.

They rejected Him and yet He redeemed them. He has offered to them every benefit and right that was promised to them. And now, as we draw near to the end of the church age, the redeemed of Israel are seeing that He never forsook them.

He has been there all along waiting for them to return to Him. The maidservant, the Daughter of Zion, has been unfaithful and displeasing in His sight, but He has never been unfaithful to them. Instead, He has fulfilled every provision of His word. What He has instructed man to do is only a picture of what He Himself has done and continues to do.

This same faithful God who looks out for the rights of even the poorest of maidservants also looks out for the rights of those He has redeemed. He will never break His faithfulness with them and He will never let a word of His promises to them fail.

Though these verses today speak of things which seem almost foreign to us, they are actually as relevant to us now as they were when slavery was considered a normal institution of man. The reason is that we are all slaves to something. We are either slaves to sin or we are servants of God. If you have never called on Jesus, then you are a slave to sin and the devil is your master. His yoke is heavy and his burden will only lead to destruction. But Christ came to free us from that. If you have never called on Him but would like to, let me tell you how you can, even right now…

Closing Verse: “Therefore know that only those who are of faith are sons of Abraham. ⁸ And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel to Abraham beforehand, saying, ‘In you all the nations shall be blessed.’ ⁹ So then those who are of faith are blessed with believing Abraham.” Galatians 3:7-9

Do you wonder why the term “Hebrew” was brought by God into the verses today? It is because it pictures those who have crossed over. Abraham was noted as the first Hebrew. Now all who cross over are also sons of Abraham, by mere faith.

Next Week: Exodus 21:12-27 How to keep from a lot of heck (Keeping Violence in Check) (58th Exodus Sermon)

The Lord has you exactly where He wants you. He has a good plan and purpose for you. Even if a deep ocean lies ahead of You, He can part the waters and lead you through it on dry ground. So follow Him and trust Him and He will do marvelous things for you and through you.

Hebrew Slaves

Now these are the judgments which you shall before them set
They are new judgments which I have not spoken yet

If you buy a Hebrew servant
He shall serve six years
And in the seventh he shall go out free
And pay nothing, nothing is considered as left in arrears

If he comes in by himself
He shall by himself go out
If he comes in married
Then his wife shall go out with him, let there be no doubt

If his master has given him a wife
And she has to him sons or daughters given birth
The wife and her children shall be her master’s
And he shall go out by himself, a free man on the earth

But if the servant plainly says
‘I love my master, my wife, and my children too
I will not go out free
Then this is what you shall do

Then his master shall him to the judges bring
And you will together do the following thing

He shall also bring him to the door
Or to the doorpost, either will do
And his master shall pierce his ear with an awl
And he shall serve him forever; he will be a slave to you

And if a man sells his daughter
This I now instruct to you
To be a female slave
She shall not go out as the male slaves do

If she does not please her master
Who has her to himself betrothed
Then he shall let her be redeemed
Because she to him was loathed

He shall have no right to sell her
To a foreign people, this would not be right
Since he has dealt deceitfully with her
And only increased to her misery and plight

And if he has betrothed her to his son
He shall deal with her according to the custom of daughters
He shall treat her as if she were one

If he takes another wife
He shall not diminish her food
Her clothing, and her marriage rights
In doing such a thing, to her he would then be rude

And if he does not do these three for her
Then she shall go out free
Without paying money, for sure
These are my judgments and so shall they be

It’s pretty wonderful to see God’s plan of redemption
Revealed in such seemingly obscure places
But it is everywhere, in each passage we mention
And His plan is realized in all redeemed faes

Are you one of the redeemed of the Lord?
If so, given Him praise and thanks, let it flow from all of us
Let us forever hail God’s incarnate Word
Yes, for ever let us hail, Christ the Lord, our Jesus!

Hallelujah and Amen…

Exodus 20:18-26
The Earthen Altar

The Lord came down on Sinai and gave the Ten Commandments. After hearing His voice and seeing His splendid majesty so strikingly revealed, the people begged to not hear His voice any longer. He agreed and from that point on it would be to Moses that He would speak and then Moses would relay the rest of the law to the people.

No sooner had this come about than He began to relay the words of the law to Moses. The first words are to avoid idolatry and then immediately came the instructions for the building of an altar to Him for offerings. On the surface, it does seem a bit disconnected. Doesn’t it? But it is not. One thing follows logically after the next.

The details are in the words and the words are there to reveal what is on the Lord’s mind. And so let’s look into them today with a sense of anticipation that we will learn more about His marvelous plan as it slowly unveils before us.

Text Verse: “Men of Athens, I perceive that in all things you are very religious; ²³ for as I was passing through and considering the objects of your worship, I even found an altar with this inscription:
TO THE UNKNOWN GOD.
Therefore, the One whom you worship without knowing, Him I proclaim to you.” Acts 17:22, 23

Altars are found throughout the world because people throughout the world believe in “God.” They may have it wrong, but they intuitively know He is there. In today’s passage, the instructions for the building of an altar to the Lord are precise but simple. Why are we being told about it? What purpose do the details serve and what can they tell us about our interactions with Him?

Well, the answers are all to be found in His superior word. And so let’s turn to that precious word once again and… May God speak to us through His word today and may His glorious name ever be praised.

I. The Spoken Word of God (verses 18-21)

¹⁸ Now all the people witnessed the thunderings,

It is not unusual for one sense to be applied to all of them. The sense of sight then is given to describe not only what was visual, but also that which follows in the other senses – hearing, tasting, feeling, and smelling.

Here the thunderings which their ears heard are recorded in the sense of the mind’s eye as being seen. As a squiggle for your brain, this form of writing is known to grammarians as zeugma. It is where a word applies to two others in different senses. A funny example of a zeugma would be “John and his license expired last week.” Poor John.

The word for “thunderings” is ha’qolot – literally, the voices. Rather than the actual word for “thunder” which is raam, the idea of thunder has to be inferred from other passages in Scripture where the Lord’s voice is said to thunder.

This metaphor for thunder is used many times in connection with the Lord, and the sense of His power and His glory is seen in connection with it. But often His judgment is seen in connection with it as well. The thundering of the Lord in this manner was seen in the seventh plague upon Egypt where we read this –

“And Moses stretched out his rod toward heaven; and the Lord sent thunder and hail, and fire darted to the ground. And the Lord rained hail on the land of Egypt.” Exodus 9:23

Elsewhere throughout the Bible, the voice of the Lord is noted and it is often in the sense of judgment. A classic example of this is found in Isaiah 66 –

“Hear the word of the Lord,
You who tremble at His word:
‘Your brethren who hated you,
Who cast you out for My name’s sake, said,
‘Let the Lord be glorified,
That we may see your joy.’
But they shall be ashamed.’
⁶ The sound of noise from the city!
A voice from the temple!
The voice of the Lord,
Who fully repays His enemies!'” Isaiah 66:5, 6

The people of Israel heard this terrifying voice and they shuddered. And along with the voice came more as well…

^{18 (con’t)} the lightning flashes,

ha’lappidim – literally, “the torches.” From this, we infer the idea of “lightning.” Interestingly, this word lapid wasn’t used to describe the scene in Exodus 19. It is, however, brought in now to explain a portion of the marvelous sight which was seen by the people. The word has only been used once before, in Genesis 15.

This was at the time that Abraham received the covenant promises from the Lord. At that time, this was what occurred –

 And it came to pass, when the sun went down and it was dark, that behold, there appeared a smoking oven and a burning torch that passed between those pieces. ¹⁸ On the same day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying:

“To your descendants I have given this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the River Euphrates— ¹⁹ the Kenites, the Kenezzites, the Kadmonites, ²⁰ the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim, ²¹ the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites, and the Jebusites.” Genesis 15:17-21

As I noted at that time, and again in Exodus 19, the two accounts are being tied together. The promise to Abraham and the Exodus, including the giving of the law at Sinai, are showing us the horror and dread of the Lord’s majesty.

^{18 (con’t)} the sound of the trumpet,

v’et qol ha’shophar – literally, “the voice of the trumpet.” The sound, or voice, of the trumpet can be used as the herald of good news or of bad news. The symbolism which we are seeing at the giving of the law is that of warning.

Each law was spoken out with a terrifying display and it was intended to instill in the people that these words are God’s standard. They must be fulfilled or there can only be the expectation of wrath.

This is true with the sound of the shophar here and elsewhere. In Joel 2, we read these words concerning the coming of the Day of the Lord. It is a time of wrath on earth, specifically for rejecting the way of the Lord –

“Blow the trumpet in Zion,
And sound an alarm in My holy mountain!
Let all the inhabitants of the land tremble;
For the day of the Lord is coming,
For it is at hand:
² A day of darkness and gloominess,
A day of clouds and thick darkness,
Like the morning clouds spread over the mountains.
A people come, great and strong,
The like of whom has never been;
Nor will there ever be any such after them,
Even for many successive generations.” Joel 2:1, 2

Every detail of what occurred at Sinai speaks not of grace, but of judgment, condemnation, and wrath. The law was given to terrify the people concerning the absolute majesty of the Lord, and the absolute perfection that He demands. Who can attain to such perfection? Surely we are all condemned by these words.

The book of Revelation shows us that God’s judgment will come heavily upon the world. This judgment will include the seven trumpets which will be blown to usher in great and terrible destruction. This is the high cost of shunning the grace of Christ and deciding instead to pursue one’s own perverse course.

And this is why when we talk to people about the Lord. We need to explain to them that the law is what we must face if we reject His offer of grace. Adam Clarke notes this about the giving of each of the Ten Commandments in relation to the thunderings, lightnings, and the sound of the shophar –

“…here they seem to have been repeated; probably at the end of each command, there was a peal of thunder, a blast of the trumpet, and a gleam of lightning, to impress their hearts the more deeply with a due sense of the Divine Majesty, of the holiness of the law which was now delivered, and of the fearful consequences of disobedience.” Adam Clarke

He is probably right about this. Each individual commandment carries the penalty of the entire law. This is why James notes that to stumble at one point of the law thus breaks the entire law. In order to get the people to understand this, each command uttered was probably followed by the terrible sights and sounds.

^{18 (con’t)} and the mountain smoking;

v’eth ha’har ashen – This is the first of only two times that the adjective form of smoke will be used in the Bible. The entire time that the law was being given, the mountain remained smoking. As I explained in Exodus 19, this smoke is a metaphor for “wrath.”

With each utterance the mountain continued to smoke because wrath, not love, is associated with the words. It is wrath at how man refused to even attempt to live in a godly manner. And the Lord knew that they would continue to refuse.

In Jeremiah 18, the Lord warned the people once again, as He had many times before. Rather than remember the terror of Sinai that they had been told of, or maybe because of the terror that they had been told of, they said that it was hopeless –

 “Now therefore, speak to the men of Judah and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, saying, ‘Thus says the Lord: “Behold, I am fashioning a disaster and devising a plan against you. Return now every one from his evil way, and make your ways and your doings good.”’”

¹² And they said, “That is hopeless! So we will walk according to our own plans, and we will every one obey the dictates of his evil heart.”

What the people refused to see was that under the law, there was also grace to be found. The Day of Atonement was available to those with faith. But Israel of old, like the world today, has rejected both God’s commands and His grace.

Again, the smoke was seen to reveal God’s wrath at the sins of humanity. His standard is revealed in this law which is endlessly violated. If only people could see that the grace of Christ can and will free them from this wrath if they would just receive it.

^{18 (con’t)} and when the people saw it, they trembled and stood afar off.

This isn’t the best translation of these words. Instead of “trembled” it should say, they “moved” or “removed.” The word is nua and it means “to wander.”

When Moses first went up the mountain, it became apparent that some of the people actually thought that they could break through and come to the mountain where God was. Moses told the Lord that they had been warned, but He knew that they were going to push forward anyway. And so He spoke quickly and firmly –

“Away! Get down and then come up, you and Aaron with you. But do not let the priests and the people break through to come up to the Lord, lest He break out against them.” Exodus 19:24

The haughty, arrogant attitude which was displayed before the law began to be given was quickly replaced with horror, fear, and dread. As each commandment blasted forth with its accompanying display of awesome splendor, the people probably backed up a little further.

This is what is implied by the word nua. By the speaking of the last commandment, it says they “stood afar off.” Imagine the sight! The first commandment blasts out and the congregation backs up. The second blasts out and they back up more. With each new utterance, they continued to back up until they were completely removed from the mountain.

The people of the world, all around the world, speak of someday meeting God as a friend. Maybe a pat on the back; maybe a question or two about why He was so unfair to them in their lives. If we understand who God truly is and the nature of His majesty, we would never speak in such a proud and overconfident manner.

Instead, we would shudder at the day of our death, pleading for it to never come about. And the fact that man fears death should show him that it is written deep in his heart. It won’t be a time of fist-bumping, but a time of terror. But there is good new for those who trust in Christ.

Probably thinking of exactly this verse, where the people backed up as they heard the terror of the law, the author of Hebrews shows that there is a difference in the New Covenant. Instead of removing ourselves from the presence of the Lord, we are welcomed to draw near to Him –

“For on the one hand there is an annulling of the former commandment because of its weakness and unprofitableness, ¹⁹ for the law made nothing perfect; on the other hand, there is the bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God.” Hebrews 7:18, 19

Thank God for Jesus Christ who takes away the terror and replaces it with grace.

¹⁹ Then they said to Moses, “You speak with us, and we will hear; but let not God speak with us, lest we die.”

The voices that were heard at the giving of the law were so terrible that the people asked Moses to alone speak to the Lord and for Him not to speak to them. Moses reminded them of this when the law was reiterated to them at the end of their wilderness wanderings and just prior to their entrance into the Canaan –

“The Lord your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your midst, from your brethren. Him you shall hear, ¹⁶ according to all you desired of the Lord your God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, ‘Let me not hear again the voice of the Lord my God, nor let me see this great fire anymore, lest I die.'” Deuteronomy 18:15, 16

But it wasn’t just the people that were in fear. Their leader Moses was as well. In Hebrews 12, we read about that –

“And so terrifying was the sight that Moses said, ‘I am exceedingly afraid and trembling.'” Hebrews 12:21

The request for a mediator by the people, and the fact that even Moses who was designated as such was terrified at the holiness of the Lord, showed that a different sort of Mediator was necessary. Moses told them that a Prophet would be raised up from among Israel to fill this role.

He would be able to speak the words of the New Covenant in a manner where any and all could hear and accept it. The Covenant at Sinai came with a display of fear and wrath; the Covenant in Christ’s blood removed the fear because He received the wrath. As Adam Clarke notes about this account –

“This teaches us the absolute necessity of that great Mediator between God and man, Christ Jesus, as no man can come unto the Father but by him.” Adam Clarke

²⁰ And Moses said to the people, “Do not fear;

al tirau – not fear. Moses wanted them to not fear, but to have fear. There is a difference. The word here, yare, means to be affrighted. They were to receive the words of the Lord, apply them to their lives in the fear of the Lord, and thus they would not have to be in fear of the Lord. This is what is implied here because it is made explicit in the rest of the verse…

^{20 (con’t)} for God has come to test you, and that His fear may be before you, so that you may not sin.”

The word for “fear” here is different. It means fear in a different way. It was first used in Genesis 20:11 in this way –

“And Abraham said, ‘Because I thought, surely the fear of God is not in this place; and they will kill me on account of my wife.'” Genesis 20:11

God was testing the people so that they would have a reverential fear of Him. In turn, this would lead to obedience and the avoidance of sin.

Of importance is that the name Yehovah, or the Lord, is mentioned 8 times in the giving of the law, from verse 1-17. The term elohim or “God” is used to refer to him 7 times in those same verses. However, in verses 18-21, only the term elohim, not the name Yehovah, is used.

What adds to this is that when the people mention elohim in verse 19, there is no definite article. But when Moses refers to him here, and when the text refers to him in verse 21, both times there is an article – ha’elohim.

This might sound like, “Who cares!” But it shows that the people still have not grasped that there is but one God who is the Lord. Their failure to call him ha’elohim or “the God” in the previous verse perfectly explains why they rejected him and built a golden calf just a short time later.

They failed to grasp the fact that the Lord is the One and only God. Instead, after fashioning the golden calf, they will say this at the base of the very mountain that they are at now –

“This is your god, O Israel, that brought you out of the land of Egypt!” Exodus 32:4

Verse 20, this verse, says that the God came to test the Israelites, that His fear would be before them, and that they might not sin. In one fell swoop, they failed the test, they showed no fear of the One they were to fear, and they sinned greatly. So much so that Moses knew what to expect if he did not immediately intercede for them –

“Oh, these people have committed a great sin, and have made for themselves a god of gold! ³² Yet now, if You will forgive their sin—but if not, I pray, blot me out of Your book which You have written.” Exodus 32:31, 32

²¹ So the people stood afar off, but Moses drew near the thick darkness where God was.

Here it says that the people stood m’rahoq, or at a far distance. The display had been such that they were completely terrified to come near to God. In Deuteronomy, a further explanation is given. Not only were they afar off, but Moses told them they could now go home –

“Go and say to them, ‘Return to your tents.’ ³¹ But as for you, stand here by Me, and I will speak to you all the commandments, the statutes, and the judgments which you shall teach them, that they may observe them in the land which I am giving them to possess.” Deuteronomy 5:30, 31

While they departed to their tents, it says that Moses alone drew unto ha’araphel, or the thick cloud of darkness where ha’elohim, or “the God” awaited him. As the people drew away, Moses alone drew near. From this point on, the Exodus account will have a dramatic change in its content.

Instead of being marvelous stories of adventure, excitement, and wonder, there will be minute details and much repetition as the law, and the details for its associated place of worship, is explained. This is the point where many who picked up their Bible for the first time and excitedly read the stories of Genesis and Exodus give up.

I am telling you this now because the sermons during these instructions will often be filled with details which seem unrelated to anything we might expect to be useful to our walk with Christ. It is probable that some of you will give up on attending here or listening on-line, just as some give upon their Bible reading, but God’s word is a unified whole and it is important to take it as such.

For those who remain and continue on through the coming chapters, you will have a far better understanding of the workings of God, even if the time you spend is less exciting than it otherwise could be. I will pray at this moment that you will be blessed as you continue to pursue the Lord’s word from here on out.

The mountain is filled with terror, an overwhelming sight
There are thunderings and torches of fire ever so bright
And the sound of the trumpet has filled us with fright
Surely this is an awesome display of the Lord’s power and might

Let us not again hear the Lord speak to us
Just receive His word and we will be obedient to it
We will obey and never cause a fuss
To His will, and to His commands, we will submit

And when the Messiah comes, we will be able to draw near
Through His work we will be spared and safe from harm
We will never again have terror or fear
Because of the comfort of the Lord’s right arm

II. An Altar of Earth (verses 22-26)

²² Then the Lord said to Moses, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel:

After the terrifying display of the giving of the Ten Commandments, a new means of God’s revelation is introduced in order to continue to bring His divine will to the people. He will speak directly to Moses and Moses will then instruct the people.

The words of the law were also recorded in writing and so they form the authoritative word of God. There can be no distinction between the spoken word to Moses and the written word from Moses. They are one in the same and they bear the same weight and authority.

How terrifying that churches, ministers, and teachers throughout the world cannot see this fundamental truth for what it is. For us to misrepresent the written word of God is to misrepresent the One who spoke those words out in order for them to be written.

And even if the error is unintentional, it is still error. When we err in doctrine, we sin. How much worse then for those who intentionally abuse God’s word, dismissing it as a book of mere human origin and one that contains only moral lessons for us to pick and choose from!

^{22  (con’t)} ‘You have seen that I have talked with you from heaven.

The words of this sentence are in the plural. The Lord spoke to all of the people, and they all saw that He had spoken to them from heaven. What is apparent here is that the words issued out in a way that they could not have been perceived as anything but divine and directly from heaven itself.

Because of this, what will now be relayed to and through Moses to them bears the same Divine source. They had asked for Him to speak through Moses, He agreed, and now they were to accept the words from Moses as bearing that same authority.

²³ You shall not make anything to be with Me—

lo taasun itti – not do make alongside Me. These words are a single proposition and thus they stand alone. Rather than the words of the first commandment which said, “You shall have no other gods before Me,” these say there shall be nothing alongside the Lord.

This is to be taken in one of two ways. The first is to not have anything in a parallel position to the Lord. In other words, there is not to be anything held in the same esteem as Him. There is One God; Yehovah. This was violated when they fashioned the golden calf. When they did, they exclaimed –

“This is your god, O Israel, that brought you out of the land of Egypt!” Exodus 32:4

The second way these words apply is that there is not to be anything fashioned which is to be representative of the Lord. In other words, when the Israelites fashioned the golden calf, we will read this –

“So when Aaron saw it, he built an altar before it. And Aaron made a proclamation and said, ‘Tomorrow is a feast to the Lord.'” Exodus 32:5

In the first instance, the people placed the golden calf on the same level as the Lord. In the second instance, Aaron placed the golden calf as representative of the Lord. The wording in this proposition prohibits both of these cases.

The first commandment in the Decalogue was one of honoring the eternal significance of the Lord – He alone is to be worshipped. This law now is one of the proper means of worshipping Him.

The adoration of any images for any purpose is the very germ of idolatry. This is why the actions of many churches, especially the RCC, are so reprehensible. Though the law is set aside in Christ, the warning against idolatry permeates the New Testament as well.

^{23 (con’t)} gods of silver or gods of gold you shall not make for yourselves.

This second half of the verse is its own proposition as well. It is used to explain the first. The words of the second commandment were more all-encompassing; these here are more specific. Gods of silver or gods of gold would be considered the most precious.

If one were to suppose they could honor the Lord with something tangible, the use of silver or gold would be preferred. But even silver and gold are a part of the creation. To make an image of even these precious metals would be to profane the name and glory of the Lord who created them.

Unfortunately, the rest of the Old Testament shows that these were the preferred elements for the idolatrous worship of the Israelis. Gold and silver are found throughout the rest of the Old Testament as the base material for creating their false gods.

²⁴ An altar of earth you shall make for Me,

In a seemingly sudden transition from idolatry to the law of the altar, the Lord states that it is an altar of earth which is to be made for Him. One must ask, “Why this sudden jump from idolatry to a sacrificial altar?” The answer is that they two are intricately connected. As Keil notes –

“The altar, as an elevation built of earth or unhewn stones, symbolizes the elevation of man to the God who is enthroned on high, in heaven.” Keil

Lange then builds on that and says –

“Most especially it is a monument of the place where God is revealed; then a symbol of the response of a human soul yielding to the divine call.”

From the earliest pages of the Bible, man made offerings to God. The first was immediately recorded after the fall of man. Without any noted instruction, and without any recorded sin by man after Adam’s transgression, we read this in Genesis 4 –

“And in the process of time it came to pass that Cain brought an offering of the fruit of the ground to the Lord. ⁴ Abel also brought of the firstborn of his flock and of their fat.” Genesis 4:3, 4

In this offering without any recorded sin by the boys, it is implied that man is fallen and this fallen state is inherited. In order to make peace with the Creator, offerings were made. This is found in all places on earth and in all people groups.

To ensure Israel kept from idolatry – either self-idolatry or idolatry associated with the construction of the altar, the people are instructed to build an altar of earth. The interaction of raising to God in sacrifice was not to be defiled through any type of idolatrous practice.

^{24 (con’t)} and you shall sacrifice on it your burnt offerings and your peace offerings, your sheep and your oxen.

The way that these words have been stated implies that these types of sacrifices were already in practice and known to the people. The burnt offerings or olah were first introduced into the Bible just after the flood. In Genesis 8:20, we read this –

“Then Noah built an altar to the Lord, and took of every clean animal and of every clean bird, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.” Genesis 8:20

Burnt offerings are also seen at the time of Abraham as well. The peace offerings, or shelem, must have been known to Moses, but this is the first time that they are mentioned in the Bible. Shelem comes from the word shalam, which means “to make amends.”

The peace offering then is one intended to satisfy the Lord and to bring about a sense of alliance or friendship. For this reason, some translations call them “fellowship offerings.”

^{24 (con’t)} In every place where I record My name I will come to you, and I will bless you.

The regulation for the altar must be one which applies to either special or temporary occasions. The reason why this is true and certain is that Israel is now at Mt. Sinai. They will not depart from this mountain until after the tabernacle is constructed. And with the building of the tabernacle comes the place for sacrifices and offerings to be made.

Therefore, the Lord is speaking of specially selected places for particular purposes. One of those is recorded in Joshua 8. Others are noted at various places and times. Sacrifices were made at locations other than at the temple. In 1 Samuel, Saul was looking for Samuel. When he inquired about him, we read this –

“As soon as you come into the city, you will surely find him before he goes up to the high place to eat. For the people will not eat until he comes, because he must bless the sacrifice; afterward those who are invited will eat. Now therefore, go up, for about this time you will find him.” 1 Samuel 9:13

This would have been such an altar. It was to be erected in the way designated here, even in these earliest instructions to Moses by the Lord. The Lord’s words of this verse, “In every place” means there was no need for an impressive altar in a fixed location. Were it so, it would imply that His presence was there and thus not elsewhere.

Rather, He was present at any such altar were He caused His name to be remembered. The Pulpit Commentary notes this concerning such an altar and the Lord coming there and blessing it –

“The promise is conditional on the observance of the command. If the altars are rightly constructed, and proper victims offered, then, in all places where he allows the erection of an altar, God will accept the sacrifices offered upon it and bless the worshippers.” Pulpit

And in order to accommodate the making of such an altar that would be more permanent than one merely made of earth, stone would be considered acceptable for its construction with specific conditions being met…

²⁵ And if you make Me an altar of stone, you shall not build it of hewn stone;

A stone altar could be built rather than an earthen one, but it was not to be of hewn stone. The word for “cut stone” is entirely different than the word stone. The word for “stone” is eben. The word for “hewn stone” isn’t eben with some adjective attached to it. Instead it is a single word, gazith.

This is the first of only 11 times that this word is used in the Bible and it always indicates stones which have been worked by man, being cut or hewn. To understand this word, we need to look at its root which is gazah.  This is a word which is used only one time in the Bible, in the 71st Psalm –

“By You I have been upheld from birth;
You are He who took me out of my mother’s womb.
My praise shall be continually of You.” Psalm 71:6

The idea is that it is the Lord who fashioned us in the womb and it is He who cut us from the womb. Our fashioning and our birth is a work of the Lord and not of man. So why shouldn’t the altar be made of hewn stone? Various reasons have been given, but the continuation of the verse itself gives its own clue…

^{25 (con’t)} for if you use your tool on it, you have profaned it.

One theory is that by using iron on a stone, it would profane it because iron was a taboo metal. This incorrect theory comes from a misapplication of Deuteronomy 27:5 which says –

“And there you shall build an altar to the Lord your God, an altar of stones; you shall not use an iron tool on them.” Deuteronomy 2:5

The specificity of iron there is only given because it is the main tool that was used in cutting and shaping stone. Iron is found in rocks and such a rock isn’t forbidden from altar construction. Further, this verse in Exodus says nothing about iron.

Rather, the use of a tool profaning the stone is because the stone is something that God created. If man were to shape the stone, then it would include man’s efforts in it. Thus it would lead to either idolatry of the altar which man had made in order to fellowship with God, or it would lead to idolatry of self because the man had erected the place where God and man fellowshipped.

Either way, it is a picture of works-based salvation. It is man reaching up to God by his efforts rather than man coming to God through what God has done. He made the rocks. For us to add our effort into what God had made would then be contrary to the premise of the Bible. We are saved by grace, not by works.

The erection of the altar itself cannot be equated to a work anymore than the compilation of the Bible can be. God gave the words, man recorded the words, and through the words man meets with God. Likewise, God made the earth and the stones, man simply arranges them into an altar, and God then meets with man.

And in the specified materials and construction of the altar is a second intent, a picture. The earth or adamah, and the stone or eben, both picture the human nature of Christ. He is the altar where man has a right to fellowship with God.

The word adamah, or earth, is from the same root as adam, earth or man. In Genesis 2:7, it says that man was taken from the adamah or earth –

“And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.”

Likewise, Jesus was taken from Adam, being his descendant and the second Adam. Elsewhere, the eben, or stone is used to speak of the Lord and of the Messiah, verses which are then cited when speaking of the Lord Jesus in the New Testament.

It is God who cut Christ from His mother’s womb, fashioning Him as He chose. Thus to shape a stone for this altar would be to fashion a false “christ” of our own choosing. This is the reason for the specificity of wording. The earthen altar, or one of stone, pictures Christ who was alone fashioned by God.

To hew the stones would then say that we are fashioning a Messiah of our own, rejecting the only true Lord who is willing to meet with man. In the end, it is all about Jesus, not us – His work; our faith. He is the Stone of our help; let us not attempt to carve out another in His place.

As we progress through the Bible, we will see other altars that have different constructions. When we get to each, they will also picture Christ, but in different ways. God is slowly and progressively revealing the glory of Christ to us, one step at a time.

 ²⁶ Nor shall you go up by steps to My altar,

This verse seems like an odd way to end the chapter where the Ten Commandments were revealed, unless one understands the reason for the Ten Commandments. The chapter began with these words –

“And God spoke all these words, saying:
² ‘I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.'” Exodus 20:1, 2

God is the Creator and the offended party in relation to man. The Lord God, or Yehovah Elohim, is the one who brought His people out of the land of Egypt. Egypt was a very clear picture of the world of sin. Israel was redeemed from Egypt; man is redeemed from the world of sin.

There is a place where man may meet the Lord and that is through offering made at His altar. And that altar is not to be high, thus requiring steps. The word step, or maalah, is used for the first time here in the Bible.

It indicates a step, things that come up, high degree, go up, etc. It comes from the verb maaleh which means “to ascend.” It is noted that around the world, altars to a god are usually built high, some exceedingly high. The higher the altar, the closer one feels they have come to their god. Consider of the tower of Babel!

The common thinking then is the more imposing the altar, the more maalah you go up and thus the more you will maaleh. Said in normal English, one does not ascend to God in order to be saved. God descended to man in order for him to be saved.

The term “high places” concerning altars of sacrifice is used dozens of times in Kings and Chronicles. It is a note of rebuke to the people of Israel. Even when a good king is noted for his goodness, if he allowed the high places to continue, a note of censure is placed on his record –

“And he walked in all the ways of his father Asa. He did not turn aside from them, doing what was right in the eyes of the Lord. Nevertheless the high places were not taken away, for the people offered sacrifices and burned incense on the high places. ⁴⁴ Also Jehoshaphat made peace with the king of Israel.” 1 Kings 22:43, 44

When a king was specifically said to have “removed” the high places, it was with a note of commendation. If you ever wondered why these were considered wrong, now you know. It is because it was a part of man’s futile attempt to raise himself to God.

Instead, the altar being at a common level with man is a picture of Christ coming down to our common level. It is through His sacrifice, at our level, that the offerings rise to God. Our attempts at reconciling with God are insufficient and worse. They are sinful because they reject what God has first instructed and then what He did for us in what the instruction pictures – Christ.

But Charlie… the last words of the chapter don’t allude to that at all. Just read them! Go ahead Charlie. Ok, I will…

*^26 (fin) that your nakedness may not be exposed on it.’

“See, this is a matter of decency and not letting people see your private parts. See!”

This is the explanation that almost every scholar gives and it has nothing to do with that. This verse is reaching back to the first moments of man’s existence on earth and all the way to the last book of the Bible. The translation is correct, “…that your nakedness may not be exposed on it.”

It is speaking of the altar and it is referring to the nakedness of sin. In Genesis 3:7, just as soon as Adam and Eve ate of the fruit, we read this –

“Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves coverings.”

Shame of nakedness is how sin first manifested itself. And it was the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh, and the pride of life by which that sin came about. Man wanted to be like God, rising to His level. The altar was to be without steps because man cannot rise to the level of God.

The higher the altar, the greater the sin is revealed, and thus the more nakedness is exposed. God instead made it known that He would condescend to become a Man and meet us on our own level. In Revelation 3, as Jesus speaks to the churches, He says this –

“I counsel you to buy from Me gold refined in the fire, that you may be rich; and white garments, that you may be clothed, that the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed.” Revelation 3:18

The nakedness of the body only pictures our revealed sin. Christ came to take that away and to cover us with His righteousness. It was He who hung naked on Calvary’s cross so that we could be covered by Him. What a marvelous story and what a beautiful verse to end our passage today.

From the first to the last, it is all about Jesus Christ. Writing about this most marvelous chapter of Scripture, where the law is revealed, and where the sufferings of Christ are pictured, Matthew Henry gives us words to end our thoughts today –

“This law, which is so extensive that we cannot measure it, so spiritual that we cannot evade it, and so reasonable that we cannot find fault with it, will be the rule of the future judgment of God, as it is for the present conduct of man. If tried by this rule, we shall find our lives have been passed in transgressions. And with this holy law and an awful judgment before us, who can despise the gospel of Christ? And the knowledge of the law shows our need of repentance. In every believer’s heart sin is dethroned and crucified, the law of God is written, and the image of God renewed. The Holy Spirit enables him to hate sin and flee from it, to love and keep this law in sincerity and truth; nor will he cease to repent.” Henry

He is right. The law received at Sinai is what all men will be judged by. It is a terrifying law by which only condemnation can result. But God, in His wisdom, allows that the condemnation of sin can be through the flesh of His Son on Calvary’s cross.

He is the Earthen Altar for our propitiation. Now you can see why the earthen altar is the first thing mandated by the Lord after the giving of the Ten Commandments. There was terror, horror, and dread and the people removed themselves from the presence of God as He spoke.

But at the Earthen Altar, our Lord Christ, pictured by the earthen altars of Israel, we can now draw near to God without fear, but in fellowship. It is Christ who is the center and focus of what we are being shown in the construction of it – His earth, His stones, shaped by Him for a place where the fear is replaced with fellowship.

It is either there in Christ, or God’s wrath will fall upon you when you stand before Him. I hope that you will choose wisely and choose Jesus. By God! I pray you will choose Jesus. Let me tell you how you can do it right now…

Closing Verse: “For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh, ⁴ that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.” Romans 8:3, 4

Next Week: Exodus 21:1-11 Don’t beat your Hebrew servant until he ends up in a grave… (The Law of the Hebrew Slave) (57th Exodus Sermon)

The Lord has you exactly where He wants you. He has a good plan and purpose for you. Even if a deep ocean lies ahead of You, He can part the waters and lead you through it on dry ground. So follow Him and trust Him and He will do marvelous things for you and through you.

Christ our Altar

Now all the people witnessed the thunderings
The lightning flashes; the trumpet’s sound
And the mountain smoking; and when the people saw it
They trembled and stood afar off, not near around

Then they said to Moses, “You speak with us
And we will hear
But let not God speak with us, lest we die
This is the thing that we fear

And Moses to the people said
“Do not fear; for God has come to test you
And that His fear may be before you and so instead
You may not sin; that sin you may not do

So the people stood afar off
But Moses drew near
The thick darkness where God was
Where Moses himself was trembling with fear

Then the Lord said to Moses
“Thus you shall say to the children of Israel:
‘You have seen that I have talked with you from heaven
And these words to you I do now tell

You shall not make anything to be with Me—
Gods of silver or gods of gold
You shall not make for yourselves these certainly
Just as now you have been told

An altar of earth you shall make for Me
And you shall sacrifice on it your burnt offerings
And your peace offerings, your sheep and your oxen
To Me you shall make these profferings

In every place where My name I record
I will come to you, and I will bless you
This is My spoken word

And if you make Me an altar of stone
You shall not build it of hewn stone
For if you use your tool on it, you have profaned it
You shall be obedient to My word alone

Nor shall you go up by steps to My altar, I do submit
That your nakedness may not be exposed on it

Oh! Sin is tempting, especially the sin of pride
We want to work to God instead of trusting Him alone
But it is He who did alone decide
That with His chosen Lamb our sin He would atone

No other way is possible for our reconciliation
It is only through the sacrifice of our Lord Jesus
And it is offered to all people in every nation
Great and marvelous things He has done for us

And so we praise You O Lord our God
We will receive what You have done and not add a thing
We receive your grace here on this earth we trod
And to You alone for ever will our praises ring

Hallelujah and Amen…