Verse-by-Verse Bible Commentary
Exodus 21:22

Clarke's Commentary

Verse Exodus 21:22. And hurt a woman with child — As a posterity among the Jews was among the peculiar promises of their covenant, and as every man had some reason to think that the Messiah should spring from his family, therefore any injury done to a woman with child, by which the fruit of her womb might be destroyed, was considered a very heavy offence; and as the crime was committed principally against the husband, the degree of punishment was left to his discretion. But if mischief followed, that is, if the child had been fully formed, and was killed by this means, or the woman lost her life in consequence, then the punishment was as in other cases of murder - the person was put to death; Exodus 21:23.

Bridgeway Bible Commentary

Concerning violence and injury (21:12-27)

Death was the penalty for wilful murder, violence to parents and kidnapping for slavery. Israelite law did not allow the widespread ancient practice of a murderer trying to escape punishment by clinging to the horns of the altar and pleading for mercy. But cases of manslaughter were different. When the Israelites settled in their new homeland, they were to appoint certain places as cities of refuge, where a person guilty of manslaughter could find safety (12-17; Numbers 35:9-15; Deuteronomy 19:1-6).

A person had to pay compensation for injuries done to others, the amount paid depending on the nature of the injury and the loss or inconvenience it caused (18-19). A master could not treat a slave brutally and could not beat him to death. If he did, he was punished. If there was no proof that the slave’s death was the result of the beating, the master was not punished; but neither could he replace the slave. He had to bear the cost of the loss (20-21).
The basic principle of justice was ‘an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth’; that is, the punishment had to fit the crime. A heavy penalty was required for a major offence, a light penalty for a minor offence. This principle also restricted vengeance, as people often take revenge far in excess of the wrong done to them (22-25). If a slave suffered serious injury through cruel treatment, he was compensated by being freed unconditionally (26-27).

Jesus, in his reference to ‘an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth’ (see Matthew 5:38-42), did not contradict the principle of fair punishment for wrongdoing, a principle that is a basic element in civil government. Jesus was not laying down laws for civil administrators as was the case with Moses, but was reminding his disciples that they must not always stand on their rights. In personal relationships they must be guided by a spirit of forgiveness, self-denial and active love towards the offender. The spirit ruling in the hearts of Christians is not the same as that which rules in the code of legal justice.

Coffman's Commentaries on the Bible

"And if men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart, and yet no harm follow; he shall be surely fined, according as the woman's husband. shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if any harm follow, then thou shalt give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe."

They are grossly in error who find this law harsh or unjust. Let it be remembered that this glimpse of Divine Light fell in a world darkened by ages of the grossest paganism, the societies of which wallowed in the most primitive and debased emotional darkness. The law as practiced by that shameful world was: (1) If you kill my child, I will kill you, your family, and your whole generation. (2) If you knock out my tooth, I will knock out all of yours and gouge out your eyes in additional! Etc., etc. Thus, the introduction of the law called the "Lex Talionis,"Wilbur Fields, op. cit., p. 472. was a vast improvement over what preceded it. This law was known as early as the Code of Hammurabi (circa 2,000 B.C.). It had the effect of limiting revenge. Also, as the Jews interpreted it, it gradually led to the substitution of monetary penalties for the retaliative dismemberment of enemies, as when a victim would confront the relative benefit to himself of seeing his neighbor's hand cut off (for example), or of receiving a money reward instead of it. "The Hebrew words here carry the sense of `substitute.' What is meant is that whoever causes another to lose his eye… must make financial restitution."Haketav Vehakabbalah, Wellsprings of Torah, Vol. 1 (New York: The Judaic Press, 1969), p. 155. We are not qualified to decide whether that interpretation is authentic or not, but one thing is clear, the Code of Hammurabi demanded that the penalty be executed, whereas, there are no instances in the Bible where the "Lex Talionis" was applied in any such brutal manner.

The world still has a long way to go in the matter of handling the revenge motive. The law here was a sign of progress in human relationships, but if men ever desire to have a truly desirable social climate in which to live, "They must accept the law taught by Christ, the law of unlimited forgiveness: `If thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink' (Romans 12:20).Wilbur Fields, op. cit., p. 473.

Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible

The rule would seem to refer to a case in which the wife of a man interfered in a quarrel. This law, “the jus talionis,” is elsewhere repeated in substance, compare the marginal references. and Genesis 9:6. It has its root in a simple conception of justice, and is found in the laws of many ancient nations. It serves in this place as a maxim for the magistrate in awarding the amount of compensation to be paid for the infliction of personal injury. The sum was to be as nearly as possible the worth in money of the power lost by the injured person. Our Lord quotes Exodus 21:24 as representing the form of the law, in order to illustrate the distinction between the letter and the spirit Matthew 5:38. The tendency of the teaching of the Scribes and Pharisees was to confound the obligations of the conscience with the external requirements of the law. The law, in its place, was still to be “holy and just and good,” Romans 7:12, but its direct purpose was to protect the community, not to guide the heart of the believer, who was not to exact eye for eye, tooth for tooth, but to love his enemies, and to forgive all injuries.

Calvin's Commentary on the Bible

22.If men strive, and hurt a woman. This passage at first sight is ambiguous, for if the word death ⁽³⁹⁾ only applies to the pregnant woman, it would not have been a capital crime to put an end to the foetus, which would be a great absurdity; for the foetus, though enclosed in the womb of its mother, is already a human being, (homo,) and it is almost a monstrous crime to rob it of the life which it has not yet begun to enjoy. If it seems more horrible to kill a man in his own house than in a field, because a man’s house is his place of most secure refuge, it ought surely to be deemed more atrocious to destroy a foetus in the womb before it has come to light. On these grounds I am led to conclude, without hesitation, that the words, “if death should follow,” must be applied to the foetus as well as to the mother. Besides, it would be by no means reasonable that a father should sell for a set sum the life of his son or daughter. Wherefore this, in my opinion, is the meaning of the law, that it would be a crime punishable with death, not only when the mother died from the effects of the abortion, but also if the infant should be killed; whether it should die from the wound abortively, or soon after its birth. But, since it could not fail but that premature confinement would weaken both the mother and her offspring, the husband is allowed to demand before the judges a money-payment, at their discretion, in compensation for his loss; for although God’s command is only that the money should be paid before the judges, ⁽⁴⁰⁾ still He thus appoints them to settle the amount as arbitrators, if the husband should chance to be too exorbitant. We plainly perceive, by the repetition of the lex talionis, that a just proportion is to be observed, and that the amount of punishment is to be equally regulated, whether as to a tooth, or an eye, or life itself, so that the compensation should correspond with the injury done; and therefore (what is first said of the life ⁽⁴¹⁾) is correctly applied also to the several parts, so that he who has plucked out his brother’s eye, or cut off his hand, or broken his leg, should lose his own eye, or hand, or leg. In fine, for the purpose of preventing all violence, a compensation is to be paid in proportion to the injury. But although God commands punishment to be inflicted on the guilty, still, if a man be injured, he ought not to seek for vengeance; for God does not contradict Himself, who so often exhorts His children not only to endure injuries patiently, but even to overcome evil with good. The murderer is to be punished, or he who has maimed a member of his brother; but it is not therefore lawful, if you have unjustly suffered violence, to indulge in wrath or hatred, so as to render evil for evil. Since this error was rife among the Jews, our Lord refutes it, and teaches that the punishment, which is publicly awarded to the wrong-doer, is not subservient to every man’s private passion, so that he who is offended should make haste to retaliate. (Matthew 5:38.) Nor indeed are these words addressed to them in order to inflame or excite the desire of vengeance, but all violence is restrained by the fear of punishment.

(39) It will be seen that the word אסון in the text is translated by C. , mors; in A V. , mischief. “The Chaldee expounds it, (says Ainsworth,) no death; but it implieth less also than death, as the words following manifest. The Greek refers it to the child; translating, if it be not figured, ( ἐξεικονισμένον,) i e. , have not the shape and proportion.”

(40) The word determine is added by our translators. Ainsworth’s literal rendering is, “and he shall give by the judges.”

(41) Added from Fr.

Smith's Bible Commentary

Exodus chapter twenty-one, God said to Moses,

Now these are the judgments which thou shalt set before them ( Exodus 21:1 ).

Now the judgments are really for the judges. You remember they appointed seventy to rule over the lesser, or they appointed "men over the thousands, men over the hundreds, men over the fifties, men over the tens", to judge in the smaller matters. So that they would only bring the major cases to Adam-I mean to Moses, so that Moses wouldn't be bogged down. Jethro said, "Hey, you know, you're gonna kill yourself standing here all day long, judging the matters of the people."

So these are the judgments or the guidelines for the judges who are judging in these matters that are brought before them. These are the judgments, the guidelines for the judges. These are not an individual kind of a retaliation-kind of thing that you're supposed to take, but these are the standards that have been set for the judges. The term "judgments" referred to the standards set for the judges.

Now you read of God's statutes, of His ordinances, of His law, and of His judgments. These are one of the things you read about. The judgments of God are different from the statutes. The statutes are different from the ordinances. The ordinances are different from the basic law. So all is comprised in the law, but these are now the guidelines for those men who were chosen to be judges.

Now it is interesting that here in verse six, and then in chapter twenty-two, verse eight and verse nine, the word "judges" in these verses is the Hebrew word "Elohim" which is the word for "gods". The judges are called gods because they are acting in the place of God in bringing God's judgment upon man and enforcing God's judgment upon the particular situations. They were acting in the place of God, and thus, the term for the judges was "gods", "Elohim".

Thus, in the New Testament when the Pharisees were arguing with Jesus in the gospel of John, and when He declared the fact that "before Abraham was I am", and they took up stones to stone Him. Jesus said, "I've done many good works among you for which of the works are you going to stone me?". They said, "Not for the works that you have done, but because you're a man, and continually insisting that you are equal with God." He said, "Did I not say", or, "Did I not say, or the Word of God say that ye are gods? Then why are you gonna stone me because I say I'm the Son of God?"( John 10:32-36 ).

Now in the Word it said, "Ye are gods". In other words, here in Exodus these men are called gods, those who were to judge and to enact God's judgment on men. It doesn't mean in anywise that they were as the eternal God, the Creator of heaven and earth. It just meant that they were acting as gods and in the place of God, in the fact that they had been given this responsibility of judging men, and thus, men's lives were in their hands. Thus acting for God, they were called "Elohim", gods. The word "Elohim" refers in the Old Testament to many different gods. It is not a term used exclusively for the God who created the heaven and the earth.

The Bible recognizes that man can have many different gods that are not true gods; that is, they are not the true God. They are god as far as they are the ruling master passion of a person's life. David says, "The gods of the heathen are vain", ( 1 Samuel 12:21 ) "Elohim", recognizing that heathen had gods but they weren't true gods. God challenged, "If you be gods, if you be Elohim, then prove it by telling us something that is going to happen before it ever happens." Thus the term "Elohim" refers to that which is the master guiding principle, or passion of a person's life.

Now I went into that to give you just a background to the scripture that Jesus referred to in the gospel of John because the Mormons, because of that one reference of Christ to this scripture, "Ye are gods", have built the whole doctrine of man's progression into gods. That if you are a faithful Mormon and your marriage has been sealed in the Mormon temple, and you've gone through the rites, and you wear your underwear, and the whole thing; what that has to do with making you a god, I don't know, but you can be one.

"You will be gods." That's their teaching. You and your wife, who has been sealed to you in marriage, will be able to go to a planet. You will be able to start your own little world on that planet. Other Mormons and good people, Christians and all, who weren't faithful true Mormons all the way, who didn't quite make it to the god stature, will be your angels and will serve you in your own system that you inaugurate. You will be god over that planet, and you will watch over that planet and develop and so forth, a whole life form and style, and all, from your offspring there in some planet in the universe. Now that is the acknowledged, recognized goal of the Mormon.

Now Brigham Young did something that has upset a lot of Mormons, in that he has carried this particular concept back one step instead of forward one step. If you carry it forward one step, every Mormon will acknowledge that that is the goal, and that is the purpose, and that is their desire, to be god and they're ascending the scale in progression into godhood; to have their own planet, and take their wife and begin their own little experiment on a planet someplace. Brigham Young carried it back one step. He said that Adam was a good Mormon who progressed into god. He brought to the earth one of his celestial wives Eve, and they began to have their children and that they began to populate the earth. That Adam is our god and the only god with whom we have to do.

Now Mormons get very upset about that and they say, "Oh you've taken what he said out of context." But I challenge you to read the whole context of that sermon, and you'll find that it isn't taken out of context, it is actually consistent with the Mormon doctrine, but it takes it back one step instead of forward one step. Why not? If you and your wife can be god on a planet someplace and start the whole thing off, why wasn't Adam a man somewhere in another planet within the universe, and became faithful and true and all, and ascended into the godhood, and of course brought one of his celestial wives Eve and started the whole thing?

Now that whole system of thought and idea taken from one little verse in the New Testament where Jesus said, "Did I not say in the law, Ye are gods?" From that one little verse, this whole system of thought and doctrine that you're gonna be god, providing you are a faithful Mormon and so forth, has come out of that one verse of scripture, rather than researching and finding out what that scripture was referring to. Not at all a progression into the godhood, as such; it's not what that was teaching.

In fact, that desire to be god is the thing that has started the whole problem with the human race and with the angels prior. You read of Satan's fall in Isaiah fourteen, "How art thou fallen from heaven O Lucifer son of the morning?" ( Isaiah 14:12 ). He goes on to tell of his will against the will of God. The fifth statement of Satan was, "I will be like the most High" ( Isaiah 14:14 ). Shakespeare has someone saying "Oh Cromwell flee ambition, for by this sin did the angels fall." "I will be like God."

When Adam and Eve were in the garden and Satan came to Eve to tempt her to eat of the fruit that God had forbidden, what was the enticement that Adam held out to her? "The day that you eat of it, you will be wise as God"( Genesis 3:5 ). So that desire to be wise, as God is the thing that he used to trip Eve up in the garden. "Be like God, be as God." So it is the same thing that is being held out to people today.

But the word judges, "Elohim", does not refer at all to the living, eternal God who created the heavens and the earth, but men who are appointed to judge in the cases that are brought before them. And in judging are representing God and are acting for God, holding the lives and the destiny of these men in their hands. It is so that the judges will realize the awesome responsibility they have as a judge.

There is one occupation I would never want, and that is to be a judge. To me, I could not live with myself if I were a judge. I would have too much difficulty in worrying about making a wrong decision, making a wrong judgment, realizing the awesome responsibility that here's a man, his life, his future, is in my hands. It would absolutely destroy me to think that I had sent a man to prison for five years for a crime he did not commit. That's one occupation I would never want.

But unfortunately those men who have that occupation have more or less taken, I think, from judges the concept of gods. And so many of them act as though they are God and want to be treated as God. When they walk into the courtroom they want you to all stand and bow and so forth, and come before them and offer your pleas. The attitude that many of them have is reprehensible. They need to realize the awesome, awesome responsibility that they have. Rather than making them proud, it should humble them, and they should come in, I feel, in a very humble way to sit in judgment, realizing the awesome responsibility that is theirs.

Now this whole chapter twenty-one deals with the judges and deals with their judgments, as it does on into chapter twenty-two. So this is addressed basically to those men who were to occupy the position of a judge in Israel, and they were to judge over the various matters. So He starts laying out certain basic laws that will govern first of all, the position of a servant.

If you buy a Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him ( Exodus 21:2-3 ).

So here we find again the six-and-one pattern. "Six days shalt thou labor, do thy work, the seventh day is the day of rest"( Exodus 20:9-10 ) "If you buy a Hebrew slave, six years shall he serve." If you were a Hebrew sold into slavery, six years you would have to serve, but the seventh year you'd go free.

I believe that this six-and-one pattern is significant not only in a day, but God established it in a year also. He established the months. The seventh month of the Jewish calendar was to be a sacred month; the day of atonement, and so forth came in the seventh month along with the feast. It was a sacred month in their calendar. Then the six years they were to sow their land. The seventh year the land was to just grow of itself. They were just to eat of that which came from the land; they weren't to sow it. They give the land a rest in the seventh year.

They failed to do this and God got after them later for their failure to do that. Inasmuch as for four hundred and ninety years that they were in the land, they didn't give the land the rest. God said, "You owe the land seventy years of rest, so you can stay in Babylon for seventy years and the land will get its Sabbaths that you robbed it of the whole time you were living there"( Jeremiah 29:10 ). So God gave the land its rest, its Sabbath, as He shut them up in Babylonian captivity for four hundred and ninety years.

But I believe that the pattern will also carry out that for six, and this is in a thousand-year cycles, for six millennia the earth will go on in the bondage to Satan, sold out by Adam. But the seventh millennia will be a restoration, the freedom, the return to God. Thus, it makes the age in which we are living extremely exciting because we're getting very, very, very close to the beginning of the seven thousandth year.

Now how long before Christ Adam fell in the garden, we don't know for certain. Somewhere around four thousand years before Christ, Adam turned this whole system over to Satan. Living now in nineteen seventy-nine, we realize that we are coming very, very close to the seventh millennia. Satan has ruled. We've been in bondage for just about six thousand years. But we look forward to that glorious seven thousandth year when man has been delivered, when the earth has been delivered. We'll be restored, and we will live and reign with Christ upon the earth for a thousand years in the glorious kingdom age.

So this six-and-one pattern has been established by God. I am convinced that it will also follow in thousand year cycles, and that we are coming extremely close to the end of Satan's reign and dominion and rulership over the earth and over man, that the day of redemption is very close. That's what Revelation chapter five is all about, as Jesus takes the seven sealed books, the title deed of the earth, and lays claim to that which He redeemed with His own blood. Then in chapter nineteen of Revelation, returns to establish God's kingdom upon the earth. So it's a very interesting law.

"Now if he came, if he was sold as a slave, and he came by himself, he will go out by himself. If he were married and his wife came with him, then his wife can go out with him."

But 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 ( Exodus 21:4 ).

The slave had no rights at all, no rights of possession. Therefore, if you were sold as a slave, and while you were a slave your master gave you one of the other slave girls for your wife, and you've had a couple of children, now the seventh year is come; it's time for you to go free. You can go free, but you can't take your wife and children because she belongs to your master. And thus, the fruit that has come from your relationship also belongs to him, because you had no rights of your own of possession while you were working for him. You say, "Well, that seems very hard and cruel." Yes, it does. It's hard for us to even imagine such a thing.

But if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free: Then his master shall bring him unto the [gods, the Elohim, translated,] judges; [Correctly so.] he shall also bring him to the door, or to the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for ever ( Exodus 21:5-6 ).

So you've had your wife and your children, say, "Hey I love this, I love my master, he's treating me good. I love my wife; I love my children. I don't want to go free, I want to serve him." Then he brings you before the judges and there your master takes an awl, and he runs the awl through the lobe of your ear, and he pins you to a post with that awl. Then you would put a gold ring, as a rule, in the pierced ear, which was the sign of a slave by choice. It indicated that you, it was a slave by choice. You had willingly submitted to this life of slavery.

Now there is an interesting prophecy concerning Jesus Christ that declares, "My ear hath He pierced." So Christ in a figurative sense had a pierced ear, inasmuch as He by choice submitted to the will of the Father. "Who, being in the form of God, and thought it not robbery to be equal with God, yet emptied Himself, became of no reputation, humbled Himself and became as a servant"( Philippians 2:6-7 ). The pierced ear servant, it was service by willingness. He willingly submitted Himself to the Father's will, to serve. Thus the prophecy, "Mine ear hath He pierced", referring to Jesus Christ, and His serving of God.

Now in a figurative sense I have a pierced ear, in that I am glad to take the title of, "Chuck, a bondslave of Jesus Christ." It's slavery by choice. I don't have to serve Him, I don't have to be His slave; I want to be His servant. I want to be His slave. I really want everything that I possess and am to belong to Him. Not to lay claims to things for myself, but what I am, and what I have are His. The pierced ear. All of the New Testament writers beginning their epistles would write, "Paul, a bondslave of Jesus Christ." "Peter a bondslave of Jesus Christ." "Jude, a bondservant of Jesus Christ." They loved the title.

I know of nothing better that could happen to any of us than just to be a bondservant of Jesus Christ, a servant by choice. Oh, that He would bring us to the post, and run the awl through our ears that we might demonstrate that we are servants by choice. It isn't forced upon us. We don't have to be, but I love Him. I love my Master. No one's ever treated me so good. I've never had it so well. I love serving Him.

Thus it is the choice of life, and the choice of being a bondslave was irrevocable, that was it. Once your ear was pierced, that was a choice of life, an irrevocable choice.

So the law of the servant,

And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do. And if she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: but to sell her to a strange nation he shall nave no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her ( Exodus 21:7-8 ).

So it's the idea of-actually, men bought their wives in those days when they became like a servant, or like a slave practically; you bought her, she belonged to you. So they had this form of dowry. If you took a wife, you paid the dowry.

Now a dowry wasn't such a bad deal. Actually, what a dowry was, was alimony in advance. The father would figure how much it would take for her to live, if you should decide you don't want her after you're married, because divorce was quite easy. Find out once I've purchased her, I don't like her, then let her be redeemed. She doesn't have to stay there and take my guff forever. But I don't have any right to sell her to a strange nation, but she should have the right of her dowry. She can live off of what I paid to get her in the beginning. "If she please not her master who has betrothed her to himself, then let her be redeemed."

Verse nine,

And if he have betrothed her unto his son, he shall deal with her after the manner of daughters. And if he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish. [In other words, he's got to go ahead and pay her alimony, and take care of her and so forth.] And if he do not these three unto her, then she shall go out free without money ( Exodus 21:9-10 ).

So it was tragic, but that's the way their customs were in those days. Women had very little rights; so you've come a long way. Why have you come a long way? Because of Jesus Christ. Hey, women still have it tough in a lot of cultures. If you don't believe it, you just go to some of these other areas, New Guinea, Guatemala, even, close by. Look at the lot of the Bedouin women; man, they have it tough. You women can be thankful for what the Lord has done in liberating you.

It is actually because of Jesus Christ, and His declaring that we are, all of us, children of God, and in Christ "there is neither male nor female". The distinctions are broken down. It is Christ that has put us all on an equal footing, and an equal plain and has taken away any concept or idea of a superior sex. That God favors men over women, or vice a versa; it doesn't exist. "We are all one in Christ Jesus" ( Galatians 3:28 ). It is the Christian ethic that has done so much to give the woman the rightful place of equality with a man but such does not exist in cultures where the Christian gospel has not had a strong influence.

Be glad women, you're not a Moslem. If you don't believe that, just read what Khomeini is doing to the women there in Iran, and you'll find out that being a Moslem woman wouldn't be so easy. Many of you wouldn't last long under his reign.

Now we deal with assault and battery, and murder, manslaughter, first and second degree in manslaughter.

Now he that smites a man, so that he dies, shall surely be put to death. And if a man lie not in wait, but God delivers him into his hand; then I will appoint thee a place whither he shall flee ( Exodus 21:12-13 ).

So if you first of all are guilty of just plain murder, capital punishment. But if it was accidental or just not a premeditated thing, then God was going to appoint a place where you could flee and be safe; they were called cities of refuge that they established. You could flee to a city of refuge and there you would be safe from the avenger.

Now if you would kill my brother, then I would be obligated to kill you because you killed my brother. So if it were an accident and yet I'm mad at you because you were foolish in doing it, and I'm wanting to get retribution and kill you, you could flee to a city of refuge, and there you would be safe as long as you stayed in the city of refuge. But if you came out and I caught you, then I could kill you. But you had to stay in that city of refuge. So God appointed these cities of refuges at strategic points in the land when they came into the land. So God is promising that these cities of refuge would be appointed.

Now if a man come presumptuously upon his neighbour, [This would be premeditated, your purpose for coming was] to slay him with guile; [deceitfulness] thou shalt take him from mine altar, that he may die ( Exodus 21:14 ).

In other words, you may even flee to the altar of God, but they can take you right from the altar of God and kill you, because yours was a premeditated action.

Now several things for which capital punishment was to be given:

He that smites his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death. [The law said, "Honor thy father and thy mother."] He that stealeth a man, and sells him, [or kidnappers] or if it be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death. He that curses his father, or mother, shall surely be put to death. [They didn't have nearly the problem with juvenile delinquency in those days that we have today.] And if men are fighting together, and one smites another with a stone, or with his fist, and he did not die, but he laid up for awhile: And he's able finally to get out of bed, and walk on a crutch, he that smote him will be acquitted: only he shall pay for his loss of time, until he is thoroughly healed. Now if a man smite his servant, or his maid, [Shows you what little rights the maids and servants had, if it's your servant or maid,] you smite him with a rod, and he dies under his hand; he shall be punished. [But it wasn't capital punishment.] Notwithstanding, if he continues a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money. [In other words if he, if he lingers before he dies than you won't be punished because actually you've lost your own money, he belongs to you.] If men are striving, and hurt a woman that is pregnant, so that she aborts [actually] the child, [miscarriages, has a miscarriage] and yet no further danger, or mischief follow: he shall surely be punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he must pay whatever the judges determine. But if any further mischief follow, then you are to give life for life. Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. And if a man smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it perish; then he shall let him go free for his eye's sake ( Exodus 21:15-26 ).

But this "eye for eye, tooth for tooth, burning for burning", and so forth, now men had begun to misinterpret this law. As if someone had struck you in the eye, that you have a right, not only a right, you've got an obligation to smack him in the eye. In other words, they made it an obligatory thing. "You knocked out my tooth, all right man you've had it. I gotta knock out your tooth." Tooth for tooth.

Jesus said, "You've heard that it hath been said" ( Matthew 5:38 ). Now really what the Lord is doing here is limiting because there is a perversity about our human nature that doesn't want to just get even. We want to more than get even.

It used to be when my brothers and I were growing up, scuffling with each other, you know we'd be sort of boxing and all, and maybe he would catch you one. What do you want to do? You want to catch him one back just a little harder. So many times when we started out just playing, boy, we ended up in a full-fledged fight cause you keep getting harder, and harder, and harder, and wanting to get back at him a little more. You'd start out with just sort of a game, and playing, but boy you end up just really going at it. That is human nature.

So this was to put a limitation. "An eye for an eye", not two eyes for an eye. "A tooth for a tooth", not three tooth, three teeth for one tooth, three tooths. So the purpose of the law was so that it would not exceed, but they had begun to interpret it as an obligation.

So Jesus said, "Hey look, I say unto you if a man smites you on one cheek, turn the other. You know, don't seek retribution, don't seek to get even"( Matthew 5:39 ). So Christ gave a whole new concept to this. It isn't, "I'm not under an obligation to blacken your eye cause you blacked mine. Better to forgive, better to pass it over." So Christ was showing actually that the law was intended to curb man's spirit, and to curb that spirit of retaliation, that desire to retaliate, but it had become misinterpreted by the Pharisees.

Now we deal with the person dealing with his servant. "If he hits his servant in the eye, and the servant loses the eye, the servant goes free for the eye's sake."

If you knock out a tooth of your servant, or your maidservant; then they get to go free for the tooth's sake. If an ox gore a man or a woman, that they die: then the ox shall be surely stoned, and his flesh shall not be eaten; but the owner of the ox will be acquitted. But if the ox were known to push with his horn in times past, and it has been testified to his owner, and he did not keep him corralled, but that he has killed a man or a woman; the ox shall be stoned, and his owner also will be put to death. [You've been told that your ox is bad, that it's out there goring people, or trying to gore people, and you've been told about it and you do nothing to corral it or to restrain it, then you are responsible for what your ox did.] If there be laid on him a sum of money, then he shall give for ransom for his life whatever is laid upon him. [So you could buy your way out of that one.] Whether he have a gored son, or a gored daughter, according to the judgment it shall be done unto him. Now if the ox shall push a manservant or a maidservant; he shall give unto their master thirty shekels of silver, and the ox shall be stoned ( Exodus 21:27-32 ).

So it is interesting that Jesus was sold by Judas Iscariot for the price of a slave that had been gored by an ox. That was the amount if a slave was gored by an ox, you were to pay the master thirty pieces of silver.

If a man shall open a pit, if you dig a pit and you don't cover it, and an ox or an ass falls in; Then you've got to pay for the ox or the ass to the owner of the beast that was slain. If one man's ox hurt another that it die; then they will sell the live ox, and divide the money; and the dead ox also they can divide. [And barbecue.] So if it be know that the ox has been used to push in the times past, and the owner did not keep him in; then he shall pay for the ox; and the dead one shall be his own ( Exodus 21:33-36 ).

In other words, you get the whole thing. He kills your ox, he has to pay you, and then you get the dead carcass also.

"

Dr. Constable's Expository Notes

Bodily injuries 21:18-32

Moses cited five cases in this section, as was true in the preceding one (Exodus 21:12-17).

Dr. Constable's Expository Notes

Manslaughter of an unborn child carried a fine (Exodus 21:22). The reason seems to have rested on two assumptions. First, accidental killing is not as serious a crime as deliberate killing. Second, a fetus, though a human life, does not have the same status as a self-sufficient human being. [Note: See Sandra Lubarsky, "Judaism and the Justification of Abortion for Non-Medical Reasons," Journal of Reform Judaism 31:4 (Fall 1984):1-13, which contains helpful information on the rabbinic teaching on abortion, though the author’s conclusion, ". . . Judaism not only permits abortions for medical reasons, but also supports abortion for non-medical reasons" (p. 12), contradicts the spirit of Old Testament teaching.]

"The most significant thing about abortion legislation in Biblical law is that there was none. It was so unthinkable that an Israelite woman should desire an abortion that there was no need to mention this offense in the criminal code." [Note: Meredith Kline, "Lex Talionis and the Human Fetus," Simon Greenleaf Law Review 5 (1985-86):75. See also Bruce K. Waltke, "Reflections from the Old Testament on Abortion," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 19:1 (Winter 1976):3-13; and Robert N. Congdon, "Exodus 21:22-25 and the Abortion Debate," Bibliotheca Sacra 146:582 (April-June 1989):132-47.]

Pro-abortion advocates frequently appeal to Exodus 21:22 to support their claim that a fetus is not a person and, therefore, abortion is not murder.

"In other words, if you cause the death of the fetus, you merely pay a fine; if you cause the death of the woman, you lose your own life. Thus the Bible clearly shows that a fetus is not considered a person. If the fetus were considered to be a person, then the penalty for killing it would be the same as for killing the woman-death. Abortion, then, is not murder." [Note: Graham Spurgeon, "Is Abortion Murder?" in The Religious Case for Abortion, p. 16. For the same view, see also Shalom Paul, Studies in the Book of the Covenant in the Light of Cuneiform and Biblical Law, p. 71; Lloyd Kalland, "Fetal Life," Eternity, February 1971, p. 24; and Dolores E. Dunnett, "Evangelicals and Abortion," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 33:2 (June 1990):217.]

However other Scriptures present the fetus as a person, a real human being (Job 10:8-12; Job 15:14; Psalms 51:5; Psalms 58:3; Psalms 139:13-16; Ecclesiastes 11:5; Jeremiah 1:5; Galatians 1:15). This was the prevailing opinion in the ancient Near East as well. [Note: See the excellent discussion by Russell Fuller, "Exodus 21:22-23: The Miscarriage Interpretation and the Personhood of the Fetus," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 37:2 (June 1992):169-84. Fuller also evaluated and rejected the popular evangelical view that this verse does not refer to a miscarriage but to a premature birth.]

In contrast to other ancient Near Eastern law codes, the Torah made no differentiation on the basis of the woman’s social class. It treated all equally. Also only the man who caused the injury was liable, not other members of his family who could suffer punishment for his offense and often did in other ancient Near Eastern societies. Principles explained elsewhere in the Torah determined the penalty the guilty party had to pay. [Note: See Stanley Isser, "Two Traditions: The Law of Exodus 21:22-23 Revisited," Catholic Biblical Quarterly 52:1 (January 1990):30-45, for some ancient abortion laws and the views of Jewish rabbis and translators on this passage.]

Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible

If men strive,.... Quarrel and fight with one another, which is to be understood of Hebrews, as Aben Ezra observes:

and hurt a woman with child; who being the wife of one of them, and also an Israelitish woman, interposes to part them, or help her husband; but the other, instead of striking his antagonist as he intended, gives her a blow:

so that her fruit depart from her; or, "her children go forth" z, out of her womb, as she may have more than one; through the fright of the quarrel, and fear of her husband being hurt, and the blow she received by interposing, might miscarry, or, falling into labour, come before her time, and bring forth her offspring sooner than expected:

and yet no mischief follow: to her, as the Targum of Jonathan, and so Jarchi and Aben Ezra restrain it to the woman; and which mischief they interpret of death, as does also the Targum of Onkelos; but it may refer both to the woman and her offspring, and not only to the death of them, but to any hurt or damage to either of them: now though there was none of any sort,

he shall surely be punished; that is, be fined or mulcted for striking the woman, and hastening the childbirth:

according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine; the husband might propose what fine should be paid, and might ask it in court; and if the smiter agreed to it, well and good, but if he judged it an exorbitant demand, he might appeal to the judges; for the husband might not lay what fine he pleased: this, if disputed, was to be decided by the judges, and as they determined it, it was paid; of which Maimonides a gives this account:

"he that strikes a woman, and her fruit depart, though he did not intend it, is obliged to pay the price of the birth to the husband, and for hurt and pain to the woman; how do they estimate the price of the birth? they consider the woman how well she was before she brought forth, and how well she is after she has brought forth, and they give it to the husband; if the husband be dead, they give it to the heirs; if she is stricken after the death of her husband, they give the price of the birth to the woman.''

z ויצאו ילדיה "et egressi fuerint nati ejus", Pagninus, Montanus, Vatablus, Drusius. a Hilchot Chobel Umazzik, c. 4. sect. 1. 2.

Henry's Complete Commentary on the Bible

      22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.   23 And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,   24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,   25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.   26 And if a man smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it perish; he shall let him go free for his eye's sake.   27 And if he smite out his manservant's tooth, or his maidservant's tooth; he shall let him go free for his tooth's sake.   28 If an ox gore a man or a woman, that they die: then the ox shall be surely stoned, and his flesh shall not be eaten; but the owner of the ox shall be quit.   29 But if the ox were wont to push with his horn in time past, and it hath been testified to his owner, and he hath not kept him in, but that he hath killed a man or a woman; the ox shall be stoned, and his owner also shall be put to death.   30 If there be laid on him a sum of money, then he shall give for the ransom of his life whatsoever is laid upon him.   31 Whether he have gored a son, or have gored a daughter, according to this judgment shall it be done unto him.   32 If the ox shall push a manservant or a maidservant; he shall give unto their master thirty shekels of silver, and the ox shall be stoned.   33 And if a man shall open a pit, or if a man shall dig a pit, and not cover it, and an ox or an ass fall therein;   34 The owner of the pit shall make it good, and give money unto the owner of them; and the dead beast shall be his.   35 And if one man's ox hurt another's, that he die; then they shall sell the live ox, and divide the money of it; and the dead ox also they shall divide.   36 Or if it be known that the ox hath used to push in time past, and his owner hath not kept him in; he shall surely pay ox for ox; and the dead shall be his own.

      Observe here,

      I. The particular care which the law took of women with child, that no hurt should be done them which might occasion their mis-carrying. The law of nature obliges us to be very tender in that case, lest the tree and fruit be destroyed together, Exodus 21:22; Exodus 21:23. Women with child, who are thus taken under the special protection of the law of God, if they live in his fear, may still believe themselves under the special protection of the providence of God, and hope that they shall be saved in child-bearing. On this occasion comes in that general law of retaliation which our Saviour refers to, Matthew 5:38, An eye for an eye. Now, 1. The execution of this law is not hereby put into the hands of private persons, as if every man might avenge himself, which would introduce universal confusion, and make men like the fishes of the sea. The tradition of the elders seems to have put this corrupt gloss upon it, in opposition to which our Saviour commands us to forgive injuries, and not to meditate revenge, Matthew 5:39. 2. God often executes it in the course of his providence, making the punishment, in many cases, to answer to the sin, as Judges 1:7; Isaiah 33:1; Habakkuk 2:13; Matthew 26:52. 3. Magistrates ought to have an eye to this rule in punishing offenders, and doing right to those that are injured. Consideration must be had of the nature, quality, and degree of the wrong done, that reparation may be made to the party injured, and others deterred from doing the like; either an eye shall go for an eye, or the forfeited eye shall be redeemed by a sum of money. Note, He that does wrong must expect one way or other to receive according to the wrong he has done,Colossians 3:25. God sometimes brings men's violent dealings upon their own heads (Psalms 7:16); and magistrates are in this the ministers of the justice, that they are avengers (Romans 13:4), and they shall not bear the sword in vain.

      II. The care God took of servants. If their masters maimed them, though it was only striking out a tooth, that should be their discharge, Exodus 21:26; Exodus 21:27. This was intended, 1. To prevent their being abused; masters would be careful not to offer them any violence, lest they should lose their service. 2. To comfort them if they were abused; the loss of a limb should be the gaining of their liberty, which would do something towards balancing both the pain and disgrace they underwent. Nay,

      III. Does God take care for oxen? Yes, it appears by the following laws in this chapter that he does, for our sakes,1 Corinthians 9:9; 1 Corinthians 9:10. The Israelites are here directed what to do,

      1. In case of hurt done by oxen, or any other brute-creature; for the law, doubtless, was designed to extend to all parallel cases. (1.) As an instance of God's care of the life of man (though forfeited a thousand times into the hands of divine justice), and in token of his detestation of the sin of murder. If an ox killed any man, woman, or child, the ox was to be stoned (Exodus 21:28; Exodus 21:28); and, because the greatest honour of the inferior creatures is to be serviceable to man, the criminal is denied that honour: his flesh shall not be eaten. Thus God would keep up in the minds of his people a rooted abhorrence of the sin of murder and every thing that was barbarous. (2.) To make men careful that none of their cattle might do hurt, but that, by all means possible, mischief might be prevented. If the owner of the beast knew that he was mischievous, he must answer for the hurt done, and, according as the circumstances of the case proved him to be more or less accessory, he must either be put to death or ransom his life with a sum of money, Exodus 21:29-32; Exodus 21:29-32. Some of our ancient books make this felony, by the common law of England, and give this reason, "The owner, by suffering his beast to go at liberty when he knew it to be mischievous, shows that he was very willing that hurt should be done." Note, It is not enough for us not to do mischief ourselves, but we must take care that no mischief be done by those whom it is in our power to restrain, whether man or beast.

      2. In case of hurt done to oxen, or other cattle. (1.) If they fall into a pit, and perish there, he that opened the pit must make good the loss, Exodus 21:33; Exodus 21:34. Note, We must take heed not only of doing that which will be hurtful, but of doing that which may be so. It is not enough not to design and devise mischief, but we must contrive to prevent mischief, else we become accessory to our neighbours' damage. Mischief done in malice is the great transgression; but mischief done through negligence, and for want of due care and consideration, is not without fault, but ought to be reflected upon with great regret, according as the degree of the mischief is: especially we must be careful that we do nothing to make ourselves accessory to the sins of others, by laying an occasion of offence in our brother's way, Romans 14:13. (2.) If cattle fight, and one kill another, the owners shall equally share in the loss, Exodus 21:35; Exodus 21:35. Only if the beast that had done the harm was known to the owner to have been mischievous he shall answer for the damage, because he ought either to have killed him or kept him up, Exodus 21:36; Exodus 21:36. The determinations of these cases carry with them the evidence of their own equity, and give such rules of justice as were then, and are still, in use, for the decision of similar controversies that arise between man and man. But I conjecture that these cases might be specified, rather than others (though some of them seem minute), because they were then cases in fact actually depending before Moses; for in the wilderness where they lay closely encamped, and had their flocks and herds among them, such mischiefs as these last mentioned were likely enough to occur. That which we are taught by these laws is that we should be very careful to do no wrong, either directly or indirectly; and that, if we have done wrong, we must be very willing to make satisfaction, and desirous that nobody may lose by us.

Kelly Commentary on Books of the Bible

"In the third month, when the children of Israel were gone forth out of the land of Egypt, the same day came they into the wilderness of Sinai." Up to this point all the dealings of God have been the simple application and outflow of His own grace. This is all the more striking too, because even after the redemption of the people from Egypt there are grievous faults, unbelief, complaints, and murmurs; nevertheless, not a blow, not a single answer on God's part save in tender mercy towards a poor and failing people. All changes now.

The reason is manifest. They left the ground of the grace of God, which they had in no wise appreciated. Their conduct proved that His grace had not at all entered into their hearts. It was a perfectly righteous thing therefore that God should propose terms of law. Had He not done so, we should not have had duly raised the solemn question of man's competence to take the ground of his own fidelity before God. Not a soul that has been since brought to the knowledge of God but what at least ought to have profited in point of fact, must have profited by this grave lesson. It is true that God had taken every care to show His own mind about it. From the time that man fell, He presented grace as the only hope for a sinner. But man was insensible, and therefore, inasmuch as his heart was continually taking the place of self-righteousness, God's law put him thoroughly to the test. This accordingly was proposed. Had there been any true understanding of their own state in the sight of God they had confessed that, however righteous the obligation to render obedience to the law, they being unrighteous could only be proved guilty under such a proof. The test must have brought inevitable ruin. But they had no such thoughts of themselves, more than real knowledge of God.

Hence therefore, no sooner does God propose to them that they should obey His law as the condition of their blessing at His hands, than they at once accept the terms: "Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine." The result soon appears in their ruin; but Jehovah shows that He knew from the first, before any result appeared, their inability to stand before Him: "Lo," says He to Moses, "I come unto thee in a thick cloud, that the people may hear when I speak with thee, and believe thee for ever." But in this chapter, and indeed in the next still more, the people entreat that God's voice should not speak to them any more.

Then (Exodus 20:1-26) are uttered those wonderful ten commandments which are the great centre of divine communications through Moses the fundamental expression of God's law. On this, being so thoroughly familiar to all, I of course do not enlarge. We know from our Lord Jesus its moral summary and essence the love of God, and the love of man. But it was presented here for the most part in a way that betrayed the condition of man not in positive precepts but in negative ones a most humbling proof of man's estate. He loved sin so well that God had to interdict it. In the greater part of the ten commandments, in short, it was not "Thou shalt," but "Thou shalt not." That is, it was a prohibition of man's will. He was a sinner, and nothing else.

A few words on the law may be well here. It may be looked at in its general and historical bearing, more abstractly as a moral test.

First, God was dealing with Israel in their responsibility as witnesses of Jehovah, the one true self-existing God, the almighty God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. His relationship was with them as they then were, redeemed from Egypt by His power and brought to Himself indeed, but only after an outward sort, neither born of God, nor justified. They were a people in the flesh. They had been wholly insensible to His ways of grace in leading them out of Egypt to Sinai. They lost sight of His promises to the fathers. They stood in their own strength to obey the law of God, as ignorant of their impotence or of His holy majesty. Accordingly we may regard the law as a whole, consisting not only of moral claims but of national institutes, ordinances, statutes, and judgment) under which Israel were put. These consequently were to form and regulate them as a people under His special government, God suiting them to their condition and in no way revealing His own nature as He afterwards did personally in the Word made flesh in the New Testament as a full display of His mind, and in the Christian individually or the church corporately as responsible to represent Christ, like Israel in relation to the tables of stone. (2 Corinthians 3:1-18) Hence we can understand the earthly, external, and temporal character of the legal economy. There were believers before it and all through; but this of course wholly distinct from Judaism. It was now a question of a nation, and not of individuals merely, thus governed of one nation in the midst of many which were to behold in it the consequences of fidelity or the lack of it toward the law of Jehovah. The Old Testament proves, and indeed the New Testament also, how utterly Israel failed, and what the consequences have been alike in the justice and in the grace of God.

But, secondly, the law is a test morally and individually. This always abides; for the law is lawful if a man use it lawfully. Christianity teaches its value instead of neutralising it. It is false that the law is dead. It is not thus that the believer, even if a Jew and therefore under law, was withdrawn from its condemning power. By the law he died to the law that he might live to God. He is crucified with Christ and nevertheless he lives, yet not himself but Christ in him. He underwent death to the law by the body of Christ that he should belong to another Him that was raised from the dead in order that we should bear fruit to God. But it is as far as possible from the truth that "the discipline of the law comes in to supply the deficiencies of the Spirit, and curb the still remaining tendencies to sin."* Such was no doubt the doctrine of those whom the apostle censures as wishing to be law-teachers, understanding neither what things they say nor whereof they stoutly affirm. It is not Christianity to talk of "deficiencies of the Spirit," any more than of "still remaining tendencies to sin;" still less to call in the discipline of the law to mend matters. Is it not known that for a righteous man (which assuredly the believer is) law is not in force, but for lawless and insubordinate, the ungodly and sinful. They that are of Christ Jesus crucified the flesh with its affections and lusts. It is a question of mortifying our members which are on earth, on the ground of our being dead, and of walking by the Spirit, even as we live by Him, and of those not in anywise fulfilling flesh's lust. Thus, if the law be the power of sin, grace is of holiness. Thanks be to God who gives us the victory by our Lord Jesus Christ.

* Dr. P. Fairbairn's Typology, ii. p. 190.

However, we find that God was pleased to give subsequently and separately, but yet in connection with the ten words, certain ordinances which concerned Israel in their worship.

All the people then saw the thunderings and the lightnings, and the voice of the trumpet, and the mountain smoking, and stood afar off, asking that not God but Moses should speak with them. He accordingly drew near into the thick darkness; for so God dealt with Israel as a people in the flesh. For the Christian it is not so. The veil is rent; and we walk in the light as He is in the light. Yet even then Jehovah, while warning against making gods of silver and gold, deigned to direct them to make to Him an altar of ground for burnt-offerings and peace-offerings: if of stone two prohibitions instruct His people. It must not be of hewn stone, as their work would profane it; neither must the Israelite go up by steps, as thereby his nakedness would be manifested. Grace covers through the expiation of Christ, as it flows in virtue of God's work and in maintaining God's order.

In the beginning ofExodus 21:1-36; Exodus 21:1-36 we find the type of the servant. There cannot be a more striking illustration of the truth that Christ is the continual object of the Holy Ghost than that, even in these temporary ordinances, God cannot refrain from looking onward to His Son. No doubt it was connected with the earth, and what was in itself anything but a condition suitable to the mind of God. It is the condition of a slave; nevertheless even there God has Christ before Him. If a Hebrew servant were bought, he was to serve for six years, in the seventh to go out free for nothing "If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master have given him a wife, and she have borne him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself. And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free: then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for ever."

Such was the choice of Jesus not to be merely a servant here on the earth for a time He has chosen of His own gracious will to be servant for ever. No doubt He cannot but be a divine person, the Son, as He is also the exalted Lord; but He is nevertheless by His own grace the servant for ever. Even in glory we shall know Him thus. What is He doing now? He gave a sample of it before He went up on high. When the time was come, He took a basin of water and a towel, and washed His disciples' feet. What they knew not then, they were to know hereafter, as we know it now. Intimacy with what is unseen and heavenly is quite as much the portion of a Christian and even more characteristically so than the knowledge of what passes around us now. We ought to know heaven better than the earth. We may know and ought to judge what is passing in the world, though it be through an imperfect medium; but we know heaven and heavenly things from God. It is not merely as having the word that reveals heaven; but we know it from Him who comes from heaven and is above all, and testifies what He has seen and heard; we know it through the Holy Ghost who has come down from it, and hence should know it better than the earth, and the things of the world which ensnare the flesh. But looking onward to the day of glory that is coming, when the Lord will be publicly manifested, and we manifested with Him, changed into His glorious likeness, it might have been thought that surely His service will cease then. But not so: it will take a new shape. He is the servant of His own choice for ever. As He will never cease to be God, He will never cease to be man. In His love He is become a servant for ever; and He loves to be so.

After this follow the general institutions of the law, which mainly insist on retribution. Advantage must not be taken of the weak or subject; violence cannot go unpunished, any more than dishonour where we owe reverence; responsibility for what is allowed, were it but a mischievous brute; restitution must be made, and this double, fourfold, or even fivefold, according to the wrong; neither a witch nor an offender unnaturally could live; neither stranger nor widow nor orphan must be vexed or afflicted; neither poor must be burdened, nor judges reviled; but God is to be honoured with the first of the fruits, and of the sons, as well as of the cattle. Israel are to approve themselves as holy men to God. False report and testimony are forbidden, were a multitude to lead the way; as on the other hand there must be no partiality to the poor man's cause, nor a refusal to help an enemy, nor falsehood, nor bribery, nor oppression. The seventh year was to be enjoyed as the land's Sabbath, even as the seventh day by each Israelite, who must avoid naming false gods, but keep the due feasts thrice a year to the true God, not offering blood with leavened bread, nor letting the fat remain till the morning A prohibition occurs of a peculiar kind, and is repeated not only in a later part of this book, but also in Deuteronomy: "Thou shalt not seethe a kid in its mother's milk." God would guard His people from an outrage in comeliness, were it even about a dumb or dead animal; as Satan triumphs in all that is abnormal and unnatural in the superstitions which usurp the place of the truth, and are bound up with idolatry. His angel is promised, not only to keep and lead Israel, but to bring them in, spite of the doomed Canaanites, who should be driven out: they should have no covenant with them or their gods. (Exodus 21:1-36; Exodus 22:1-31; Exodus 23:1-33) These points do not call for particular remarks.

Along with them there is the greatest possible care for the maintenance of one true God an immense principle. No doubt the time was not yet come for God to reveal Himself as He is. Into that wondrous knowledge we are brought by the Son come down here below; and above all by the Holy Ghost, now that Christ is gone up on high For in point of fact, when God was only known as the one God, however true this may be, He could not really be known as He is. Now we do so know Him. We know Him better than even His earthly people will know Him by and by. The knowledge of Israel in the millennium will be genuine, for they shall be all taught of God. But there is now an intimacy of acquaintance with the God and Father of the Lord Jesus which none on earth can ever know as a Christian ought to know it. The reason is manifest; for the proper knowledge of the Christian is such knowledge as the Son, speaking according to His own communion with His Father, communicates to us.

Now the Lord Jesus will not be dealing then as Son, though then as evermore the Son of God. He will not undertake to unfold His Father's words to men in the millennium. He will reign as the great King King of kings and Lord of lords, but still as King. It would not be suitable to such a position that there should be undue familiarity. The very notion of a king and a kingdom puts the subjects at a greater distance. A certain reserve becomes requisite to majesty; whereas such considerations disappear in the nearness of relationship He is pleased to enter into with us. It is true He was born King of the Jews, and He never can cease to be really so; but it is not so that we know Him. The Son of the Father, He brings us into the knowledge of the true God as the Son knew Him in heaven, as the Son still of course knew Him on earth. And the Holy Ghost completes this wonderful circle of divine intimacy. If I may venture on such an expression without irreverence, it is the introducing us into the family circle of the heavens the Father made known in the Son by the Holy Ghost. This I maintain to be peculiar to Christianity in all its fulness. When God the Father shall have accomplished His present purpose here below, then will be caught up to meet the Lord those among whom the Spirit is thus making known God; and after that the ordinary dealings of God will resume their course through this world. No doubt all was advancing as regards the world; but that which was brought to us now was before the world, and altogether above the world in its own nature. How greatly blessed then is the Christian, and what the manner and measure of the worship and the walk which become those to whom grace has given such a knowledge of God!

At the end of these communications a call is given Moses to come up to Jehovah. (Exodus 24:1-18) "And he said unto Moses, Come up unto Jehovah, thou, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel, and worship ye afar off." There is distance, even though they are called to this place of distinction. "And Moses alone shall come near Jehovah, but they shall not come nigh, neither shall the people go up with him." And there the solemn compact into which Israel had passed is renewed. All the people answer when the words and judgments are pronounced, "All the words which Jehovah hath said will we do." They promise obedience, but it is obedience of the law. Now we must always bear in mind that, though in the Christian walking aright the righteousness of the law will surely be fulfilled, never has Christianity either a legal principle or a legal character: not a legal principle because it flows from the known grace of God to the soul; not a legal character because it is consistency with Christ risen from the dead, not merely with the Ten Command meets. But inasmuch as Christ differed from Moses, as grace differs from law; as that which suits God the Father known in heaven, though manifesting Himself upon earth, differs from a process of mere dealing with the first man according to righteous claim; so it is with the Christian man: while faithful to Christ, as he knows Him, he will never do anything which the law could possibly condemn. Against the fruits of the Spirit there is no law, as the apostle so emphatically says to the Galatians. But then the fruits of the Spirit can never be attained by the law; nor are they even contemplated by a legal measure.

In short therefore the children of Israel stood on the ground of man in the flesh; and man in the flesh, as he is a sinful being, can neither deny nor accomplish his obligation to do the will of God. As surely as God is, man's conscience bears witness to Him. If the true God deigns to give a law to man, it must be an unimpeachably wise and worthy law adapted to the condition of man, as far as a law possibly can be; and such is God's law holy, just, and good. But the difficulty is this, that man being a sinner is as far as possible from ability to meet God's law; for how indeed can there be any real stable bond between a bad man and a good law? There lay the insuperable difficulty once; but now grace perfectly meets it, and meets it in a way which evinces alike the goodness and the wisdom of God.

Law is essentially incapable of helping, because being only a claim on God's part, and a definition of His demands, it can only condemn him whose condition makes due obedience impossible. It is evident that law as such, first of all, has no object to present to man. It can press duty to God and man on pain of death, but it has no object to reveal. Secondly, it cannot give life; and this is another necessity of man. In addition to atonement, these are the two urgent wants of fallen humanity. Without life it is impossible for one to produce that which is according to God; and without a worthy object, nay without a divine object presented, there can be nothing to draw out divine affections. As divine life alone can have affections according to God, so a divine object alone can either act on those affections or minister to them. Now this is exactly what grace does in Christ. He who has wrought expiation for our sins is our life, and at the same time He is the object whom God has revealed to our faith. This shows the essential difference between law and grace, which last means God giving in Christ all that man really needs for His own glory.

Undoubtedly there is another measure of responsibility. A few words on this subject may not be amiss for any souls that have not adequately considered the matter, as there is hardly anything on which men are so much at fault as this question. Some seem on the very verge of denying it altogether, in their one-sided zeal for the grace of God; others who stand stoutly and so far well for the responsibility of man misuse this truth so as apparently to swamp God's grace. Scripture never sacrifices one truth to another. It is the peculiar property and glory of the word of God that it communicates not merely a truth here and there, but the truth; and this in the person of Christ. The Holy Ghost is the only power for rightly using, and applying, and enjoying the truth; and therefore He is called "the truth" no less than the Lord Jesus. He is the intrinsic power by which the truth is received into the heart, but Christ is the object. Where Christ is thus received in the Holy Ghost, a new kind of responsibility is created. The measure of it for the Christian is based on the fact that he possesses life, and that he has Christ Himself, the object which shows him the position in which he stands, and consequently the character of the relationship that attaches to him. His relationship is that of a son, not merely of one adopted into that place with no more reality than he obtains in human things. We are adopted sons; but then we are more than that. We are children, members of the family of God. That is, we are children as having God's own nature. We are born of God, and not merely adopted as if we were strangers to Him. Every Christian has a nature that is intrinsically divine, as we are told in 2 Peter 1:1-21.

Thus, it is plain, nothing can be more complete. We have a nature which answers morally to God whom we imitate as well as obey in light and love, in holy and righteous ways, in mercy, truthfulness, and humility. We have the position of sons, a relationship which the Lord Jesus had in all its perfection, and in an infinitely higher sense, in which no creature can share it along with Him. Still Christ does bring us into His own relationship as far as it is possible for the creature to possess it. Hence, as duty is ever measured by responsibility, that of the Christian is according to the place in which grace has put him. It is certain therefore that all the common-places about the law as the rule of the Christian's life are practically a denial of what Christianity is. Those who reason from Israel to us, without intending it, ignore the relationship of the Christian, and set aside the bearing of redemption on our walk: so serious is that error which to many seems a pious thought, and I am sure taken up by them with the desire of honouring God and His will. But sincerity will not serve in lieu of His word; and our own thoughts and desires can never be trusted as a standard of principle or of practice. God has revealed His mind, and to this, if wise, we must needs be subject. In divine things there is nothing like simplicity; by it we enjoy a wisdom far higher than our own and real power to strengthen and guide the heart.

In Israel's case it was not so. First of all they promised obedience; but it was the obedience of the law. Secondly, when the blood of the victims was shed, it was sprinkled on the book as well as on the people (verses 7, 8). What was the meaning of the blood? Not atonement. The prime idea in blood seems always to be the life given up, i.e., death, in acknowledgment of the guilt of the one concerned. This is true, no doubt; but unless it goes farther than this, it is a declarative sanction of God's punishing in case of failure to meet His demands. The grace of God applies the blood of Christ in a totally different way; and this is what is referred to in1 Peter 1:2; 1 Peter 1:2. He describes the Christian in terms which at once recallExodus 24:1-18; Exodus 24:1-18. He says that we are elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father through sanctification of the Spirit unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus. The Israelites were elect as a nation according to the sovereign call of Jehovah the known God of their fathers. Ignorant of God as well as of themselves, they dared to take their stand on His law. Accordingly they were severed by the ordinance of circumcision and other rites. They were sanctified from the nations by this fleshly separation to obey the law under its solemn and extreme penalty. The blood threatened death on every one who transgressed. The Christian position is altogether different: we are elect as children "according to the foreknowledge of God the Father through sanctification of the Spirit," meaning by this the separating power of the Holy Ghost from the very first moment of our conversion. This vital separation to God, and not practical holiness, is what is here called sanctification of the Spirit the most fundamental meaning of it indeed anywhere. But practical sanctification there is, and amply insisted on elsewhere; but it is not the point here, and if we attempt to bring practical sanctification into this verse, we destroy the gospel of grace. Nobody doubts the good intentions of such as interpret it thus; but these are not enough with the word of God.

We must take care that we receive the sense which God intends, otherwise we may err seriously, to His dishonour and to our own hurt and that of others. Let us then bow to God instead of forcing our own meaning on scripture. What for instance would be the meaning of our being practically sanctified to obedience as well as to have the blood of Jesus sprinkled upon us? It simply proves that he who expounds unwittingly sets aside the gospel. Practical sanctification for obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus! What do people mean by restricting themselves to a sense of sanctification which necessarily involves in it so portentous a conclusion? Evidently the language of the Spirit of God is as unambiguous, and the construction as plain and simple as possible.

Take a case in illustration. A man hitherto has been altogether indifferent to the word of God. He hears it now; he receives Jesus as the gift of God's love with all simplicity. Perhaps he has not peace at once, but at any rate he is thoroughly arrested; he desires earnestly to know the gospel from the very first. If the Spirit of God has thus wrought in him, he is separated to God from what he was. This is here called "sanctification of the Spirit." For, as we said, the sanctification is "to obedience;" and this is the very first desire implanted in a soul from the moment that there is a real divine work in him. Such an one may be very ignorant, no doubt; but at any rate his heart is made up to obey the Lord his desire is Godward. It is not a merely legal way of escaping the dreadful doom that he sees is the just portion of those that despise God. The truth has touched his conscience by grace, and God's mercy, however dimly seen, is enough to attract his heart to obey. Thus he is sanctified by the Spirit unto the obedience and the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus. He would now obey, because he has the new nature through receiving the name of the Lord Jesus, and would enter into the grace of God that sprinkles the guilty with the blood of Jesus. He would obey like Jesus, not under compulsion like a Jew, and is sprinkled with His blood in remission for his sins, instead of having the blood sprinkled on him as a menace of death in case of disobeying the law. The Christian loves to obey, and is already forgiven through faith of Jesus and His blood. This I believe to be the true meaning of the passage, and especially of the term "sanctification of the Spirit" here; though it is frankly and fully allowed that this is not the only meaning of "sanctification" in scripture.

The sanctification here in question then applies from the start of an effectual inward work even before a soul knows pardon and peace, but there is also room for the practical power of the Holy Ghost in subsequent work in heart and conscience severing us more and more by the truth to the Lord. The latter is practical sanctification, admits of degrees, and is thus relative. But in every soul there is the absolute separation of the Holy Spirit from conversion. Thus there are plainly two distinct senses of sanctification: one absolute, in which a man is severed once for all from the world to God; the other relative, as being practical and hence differing in measure in the after career of each Christian. "But ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified, in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God." Here it seems in substance the same thing as in 1 Peter 1:2. "Sanctified" in this sense is clearly before justification; and so the apostle puts it. It is of no use to decry the plain meaning of the scripture because the Romanist theologian perverts the fact more fatally than the Protestant. If the Spirit of God here puts "sanctified" before "justified," our plain duty is to learn what is meant, not to wrest His word because of Popish misuse of it a misuse due largely to the common ignorance of the primary force of sanctification. Why should souls be driven from the truth by prejudice or clamour? It is not to be allowed that God's word makes mistakes: man does, but is it with the Spirit of God? Does not He mean what He says? When He says they were washed, He is referring to the water of the word used by the Spirit of God to deal with man. This looks more at evil; "sanctified" to the good which attracted the heart now. But these are not the only things. "Justified" is not when the prodigal son returns to his father, but when the best robe is put upon him; then he is, according to1 Corinthians 6:1-20; 1 Corinthians 6:1-20, not washed and sanctified alone but "justified." It is the application of the full power of the work of the Lord Jesus. It is not always immediate on conversion It may be, and, if you please, ought to be, soon; but still it is far from being always so; and in fact there is and perhaps must be always an interval more or less before comfort or peace is enjoyed. It may be ever so minute, but there is habitually a dealing of Christ between the touch that stays the issue and the word which declares with no less authority than love, "Daughter, be of good comfort: thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace." Very often it is not so little a while, as many of us know to our cost. But it remains always true that there is this difference. And it seems well to remark it, because it is of considerable practical and also doctrinal importance, contrasting as it does the place of the Christian with that of the Jew. The tendency of some to insist on the whole in an instant is a reaction from the popular unbelief, which, if it allow peace at all, allows it as a matter of slow, laborious and uncertain attainment. But we must not be driven into any error, even the least to avoid the greatest; and it is certainly an error to swamp in one all the ways of God with the soul.

In the latter part of the chapter we have clearly the legal glory. This does not take them out of their condition of flesh and blood and all that pertains to it. It is in no way the glory which is the hope of the Christian.

Exodus 25:1-40 introduces us to a new order of figures, not only earthly ordinances, but that which appertains to the tabernacle. Undoubtedly in itself it composed a worldly tabernacle; but this does not hinder these figures from typifying what was to be for the most part of a heavenly character.

After the call to the people to bring their offerings, we find the use to which they were to be applied First and foremost stands the centre of Levitical worship the ark. We must remember that they are but shadows, and not the very image of the thing. In none of these types can one find the full truth of Christ and of His work. They are only a faint and partial adumbration of the infinite reality, and could not possibly be more. Hence they have the imperfection of a shadow. In fact we could not have the full image till Christ appeared and died on the cross and went to heaven. As Christ is the true and perfect image of God, so is He the expression of all that is good and holy in man. Where will one find what man should be but in Christ? Where the faultless picture of a servant but in Him? And so one might go through every quality and every office, and find them only in perfection in our Lord Jesus. There indeed is the truth. The legal ordinances and institutes were but shadows; still they were types distinctly constituted; and we should learn by them all.

In these shadows* we may see two very different characters or classes, we may say, into which they are divisible. The first and foundation of all the rest is this: God would disclose Himself in some of them to man, as far as this was possible then; secondly, founded on that and growing out of it, man would be taught to draw near to God. Impossible for such access to exist and be enjoyed till God had drawn near to man and shown us what He is to man. We can see therefore the moral propriety and beauty of this distinction, which at once separates the shadows of the latter part of Exodus into two main sections. The ark, the golden table, the golden candlestick, the tabernacle with its curtains, the veil, the brazen altar, and the court, form the first division of the types, the common object of them all being the display of God in Christ to man.

*Dr. Fairbairn's "Typology" is here, as in general, poverty itself. He considers that distinct meanings to be attached to the materials, colours, etc., can have no solid foundation, and are " here out of place"! Even the force of the silver redemption-money he thinks disproved by the fact that the sockets of the door were made of brass. This is the way to lose all but a minimum of truth.

Of these the highest is the ark. It was the seat of Divine Majesty in Israel; and as all know (and most significant it is), the mercy-seat was pre-eminently that throne of God the mercy-seat which afterwards we see with blood sprinkled on it and before it the mercy-seat which concealed the law destructive to the pretensions of man, but maintained it in the place of highest honour, though hidden from human view. Was this nothing? Was there not comfort for any heart which confides in God, that He should take such a seat as this, and give it such a name, in relationship with a guilty people on the earth?

Next came the table,* and upon it a defined supply of bread. For what was presented there? One loaf? No such carnal thought entered as if God had need of bread from man. The bread that was set on the golden table consisted of twelve loaves in evident correspondence with the twelve tribes of Israel, but this assuredly in connection with Christ, for He is ever the object of God's counsels. It is God displaying Himself in Christ; but those who had this connection with Christ were Israel. Of them He came, and He deigned to have the memorial of them on this table before God.

*Dr. Fairbairn views Christ's whole undertaking as symbolized already in the furniture and services of the Most Holy Place, and therefore considers the things belonging to the Holy Place as directly referring only to the works and services of His people. The consequence of such a division is indeed lowering in the extreme.

In the candlestick another truth comes before us. It is not God who thus deals with humanity, of which Israel was the chosen specimen, and the one remembered before Him; but in the seven candlesticks, or rather the candelabrum with its seven lights, we clearly see the type of Christ as the power and giver of the Holy Ghost in testimony for God. This is in connection with God's sanctuary and presence. Now, in all these things it is the display of what God is to man; God Himself in His own sole majesty in the ark, God Himself associated with man, with Israel, in the show-bread, God Himself with this light of the sanctuary or the power of the Spirit of God.

All this was plain, but in the tabernacle we have more than this. (Exodus 26:1-37) Christ is set forth in various ways by the curtains Christ in His human purity and righteousness Christ in what was heavenly Christ in His glory whether Jewish or extending over Gentiles also, with His judicial title asserted. The goats' hair would seem to speak of Christ in His prophetic separateness; the rams' skins dyed red point to His absolute consecration to God; as the power which kept out all evil would appear to be meant by the badgers' or tachach skins, which covered the tent above. The reference is to the fine linen and blue, etc., with the various coverings of goats' hair and badger skins. All these, I have no doubt, have their own proper significance, as manifesting the character of Christ here below.

Next (versesExodus 26:15-30; Exodus 26:15-30) follows the account of the acacia boards with their tenons and bolts, the sockets of silver and the rings of gold.

Then we have the veil and screen. Now we know what these mean. Scripture is positive that the veil is His flesh, but then it is as manifesting the Lord as man here below. As long as this was the case only, man could not come to God. When the veil was rent (namely, by Christ dying as a man), man could go into the presence of God, at least the believer. I do not mean man as man, but that there was no bar to man. The way was now open into the presence of God.

In the brazen altar it is the same side of truth, but there is this characteristic difference. (Exodus 27:1-21) Not less than the ark, the golden throne of God in the most holy place, it shows us God's righteousness; but with this difference between them that gold is the righteousness of God for drawing near where God is; brass is the righteousness of God for dealing with man's evil where man is. Such is the line which divides them. It is the display of God in both cases the one in the presence of God where He manifests Himself; the other in dealing with man and his wants in this world. Hence we find, for instance, the righteousness of God in Romans. If we consider with any care Romans 3:1-31, it is the righteousness of God presented to man as a sinful being in this world. But if I look at the passage where it is said, "He made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him," it is evident that we are brought into the very presence of God. Thus 2 Corinthians 5:1-21 corresponds with the ark rather than the brazen altar. Everything has its beautiful and perfect answer in the word of God; but then all is useless to the soul, except just so far as one sees and receives the Lord Jesus Christ.

Next, from the latter part ofExodus 27:1-21; Exodus 27:1-21 we have a change evident, and of more weight.

The last two verses are, I think, transitional. They prepare the way for types which, instead of displaying God in Christ to man, set forth rather man drawing near by the appointed channel to God. They are occupied with the provision of light where God manifested Himself, and in order to the due service of those who entered the sanctuary. "And thou shalt command the children of Israel, that they bring thee pure oil olive beaten for the light, to cause the lamp to burn always." It may be added here, as some have found an apparent inconsistency in comparing the passage with 1 Samuel 3:3, that the Hebrew means not "always" in the absolute sense, but continually or constantly. It was from evening to morning" and of course uninterruptedly for that time. "In the tabernacle of the congregation without the veil, which is before the testimony, Aaron and his sons shall order it from evening to morning before Jehovah." This is greatly confirmed by what follows.

In Exodus 28:1-43; Exodus 29:1-46 is given the prescribed ceremonial in consecrating the priesthood. And what was the object of the priesthood? Clearly it was for drawing near to God. This is the new division brought in and what might seem at first sight a notable irregularity, as has been observed before, is simply an effect of the perfect arrangement of God's mind. Doubtless to a superficial glance it appears somewhat unaccountable, in the midst of describing the various parts of the sanctuary, to interrupt the course of it by dragging into the very midst of it the consecration of Aaron and his sons. But if there be two separate objects in these types first, God displaying Himself to man; and, secondly, man in consequence drawing near to God the way of all is clear. The priesthood undeniably consisted of that class of persons who had the privilege and duty of going into the sanctuary on behalf of the people. And the vessels of the sanctuary described after the priesthood are those which preserve the same common character of presenting the service due to God approached in His sanctuary. Now, let me ask, what mind of man could ever have thought of a decision so excellent, though surely far below the surface? As the foolishness of God, says the apostle, is wiser than man, so (may we not say?) the seeming disorder of God is incomparably more orderly than man's best order.

Thus it will always be found in the long run. We may have absolute confidence in the word of God. Our only business is to learn what He is, what He says, and, more than that, to confide in Him; and when we do not know what He means, always to take the ground of faith against all adversaries. We may be ignorant, and unable to expose them; but we may rest perfectly sure that God is never wrong and man ever untrustworthy. The habitual means whereby God gives proof that He is right, graciously enabling us to understand is by His word. There is no other means of knowing the mind of God; the power for understanding is the Spirit of God; and the object in whose light alone it can be understood is Christ. But the written word of God is the sole instrumental means and the revelation of it all.

Then, after the priesthood has been fully brought before us, we have the various portions of their dress. A few words will suffice here before passing on. A remarkable provision is that the ephod of the high priest, which was the most important part of his costume, had the names of the children of Israel twice over. One inscription was in the shoulder-pieces. There were the names in a general way six on one shoulder, six on the other. Besides this their names were written on the breastplate. There the names were all found together on his heart. He who cannot appreciate the blessedness of such a place, with the great high priest bearing up thus the names of God's people before God, must be very insensible to the highest favours. But God, who showed how He would continually remember those He loved, and who could not have a high priest without having their names in honour and love before Him that blessed God has given us much more. He ordered that there should be the Urim and the Thummim connected with the high priest's breastplate; that is the means of divine guidance for the people. The Christian has it also, and in a far better way. The Jew had it after this outward sort, all being comparatively external in Israel. We have it intrinsically by the Holy Ghost Himself. It is in vain for any person to pretend that it was better to have the Urim and Thummim, for which one had to seek the priest from time to time when wanted, than to be indwelt always by One who knows all the truth. May Christians believe and use for God the portion each has in Christ!

But besides, when the high priest went into Jehovah's presence, there was the sounding of the bells between the pomegranates of blue, and purple, and scarlet on the skirts of his garment. Such is the effect, it is to be observed, "when he goeth in" and "when he cometh out." Under this falls the Christian testimony now, as the result of the entrance of Christ into heavenly places; and under this will fall the future fruit-bearing portion and testimony of Israel in the day when Christ will appear in glory from the heavens. The bells give their sound when the high priest goes in and when he comes out. When Christ went into the presence of God, what a mighty effect did not the Spirit produce! The church comes under that now. When Christ returns the Spirit will be poured out once more on all flesh, and Israel will be brought into the blessed position of bearing fruit in testimony for God. But, again, Aaron with the golden plate (engraved "Holiness to Jehovah") always on his forehead, bears the iniquity of Israel's holy things that they may be accepted; an important consideration, especially when we know the seriousness and the facility of iniquity therein. Is it not true that there is scarce anything in which we feel more the need of gracious care than in the holy things of God? We know His tender mercy in the smallest matters; but in that which so nearly concerns His honour, it is indeed a truly merciful provision that the Great High Priest bears the iniquity of holy things, where other wise defilement would be fatal. The coat of fine linen embroidered means personal righteousness in ways, set off with every beauty of grace. Aaron's sons were to have coats, priests' girdles, and bonnets for glory and for beauty. It is Christ put on us. Then follows the ritual required in the act of consecrating Aaron and his sons.

In the hallowing of the priestly family the following points are observable. First, they were all washed in the water, Aaron and his sons. "He who sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one." Christ is essentially apart from sin and sinners; we by grace are set apart. Further, our Lord says, "For their sakes I sanctify myself ( i.e. on high), that they also might be sanctified by the truth." Then Aaron is duly clothed; as in the priestly character Christ appears before God for us. Then the high priest alone was anointed; as we know Christ could be and was sealed of God the Father without blood, the Spirit thus attesting both the absolute purity of His person and the truth of His Sonship as man. Aaron's sons were then clothed, and girded for priestly work. The blood of the bullock for a sin-offering was put on the horns of the altar; the blood of one ram for a burnt-offering was sprinkled round about upon the altar; and the blood of the other ram for consecration was put on Aaron's right ear, and that of his sons, on their right thumb and right great toe. It was necessarily so with the high priest taken from among men, after the witness already given to Christ's exceptional place. So Christ entered by His own blood entered in once for all into the holies, having obtained eternal redemption that we might have a common place with Him by blood and in the Spirit's power. Grace binds us with Christ as Aaron with his sons. As no sacrifice was absent here, so we enjoy all the value of Christ and His work.

But after the form of hallowing the priests, the Spirit prescribes in the end of Exodus 39:1-43 (ver. Exodus 39:38-43) the sacrifice of the daily lambs which presented the continual acceptance of the people of God, with the renewed and most express assurance of His dwelling among them. Exodus 30:1-38; Exodus 30:1-38 resumes the account, for a reason already explained, of the various vessels of the sanctuary which had to follow the priesthood, and pursue the truth meant by it, namely, the means of access to God.

Among the vessels of the sanctuary the altar of incense stands first (versesExodus 30:1-10; Exodus 30:1-10). Who does not know that this was to secure the people always being acceptable before God! It is the type of Christ interceding for us, and along with this the high priest's work that the manifestation of the Spirit be not hindered.

In verses 11-16 is introduced the ransom money of the people, rich and poor alike, as an offering to Jehovah, their atonement money for the service of the sanctuary (for this is the great point here), the link of all with the priests who actually entered on their behalf.

But there was another requisite next set forth. The brazen laver judged sin by the word of God, just as the brazen altar judged it sacrificially. We need "the washing of regeneration" and generally the washing of water by the word. This follows here. The former in its scriptural usage is not merely, I apprehend, that we are born of God, but goes beyond new birth. It is the putting the believer into an entirely new place before God, which is a different thought from his receiving a new nature. As being a position, it may have so far a more external sound, but it is a real deliverance, which grace now confers on us in Christ Jesus, not merely the communication of a life which hates sin, but the putting one according to the new place of Christ Himself before God. With this goes also the action of the Spirit of God in dealing with us day by day according to such a beginning. This we need, the application of the word of God by the Spirit to deal with every kind of impurity. Just as in the type the priests had not only to be washed completely in the laver in order to be consecrated; but whenever they entered into the presence of God, they washed their hands and feet. We have what answers to it. Let us not forget it.

Then we have the holy anointing oil, which also had to do with fitting the priests for drawing near to God. It was the power of the Spirit. It was not merely a new nature or a new position, but it was a corresponding power of the Spirit of God. For the bare possession of a new nature or place would not enable us to do the will of God. It would make us feel what ought to be done, but gives not of itself the power to do it. The Spirit given to the Christian is of power, love, and a sound mind. A new nature finds its great characteristic in dependence in weakness, or sense of weakness certainly; but the Holy Ghost gives the consciousness of power, though no doubt exercised in dependence. The new nature accordingly has right affections and gracious desires; but there is power in the Spirit through Christ Jesus. God "hath not given us the spirit of fear, but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind."

The last of these types is the holy perfume. Here it seems to be not so much what we have by Christ, but that fragrance in Christ Himself of which God alone is the adequate judge, and which rises up before Him in all its perfection. How blessed for us! It is for us, but it is only in Him before God.

In Exodus 31:1-18 we have all this closed with two facts the Spirit of God empowering man to make a tabernacle according to the pattern, and the Sabbath-day connected with the order of the tabernacle. It has been remarked by another, and it is perfectly true, that in this book when we meet with any dealing of God, of whatever kind it may be, the Sabbath-day is always introduced. For instance, in the earlier half of Exodus, where we have God's dealings in grace, the Sabbath-day is brought in, marked out by the bread God provided for His people, the manna the figure of Christ come down from heaven to be the food of the hungry on earth: then followed the Sabbath at once. Next, when the law was given, in the very centre of its requirements stands the Sabbath-day. Again, in these various figures or institutions of good things to come, the Sabbath re-appears. Thus it is evident that, no matter what the subject may be, the Sabbath has always a place assigned to it. God therefore makes much of the sign. The reason is that He would impress on His people that all His dealings, varied as they may be, are intended to keep before their minds that rest to which He was steadily working, and into which He means to bring His own in due time. Therefore whatever the work introduced meanwhile whether of grace, as the effectual working of God, or whether of law as proving the inefficiency of man He always holds out His rest, to which He would also direct the eyes of all who love Him.

Exodus 32:1-35 reveals a sad interruption after the wonderful communications of God to His servant. Here at least the people are at their work earnestly at work in dishonouring God striking at the very foundation of His truth and honour to their own shame and ruin. Poor people! the objects of such countless favours, and of such signal honour on God's part. They, with Aaron to help them, aimed a blow at the throne of God by making a golden calf. It is needless to linger on the scene of the rebellion. Jehovah directs the attention of Moses to the camp, saying, "I have seen this people, and, behold, it is a stiff-necked people. Now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them; and I will make of thee a great nation." He wanted to prove and manifest the heart of His servant. He loved the people Himself, and delighted in Moses' love for them. If the people were under the test of law, Moses was under the test of grace.

"And Moses besought Jehovah his God and said, Jehovah, why doth thy wrath wax hot against thy people, which thou hast brought forth out of the land of Egypt with great power, and with a mighty hand? Wherefore should the Egyptians speak and say, For mischief did he bring them out, to slay them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth? Turn from thy fierce wrath, and repent of this evil against thy people. Remember Abraham, Isaac, and [not merely Jacob, but] Israel, thy servants, to whom thou swarest by thine own self, and saidst unto them, I will multiply your seed as the stars of heaven, and all this land that I have spoken of will I give unto your seed, and they shall inherit it for ever."

See the ground Moses took the unqualified promises of God's mercy, the grace assured to the fathers Impossible for Jehovah to set aside such a plea Nevertheless Moses comes down with the two tables in his hand, the work of God. He hears the noise, which Joshua could not so well understand, but which his own keener and more practised ear fails not to interpret aright; and as soon as he came near, and saw the confirmation of his fears the calf and the dancing his "anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of his hands, and brake them beneath the mount. And he took the calf which they had made, and burnt it in the fire, and ground it to powder, and strewed it upon the water, and made the children of Israel drink of it."

At once we find him reproaching Aaron, the most responsible man there, who makes a sorry excuse, not without sin. But Moses took his stand in the gate and said, "Who is on Jehovah's side? Let him come unto me." Thus he who rejected every overture for his own advancement at the expense of the people now arms the Levites against their brethren. "And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses; and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men." Yet we know on the best authority that Moses loved the people as not another soul in the camp did. There is hardly a subject on which men are so apt to make mistakes as the true nature and application of love. Moses loved Israel with a love stronger than death; yet he who thus loved them showed unsparingly his horror of the leprosy that had broken out among them. He felt that such evil must at all cost be rooted out, and banished from amongst them. But the same Moses returns to Jehovah with the confession "Oh, this people have sinned a great sin, and have made them gods of gold. Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin -; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written."

Jehovah however stands to His own ways, and says to Moses, "Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book. Therefore now go, lead the people unto the place of which I have spoken unto thee: behold, mine angel shall go before thee: nevertheless in the day when I visit I will visit their sin upon them. And Jehovah plagued the people, because they made the calf, which Aaron made." Nevertheless Moses persists in his plea with Jehovah, who does not fail to try him to the utmost by adopting the language of the people. They had denied God, and attributed their deliverance merely to Moses: so Jehovah takes up these very words, and says, "Depart and go up hence, thou and the people which thou hast brought up out of the land of Egypt, unto the land which I sware unto Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, saying, Unto thy seed will I give it." He reproaches them once more with being a stiff-necked people; He will not go up in the midst of them, lest He should consume them in the way. The people thereon mourn; and Moses has recourse to a remarkable act. He takes and pitches the tabernacle, it is said, "without the camp, afar off from the camp, and called it the Tabernacle of the Congregation." After this follow two things worthy of all heed, a nearness of communication between Jehovah and His servant never enjoyed before, and more than that, a blessing secured to the people never vouchsafed before.

From this moment a new plea is urged: the faultiness of the people is used as a reason why God should go up the very reason which righteousness made a ground for refusing to go with them, lest His anger should burn against such a stiff-necked people. But, argues Moses, for this very reason, we most of all want Jehovah's presence. Astonishing is the boldness of faith; but then its pleading is grounded on the known grace of God Himself. Moses was near enough to God in the tabernacle, outside the camp, to get a better view of His grace than he ever enjoyed before. And so it always is No doubt there was large and rich blessing and of the most unexpected kind when God sent down the Holy Spirit here below, and His church was first seen. But is it a fact that the church at Jerusalem had the deepest enjoyment of God in apostolic times? This, one may be permitted to question. I grant you that, looking at the Pentecostal saints, in them we see the most powerful united testimony that ever was borne in this world; but it was borne in what was comparatively not the severest trial in earthly things chiefly, the superiority of those who had been newly created in Christ to the wretched selfishness of human nature. But is that the highest form of blessedness? Is that the way in which Christ was most glorified?

When the earliest phase of things passed away when not merely there was the unbelief of the Jewish people but the unworthy sights and sounds which Satan introduced among that fair company God, always equal to the occasion, acts in the supremacy of His own grace, and brings out a deeper understanding of His truth more difficult to appreciate; not striking the people of the world perhaps in the same way, but that which I think has a more intimate character of communion with Christ Himself than anything that was found before. It will scarcely be affirmed that what we discern in the church, while limited to the circumcision, had the same depth and heavenly character stamped upon it, as what was found when the full grace of God broke all barriers and flowed freely among the Gentiles. It is in vain to argue that the fruit of the teaching of Peter or of James had the same power with it as the fruit of Paul not very long after, or of John latest of all. I grant you this that, looked at as a whole, distressing failure was setting in just as it was here; yet as here the very failure isolated the truehearted, but isolated them not in want of love but in the strongest possible manifestation of divine charity and sense of God's glory. Assuredly Moses in the tabernacle outside had not less love for the people, nor more loyalty to God, than within the borders of Sinai when the ten commandments were uttered.

In the scene which follows we have the magnificent pleading of Moses still more touchingly, and, I am persuaded, in advance on what went before. This is not the time to enter into details; but hear what Moses says to Jehovah now: "See, thou sayest unto me, Bring up this people: and thou hast not let me know whom thou wilt send with me. Yet thou hast said, I know thee by name, and thou hast also found grace in my sight." What can be more lovely, more according to Christ, than this? He uses all the personal confidence that God had in him on behalf of the people. That is the bearing of it all. "Now therefore, I pray thee, if I have found grace in thy sight, show me now thy way, that I may know thee, that I may find grace in thy sight: and consider that this nation is thine." He will not give up his love and desire for Israel. God may treat them as the people of Moses, and say, "They are the people you have brought up: they are your people." "Oh no," says Moses, "they are Thine; and Thou art their only hope." He will not be put off. Jehovah loves to surrender to Moses, as of old to Jacob with far feebler forces. Faith, hope, and charity abounded in the mediator; and if the people were to be blessed, from God he drew on every spring of the blessing for His own glory. Mark the answer of Jehovah: "And he said, My presence shall go with thee, and I will give thee rest. And he said unto him, If thy presence go not with me, carry us not up hence." Moses wanted` nothing apart from the people; even if he went out of the camp, it was to gather so much more of blessing for the people that he had left behind. "And Jehovah said unto Moses, I will do this thing also that thou has spoken: for thou hast found grace in my sight, and I know thee by thy name." He asked to see His glory. This was impossible yet. It awaited the coming of a greater than Moses. But at any rate His goodness is caused to pass before him, which in Exodus 34:1-35 he sees.

But here we must take care. It is a great mistake to suppose that the proclamation of divine goodness in this scene is the gospel. They greatly err who in this sense quote "Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin," and stop there. God does not stop here. He immediately adds, "and by no means clearing the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation." There is no doubt that it is the goodness and mercy of God; but it is to a people still under the government of the law. This is the peculiarity. What we find here then is not law pure and simple, but law with mercy and goodness and long-suffering in the government of God His condescending love and patience mingled along with law. Hence we see its character and the reason why it appears here. Without it the guilty people never could have been spared, but must have perished root and branch, as it was in consequence of this change that a new generation of the people of Israel entered into the land at all. Had He dealt on the ground of pure law, how could it have been? They were guilty, and must have been cut off.

Now this mingling of grace with the law is the kind of system which Christians have accepted as Christianity. No real believer ever takes the ground of pure law. They take a mingled system; they mix up law and grace together. This is what is going on every day now in Christendom. It was the state in which the children of Israel were put here, and was a very great mercy for them in a certain sense. It is no less a misfortune for the Christian, because what those in Christ are called to is neither law, nor the mingled system of law interspersed with the gracious care of those under it (who must have been consumed had law reigned alone), but pure grace in Christ without the law. At the same time the righteousness of the law is fulfilled so much the more in those that "walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit."

In answer to Moses who advances in his demands, yet withal no less suiting them to the divine glory than to the people's wants according to the light then vouchsafed, God makes a covenant different from what went before. (Exodus 34:10) Moses had prayed Him as Adonai to "go among us; for it is a stiff-necked people; and pardon our sin, and take us for thine inheritance." Thus he avails himself of the special affection God had shown him to put himself with the people, and to secure God's presence going with the people, who otherwise could never enter the land. It was bold faith, working in unfeigned love of the people, and with a deep sense of what God is spite of all demerits; yet its highest petition is based on revealed grace, and is therefore the very reverse of human presumption.

The Lord accordingly hearkens in grace, and undertakes for Israel against the Canaanites, warning them against a covenant with the inhabitants of the land, and insisting on His own sole worship, His feasts, His firstlings and firstfruits; on His sabbaths, on the absence of leaven and unseemly ways, the fruit of Satan's wiles among the heathen.

This is pursued to the end of the chapter, and in a very interesting way. We have a figure to which the apostle refers (2 Corinthians 3:1-18), confirming what has just now been stated. For the first time the face of Moses shines after communications with God. There was no such effect when it was merely the ten commandments or the ordinances connected with the people and the land; but after the communications of heavenly shadows and the mercy of God which intermixed itself with the law, Moses' face shines, and the people of Israel could not bear it. The glory of God, or at any rate the effect of seeing His goodness, was brought too near to them. He had to put a veil on his face. The apostle uses this to show that, as the veiled Moses speaking to the people of Israel is the most apt possible figure of the actual state in which they were placed (that is, not law simply, but with gracious care for the people mingled with it), so the condition of the Christian is in marked contrast. For our position the true image is Moses not when speaking to the people, but when he goes up into the presence of God. In him unveiled there we have our figure, not in Moses veiled, still less in Israel The Christian in his full place is nowhere set forth by the Jew. Certain things which happened to Israel may be types for the Christian, but nothing more. As far as this figure is concerned, then, our place is represented by Moses when he takes off the vail and is face to face with the glory of God Himself. What a place for us, and for us now! Surely this is a wondrous truth, and of the greatest possible importance. We should remember that we are heavenly now (1 Corinthians 15:1-58) as truly as we ever shall be. More manifestly we shall be heavenly at the coming of Christ, but not more really than at present. I speak of our relationship and title. "As is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly." By and by we shall bear the image of the heavenly. This is another thing, and only a consequence when the due moment arrives. For the soul the great change is a fact; it remains for the body when the Lord comes.

The rest of the book of Exodus consists of the people's response, and the actual accomplishment of the directions that were given inExodus 25:1-40; Exodus 25:1-40; Exodus 26:1-37; Exodus 27:1-21; Exodus 28:1-43; Exodus 29:1-46; Exodus 30:1-38, and calls for no lengthened remarks in such a sketch as this. But we may refer toExodus 35:1-35; Exodus 35:1-35 as the witness to the zeal of the congregation for the construction and service of the sanctuary, opened by the law of the sabbath stated here for the last time in the book. Whatever be the work of God, His rest remains for His people. The utmost alacrity in answer to the call for material, useful and ornamental, common or costly, is shown by all. "And they came, every one whose heart stirred him up, and every one whom his spirit made willing, and they brought Jehovah's offering to the work of the tabernacle of the congregation, and for all his service, and for the holy garments. And they came, both men and women, as many as were willing hearted, and brought bracelets, and earrings, and rings, and tablets, all jewels of gold: and every man that offered offered an offering of gold unto Jehovah. And every man, with whom was found blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine linen, and goats' hair, and red skins of rams, and badgers' skins, brought them. Every one that did offer an offering of silver and brass brought Jehovah's offering: and every man, with whom was found shittim wood for any work of the service, brought it. And all the women that were wise hearted did spin with their hands, and brought that which they had spun, both of blue, and of purple, and of scarlet, and of fine linen. And all the women whose heart stirred them up in wisdom spun goats' hair. And the rulers brought onyx stones, and stones to be set, for the ephod and for the breastplate: and spice, and oil for the light, and for the anointing oil, and for the sweet incense. The children of Israel brought a willing offering unto Jehovah, every man and woman, whose heart made them willing to bring for all manner of work, which Jehovah had commanded to be made by the hand of Moses" (verses Exodus 35:21-29).

Nevertheless, here as everywhere God maintains His right to call, and gives the requisite gifts. "And Moses said unto the children of Israel, See, the Lord hath called by name Bezaleel the son of Uri, the son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah; and he hath filled him with the spirit of God, in wisdom, in understanding, and in knowledge, and in all manner of workmanship; and to devise curious works, to work in gold, and in silver, and in brass, and in the cutting of stones, to set them, and in carving of wood, to make any manner of cunning work. And he hath put in his heart that he may teach, both he, and Aholiab, the son of Abisamach, of the tribe of Dan. Them hath he filled with wisdom of heart, to work all manner of work, of the engraver, and of the cunning workman, and of the embroiderer, in blue, and in purple, in scarlet, and in fine linen, and of the weaver, even of them that do any work, and of those that devise cunning work" (versesExodus 35:30-35; Exodus 35:30-35).

Exodus 36:1-38 shows us the chosen workmen engaged in their allotted tasks, and even begging Moses to check the over-abounding supplies of Israel's liberality. The work is described with as much minuteness, in the execution as in the plan, throughoutExodus 36:1-38; Exodus 36:1-38; Exodus 37:1-29; Exodus 38:1-31; Exodus 39:1-43 till Moses, inspecting all and seeing that they had done it as Jehovah had commanded, blessed them.

It is of great interest to observe that the silver paid in by the children of Israel, a bekah or half shekel each, was applied to the production of the silver sockets of the veil, and the hooks of the columns. Now if gold represents God's righteousness which we approach within; and if brass or rather copper means, when thus symbolically viewed, His righteousness as applied to man outside in His immutable judgment, what is the force of silver in this connection? Is it not His grace shown in man, even in the man Christ Jesus? Thus the redemption price was the basis; and on hooks made of the silver expiation money were suspended the hangings of the court which separated the sanctuary service of God from the world. The judgment of One who could not bear sin was represented in the copper sockets of the boards which gave immutable stability; but grace in redemption was that on which all hung and shone in the chapiters and fillets also, the ornament of the work. Both unite in Christ and His atoning death.

The last chapter records, first, Jehovah's call to Moses to set up the dwelling of the appointed tent on the first day of the first month (i.e., in the second year, ver. Exodus 40:17), with all its parts and vessels in due order; secondly, the obedience of Moses according to all that Jehovah commanded him. It is remarkable that on this occasion the tabernacle and all within it were anointed with oil. Thus, whatever sin on our part may call for, we have here the whole scene of creation, all things in heaven and all things on earth, claimed in the power of the Spirit in virtue of Christ's person and title, just as He was in fact anointed with the Holy Ghost and with power apart from blood-shedding.

Finally, when the work was finished and all duly set up, a cloud covered the appointed tent, and the glory of Jehovah filled the dwelling. And Moses was not able to enter because the cloud dwelt thereon, and the glory filled the tabernacle. Thus solemnly did Jehovah mark His dwelling-place in the midst of His people redeemed from Egypt; and He deigned to guide their journeys through the desert also by the same sign; for when the cloud was taken up, they journeyed; and if not taken up, they abode till it was. But cloud by day and fire by night, the token of is presence was ever before all Israel (versesExodus 40:34-38; Exodus 40:34-38).